October, 30, 2009 International AECT Convention, Louisville, KY (Oct 27-31) Presenting:

Topic: Learning Information Techologies as Empowering Tools to Narrow the Class and Gender Gap in Rural-Urban Spetrums- A review from Global to U.S. Perspective.

Presenter: Li-chin (Crystal) Huang, 10/30/09, Louisville

Abstract

Information technologies are rapidly reshaping the world, but the digital divide has been a growing concern both in the domestic and international discourse. Generally speaking, the poor and the disadvantaged tend to live in the remotely isolated rural areas. Gender plays a role in this scenario. This paper provides a review of learning technologies as empowering tools for rural low income women from global and domestic perspectives.

Though information technology (IT) is no longer considered a luxury in many affluent societies, the digital divide continues to be a major concern both in domestic and international discourse (NPA Report, 2002; PEW, 2004). Statistics shows a significant gap in access and knowledge of IT among the rural, urban and suburban areas where socio-economic status, gender, and racial background distinguish such disparity (World Bank, 2002). Issues with accessing opportunities and resources relating to IT imply the increasingly marginalization of low-income rural mothers. As Dean (2000) remarks those who with lack of access to information technologies will become the second class citizens of the future.

Rural low-income women are disproportionately burdened with task loads, and have the least social mobility to access resources and services such as health care, child care facilities, social supports, education, and job opportunities. Many government policies, including U.S. Welfare Reform in the 1990s intend to support low income mothers’ independence by providing job and skill training, education opportunities and other relevant self-sufficient strategies. Learning technologies have been deemed as powerful tools to transform many aspects of human lives (Brown, et al, 2009). The following are some practices gleaned from different regions of the world.

At the global level, in its Gender and Development Plan of Action, the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations recognized the power of IT in transforming both natural and human capital development. It pointed out that changes could accelerate progress through gender equality. It calls for policymakers, practitioners and communities to give attention to the risks and burden that women bear and suggested that unless women have access and use new technologies, the inequality could be exacerbated (FAO, 2002). We reviewed several countries across different continents regarding their conditions and practices.

With this brief glance of gender and technology in developed, developing and underdeveloped countries, we focuses on the conditions in the U.S and reviews research related to IT use and needs from a project on rural low income mothers. The data of this research were generated from the Rural Families Speak (RFS) - a multistate longitudinal research project focusing on the well-being of rural low-income families in the context of welfare reform. The original project began in 2000 across 17 states, targeting on mothers with at least one child under the age of 12 living at home and with an income at or below 200% of the federal poverty line. Data were collected from 413 families in rural counties (with population centers of less than 20,000).

Questions regarding low income mothers’ job training, educational opportunities and family life revealed serendipitous information relating to computer and the Internet usages. These face to face interview results provided an opportunity for investigation of IT use in the rural low income mothers’ lives. Based on this discovery, we formulated our research question to probe into low income mothers’ relationship with IT - “What are rural low income mothers’ perceptions, experiences, barriers and supports relating to computer and Internet usage?”

We read through original transcripts several times. A search through interview texts for the words ‘computer” and “Internet” via software Maxqda2 revealed 165 cases with segments containing the searched expressions. To examine the salient themes from computer usage and Internet access, we tabulated the collected segments to extract the essences that potentially contribute to a theme. All the proper segments went through thematic reduction process and qualitative analysis techniques (Miles & Huberman,1994; Strauss & Corbin, 2002).

After several readings of the extracted texts of 165 cases, 33 were identified with meaningful segments related to perceptions and experiences with information technologies. Based on the above criteria, the similar statements of participants’ expressions were grouped into categories which were then clustered into sub-codes and codes. Through back and forth inductive, deductive, and abductive reasoning processes, similar segments were clustered into three primary themes: general usage, barriers, and supports.

Results

The primary and sub-codes were organized and explained as follows:

Figure 1: Primary Codes and Sub-codes of Rural Low Income Mothers’ Using IT
(The inter-rating validity was done with Dr. S. Walker, U of M).

General speaking, rural low income mothers revealed the uses of IT, primarily for family and employment purposes, which encountering barriers to access and relaying on family and friends, community and employment resources as supports. Cost was the largest barrier, and most mothers reported not having the Internet in their homes. Based on mothers’ comments, many did not have computers at all due to the cost of purchase or maintenance. Using computers in public places and at work were resources for mothers’ use. Family and friends also were supports, letting mothers use their computers, or giving them old computers. This issue resonated Hargittai’s (2002) the double levels of digital divide: the first level of computer ownership and the second-level of multiple effects on digital divide, which extend to broadband access; machine vintage; connectivity; online skills; autonomy and freedom of access; and computer-use support (Hawkins, Rudy, & Nicolich, 2005). Horrigan (2004) also pointed out that solving the availability problem would get higher IT adoption in rural areas. Broadband technology is the ideal mechanism to narrow the divided gap. Practical uses of technology in diverse learning environments, in particular, the remote rural areas, the distant killers can conquer the distance barriers.

Having access to broadband Internet means that rural low income mothers obtain new kinds of support systems to provide the communication mechanism for their children, schools, teachers and other stakeholders. It opens up new ways of exploring resources and opportunities, which has impact on children’s well being. Such learning environment includes local libraries, community centers, and K-12 schools where all members of the community have access to meaningful programs and providing useful lifelong knowledge and skills.

Domestically, many non-profit organizations,[1] promote a wide range of free broadband for everyone and Internet neutrality issues. They have been organizing grass-root movements to raise the consciousness and to persuade policy makers. For example, Socialfreenet advocates free broadband Internet access to low-income families that are in need of high-speed access to attain financial, educational and employment goals. Other organizations such as Geekcorps, EduVision and Inveneo also help to overcome the digital divide through the use of education systems that draw on IT. The technology they employ often includes low-cost laptops/subnotebooks, handhelds tablet PCs, Mini-ITX PCs and low-cost WiFi-extending technology as cantennas and WokFis. Other well-known projects like One Laptop per Child and 50x15 offer a partial solution to the global digital divide; these projects tend to rely heavily upon open standards and free open source software. The OLPC XO-1 is an inexpensive laptop computer intended to be distributed to children in developing countries around the world, to provide them with access to knowledge. Programmer and free software advocate Richard Stallman has highlighted the importance of free software among groups concerned with the digital divide such as the World Summit on the Information Society.

