Step outside of the course management system

Even the best course management system has limitations.  Since they are designed primarily to protect student data and insure reliable, secure access to course content and assessments, course management systems have walls.  While the walls are digital, they are no less real.  These walls control what information can be accessed, when it can be accessed and by whom.  As you’re considering what types of content and interaction to add to your course shell in a CMS, remember that the boundaries will limit you, your students and your class.  If you’re thinking of incorporating any of the following aspects into your course, you may want to consider stepping outside of the CMS.

1.  You want your students to author content for worldwide access.  When students in your class are completing research or writing content that you want them to share with the world, you need to look beyond the walls of the CMS.  A colleague of mine has her advanced Spanish students write blogs outside of the CMS so that native Spanish speakers can comment on their work.  Locked inside a CMS, the blogs would not have the global reach and the same authentic nature as they do in more accessible locations.

 2.  You want your students to author content they can use after a course ends.  While a CMS provides secure access to course content, what happens when the course ends?  What happens when a student graduates?  Usually, student access to course content and to the work they’ve contributed ends at the end of the semester or when they leave the institution.  If you want students to have more open access to course content or want them to develop materials that they can use later in their careers, break free of the CMS. For instance, a blog or a wiki would make great portfolio tools that students can use to showcase their work beyond the dates they are enrolled in a course or at an institution.

3.  You want your students to interact with people not enrolled in a course.  Technically, most CMSs will allow you to add guests or guest speakers to a course shell.  At some institutions, however, the process of adding an “outsider” can be cumbersome or forbidden. Stepping outside of the CMS opens your students to a host of communication options like Google Hangouts or Skype and does not limit their interaction to the people enrolled in the course or working at your institution.

4.  You want to develop a learning community that lives after the class has ended.  Opening up an old course shell is like visiting a ghost town.  The discussion boards are the lifeless remains of engaging conversations.  The modules stand as empty edifices where occupants once played.  I’m being a little dramatic but the reality is that most courses within a CMS are only active when students are enrolled in a course.  But what if you wanted to foster a learning community that lived beyond the confines of the course?  Consider having your students join Twitter and develop a hashtag unique to your group or course.  This way, participants can still interact with one another long after the virtual tumbleweeds have descended on your course in the CMS.

5.  You want your students to be creative and utilize the landscape of tools available online to demonstrate their learning.  Most CMSs have a limited number of interactive tools and assessment options.  Opening a CMS discussion board to embeddable content from outside sources can really tap into your students’ creativity.  Students could make movies that they post on YouTube, make interactive webpages using Glogster, or play out a debate with GoAnimate.  While these tools live outside of the CMS, they can help to embed a creative element to your dull CMS.

Are there other activities that would prompt an instructor to step outside the CMS?  Share your ideas in the comment section below.

Working with these students today

At a conference yesterday, a colleague approached me and asked me about working with “these students today.”  Since being on a sabbatical and overseeing an outreach program at his institution, he’s been away from teaching for a few years.  This semester, however, he’s back in the classroom and he’s troubled by the students’ work ethic, their level of engagement and their ability to critically think.  He wondered how I’m able to work “with these students today!”

There is no doubt that students in our classrooms have more access to technology and information then ever before.  Some have written that this unprecedented access to technology has changed the students.  For instance, Marc Prensky has written extensively about Digital Natives and claims that the brains of our students have changed by being constantly connected.  While Prensky’s work has been debated and scrutinized, it’s also been fodder for those educators who see technology as the downfall of humanity, for learning, and just about every other societal aspect we value.

I try not to get too caught up with debating whether the students have changed or not.  My role as a educator is to teach the students I have.  I don’t spend too much time worrying about the types of students I had five years ago or the ideal students with whom I’d like to work.  The students I have are the ones I am going to teach.  I need to do everything in my power pedagogically to help them learn and help them meet my expectations.  If I’ve been a successful educator with “these students today” (and you’d have to talk to my students to know for sure), it’s because I believe in a few foundational tenets that guide most of work.  I shared these principles with my colleague and explained that these aren’t really new concepts at all.  They’re rooted in concepts shared by John Dewey almost seventy five years ago.

