#ETOM16 – Creating Caption for the Accessible Video with Limited Tools

fullsizerender-12Presenter: Julia VanderMolen, Grand Valley State University

Closed Captioning provides support for students who are hearing impaired or use English-as-a-Second-Language. Not only will this meet the needs of your students, but it will also help your organization meet Section 508 compliance requirements. This session will provide tips and tools for the creation of closed captions, explanation of caption formats and video player compatibility, as well as an overview of automated workflows and integration with lecture capture and video platforms.

Notes:

  • Meeting the students’ needs is of utmost concern. By creating accessible instruction, all learners are given opportunity.
  • Challenges of making a online courses accessible:
    • Technical Challenges
    • Pedagogical Challenges
  • Brainshark was used to narrate lectures. Import PPT, YouTube, PDF, and you can narrate each piece slide by slide.  The note pages from Brainshark are includes as a transcript.
  • Blue Microphone is an excellent microphone.
  • Logitech headset is also a great tool, rather than using the onboard laptop.
  • Uses Lightboard to also create content and that is uploaded to YouTube for captioning.
  • 10 Tips for Creating Course Content
    • Provide an accessibility statement
    • Clearly name files and links
    • Present content in as flat a navigational structure as possible
    • Chunk videos
    • Provide closed captioning for all videos
    • Present instructions or handouts in HTML
    • Semantic structure
    • Avoid auto play
    • Avoid drop down
    • Use an accessibility checklist
  • Speechnotes.co is used for voice to text.
  • Dictation.io is similar to Speechnotes.
  • H5P.org allows you to add annotations in YouTube.
  • Screencast-o-matic is used for weekly tours in the online class.
  • YouTube can be used to edit your video captions after they are automatically captioned.
  • Presentation Slides Available

#ETOM16 – Credentialing Online Faculty with Badges: How To Do It & Why You Should Try

Presenters:  Shaelynn Long-Kish and Marisa Enos, Mid Michigan Community College

img_1250MMCC has recently implemented a badge-granting credentialing opportunity for faculty members interested in teaching online. There are 5 self-paced modules our faculty go through, and successful completion earns them badges that are visible in their LMS profiles. We built this training from scratch, using gamification and backwards design as our primary methodologies, and we want to share with you what we learned, why we love it, and what you can do to implement this at your own institutions.

Notes:

  • MMCC created a badge-granting credentialing module.
  • Self-paced using badges out of the LMS.
  • Each unit takes 30-45 minutes to complete.
  • Why badging? Confront the reduction of attendance at training sessions. Lack of engagement. Better management of time for faculty.
  • Badges offer:
    • clear goals
    • visual fulfilment
    • focused content
    • independent activity
    • engaging experience
  • Research process took 6 months of reading, research, asking questions.
  • Resources used: Wikipedia “Gamification, Game Theory, Andragogy” and James McGonigal (Reality is Broken: Why games make us better and how they can change the world.), EDUCAUSE 7 Things, etc.
  • Major game elements: immediate feedback, narrative, collaborative problem-solving, master and leveling up, progress mechanics, player control, scaffolded learning, social connection.
  • Used backwards design: learning outcomes, assessments/measurements, and then content, practice.
  • TPACK model was used: content | pedagogical knowledge | technology proficiency
  • 5 modules meet the credential competency.
  • Final Badges: Learning Outcome Artisan, Engagement and Interaction Architect, Online Roles & Responsibilities Champion, Assessment Agent, Accessibility Advocate
  • Going Live: Needed communication to faculty and marketing to help everyone understand the change and the why.
  • Offered a $100 stipend for first time completers.
  • Maintaining Online Credentialing: need to check completion, update those that received badges, and then send stipend, and also keep track of the database of recipients
  • Used: Best Practices in Online Faculty Development to extend and add to and update the modules:
    • ADA Training = Accessibility Advocate
    • Timeliness = Online Roles & Responsibilities Champion
    • Practice Discussion Forums = Assessment Agent
    • Continuing Development = Add more Workshops
  • A survey was deployed to measure success of online training and badges initiative.
  • A certificate is mailed out after faculty complete all the badges.
  • Future, develop an online orientation for students that receive badges.
  • Establish a badge that will “re-certify” for ongoing online teaching certification.
  • Presentation Slides

 

#ETOM16 – Davenport’s Global Campus University: Building a competency-based faculty training platform to impact student success.

img_1242Presenter: Kriss Ferluga, Davenport University

Numerous studies tell us that interactions between students and instructors factor heavily into student satisfaction with their learning.  Seeking to improve student learning experiences through instructor preparedness, Davenport University created Global Campus University (GCU), an online, competency-based, faculty training program that features interaction-driven teaching topics such as teaching strategies, discussions, feedback, and instructor presence.

