Nov. 17 (Sn), 2019 Critical Theory to Virtual Learning?

黃艋舺 The virtual learning enterprise has enjoyed a Sacrosanct status for multiple reasons, long enough...

Recalling in 2010, I submitted three research proposals to a conference. One of them was on critiquing the whole frenzy of virtual learning business from the sociological perspectives, focusing on the social conflict aspect (close to the critical theory), which was kindly rejected, while the other two "uncritical" (from my own biases) - embracing virtual learning whole-heartedly, were accepted.

Perhaps, when the popularity was on the rise, that intention for critiquing was not a timing affair, and, I am not a fully trained scholar in Critical Theory. Furthermore, some people might think of the critical theory being unpractical, useless, or a hindrance to a booming business.

The following table showing critical analysis is part of the research orientations required in students' research projects (transfer track to the 4-year college).

For the purposes of a general Critical Theory, Horkheimer states that they must account for society within a historical context and offer a robust and holistic critique by incorporating insights from ALL social sciences. This infers that an interdisciplinary/transdisciplinary knowledge is a sufficient condition to take on the task.  The theory must adequately explain the social problems that exist, offer practical solutions for how to respond to them, and abide by the norms of criticism established by the field.

This may be the main reason why the traditional structural-functional theory (except later, Morton's mid-range theories of latent and dysfunctions) is inadequate in explaining the above conditions by missing the important components, such as, the false ideological construction, power structure, and domination prevalent in human societies and knowledge domains.

A reminiscence:

Due to a job relocation, I did not complete my sociology terminal degree and launched on teaching with master's degrees at a 4-year university as an adjunct, and then a 2-year technical college, a full-time faculty. The tech college environment stimulated me to change a couple of Ph.D. programs into a new one related to something associated with technologies. For, I had involved in teaching Social Sciences and Visual Arts. By nature, they required intense verbal communications, of which, the local native English-speaking faculty could express much better than I. After having evaluated the circumstances, I decided to re-apply into Learning Technologies (previously Instructional System and Technology) and Art Education dual tracks, which could facilitate me with extra strength and accentuate me as a unique faculty.

With this degree program, I followed the trend to jump on the virtual learning bandwagon with curiosity and enthusiasm. I turned myself into a One-Dimensional woman, chanting Morrison's slogan, "University is dead." :D! No more taxpayers' money for colleges' bricks and mortars!! (What a proud but not-so-accurate prophet! Now, you see more and more college brand-new buildings mushrooming for educational accreditation and inviting learning outcome credits :)!).

I created several online, hybrid, web conferencing curricula for social sciences and art courses with tremendous confidence and success. Partially from vanity and ambition with a small portion of idealism, I pollyannaishly imagined that these learning technologies could be a great social equalizer to alleviate the issues of the "class/digital divide."

I still vividly remember when I started my Ph.D. program, one of the important tasks was to write a quasi-affidavit confirmation paper about your conviction to devote to this field of studies (to make sure be a successful foot-soldier at this virtual frontline?) I will repost that "affidavit" soon.

At that time, all those computer-aid learning devices, gadgets, mash-up learning theories, web 1.0, web. 2.0, web 3.0, ceaseless killer-apps' appearing... and the rest of kits and caboodles were fascinating to a beginner. I wrote it with passion, not knowing that my embedded sociology critical eyes, in the later days, would find some not-so-fascinating spots in the virtual learning.

Now, I am taking a break. Stay tuned.

Well, before the break, here is a little bit more messages about critical theory for myself and some students. I am still learning about it.

As posted above, in the three major sociological perspectives: structural function, social conflict, and symbolic interaction, critical theory much embodies the social conflict theory which is different from the conventional view on the static society.

Critical theory can be traced to Marx's critiques of the economy and society, which was developed by a group of sociologists at the University of Frankfurt in Germany (the Frankfurt School). It aims to probe beneath the surface of social phenomena and deconstruct the assumptions (false, or hegemonic ideologies) that keep most people from a full and true understanding of the world.

It takes a systemic and systematic understanding and reformation on the theories and practices of this business. This is a daunting task.

The aforementioned can be a prologue of my attempt for this writing.
Stay tuned.

Some good reads:

Critical and Traditional Theory (Horkheimer)
Dialectic of the Enlightenment (Adorno and Horkheimer)

Escape from Freedom (Fromm)
Eros and Civilization (Marcuse)
Ideology and Utopia- An Introduction to the Sociology of Knowledge (Mannheim)

One-Dimensional Man (Marcuse)
Knowledge and Human Interests (Habermas)
The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (Habermas)
The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction (Benjamin)

-----
I just found that statement/affidavit of an innocent devotion to the Learning Technologies as a student in 2009.
But FB said, "Too long!"
-----
Well, I found the link that I posted a while ago. Shere here. Welcome your input.

https://ci8395.blogspot.com/2013/05/re-read-old-writing-how-time-flied-and.html

Jan 17 (Sa), 2015 Brave MOOC World - since 2008! Crystal's one-page-snippet #319

Have a great Saturday!

