Tag: faculty

#AcDigID, #diglit, #EdDigID

Being a Networked Scholar in 2018: Join #AcDigID Twitter Chat this Friday, January 12th

Laura Pasquini

Being an open, networked academic might mean sharing research, teaching, and scholarly practice online. Social networks and online tools are increasingly offering higher ed faculty a digital place for collaboration, learning, and work. In the information age, being able to share instructional practices, disseminate research, and engage in scholarly conversations is becoming the norm in and it is even more critical academia contributes to accurate public knowledge. There are a number of benefits for being open and online; however, being a networked scholar does not come without questions or challenges in 2018 [See: My last post on the topic.] If you’re interested in joining a conversation about “Being a Networked Scholar in 2018” and sharing your perspective on the topic, I would love if you could save the day to join this LIVE Twitter Chat on Friday, January 12, 2018 from 11 am-12 pm CDT (time zone converter, I’m in Dallas, TX, USA). What does it mean to be a connected academic? How has being a faculty in a networked world impacted your teaching, learning and service scholarship? Come chat with us to share your thoughts, ideas, and questions you are pondering this year. All #highered colleagues and academic peers are welcome for some FREE Twitter PD!

HOW TO: Participate in the #AcDigID Chat

Here’s a quick overview of how to participate in #AcDigID Twitter Chat:

  1. Set up your Twitter Account (HOW TO: Set Up The Twitters).
  2. Follow the #AcDigID hashtag on Twitter for the latest tweets.
  3. Follow @LauraPasquini who will moderate the Q & A for the Twitter Chat, a.k.a. “MOD”
  4. Get ready and excited for Friday’s (1/12) chat by checking out what’s being shared and discussed on the #AcDigID hashtag NOW! BONUS: You might learn what’s happening and what we’re talking about in the workshop. 🙂
  5. JOIN US Friday, January 12th from 11 am- 12 noon CDT  for the following TOPIC: Being Online as a #HigherEd Professional in 2018

Contribute to the #AcDigID Twitter Chat by:

  • Logging into your Twitter account as the #AcDigID chat will happen ON TWITTER.
  • Follow along in real time during the #AcDigID Twitter chat by following along on the Twitter hashtag: #AcDigID  or this Tweet Chat Room: http://tweetchat.com/room/AcDigID
  • The MOD (moderator) @LauraPasquini will ask 3-4 questions during the 60-minute chat; please respond with the Q# in your update, e.g. “Q1: Your Answer” or “A1: Your response”
  • Invite your higher education faculty/staff peers to join the conversation – all are welcome to join!
  • Include the #AcDigID hashtag in your tweets and responses (“@”) to others.

Being a Networked Scholar in 2018: To help you prepare, here are a few of the #AcDigID chat questions we might chat about for you to think about IN ADVANCE of our conversation:

  1. What questions should we discuss, with regards to being a networked scholar or digital academic in 2018?
  2. What are your preferred digital spaces to learn or connect with academics online? Please share.
  3. Where can we find traces of your work in #highered or scholarly self online (besides Twitter)?
  4. What are some of the benefits of developing a digital identity or being part of an online community?
  5. What are the possible challenges/issues for being online, on social media or having a professional a digital presence in 2018?
  6. What advice do you have for #highered colleagues & academics about their digital identity or being in an online professional network?

UPDATED #acdigID POST CHAT (1.12.18):

TRANSCRIPTS: #acdigID Storify Archive  and a PDF for download and review: #acdigID Chat_ TOPIC_ Being a Networked Academic in 2018 (01.12.18)

Higher Education, Networked Community, networkedscholar, Reflections, Research

Thinking About My Networked Self & Digital Experiences In Higher Ed

Laura Pasquini

This past summer, I spent a great deal of time talking to colleagues in higher ed to learn how they utilize social media to connect with peers and support one another in online communities. These interviews and conversations have been enlightening to help us understand more about how our digital, networked selves come to work on a university/college campus and contribute to our professional fields. For some, it is becoming increasingly vital to share instruction, scholarship, and practice online.  For others, there are still concerns about being connected to colleagues as our social networks now have context collapse. In the online world, what IS really private vs. public? Which networks are used for personal and/or professional practice?Open and digital channels help higher ed faculty and stuff in a number of different ways: asking/giving advice, collaboration on projects, free professional development, sharing information/resources, colleagues solicit advice, personal/professional support, and opportunities to learn in digital communities with common interests. Besides developing a digital presence or a “persona” online, higher education staff, administrators and scholars are utilizing social media and digital technologies to support their work, add to their professional development, engage with peers, learn in the collective and publicly in digital spaces and places.