1.  Meet the students where they are.  I’ve written about this in other posts, but I think it’s relevant here.  Being successful educators requires that we understand our students and use this understanding to guide our instruction.  We shouldn’t lower our expectations but we do need to develop lessons with our students in mind.  Understanding students and their needs is important, Dewey writes in Experience and Education, because

“without this insight there is only an accidental chance that the material of study and the methods used in instruction will so come home to an individual that his development of mind and character is actually directed.“

2.  Make the content relevant and meaningful.  I know this may be difficult with some content areas, but I think it’s important for educators to help students make connections between what they’re learning and their lives.  We need to ask ourselves “How will what they’re learning inform other areas of their lives?  Why is it important?”  As educators, we often focus on the “future” at the expense of the now.  By making the content more meaningful in their present lives, students can be more motivated to learn.  As Dewey writes:

“It means that a person, young or old, gets out of his present experience all that there is in it for him at the time in which he has it. When preparation is made the controlling end, then the potentialities of the present are sacrificed to a suppositious future. When this happens, the actual preparation for the future is missed or distorted. The ideal of using the present simply to get ready for the future contradicts itself. It omits, and even shuts out, the very conditions by which a person can be prepared for his future. We always live at the time we live and not at some other time, and only by extracting at each present time the full meaning of each present experience are we prepared for doing the same thing in the future. This is the only preparation which in the long run amounts to anything.”

3.  Let the students take ownership.  Last week, our campus held its Spring Convocation.  At the event, our associate provost shared a video compilation of some interviews he conducted with students.  One theme present in all of the student interviews was the students’ desire to take ownership of their work.  Students want to play an active role in developing the classroom structure and want to make choices in the way they can present their work or be assessed.  This sounds like a pretty radical idea but it’s also rooted in Deweyian philosophy.  Returning to Experience and Education, Dewey writes:

“The way is, first, for the teacher to be intelligently aware of the capacities, needs, and past experiences of those under instruction, and, secondly, to allow the suggestion made to develop into a plan and project by means of the further suggestions contributed and organized into a whole by the members of the group. The plan, in other words, is a co-operative enterprise, not a dictation.  The teacher’s suggestion is not a mold for a cast-iron result but is a starting point to be developed into a plan through contributions from the experience of all engaged in the learning process. The development occurs through reciprocal give-and-take, the teacher taking but not being afraid also to give. The essential point is that the purpose grow and take shape through the process of social intelligence.”

Experience in Education was published in 1938 but Dewey’s words still resonate with us in the 21st Century.  As we struggle with “working with these students today,” I wonder whether we’re just wrestling with concepts that educators have faced for decades, concepts like freedom, democracy and liberty.   It’s easy to target a cell phone, Facebook or an iPad as the negative catalyst for our students.  I think the real challenges are much bigger.

BYOD Concerns: Education vs. Prohibition

One innovation that is sweeping American institutions of learning is the BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) movement.  The reasons are compelling.  Instead of schools and universities purchasing expensive technology and paying for its upkeep, individual students simply use the devices that they already have.  A recent ECAR survey reports that over half of collegiate students now own smartphones and over 85% own laptop computers.  Simply allowing students to use the devices they already own reduces the financial burden to schools.  It also allows students to use those devices with which they are already comfortable.  Many students customize the look and feel of their computers and phones to suit the needs.  Schools that embrace BYOD recognize the importance of individualized technological experiences for students.  BYOD schools also recognize the power that these technologies can have on learning.  Educators can use affordable student response systems like iClicker or PollEverywhere to engage and assess their students.  Additionally, through increased academic use, students will better understand how to use devices they already own as tools for learning.

When schools embrace BYOD, however, new challenges emerge.  For instance, a recent study by Junco & Cotten shows that multitasking during schoolwork can a strong negative impact on a collegiate student’s GPA.  While activities like Google searching during schoolwork do not significantly impact a student’s GPA, the study shows that using Facebook and Twitter does.  This study provides empirical evidence for what many educators already know:  Students can’t be updating their Facebook statuses or Tweeting when they’re trying to study and be successful students.  The study also reinforces work by Wood and her colleagues that showed the negative impact that off-task multi-tasking during classroom lessons could have on student performance.

These studies provide some interesting obstacles for those of us advocating for the BYOD movement.  With students using their own devices, isn’t there a greater likelihood that they’ll be tempted to check their Facebook page or their Twitter feed during classtime?  Don’t these research studies show the BYOD is doomed and we should just ban students’ distracting technologies from our classrooms?  While some may argue that the studies would support a prohibition of technology from our classroom, I tend to read the research more broadly.  The studies absolutely show that technologies can have negative impact on student performance. But examined collectively, the studies also show that students will be distracted from their schoolwork whether they’re in our classrooms or not.  We can’t ban technologies from their lives completely.  It’s really an age old challenge that parents, educators, and politicians (and others) find themselves facing time and time again:  Education vs. Prohibition.  Do we ban soft drinks and sweets completely or do we teach children to balance their diets?  Do we ban certain types of literature or do we teach readers the value of great literature?  Do we ban sites like Wikipedia completely or do we teach students how to critically analyze information and vet sources? Do we ban distracting technologies or teach students how to better manage their technical lives so they’re less distracted?