Who doesn't like technology? Raise your hoof, fin, or paw :)! - solute to my animal-lover friends heart emoticon!

Yep, remember 2nd life? It hyped me a short while ago.
The beauty and strength of technology - the digital dream job creator, the imagination simulator, the artificial consumption generator, the "disruptive" inventor, the silicon valley constructor, the dot.com-million//billionaire builder, the cubical world designer, the technocrat organizer, the Big-Brother's lover, and the rest...

Let's rehearse it - The digital world: The final frontier...These are the voyages of the Binary Enterprise.... Its continuing mission:
To explore strange new worlds...
To seek out new experiments at whose cost, as well as
the new digital civilizations-whether inhabitable?...
To boldly go where no one has gone before! - Digital Trek: The unlimited Enterprise, many next generations to _____________ (fill-in-the-blank).

Like · · Share
Marcie Bakker, John Pack and 錶仔林 like this.

Sun Lasting Constructing a unified, solid foundation of digital theory...
5 mins · Edited · Like

Sept. 6 (Sa), Where is Plato's Cave Located? Crystal's One-page Snippet#287

Crystal Huang Seemingly the following article is against my future paychecks (yep, I am not a Luddite. With a computer science minor degree and a Educational Technologies background, maybe I should stand for my fields and defend for my like-minded fellows???...Thanks to professor Martha Wallen's Shari the following article. http://www.nybooks.com/.../14/hi-tech-mess-higher-education/

The Hi-Tech Mess of Higher Education by David Bromwichwww.nybooks.com
Andrew Rossi’s documentary Ivory Tower prods us to think about the crisis of higher education. But is there a crisis?
2 hours ago · Edited · Like · Remove Preview

Aug 14 (TH), 2014 Don't Shoot! Crystal's serendipitous teaching-learning-sharing#40

Crystal Huang shared Occupy San Francisco's photo.
26 minutes ago
Picture taken today at Howard University.
#solidarity

LikeLike · · Share
2 people like this.


Crystal Huang On Aug 6 (W), 2014 during a tech blending/integration workshop, here is my project presentation- : http://prezi.com/.../the-learning-journey-of.../



The learning Journey of Introduction to Diversity Studies

23 minutes ago · Edited · Like

Crystal Huang Click the above the forward/backward arrow keys or any part of the canvas for a specific scene ( ZUI- zooming user interfaced with an Imagined background music).
15 minutes ago · Edited · Like

Sept 19 (Th), 2013. Crystal's Serendipitous Learning-Teaching and Sharing on fb (#10)

091913 (R) - What's Going On In Your ITV Classroom!? Leaning and Teaching Sharing-Snapshot#5



Topics- Theoretical analysis on Culture - culture freedom and constraints (e.g., cultural creators and cultural prisoners vs. sociobiology).

Like · · Promote · Share

· Eleonora Boneva, 羅秀華, 郭墉 and 26 others like this.

Crystal Huang A friend asked about ITV. It is an Interactive TV (=talk to TV) delivery format.

A brief: Similar to Skype, Google hangouts (but with big TV screens and dynamics), I am at the hosting site, and learners are in the multiple far sites via the aids of several electronic devices (such as TV quad screens, individual microphones, ELMO, Fax/phone machine...etc.) to engage in synchronous interactions among students (between schools as well), local schools' facilitators/assistants, contents delivery/assessing of LMS (learning management system for asynchronous learning activities, such as "the flipped" ), and me. 

All participants can see and interact with one another simultaneously in a more authentic way than the Tele/WebConference's. 

Mainly, it is one of the educational technologies/pedagogies to overcome the geographical challenges without losing much of the human contacts.

16 hours ago · Edited · Like · 8

May 20 (M,) 2013 Re-read an old writing- How time flied and changed!!! Educational/Learning Technology and Crystal - as a grad student, Fall, 2009

Title: My role in the Educational/Learning Technology (EL/T) community
by Li-chin (Crystal) Huang Fall, 2009

In the EL/T 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 myself in multiple ways of teaching and learning.

To be/Being a diligent educator-researcher is my life long learning inspiration.

I have been designing and implementing curriculum and instruction for 10 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 workplace, 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 the 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 an 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 further engaging with students’ learning, communicating with parents, building learning communities, advocating the future of learning technologies, convincing policymakers, and empowering the human capital, just to name a few positive functions.

These opportunities demand all stakeholders to reshape and reflect on the goals and purpose of education. The technology affordances of the Internet and the constantly 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, unions, administrators, and the whole edu-ecological system. I deeply believe that 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 a 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 14 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 14 years’ teaching at a four-year poly-technical university and current two-year technical college provide 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 a 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. The socio-economically induced digital gap between 2 and 4 year -college is a field constantly fascinates me.

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 the 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 longitudinal multistate research focusing on rural low-income mothers’ well being. My team narrowed down to study the role of the Intent playing out in this low-income (intersections of geo-social class and gender) mothers’ lives.

Furthermore, the most relevant one tied to my daily learning and teaching is witnessing the stratified educational institutions in the higher education domain in terms of funding/technological affordance, academic freedom, accountability, educational quality and equity situated in the national edu-policy agenda that affect the life chances for different social classes intersecting with other diverse dimensions.

