(This short paper was accepted by 28th Annual Conference of Distance Teaching and Learning
Aug. 8-10, 2012, Madison)
This paper describes a semi-constructivist-based pedagogical model to integrate an E-book project into a social science web-enhanced course (Race, Ethnicity and Diversity-RED) in a two-year technical college environment. The teaching-learning process confronted several challenging stages which were solved via a differentiated learning model with an emphasis on situated, contextualized, and authentic learning activities to ensure learning to be useful in real-life/career setting.
The purpose of this study is threefold. First of all, it aims at sharing a better understanding for stakeholders to continue the dialogue regarding the idea of teacher-researcher practice in a social science field. Secondly, this paper intends to gain the insight via the process of the negotiating, adjusting, and revising process among the instructor, learners, and contents to adopt different technological affordances and pedagogical approaches, in particular, the differentiated model to accommodate the diverse student population’s needs. Finally, it intends to share the lesson learned in integrating behaviorist, cognitive, and constructive strategies to obtain the "what" (facts), the "how" (processes and principles), and the "why" (higher level thinking that promotes personal meaning and situated and contextual learning) presented in students' final online projects.
A Unique Teaching and Learning Environment
Technical colleges play a key role to bridge PK-12 and 15 to 20 for many higher educational institutions. Since the first Juliet junior college was established in 1901, currently there are 1,173 two-year colleges educating more than 50% of undergraduate students in 2012 (AACC, 2012). The converging socio-economic forces of urbanization, industrialization, and economic development reshape the two-year educational landscape. The trajectory of this development has not been without controversies. Debates between advocates and critics on issues regarding two-year colleges whether they continue a culture of privilege through training business workers at public expense, or protect selective admissions at four year institutions for the nation's elite are still dominating the discourse in the higher education arena (Dougherty, 1994). In short, the century-long history of two-year college development has evolved into a unique aspect of post-secondary education in the higher educational system.
Among the characteristics of the two-year college, emphasizing the strength of teaching has been the most distinctive one, particularly in the technical college setting. Parilla (1986) pointed out that the community college developed, in part, as a response to the preoccupation of elite universities with research. Such emphasis has frequently caused classroom teaching to be separated from scholarship. Using my current work-setting as an example, a full time instructor typically teaches seven classes of a twenty one-credit contract per semester, which are forty two credits of fourteen classes per academic year. Though the formal scholarly endeavors, such as academic research and publications are not required as part of job performance, teaching-learning engagement has been the center of this teaching enterprise. According to a recent National Survey of Student Engagement (2010) reported, students who engage in varieties of educational activities exhibit better learning outcomes. Interconnectivity and engagement are the keys to student success in the two-year technical college setting.
One of the most challenging tasks in pedagogical practices at a two-year technical college is the learner- diversity in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, age, class, disability, learning styles, time-management skills, readiness, and motivations in addition to availability of system support. The low-income individuals, displaced workers, high percentage of single parent, minority, veterans, elder/returning learners, remedial/prepare learning students, traditional students for university transfer track, the special need students and so on may meet up in a classroom. Facilitating diverse students' learning needs with sound and effective pedagogies, andragogies, and heutagogy via the technological affordances could be one of most significant and challenging tasks of the instructor, especially in the field of social science disciplines.
Though theory and practice are two sides of a coin which is not a novel idea in the four-year educational system, it is still an aspiration to most of the two-year colleges. The heart of teaching is the quality of pedagogical effectiveness rooted in the theoretical groundwork. Thus, how to engage the diverse disadvantaged student population becomes the driving force for the author to constantly seeking the solution. One of the approaches is to engage in variety of formal and informal scholarly developments in the social science field. Nevertheless, under the heavy emphasis on teaching, searching for formal academic engagement can be an overwhelming task. The full-fledged research project might not be feasible. One practical activity could be the action research or reflective practice as Furlong and Oancea suggest. They point out that these models, though not contributing to general theoretical knowledge production, provide opportunities to achieve anticipated outcomes (Furlong, & Oancea, 2005).
An additional note to this project is about the author, though teaching social science has a disciplinary background in Learning Technologies and Computer Science minor that make the integration of content, pedagogy, technologies, and theories less daunting. Having said so, to effectively engage students via a “hybrid constructivism” takes a thorough course design, timing feedback, and available supporting systems to be successful. The author applied a "semi-constructivist" pedagogical model, emphasizing on learning that was situated, contextualized, collaborated, and differentiated via an E-book project as the final product to her two RED classes during the spring semester of 2012.
