ADTED 532: Research & Evaluation in DE

When reflecting on the course of the past 13 weeks; it only seems appropriate to start at the beginning. It is through Michael G. Moore that we are offered a definition of Distance Education to build on.

The foundational definition of any theory is the touchstone to all that is produced as a result of that definition. Once DE was defined, we then saw the nuances evolve. We looked into structure, dialogue and their relation to transactional distance. Out of this came the emergence of the Community of Inquiry model. We delved into the importance of social, cognitive and teacher presence and the interconnection that these three play in developing a sound DE course. To me, this first building block is the most profound and the touchstone for all that comes after.

As an educator, teaching and learning is my passion. I know that good design relies on more than just an idea. There has to be a confluence of sound pedagogical practice and, in the case of distance education, a purposeful use of technology. One of the most impactful chapter we read this semester was Chapter 18: Frameworks for Designing and Analyzing Learning. This chapter addressed all areas of design and made us think about the significance of each element. It stressed the importance of a systems view and to remain diligent in utilizing proven design and learning pedagogies. Knowing your students, as is the guiding principle in CAFE model design framework, is the backbone of all content design. The student is the central player in the design and delivery of the materials. We do not use technology for technology sake, we use it to enhance our content.  It is vital to keep interaction – learner to  learner and leaner to instructor as the focus of design and delivery.

Throughout many of my courses, there has been an underlying theme of interconnectedness. This was seen in the works of John Dewey, Vygotsky,  and in this course, Jon Dron.  We do not live within boxes. Our lives are interconnected and we come to “school” (whatever form that may be) with many different contexts from life. I found this entry one of the most impactful from this semester.

Jon Dron discusses the connectivist generation that has been emerging. People are more connected than ever and can seek a formal teacher when necessary or go it their own. He posits, ” the modern independent learner can be almost totally independent of formal teachers; but, at least to an extent, can call upon myriad of teachers, directly or indirectly, as and when needed. … Independence in this model is multi-faceted and constantly shifting. (p. 57) So we now have this continuum of independence. We constantly shift in the levels of independence we seek and desire. We find we are not alone and as Dron so aptly puts it we can be parts of “wise crowds and stupid mobs”

Learning is a relationship between many different aspects of one’s life. Learning can take place in any setting and is not a linear process. As our symposium presentations demonstrated, we can often focus on the same topic yet we look at that topic through various lenses. It is this diversity and connectedness that tie us all together to create a living and moving life experience.

 

References

Dron, Jon. (2019) Independent learning. In Moore, M.G. & Diehl, W.C. (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education (pp.47-56). New York: Routledge, https://doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.4324/9781315296135

Kaye, T., & Ehren, M. (2021). Computer-assisted instruction tools: A model to guide use in low- and middle-income countries. International Journal of Education and Development using Information and Communication Technology, 17(1), 82-99. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/scholarly-journals/computer-assisted-instruction-tools-model-guide/docview/2491246842/se-2?accountid=13158

Moore, M. (Ed.), Diehl, W. (Ed.). (2019). Handbook of Distance Education. New York: Routledge. https://doi-org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.4324/9781315296135

One outcome of the COVID-19 pandemic was that we were able to see the ever present connection the world has. We are no longer isolated from one another. We live in a globalized society that transcends all borders and all areas of life. Given the global society we live in, it is important to look at distance education throughout the world so that we can critically evaluate other programs and learn from one another.

Source: Anglia Ruskin University
Designed by MediaCo

Through our discussion posts this week; our class investigated Distance Education in different areas of the world. Here is a sampling:

Brazil: DE works under the Brazilian Quality Benchmarks; positive framework within the UAB

Russia: poor instructional designers; no national standards; deeply imbedded bureaucracy

Philippines: (COVID-19 responses) online courses cancelled; lack of access; need for mental health education, poor teacher training

United Kingdom: steeped in marketization

British Columbia: (COVID-19 responses) diminished student motivation; lack of teacher communication; overwhelming request to have flexible assessments steeped in application

The walls of education have come down and we are now deeply entrenched in a global system of education. Moving forward, it is important to further research opportunities globally so that we can analyze, change and implement systems that will benefit students across the globe.

