Date post: | 07-Apr-2016 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | ricardo-vilela |
View: | 213 times |
Download: | 1 times |
Planning an ICT online strategy
I teach at The Foundation Degree in Broadcast Television, delivered by The
Manchester College and accredited by Salford University. Our cohort is mostly
composed of young male British adults, together with a minority of foreign
students, mature students and British female students. It’s my third year of
teaching.
Through this paper, I will look at different models of e-learning, in order to
build up a reference system, to support me on designing ICT resources
specifically related to the only module outcome common to all modules in the
course.
“Allow students to manage appropriate pre-production, production and post-production”
This module outcome is present in virtually all modules from year 1 and year 2
of the Broadcast Television Foundation Degree. The following information is
included in the Programme Introduction paragraph, on the Student handbook:
“The course is broken down into three stages: pre-production, production and post-production. The pre-production stage of the course features an in-depth look into developing projects and researching ways of exploring and developing initial ideas. Time management plays an integral part in the course at this stage. The production stage involves taking developed ideas and creating television content, using equipment and software to film and edit content. The production side of the course is used to explore software in conjunction with a computer environment to turn the filmed content into professional quality productions. The post production stage gives students a unique chance to explore opportunities for publishing content. It also gives students insight into how to develop a proposal to gain funding and how to understand the different funding associations.”
The students have six to eight major long group projects over the two years
period, which the course lasts. Through exercises in the classroom,
individually or in group, and linking up to both formative and summative
assessment, the students have plenty of opportunities to go through the three
production stages and develop a good degree of confidence in the whole
process. The students get feedback from all the tutors in all the modules,
throughout the whole course, relating to their accumulated learning, and
confidence in this specific outcome.
Although thorough, the teaching/learning of the production stages happens
differently for each student. It might be that his/her first role in Production is
centred in research (Pre-production), or video editing (post production), then it
will be difficult to grasp the scope of the whole production. When this
happens, the student will have a chance to experiment and reflect on that
particular part of the process before producing the final work, and he/she will
have a chance to explore another part of the production process later on the
course. This is where some valid e-learning support can assist the overall
Learning Process.
I found it useful to look at Kolb’s experimental learning cycle, which although
coming from a constructivist approach, I feel represents well the learning
environment in which the students formulate this specific outcome.
!
The experimental learning cycle transposes well into different time scales
regarding the learning of the production process.
Here’s an example applied specifically on an exercise about colour grading,
on the directing module of the second year:
1. Discussion on nature and definition of colour grading supported by
learning tools uploaded on the module blog, such as, short video
explaining the technique, short videos about the nature of colour and
industry examples of application of technique.
2. Students do the proposed grading exercise and try the technique, and
uploading the result on their personal blog (AE)
3. One to one formative feedback on exercise, using the learning tools
uploaded on the module blog as reference
4. The students will then apply the same technique in their main project
(CE)
5. The work is reviewed once more and individual feedback is provided
6. The student will follow onto Reflective Observation (RO) by drawing
some conclusions in his/her production diary in his/her personal blog
7. The student will put in practice some of the conclusions drawn from the
process, by deciding on a new/final approach to the task of colour
grading (AC)
8. The student will do some more experimentation (AE), or decide to
apply the best of his knowledge into the final piece of work (CE)
The same experiential learning cycle also applies in the following module on
the course, when the student will face the same task. This time however, the
student will be able to start the cycle in the region of Reflective Observation
(RO), by taking into account his previous experience with the task, which is
documented and easily accessible on both the module’s blog and the
students’ personal blog.
The student can also access strategies that colleagues have developed to
fulfil the brief, by visiting their blogs. The second time around allows for more
emphasis to be placed in the parts of the cycle that the student didn’t initially
explore.
If we now come back to the course outcome I’m concentrating on - the
production stages - we can easily transpose this learning cycle to a larger
timescale, where the student will start building a relationship with a particular
part of the production process (i.e. post production), that he/she will revisit
with the aim of increasing the specific embedded learning. Concurrently, in
other modules, the same student is learning about other parts of the
production stages (i.e. pre production), that he/she will soon revisit.
Overall, the skills and knowledge necessary to fulfil this specific course
outcome are developed and acquired throughout the two years of the course,
across all modules literally, and supported by our ICT resources including
online engagement.