As of today, Finland is the first country to announce every Fin citizen to access a 1 megabit-per-second broadband connection in next year, and a 100 megabit-per-second broadband connection at the end of 2015. This move inspires other countries to start perceiving broadband as citizens’ inalienable legal right, akin to part of the First Amendment.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is set to vote Dec. 18 on whether to auction off the so-called AWS-3 spectrum, an unused chunk of airwaves. The winner would have to agree to use at least 25 percent of the spectrum to build a free, national broadband network which would reach 95 percent of the U.S. population, especially those in rural areas where broadband is less accessible, We suggest that US federal government play a more active role to shorten the digital divide in broadband access. This means investing and renovating IT infrastructures at local public organizations, such as community centers, child care facilities, transportation agencies, job centers, libraries, schools and churches can open up wider opportunities for learning, training, and guidance to low income mothers.


[1] Such as Freepress ( http://freepress.net/media_issues/internet), SaveTheInterent (http://www.savetheinternet.com/), Finding Dulcinea (http://www.findingdulcinea.com/guides/Technology/Internet/Free-Use-Media.pg_05.html,) , and Socialfreenet (http://socalfreenet.org/mission).
This project was completed under the team leader Dr. S. Walker's guidance.

AECT 2009 Louisville International Convention (Oct 27-31)

Presenter- Topic: What is the Lived Experience of Designing and Teaching Multiple Delivery Methods -Live Meeting, Hybrid, Online, and Face To Face (f2f) within a Semester at a Technical College Setting?

AECT Convention presentation - Situated teaching experience 102909

More PowerPoint presentations from Xena Huang

http://www.authorstream.com/Presentation/lchuang-276649-102909-situated-teaching-experience-new-entertainment-ppt-powerpoint/

The 25th Annual Conference of Distance Teaching and Learning Brief Report (Aug. 5-7, 2009 at UW-Madison)

Dr. Moore, Mary, and Crystal --------T. Arina, Crystal, and Dr. Kamau

Aug. 5 (W). I participated in FD-3 whole day Workshop

Topic- Imagination Engine: Visual Concept Design process for Interactive media development
It is about creating instructional materials via software tool in the 2nd life environment.
Summary-Distance education professionals continue to evaluate and discover new ways to combine and apply new information discovery and visual design tools to produce educational content. Following an overview of the steps in the Imagination Engine process and a demonstration of the tools used to develop scenario content. We worked in group to:

1. Develop a digital media design using the Imagination Engine process and the latest software tools
2. Brainstorm, visualize, storyboard, and produce imagery for use in interactive instructional content
3. Review and evaluate group experiences.
Comments- Our school has not officially emphasized 2nd life as a teaching and learning tool.
This area can be developed tailored to 2-year colleges' needs.

Aug 6 (R).
11. Creating online learning communities using Web.2.0 technology
Comments- We have done some part of it at our school. But I listened the whole session patiently.

25. FD Model; Overcoming attitudinal and infrastructure barriers to enfranchise remote faculty
My reflection was how 4-year colleges work hard to provide online courses, but bureaucracy and barriers still exist in their specific environment. The presentation provides a model (similar to ADDIE, intending to recruit more pure online faculty for program instructions).
Comments – I was interested in how they render the “Quality Assurance” issues.

14. Enhancing student persistence online: Retention and reporting a multi-dimensional approach In the second part Mr. Ice provided research data regarding retention which is beneficial.

Aug 7 (F).
43. Studio e: A professional development model for e-learning
Comments- Our school has done the contents of this presentation.
Good to know how other schools tackle problems.

Conclusion:
Generally speaking, I feel that 2-year colleges are still a little bit ahead of general 4-year universities in terms of mobility and adaptation, except some cutting-edge Tech research institutes such as MIT, Nova, and proprietary universities. The Conference has more focuses from general 4-year colleges’ perspectives. The characteristics of student population, faculty, and the edu-ecology between 4-year vs. 2-year are quite different. These can be my personal bias.

Overall, in addition to Michael G. Moore's presentation, two events stood out as my favorites – Teemu Arina’s Keynote and the fascinating E-Poster sessions in the Exhibit Hall.

# For the E-Poster sessions, I would like to share my thoughts:

Ideas- School can purchase wide Plasma (HD Koisk, twice or much larger than the ones we have currently ) screens installed in different campuses for each division, department, or program. Projects from faculty, students or other kind of collaborative works presented in the e-poster format can be instantly shown on the Wide Screen high density of Plasma around all campuses.

Doable conditions- Encourage each department, division, or program to provide teaching&learning relating project plans, work-in-progress, or completed projects on E-Poster with “specific incentives” as rewards.

Match the Green sustainable cores: E- poster saves the project materials (such as paper, tripartites, color, paints and other presenting items…etc.) The whole product-process activity relating to Green Initiatives is pedagogically and economically sustainable (except time spent on projects).

Potential impact- showcase individual and collaborative work via e-poster presentation in an omnipresent fashion to share information and recognize participants’ endeavor and contribution. Promote 2-year college type of scholarship.

Crystal Li-chin Huang Handouts 082709

Small Minimum Wage, Big Structural Hurdle

Our union (CVTCEA) president Ms. Peck emailed faculty members regarding a blog site for sharing ideas. The latest issue was about "minimum wage". See the following Tech Blog site: http://www.weac.org/multimedia/blogs/wtcs_blog/09-08-07/Minimum_Wage.aspx

I agree with the author's "...But while it is easy to point to education and training as a solution, it’s much more difficult for low-wage workers to attain the skills that will lead them to family supporting employment." But I would also like to go back to President Eisenhower’s 3 old principles on the philosophy of labor as a background understanding.

