1 / 23

Re-Sources

Re-Sources. Have It Your Way…..Now! Michael Anderson , UT System TeleCampus Terri Rowenhorst , Monterey Institute for Technology and Education. Why Use External Content?. High-quality and diverse usually beyond the means of institutions Multi-modal learning experiences

lawrence-ferguson
Télécharger la présentation

Re-Sources

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Re-Sources Have It Your Way…..Now! Michael Anderson, UT System TeleCampus Terri Rowenhorst, Monterey Institute for Technology and Education

  2. Why Use External Content? • High-quality and diverse usually beyond the means of institutions • Multi-modal learning experiences • Allows instructor to focus on designing the learning experience • Saves time and money

  3. Graphics Text Documents Interactive Exercise Documentary Video Newsreel WWII Learning Object NROC History Demo

  4. Advanced or Remedial Study Instructor Presentation Offered Course Reassemble Learning Objects NROC Course

  5. Selecting Content To achieve course learning outcomes • What content adds value? • Multi-modal or media-rich • Activities, assignments, assessments utilizing CMS • Simulations and interactivity • And is appropriate? • Bandwidth and Accessibility • Support and Reliability • Design and Usability • Rights of Use and Costs

  6. Wide Range of Sources • Commercial • Print publishers (proprietary or Blackboard) • Course vendors (complete courses) • Supplement providers • Non-Profit & OER • Course Developers (complete courses) • Repositories • Referatories • Institutions/CoP • Local Initiatives

  7. Commercial: Print Publishers • Vetted content (confidence in editorial quality saves review time) • More costly, per student charges • Textbook specific materials usually provided as course cartridges • Lack of flexibility for instructor customization and hosting

  8. Commercial: Course Vendors Thinkwell, SIRIUS • Vetted content (confidence in editorial quality saves review time) • More costly, per student charges • Services in addition to courses • Lack of flexibility for instructor customization and hosting

  9. Commercial: Supplement Providers WebAssign, SAS: Curriculum Pathways • Vetted, permissioned content • Search and choose • Flexibility to download (United Streaming) or access in hosted environment (CP) • Breadth of coverage • Transaction model for the content (student purchase, license, statewide purchase, etc.)

  10. Non-Profit Collections Repositories (Wisc-Online), Referatories (MERLOT), & Institutions/CoP (Orange Grove, SCORE, TLT) • Low cost or gratis access • Flexibility varies significantly • Not vetted (uneven quality, single perspective) • Requires time to visit multiple sources • Technology incompatibilities/multiple support

  11. Non-Profit & OER Courses NROC, MIT-OCW, CMU-OLI, SOFIA • Vetted (partly) content at affordable prices • Flexibility for customization and hosting • Inclusion of media-rich, multi-modal content varies significantly • Commitment and funding • Educational non-profits provide balance between vetted content, flexibility and cost

  12. The Goals of NROC To create a repository of high-quality undergraduate, high school, and AP courses and distribute them at little or no cost to students and teachers worldwide. In pursuing this goal, NROC achieves other important outcomes: • increasing access to high-quality content designed for online • helping establish content and technical standards for online content • fostering collaboration among content developers and users • promoting the scholarship of teaching • addressing the needs of underserved students (OER)

  13. Strategies for Evaluating Online Content Does the content and technology fit the design philosophy of the online program? • Objectives and outcomes • Instructional design philosophy • Flexibility to fit within the course format • Institutional branding • Transparency • Development process

  14. Strategies for Evaluating Online Content What are the limitations of your support structure? • Technology compatibility (i.e., plug-ins, software apps) • Flexible access and storage • Ownership and rights of use • Term of access • Licensing concerns

  15. Strategies for Evaluating Online Content Is it easy for instructors to use? • Transparent technology • Technology support staff and training • Instructional design staff and training • Support and feedback loop with the developer

  16. Strategies for Evaluating Online Content Is it easy to use for students? • Quality directions for using the content • Transparent navigation and access • Transparent technology • Appropriate bandwidth • Is any additional help desk support required and how does that affect student success?

  17. External Content:A Decision-Making Model Do I want to use 3rd party content? No Continue building course on my own Yes How do I plan to use the content? Replace existing content Augment existing content Start with all new content

  18. The Ecology of External Content Replace existing content Augment existing content Start with all new content What sources do I want to use? Repositories/ referatories Community of Practice Publishers & non-profits Time

  19. Pedagogical Strategy Replace existing content Augment existing content Start with all new content What computer-aided strategies do I want to utilize? terminology research design theories Vocabulary Drill Access to tools Audio cases Simulation Podcast

  20. Quality Standards Evaluate search results • Design Integration • flexibility • Color • Editing/CMS • Navigation • Detachable/target • Plug-ins • Technical Integration • reliability • Linked location • Embedded location • IP/storage • SCORM • Support Implementation

  21. Continuous Improvement Evaluating Effectiveness • Student Engagement Levels and Performance • Learning Outcomes and Achievement • Using CMS Tools • Networking and Sharing in Communities • Feedback loop with the developer • Course evaluation tools like OCEP or cEval

  22. OCEP: Categories and Process The Evaluation Team • Project Director ●Instructional Design Evaluator • Academic Evaluator ●Technology Evaluator OCEP categories - 7 major divisions • Scope and Scholarship • User Interface • Course Features and Production Values • Assessments and Test Items • Instructor and Learner Communication • Technology • Distribution Model

  23. Contact Information University of Texas System TeleCampus www.uttc.org Michael Anderson manderson@utsystem.edu Monterey Institute for Technology and Education www.montereyinstitute.org Terri Rowenhorst trowenhorst@montereyinstitute.org

More Related