eLearning and Lawn Tractors

Spring is in the air. Well, at least it was on a sunny, 70′s yesterday, before diving back into the blustery 30 somethings. Nonetheless, I wasn’t about to give up the plans that sprouted yesterday along with the daffodils and garlic mustard: the lawn tractor needs its annual fix up and I, who just barely knows where to stick the tire pressure guage, decided to do this myself. Why not? I am literate – in the sense that I generally understand the text in front of me enough to question what on earth the author was thinking. And we’re just talking equipment manuals. I humor myself by saying I am also literate in regards to technology. Oo. Wait. Since there’s a tractor involved, I’d better clarify: I’m generally literate as far as computers go. So, if I need to, I’m sure I can find assistance online… if I really need it.

My annual lawn tractor mantenance kit from Sears in one hand, tools I think I’ll need in another, and the manual which I’d studied over a morning coffee and milk (“latte” just seems out of place here) in my teeth, I head to the garage and hunker down for what I think should take me all of an hour or so.

That was six hours ago.

Draining the oil went smoothly, but the oil filter that came in the box, Where does that go? The manual does not have pictures. YouTube perhaps? Thanks Trevor, whoever you are, for letting me know that even you have to use that Special Wrench and can’t remove the oil filter simply with sheer brawn and manly hands. Off to the hardware store.

Then there was the in-line fuel filter. I get what it’s for. But where is it? There’s nothing under the hood that looks anything like the one in the box. The manual doesn’t really say where it is or provide any helpful illustrations. After poking about tractor innards, the thing that I find that I’m sure must be the filter does not resemble the thing in the box. The manual pages with the parts listing – you know, the ones with all the anatomically correct line drawings of various engine bits, pieces and parts, all numbered, with the corresponding part names on the facing page – provide the fuel filter part number that I should have received, but which is not what is written on the nice new fuel filter in my hand. More online searching, and finally a call to the friendly Sears cusomer service. After reassurance that the part is a correct substitute, I am ready to go. Now, where’s that piece of paper? Ah…Here it is. The instructions provided say,

“Install new fuel filter in proper position, according to the directional flow, or “in” and “out” markings on the filter body. Secure with the original clamps.”

No pictures. Right. This is where I get tired of running in and out of the house to dig for videos – someone to show me, for heaven’s sake – what the proper position is, how on earth those clamps work, and, what I wouldn’t have known without the nice people at Lowe’s who posted that John Deere video just last month: that gasoline is going to spew out everywhere in the process.

Husband’s laptop balanced on engine.
Wireless, go.
Battery, check.
I’m on a roll again.

 There’s a spark plug in that box, too. I did not know that there exists a special gizmo just for spark plugs, just for measuring the distance between the hook doodad on the end and the plug body. Another video later with the same friendly sounding tractor-fixing guy, and a few google searches for “Where’s the spark plug on a Sears lawn tractor?” (“Natural language” search strategy employed. Intentional, of course) I manage to find it, use both the wire gauge and spark plug socket procured on trip number two to the local hardware, and do the deed. I credit the video tractor guy with such an encouraging voice, the voice with the kind tone that says,

“You can do this.
I know you can.
I know you know that people who do this for a living, like me, do all of this in under an hour without getting oil all over the garage floor. But, yes, you can do this, too.”

So, would it be legitimate to say that “elearning goes to the garage”? The interaction between my lawn tractor and me felt a bit one-sided; but, then the classroom sometimes does feel that way despite our best efforts. I definitely feel as though I’ve warmed up to the John Deere guy, despite my initial misgivings. I’m not certain there was collaboration of any sort; I felt like I was doing all the work this time around. Now, if I could have had technical service via video conferencing, that definitely would have improved matters all around.

Now I just need someone to assure me that nothing bad will happen when I start the engine.

Final Project

Well, here is the  formation stage. Feel free to comment at any point in the messy process.

Online Assessment Final Project

Photo credit: NASA

WikiEducator & Open Education Resource University

I can’t begin to count how many thought-provoking interviews I’ve been listening to through Learn Central . Steve Hardigan, consultant for Elluminate, interviewed Dr. Wayne Mackintosh, the founder of WikiEducator. One of his visions is that WikiEducator become an accredited, global, open education resource university. He admits to many hurdles, and hopes for many credible individuals to participate in the conversation around how quality student support can be provided in open, free online environments. I am sure that in light of how Wikipedia began and over time has gained some credibility, this will be as interesting to watch. Visit the site or listen to the interview.

Cybercoaching: How Different, Really?