 

 

This is the conversation had by many when discussing the costs of traditional schooling to online course offerings. As a matter of fact, this is a debate that is often played out between educational professionals and government officials. Each party has their own stance. Distance education professionals understand everything that goes into developing a quality online product.  Others, outside the industry, have a tendency to believe that once technology is involved costs can come down. This isn’t a wrong belief, there are many many ways in which technology can reduce costs. However, there is much more than just the technological delivery that adds to the costs of quality distance education programs.

In a room of more than 150 [legislative] attendees, not one thought distance education costs more to create, offer and support. About one quarter thought it should cost the same. The remainder chose the “it costs less” option. Two legislators said, “It depends.” Kudos to those two independent thinkers.

Paulin & Straut (2018)

Paulin & Straut provide a succinct graphic to show the difference in needed components for distance education courses as opposed to traditional courses. It is important to dispel inaccurate thought patterns with facts. Simplified tables as the one provided can become a starting point in opening a dialogue to better understand the entire process of instructional design for distance education.

Without an open dialogue and the ability and desire to better understand the true costs that are inherent in all components of a distance education course, neither side will benefit. It is apparent from the current COVID-19 circumstance that distance education needs to be a strong component of our educational system at all levels. If educational professionals and government officials continue to remain steadfast, we can never find a middle ground. There are options that can aid each side in reaching their goals. There has never been an opportunity to reimagine our education system as there is right now. We must find middle ground to ensure the evolution of our systems.

References

Poulin, R., & Straut, T. T. (2018). The economics of distance education: Boxing match or productive dialogue? Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 50(1), 14-23. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1080/00091383.2018.1413900

When looking into research of audiences, I did not focus on a particular set audience such as the corporate sector or the Armed Forces. I looked into professional development and how it can affects the audience it is intended for. We have all sat through professional development courses that do not have any practical advice that we can implement. We have sat through the rah-rah sessions to gear us up for a new program that never quite gets off the ground. As adults, we have different needs to be met when we attend classes.

Malcolm Knowles, a pioneer in the study of adult learning, observed that adults learn best when:

• They understand why something is important to know or do.
• They have the freedom to learn in their own way.
• Learning is experiential.​
• The time is right for them to learn.
• The process is positive and encouraging.

Retrieved from thoughtco.com

When professional development courses are being created they should always reflect Knowles’ tenets to be effective. Currently, our teachers are scrambling as we made the sudden move to remote learning due to the COVID-19 pandemic. There has never been a greater need for timely, practical and pertinent professional development. Below are 10 points administrators should consider for professional development to prepare for the upcoming school year.

1. Teachers need to be instructed on the three types of learning they may be utilizing: remote, face to face, and hybrid.
2. Technology literacy
3. Restructuring lessons to meet delivery modes
4. Online engagement techniques
5. Enhancing accountability
6. Developing independent learning opportunities
7. Understanding frameworks such as flipped classroom and CAFE model.
8. Developing trauma informed teaching practices
9. Social, emotional, and culturally responsive pedagogies
10. Realigning Assessment techniques

The move to remote learning happened overnight. These new professional development courses will will not happen overnight. However, it is most important to capitalize on the momentum of change at this point in history.  We can not lag in making changes to our pre-service programs and our professional development programs.

References

Darling-Hammond, L., & Hyler, M. E. (2020). Preparing educators for the time of COVID…and beyond. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 457-465. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.1080/02619768.2020.1816961

Lemov, Doug. (2020). Teaching in the online classroom: Surviving and thriving in the new normal. New Jersey: Jossey-Bass.

Peterson, Deb. (2021, February 16). The Basics of Adult Learning. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/what-is-adult-learning-31425

The quality of education is not a new discussion or concern across the United States; however it certainly has taken on a new dimension with the move to remote learning due to COVID-19. Depending on where you look, you will find every opinion across the great expanse of teachers and parents pleased with remote learning to those extremely dissatisfied. This is not a new concept. Many people are dissatisfied with public school and choose to home school their children or send them to a parochial or private school. Some parents offer high praise of their school districts. The sticking point is that these are all opinions. What are the facts? How do schools rank? How effective are school districts? How do we delineate between a “good” school and a “bad” school? So, as they say, who is minding the store?