Design Research in Action
Whitehead (1989) refers to his action research as “living educational theory” that gives meaning to teaching and purpose to professional lives. He suggests that by asking questions about how teaching practices can be improved, practitioners can embody their own educational values. This study focused on pedagogical improvement via a case study to examine how instructor and students co-constructed learning experience by problem-solving and utilizing available resources. The author asked herself “how can I teach this course in more meaningful, interesting and engaging way to enhance the pedagogical effectiveness and personal professional development”?
Wiggins pointed out that it was not teaching that causes learning but the attempts by the learner to perform that caused learning. Furthermore, it was also dependent upon the quality of feedback and opportunities to use what one learned that make learning happen (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). “Visualize yourself as an author. You will publish an E-book about what you learn to make a difference in enhancing human understanding” were two attention-getting sentences throughout the semester to motivate students to attempt and perform. To ensure various feedback pathways open throughout the semester, two formal semi-structured with open-ended questionnaires were given to two web-enhanced RED classes with informal discussion via online forum and daily in-class discussion in spring 2012. One survey was given at the beginning of the semester to get basic information regarding students’ technological concerns and competency for selecting appropriate e-book software and formulating project guidelines. The other survey was conducted at the end of the semester to obtain students’ feedback to improve the project for the coming semester. In addition to the two major surveys, throughout the semester, student inputs and suggestions were encouraged and collected with proper incentives.
Though this is a face to face class, it was similar to a hybrid via the web-enhanced facilitation. The seat time was divided into lectures/discussion, peer-reviews, presentation, and lab time. Online discussion board and wiki sharing were via school LMS system. The original project guideline was reasonably adjusted to accommodate students’ different levels of technological competency and individual academic engagement.
In the early project survey, 95% of students expressed a major concern regarding time and technological availability outside classroom to complete the seven step big project in addition to seat-time attendance, face to face/online sharing and discussions as well as daily/weekly reading and writing assignments. The resistance and the progress delay of majority students expressed in the Q&A sessions during the first quarter of the semester. As mentioned before, the diverse background of our students and different capacity of time management issues impose tremendous challenges in the learning processes. To solve the problems, the instructor adopted the “inverted classroom” (Lage, Platt, & Treglia, 2000) solution to re-allocate time for online, classroom, and lab activities. By moving major contents online reduced lecture time for various face to face interactions, such as instructor-peers-lab, peers-contents-peers, and learning applications in the computer lab. In this project, the co-constructing knowledge was achieved via the design-research approach through negotiation, adaptation, revision of the work-in-progress guidelines to build-up trust and confidence among learners-instructor, learners-content, learners-learners, and learners-instructor-technology interactions (Moore & Kearsley, 1995).
In the end of semester project survey, majority of students were amazed that what a seemingly scary and impossible task could be done with joy. Four themes emerged in students’ end of project survey.
Differentiated Learning and Semi-Constructivism
Though constructivism has been touted for decades, the authentic learning in this case, required specific aid of instructivism due to the diverse background of learners who were encouraged to involve with learning technology which is one of the college core abilities. That’s one of reasons why this project was more an e-portfolio than a pure e-book writing. More than 90% of students needed the step by step instructions as scaffolds at the beginning of the project which included three diversity interviews, four movie critiques, a community involvement project, a reflection of what one learned, book design, and the rest of optional elements to differentiate and accommodate individual’s learning conditions.
The instructor also learned with students’ frustration and triumph. She targeted on things worked or did not work for adjustment and redesign. For example, several unsurprising conditions frequently happened among students, such as no access to computer at home, working multiple odd jobs, family obligations, illness, and other personal issues impeding the completion of the project. The instructor had to spend time on each individual to provide assistance. Research points out that if students feel comfortable and know their ideas will be supported they are much more likely to contribute (Jacobson, 2011). As semester progressed, more and more students became confident and creative in expressing their desire to perform.
