Posted in 1. Instructional Systems Design, 1.2 Message Design, 512 Online Course Design, DESIGN

Pre-Planning Activities

Gantt Project Time Line (p.181)


Screen Shot 2013-03-09 at 11.33.33 AM

 

 

Completed Task Objective Analysis (p.188-196)

Clustered Objectives (p.198)

1.0 Using Forms to Gather Data

  • A. Prerequisites (objective 1.1)
  • B. Application (objectives 1.2, 1.5)
  • C. Analysis (objective 1.3-1.4)

2.0 Google Drive to Save You Time

  • A. Prerequisites (objectives 2.1-2.3)
  • B. Application (objectives 2.4-2.5)
  • C. Analysis (objective 2.6)

3.0 Blog Planning for Better Preparation

  • A. Prerequisites (objective 3.1)
  • B. Application (objectives 3.2-3.4)
  • C. Analysis (objectives 3.5-3.6)

4.0 Authentic Student Engagement with Digital Learning Logs

  • A. Prerequisites (objective 4.1)
  • B. Application (objective 4.2)
  • C. Analysis (objective 4.3)
Posted in 1. Instructional Systems Design, 1.2 Message Design, 1.3 Instructional Strategies, 512 Online Course Design, DESIGN

Summative & Formative Evaluation Planning

Assignment 1: General Overview of Evaluation Criteria (p. 132)

Evaluation Criteria Explanation Data Source
Appeal: create a connection for user between the formula (daily activities + time management tools = more efficiency.) Review ability to hook the audience by pin pointing real life challenges
  • Teacher KLW survey
  • Application of technologies in the classroom
  • Time on task survey
Usability: ease of user access and use Determine if users are able to navigate the course without any tech support
  • Ability to turn assignments in
  • User interest in taking another similar course
 Effectiveness: ability to utilize the tools as they were taught in the WBI course Determine if participants are able to apply new skills
  • Frequency with which the technologies are applied the classroom

General Evaluation Orientation (p.132)

This course model is oriented toward the participant.  The both formative and summative assessments will be designed to evaluate how well the course has served the participants needs.

Evaluation Matrix: Formative Evaluation Questions. (p140)

Evaluation Criteria & Categories Questions
Appeal
Goals
  • Are the goals relevant to the learner?
  • Is there a clear connection between technology use and time management?
  • Are the goals manageable for learners at varying levels technology proficiencies?
Content
  • Does the information directly address teachers’ daily duties?
  • Is the information applicable immediately?
  • How many people will application of the content impact?
Technology
  • Is the navigation intuitive?
  • Are the materials easy to access?
  • Is the course free of typos?
Message Design
  • Is the course organization easy to understand?
  • Do the videos, graphics, fonts, and colors have universal appeal?
  • Is the course pitched at adult learners of varying age and skill level?
Efficiency
Goals
  • Are the goals stated clearly and concisely?
Content
  • Is the content appropriate for all teaching disciplines?
Technology
  • Is the LMS/web structured properly?
  • Is access to other learners or an instructor an option?
  • Do technology applications outside the course design function easily and efficiently (Google & Weebly)?
Message Design
  • Does the information scaffold on prior skills?
  • Is there a clear organizational pattern?
Effectiveness
Goals
  • How do the goals support best practice instructional strategies?
  • How to the goals reprioritize teachers time?
Content
  • Will the information enable teachers to apply skills immediately or will additional practice be needed?
  • Does the information reflect current instructional practices?
Technology
  • Will the required WBI platform (Edmodo) support learners?
  • Will there be access to an instructor or other learners?
Message Design
  • Is the message design consistent with district instructional practices?
  • Are the directions short and concise?
  • Have screen shots been used according to district standards?

Stakeholders (p.143)

Primary Stakeholders

  • Designer: Responsible for course quality and revisions
  • Instructor: Responsible for informing the designer of snags or challenges in the course
  • Learners: will spend time trying to expunge information from the course
  • Learner’s students: successfully application will directly impact how the students are trained to use these tools.