This leads me to ask these questions of my peers working in higher ed:

  • How does being part of a digital learning network support your professional learning and development?
  • How are you shaping your online identity and presence to share your professional values?
  • How can networked communities expand your knowledge and learning to enhance your role on campus and the work you do?
  • Why might others consider finding networked peers and practitioners to scaffold their own career goals?

Although there are benefits to “working out loud” and online, there are also a number of issues as we repurpose social, digital spaces. The stakes are high, as an increasing number of higher ed professionals participate in online social networks with minimal institutional guidance for sociotechnical support or training (Pasquini & Evangelopoulos, 2017). Social and digital networks are connected, public and scaled — and often not on spaces we own or have control over. Additionally, much of our own data is being collected and reused on these networked platforms. This has me wondering:

  • How are higher ed staff and faculty evaluating their online participation on these social networks?
  • How has their contribution to open, public spaces shifted over the years?
  • What does being online as a higher ed professional look like now?

These are just a few of the questions we are asking in our research study. If you are interested in sharing more about your own experiences as a professional in higher ed, please consider contributing by participating in an interview (more about the study here).

Research Interview Sign Up: http://bit.ly/networkedself

Part of this blog post is cross-posted via my Inside Higher Ed Digital Learning opinion piece.

#AcDigID

Social Scholarship: Being a Digital Academic #AcDigID

Laura Pasquini

In thinking about scholarship today, I can certainly see how the web has influenced and impacted an academic’s professional life. Greenhow and Gleason (2014) outline the impacts of social scholarship using Boyer’s (1990) four dimensions of scholarship: discovery, integration, teaching, and application. In the social media age of academics, there are a couple of key questions that still need to be examined (Greenhow & Gleason, 2014, p. 1):

  • What is scholarship reconsidered in the age of social media?

  • How ought we to conceptualize social scholarship —a new set of practices being discussed in various disciplines?

Whether faculty are reluctant or embrace social media in their work life, it is apparent our institutions are not directing these online initiatives. Both policies and programs to support graduate students, researchers, and scholars have not met the needs of this growing social scholarship integration (Greenhow & Gleason, 2014). Social and digital spaces are thriving in academia. Academic social networks are on the rise and there are a number of reasons why scholars use social media and digital resources (Van Noorden, 2014). In thinking about how scholars interact and participate on social media, there are increasing considerations and questions faculty have about engaging/being online. Although I wish there was an “app for that” as an easy solution for an academic (see below), I think it takes some thought and intentionality for identifying and developing social/digital scholarship.

phd113016s

Image: Handy Academic Apps by PhD Comics

In the upcoming, Developing Your Social Media and Digital Presence for Faculty, Researchers, and Scholars (#AcDigID) online workshop, I hope to dig into digital identity development, discuss open and shared practices on social media, and share challenges and affordance being a networked academic. Whether you are a faculty who teaches online, face-to-face, or in blended learning environments, an early career scholar, or seasoned researcher — this workshop might be for you if you are interested in crafting your digital identity and interested in being part of a networked community of academics online. [Note: Future iterations of this OLC online workshop in 2017 will be targeted towards practitioners and administrators in higher education.]

OVERVIEW OF THE WORKSHOP: What does your online identity look like today? Have you Googled yourself lately? In academia, it is becoming increasingly vital to publish and share your teaching, service, and research scholarship. Besides developing an online presence and utilizing social media for professional development, faculty, researchers, and early career scholars are actively utilizing open and digital channels to enhance their instruction, share research findings, and find support in a community of connected scholars. Scholars are using online networks to share syllabi, ask questions for research needs, solicit support for peer review, and be part of the sharing economy for research impacts. In this workshop, we will explore meaningful ways to craft an active, online persona that includes using social media and other digital resources for teaching, service, and research in academia.