Convincing Students the Benefits of Applying Learning Technologies in Learning
Selecting proper software to enhance teaching, learning, and sharing can be a tough job for a social science instructor. It took several lab times to convince students that emerging technologies could scaffold or enhanced the learning processes. Making condition less promising was that in several occasions, there were no computer labs available for a social science class! In the project survey, for example one student wrote on her reflection, “I thought this class was supposed to be fun. I prefer to listen and take notes and then prepare for exams, not the hands-on things” while the other one reflected, “When you introduced this project, I did not understand the software you were talking about. I wished I did not have to do this project. Later you explained more in details, and then, I tried it. Boy, just unbelievable! It is easy. I love it”.
Students and Instructor Collaborating A Mutual Supporting System
During the semester, the instructor kept her schedule flexible for extra lab time and encouraged peer-paired learning to reduce technological anxiety of some students. For example, one student said, ” I have to admit, I was a little leery of this project when it was first mentioned in class. I like to scrapbook and the idea of designing a book on a computer program did not inspire me- until I started using the e-book editing software. I actually enjoyed playing around with the program and creating a book… Of course, it’s hardly good enough to publish, but I am pleased with the end result. Plus, I had a ton of fun”. One of the students critiqued on one of the components in the project, “I don’t like interviews at all! Why should I do that? I asked several questions in class. After understanding the interview steps, I reluctantly recruited several potential interviewees. Now I have to say, in fact, this is the most rewarding part of the project. Now I have a better understanding what the stigmatized status means and how privileged I am”.
Reflecting the Learning Processes and Identifying Problems
Most of students re-assessed their own learning journey via this project. They expressed their frustration, triumph, satisfaction, and joy in the project reflection. Through their writing the author identified problems to help herself redesign the future project. 80% students showed appreciation of the hands-on opportunity. For instance, one student critically reflected on her learning in the e-book, “…This class has really opened my eyes to see the big picture, which is the really of what we are living today. I did not realize this world was so diverse. Coming from a small town, you don’t get to see much of the ‘real world’ and this class has really opened my eyes and I have learned more in 16 weeks of class than I have ever learned in my lifetime. Going toward with my career goals, I feel that this class will help me to analyze each problem from the view of similarity, difference and diversity”, while the other student critiqued, “From my opinion, this project is more a homework compiling task than a real book writing..., but I still appreciate the opportunity to reflect what I learned”.
Oromaner (1986) points out that the teaching role is not a necessary condition for successful scholarship, but some form of scholarship appears to be a necessary condition for successful teaching over an extended period of time. This cannot be truer in the social science teaching. This student-centered instructor-guided “quasi-constructivism” project released the educator’s role of sage on the stage to the guide on the side as the knowledge facilitator instead of transmitter. In integrating behaviorist, cognitive and constructive strategies to obtain the "what" (facts), the "how" (processes and principles), and the "why" (higher level thinking that promotes personal meaning and situated and contextual learning), 93% of students completed the tasks and presented in the big classroom. Students' final presentation shared online and face to face peer reviews. The end of project survey provided invaluable information for the instructor to reflect and improve. Based on the lesson learned, to redesign and differentiate an authentic e-book project from e-portfolio one will be a new direction for the coming semesters.
Ambrose, S. et al. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Clark, B. R. (1960). The “cooling-out” function in higher education, American Journal of
Sociology. 65(3), 569–575
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. AAHE Bulletin, 3-7.
Dougherty, K. J. (1994). The contradictory college: The conflicting origins, impacts, and futures of the
community college. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Furlong, J., & A. Oancea. (2005). Assessing quality in applied and practice-based educational
research: A framework for discussion. Oxford: Oxford University Department of Educational Studies.
Retrieved from http://www.bera.ac.uk/pdfs/Qualitycriteria.pdf.
Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/5YfRbYfZd.
Harrison, J. D. (1979). Ph.D. Faculty in Community Colleges. Community College Review.
6(1979), 24-28.
Kent, P., & Patton, M., (2000). National Profile of Community Colleges: Trends & Statistics.
American Association of Community Colleges. Washington D.C.
Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J., &Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive
learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1).
Miller, R., & Morgaine, W. (2009). The benefits of e-portfolios for students and faculty n their own
words. Peer Review, 11(1). Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-
wi09/documents/PR-WI09_Benefits.pdf
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1995).Distance education: A systems view. New York: Wadsworth
Publishing Co.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2010). Major differences: Examining student
engagement by field of study. Retrieved from
http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2010_Results/pdf/NSSE_2010_AnnualResults.pdf#page-10
NEA. Higher Education. Advocate. (2012). 29(3), 6-7.Washington D. C.: National Education Assoc.