The fact that most of the exercises, resources and products are all web
based, allows students that have missed lessons to easily catch up with the
others, and all to revisit the material at any time, which led me to plan more
lessons around an online structure. This suits our 2nd years very well, as they
are all involved in different productions with different schedules, and are more
independent learners.
Friedman et al (2002) pointed out the following when applying Kolb’s cycle to
online continuing professional development courses:
“Although some authors doubt whether learners can have a concrete experience in an online environment, Mackenzie and Staley (2000) cite research in which it was found that different technologies, including email, web-based discussion and multimedia resources, could fulfil the
requirements of the different stages of the learning cycle. However, Staley (2000) also suggests that, in the context of higher education, breaking away from the computer for some parts of the learning cycle is a more appropriate model for learning” Friedman et al (p370:2002)
I apply this learning cycle successfully when planning and delivering my
lessons because the course I’m teaching in has a strong emphasis in practical
experience. I use it as a tool to increase both the reflective and the creative
character of our curriculum outcomes. I would have reservations in using it as
an e-learning standalone framework in my curriculum, (I also don’t need to),
because the bulk of the teaching and learning happens in the classroom,
where I provide plenty of individual support.
The experience of using the blog as a tool, and as a teaching and learning
platform was very positive, but I felt I needed references from other online
learning modules in order to develop my own appropriate tools.
The five stage model for e-learning:
1 -Access and Motivation
2 -Online socialisation
3 -Information Exchange
4 -Knowledge Construction
5 -Development
This model was developed by Salmon (2000) in “E-moderating The Key to
teaching and learning online”.
From this model, I took on the issues of access and motivation, which I
stumbled upon with my students. One student didn’t have Internet at home,
which in turn means he will be cut off from the platform when he leaves
school, reducing his “off school” learning potential. More online resources also
mean more passwords to remember, and to forget… The student motivation
to use these resources is varied, although it seems to be appealing enough
when totally embedded on the lesson plan as part of the classroom activities.
The online socialization stage does not seem to be of paramount importance
since the students already do it via popular sites, such as facebook and
youtube.
The remaining three stages are not dissociated from my experience with
Kolb’s model. This model offered a bit of guidance but it’s not contrasting
enough with Kolb’s.
Moule challenged the five stage model in the following manner:
“It should be recognised, however, that the e-moderating model was developed from experiences of facilitating online networking and group working. Its principle purpose is to provide a model for e-moderators to support student engagement and learning online, employing constructivist pedagogic theory. Consequently, it is limited because the variety of e-learning approaches available for use within computer-mediated communication is neglected and the range of learning theories available is ignored”. (Moule 2007, pp. 38-39)
Moule himself come up with the following e-learning ladder:
!
Figure 2. A conceptual model of online learning: the e-learning ladder (Moule,
2006b; 2007)
I found it particularly helpful to draw inspiration from Moule’s ladder in
planning the development of the ICT/online resources for the course I’m
teaching in. I found that although not very helpful in specific lesson planning,
this model raised the issues I encountered when developing my tools.
Certainly I found challenges on the issues exposed on the right hand side of
the chart, mostly around faulty IT equipment, and a lack of basic ICT skills in
some cases.
On the other hand, I felt unsure as to what kind of tools I was actually looking
for. For example, should I concentrate on one course module only, or look at it
from a wholesome perspective, considering the whole course. I also feel that
the progression from isolated to interactive learning is a quality I see
developing in all our students. I can almost draw my own vector, increasing
upwards like the others on the chart, where I can have “awareness/
experience of the production process”.
Based on the findings of this research I decided to support the delivery of the
curriculum outcome “awareness and experience of the production process” by
developing the following online ICT strategies:
- Implementation of the usage of blogs in the classroom. I use a blog per
module as a constant classroom teaching and learning tool. Each
student has an individual blog, used mostly for his or her PDP
reflexion. It helps me differentiate the actual experience of the
production process that the student has reflected on,
- Inclusion of project management software in the production process.
The tool “Trello” is the only Content Management Software that the
students have continued to use. So I’m sticking with it and have
abandoned others, such as Basecamp. It took some trial and error, but
this tool directly influences their understanding of the process. In Kolb’s
model it emphasises the Reflective Observation (RO) and Active
Conceptualization (AC) aspects of the cycle.
