Week 5 (March 1 – 7, 2011)

This week we were asked to formally investigate and try to achieve one of the three goals we chose to focus on this semester back in Week 2 (my three goals). The following is the formal task we were assigned and asked to post about on our blog space in Blackboard:

In a blog post, describe your technology goal, the steps you chose to accomplish it and a list of resources you used (including web sites, training or help from a colleague). Also, post an artifact of your choice to demonstrate your new skills.

This is what I came up with:

My goal: Distinguish between effective and ineffective design and presentation in electronic format (e.g., websites, multimedia, charts).

In order to achieve this goal, I chose to use a combination of readings and activities from class (see References below).

First, I began to identify the characteristics of effective vs. ineffective design and presentation in electronic format. Based on Cognitivist theory, the area covering Perception and Attention is what I decided to base my criteria on (Alessi & Trollip, 2001). Although the first principle in the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework (providing multiple means of representation) should also be considered in determining effectiveness, it is somewhat beyond the scope of this evaluation (although some concepts do go hand-in-hand here).

Perception and attention is comprised of three subcategories including ease of perception, position of information and differences/changes.

Ease of perception deals primarily with the basics of presentation considerations including text (font and size, color), background (color), images (size, details), audio and video (volume, clarity, resolution, etc.). This subcategory is also further divided into three sections including choice of mode (e.g. audio or visual), repeatability (whether information can easily be repeated), and pace (speed in which information is presented).

Position of information is mainly either spatial (placement of visual information) or temporal (timing of aural information). An example of a spatial consideration would be placing important information at the center of the screen. A sample temporal consideration would be having instructions play at the beginning of activity (with option to replay).

Differences/changes can actually be thought of as a subset of ease of perception and position of information. It deals with how information presented changes over time. This change in information can either be static (doesn’t change at all; e.g. text, images), dynamic (changes or can be altered; e.g. video, text box inputs) or periodic (changes some times; e.g. background color, headings/fonts).

After identifying my criteria, I proceeded to search for examples of effective vs. ineffective design and presentation. I chose to use two lessons (Adjustable Spinner and The Cell & Cycle Mitosis) we reviewed during the UDL activity last week in class. Adjustable Spinner is an interactive lesson used to help clarify experimental vs. theoretical probability; I used it for my effective example. The Cell & Cycle Mitosis is a step-by-step lesson explaining the process of cell cycle and mitosis; it acted as my ineffective example.

My complete analysis for these two lessons can be found here: Effective vs. Ineffective Design & Presentation Analysis (http://bit.ly/dU042q)
Unfortunately, due to time constraints, I wasn’t able to produce supporting screen shots as initially planned. Hopefully these analyses will be easy enough to follow.

All in all, this exercise gave me a much greater appreciation for the skill involved in designing and presenting electronic formats effectively. So often to do we as instructional designers/developers jump in head first to creating electronic materials without considering the needs of our learners. In the end, we end up wasting both our time (creating something ineffective) and that of our learners (them not receiving the intended benefit). However, if we take the extra time to consider the factors involved in not only attracting learner perception and attention but, more importantly, maintaining it, we can in turn have profound effects on their understanding and thinking.


References

Alessi, S., & Trollip, S. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development (2nd Ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

ISTC541 Class Wiki (Spring 2011) - http://istc541sp2011.pbworks.com/w/page/35988863/5-UDL-Activity

Adjustable Spinner - http://www.shodor.org/interactivate/activities/AdjustableSpinner

The Cell Cycle & Mitosis - http://www.biology.arizona.edu/cell_bio/tutorials/cell_cycle/main.html

Universal Design for Learning Guidelines Version 2.0 - http://www.udlcenter.org/sites/udlcenter.org/files/Guidelines_2.0_Educator_Checklist.doc

Week 2 -- Part 2

In the second part of this week’s assignment, we were asked to reflect on the Massachusetts (TSAT) we completed in the previous week and answer the following question:

What are three specific skill challenges that you can accomplish this semester?

The following is how I responded:

1. Discuss current best practices on teaching and learning with technology in order to plan rich learning environments and experiences.
I feel that the readings this week have already helped in progression towards this goal. Having a firm understanding of the various learning theories should hopefully lead to effective use of instructional design and technology.

2. Distinguish between effective and ineffective design and presentation in electronic format (e.g., websites, multimedia, charts).
Again, the readings this week have already given me some insight into this. Namely, the discussion revolving around the principles of Perception and Attention (Cognitivism) shed some invaluable light on this.

3. Design and deliver effective staff development in technology and its integration into the curriculum.
I hate to sound like a broken record, but again, the readings this week come up big again here. Not only does knowledge of the key learning theories help to design and deliver effective lessons/training, it also provides one with the necessary supporting proof and evidence to convince others (i.e., fellow staff ) to take part in the evolution of educational systems.

* A couple other skills I also hope to address, but don’t know how much progress I will make with are the following:
- Design and develop lessons and activities that integrate technology in a variety of instructional settings for all students.
- Use technology resources to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and maximize student learning.

Week 1 -- Part 2

In addition to the readings in Week 1, we were also asked to complete the Massachusetts Technology Self-Assessment Tool (TSAT), which is basically a survey of (instructional) technology competencies.

I found filling out this form to be rather beneficial in helping to identify my strengths/needs. From the results, I can conclude that I have a pretty good foundation in Technology Operations and Concepts. However, there is definitely some room for improvement in terms of Ethics & Safety as well as Teaching & Learning (with Technology). I hope this course will aid me in becoming more proficient in the skills comprising these areas.

You can view my completed form here: Massachusetts TSAT (Mohammed) - http://bit.ly/gfjdJX
You can also find a blank version here: Massachusetts TSAT (blank) - http://www.doe.mass.edu/edtech/standards/tool.xls