Notes:

  • Global Campus University (GCU) – Research-driven, competency based training program, skill building, instructor preparing.
  • Online instructors are required to complete the GCU. The course is available for 4 weeks.
  • Teaching at Davenport (library, experiential learning, formative assessments, Davenport’s excellence system, etc.) and Core Teaching Topics (developing learning objectives, increasing student engagement, establishing instructor presence, providing constructive feedback, flipped classroom, learning styles and teaching strategies, and creating effective course discussions, etc.) are the 2 main content themes in the training.
  • The following pedagogical format is followed: learning objectives, topic overview, activity, assessment.

fullsizerender-7

  • Student evaluation of teaching surveys are delivered and this was used in developing some of the content for the training. Use a variety of instruction, effective communication, helpful feedback, use examples while teaching, establishing clear expectations.
  • Comments too from students was faculty needing improvement in the following area: communication skills, teaching techniques, and sympathize with students.
  • Students desired faculty more faculty Blackboard skills.

fullsizerender-9fullsizerender-8

  • Quality matters and peer view are important as well as formative assessment of students of their course experience during the semester.
  • While it used to be delivered instructor facilitated and time/place bound, the online training is now competency-based and has brought benefits:
    • Outcomes focus
    • Variable scheduling (self-paced)
    • Fixed assessment criteria

#ETOM16 – Using Open Educational Resources (#OER) to Improve Student Success

fullsizerender-6

Presenter: Garry Brand, Grand Rapids Community College

This session will start with an overview of Grand Rapids Community College’s OER Initiative (www.grcc.edu/open). In our first year, GRCC is on track to save students one (1) million dollars! However, there’s more to OER than saving students money. We’ll look at some research and initial findings that show it may also improve online student success.

Notes:

“Teaching, learning, and research materials in any media that reside in the public domain or have been released under an open license that permits their free use and repurposing by others.”

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

#ETOM16 – School is a Game… But is it a good game?

2016 ETOM FALL CONFERENCE
November 11, 2016
Mott Community College
Flint, MI

picture of Barry FishmanBarry J. Fishman, from the University of Michigan, will provide our keynote address entitled “School is a Game… But is it a good game?” We want our students to be deeply engaged with our subject matter. We want them to work hard and take on intellectual challenges. We want them to take risks and try new things. And perhaps most importantly, we want our students to be resilient in the face failure. So why it is that the design of our educational system – including colleges and universities – encourages exactly the opposite behaviors? I propose that our grading and assessment systems are the heart of the problem.

In this talk, I describe an approach called gameful learning – based on observations of one of the most durable and natural environments for learning – learning from play. This is not about learning by playing games. Rather, this talk posits that learning in school is already a kind of game, but a poorly designed one. The goal is to design a better game, and a better system.

What makes for great engagement? Three keys: feeling like you can make choices that matter, being part of something bigger than yourself, and being supported as you develop competence. Great games do this. University courses… not often enough. This talk presents a vision for how university classrooms can be as engaging as good games, and introduces GradeCraft, an application designed at the University of Michigan, that supports “gameful” teaching and learning.

fullsizerender

Notes:

“Most ideas about teaching are not new, but not everyone knows the old ideas.” – Euclid, c. 300 BCE