The first principles – he states, “the ultimate values of mankind are spiritual; these values include liberty, human dignity, opportunity and equal rights and justice.”

The second principle, he speaks of the economic interest of the employer and employee being a mutual prosperity.

It is the last principle that we have seen a great skepticism as well as modification . He stated: “labor relations will be managed best when worked out in honest negotiation between employers and unions, ‘without Government’s unwarranted interference’.” History tells us that improving the lives of workers through education, job training, and consciousness raising can never be enough.

Capitalism has been spearheading with a double-edged-sword wielding its blessings and curses in the U.S. for more than a century, while other countries such as England, France, Germany, Australia , and countries in the Scandinavian regions have historically developed strong Labor Parties , Socialist Parties, and various kind of third parties that played a prominent role in strengthening the unions and general well being of their citizens. Two party system – is not the norm, which may take on unicameral functions.

Though labor union laws vary from country to country, immersing in a broader International framework could provide a mirror to reflect on the accolades and criticisms of unions of what we have practiced - if change is not a phantom or rhetoric!

Big Carrot, Invisible Stick - Think about the good will - $9 billion grants

Recently Federal Government announced that there would be a $9 billion block grant for improving 2-year colleges. With such an amount of grant, the high expectation is inevitable.

To Achieve the Dream, U.S. House of Representatives laid out a series of benchmarks that colleges and states would have to meet to receive the grants. Though still under the floor action, suggested goals such as program completion, work-force preparation, and job placement and so on are familiar anticipations to the interested parties.

I have an ambivalent perspective toward this grandiose event as an instructor at a two-year Tech college for six years. The aid can be an edu-political good will with turbulence run deep underneath this unique educational system. It can be a high time to diagnose the accumulated problems and controversies with systematic/systemic approach instead of the habitual piece-meal work.

In terms of access vs. success, 2-year colleges are not exactly FOR the under-served, OF the less-prepared, and least BY the under-privileged. As the saying goes, it is much more a unique hybrid entity of socio-politics, industrial-business compound, and rhetoric than that of the concern of what teaching and learning actually happens to improve the “human capital”.

I am still baffled by the long term “sacrosanct”(sacred cow?) state imposed on the 2-year colleges. What I am looking for is a systematic and theoretical based of this multifunctional and controversial system to be tangibly understood by the majority of stakeholders, like that of the K-12, or at least the 15+ systems.
This lost child (13-14) educational setting shall not be an edu-business-political hot potato as it used to be! I am embarking on piecing together for this missing link.

Here is my tiny step- http://cvtcscholarship.wetpaint.com - a developing wikiblog invites your input.

Truly Madly Deeply

I am teaching both face to face and online diversity classes this summer.
Bombarded by the media frenzies about Michael Jackson's death, children, debt, Neverland, properties, will, and legality, critically I found "Ben" is the only song that I 'realize’ touching my soul "truly ‘madly’ and deeply."

Ben told the stories of an inner state that relates to my own conditions sociologically.

The lyrics of Ben subtly and elegantly expresses W.E.B. Du Bois' "double consciousness", C. Cooley's "looking glass self" and Becker's labeling theory and other relating social interaction processes that we have discussed in class recently.

The lyrics of Ben: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aSqo17o2a1w - listen to the song)

Ben, the two of us need look no more
We both found what we were looking for
With a friend to call my own
I'll never be alone
And you, my friend, will see
You've got a friend in me (you've got a friend in me)

Ben, you're always running here and there
You feel you're not wanted anywhere
If you ever look behind
And don't like what you find
There's one thing you should know
You've got a place to go (you've got a place to go)

I used to say "I" and "me"
Now it's "us", now it's "we"
I used to say "I" and "me"
Now it's "us", now it's "we"

Ben, most people would turn you away
I don't listen to a word they say
They don't see you as I do
I wish they would try to
I'm sure they'd think again
If they had a friend like Ben (a friend)
Like Ben (like Ben)
Like Ben

Sacred Cow vs. Multifunctional Economical Cow

A letter-to-the-editor fingerpointing (as this writer's usual tone) 2-year colleges were "Sacred Cow" of the state in terms of the funding issues shown up in the local newspaper yesterday.

Here is my point, published on June 10 (W), 2009 in the local Dunn County Newspaper. Share with you.

"Public 2-year colleges account for close to fifty percent of higher education institutions. They have been commonly portrayed with the image of a “step or foster child” of the pk-16 educational system due to the historical necessity of openness to non-traditional students, their key role in vocational training, and the democratic notion of access to higher education. Given their centrality to higher education while not yet reaching the status of the “multi-functional cow”, 2-year colleges play crucial roles for extending college opportunities in a systematic and cost-efficient way.

Teaching at a Tech College reminds me of the experience as an adjunct at 4-year colleges where a full-time teaching of 6-12 credits plus scholarship is the norm. Though 2-year colleges have not specifically emphasized scholarly endeavors, they require an “18 to 21” credit teaching load under “economic” and efficient infrastructures to produce well-reported high educational engagements among students, faculty and staff, in addition to the reputable job placement rate.

Here is a vivid example of 2-year Colleges’ playing myriad roles in the democratic capitalist society - GM’s mass laid-off of approximately 1,800 employees in Janesville that created a major social issue resulting from the downturned economy. Fortunately, it was Blackhawk Tech College strategically and effectively absorbing the displaced workers into job retraining relating educational programs.

We have not yet heard of any 4-year institutions providing that mobility and flexibility to partake in the similar unexpected consequences of societal operations. Chippewa Valley Technical College has been functioning in similar way to educate and train many locally needed professions and adapting to the fast changing society’s needs.

Engaging with a wide spectrum of students with less advantaged backgrounds in a tech college on a daily basis, if it is not for a noble calling, then it is a call of challenge as an educator.