Learning Objectives

  • Evaluate social media and digital platforms for faculty development, connected scholarship, and to enhance research impact.
  • Establish effective strategies for developing an online digital identity within the open, networked community online.
  • Outline the benefits and challenges of open and digital scholarship, specifically with regards to social media and other networked platforms.

This is an asynchronous, week-long online workshop which will begin on a Monday (1/23) and end on the following Sunday (1/29).  If you want a look at the #AcDigID workshop agenda, here is the outline for short-course:

  • Why Does Social & Digital Identity Matter in Academia?
    • Getting started, digital identity development, and state of scholars online
  • The Tools of the Digital Academic Trade: Social Media
    • Twitter, hashtags, blogging, podcasting, LinkedIn, and more!
  • Being a Connected and Digital Scholar
    • Digital research impact and influence: ORCID iD, Academia.edu, ResearchGate, etc.
  • Openness in Academia: Benefits & Challenges
    • Working “in the open”  and the tension between benefits & challenges of online
  • Building Your Social and Digital Presence Online
    • Creating your own space and place for scholarship
  • Developing Your Digital Academic Identity
    • Bonus: Ways to aggregate and showcase your digital academic self

Dates Offered: January 23-29, 2017; Registration Page (to sign up)

To prepare for the workshop ahead, I am adding articles, resources, and suggestions. If you are an academic who is/was on social media, academic networking sites, or just online – please consider sharing your #AcDigID ADVICE and KNOWLEGE below:

  • ADD TO THE TWITTER LIST: Are you on the“Academics Who Tweet” Twitter list? I would like to get a variety of scholars from all disciplines and areas in higher education. Let me know if YOU or someone else should be added.
  • USE the #AcDigID Workshop HASHTAG this week to introduce yourself, say hello, share resources, or offer advice. I am encouraging learners to follow, read, and use this same hashtag during the week of January 23-29, 2017.
  • TELL YOUR #AcDigID STORY: Interested in coming to talk about your #AcDigID development? How did you become a networked academic? Why do you participate in networked, online communities higher ed? Let me know – happy to have you join during our #AcDigID Online, Synchronous Meeting on Wednesday, January 25, 2017 from 12-1 pm CST. [Drop me a DM on Twitter: @laurapasquini]
  • PARTICIPATE & TWEET during the #AcDigID Twitter Chat: Join us for the LIVE Twitter chat on Saturday, January 28, 2017  from 10-11 am CST.  Using the workshop hashtag, #AcDigID, I will moderate a Q&A 60-minute chat digging into the questions, challenges, and ideas/suggestions for being a networked scholar.

I look forward to seeing some of you in the OLC workshop, and others joining the #AcDigID online meeting (1/25), Twitter Chat (1/28) and contributing to the conversation using the #AcDigID workshop hashtag soon!

References:

Greenhow, C., & Gleason, B. (2014). Social scholarship: Reconsidering scholarly practices in the age of social media. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 392-402.

Van Noorden, R. (2014). Online collaboration: Scientists and the social network. Nature, 512(7513), 126-129.

EdTech, Learning Technologies

Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

Laura Pasquini

With so many possibilities for digital learning, selecting media and technologies for appropriate course instruction is a very complex process. Although there are a wide range of options in the ed tech realm, pedagogical considerations should always come first. Instructors should reflect on the learning objective and desired outcomes for their subject matter before identifying technological applications for the course.

The SECTIONS model, developed by Tony Bates (2015), is a pedagogical framework for determining what technology, specifically how this technology will be appropriate for instructional approaches. This might include identifying and determining pedagogical characteristics of text, audio, video, computing, and social media. With this framework, Bates (2015) asks five critical questions for teaching and learning for technology and media selection:

  1. Who are the learners?
  2. What are the desired learning outcomes from the teaching?
  3. What instructional strategies will be employed to facilitate the learning outcomes?
  4. What are the unique educational characteristics of each medium/technology, and how well do these match the learning and teaching requirements?
  5. What resources are available?

In thinking about the interplay of technology and learning, higher education courses will need to consider how this design process is developed. In this book chapter, Bates shared an alternative approach to the ADDIE model for instructional design – Learning + Technology Development Process Model (Hibbitts & Travin, 2015).