Oromaner, M. (1981). The quality of scientific scholarship and the ‘graying’ of the Academic
Profession: A Skeptical View. Research in Higher Education. 15(1981), 231-239.
Parilla, R. E. (1986). Gladly would they learn and gladly teach. Occasional Paper. 4 (1), 1.
Southern Association of Community and Junior Colleges.
Palmer, J., Vaughan, G., (1992). Foster a climate for faculty scholarship at community College. AACJC.
Pellino, G. R., Blackburn, R.T. & Boberg, A. L. (1984). The dimensions of academic scholarship:
faculty and administrator views. Research in Higher Education. 20 (1984), 103-115.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace everything
elearning. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind, "How do I improve
my practice?" British Educational Research Journal. 15:3-17.
Zubizaretta, J. (2009). The Learning Portfolio: Reflective Practice for Improving Student Learning
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Li-chin (Crystal) Huang is a Social Science faculty in the Department of Behavioral Science and Civic Effectiveness at Chippewa Valley Technical College. She teaches online, hybrid, ITV, Web-conference, face to face, and Accelerated Learning courses in Sociology, Psychology, Social Problems and Race, Ethnicity and Diversity Study. Her teaching and research interests include innovation in online education, TPACK integration of emerging technologies, equity & quality of diverse learning in the digital age, learning technologies in the 2-year technical college, and interdisciplinary and collaborative (Art, Technology and Sociology) learning.
Address: Chippewa Valley Technical College 620 W. Clairemont Avenue
Eau Claire, WI 54701
Email: lhuang@cvtc.edu
URL: http://ci8395.blogspot.com
Phone: 715-833-6283
Aug. 8-10, 2012, Madison)
Facilitating An E-Book Project in A Social Science Course
-An Integration of Teaching and Research at A Technical College Setting
Li-chin (Crystal) Huang
Social Science Instructor
Chippewa Valley Technical College
Background
This paper describes a semi-constructivist-based pedagogical model to integrate an E-book project into a social science web-enhanced course (Race, Ethnicity and Diversity-RED) in a two-year technical college environment. The teaching-learning process confronted several challenging stages which were solved via a differentiated learning model with an emphasis on situated, contextualized, and authentic learning activities to ensure learning to be useful in real-life/career setting.
The purpose of this study is threefold. First of all, it aims at sharing a better understanding for stakeholders to continue the dialogue regarding the idea of teacher-researcher practice in a social science field. Secondly, this paper intends to gain the insight via the process of the negotiating, adjusting, and revising process among the instructor, learners, and contents to adopt different technological affordances and pedagogical approaches, in particular, the differentiated model to accommodate the diverse student population’s needs. Finally, it intends to share the lesson learned in integrating behaviorist, cognitive, and constructive strategies to obtain the "what" (facts), the "how" (processes and principles), and the "why" (higher level thinking that promotes personal meaning and situated and contextual learning) presented in students' final online projects.
A Unique Teaching and Learning Environment
Technical colleges play a key role to bridge PK-12 and 15 to 20 for many higher educational institutions. Since the first Juliet junior college was established in 1901, currently there are 1,173 two-year colleges educating more than 50% of undergraduate students in 2012 (AACC, 2012). The converging socio-economic forces of urbanization, industrialization, and economic development reshape the two-year educational landscape. The trajectory of this development has not been without controversies. Debates between advocates and critics on issues regarding two-year colleges whether they continue a culture of privilege through training business workers at public expense, or protect selective admissions at four year institutions for the nation's elite are still dominating the discourse in the higher education arena (Dougherty, 1994). In short, the century-long history of two-year college development has evolved into a unique aspect of post-secondary education in the higher educational system.
Among the characteristics of the two-year college, emphasizing the strength of teaching has been the most distinctive one, particularly in the technical college setting. Parilla (1986) pointed out that the community college developed, in part, as a response to the preoccupation of elite universities with research. Such emphasis has frequently caused classroom teaching to be separated from scholarship. Using my current work-setting as an example, a full time instructor typically teaches seven classes of a twenty one-credit contract per semester, which are forty two credits of fourteen classes per academic year. Though the formal scholarly endeavors, such as academic research and publications are not required as part of job performance, teaching-learning engagement has been the center of this teaching enterprise. According to a recent National Survey of Student Engagement (2010) reported, students who engage in varieties of educational activities exhibit better learning outcomes. Interconnectivity and engagement are the keys to student success in the two-year technical college setting.
