Choose your own SoTL adventure!

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) is all about furthering skills, growing knowledge, and contributing insights. Some would argue that life is defined by growth, the more alive we are, the more we grow. This is probably a conditional truth, but as far as the teaching profession goes, I believe it is completely applicable. A teacher who is alive in the profession is always looking for new ways to learn and grow in theory and practice. It likely does not always happen through formal education or scholarly readings, but we all know that those areas constitute only a small percentage of life’s learning environments!

Below, I have included several resources that have struck me as especially relevant and beneficial to my own efforts. Read on to discover why and decide whether they can help you!

Source 1:

Graham, C. R., Dziuban, C., & Picciano, A. G. (2013). Chapter 6: Student Perspectives on Blended Learning Through the Lens of Social, Teaching, and Cognitive Presence. Blended Learning: Research Perspectives (pp. 93-103). Needham, MA: The Sloan Consortium. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/bmxlYmtfXzY2MjMzN19fQU41?sid=0019ac68-544d-4b28-9a5f-fe9bb683d37b@sessionmgr4002&vid=1&format=EB&lpid=lp_11&rid=0

In this second volume edition, Graham and Dziuban join Picciano in an effort to evaluate blended learning through the eyes of students. The sixth chapter of Graham, Dziuban, and Picciano’s (2013) work demonstrates student perspectives on the social, teaching, and cognitive aspects of their blended learning experience, denoting some commonalities such as the desire for increased peer-to-peer interaction during class time, as opposed to lectures. In my own practice, I have struggled with some of the very concepts underscored by the feedback received by the students above. Beyond the desire for more interaction, students tend to easily recognize greater need for organization and structure, perhaps one of the most fundamentally important aspects of a blended learning environment. As I pursue greater efforts in this field, I must consider these norms seriously to best anticipate my own students’ needs and desires.

Source 2:

Caulfield, J. (2011). Chapter Six: Providing and Soliciting Student Feedback. How to design and teach a hybrid course: Achieving student-centered learning through blended classroom, online, and experiential activities (pp. 98-109). Sterling, VA: Stylus Pub. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/ehost/detail?sid=2085b0fe-a8df-4735-9865-47ba613eb252%40sessionmgr4005&vid=1&hid=4204&bdata=JnNjb3BlPXNpdGU%3d#db=e000xna&AN=444402

This source digs deeply into the concept of hybrid education, a term closely related to blended learning. More specifically, chapter 6 focuses intently on the necessary component of student feedback. According to Caulfield (2011), feedback is not merely important for students, but it is essential for growth in any skill or activity for many reasons, including the need to correct misonceptions before bad habits form. I find this concept to be pertinent to me not merely on the digital or blended front, but simply because of its universal applicability. One of the weakest points of my teaching career has been providing timely, valuable feedback to students. As a teacher, it is hard to balance all the grading and planning that must take place, but I have come to realize that the feedback itself need not always be formal or attached to a result (like a grade). The important thing is that, as the teacher, I am guiding the students to hone their skills correctly over time. Sometimes it only takes a nudge to keep someone on course!

Source 3:

Hew, K. F., & Cheung, W. S. (2012). Chapter 3: Possible strategies to overcome limited student contribution: Empirical findings from previous research. Student participation in online discussions: Challenges, solutions, and future research (pp. 31-48). New York: Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4614-2370-6_3

In Chapter 3 of Hew and Cheung’s (2012) book, the authors assign numerous strategies to overcoming ten primary struggles students face when engaging in online discussions, problems including lack of seeing the need, concern for others’ behavior, inability to keep pace, and failure to demonstrate critical thinking. This material easily connects to concerns that I have had for quite some time now, specifically revolving around struggles to get substantial contributions to online discussions. Some of the suggestions in this chapter strike me as especially insightful, though, such as the idea of setting ground rules and expectations for both behavior and content, helping to clarify the nature of an acceptable or appropriate discussion post.

Source 4:

MacDonald, J. (2008). Chapter 11: Course design for blended learning. Blended learning and online tutoring: Planning learner support and activity design (pp. 123-134). Aldershot: Gower. Retrieved from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.proxy2.cl.msu.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/ZTAwMHhuYV9fMjY5NTU1X19BTg2?sid=77c36e39-bafa-47c8-b7d9-b82fbff28052@sessionmgr111&vid=1&format=EB&lpid=lp_123&rid=0

In chapter 11 of her work, MacDonald (2008) writes about organizing a blended learning course, suggesting many practical considerations to include such as pre-conceived study schedules, learning contracts, assessments and activities aligned with objectives, and ever-constant feedback. In some ways, this text reinforces ideas from some of the other texts, but what I appreciate most is that it offers a great deal more practicality than many writings on these topics. Designing a blended learning course can be intimidating, but by implementing MacDonald’s suggestions and mirroring her examples, I feel that many could create a fairly effective course their first try. This is a must-have resource for schools attempting to digitize classrooms more.