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 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 a current semester – online, hybrid, Live Meeting, and face to face with the 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, policymakers, and individuals with rational enthusiasm serve as my role models. 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 role models in our field, exemplifying tenacity and unwaveringness, so I learn and have the courage to select the road less traveled.

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 an “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” are no longer the nickname 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 capital and shorten the digital gaps. It is time to redirect such a powerful capacity of learning technologies into 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 in 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.

021713 (Sn) Welcome the future Interdisciplinary Young Scientists!

Welcome the future Interdisciplinary Young Scientists!

STEMSS from Xena Huang   Presented in last summer (May, 2012) at CVTC for local districts.

28th DT&L Conference

(This short paper was accepted by 28th Annual Conference of Distance Teaching and Learning
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

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/

#15 Reflection and question on experiential learnign with working adults

Continuous, Interactive, and Online: A Framework for Experiential Learning with Working Adults by Eric Riedel, Leilani Endicott, Anna Wasescha, and Brandy Goldston published Volume 3 issue 6, August/Septermber/2007

When I was studying some quality assurance issues on adult learning, this article showed up during my browsing. It is like a case report. I gleaned over it and picked some good points for reference.

Summary: The article started with retrospection on the response to the criticism that universities were either dangerously aloof from the practicalities of the workplace or aligned with the military-industry complex. Later the higher education picked their new roles in facilitating students’ internships, field experiences, and service-learning to demonstrate some functionalities in preparing citizens for meaningful work and participation in the larger society.

The central theme of this article focuses on Walden University’s practice as a showcase. Walden is a distance learning alternative to traditional graduate schools, enrolling over 22,000 masters and doctoral students seeking several of degrees. The programs at Walden are administered through online courses, faculty-guided independent study projects called Knowledge Area Modules (KAMs), or a mix of the two approaches:

A. Lead faculty develop courses and are administered by full and part-time faculty who guide discussion, provide feedback on assignments, and supplement standard course materials. B. Faculty mentors guide student work on KAMs through e-mail, telephone, and an online forum providing continuous support to all of a mentor's students. Doctoral students are also required to attend 20 days of in-person residencies with faculty and other students held at temporary meeting spaces each year.

The school applies the intersection between experiential and online learning relies on those professional and social experience the students bring to the learning environment from their lives beyond the classroom. This scholar-practitioner approach contrasts with the traditional university model whereby a young adult with little work experience withdraws from the wider society to focus primarily on learning. The opportunity costs for older adults already engaged in professional, community, and family life often preclude such a withdrawal.

Reflection:

A significant point in Walden’s practice is that their admissions policy requires doctoral students having 3 years of practice within the field in which they seek a degree. Master's students are not required to have experience in their field at the time of admission, although these students typically do have such experience above and beyond the requirements they otherwise must meet. The average age of the Walden student is 37.6 years old, and nearly all of them are employed full-time during the period in which they are enrolled.

I can see the functions of the admission standards that obtain a certain degree of homogeneity in terms of age, educational level and occupational elements among those online students. From my observation, they comprise several aspects of adult learning theory: self-directed, transformative, experiential and contextualized learning within and beyond their learning communities. And like most of the busy adult life style, they juggle against time constraints in engaging in the multitasks among family, career, or communities.

Questions:

One of my puzzles in engaging in online teaching and learning is that there are population under various circumstances, seemingly having or seeking the possibility to do more with less resources (both the quantifiable and unquantifiable resources, in particular, time and money, and others, such as the emotions and relations etc.- the cost and effectiveness consideration). Time constraint is a typical factor in many people’s teaching and learning experiences. In Bransford et al’s (1999) “How people learn: mind, brain, experience and school”, pointing out an important component for learning to be transferred to new problems and situations is the time element. The same point was also presented in Lindsey Godwin and Soren Kaplan’s “Designing ee-Learning Environment” as posted in my previous reflection. They honestly addressed an important challenge that confronted the ee-learning: the time commitment from both participants and facilitators. Time spending is a measurable factor. Some research and experienced on liners claim that online teaching and learning are time consuming. According to this line of understanding, then it presents a contradictory scenario that people seek to save time and other resources by selecting a time consuming mechanism to fulfill that goal. I am not referring to the issue of short change of the educational quality. My question is about under what kind of conditions that people can do more with less, in particular, in term of the time constraints – the quantifiable equalizer – because we all have the same 24 hours a day!

Here is a vivid example to illustrate my question- some of my students – such as parents and single parent with young kids, dealing with many other family affairs (sick child, old relatives, personal illness and so on physical and emotional issues), juggling a couple of paid jobs, taking full time loads, busy with other communities issues, and expect to be an “A” student! Sometimes, I am thinking that most of them are supermen and superwomen!! In my case, as a slow bloomer, I have to sacrifice so many things and time in order to get one thing to be done a time!

Replace the previous posting (due to the blurry upload

Here are the two diagrams of DE theorists' perspectives replacing the previous blurry posting.