I've just learned that Athabasca University Press is starting to publicize my new book, due out this Fall. It's in French, entitled "Le conseiller pédagogique réflexif: un journal de bord" and it's all about the woes (and Whoas!) of an instructional designer in a traditional university. The English-language version will come out in Spring 2008, hopefully. Naw, absolutely.

See the blurb on it at : http://www.aupress.ca/MichaelPower.php 

Mike

Well, I had about two weeks on Cape Breton Island at Port Hood beach, a beautiful spot, seemingly passed over by tourists in favour of the Highlands National Park. The water was beautiful and the weather clear and warm. I highly recommend it!

Now back at work, I've just been notified that my candidacy for a re-emerging research center (named CIRTA and based at Université de Montréal) has been accepted. This center is specialised in "learning technologies". It is bringing together researchers and associates from a variety of fields but most are from educational technology.

During my vacation, I sent off a proposal to AERA which will be in New York this year. Unfortunately proposals are due on August 1st which, for some strange reason, is the day on which I usually submit... meaning I stop holidaying and hunker down to write... Oh well, I did so with a backdrop of waves breaking gently on the beach and a warm wind wafting in from the West. While I was at it, I got a proposal off to the Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration (OJDLA) for the Aug 15th deadline on a theme I wrote about earlier in this blog, that of Blended Online Learning.

I am currently working on two new graduate courses: one addressing the needs of EdTEch MA and PhD students, Instructional Design Theory and Practice using Reiser & Dempsey's 2007 Trends and Issues book, and the other a more general Design & Development course adapted to the needs of Community College teachers. Enrollments are up this year and we've recently reinvigorated a joint CC-Uni partnership aimed at improving comms and harmonising activities.

That's about it for now. More later.

Michael

I've just had a nice chitchat with Dr. Rick Lillie who kindly responded to my last blog posting. He also has a blog here in EduSpaces and I encourage you to go take a look. Rick is very innovative in the combination of technologies (and, for the most part, freeware) he is using.

I've thought some more about Blended Online Learning and about a comment George Siemens made in his blog today. He's talking about the proliferation of terms, about how some are saying that e-learning has had its day and that the term no longer represents what is happening in our field. And here I am introducing yet another concept (at least I think I am; haven't found any other mention of Blended Online Learning yet after a quick Google search). Well, so is life in the electronic age. My take on the number of terms being generated is simple: some will stick and some won't. I've heard TIME generates hundreds of neologisms yearly, some become part'n parcel of our language, some, like shooting stars, don't. Science is increasingly building on the efforts of the many (as opposed to the few, not so long ago) and multiplication and even some degree of redundancy is to be expected. What is MOST important I think is the generation of new ideas, concepts, hypotheses and eventually theories that help us make sense out of all this.

My 2 cents befor ehitting the road for a couple of weeks of R&R on the North-Western coast of Cape Breton Island.

Mike

Further to my June 27th posting, I was thinking about Blended Learning (as in Kanuka & Anderson), but more specifically Blended Online Learning which, according to a quick Google search, is not yet a concept (well, it is NOW). First, what is Blended learning? According to the Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blended_learning 

"Blended Learning is the combination of multiple approaches to learning. Blended learning can be accomplished through the use of 'blended' virtual and physical resources. A typical example of this would be a combination of technology-based materials and face-to-face sessions used together to deliver instruction.

In the strictest sense, blended learning is anytime any instructor combines two methods of delivery of instruction. However, the deeper meaning lies in engaging the students of the current generation. Thus a better example would be using active learning techniques in the physical classroom and a social web presence online. Blended learning is a term that represents a shift in instructional strategy".

 OK, so when we hear the term BL (and see it in the literature), we usually mean "a combination of technology-based materials and face-to-face sessions used together to deliver instruction" and "using active learning techniques in the physical classroom and a social web presence online". Right? Well, I wish to introduce the concept of "Blended Online Learning" which means :

- the combined use of asynchronous-based online materials (for instance, Web-based course materials accessible via WebCT) and synchronous-based online working/teaching-learning sessions (for instance, via a virtual classroom like Saba Centra's classroom or Elluminate's) integrated as a single system/portal for learning, delivering instructional materials (offering both individual and/or team assisgnments/materials/exercises) and providing a real-time, virtual classroom learning environment for immediate dialog, exchange, meaning negociation & feedback. That is how, off -the-cuff so to speak, I would define a Blended Online Learning environment and/or approach.

Materials deposited on the asynchronous website serve as preparatory material (teaching material) to be used by the individual and teams prior to the synchronous working sessions (as in tutoring sessions). This respects the classical distance education model while integrating on-campus tradition of in-class discussion. Similar to a pyramid-like structure, individual work accomplished asynchronously (rthe base) feeds the team activity (the middle section) which then feeds the online, synchronious working session (the top).

I am currently involved in a pilot using Elluminate here at Laval. Our hypothesis is that use of a BOL approach will facilitate faculty "migration" to online learning, will improve the quality of instruction/didactic exchange, will allow our university to improve its outreach goals and overall improve access to our programs. This all hinges on faculty buy-in, of course. To be continued...