Source 5:

Kayalis, T., & Natsina, A. (2010). Chapter 8: Teaching literature in a virtual campus: Uses of hypertext. Teaching literature at a distance: Open, online and blended learning (pp. 87-99). London: Continuum International Pub. Group. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.proxy1.cl.msu.edu/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/ZTAwMHhuYV9fMzE0OTA2X19BTg2?sid=cf703cb9-54e5-44a0-b233-ffe5fae35121@sessionmgr4005&vid=1&format=EB&lpid=lp_87&rid=0

Kayalis and Natsina (2010) use chapter 8 of their work to emphasize the possible dynamics that can be accomplished when teaching literature in a virtual environment, focusing specifically on the principle advantages of removing literary works from the vacuum of pages and covers and placing them in the immeasurably interconnected world of the internet. As an English teacher first, I find that while digital learning is certainly conducive to many subjects, it is somewhat more difficult for literature classes. In one sense, showing mastery is not quite as simple as answering a few multiple-choice questions (but really, does anyone think that about school any more?). In another sense, many of the traditional skills of English classes are unnecessary in the digital world (spelling, handwritting, etc.). For now, some of my questions must remain unanswered, as the authors focus primarily on literature courses instead of general ELA courses. Even so, the implications by their suggestions regarding virtual literature courses open doors I had not previously considered.

Design Experiment #1

Introductory Thoughts and Context

The following post, based on my CEP811 course, will outline my considerations for how to re-design a classroom to reflect 21st-century learning. Before leaping forward, however, I should first comment on the fact that my current situation (teaching at the West Michigan Aviation Academy) is far from what may be considered old-school, traditional education. From the classroom furniture to the technological layout, my school has adopted some particularly uncommon aspects (mobile desks, triangulated projection, portable whiteboards, etc.). That said, everything can always be better.

The Learning Space to be Re-Designed

My current learning space (as mentioned above) contains a classroom set of mobile desks (called “nodes”), three projectors (different walls/angles), two instructional whiteboards, and a wall-rack full of portable whiteboards (called “huddle boards” by Steelcase – visit their education page here). The walls of the classroom are absolutely ram-packed with student work, informational posters (content-related), student recognition, etc. Other furniture elements include no more than two book cases, a file cabinet, and a teacher station (tech hub for the room/projectors/etc.).

In many ways, these classrooms appear fairly traditional at casual glance, seem especially progressive at closer inspection, and end up somewhere in-between after in-class experience. Most in the school would consider the fancy aspects to be little more than bells and whistles simply because they are not often used to their fullest potential. Further still, while the room has potential as is, the addition of a few simple dynamics (and perhaps one or two less simple dynamics) could vastly improve the current situation.

(Unfortunately, I do not have images on hand of my current classroom.)

Restructing The Space

Conceptually speaking, the current space lacks some very essential opportunities to engage different learning styles of students. There is no clear designation of space for any particular activity, which is likely to overwhelm many students because the expectations would often change regarding space and behavior depending on the day’s activity. Similarly, without appropriate boundaries between individual work space and group work space, students would very easily, whether on purpose or by accident, invade other students’ space when one activity or another is intended to be taking place. Finally, as the teacher, when direct instruction is desired for only a certain portion of the class, the task of effectively dividing the class in an organized manner is nearly impossible (and quite time-consuming).

Therefore, my main focuses and intentions in re-designing my space are to establish areas of clear separation depending on the desired or needed activity and/or learning style, ultimately creating the opportunity to personalize students’ learning experience. In so doing, some areas will clearly better-suite the interpersonal vs. intrapersonal learner. Some areas will better-suite the kinesthetic or active learner. And some areas will better-suite the linguistic vs. auditory/visual learner.

From the outset, the simplest measures desired to restructure the space fall in the category of furniture and space.

Created with SketchUp Make

As you can see pictured above, the primary classroom environment consists of various different areas devoted to certain types of tasks and/or learning styles. The traditional direct instruction model can be noted on the far right where a teacher can use a whiteboard (or projector) to instruct a small group of students (current maximum set at 10). Those students, however, sit at a type of standing desk that provides the opportunity to choose to stand, if preferred, while still being able to take notes/type. This allows for the more kinesthetic/active learner to be more mobile during instruction.