Learning Technologies and Me

My role as an academic in the LT community

In the LT community, I am a believer that innovation and responsibility go hand in hand. Being one of the digital immigrants of this information technology revolution, I would consider myself to be an enthusiastic, caring, and conscientious teacher-researcher. Focusing on the need to be at the forefront of educational change and innovation has been an important part of my academic endeavors.

Inspired by the power of multimedia technology as an art student in1995 began my life-long journey with learning technologies. I started integrating multimedia technology into Art curriculum as a grad student and teaching assistant, and later into my Social Science teaching both at two and four year colleges. I perceive myself as a rational and zealous LT educator with an adventurous quality to cross cultures and to immerse in multiple ways of teaching and learning.

My current career goal is to be a diligent educator- researcher. I have been designing and implementing curriculum and instruction for six years at my current work setting. I am also one of those who “dare to teach-research-serve, never cease to learn”. Thus, learning and teaching become an important part of my life. For example, the curiosity and desire to learn have led me to a multi-disciplinary background through three previous Master’s degrees and the current Ph.D. program. I ended up having five majors and four minors.[1] Fortunately, Learning Technologies weave my previous multidisciplinary teaching and learning experience into a holistic tapestry. In this sense, I would also perceive myself as an artistic and versatile educator and learner, who actively participates in many scholarly activities and productions at my previous wrokplace, UW-Stout, and currently - Chippewa Valley Technical College, as well as at University of Minnesota -Twin Cities.

In connection to technologies, Marshall McLuhan once pointed out that we shaped our tools, but then our tools shaped us. The dramatic change of information technology since 1960s with the PLATO system along with today’s Web 2.0  and the evolving semantic Web 3.0 provides myriad teaching and learning possibilities for more facilitators and learners than ever before to access knowledge. With this constant advance in computer and communications technologies, research in educational technologies has undergone a paradigmatic shift toward a new horizon: enhancing the fluid mobility between theories and actions. This new horizon focuses on merging the study of learning in complete, complex, and interactive learning environments with the use of emerging technology to advance the integration of contents, pedagogy, and technology.


Those Who Can, Teach – Creatively, And Responsibly. – Crystal

My teaching philosophy

In a differentiated teaching methods seminar, I found an inspirational message - “When we identify a student who doesn’t understand, louder and slower won’t do it. We need to be more creative than ever; when we identify students who already understand, doing it again isn’t acceptable. We need to be more creative than ever”. Students learn in different ways and paces under various circumstances. This is what I consider to be the most challenging issue in the digital age. The key solution is “we need to be more creative than ever” which I emphasized at the beginning of this statement – Innovation and responsibility go hand in hand.

At the individual level, being a cross cultural learner and educator, immersed in this best and the most revolutionary period of time, teaching has always been a challenging yet highly rewarding profession. At the collective level, this sense of challenge is particularly acute for educators today. Educators have been facing increasingly diverse student population and the demands of accountabilities. At the same time, education in the digital age is endowed with an environment of unprecedented opportunities. Learning technology is a gift to practitioners with golden opportunities that open windows for the further engaging with students’ learning, communicating with parents, building learning communities, advocating the future of learning technologies, convincing policy makers, and empowering the human capital, just to name a few positive functions.

These opportunities demand all stakeholders reshape and reflect on the goals and purpose of education. The technology affordances of the Internet and the constant innovated interactivities make it feasible both in access and delivery of interactive/
differentiated methods tailored to diverse students’ needs. Thus, it is imperative for educators to be innovative, responsible, and insightful in designing, implementing, and assessing the affordances of technologies in enhancing student learning.

As a conscientious educator, I don’t take any available opportunities to engage my educational environment for granted. I value every interaction with students, colleagues, Union, administrators, and the whole edu-ecological system. I deeply believe that the well informed citizens is the currency of democracy. I envision the digital citizenship prevailing in every corner of human societies. And this democratic reality has been growing fruitfully via the omnipresent NGI super Broadband accessibility. But for learning to happen effectively, it needs seamless hardware and software interface. It needs the innovative integration of contents, pedagogies with technological affordances. It needs a conscientious educator to take on her/his catalyst role to make it happen effectively and efficiently.

Personally, I benefit from rich media technology’s affordances that assist my teaching philosophy and pedagogies toward fruition. During the last ten years’ college teaching experiences, I was a recipient of the outstanding contributor to UW-System and Color of Woman Award in 2001 representing UW-Stout,  Teacher of the Year in 2007, representing my district for Chippewa Valley Technical College, as well as nominated to the 2010 Fuerstenberg Teaching Excellence Awards. Educational technology is one of the key scaffolds supporting my pedagogical endeavors.

An Integrated Research Approach

My Research Agenda

In the Educational Technologies field, many disciplines have assisted in building the knowledge foundation necessary to understand human learning and interacting with the aids of technologies. For example, Behavioral-cognitive-Psychology, Neuroscience, Computer Science, and numerous renowned learning technology scholars’ endeavors have contributed immensely to this understanding from a wide range of perspectives.

Having come originally from a Sociology/Social Psychology background, I envision sociological perspectives well integrated into the mainstream research trends. I am interested in the social forces shaping daily reality in the digital age from the micro and macro aspects. These approaches such as structure and functionalism, symbolic interactionism, social conflict perspectives and their combined methods have generated several strands of research agenda that guide my current and future studies.

The macro structural-functional perspective sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability. During the last decade, research in the field of human capital management (e.g., HPI or HPT) and organizational cost-effectiveness research tinted with the flavor of this perspective. Tied to my teaching philosophy, to keep the currency of democracy up-to-date, educator-researchers have to confront the issues of empowering human capital and enhancing the quality of access and application of information technology in the digital age.[2]

One of the concrete examples of this research orientation is my interest in studying e-learning in a technical college setting. My last ten years’ teaching at a four year poly-technical university and current two-year technical college provides me rich information regarding how different structures and functions of educational ecology and potential changes affect teaching and learning pertaining to learning technologies.