Secondary Stakeholders

  • ITC department: The course reflects the department’s productivity level
  • School Administration: teachers working smarter reallocates time teachers’ time
  • Parents: Transparency and efficiency = more effective instructional time

What is Being Evaluated? (p.145)

   
  • Motivation strategies
  • Objectives
Design Plans
  • Grouping of objectives
  • Instructions
  • Activities
  • Example Items
Prototype & Website
  • Assessment items
  • Navigation
  • Interface
  • Collaborative Modeling

Who Are The Evaluators and Reviewers (p. 147)

Evaluator/EDTECH 512 Online Course Design Professor:

Youngkyn Baek has his Ph.D., Educational Foundations and Computer Based Instruction. He is a professor at Boise State University and teaches Online Course Design among other online classes.  Areas of Interest and Expertise: Game-based Learning, Instructional Mobile Game Design, Teaching and Learning in Virtual Worlds.

Evaluator/Designer/Instructor: Gillian Riley is an Instructional Technology Coach for SCCPSS. She holds an Education degree and has 7 years of classroom teaching experience. She is also a former Instructional Designer and is ¾ through the M.E.T program at Boise State University.

Expert Reviewer (instructional design, subject matter expert): Wendy Marshall is the Program Manager of the Instructional Technology Department of SCCPSS. She is the former director of the Educational Technology Training Center at Armstrong Atlantic State University.

Expert Reviewer (instructional design): Cris Higginbotham has her Ed.S. in Education and is an Instructional Technology Coach SCCPSS high school teachers.  She headed the adoption of Edmodo as a LMS for professional development and has developed the districts first online courses for teachers.

Expert Reviewer (subject matter): Stephen Routh is Science teacher in SCCPSS. He is partnering with the designer to test implementation logistics. Stephen is an avid user of Google Apps for Educators and is a leader of technology integration at his school and throughout the district.

Expert Reviewer (instructional design): Melissa Milligan is and Instructional Technology Coach at the middle and elementary level for SCCPSS. She has her Ed.S. in Education and is an online instructor.

Expert Reviewer (instructor): Caronia Shafer has 12 years teaching experience and is a professional development coach for SCCPSS. She has her Ed.S. in education and works with the designer as an instructional partner.

End-User Reviewer: Teachers who participate in both the face-2-face course and online version will be asked to give feedback on the course after each module. Learners from of the face-2-face version will have required attendance. Those accessing the content online will have chose to take the course. This should be noted as the responses from participants will be impacted based on how they came to take the course.

Evaluation Matrix Revisions (p.152)

Evaluation Criteria & Categories Questions Methods & Tools

 

Appeal

Goals
  • Are the goals relevant to the learner?
  • Is there a clear connection between technology use and time management?
  • Are the goals manageable for learners at varying levels technology proficiencies?
  • Observation
  • Pre-assessment
  • Pre-requisite survey
Content
  • Does the information directly address teachers’ daily duties?
  • Is the information applicable immediately?
  • How many people will application of the content impact?
  • End-user and expert reviews (SME)
  • Observation
  • Survey
Technology
  • Is the navigation intuitive?
  • Are the materials easy to access?
  • Is the course free of typos?
  • End-user and expert reviews (ID)
  • Survey
Message Design
  • Is the course organization easy to understand?
  • Do the videos, graphics, fonts, and colors have universal appeal?
  • Is the course pitched at adult learners of varying age and skill level?
  • End-user and expert reviews (SME, ID)
  • Survey

 

Efficiency

Goals
  • Are the goals stated clearly and concisely?
  • Expert review (SME, ID)
Content
  • Is the content appropriate for all teaching disciplines?
  • Expert review (SME, ID)
  • End-user review
  • Observation
Technology
  • Is the LMS/web structured properly?
  • Is access to other learners or an instructor an option?
  • Do technology applications outside the course design function easily and efficiently (Google & Weebly)?
  • Expert review (SME, ID)
  • End-user review
Message Design
  • Does the information scaffold on prior skills?
  • Is there a clear organizational pattern?
  • Expert review (SME, ID)

Effectiveness

Goals
  • How do the goals support best practice instructional strategies?
  • How to the goals reprioritize teachers time?
Expert review (SME, ID)
Content
  • Will the information enable teachers to apply skills immediately or will additional practice be needed?
  • Does the information reflect current instructional practices?
End-User and expert (SME, ID) review
Technology
  • Will the required WBI platform (Edmodo) support learners?
  • Will there be access to an instructor or other learners?
Expert review (ID, instructor)
Message Design
  • Is the message design consistent with district instructional practices?
  • Are the directions short and concise?
  • Have screen shots been used according to district standards?
  • Expert review  (ID)
  • Instructor review