In the middle and far left of the room, the structure reflects a more individual environment where students work at counter-type seating or lounge-type seating (not pictured: traditional desks/tables also available) on individual tasks. This area would be devoted to isolated experiences allowing students who desire to tune-out distractions and/or focus more closely to have the option. Additionally, the lounge-type seating (options could also include beanbag chairs, couches, etc.) allows for a diversified atmosphere.

The empty walls throughout the classroom would be devoted to student work, recognition, data/progress, learning objectives, etc., allowing for student ownership of the learning space, as well. This would be especially true of the individual area.

Picture at the top of the image are the windows and doors leading to three breakout rooms. These would be rooms devoted to focused group work or collaboration or individuals desiring to narrow the potential stimuli around them even further. See below for additional details on the breakout rooms.

Created with SketchUp Make

Pictured above is one of the breakout rooms. These rooms would consist of a smaller space with tables and a coupel standing desks as well as a whiteboard on one wall. The rooms’ primary purpose is to provide a space for students to collaborate without disturbing/interrupting/invading the learning of other students. However, the room can serve a different purpose by providing an isolated space for those individuals who still struggle focusing in the common classroom space.

The breakout rooms provide the unique opportunity of physically separating students from peers, allowing for a sub-environment within the classroom. This would provide its own unique challenges (management and monitoring, unobserved abuse, accountability), but with proper measures and expectations in place, the space could be invaluable.

The walls of the breakout rooms would clearly display learning objectives and targets as well as any important deadlines.

Created with SketchUp Make

One additional dynamic to note is the teacher station, located right in the center of the common space, a fitting location for the teacher desiring to be present and accessible at all times. This eases management and breaks down some of the traditional “boundaries” that distance students from teachers.

One final note about the space is the need for technology. A 1:1 chromebook or laptop initiative would be preferred, but a classroom set of devices would also make the situation possible. Depending on the nature of the technology, the space would require some modifications, such as carts for devices, outlets for charging, etc.

Reflection on Re-Designed Space

Most importantly, the changes in the learning space should focus directly on the students’ needs. These various areas or zones would directly relate to specific learning styles and needs. Some of these needs include the ability to work more closely with a teacher, made possible with a smaller instructional population and a focused individual learning area; the opportunity to collaborate apart from the general classroom population, a perpetual need of students desiring more focused interpersonal learning environments; and a number of differing options for all students regarding individual and group learning, whether in seating, location, or proximity to other students.

Needed Resources for Implementation

Within the re-design, the need for resources focuses primarily on furniture. Very little traditional classroom furniture is pictured above, which is likely impractical. Much of the benefit for the re-design falls in the incorporation of dynamic furniture options.

In addition to furniture, the re-design also requires technology of a portable/mobile nature and possible renovations to add breakout spaces (improbable perhaps, but not impossible).

Stakeholders Involved

When considering one single classroom, the situation differs slightly (verses the entire building). Even so, our school does not have classrooms for particular teachers or even subjects, so spaces are all shared. That being the case, those teachers that share the same space all become stakeholders in addition to the building administrators and potentially the board (budget proposals, funding requests, etc.).

The operation grows further still, when renovations are suggested. The facilities manager is also an essential component to determining how to ascertain the most effective and efficient means of renovating spaces.

Costs and Expenses

The ideal implementation of such a re-design would likely cost tens of thousands of dollars. This would include purchasing furniture (100-150 dollars for each standing desk, 50 dollars for each lounge chair or counter stool), installing the counter and whiteboards (hundreds of dollars), purchasing the technology if not already owned (at least 250 dollars for each device times 10-30 devices), and renovations for the breakout rooms (full renovations costing tens of thousands, but even simple partitions and furniture costing thousands).

With only the cost of furniture and technology, the bill would exceed $10,000.00.

Staging of the Implementation

Being that some of the ideas suggested would be improbable in most situations, the staging of the implementation would not need to happen all at once (and may benefit from gradual changes). Thus, the first stage of implementation would be the most feasible step, separating the room into devoted spaces using existing furniture. If asked, many students would likely be eager to donate the occasional stool, beanbag chair, etc., as well. The first stage can be used to begin the adjustment in expectations, as well, modeling and instructing students how to choose learning environments best and when and how collaboration is most effective and acceptable.

Once the space is divided, the goal of acquiring various furiture and technologies is imperative. This will provide for the more individualized environment that can better appeal to different learning styles and student needs.