In the United States that is every state and just as unique every state is, so is their educational system. The Department of Education in the United States is not granted the same oversight and influence as other countries counterparts; national educational ministries. Hamlin & Williams (2019) remind us in their article Assuring Quality in Distance Education: Accreditation, Regulation, and Movement that there is not one manager minding the store in the United States. 

Under the principle of federalism, adopted by the United States, oversight of education, at all levels is reserved to the states, and institutions are licensed in each state in order to operate legally. In most states, however, the licensure process is intended to certify that institutions meet a minimum threshold of viability, and does not provide criteria for the effectiveness of educational outcomes.

The United States Department of Education has the main focus of allocating funds, data collection, providing national exposure of educational challenges, and enforcing federal anti-discrimination laws.

In creating the Department of Education, Congress specified that:

No provision of a program administered by the Secretary or by any other officer of the Department shall be construed to authorize the Secretary or any such officer to exercise any direction, supervision, or control over the curriculum, program of instruction, administration, or personnel of any educational institution, school, or school system, over any accrediting agency or association, or over the selection or content of library resources, textbooks, or other instructional materials by any educational institution or school system, except to the extent authorized by law. (Section 103[b], Public Law 96-88)

Thus, the Department does not

• establish schools and colleges;
• develop curricula;
• set requirements for enrollment and graduation;
• determine state education standards; or
• develop or implement testing to measure whether states are meeting their education standards. 

These are responsibilities handled by the various states and districts as well as by public and private organizations of all kinds, not by the U.S. Department of Education. 

It is interesting to note that the Department of Education does oversee accreditation of Higher Education institutes but there is no oversight, as displayed above, for K-12 programs.

Where does that leave us?

That leaves us with as many educational systems as there are states. The Department of Education refers anyone interested in state-by-state information on academic achievement to visit two National Organizations:

• The National Center for Education Statistics provides state-by-state information on achievement, attainment, demographics, enrollment, finances and teachers at the elementary, secondary and postsecondary levels.
• The National Assessment for Educational Progress (NAEP) also known as “the Nation’s Report Card” is the only nationally representative and continuing assessment of what America’s students know and can do in various subject areas. NAEP provides information about student performance in states that choose to participate in the state-level NAEP.

Do not overlook the fact that the NAEP notes that their findings are from states that choose to participate. In the most recent data collection February 22 through March 12, 2021, 42 states participated and 3,300 of 5,000 sampled schools responded.

What about the rest? How do we extract any data from the states that won’t participate? How do we ensure our children are receiving the best education possible?

I don’t know. I do know that the last year has certainly illuminated the need for consistency and accountability. Our Nation was built on the idea of a democratic nation; a nation where no one entity holds all of the power. We were also a Nation built with only 13 states. As our Nation has grown, as our needs have changed, do we need to reconsider the role of  National policy to guide our educational systems? How can we honor the rights of our States while still making sure each state is meeting expectations? How do we secure the best educational systems for each student no matter where they reside?

As usual, I walk away with more questions than answers. But as we all know, that is where change begins. When we begin to questions our institutions. When we seek answers and solutions. We we move toward a better system than ruminate in the one we have because it is all we have ever known.

 

In looking deeper into organizational issues, and building on my thoughts of the last post regarding the need for policy improvement through infrastructure, I focused my thoughts on technological advances and the divide we can see so clearly now that we were forced into a sudden and encompassing move to relying on technology to sustain our educational systems during the COVID-19 pandemic. It has become very clear that we have two forms of a digital divide: access and proficiency.

One consequence of the technological society we live in is the development of new power struggles that reveal themselves in the digital divide. We live in a globalized society and technology has created a new form of haves and have-nots.  Most would surmise that this issue of access is most prevalent in developing countries where the infrastructure does not exist to support Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) however, 2020 revealed that these gaps in infrastructure exists in the United States and are more prevalent than one would think. This struggle is very real to many people; be it they live in a rural community and do not have reliable cable or internet service or they live in a poor economic location where forms of ICT may not be available. President Biden has made digital infrastructural improvements part of his Build Back Better campaign.