I believe we need to educate students about appropriate use of technology and show students that they will be more productive and more engaged when they focus on a single task without the distractions from Facebook and Twitter.  This is a 21st Century life skill that will help them be better students, but it will also help them be more attentive friends, partners and parents.

Examining “what the pedagogy requires”

Educause recently published a comprehensive examination of technology ownership by collegiate students.  In the study of 3,000 students in 1,179 American institutions, Educause reported that almost 87% of undergraduate students owned laptops.  They also reported that 55% of students owned web-enabled “smartphones” that allowed connection to the Internet.  As a professor who teaches instructional technology courses and studies student use of technology, I see these statistics as a blessing and as a curse.  While these devices can provide tremendous opportunities for educators and their students, they also can create distractions in classrooms and have the ability to undermine assessment integrity.  Faced with these concerns, I understand when my colleagues ban the devices from their classrooms and teach in technology-free zones.  But also I hope (and work) for better.  One of the reasons I started this blog over two years ago was to help educators develop skills to utilize technology in meaningful ways in their classes.  In this blog, I try to highlight instructional strategies that are pedagogically sound and incorporate technology to engage students and foster new means of collaboration and learning.  While I feature a lot of different websites and tools on this blog, my focus is always on education and learning.  I came across this quote by Diana Laurillard recently that captures my philosophy of technology integration and the motivation behind my work:

“We have to be careful not to focus simply on what the technology offers, but rather on what the pedagogy requires.”

While I agree completely with Ms. Laurillard, before educators can effectively integrate technology, they need to have a grasp of what technology can offer and how it can support any pedagogical requirements.  This involves educators having more than a passing knowledge of the digital terrain.  They need to know how technology can support collaboration and communication and how it can help to form learning communities.  I don’t take a “technology first” approach when planning lessons for my students.  I don’t squeeze blogging artificially into some lesson just to have my students blog.  This is like having a hammer and treating every lesson like a nail.  I start with my instructional objectives and choose instructional strategies based on these objectives.   At times, this might mean utilizing no technology at all for a lesson.  Other times, it might involve developing a fully online lesson where students communicate via a chat room.  The important component, however, is that we as educators need to a have a variety of pedagogical strategies to draw upon when we plan and teach lessons.  We wouldn’t want to artificially squeeze blogging into a lesson any more than we would want to lecture to students every day.  We absolutely need to focus on what the pedagogy requires. But we also need to have a strong understanding of what technology can offer in order to make informed pedagogical decisions.

Incorporate cellphone interaction with Celly

When I was twelve years old, my family purchased its first computer, a TRS-80.  My father was sort of a computer guy and first learned to program using punch cards on a mainframe at a local university.  He wanted his sons to learn to program as well and presented us with the TRS-80 for Christmas.  My brothers and I learned to program in BASIC and we stored these very simple programs on cassettes after hours and hours of “coding.” We would anxiously run the program, hopeful that no error messages would disrupt the process.

I share these nerdy holiday memories to demonstrate how far we’ve come as a society.  Thirty years ago, the TRS-80 was a relative novelty.  Now, almost every teenager walks around with a device that is far more powerful than that computer.  The Pew Internet Research Center reports that 75% of teenagers (ages 12-17) own cell phones.  While educators often complain about these devices being huge distractions in classrooms, I think we miss the power that these devices hold.  Although I doubt anyone is learning to program in BASIC on their cell phone, mobile devices can be tremendous tools, especially in classroom settings.  Sites like PollEverywhere allow educators to easily create free cell phone polls to engage their students and assess their understanding.  The downside of Polleverywhere, however, is that it only allows one-way communication.  While its great that students can respond to a poll with a text message, the site isn’t really designed to promote teacher-student or student-student interaction.

That’s where Celly comes in.  While Celly allows for student polling, it also offers so much more.  With Celly, an educator can create a “cell” to promote communication and interaction across a group of students.  The cell can be tailored in a variety of ways, allowing teachers to customize how they interact with their students.  A teacher can create a cell to send out text announcements to students or create a cell that allows students to interact with one another. For those of you who may be concerned about privacy, Celly blocks the phone numbers from text messages so you don’t need to be worried about being texted by students in the middle of the night.

The important thing to remember is that cell phones can be powerful communication devices when used properly.  While we don’t want to promote texting while driving or personal texting during class time, we can’t forget that cell phones are mini-computers with tremendous computing power.  Celly can help us expand how we communicate and interact with our students and, best of all, it’s free! For help getting started, check out this Celly guide and this short tutorial.