Though most two year technical colleges, comprehensive community colleges, and four year colleges tend to be lumped together as the post-secondary educational system or “higher educational” institution,[3] they are fundamentally different in many aspects. These include educational missions, climates, diversity of student body, specific roles of faculty and staff, funding, infrastructure and the overall ecological configuration, just to name a few, comprise the uniqueness of two-year technical colleges that stand out as a special and controversial educational entity. These two-year colleges play a crucial role in American economic, political, and educational reality. But there is limited amount of research focusing on the complex educational ecology of two year colleges that affects the daily teaching and learning, in particular, when relating to learning technologies. This is a field that I would like to focus on.

The social conflict perspective is a framework for building theory that sees society as an arena of inequality that generates conflict and change. From this aspect, I focus on social stratification[4] both in domestic and global domains tied to digital equity and quality, as well as the potential systematic/systemic change. For example, digital-divide is one of established fields of research tackling the gaps and effects of race/ethnicity, gender, social class, disabilities, as well as others relating socially constructed reality in the digital era. One of my previous studies of this approach was the last semester’s collaborative “Rural Families Speak” project (2007-8). It was a longitudinal multistate research focusing on rural low income mothers’ well being. My team narrowed down to study what the role of the Intent playing out in these low-income (intersections of geo-social class and gender) mothers’ lives.

The micro symbolic-interaction perspective sees society is the reality that people construct for themselves as they interact with one another. The cyber phenomena have been constantly created and re-created by different digital generations through their daily interactions. The formation of learning communities, TPACK integration in classrooms, and quality assurance in the online learning are the three fields that I would like to investigate in the higher education setting within this perspective. Hermeneutic phenomenology, ethnomethodology, virtual and auto-ethnography are applicable research methods for this approach. A real life case to illustrate this perspective is that I am documenting my daily interactions with my four course delivery formats within current semester – online, hybrid, Live Meeting, and face to face with web-enhanced curriculum.

Generally speaking, my research agenda is based on a framework integrating sociology and learning technologies to examine different aspects of digital reality shaped by multifaceted social forces.

Individually, We Are One Drop. Together, We Are An Ocean

My role-models within the LT field

All effective and conscientious scholars, practitioners, educators, policy makers and individuals with rational enthusiasm serve as my role model. A visionary role model, who is a resolute social change agent and leader, whose passion for learning, teaching and research envisage educational technologies as a positive transformative mechanism that democratizes human societies. A rational and enthusiastic innovator who foresees the potentials of learning technologies that can lead to an authentic democratic society guides my enthusiasm and energy to the common good.

They are many of role models in our field, exemplifying tenacity and unwaveringness, so I learn and have the courage to select the road less travelled.

If Technology Is Not Used For Enhancing Humanity, Then For What?

The future of Learning Technologies

We are witnessing the accelerated effect of cybernetics which is all about humans and technology interacting to form the foundation of human infrastructure. In this cyber-structure, the high tech and high touch can be mutually complementary. Different digital generations are constructing ways of facilitating multi-generational and global communications. The current Web 2.0 and the evolving Web 3.0 are such transformative tools reshaping the educational experience. The line between space and time is rapidly becoming blurred and may cease to exist in the foreseeable future. E-learning in both “virtual” and “real” worlds simultaneously creates “inter-reality“ phenomenon that implies more options available to effectively merge teaching and learning in a seamless way.

I envision one day the “cutting edge” and “innovative” is no longer the nick name of the business world or industrial-military compounds. Those who can, teach – creatively and responsibly, are the catalysts to the systematic and systemic change of our society. Learning technologies will be the hardest science that requires robust digital engagers to take on studies that are dynamic and contingent. In such a profession, only those stakeholders who tackle the challenge as a way of conscious living will reshape the future of our society.

I envision an omnipresent and mobile environment (facilitating the M-learning)  for all learners to create the -world-is-flat phenomenon. A new term of Blog 2.0 encapsulates the idea of the proliferation of interconnectivity and interactivity of the e-effects. It opens up sky-is-the-limit possibilities to transform learning to defy various digital divides in domestic and global domains.

The optimism and challenge are co-existent in this unprecedented epoch. Learning Technology is a gift as well as a social responsibility to the educators and relevant stakeholders. It is a golden opportunity to reach diverse learners to optimize human capitals and shorten the digital gaps. It is time to redirect such powerful capacity of learning technologies into the humanitarian change.

It is a goal, an action, a commitment, and most importantly, a responsibility!

[1] My majors are: Sociology/Social Psychology, Socio-political science, Studio Art, Art Education, Learning Technologies. The minors are Computer Science, Women’s Studies, Journalism, and Military Education.
[2] I expanded three extra current digital populations into the original categories: the “digital elite”, the digital native, the digital immigrant, and the “digital behind”, and the “digital deprived”.
[3] Technical colleges play a key role to bridge PK-12 and 15-16 educational settings. Yet, most people consider two year colleges being only a peripheral part (a step-child or child out of the educational wed-lock) of the collegiate system, or a “catch basin” for those few students unable or unwilling to enter “regular” colleges.
[4] Such as race/ethnicity, gender, social class, disability and various types of intersectional theories .

Who takes care of the "Culture Inc."?

I would like to share a posting relating to an article that I read from another Ning-group. It was about why sustainable education is an enemy to the edu-capitalism or edu-imperialism, if we are not too far away from the ed-utopia?

The article originated from a student’s question posted on May 8, 2008 Chronicle titled "Invest in People, Not Buildings.” Here it goes:

“Everywhere I hear the sound of dump trucks. It’s my fourth year at the University of Virginia, and they haven’t stopped building since I got here. A new commerce school, a new theater. If UVA is any example of the state of public education in general, we need to evaluate our priorities before another brick gets bought.”