One of the most challenging tasks in pedagogical practices at a two-year technical college is the learner- diversity in terms of race, ethnicity, gender, age, class, disability, learning styles, time-management skills, readiness, and motivations in addition to availability of system support. The low-income individuals, displaced workers, high percentage of single parent, minority, veterans, elder/returning learners, remedial/prepare learning students, traditional students for university transfer track, the special need students and so on may meet up in a classroom. Facilitating diverse students' learning needs with sound and effective pedagogies, andragogies, and heutagogy via the technological affordances could be one of most significant and challenging tasks of the instructor, especially in the field of social science disciplines.
Though theory and practice are two sides of a coin which is not a novel idea in the four-year educational system, it is still an aspiration to most of the two-year colleges. The heart of teaching is the quality of pedagogical effectiveness rooted in the theoretical groundwork. Thus, how to engage the diverse disadvantaged student population becomes the driving force for the author to constantly seeking the solution. One of the approaches is to engage in variety of formal and informal scholarly developments in the social science field. Nevertheless, under the heavy emphasis on teaching, searching for formal academic engagement can be an overwhelming task. The full-fledged research project might not be feasible. One practical activity could be the action research or reflective practice as Furlong and Oancea suggest. They point out that these models, though not contributing to general theoretical knowledge production, provide opportunities to achieve anticipated outcomes (Furlong, & Oancea, 2005).
An additional note to this project is about the author, though teaching social science has a disciplinary background in Learning Technologies and Computer Science minor that make the integration of content, pedagogy, technologies, and theories less daunting. Having said so, to effectively engage students via a “hybrid constructivism” takes a thorough course design, timing feedback, and available supporting systems to be successful. The author applied a "semi-constructivist" pedagogical model, emphasizing on learning that was situated, contextualized, collaborated, and differentiated via an E-book project as the final product to her two RED classes during the spring semester of 2012.
Design Research in Action
Whitehead (1989) refers to his action research as “living educational theory” that gives meaning to teaching and purpose to professional lives. He suggests that by asking questions about how teaching practices can be improved, practitioners can embody their own educational values. This study focused on pedagogical improvement via a case study to examine how instructor and students co-constructed learning experience by problem-solving and utilizing available resources. The author asked herself “how can I teach this course in more meaningful, interesting and engaging way to enhance the pedagogical effectiveness and personal professional development”?
Wiggins pointed out that it was not teaching that causes learning but the attempts by the learner to perform that caused learning. Furthermore, it was also dependent upon the quality of feedback and opportunities to use what one learned that make learning happen (Chickering & Gamson, 1987). “Visualize yourself as an author. You will publish an E-book about what you learn to make a difference in enhancing human understanding” were two attention-getting sentences throughout the semester to motivate students to attempt and perform. To ensure various feedback pathways open throughout the semester, two formal semi-structured with open-ended questionnaires were given to two web-enhanced RED classes with informal discussion via online forum and daily in-class discussion in spring 2012. One survey was given at the beginning of the semester to get basic information regarding students’ technological concerns and competency for selecting appropriate e-book software and formulating project guidelines. The other survey was conducted at the end of the semester to obtain students’ feedback to improve the project for the coming semester. In addition to the two major surveys, throughout the semester, student inputs and suggestions were encouraged and collected with proper incentives.
Though this is a face to face class, it was similar to a hybrid via the web-enhanced facilitation. The seat time was divided into lectures/discussion, peer-reviews, presentation, and lab time. Online discussion board and wiki sharing were via school LMS system. The original project guideline was reasonably adjusted to accommodate students’ different levels of technological competency and individual academic engagement.