Assignment 2:  Summative Assessment (p.163)

 Guiding Questions—Evaluating Appeal

  • Is there a change in appeal of face-2-face professional development vs. WBI?
  • What benefits do participants sight as preference for WBI over face-2-face instruction?
  • What challenges do participants sight a detractor for WBI vs. face-2-face instruction?
Data Source  Rationale & communication method Time-frame
Survey participant perceptions Evaluate the appeal of online professional development to present report to department head and board of education. Face-2-face data collected Spring 2013. Online data collected Summer and Winter 2013.
 Guiding Questions—Evaluating Efficiency

  • Do learners find WBI more efficient than face-2-face instruction?
  • Did learners feel their time was spent more efficiently in WBI or face-2-face course?
Data Source Rationale & communication method Time-frame
Survey participant perceptions Evaluate the efficiency of online professional development to present report to department head and board of education. After a face-2-face and online version have been offered (Winter 2013)
 Guiding Questions—Evaluating Effectiveness

  • Was there a difference in implementation rates between face-2-face participants vs. WBI participants?
Data Source Rationale & communication method Time-frame
ObservationInterview participants Evaluate the efficiency of online professional development to present report to department head and board of education. Conducted Spring 2014
Posted in 1. Instructional Systems Design, 4.1 Project Management, 512 Online Course Design, DESIGN, MANAGEMENT

Learning Task Map

LEARNER TASK MAP

Part 1: The learner task maps identifies the major steps participants will need to complete the activities outlined in this course. Click on the brainstorm image to see it full size.

Screen Shot 2013-02-19 at 6.25.32 PM

Part 2:

Task-Objective Assessment Item Blueprint by Gillian Riley

Part II: Task Objective Assessment Item Blueprint

REVISION PROCESS

Laying the tasks helps the designer realize how just many steps are involved in each objective. Perhaps more importantly, misalignments become apparent. In constructing the Task Objective Blueprint, I could see how both my objectives and my activities were aligned. After spending a good amount of time with teachers, I realize they want something that’s applicable…tomorrow.

While the realization about what teachers want was heavy on my mind at the I set into design mode, the Task Objective Map helped me realize skills were embedded, but I wasn’t asking the most important questions: Why is this important to me? What benefit does this process produce for me and my students? How does the implementation effect my students or I long run? and If I do this, then what? The task objectives helped me extend my orignal activities to reach for more depth in the critical thinking process. In each course design, the Task-Objective Assessment Item Blueprint is the most helpful.

Posted in 1. Instructional Systems Design, 2.3 Computer-Based Technologies, 512 Online Course Design, All

Project Analysis

PROBLEM ANALYSIS

When you ask teachers what they want more of, emphatically they answer TIME! Time to collaborate, plan, reflect, analyze data, and give feedback. These are fundamental to sound instructional processes.  Yet their time is often spent working in isolation, improvising, and using their bare hands to grade 100’s of assignments weekly. Public k-12 education has been one of the slowest industries to adopt time saving technologies and teachers are paying the price. Consider that even the auto mechanic leverages his time more effectively. Technology can automatically diagnose a car’s problem, identify needed parts, locate them, and place automatic orders. Repair shops use databased of information to preemptively market to their clients based on miles and make a BEFORE the repair is every needed.  Can you imagine such sophisticated and proactive data to educate our children?

While the similarities between cars and students are slim, what doesn’t change from the mechanic to the teacher is  one field the need to work smarter. Teachers will be the first to admit their attention and time is divided in 100 directions and rarely is the right amount spent on the design behind of the instruction. In conversations with teacher, they’ve said they need more time to:

  1. grade & give feedback
  2. get to know their students
  3. plan
  4. figure out how to engage students

SYMPTOMS

Digital tools have the ability eliminate  or reduce some of symptoms I see daily working with teachers as an Instructional Technology Coach. These symptoms include

  • High stress levels
  • Sense of isolation
  • Bitterness toward professional development and other things that are not “A priorities.”
  • Make it up as you go instruction
  • Reinventing the wheel
  • Lack of communication with students & parents
  • Lack of engaged students

ROOT CAUSES

The root cause of this problem, is that the responsibilities of teachers huge and the number of hours in the day outside of instruction are limited. Time management is a popular training topic in corporations across the county, yet after 10 years in the education field, and after completing three education programs spanning 6 years, time management has never been addressed. Another cause is that teachers are challenged to manage their multiple daily responsibilities along with finding time to grow professionally. Taking their planning time for professional development is like robbing Paul to pay Mary.