Later in October 3, 2008 Chronicle has another article about the 375-Billion Dollar Question: Why Does College Cost So Much? In the October 20, a faculty member Mr. Orr, put it in a tangible way in his article “Meditation on Building”-

“It is estimated that the construction, maintenance, and operation of buildings in the United States consumes close to 40 percent of the country’s raw materials and energy and is responsible for about 33 percent of our CO2 emissions, 25 percent of our wood use, and 16 percent of our water use. In 1990, 70 percent of the 2.5 million metric tons of non-fuel materials that moved through the economy were used in construction.”

Fine, these inquiries were from the typical "resourceful" 4-year universities. Though the size of a textbook in our 2-year colleges can never be comparable to that of an edu-building, to what extent the open textbook project is a potential omen to the "Culture Inc."?

A couple of my recent blog postings on social networks ( The info of Dr. Kanter's nomination to the Dept of Edu was attached here)

Several Innovate-blog postings regarding the open e-university reminded my recent CCCOER (The Community College Consortium for Open Educational Resources) networking. It is a joint effort by the League for Innovation in the Community College and many other community colleges and university partners to develop and use open educational resources (OER) and in particular, open textbooks for community college courses, since the demographic features of our students (tech colleges) are much different from those of the typical 4-year universities/colleges in terms of, SES in particular. Welcome to participate in this joint effort of OER movement.

The following is the open textbook site.
http://oerconsortium.org/discipline-specific

The CCCOER is a grand scale of collaborative work-in-progress project. There are still many issues opened up for input, such as the models of collaborations, time, energy, usage criteria, altruism/compensation, intellectual property right, as well as other emerging issues.

Hope you can help provide information, experience and advice.

(For more details, see the It Takes a Consortium to Support Open Textbooks article in the January/February 2009 issue of Educause Review magazine).

A couple of open journal sites were posted here as well
http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=subject&cpid=130
Open Journals
http://innovateonline.info/


The other one is about technology resistence:

One of my network groups opened a forum for discussing the technology resistence. There are many real life experiences and observations from relevant stakeholders.
I also added a piece of info to the discussion:

Pajo and Wallace (2001) categorized barriers to info tech resistence from personal barrier, attitudinal barriers, and organizational perspectives. Berge Muilenberg, and van Hangegh (2001) also indentify 64 barriers to the adoption of technology.

According to Rogers’ Diffusion of Innovation, the various adopter categories form the shape a of bell curve. Innovators who readily adopt, are making up 2.5 %; early adopters, about 13%; early majority, 34%; later majority, 34%; and laggards 16%. He identified attributes to the resistance as: the relative advantage to adopters, compatibility to the adopters’ values, offering better ways to do things, the degree of complexity of the technology, triability before adoption; and the observable benefits.

If Roger’s theory is not too far away from reality, then we look at current 3.2 million educational employees scattering in the differently edu-systems: 2.5 % of innovators who are ready to adopt are about 80,000 individuals spreading over numerous PK to 16+ educational institutions, and the later adopters as well as laggards will be 1.6 million.



The following exciting message was excerpted from Inside Higher Ed, April 2.

As a faculty member of the 2-year college communities, I see the significance of this event if Dr. Kanter is nominated and take on this important role in the Dept of Edu at Washington D.C.

"President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan will nominate Chancellor Martha J. Kanter of Foothill-De Anza Community College District , as U.S. under secretary of education, which is the second- or third-highest ranking position in the Education Department. The nomination was made official Wednesday evening, hours after Duncan, apparently prematurely, let slip news of the nomination during a speech to a meeting of Ohio college presidents convened by U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown.

If confirmed, Kanter would be the first community college official to reach such a high rank within the U.S. Education Department. Community college officials have headed the agency's vocational education branch, and Diane Auer Jones, assistant secretary for postsecondary education in 2007, had been a two-year college faculty member and administrator. But the idea of having a community college leader in such a high profile position elated officials in the sector. The under secretary oversees policies, programs, and activities related to postsecondary education, vocational and adult education, and federal student aid.Colleagues describe Kanter as a hard worker and an inclusive leader, and particularly cite her interest in and passion for using technology to make educational resources freely available, spearheading the Community College Consortium for Open Educational Resources and the Community College Open Textbook Project. "
Share

My understanding and stance toward the three debates in the learning technologies field

My understanding and stance toward the three debates in the learning technologies field were summarized as follows:
1.The Media vs. Message (methods)
2. Learning sciences (LS) vs. Instructional sciences (IS): (Instruction systems, Instructional Design, Instructional Systems and Design)
3. Constructivism vs. Instructivism

1. For the first debate, Richard Clark published his controversial paper in 1983, titled “Reconsidering Media research on learning” which he cited numerous research from last 70 years (e.g., in particular, from Lumsdaine, Mielke) to assert that media do not have influence on learning and coined the well-known "truck and groceries' metaphor. He propounded that media function as delivery vehicle conveying the methods (instructional strategies). Later in 1991, Robert Kozma, “ 7” years (it does “need “ the time) responded with an article of learning with Media , and revisited in 1994 “Will media influence learning “ to open up the heated debate. Kozma posited the media and methods should not be separated. He proclaimed that via the activities provided by media’s symbol systems, nature/characteristics of media, and the cognitive structures where learners constructed their knowledge in the specific contexts. He used two media-based examples as illustrations, one was developed by White’s computer mediated Thinkertools and the other one was Cognition and Technology group of Vanderbilt University’s Japer Woodbury video series to strengthen his arguments.

There are mediator (Steve Ross) and reviewers (Ullmer, Reiser, Morrison, Shrock, Jonassen, Campbell and Davison (deceased) provided various valuable comments on this debate. Later Barney Dalgarno revisited this Media Effects debate in 1996 - at a time technology has dramatically changing the educational technology landscape. Hence the themes of the debate moved from "media to message", to "contents", "contexts" up to current “Interactivity” as the central concern.