In the early project survey, 95% of students expressed a major concern regarding time and technological availability outside classroom to complete the seven step big project in addition to seat-time attendance, face to face/online sharing and discussions as well as daily/weekly reading and writing assignments. The resistance and the progress delay of majority students expressed in the Q&A sessions during the first quarter of the semester. As mentioned before, the diverse background of our students and different capacity of time management issues impose tremendous challenges in the learning processes. To solve the problems, the instructor adopted the “inverted classroom” (Lage, Platt, & Treglia, 2000) solution to re-allocate time for online, classroom, and lab activities. By moving major contents online reduced lecture time for various face to face interactions, such as instructor-peers-lab, peers-contents-peers, and learning applications in the computer lab. In this project, the co-constructing knowledge was achieved via the design-research approach through negotiation, adaptation, revision of the work-in-progress guidelines to build-up trust and confidence among learners-instructor, learners-content, learners-learners, and learners-instructor-technology interactions (Moore & Kearsley, 1995).
Results
In the end of semester project survey, majority of students were amazed that what a seemingly scary and impossible task could be done with joy. Four themes emerged in students’ end of project survey.
Differentiated Learning and Semi-Constructivism
Though constructivism has been touted for decades, the authentic learning in this case, required specific aid of instructivism due to the diverse background of learners who were encouraged to involve with learning technology which is one of the college core abilities. That’s one of reasons why this project was more an e-portfolio than a pure e-book writing. More than 90% of students needed the step by step instructions as scaffolds at the beginning of the project which included three diversity interviews, four movie critiques, a community involvement project, a reflection of what one learned, book design, and the rest of optional elements to differentiate and accommodate individual’s learning conditions.
The instructor also learned with students’ frustration and triumph. She targeted on things worked or did not work for adjustment and redesign. For example, several unsurprising conditions frequently happened among students, such as no access to computer at home, working multiple odd jobs, family obligations, illness, and other personal issues impeding the completion of the project. The instructor had to spend time on each individual to provide assistance. Research points out that if students feel comfortable and know their ideas will be supported they are much more likely to contribute (Jacobson, 2011). As semester progressed, more and more students became confident and creative in expressing their desire to perform.
Convincing Students the Benefits of Applying Learning Technologies in Learning
Selecting proper software to enhance teaching, learning, and sharing can be a tough job for a social science instructor. It took several lab times to convince students that emerging technologies could scaffold or enhanced the learning processes. Making condition less promising was that in several occasions, there were no computer labs available for a social science class! In the project survey, for example one student wrote on her reflection, “I thought this class was supposed to be fun. I prefer to listen and take notes and then prepare for exams, not the hands-on things” while the other one reflected, “When you introduced this project, I did not understand the software you were talking about. I wished I did not have to do this project. Later you explained more in details, and then, I tried it. Boy, just unbelievable! It is easy. I love it”.
Students and Instructor Collaborating A Mutual Supporting System
During the semester, the instructor kept her schedule flexible for extra lab time and encouraged peer-paired learning to reduce technological anxiety of some students. For example, one student said, ” I have to admit, I was a little leery of this project when it was first mentioned in class. I like to scrapbook and the idea of designing a book on a computer program did not inspire me- until I started using the e-book editing software. I actually enjoyed playing around with the program and creating a book… Of course, it’s hardly good enough to publish, but I am pleased with the end result. Plus, I had a ton of fun”. One of the students critiqued on one of the components in the project, “I don’t like interviews at all! Why should I do that? I asked several questions in class. After understanding the interview steps, I reluctantly recruited several potential interviewees. Now I have to say, in fact, this is the most rewarding part of the project. Now I have a better understanding what the stigmatized status means and how privileged I am”.
Reflecting the Learning Processes and Identifying Problems
Most of students re-assessed their own learning journey via this project. They expressed their frustration, triumph, satisfaction, and joy in the project reflection. Through their writing the author identified problems to help herself redesign the future project. 80% students showed appreciation of the hands-on opportunity. For instance, one student critically reflected on her learning in the e-book, “…This class has really opened my eyes to see the big picture, which is the really of what we are living today. I did not realize this world was so diverse. Coming from a small town, you don’t get to see much of the ‘real world’ and this class has really opened my eyes and I have learned more in 16 weeks of class than I have ever learned in my lifetime. Going toward with my career goals, I feel that this class will help me to analyze each problem from the view of similarity, difference and diversity”, while the other student critiqued, “From my opinion, this project is more a homework compiling task than a real book writing..., but I still appreciate the opportunity to reflect what I learned”.
