Group items tagged

misconceptions and myths related to the difficulty of teaching and learning online, technologies available to support online instruction, the support and compensation needed for high-quality instructors, and the needs of online students create challenges for such vision statements and planning documents.

Adding to this dilemma, bored students are dropping out of online classes while pleading for richer and more engaging online learning experiences.1 Given the demand for online learning, the plethora of online technologies to incorporate into teaching, the budgetary problems, and the opportunities for innovation, we argue that online learning environments are facing a "perfect e-storm," linking pedagogy, technology, and learner needs.

cation. In this study, Keeton interviewed faculty in postsecondary institutions, who rated the effectiveness of online instructional strategies. These instructors gave higher ratings to online instructional strategies that "create an environment that supports and encourages inquiry," "broaden the learner's experience of the subject matter," and "elicit active and critical reflection by learners on their growing experience base."12

A Tangled Web Gather students in a circle sitting around you on the floor. Hold a large ball of yarn. Start by telling the students something about yourself. Then roll the ball of yarn to a student without letting go of the end of the yarn. The student who gets the ball of yarn tells his or her name and something good about himself or herself. Then the student rolls the yarn to somebody else, holding on to the strand of yarn. Soon students have created a giant web. After everyone has spoken, you and all the students stand up, continuing to hold the yarn. Start a discussion of how this activity relates to the idea of teamwork -- for example, the students need to work together and not let others down. To drive home your point about teamwork, have one student drop his or her strand of yarn; that will demonstrate to students how the web weakens if the class isn't working together.       Amy Henning, W. C. Petty School, Antioch, Illinois

Microsystems consist of individual or interpersonal features

Mesosystems are the organizational or institutional factors that shape or structure the environment within which the individual and interpersonal relations occur

Macrosystems are the cultural contexts (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), not solely geographically or physically, but emotionally and ideologically

How do participants plan, implement and reflect upon their learning goals within Change MOOC?What strategies do they use to self-regulate their learning?What tools do they use to self-regulate their learning? How do participants draw upon collective knowledge – people and other environmental resources – when planning, implementing and reflecting upon their learning goals within Change MOOC? What are the environmental factors, in particular those related to the coherence of the information space and structure of the MOOC, that constrain or enable SRL? What are the similarities and differences in the use of SRL strategies between learners who have diverse self-regulatory profiles? For example, do learners who score higher on self-regulatory skill measures use significantly different goal planning, implementation and reflection strategies than participants who score lower on the SRL measures?

This line of research indicated that the multivariate measure of learning represented by the cognitive presence factor could be predicted by the quality of teaching presence and social presence reported by learners in online courses. The relationship between these constructs is illustrated in Fig. 1 below.

One study explicitly examined the quality of the discourse environment in an online literacy course at the graduate level in a teacher education program (Many, Howrey, Race, Pottinger-bird, & Stern, 2001). The authors noted that with deliberate scaffolding by the instructor and teacher-leaders, students developed a strong support community, provided mentoring and advice, and collaborated with colleagues. In addition, research has focused specifically on the nature of scaffolding that occurred in an online reading assessment course (Many, Bates, & Coleman, 2002). In that study, bulletin board postings included support from both the instructor and the class members and focused on the use of technology; clarification of assignments; strategies for learning online; understanding, assessing, and teaching literacy concepts; and understanding general concepts in education. Online scaffolding processes included modeling, supplying information, clarifying, assisting, questioning, prompting, focusing attention, encouraging self-monitoring, and labeling/affirming.

Instructional scaffolding of course content in online conversations. Instructional scaffolding took place in the highly individualized and elaborative e-mail feedback given by the instructor for all course assignments. An analysis of all such correspondence between the instructor and the members of the focus group revealed the following four categories related to scaffolding: Affirming Probing Providing explicit instruction Clarifying

The Classroom Use Exemption does not apply outside the nonprofit, in-person, classroom teaching environment! It doesn't apply online - even to wholly course-related activities and course websites. It doesn't apply to interactions that are not in-person - even simultaneous distance learning interactions. It doesn't apply at for-profit educational institutions.

Some people argued that the current statement of purpose was sufficient. Others maintained that no one would ever read it and that preparing one would waste time and effort. A few board members suggested that mission statements were impractical, academic exercises.