- Creation of an online course portal. I felt the need to create a web
space that mediates between the College’s Virtual Learning Centre and
the new web spaces that are developed out of the VLC, such as the
blogs and the CMS Trello. This space works very well in terms of being
a one-stop-shop destination for all online resources. It also contains
links to industry specialists platforms, good valid academic resources,
and course related links, such as our shared google calendar, and
equipment booking form online form.
!
Figure 3: detail of one of the modules’ blog
!
Figure 4: CMS Trello
!
Figure 5: Course Portal
Having had a look at Gilbert-Jennifer and Rowley (2007) qualitative research
on students’ evaluation of e-learning at masters level, I found their first 3
conclusions akin to my own. Students engage differently, sometimes away
from the planned integrated approach offered at their VLC, and they
appreciate forums and discussions. However, I found the fourth item to be the
most revealing to me.
“Students are very unsure about the tutor’s role in e-learning. Their expectations are unformed, but are shaped by previous experience of face-to-face teaching. Many are seeking greater input from and interaction with the tutor.” (Gilbert-Jennifer and Rowley 2007, pp. 570-571)
This is certainly my experience, especially because I’m trying out different
approaches. The more resources I offer online, the more questions and
queries I get from the students. Through different resources I’m also
accessing the different levels of my involvement. From a starting point, I’m
always present in the classroom to conduct a focused learning. Still, I’m
planning the online support around the idea that students will be able to
process the learning independently, without my presence, which is common
with the second year students. The blogs, although allowing for greater
differentiation, definitely add another layer of work to the ongoing load.
I’ve taken ideas from all three e-learning models. Kolb’s is very useful on the
day to day tasks and exercises, and akin to the production process. Salmon’s
raised paramount issues that I confront daily, specially on the first step of
access and motivation. Moule’s provides a context to develop resources in a
wholesome manner, looking at the student progression and confidence over
the whole course, and how I can develop e-learning resources that can be
picked and dropped at suitable times.
After some trial and error I developed the three tools mentioned above, which
although successful, haven’t been rolled out into the course officially. My plan
now is to develop an e-learning support solution for our course, and propose it
to my manager. I will use the research conducted for this paper to support my
plan, and will contrast the solutions with valid student feedback. I will also
aspire to explore the different components of ICT literacy: define, access,
manage, integrate, evaluate, create and communicate (Katz and Macklin,
2007)
“We believe that the concept of Pedagogy 2.0, inspired and underpinned by the knowledge-creation metaphor of learning and the
theory of connectivism, signals a movement away from a teacher-centric pedagogy to one emphasizing learner-directed activity and content creation.” (McLoughlin and Lee, 2008)
Bibliography:
Gilbert-Jennifer. J., Morton, S and Rowley, J. (2007). ‘e-Learning: the student
experience, British Journal of Educational Technology’, 38 (4), 560-573.
Catherine McLoughlin and Mark J. W. Lee.(2008) Future Learning
Landscapes: Transforming Pedagogy through Social Software. Software
Quality Journal 6, (1997) 181–194
Stephen Dowes (2004) Evaluating online CPD using educational criteria
derived from the experiential learning cycle. EDUCAUSE Review, vol. 39, no.
5 (September/October 2004): 14–26.
Irvin R. Katz, Alexius Smith Macklin (2007) Information and Communication
Technology (ICT) Literacy: Integration and Assessment in Higher Education.
Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics
Volume 5 - Number 4 - Year 2007 : 50-55
CHRISTINA WILLIAMS (2002) Learning On-line: a review of recent
literature in a rapidly expanding field. Journal of Further and Higher
Education, Vol. 26, No. 3, 2002
Su Illingworth (2011) My use of social media. InTuition-IfL, Issue 4, 2011 :7
Reece, I. And Walker, S. (2007) Teaching, Training and Learning: A Practical Guide.
6th rev. ed. Sunderland: Business Education Publishers.
A.V.Kelly (2004) The Curriculum: Theory and Practice 6TH Ed. Sage Publications
University of Salford (2011) Programme Handbook - FDA Television Production
Student Handbook 2011/2012. The Manchester College