Learning + Technology Development Process Model (Hibbitts & Travin, 2015)Regardless of the model for learning design, it will be important to assess how technology will impact the pedagogy. The SECTIONS model is an effective framework to best inform instructors when deciding what media or technology to use for face-to-face, online or blended learning courses:

  • Students
  • Ease of use
  • Costs
  • Teaching functions (including the affordances of different media)
  • Interaction
  • Organizational issues
  • Networking
  • Security and privacy

I would encourage you to utilize Bates’ (2015) Questions to Guide Media Selection and Use, to support your learning design when consider technology adoption for teaching. This open, shared educational resource will provide you with a broader reflection on issues and considerations for your digital pedagogy. Here is an abbreviated checklist for selecting technologies for learning I adopted for a learning module. It was developed for faculty who would like to consider the broader issues for teaching with technology, and how to navigate this course planning process for digital/media inclusions.

Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

STUDENTS

  • Review accessibility mandate or policy of your institution, department or program.
  • Determine demographics of the students and appropriateness of technology.
  • Consider student access to technologies, both off campus and on campus.
  • Determine digital skills and digital readiness of your students with learning expectations.
  • Justify students purchases of a new technology component (if needed) for learning.
  • Assess prior learning approaches & how technology can support student learning.

EASE OF USE

  • Select the technology for ease of use by instructor and students.
  • Identify technology that is reliable for teaching and learning.
  • Verify the technology set up, maintenance and upgrade are simple.
  • Confirm the technology provider/company is stable to support hardware or software use.
  • Outline strategies to secure any digital teaching materials you create should the organization providing the software or service cease to exist.
  • Locate technical & professional support, both in terms of the technology and with respect to the design of materials.
  • Determine technologies to best support edits and updates of learning materials.
  • Outline how the new technology will change teaching with to get better results
  • Assess risks and potential challenges for using this technology for teaching and learning.

COST & YOUR TIME

  • Consider media selection by the length of time and ease of use during course development.
  • Factor the time it takes to prepare lectures, and determine if development of digital learning materials will save time and encourage interaction with students (online and/or face-to-face).
  • Investigate if there is extra funding for innovative teaching or technology applications; if so, determine how to best use that funding for learning technologies.
  • Assess the local support from your institution from instructional designers and media professionals for media design and development.
  • Identify open educational resources for the course, e.g. an open textbook, online videos, library page of articles, or other potential open educational resources.

TEACHING & LEARNING FACTORS

  • Determine the desired learning outcomes from the teaching in terms of content and skills.
  • Design instructional strategies to facilitate the learning outcomes.
  • Outline unique pedagogical characteristics appropriate for this course, in terms of content presentation and skill development, specifically for:
    • Textbook, readings, or other online text materials;
    • Audio, such as podcasts, streaming audio from news, etc.;
    • Video, such as slide presentations, lectures, tutorials, and screencasts; and
    • Social media, such as blogs, wikis, microblogs, photo sharing, curation, etc.
  • Plan learning aspects that must be face-to-face (in-person or online).

INTERACTION

  • Identify the skills for development and interactions that are most to determine the best type of media or technology to facilitate this learning.
  • Determine the kinds of kinds of interaction to produce a good balance between student comprehension and student skills development.
  • Estimate the amount of time the instructor will be interacting personally or online with students, and the type of medium for this interaction.

ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES

  • Determine institutional support in choosing and using media or technology for teaching.
  • Identify if the institutional support is easily accessible, helpful, and will meet the needs for the learning technologies for the course.
  • Determine if there is funding available to “buy me out” for a semester and/or to fund a teaching assistance/support to concentrate on designing a new course or revising an existing course.
  • Locate institutional funding or resources for any learning technology or media production.
  • Review the standard technologies, practices and procedures for teaching and learning, to verify requirements for utilizing institutional technology resources, i.e. the learning management system, lecture capture system, etc.
  • Determine if the institution will support trying a new technological approach to learning, and will support innovative media or digital design.

