Group 1 - Online Course Formats & Technologies
Group 1 - Online Course Formats and Technologies - Robert and Raagavi
The first group to showcase their research in Innovative Online Learning was Robert and Raagavi. They focused on three designs: blending learning, synchronous learning, and asynchronous learning, my favourite. Robert and Raagavi analyzed several formats of learning delivery systems from MOOCs to LMS. Depending on our prior knowledge, they seemed well-situated to explain them from various access points. I appreciated the explanation of what might be common knowledge to some, but it was the first time I had heard of MOOCs as a term, even though I have engaged in open-access learning like it before.
The first thing that resonated with me, as they described option after option for online learning delivery, was that there are too many options. As someone struggling to keep up with an increasingly technological world, I find it impossible to become skilled at any platform when each Professor uses another platform, database for articles, and structure for their modules. If we could stop trying to reinvent the wheel those of us that are just learning to drive might stand a chance. Having spent time looking at cognitive load for another course, all this new information and learning just to navigate the online platform distracts from the actual learning, except in this class, where the point is to know about these systems, platforms, and technologies.
From this plethora of options for delivering online learning came my major takeaway: none of this is getting it right. We all covet student engagement, yet we are approaching it all wrong. It is not about creating a new platform to deliver the same material to all students. It should be about meeting students where they are: for Secondary students, this is TikTok or Instagram; for Elementary students this may be Discord, YouTube Kids, and Minecraft; for post-secondary students this may be LinkedIn. These are online platforms students are familiar with and enjoy using. Hence, it stands to reason that if we can harness these online platforms for educational purposes, we stand a chance for student engagement. I was reading an article for my group assignment that calls for the use of social media platforms in educational situations to build upon the intrinsic motivation that students have to engage with these enjoyable platforms rather than focus countless hours on designing environments that still will not complete, no matter how many we create (Lobo-Quintero, R. et al. 2023). This further adds to my previous point about taking away from the learning by developing new tools for students to learn when we can use what they already know. If we want engagement, why are we not engaging in the world our students access daily?
I will unpack the discussion surrounding asynchronous learning vs. synchronous learning in my next reflective blog, but for this presentation and stream of reflection, I will briefly touch on what stood out from Robert and Raagavi’s work. With the various formats to choose from, our knowledge of educational psychology, and our experiences with or as students, why must a course require the same learning mode for all students enrolled? I do not thrive in a dedicated synchronous classroom, even with the two token asynchronous classes scheduled. If students could elect to “drop in” if they need help or want to discuss, that would also promote student engagement that suits the individual student. Forcing students to attend a class does not equate to engagement or increased learning. To this point, neither do the required group assignments each M.Ed course contains. I do not assign group work as an educator because I know the pitfalls and believe it is unethical to assign one student’s grade to the collaboration of several students. If we are trying to teach group dynamics, that is one thing. Still, given the diversity behind our intrinsic motivation for pursuing our M.Ed, it has proven more often problematic than mutually rewarding.
As blogs usually do, this one has veered away from the original point quite nicely. However, is that not the real point here? We should engage with what our peers have put together, take away what is useful to us, and ask engaging questions that spark thought in others.
Fulantelli, G., Burgos, D., Casalino, G., Cimitile, M., Lo Bosco, G., & Taibi, D. (2023). Higher Education Learning Methodologies and Technologies Online : 4th International Conference, HELMeTO 2022, Palermo, Italy, September 21–23, 2022, Revised Selected Papers (1st ed. 2023.). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29800-4
Lobo-Quintero, R., Sánchez-Reina, R., Theophilou, E., & Hernández-Leo, D. (2023). Intrinsic Motivation for Social Media Literacy, a Look into the Narrative Scripts. In Higher Education Learning Methodologies and Technologies Online (pp. 419–432). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-29800-4_32