In a recent professional development survey of 30 high school teacher 83% of staff said that an opportunity to exchange ideas with other teachers was very important.

PD ideas Exchange 2013-02-13 at 1.21.14 PM
Likewise, 87% said it was very important to be able to express concerns on school, classroom, or curriculum issues.

Express Concerns 2013-02-13 at 1.21.28 PM

When asked how important it was to have time to learn to play with new technologies, only 67% said this was very important

Learn New Tools 2013-02-13 at 1.21.40 PM

My conclusion from this is that there ins’t a strong connection between time invested to learn new tools and the long term pay off of daily efficiency.

The evidence for creating a blended learning solution is slightly less conclusive because participants could select multiple options on this survey question. However, it does show that 37% prefer an online option, and 33% said a blended solution would be preferable.

PD Time 2013-02-13 at 1.19.53 PM

.

That said, the rationale for creating a web-based course is two fold. The first is to differentiate professional development and to meet the needs of already overtaxed teachers at the high schools I work with. The second rationale is so the course can be offered virtually over the summer to teachers across the district to support them as they plan for the 2013-2014 school year. This solution will allow us to accommodate more users by offering more options.

GAPS ANALYSIS

ACTUAL SITUATION GAP ANALYSIS OPTIMAL SITUATION
GRADING & FEEDBACK GRADING & FEEDBACK GRADING & FEEDBACK
Grading and feedback is widely still done by hand. Teachers are often the only ones giving feedback on student work. Class wide rapid assessment tools and data is inconstantly gathered and used to inform instructional decisions. Rapid assessment tools are regularly implemented and used to drive instructional decisions. Students take a more active role in assessing each others work before it is submitted for teachers feedback.
KNOWING STUDENTS KNOWING STUDENTS KNOWING STUDENTS
High school teacher have reported it’s a difficult to get to know 120+ students. Differentiated instruction cannot be implemented without prior knowledge about the students. Teachers will implement tools that allow them to hear from and learn about their students regularly.
PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING
Teacher often plan in isolation and reinvent the wheel year after year. No Virtual collaboration space is in place. Many teachers are unaware of the benefits of cloud-based storage solutions. Teachers collaborate regularly with those in and outside of their school and use a cloud based solutions to keep track of lesson plans and teaching resources.
MAXIMIZE INSTRUCTIONAL TIME MAXIMIZE INSTRUCTIONAL TIME MAXIMIZE INSTRUCTIONAL TIME
Instructional time is not always maximized. GAPS analysis reported a lack of closings in lessons. Teacher report they often run out of time for closings. Lessons may not be fully thought out and therefore specific goals may not be met. Time indicators are rarely utilized to keep lessons on track. Daily instructions are clearly printed so students have direction and flexibility to move at their own pace. Teachers utilize tools like digital timers to ensure openings, work sessions, and closings stay within targeted timeframes.

INSTRUCTIONAL GOAL

At the end of instruction, teachers will be able to identify how technology tools can be used to streamline their duties in gathering assessment data,learning about their students, planning, maximizing instructional time, and creating authentic engagement  They will also be able to evaluate if these tools can be applied in their classroom. Further, they will have the skills needed to apply these tools if their learning environment permits.

LEARNER ANALYTICS

As an Instructional Technology Coach and former teacher in the district, the course designer has personal experience with the learners. This course will also be offered as a blended solution before it is offered online. The blended version is a pilot to be revised based on evaluations and complete rates before the online version goes live. The image below outlines what is known about the learners. Below is a link to a survey that will need to be conducted to answer the unknown, namely discovering disabilities and learner technical skills. Click the image to enlarge.

Learner Anyalitics

See the Prerequisite Survey.

Posted in 1. Instructional Systems Design, 1.2 Message Design, 1.3 Instructional Strategies, 1.4 Learner Characteristics, 2.3 Computer-Based Technologies, 2.4 Integrated Technologies, 512 Online Course Design, DESIGN, DEVELOPMENT

EDTECH 512: Online Course Design

Time Management Tools for Teachers Designed by Gillian Riley

timemanagement

Web Based Instructional Design 

 


Final Products