NETWORKING

  • Outline the importance for learners to network beyond a course, i.e. with subject specialists, professionals in the field, and relevant people in the community.
  • Identify how the course or student learning can benefit from networking and learning from external connections.
  • Determine the appropriate network and/or social media space to integrate for your learners to network with each other and connect with external community members.
  • Integrate these networking mediums with standard course technology.
  • Delegate responsibility for its design and/or administration to students or learners.

SECURITY AND PRIVACY

  • Determine the student information you are obliged to keep private and secure.
  • Identify the institutional policies for security and privacy for teaching & learning.
  • Outline potential risks and challenges of using a particular technology where institutional policies concerning privacy could easily be breached.
  • Identify who at your institution could best advise you on security and privacy concerns, with regards to learning and teaching technologies.
  • Itemize the areas of teaching and learning, if any, available only to students registered in the course.
  • Identify the types of technologies to best restrict or limit access to course materials (if any) for my registered students.

Interested in reviewing your own learning design further? DOWNLOAD the Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

Reference:

Bates, A. W. (2015). Chapter 8: Choosing and using media in education: The SECTIONS model. From Teaching in a Digital Age. A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Hibbitts, P. D., & Travin, M. T. (2015). Learning + technology development process model.

EdTech, Higher Education, Online Learning

Online Education in the US [2014 Report]

Laura Pasquini

As I am on my way to the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI & #eli2015), specifically to attend the National Research Center for Distance Education and Technological Advancement (DETA) Summit, I figured it was critical to review the 2014 Grade Level: Tracking Online Education in the United States just released from the Babson Survey Research Group (BSRG):

“The study’s findings point to a competitive marketplace, in which traditional institutions are gaining ground on the for-profits in online and distance education,” said study co-author Jeff Seaman, co-director of the Babson Survey Research Group. “While the rapid pace of online learning growth has moderated, it still accounts for nearly three-quarters of all US higher education’s enrollment increases last year.”

It is clear that online learning is on the rise in America – yet there is a vast difference between how administration and faculty view it. A majority of post-secondary education leaders (70.8%)  indicated that online learning is “critical to their long-term strategy;” however these leaders may struggle with online adoption as only 28% of their faculty find “value” and view online education as “legitimate.” A number of findings in this report show opposing views for online education. For example, these two factions of higher differ  by their awareness of open education resources (OER).

OER_FutureHE

There is much more of this narrative to tease out; and I would like to go through this report further (on the plane) and learn what others in the field have to say. For now I will leave you with some of the ‘quick facts’ shared, and encourage you to download and read through the FULL REPORT if you are in the online learning sphere:

Key report findings include:

  • The number of higher education students taking at least one distance education course in 2014 is up 3.7 % from the previous year.
  • The year-to-year 3.7% increase in the number of distance education students is the lowest recorded over the 13 years of this report series.
  • Public and private nonprofit institutions recorded distance enrollment growth, but these were offset by a decrease among for-profit institutions.
  • The percent of academic leaders rating the learning outcomes in online education as the same or superior to those in face-to-face remained unchanged at 74.1%.
  • The proportion of chief academic leaders reporting online learning is critical to their long-term strategy reached a new high of 70.8%.
  • Only 28.0% of academic leaders say that their faculty accept the “value and legitimacy of online education.”
  • The adoption of MOOCs (Massive Open Online Course) is reaching a plateau, only 8.0% of higher education institutions currently offer one, another 5.6% report MOOCs are in the planning stages.
  • The proportion of academic leaders who believe that MOOCs represent a sustainable method for offering online courses dropped to 16.3%.

Update:

A couple areas to note, and for further discussion this week at #eli2015 and the #DETAsummit (Follow @UWMDETA):

Pgs. 43-44: Discuss the under count and over count of distance education, i.e. for “fully online” enrollments – this seems to be hazy, as it might be as learning design for enrollment varies by student population type and course design delivery.

Pg. 44 – “The definition of ‘distance education is causing confusion”

There was an interesting segment in this report that struggled with the term “distance education.” This report takes into account distance education, when looking at “fully online” higher education programs. This part of the report reminded me about the Twitter debate of online learning, online education, distance education, and then some when trying to name an update to an edited book. What terminology is best? How can we describe/define education that is delivered from a distance/online/on the web/virtually? Please advise.