Under Holmgren's Watch: Photo credit, Bernie Zimmerman

I am always looking for analogies. The article, “Cybercoaching: rubrics, feedback, & metacognition, oh my!” by Naomi Jeffery Petersen fueled another week of interesting discussion with my online cohorts. Her comment, that “A coach, as opposed to a referee or a spectator or even a player, looks for skills to develop rather than errors committed or goals scored” did have me scratching my head a little bit. Although the analogy is a good one, I am not sure I entirely agree with the explanation. Why not hear what a coach thinks about the work he does? On the recent “Wait Wait… Don’t Tell Me!” podcast, guest Pete Carroll, the Seattle Seahawks coach, had my attention starting with his comment, “Most importantly, we’re teachers…” Here I am, a teacher of sorts, trying to picture myself as a coach. Nice twist. Sometimes, the best analogies come where we least expect them, and an added bonus is laugh or two in the midst of an “ah hah!” moment. Enjoy!

Wait Wait!… Don’t Tell Me

Citation: Petersen, Naomi Jeffery. (2004). Cybercoaching: rubrics, feedback, & metacognition, oh my! Paper presented at E.C. Moore Symposium on Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, Indiana University. February 25, 2005.

Re-posting: Collaborative Assessment

Sometimes I think I do some of my better reflecting in our course online discussions. Once the course is over and after a certain length of time, I won’t have access to those. I’d like to “hold this thought”, so I’ll share this particular post, a response to an article of case studies. I’ll probably re-post a few others later on. _____________________________________________________________ All of the case studies in Koohang, Riley, Smith and Schreurs include a strong component of “team collaborative assessment”. I’ve had some interesting debates lately (the good kind) with my educator husband (another of the good kind), and found myself defending that this is not simply a “touchy feely” element as he would argue, if designed well. There is more to team collaborative assessment than a class vote of the best group presentation and giving the winning group a prize bag of chocolate kisses. These case studies have me reconsidering two major components in my high school media literacy elective multi-genre research project: the “collaborative design component” and “team collaborative assessment.” I had been planning for individual students to select individual research topics, and although they may work in groups on requisite skill development, the work for their project would ultimately be done individually. Rather, in order to employ a more collaborative design element that exposes students to “multiple representations of content/idea/concept” that are not only of their own making, I am rethinking that pairs or small groups could develop the multi-genre/multimedia collection around a group-selected topic. Each student would still be responsible for developing a variety of pieces and would still demonstrate their individual understanding of various genres, much like our Assessment Toolbox assignment, but they would benefit from the perspectives and creativity of their teammates as well. By allowing for a more collaborative approach, students will not only evaluate their virtual classmates’ final projects (which wouldn’t support them in the process), but I will be able to incorporate team assessment at various stages along the way. If done well, this may nudge teammates to assist each other first, to keep pace with the project, and to ask for instructor intervention if they or a teammate is floundering.  Koohag, A, Riley, L, Smith, T, & Schreurs, J. (2009). E-learning and constructivism: from theory to application. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning Objects , 5. Retrieved from ijklo.org/Volume5/IJELLOv5p091-109Koohang655.pdf

Creating Pre-course Surveys

Please take a look. You are a junior or senior high school student gearing up to take an elective English Language Arts class.  What suggestions do you have to tweak this survey? It is not intended to be a skills survey, but to get to know the students and their motivations. With the free version of Survey Monkey, I am limited to 10 questions.

Pre-course Survey

Bloom’s Revisited

I always find it a challenge to focus on only a few learning objectives without thinking of the entire scope and sequence of a course. Nonetheless, for this assignment, I managed to focus on a few juicy bits.

Taxonomy Table Assignment

Evaluating Tools for Assessment: A Never-ending Story

…and I do have a soft spot for sequels and series! Sure, the first book might be satisfying in and of itself, but when it’s really good, anticipation along with a barely perceptible haze of resentment builds as I near the final pages. I love knowing that there will be another chance to watch characters grow and plots thicken.

So it is with lesson plans and assessment tools that accompany them. Even if lesson, unit, project, or workshop culminates well, there are always thoughts of “What next?” “How could this be better?” “There must be a way to avoid this glitch?” “Is there a better way for students to show what they know?” Developing our Web 2.0 Toolbox reinforced this questioning. As Linda, David and I explored how Edmodo, Museumbox, and Elluminate could feature in our planning, I was constantly reminded that the tools we explored would change with upgrades or be supplanted by others. Our improved skill in evaluating new “cool” tools for educational value would be the lasting product of this activity. Happily, it’s a never-ending story.

Click to visit our Web 2.0 Assessment Toolbox.