My position on this debate:
To reflect on this debate, I would like to refer to a small episode in James Ellsworth’s Surviving Change- a Survey on Educational Change Models. In his book, there was a short passage about the field of human inquiry which is somewhat like the fabled blind men examining an elephant. After the probing the elephant, one of the pioneers excitedly exclaimed - the elephant is “over there”, and pointed the right directions for others to follow. Not until others stumbled with something else, did they find something fishy. Then they paused and compared one another’s “touching” notes. They found they all had different ideas and descriptions about what elephant was, and suspected others’ were wrong because they knew what they exactly felt ( for example, emic perspective) from the elephant. “The other” (for example, etic perspective) got to be wrong in their “methodology”. Not until another groups of new comers added to the extra info in new contexts, and analyzed why they were quarrelling, did they start the reconciliation and understand why and how conflicting thoughts happened and tried to get the whole picture of what the elephant looks like.Through all the predecessors’ diligence, endeavors, and articulation, I gradually find the image of the elephant. Thank to all of them.

Now coming back to the topic, I understand where Richard Clark and Robert Kozma are coming from- their academic background, and scholarly endeavors. In addition to the surfaced debate, there are ideological and intellectual struggle, territorial concerns, emotional charge, politics, as well as, if not the worse, the ambiguity of the buzzwords (just look at the journals referring to IT, ET, ID, IST, IDT, and IS used in our field) that subconsciously and unconsciously play out behind the academic screen. I respect both of them, in particular Clark’s constantly sharpening issues and problems in the field of education. The fast changing faces of information technology is reshaping many aspects of human life which makes Clark stance in this debate standing out. Nevertheless, Clark's emphasis on the importance of instruction and instructional strategies in contributing to the learning outcomes is significant.

As a matter of fact, the powerful modern media capacity and affordances (just think about the 400 gbs speed in network grids and web 2.0 as well as all the successful endeavors of GoNorth, Jason Project, BlueZone, 2nd Life interreality… and so on) are obvious achievements that have tremendous impact on business, industry, military, education and other important social institutions.

I hold the eclectic view on this issue similar to scholars such as Jonassen et al, Ross, and Reiser who claimed that instructional methods need to employ “powerful vehicles” to enhance the “nutrition of the groceries”. Media with its potent capacities and affordance as carriers can transform human learning capacity to reach the human improvement performance (HIP). Both “are adding two wings” for a tiger to run through the educational technology landscape.

2. As to the second debate between the LS and IS, it was much about the concerns of philosophy, ontology, and epistemology regarding the nature of knowledge and understanding that lay out the foundations of beliefs, values, assumptions, and practices of education and research in our field. Instructional sciences (as Merrill defined), has its long and old history in developing instructional strategies and educational artifacts through our early 20 century (Museum movement, audio-visual movement, programmed learning movement by the artifices of filmstrips, Lantern projectors, radio, records, television, video to 1991 the invention of Internet, and to current NGI-next generation Internet with the power of 400 Gbs speed of transistors on network grid).

LS emerged when multimedia was sweeping the educational technology landscape and the constructivism was on the rise. Under the constructivism as an epistemology, various pedagogical models prevail, such as discovery learning, situated learning, problem solving learning, inquiry learning, experiential learning, adventure learning, teaching community, community of practices gained much momentum. Both fields are all concerned the best ways to apply media’s affordances to yield quality learning. However, due to historical trajectory, epistemological emphasis, and research focus, these two fields seldom contact each other.

There are commonality and differences, described as follows:
In 2004, Educational technology journal presented a series of dialogue from both camps: Carr-Chellmem, Hoadley, B. Smith, Kolonder, Duffy and Merrill participated in this dialogue/debate. The commonality as well differences were articulated, the future of more dialogues and working together was expected. Brent Wilson points out (2006) his observations from the LS camp to Merrill (two both had a dialogue in Reiser and Dempsey’s 2006 book).

The emphasis of the LS camp are:
a. more focus on cognitive science;
b. pay attention to basis theory and research; and
c. more focus on developing prototype tools and on online environment.

Whereas, IDT tends to focus on
a. principles and practices;
b. research on non-psychological domain theory; and
c. focus more on practitioner, utilitarian, functional and product, goal driven research.

My position in this debate is that I realized both sides of the disciplines having their own historical and situational forces that shaped the ways they believe and practice . They share the common goals to enrich the learning environment to enhance human learning capacities via rich media technology. They both are based on cognitive science, though LS is more socio-cultural cognitively emphasized. The comments from Chris, Hoadley, Tom Duffy, Kolonder, Brian Smith, Sasha Barab and David Merrill are valid who pointed out that LS is more interdisciplinary by nature. It is more explorative, emphasizing mind in context, paying attention to big ideas (Kolonder)- theory construction and hypothesis generation and testing yet messier and scruffy motifs (Smith), as well as more in tune with computer science based artifacts developing. LS is more constructivistically oriented, and the research methods tend to be more qualitative; while IS more goal driven, prescriptive and confirmative by nature (cleaner, or “neats” by Smith). It focuses more on the utility and implementation, practices derived from theory.

There are several scholars cross the both fields, such as Jonassen, Hannifin and Hannifin, Duffy, and Land to relate and reshape the relationship between constructivism with instructivism. Some feel that each one of them add more tools to their toolbox (such as Winn), while other feel they are based on different core values about the nature of knowledge and understanding. Some scholars challenge the legitimacy of LS’s research and practice in the Instructional design field (such as Merrill).

I agree with several scholars such as Smith, Barab, Hoadley, that design-based research has the potential to bridge these two fields. From the Pasteur’s Quadrant perspective, I do feel these two disciplines could be complementary to each other for “applied and research’ sake" to enhance human improvement performance.

But I fully understand that it takes a huge academic pride, territorial issues, ideological and intellectual understanding, as welll as compromise to make it possible in the compartmentalized academia world.

