Group items tagged

This article reviews current research to explore how pedagogy has or has not changed. The author points out that most studies fail to contribute to knowledge about learning or teaching through technology specifically. This researcher believes that if professional development for faculty includes technological, pedagogical and content knowledge, (referred to as TPACK) grounded in a constructivist paradigm, it will lead to academic growth in those areas. The author argues that educators need to be mindful of various student learning needs and offer a range of learning opportunities to allow them to succeed. The author is a faculty member at Swinburne University of Australia, and states that academic lecturers who themselves were not students in a technologically rich learning environment, or who did not learn online, will continue to struggle in the 21st century where mobile learning, blended learning and online learning will become more prevalent. This article would be helpful for faculty development administrators who are looking for effective ways to incorporate technology conversation into topics related to effective pedagogy.

This article explains the need for e-portfolios, how they can be used as a tool, and several examples from colleges who have successfully implemented them with students. The author makes connections to the National Survey for Student Engagement (NSSE) survey, suggesting that e-portfolios may be associated with high-impact practices to improve engagement and retention. This new way of documenting evidence of learning and learning outcomes considers students as able to exercise their voice in presenting and representing their learning, with a focus on reflective learning. The author argues that since pedagogy and curriculums are changing, the way we assess students should also change to reflect this shift. This article would be most helpful for faculty and faculty development centers looking for concrete ways to implement and maximize the use of e-portfolios. The author is Vice President for Quality and Assessment at the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC & U) and writes from an assessment perspective.

This article explores virtual learning communities as an effective teaching method. Several stages, processes, and structures are explained in detail for the reader to understand how to gauge the learner's academic progress if they are implementing a virtual learning community within an academic course. The characteristics that define these academic communities are reviewed, setting them apart from other teaching strategies. Potential research designs and questions are also suggested as ways to further understand how the learning dynamic involved in this type of pedagogy occurs and how faculty can help to facilitate it. This article is useful as a tool for both faculty and administrators looking for ways to strategically incorporate technology through course design as a part of large-scale efforts to engage learners. The author is a faculty member from Universidad de las Américas Puebla, in Mexico and writes from a practitioner-based lens.

The author is Associate Provost and Executive Director of the Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship at Georgetown University. The author refers to Clayton Christensen's "disruptive innovation" term to refer to the recent changes in higher education. The author argues that a key source of disruption in higher education is coming not from the outside, but from internal practices. This administrator points to the increase in experiential modes of learning, how education is moving from "margin to center", which proves to be powerful in the quality and meaning of the undergraduate experience as well as the way business is conducted. The author refers to the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and its publishing of a "high impact practice" list, strategies which are connected with high retention and persistence rates, such as undergraduate research, service/community-based learning, and global learning. These practices also have a significant influence because they increase (according to George Kuh) student behaviors that lead to meaningful learning outcomes. The author summarizes how technologies can play a key role as new digital, learning, and analytics tools make it possible to mimic some features of high impact activity inside classrooms, changing when and how students can engage in course content. Since the greatest impact on learning is in the innovative, integrative, and socially networked experiences, then the author argues that faculty and staff need to re-create dimensions of these experiences by bridging the classroom with life outside of it. He concludes that connections between integrative thinking, or experiential learning, and the social network should no longer be an afterthought, but the connection that should guide and reshape learning in higher education. This article would be most useful for administrators and faculty who inform decisions related to technology infrastructure and tools for teaching and learning.

Terry Anderson writes a synopsis of the book 'Managing Technology in Higher Education', written by Tony Bates. In his article, Anderson captures the essence of the textbook and provides a summary of the chapter contents. This article is suitable for students and faculty wishing to locate relevant resources related to incorporating technology into learning and pedagogy. Anderson notes that even though Bates has written five texts focused on the realm of technology in distance education, 'managing technological change' moves away from his usual focal point, to embrace every model of higher education. The book begins with a summary of the salient points for the benefit of college presidents who rely on the executive summary for the meat of the matter. Anderson's overview spans the nine chapters of the book. Chapter one provides an outline of technologies used n higher education, while the following two chapters deal with leadership and planning, along with models on course organization. The following two chapters focus on the all-important issues of cost versus student access to colleges, and effectively supporting faculty on incorporating technologies into their teaching processes. In chapter four, Bates cites specific cost figures to support the information provided, thereby offering a fresh change from generic and vague statements about the actual costs of creating or implementing certain technologies, including setting up a web course. The next chapter focuses on human resource support to education technology, and the decision to either centralize or decentralize that support. In other words, whether or not to provide the support from the ranks 'within' or call in outside and professional help. The last chapter is about the gains and losses of incorporating technology into the day-to-day operations of institutions. Anderson concludes by adding that the book will assist decision makers choose the technological models best suited to their institutions

This article was written by Gabriella Grosseck, from the West University of Timisoara to advocate the adoption of a new teaching pedagogy based on the application of web 2.0. Grosseck describes web 2.0 as various technological innovations, and presents theoretical frameworks and models of integration of web 2.0 into teaching and learning. She uses the works of O'Reilly, 2008; Siemens, 2008; Zimmer, 2007 & Alexander, 2006 to explain that web 2.0 is the social utilization of the web to collaborate, generate knowledge, and share information online. Blogging, micro-blogging, wikkis, photo, video and slide sharing, social bookmarking and networking are all examples of web 2.0 models. Grosseck also points out both the advantages and disadvantages of incorporating web 2.0 technologies. Amongst the advantages, the reduction of costs, flexibility, collaborative and sharing forums are perhaps the most salient. Some of the disadvantages include security issues, different types of browsers, speed and insufficient knowledge. The author argues for the use of web 2.0 technologies to foster student collaborations and promote creativity. She also states that the technologies should be relevant to student realities such as assisting graduates finding jobs. This article is directed at colleges and universities, and even though she advises caution and more research, Grosseck urges that higher education institutions adopt the use of web 2.0 technologies.