Those Bloomin’ Verbs and Assessments

I think it’s safe to say that the preponderance of English majors like verbs. Active verbs. [This particular English major doesn't mind the use of conjunctions or incomplete sentences if the mood is right, either.] So what is not to like about referring to Bloom’s taxonomy and the helpful, corresponding action verbs to describe what students will accomplish – barring the possibility that I, the one scheming the lesson, don’t bungle the occasion?  I suspect that our friend Benjamin hadn’t escaped the influence of William Strunk, Jr. or E. B. White, even though he was only five when they published The Elements of Style; weak verbs such as “know” and “learn” will never do, he advises. Vigorous writing requires active verbs with strong intention, verbs we can observe.  This leaves us with gutsy verbs the likes of defending and distinguishing, and critiquing and differentiating.

Although so 20th century, Bloom, Strunk and White provide us language guidelines that we continue to use employ in articulating our course design, including our assessment plans.  Of all the illustrations I have seen, I find the taxonomy wheel most useful.

 

Bloom's Taxonomy Verbs and Assessments: http://zaidlearn.blogspot.com/2009/07/use-blooms-taxonomy-wheel-for-writing.html

This visual provides inspiration for selecting assessments that match an objective or the other way around. Notice as well that with the wheel, rather than referring to cognition “levels” or a hierarchy, each domain is afforded equal importance in learning; knowledge is just as important as synthesis which is just as important as application.  I do recognize that when there is a preponderance of activities that emphasize comprehending and knowing and a dearth of those that allow for evaluation and synthesis, the wheel goes out of alignment and my students will be lucky to arrive at their destination – if they don’t bail out first out of sheer boredom.  Yet, how nice it is that I don’t have to feel I ask too little to expect my students to on occasion comprehend and be “in the know” about something.

Gentle reader (or two if there are any indulgent enough to have read this far), I leave you with a quote. Perhaps it will illustrate why viewing Bloom’s taxonomy as a hierarchy may not be the most beneficial. Hopefully, it illustrates why sometimes - just sometimes – providing opportunities for my students to get to know something (electricity, in the following example) before they demonstrate application (perhaps a painful proposition? I wouldn’t know.) benefits them well:

“There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves.” (attributed to Will Rogers)

 References (although I doubt they would be proud to be associated with this particular post):

Alsagoff, Z. A. (2009, July 25). ZaidLearn: Use Bloom’s taxonomy wheel for writing learning outcomes. ZaidLearn. Retrieved February 10, 2011, from http://zaidlearn.blogspot.com/2009/07/use-blooms-taxonomy-wheel-for-writing.html.

Strunk, W., & White, E. B. (1979). The elements of style (3d ed.). New York: Macmillan.

Screenagers & Education

I shared the February, 2011, edition of Educational Leadership on our class discussion board. The theme, Screenagers, caught my classmates/colleagues attention and inspired interesting conversation. For the majority of us, this was a new, but interesting description of our generation of students. I was curious about uses of this label in contexts other than education, and found this video, produced in the UK.

She points out that by the time they are 21, these young people will have spent over 10,000 online hours. She draws a connection with Malcolm Gladwell who, in The Outliers, proposes that 10,000 hours is what it takes for a person to become an “expert” in a field. In this context I ask, expert at… what, exactly? Socializing online? Browsing? Multitasking? Finding information to answer their questions? But does that mean they will be experts at recognizing authoritative information by default? Does this mean they understand cyber ethics without instruction? Some people do learn without formal instruction, and there’s no doubt about that; however, unless the rest who are more likely to thrive with some formal guidance are led to participate in engaging learning experiences where they practice critical analysis and project collaboration, I question whether their hours in front of the screen guarantee their success in future work endeavors. As an educator, I view the term “screenager” a commentary on how students learn and a small subset of what they need to know to be successful.

I especially found Mark Bauerlein’s article, Too Dumb for Complex Texts? a case in point. What is often missing is finding engaging ways to teach the discipline of focus: managing to read longer non-fiction text, and following another author’s argument from introduction, through supporting details, to conclusion.

These two questions are from the Educational Leadership study guide for this article.  What do you think?

• What do you think of Bauerlein’s argument? If you’ve been teaching for more than 10 years, do you see students becoming less able to complete complex readings? How do your students tend to react when you assign a long, intricate reading that requires deliberation?
• Unlike Richardson, Bauerlein doesn’t see students becoming “content creators” as a purely positive development. Young readers who are used to having their own ideas spotlighted may lose the humility to patiently comprehend someone else’s ideas. Do you agree? (Educational Leadership, 2011)