• Expanding broadband, or wireless broadband via 5G, to every American – recognizing that millions of households without access to broadband are locked out of an economy that is increasingly reliant on virtual collaboration. Communities without access cannot leverage the next generation of “smart” infrastructure. As the COVID-19 crisis has revealed, Americans everywhere need universal, reliable, affordable, and high-speed internet to do their jobs, participate equally in remote school learning and stay connected. This digital divide needs to be closed everywhere, from lower-income urban schools to rural America, to many older Americans as well as those living on tribal lands. Just like rural electrification several generations ago, universal broadband is long overdue and critical to broadly shared economic success.

www.joebiden.com

This situation extends beyond the divides of economics though. Melody Thompson (2011) describes two forms of technological divides that have presented themselves, deficiency divides and generational divides. Deficiency divides are created when individuals who have proficiency in operating the new technologies in their homes and workplaces to better their situations are separated from those individuals who do not have those proficiencies and are then seen as lagging behind. Another valid point Thompson presents is the generational divide. Millennials are proficient at technology and its uses because they were born into this technology driven society. The problem lies with those born before the millennial, those “deficient digital immigrants…who are said to lag behind the younger digital natives…” (p. 55).   This divide presents problems in the workplace, which can negatively affect an individual’s economic status. If one cannot keep up with new technologies required for so many positions, they are seen as unemployable. Many will argue that ICT are available to all; it is up to the individual to seek it out. However, Neil Selwyn (2002) argues that it is not simply a matter of having access. The mere physical availability of ICT is not going to solve this digital divide. Selwyn argues “‘access’ is meaningless unless people actually feel able to make use of these opportunities.”

 

There are many more factors to be considered when looking at technology and its ever- present usage in society. We certainly notice and appreciate the great power that can come from advances, however; we can clearly see that we have created a new power struggle within our society.

This struggle has come to the surface in our educational system and must be corrected through physical infrastructure and with the promotion of technology proficiency within our school systems.

 

Photo: futureready.org

 

 

 

 

 

References

Selwyn, N. (2002). Rethinking the digital divide in adult education. Adults Learning, 13(10), p. 24.

Thompson, M. (2011). Adult education in a technological society. PAACE Journal of  Lifelong Learning, 20, pp. 51-71.

COVID-19 has had an indelible impact on education management, policy and administration. As we looked into these topics further this week; we opened up an interesting dialogue about where we go post COVID-19. Do we go back to pre-pandemic times or have we learned a valuable yet costly lesson and look to build a new and better educational infrastructure?  It is my sincerest hope that we build back with improvements. The pandemic has brought many concerns to the surface that need to be addressed.

Management improvement through Teacher Training Programs This phase has two separate considerations; new teachers and teachers who are already in the field. In addressing new teachers, there needs to be an emphasis on true distance education theory and methodologies. This can be achieved by adding a distance education component to each educational degree and to teacher certification programs. The other aspect is to equip teachers who are already in the field with robust training in distance education. This can be accomplished through a vigorous professional development program  that leads to certification extension or micro-credentialing. Teachers are already required in many states to complete professional development credits to uphold their certification; by integrating distance education training into the program; not in addition to other development, veteran teachers will be able to more fully develop their skills, extend their certificate areas, and receive higher salaries or bonuses.

Policy improvement through Infrastructure  There is a significant digital divide across most nations. We saw this inequity in the United States as school districts clamored to get laptops, Chromebooks, and WiFi to households so students could carry on with remote learning. Buses provided hot spots to areas where there is sporadic or no internet access. We must address this infrastructure issue if we are to expect to launch tech savvy students out into the world. This needs to take place on the National policy level.

Administration improvement through Pedagogy We have seen a move to personalized educational lessons for our students through the use of methods such as differentiation, personalization, active learning strategies, etc. The students of today are tech savvy and display more independence in learning. They often take on learning new skills or delving deeper into subjects they find interesting through blogs, YouTube videos, and social media platforms. If anything can come out of this crisis response with remote learning is that there needs to be collaboration of the parts of the schools, parents, and students. Schools need to build in more opportunities for independence and ownership of students’ own educational goals. Teachers and parents need to have support in helping their students reach these goals. We often talk the “guide on the side” talk but now is the time to actually put this into our pedagogical practices. Teachers need to become facilitators, curators, and guides.