M

Source: Punie, Y. (2007). Learning Spaces: an ICT-enabled model of future
learning in the Knowledge-based Society. European Journal of Education,Vol. 42, No. 2, pp.185-199. 

Mike

I am currently preparing an article for publication in an Ed Tech, ICT, e-learning etc. journal. The question is : which one? I've been putting together a list of Journals and Associations (most of which have journals) and I've hit 94 without breaking a sweat. See my list in Files (go to the right of this page and scroll down to "Files". Then  click on "File storage"). It is amazing how many there are... and I'm still counting. And there are more and more online and free. Which is encouraging. Way to go! Especially for TRUE, unimpeded peer review. I recall reading about one online journal which hosts an online, real-time, "everyone-invited" discussion with authors about a week or so after their articles appear. I think that is definitiely the way to go to encourage both publication and readership. I'll try to remember which one it was.

Mike

Today I’ve been thinking about how technology is affecting everything around us. Of course I’m most interested in learning technology. Here’s a case in point: I’m just back from seeing the new Bruce Willis movie. Same old character, same old attitude but with a new sidekick who is a genius on the keyboard. It was very entertaining, if also very violent. I guess the message is, when times get tough, you need a tough guy to take charge. Which he does. I, of course, was more interested in the very well done video graphics: scenes moved almost seamlessly from actual up-close footage to computer-generated backgrounds. It was a true learning experience of how to avoid getting killed (not an altogether useless piece of information) and a reminder to me of how effective storytelling is as a learning method. And computer-generated, graphically-enhanced storytelling is like Grandpapa on steroids.

So, as I prepare a new course on instructional design, I’m starting to see how I’m going to integrate a video-enhanced learning component for designers-in-training. It won’t be a Willis-style big budget blockbuster but it will expose designers to creatively using digital video technology for learning. This in turn reminds me of one of the cases in Ertmer & Quinn’s 2006 Casebook about how a designer developing material for an airlines training program switched from pen & paper and started making video clips as a training tool. The results showed several weaknesses (as in undetected incompetence among in-service personnel) which did not show up using a more classical approach to testing. Actually, I’m talking more about development (that’s next term) than design. Still, I realized today how much creativity you can build into instruction using digital video. And how much faster youth today seem to learn as compared to my generation.

This brings to mind something I heard from a friend of my brother’s who teaches heavy equipment in a Community College. He was saying how the course used to take a year but now the kids coming into the program have such great hand-eye coordination that they usually master the hydraulics in weeks rather than months. As a result, they’ve cut part of the program and have the students out practicing/working (under supervision) on-site within 6 months. So who said all those video games were preparing a generation of losers?  

Mike

I recall discussing simultaneous translation as opposed to written translation with a friend a few years back. She had done both for several years but had opted to specialize in simultaneous translation. When I asked her why, she intimated to me that it was more gratifying, even prestigious, to do simultaneous rather than written translation, adding (and I still remember the words she used) “people are more forgiving when it’s done on-the-fly”. I understood her meaning that people generally recognize the inherently greater difficulty involved in simultaneous translation, as opposed to written translation, and are therefore more predisposed to overlook errors and oversights made when in-the-act than they are when perusing a written translation done over a period of days, even weeks. This anecdote sat dormant in my mind only to be awakened when I embarked upon a research project involving faculty teaching online using synchronous (real-time) desktop conferencing as opposed to asynchronously Web-based online learning.  In asynchronously-delivered, Web-based online courses, expectations run rather high among administrators and peers as well as among students who generally have a low tolerance threshold for mistakes, omissions and ‘shoddy’ workmanship. They usually expect the online course to be complete, high quality and professional and if it is not, there are usually low satisfaction ratings.

Indeed, there are myriad examples of downright bad quality, low tech, pdf'ed handout-based online courses (see, for instance, cases in Ertmer & Quinn, 2006). According to virtually every author to publish on faculty developing courses for online delivery, (Bonk; Douglas & Schaffer; Fink, Harasim and Hiltz come to mind), faculty are severely limited in the amount of time and energy they can commit to course development because of the amount of time and energy they are expected to expend on research. As a result, because of faculty concerns over quality, “Web courses” (according to Judith Boettcher’s 2000 typology) as we know them often tend to leave faculty with a “bad taste in their mouth”; hence, the low and slow online course development rate. So, how can expectations be lowered a bit so as to make online learning a viable option for mainstream faculty while affording them some assurance of quality?  

Getting back to the anecdote above, the answer may lie in online, Web-mediated, spontaneous, synchronous dialogue. Once a favourite gadget ubiquitous in science fiction movies, synchronous desktop audioconferencing and videoconferencing (and not simply chat) has, since the mid 1990s, become a reality, especially in the corporate world but less in university circles, thanks to increasing bandwidth, faster computers and more users. Relatively reliable, effective and world-spanning software allow Internet users to talk, share files, manage group discussions, conduct break-out group sessions, and assemble in plenary sessions, etc. without leaving their offices or homes. Since it’s being “done on-the-fly”, being based on spontaneous interaction, may people be more forgiving? More ready to recognize the limits inherent in such an endeavour? Might faculty feel less pressure in such a teaching/learning environment that they would in preparing an asynchronously-delivered online course where everything has to be just right?  