Finally, considerations for either temporary or permanent renovations must follow to establish separate breakout spaces and additional individual work areas (counters). Teachers can accomplish some of this by using simple partitions, thus reducing cost and construction, but how best to divide the space would be a more difficult consideration, given that most mobile partitions do not include windows or doors (and removing students from sight is not likely the wisest choice).

Limitations of Re-Design

The ideas suggested above contain many obvious obstacles and potential shortcomings. These include the improbability of classroom renovations, the unlikelihood of approval for such costs, and the difficulty in separating spaces, given the other complications. Even so, the most immediate threat to a failed implementation falls on the teacher’s inability to properly organize and communicate the expectations for both the teacher and student roles. If the students clearly understand the expectations and the teacher logically structures the resources and environment, then the implementation at any stage is possible.

Sources

*All images were created using Sketchup Make. Visit this website for more details: http://www.sketchup.com/

**Some inspirations and concepts based on The Third Teacher and David Kelley’s TED Talk (see below for citations)

Kelley, David. “How to build your creative confidence.” Video. March 2012. Retrieved on April 13, 2014 from: http://www.ted.com/talks/david_kelley_how_to_build_your_creative_confidence?awesm=on.ted.com_Kelley&utm_campaign=&utm_medium=on.ted.com-static&utm_source=direct-on.ted.com&utm_content=awesm-publisher

OWP/P Architects, VS Furniture, & Bruce Mau Design. The Third Teacher. 2010. Retrieved from:  http://static.squarespace.com/static/509c0d15e4b058edb8f35a86/t/50f495b3e4b0c7661ad2ec2e/1358206387728/Ch2%20TTT%20for%20Web.pdf

 

A Blended Learning Remix

Reflection on the Assignment

For the very first assignment in CEP811 (MSU MAET program), we were asked to remix digital content on the theme of a current education buzzword. The task, realistically, is quite simple, but the process of completing it (and doing so well) is not quite so straightforward.

Using webmaker’s popcorn maker, I attempted to collect images, videos, and audio from various creative commons licensed sources in an effort to (with a little tweaking and repurposing) demonstrate certain dynamics of the concept blended learning.

Before describing my experiences making this product, I should first explain my reasoning for selecting that topic. Blended learning is indeed one of the hottest buzzwords in education right now, so it is certainly not uncommon to have picked it. My own experiences, though, lead me much deeper into the topic than simply surface interest. I have been working to near exhaustion of both creative and physical energies this year in my attempts to both establish a deep personal understanding of blended learning conceptually and practically as well as instigate implementation of new and progressive endeavors and strategies in my own school (in my classes as well as others). This has been a trying experience, but through it, I have gained a great appreciation for the benefits of a blended education environment and feel very strongly about its virtues.

Having now said that, I did not use this project to dig deeply into the concept, but rather used it try to simplify and overly-complicated idea. Blended learning is really, at its core, nothing radical or new. Most teachers who are vaguely familiar are also somewhat afraid because they have been told that blended learning involves extensive changes in methods and roles in the classroom. Most administrators are frustrated because of the costs of repurposing space, rescheduling the day, and implementing a greater degree of technological resources. Truly, blended learning does not require vast overarching changes at its outset. Perhaps the end destination seems alien to many now, but the immediate first steps can be simple and effective.

That said, this video is designed to be crisp and simple while dynamic enough to communicate an engaging though clear message. Click the link below to view the creation, and feel free to access content sources at the bottom of the page.

Blended Learning Remix

Resources (in order of appearance)

– KOAN Sound (2014). Dynasty. On Dynasty EP [Online]. OWSLA. http://soundcloud.com/koan-sound/dynasty-ep-preview

– Ter Haar, Kate. “Happy Digital Learning Day.” Image. February 1, 2012. http://www.flickr.com/photos/katerha/6801771347/

– Roberts, Rachel. “German Class.” Image. October 6, 2001. http://www.flickr.com/photos/bardwired/6216115190/

– Dombrowski, Quinn. “Collaboration.” Image. July 2, 2004. http://www.flickr.com/photos/quinnanya/111201180/

–  Larson, Ellen. “Ellen Larson on Blended Learning.” Video. February 19, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6o6b-h9GaU&feature=youtube_gdata

– Kravitz, Dvora. “RSP Blended Learning.” Video. March 21, 2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99bokjStB-4&feature=youtube_gdata

– CollegeDegrees360. “Learning.” Image. July 12, 2012. http://www.flickr.com/photos/83633410@N07/7658284016/

– Wikipedia Commons. “Down Arrow Right.” Image. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/41/Down_arrow_right.svg

– MediaCast. “Distancelearning3.” Image. http://www.mediacastblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/distancelearning3.jpg