We stand before a unique opportunity for change. In most cases, for change to happen we must break down the “old” to make room for the “new.” In this case, we have been forced to see what has worked and what has not worked. We do not need to throw away sound pedagogy or methodology. We need to move forward with a renewed vision and passion to transform our educational system to meet the needs of the globalized society we live in.

References

COVID-19 Closure Map (2020). https://www.statista.com/chart/21225/countries-with-country-wide-or-localized-school-closures/

With the worldwide scramble to move in person classes to remote learning at all levels of the educational systems; we quickly realized that no school system had an emergency backup plan. We saw the gaps in professional, student, and parental preparedness. Infrastructure was lacking to support this sudden and enormous change.

Photo from Education Week

As educators do, we stepped up and began the work needed to make this situation work to the best of our abilities. We worked from a place of reactivity and in some cases, moved mountains to be sure our students’ needs were being met. We found ourselves focusing on Maslow’s lowest tiers and yet we still needed to educate our learners. We couldn’t ignore Bloom forever.

A year into the first shut down in the United States (longer in other countries) we are now seeing research begin flow in regarding this sudden move. The transitions that schools made and how effective they were. We are sharing our lessons learned through both failures and successes. We have seen the emergence of new professional development topics, tried and true methodologies being adapted and new methodologies emerging. Charles Wang (2021) presented a new instructional design model in TechTrends called the CAFE model.

The CAFE model began as an emergency gap measure to assist teachers in adapting their lessons. The guiding frameworks for CAFE were ADDIE, ASSURE, and Systematic Design of Instruction; as was the work of Michael Moore and his three types of interaction. The developer wanted to pare down these systems to keep them as simple as possible and to directly meet the needs of teachers. Therefore, the developers began with a questionnaire to delve into the needs of various grade level and subject matter K-12 teachers. The CAFE framework went through three iterations before the final design as noted above in Fig. 1.

Educational systems are at a threshold for change.  The CAFE system was well received but needs further research to gain a stronghold as a new instructional design framework. Often from the ashes of dark times, when our institutions are tested, we see the rise of innovative research. This is a worldwide opportunity to embrace the potential of distance education to better serve all students at all levels.

 

As we moved so abruptly to remote learning; we needed to pay close attention to our students with disabilities to ensure they were receiving the supports they both deserved and were required to receive. Many schools felt this was an insurmountable task however, the US Department of Education made it clear that flexibility was necessary and it was expected that schools will continue to provide distance education to all students of all abilities.

At the outset, OCR and OSERS must address a serious misunderstanding that has recently circulated within the educational community. As school districts nationwide take necessary steps to protect the health and safety of their students, many are moving to virtual or online education (distance instruction). Some educators, however, have been reluctant to provide any distance instruction because they believe that federal disability law presents insurmountable barriers to remote education. This is simply not true. We remind schools they should not opt to close or decline to provide distance instruction, at the expense of students, to address matters pertaining to services for students with disabilities. Rather, school systems must make local decisions that take into consideration the health, safety, and well-being of all their students and staff.

United States Department of Education (March 2020) Supplemental Fact Sheet Addressing the Risk of COVID-19 in Preschool, Elementary and Secondary Schools While Serving Children with Disabilities

---

The use of technology can be both beneficial and hindering at the same time. We must recognize that first and foremost, we do still have a significant digital divide in the united States. The limited access to hardware, software, and internet access present a hurdle that must be overcome.

According to the most recent federal data, about 14 percent of households with school-age children do not have internet access. Most of those are in households that make less than $50,000 a year, and many live in rural areas. Among those who do have access, not all have a broadband connection. A separate Pew Research Center survey found that 17 percent of adults access the internet exclusively through smartphones.