Another parallel train of thought is occurring in my mind as I'm typing this: what are the implications of “going online” using an asynchronous environment as opposed to a synchronous environment, namely from an androgogico-constructivist standpoint? The oft-decried “lock-step” approach to course design and delivery is still very much alive and well in asynchronous learning, is it not, still dictating what and from whom students will learn? OTOH, “going synchronous” does not guarantee that faculty will adopt a constructivist approach to teaching and students to learning; the enduring prevalence of lecturing in on-campus courses is eloquent testimony to that. BUT might use of a synchronous, oral transmission-based, computer-mediated solution be conducive to allowing faculty to adopt a constructivist approach, if they so desire? Or how about a combined “high touch” synch - “low tech” asynch approach, as in high-level and intensive interaction between faculty and students in a synchronous environment with preparatory material (perhaps little more than ‘shovelware’) being available online? Is this too great a compromise to make? Are users that understanding and forgiving? Does this all boil down to an idealist versus a realist stand-off, again? I’m starting to think so… 

Thus ends my musings on a Wednesday afternoon.  

Mike

- Instructional design in higher education (HE), or a lack thereof. I attended an educational developer conference earlier this year and was frankly surprised to not meet any other instructional designers. Everyone was interested in educational development, in faculty development, etc. but apparently not in instructional design (ID). Why is that? Reiser (2007) said that ID has had "little impact in HE". I agree. But don't you find that odd? It's similar to people working in a shoe store preferring to all go around barefoot. As a field, ID has taken hold more in the military (M) and in big business (BB) than in HE. My take on this is that in HE, we have never been interested in mass-producing instruction. we are, on the contrary, really interested in assisting students to develop their own individual understanding of phenomena and of refining their critical analysis of such. This is seemingly incompatible with ID as it has developed in the M and BB. On a related note, I'm also currently pondering the interface between DE and didactics, the former being a more North American response to training and educational planning and the latter, a more European response. As I mentioned in my other posting, I'm working on a paper dealing with this. Maybe the didactic approach is what will appeal in HE.

 - I am also thinking about the role of synchronous desktop conferencing in a sociostructivist paradigm for expanding HE e-learning opportunities worldwide. This came to the top of the pile because of something I read in Moore & Kearsley's Distance education (2005). Their focus still seems to be on teaching and the design of teaching more than on the design of learning. It's still about designing structured content although they do talk about the growing importance of dialogue. I agree there. I'm thinking that, in HE, highly developed structure is a thing of the past and that, via new synch platforms, dialogue will reassume its role in HE as the principal means of instruction. Just a thought. Based on a faculty trend I’ve observed i.e. shunning high-level, front-end design. There is just no time for that anymore. Besides, why invest a lot of time and energy in developing content which is constantly changing and for a finite number of students? HE, outside the single-mode DE universities, has never concerned itself with enrolling thousands of students in any one course. Heavens forbid! (Back to our loathing for mass-producing minds...)

This is my first posting to eduspace. There has been a temporary lull in the academic year and I thought this would be a good place to celebrate it. I've wanted to start a blog for years and so this is  somewhat of a watershed event for me. Maybe I'll start by telling you about three papers I'm currently working on:

The first is a paper I have temporarily entitled "When Continents Collide: Instructional Design meets Didactics".  In a nutshell, I started to realize that researchers in didactics and in design are both, metaphorically and literally, continents apart (hence the title). What is interesting is that, here in Québec, some researchers are schooled in a European-grounded Didactics approach and others, such as myself, in a North American, Instructional Design approach.  After some preliminary scouting around, I realized that there seemed to be a gap in the literature and so I'm trying to see how it might be possible to make a contribution.

Another project I’m just starting work on is provisionally entitled “Designing ethically-sensitive qualitative research material: use of interpolated rotoscoping in video footage conversion”. This deals with the tricky problem of how to use interview footage of school-age children playing educational games in a school setting. Given the ethically-sensitive nature of using such footage in qualitative reporting, I've started looking for a tool that would allow us to report accurately on in situ observations using actual artefact-based material while maintaining the integrity of the material AND meeting the Ethics Committee’s standards. A major feat of juggling!

Finally, a third paper in the works is a paper entitled “Designing evidence- & participant-based heuristic algorithms for moral dilemmas and ethical decisions”. Decidedly, a mouthful. This paper is emerging from an ongoing development research project which involves the creation of a simulator for supporting a more experiential approach to teaching ethics (Ethical Advisor). So I'm looking at case study-based data on moral dilemmas and subsequent ethical decision-making and identifying algorithmic patterns that are fed into the EA simulator for a more automated approach to ethical heuristics.

That is about it for today. Let me know if any of you have similar interests.

Mike

PS See also my fledgling website (in French, soon in English) www.fse.ulaval.ca/Michael.Power