Tuesday, 28 September 2010
Thursday, 16 September 2010
The activity was done on paper with only a few students confident enough to raised their hands to admit to answering. This was also done in almost complete silence. The next session it work, students were more talkative with peers and scarcely honest with answers. Even the most technophobic of the staff became animated about the buzz it created. But there were issues Problems with the Dell laptop
The software is running on a dell laptop that does not allow presentation mode when connected with a projector. Therefore staff have to read from the projector screen, facing away from students.
We could try a different laptop or explore the option of running the software from usb
Stick. Why 63 handsets were registered and only 45 could answer?
Is there a limited setting I haven't found yet, I need to test all the handsets before the next session. about 10 of the hand sets are dead
Let's think about MCQs & online quizzes differently - lets think more about them as a method of connection with individual students
Who writes the initial communication?
Who receives it and when?
What is the motivation or requirement to answer?
What is the immediate response for and what is contained in it?
What's done with the answers? for what reason is the communication made?
This is the most important question. Why would an individual make this request. Lets look where this happens in life. - vote for someone something, show preference - survey opinion
- gather information about individuals, e.g. Where they were born
There are many points and contexts that this type of communication as useful. In an educational setting you could. . .
- vote for year rep
- be asked to send in a single idea for a criteria, these could be analysis and then used again to mark a sample piece of work.
- survey perceptions prior to a f2f meeting - identify common errors in previous work
- self diagnostic - survey student perception of how well they are doing
- level 3 students write what they wish they had know/done in level 1. This is then used in level 1 survey to see if they can guess what was said
- level 3 write questions in short text box. These are used with level 2 to identify common mistakes in answers, these are used to test knowledge of level 1 students
And on and on Who writes the initial communication? Get students to use the tool under your supervision. They devise the activity or survey/questions for their own peers or other year groups. Who receives it and when? is it a specific group
Is it a specific group identified by a previous set of question
What year level?
What part of the year? What is the motivation or requirement to answer?
This is the difficult one, but besides making it have a mark weighing you could....
With hold access to certain materials until it is completed
Make it seem exclusive, if they are submiting drafts for peer evaluation, only those that submit will be allowed to join the peer process.
But by far the most effective will be they way the information is used. If they see it has real benefit to them, they will complete it, an be involved in further question activities. This is only a starting point, the real leap in the use of this tool is to think creatively and go beyond the obvious
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
Peer review of student podcast of key concepts [sports science]
Interviews with students on placement [business]
Weekly podcast on common areas of weakness [computer science]
Answers to questions under the theme questions you were afraid to ask [art and design]
Podcasting assignment 'what makes a good student' [journalism] The project sounds a great success
Many staff dropped out because of time commitments
Some of t e student submissions proved tiring to listen to. Middleton, a. (2009) beyond podcasting; creative approaches to designing educational audio, alt-j vol 17, no 2, 143-155
Friday, 10 September 2010
Yes, placement, context etc all make a difference. but if people are really going to use them, we need to ask, what they expect to see on them, or think hard about what information is important in that context. Muller et al (2009) display blindness; the effect of expectations on attention towards digital signage. Notes
'information overload' eppler and mengis 2004
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
The best aspect is his lit review of 'net-gen'. On page 2 Berk, r, a (2001) how do you leverage the latest technologies, including web web 2.0 tools in your classroom? International journal of technology in teaching and learning, 6, 1-13.
Downes free course [siemens 2008]. 2800 students took a free onloine course.
Thursday, 2 September 2010
Powerpoint can show a diagram, but some diagrams are complex and contain levels of detail
Using Prezi you can present complex images and ideas and then zoom in and out of these to help students, see the relationship, the levels or simply be able to see the information from the back of the room.
Here is a demo
There are some issues
1. make sure the image is large enough to zoom into, you will need something like 1000 pixels across
2. prezi is a free service, but you do have to sign up
3. you have to create them online unless you pay for a full service
4. prezi does take a little while to get to know
Here is the most basic how to guide to creating a prezi zoom in presentation
Wednesday, 1 September 2010
Video linked lectures; students think more about content than the delivery technology when considering attending lectures
Student numbers; 20 included in study Technology; video conferencing between sites given by practicing professionals Conclusion; students do consider being in front of a lecturer more interactive, but by far the main considerations are who's giving the lecture and what is it about. Reference Wang et al (2010) medical students' perceptions of video-linked lectures and video-streaming, alt-j, vol 18, no 1, 19-27 Notes
Many studies in this area, issues include;
-Makes no impact on academic performance [solomon et al 2004, stain et al 2005]
- no evidence of drop in numbers [billings-gagliardi and mazor 2007; mattick, crocker and bgh 2007]
- difference in learning and interaction[carville and michell 2000, knipe and lee 2002]
- staff development [freeman, 1998]
- timetabling pitcher, [davidson and goldfinch 2000]
Made use of 'exam4' a locked down writing tool on usb stick.