Noonoo, S. (2021) Here’s what schools can do for the millions of students with no Internet access. Retrieved from https://www.edsurge.com/news/2020-03-20-here-s-what-schools-can-do-for-the-millions-of-students-without-internet-access

To address this issue some schools implemented the following protocols:

• distribution of hardware such as Chromebooks
• setting up mobile hot spots for families
• working in partnership with local television stations to air educational programming
• distribution of take home packets containing the physical resource students need
• developing videos for students to watch

Providing students with the basics fundamentals to successfully engage in their coursework was just the first step. There were many other considerations as well. Students who receive support services needed to be able to continue these services. In this case schools implemented the following protocols:

• providing telehealth and teletherapy sessions
• reaching out into the community to be sure students and caregiver basic needs are met: such as food, clothing, etc.
• holding Academic Support classes where teachers & students meet to go over homework and difficult subjects in break out rooms or they just host a social connection time
• Use of read alouds, examples, scaffolding, videos, interactive texts, self-assessment, three way translators, home learning activities, visual cues and prompts
• There are several free online resources teachers are utilizing to flex their teaching to better reach the needs of all students:  Flipgrid, ReadTheory, Seesaw, Tate Kids, Ted-Ed

The overarching threads in this situation is that of communication and flexibility. If we can work together building relationships with all stakeholders and try to remain as flexible as possible; we can meet the needs of our students.  We need to take his opportunity for further research so that we can develop emergency contingency plans in the case that we ever have to face such a situation again.

Building on the idea of independent learning, we turn toward the Internet.  A vast land that contains all the information one could want. All one has to do is a quick Google search and the information you are looking for appears before you with usually over thousands of options. So in this setting are we not independent learners?

Last week, we determined that we are all connected and that our lived experiences unite us. This connection, ultimately removes the true independence of learning. When we look at the vast information at our fingertips with no one in sight to guide or direct us, are we not independent?  I say no. Yes, we do have the independence to reach out to different forums for the information we seek but that information has been retrieved, cataloged, and displayed by someone (or something). Can we believe everything we learn on the Internet? Resoundingly, no. We can not.

Jon Dron discusses the connectivist generation that has been emerging. People are more connected than ever and can seek a formal teacher when necessary or go it their own. He posits, ” the modern independent learner can be almost totally independent of formal teachers; but, at least to an extent, can call upon myriad of teachers, directly or indirectly, as and when needed. … Independence in this model is multi-faceted and constantly shifting. (p. 57) So we now have this continuum of independence. We constantly shift in the levels of independence we seek and desire. We find we are not alone and as Dron so aptly puts it we can be parts of “wise crowds and stupid mobs” (p.57)

When we know what we want to hear, what we want to learn, we have the independence to seek out that information. This independence also comes with a disregard to any other opposing viewpoint. If we seek the answers to the questions we have from sources we know can provide the answers we seek, are we independent thinkers? We have access not only to main stream sites such as Wikipedia, YouTube, Facebook but also blogs, special interest pages, newspapers and magazines. “…the problem of learning is not one of scarcity but of overabundance: it becomes hard to tell the good form the bad, the helpful from the unhelpful, the truthful from the fictional.” (p. 58) It is this overabundance and the simplicity in which we can seek the answers we want to hear that do not make us seekers of facts but can lead us into an abyss of mob thinking.

Dron & Anderson coined the term “sets.” A set is not a connected group of people who actually know one another and have a form of leadership; a set is a group with shared interests or commonalities gathered in one place. (p.58) Dron explains the problem with sets is that since there are no strong binding social ties, these groups “are breeding grounds for trolls, ignorance, filter bubbles, echo chambers, and malefactors.” (p. 58)

Source: CrowdTangle

This was no more apparent than what we witnessed in the United States most recently as of January 6, 2021. We saw how these people who gathered had no true ties to one another. They had gathered, virtually and physically, under the shared belief that their actions were needed to “save America.” They accessed information that fed into their beliefs. They accessed information that was false and filled with angry rhetoric. It was a clear from this incident, and so many others,  that we are not independent in our learning. Even sitting by ourselves behind a computer, we are connected – whether it be for good or for evil.

References

Dron, Jon. (2019) Independent learning. In Moore, M.G. & Diehl, W.C. (Eds.), Handbook of Distance Education (pp.47-56). New York: Routledge, https://doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.4324/9781315296135