3. To the third debate-
The effects of Constructivism vs. Instructivism issues relating to since Kuhn’s the Structure of Scientific Revolution, the paradigm shift, which has a great impact on many aspects of human world to rethink and reframe the taken for granted theories and practices.

Constructivism as a philosophy challenges people’s understanding of the nature of knowledge, belief and assumptions. Knowledge is contextualized, is situated, is negotiated, is experienced, and is understood via consensus or agreement. Mainly there is no absolute of truth existing, but constructed by human being’s engagements and interacting with their environments.

Compared to the aged Instructivism, Constructivism is still "young", yet has gained great momentum in the educational enterprise. Kischner, Sweller and Clark posited that the “intuitive” appealing of minimal guidance instructions was not efficient and effective. On one side of scholars who support the minimal guidance instruction are Bruner and Anthony from discovery learning model; Jonessan, Steffe, and Gale from the constructivism approach; Barrows and Tamblyn, Schimdt from the PBL model; Bout, Keogh, Kolb and Fry from the experiential learning theory; and Papert and Rutherford from the Inquiry learning. They proclaim that learners should be left to learn and construct their own understanding within the socio-cultural contexts that they were in.

Scholars from the direct guidance Instruction are Cronbach, Snow, Mayer, Lee Schulman, Klahr and Nigam who posited that direct guidance instruction prove to be more effective and efficiency evidenced from last half century’ s research and practices. In their recent studies Kirscher et al. explained why the minimal guidance instructions failed to enhance the learning effectiveness and efficiency. The failures tended to come from the problem-based, discovery learning, inquiry learning, and experiential learning under the constructivism banner. They argued that last half century research showed the direct guidance instruction proved to be superior in terms of effectiveness and efficiency to the minimal guidance learning. They critiqued the minimal guidance instruction ignoring the human knowledge of cognitive architectures, novice versus expert difference issues, and cognitive load theories.

Kirschner at al. (2006) also referred to Lee Schulman’s content expert, pedagogical expert and curriculum expert provided well grounded theories in curriculum and instruction development that guided many generational of practitioners, educators, researchers and many stakeholders in their respective fields of endeavors. They also pointed out the direct guidance instruction recede only when learners acquired sufficient prior knowledge to engage “internal” learning.

My position on this issue:
I appreciate “change is on the way”. Constructivism is sort of humanitarianism, which champions individual learner’s self efficacy and the potential of self-actualization when the appropriate learning environments ( such as theories based instructional methods and design/pedagogy, rich media technology, learning community and larger learning organization and institution, as well as other relevant contexts are in right time and right place). Individual learners as active participants can construct their own knowledge in an authentic context or community via available constructivist pedagogical models and practices.

I identify myself as an educator who is involving in learning, teaching, research and services to explore the possible media technology that enhances students’ learning in a holistic, effective and efficient ways. I also perceive myself as a potential change agent who can analyze, design, develop, implement, and evaluate the teaching and learning enterprise from the systematic/ecological and systemic perspectives.

From my last several year’s experiences as an educator, I prefer instructivism to echo Gagne’s statement. Gagne believed in human activities, as he said that some people did not need instructions to accomplish learning some activities, and some learning could be done with self-instructions. But with most purposeful and significant activities, such as vocational and technical learning that were accomplished under the thoughtful instructional setting.

Reflecting on Gagne’s theory and practice, contrasting with Jonassen et al’s propounding the constructivsm, my life long learning experiences as a student illuminate me to have the preference in the constructivism. Learning is intentional activities with intense endeavors interweaving mind, body, interaction in the socio-cultural contexts for thinking, feeling and behaving changes or potential changes.

Duffy and Ullmer once critiqued on research and researchers focusing on manageable projects tend to be insignificant (as Duffy said “Who cares” or the “boutique” projects for vita – Kolonder). Ullmer’s commented on that it was the messy, ambiguity big ideas that challenge the practitioner and researchers’ endeavors in the educational technological knowledge claims. There are wide spectrums for teaching, learning and research. The either-or motifs (such as will or will not; do or do not in the Clark vs. Kozam debate) as well the both-and (risky fee) subjects have been providing insight to our educational technology understanding. Design-research approach has the potential to differentiate and integrate various types of methods to generate grounded theory, testing hypothesis, and refine the learning environment from micro, meso, macro, exo and chrono systematic perspectives (Brenfennbrenner). For example, in Clark and Kozam’s debate from today’s research methodology capacities (quan vs. qual: various types of experiments, ethnography, authethnography, virtual ethnography, ethnomethodology, hermeneutic phenomenology, and other types of mixed methods) and technology affordances, it has the potential to identify myriad variables interact with the environment to combine the individual factors within the social context for better understanding how teaching and learning occur.

As to why I said that I prefer the instructivism as an educator and constructivism as a student, I explained as follows.

I taught at 4-year polytech university for 4 years, and now is going through my 6th years' teaching at a 2-year tech college. My teaching experiences remind me the powerful observations of Gagne (mentioned above). My current teaching setting is so called the pure non-elite schools. I taught an elite high school before and understand the concepts of prior knowledge, learning motivations scaffolded by the social class and the life chances supported by the cultural, social, and psychological capitals to comprise an academic success.

Just to tap the tip of the iceverg- my current learners’ profiles, 85-90% of our students are from low income households (the diverse student backgrouds ranging from university tranfers, high school drop-outs, first generation attending colleges, some having criminal records, displaced workers, single parents, returned grandparents seeking 2nd or 3rd careers, tot the disability students….etc) with Perkins or Pell financial aids. Life has been much harsher for them, and hopefully academic life could ease some of them. If comparing Kischner et al.’s medical school students’ minimal guidance instructions with my current students’ characteristics (motivation, gender, social class, past experiences which comprised their prior knowledge), I have to say the direct guided instruction not just only necessary, but in many cases, is a must. Mainly, Laissez Faire approach (as people called it) won’t “guarantee effective learning outcomes".

Poster Presentation-Beauty vs. Artistic Beauty

Click the arrow key to view the presentation.