Conclusion
Oromaner (1986) points out that the teaching role is not a necessary condition for successful scholarship, but some form of scholarship appears to be a necessary condition for successful teaching over an extended period of time. This cannot be truer in the social science teaching. This student-centered instructor-guided “quasi-constructivism” project released the educator’s role of sage on the stage to the guide on the side as the knowledge facilitator instead of transmitter. In integrating behaviorist, cognitive and constructive strategies to obtain the "what" (facts), the "how" (processes and principles), and the "why" (higher level thinking that promotes personal meaning and situated and contextual learning), 93% of students completed the tasks and presented in the big classroom. Students' final presentation shared online and face to face peer reviews. The end of project survey provided invaluable information for the instructor to reflect and improve. Based on the lesson learned, to redesign and differentiate an authentic e-book project from e-portfolio one will be a new direction for the coming semesters.
References
Ambrose, S. et al. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Clark, B. R. (1960). The “cooling-out” function in higher education, American Journal of
Sociology. 65(3), 569–575
Chickering, A. W., & Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate
education. AAHE Bulletin, 3-7.
Dougherty, K. J. (1994). The contradictory college: The conflicting origins, impacts, and futures of the
community college. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Furlong, J., & A. Oancea. (2005). Assessing quality in applied and practice-based educational
research: A framework for discussion. Oxford: Oxford University Department of Educational Studies.
Retrieved from http://www.bera.ac.uk/pdfs/Qualitycriteria.pdf.
Archived at http://www.webcitation.org/5YfRbYfZd.
Harrison, J. D. (1979). Ph.D. Faculty in Community Colleges. Community College Review.
6(1979), 24-28.
Kent, P., & Patton, M., (2000). National Profile of Community Colleges: Trends & Statistics.
American Association of Community Colleges. Washington D.C.
Lage, M.J., Platt, G.J., &Treglia, M. (2000). Inverting the classroom: a gateway to creating an inclusive
learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education, 31(1).
Miller, R., & Morgaine, W. (2009). The benefits of e-portfolios for students and faculty n their own
words. Peer Review, 11(1). Retrieved from http://www.aacu.org/peerreview/pr-
wi09/documents/PR-WI09_Benefits.pdf
Moore, M., & Kearsley, G. (1995).Distance education: A systems view. New York: Wadsworth
Publishing Co.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2010). Major differences: Examining student
engagement by field of study. Retrieved from
http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2010_Results/pdf/NSSE_2010_AnnualResults.pdf#page-10
NEA. Higher Education. Advocate. (2012). 29(3), 6-7.Washington D. C.: National Education Assoc.
Oromaner, M. (1981). The quality of scientific scholarship and the ‘graying’ of the Academic
Profession: A Skeptical View. Research in Higher Education. 15(1981), 231-239.
Parilla, R. E. (1986). Gladly would they learn and gladly teach. Occasional Paper. 4 (1), 1.
Southern Association of Community and Junior Colleges.
Palmer, J., Vaughan, G., (1992). Foster a climate for faculty scholarship at community College. AACJC.
Pellino, G. R., Blackburn, R.T. & Boberg, A. L. (1984). The dimensions of academic scholarship:
faculty and administrator views. Research in Higher Education. 20 (1984), 103-115.
Siemens, G. (2004). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Elearnspace everything
elearning. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm
Whitehead, J. (1989). Creating a living educational theory from questions of the kind, "How do I improve
my practice?" British Educational Research Journal. 15:3-17.
Zubizaretta, J. (2009). The Learning Portfolio: Reflective Practice for Improving Student Learning
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
About the Author
Li-chin (Crystal) Huang is a Social Science faculty in the Department of Behavioral Science and Civic Effectiveness at Chippewa Valley Technical College. She teaches online, hybrid, ITV, Web-conference, face to face, and Accelerated Learning courses in Sociology, Psychology, Social Problems and Race, Ethnicity and Diversity Study. Her teaching and research interests include innovation in online education, TPACK integration of emerging technologies, equity & quality of diverse learning in the digital age, learning technologies in the 2-year technical college, and interdisciplinary and collaborative (Art, Technology and Sociology) learning.
Address: Chippewa Valley Technical College 620 W. Clairemont Avenue
Eau Claire, WI 54701
Email: lhuang@cvtc.edu
URL: http://ci8395.blogspot.com
Phone: 715-833-6283
Fax: 715-833-6470