  • Trends: Badges, Personalized Learning, Makerspaces, MOOCs (open ed), Learning Analytics, 1:1 and BYOD, Assessment and Accountability
  • Student engagement is key and we want students to be:
    • Deeply engaged with subject matter
    • Take on intellectual challenges
    • Take risks and try new things
    • Resilient in the face of failure
  • The way our system is designed it encourages exactly the opposite of the above.
  • In school, risks do not equal rewards.  Students are only focused on the grade vs the process of learning. We are telling students that all the really counts is the final score.
  • Well designed games:
    • Get players engaged early and keep them engaged
    • Appeal to the players sense of curiosity
    • Encourage players to take risks.
  • People will play them because they are challenging, not despite the challenge.
  • What is a game?
    • “A game is a system in which players engage in an artificial conflict, defined by rules, that results in a quantifiable outcome.”
  • Education is a practice field. Rules make a game if there are no rules it is “play”.
  • Gamification is insufficient:
    • Points
    • Badges
    • Rewards
    • Leaderboards
    • Avatars/Characters
    • These are all superficial elements of games. We need to change the underlying mechanics of our courses if we want to change motivation and engagement.
  • 10 Principles of why “Good” Games are also Great Learning Environments
    • Clear Learning Goals
    • Employ a Mix of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
    • Support Autonomy
    • Encourage a Sense of Belonging
    • Support Feelings of Competence
    • Lowered Risk of Failure and Productive Failure
      • Without failure there is no learning… goal is not to achieve an “A” but competence.
      • It’s not: win some, lose some > rather > win some, learn some
    • Encourage Exploration
    • Encourage Identity Play
    • Lots of Practice and Reinforcement
      • Engaging in meaningful practice is needed for learning.
    • Embedded Assessment
      • We stop education for delivering assessment rather than engaging students in the act of learning. We need to use technology to generate data while learning is happening. Badges is an example.
  • When teaching embodies these 10 principles, we call it gameful.
  • Game design at the University of Michigan:
  • Gameful beyond courses eg. “Talent Gateway“:
    • Experimentation
    • Risk-taking
    • Help-seeking
    • Much student learning happens beyond and across classroom experiences. How are we helping our students make sense of those experiences and capitalize on them?
  • Self-Determination Theory
    • Autonomy
    • Belonging
    • Competence

fullsizerender-5

  • Tips for Gameful Learning in Courses:
    • Change the Grading Frame
    • Increase Choice
    • Create a Sense of Mission
    • Encourage Risk Taking
  • Do not use “extra credit”, no curves – these are terrible because it rations success and it can hide learning.
  • Gradecraft – a tool that integrates with your classroom and learning management system to support gameful learning.
    • 58 courses have used gradecraft with 5,100 students
    • Paid beta starts in winter
  • Pedagogical Resources on Gameful Design
  • “We consume entertainment but take part in play.”
  • How do we engage in academic innovation, see: “Academic Innovation at the U of Michigan

What can we do in our course design to create gameful learning opportunities for students.

#EDU16 – The California Community Colleges’ Online Education Initiative: Rethinking Online Education at Scale

Session Description: The CCC OEI is a statewide initiative intended to improve access to and the quality of online education in California’s 113 community colleges. We will discuss accomplishments and challenges to date, as well as plans to rethink outdated systems that ultimately limit the potential of online course delivery to assist students in meeting their educational goals.

Outcomes: Adapt methods of developing a statewide online education initiative to your institutional environment *Gain access to multiple resources for use with online learners, online teaching faculty, and institutional programs *Learn how to create similar online course quality strategies for your institution

Speakers:

  • Pat James

    Executive Director, Online Education Initiative,California Community Colleges, Chancellor’s Office
  • Joseph Moreau

    Vice Chancellor of Technology & CTO, Foothill-DeAnza Community College District

Notes:

  • More than 2.1 million students on 113 campuses
  • 1 in every 5 students in the nation attend a California Community College
  • Received a $56.9 million over 5 years by the state – Online Education Initiative California Community College
  • 4,100 sections
  • Another $20 million was received last year…

Goal is to increase student completion of transfer degrees by working together to increase access to quality online courses and support services for students.

  • Access | Quality | Completion
    • Providing resources to colleges to allow for the addition of quality online courses
      • Improve success and retention
      • Prepare students
      • Prepare faculty
      • Quality course design and content resources
    • Providing students with opportunities to take classes when and where they need them.
  • Philosophy
    • Always consider what is best for the students
    • Engage in “agile” project management
    • Innovation is “messy”
    • Consider the big picture
    • Involve everyone in the process
  • 3 Levels of Opportunity for College Participation in OEI
    • Shared resources such as:
      • OE course design rubric,
      • online learner readiness tutorials, and
      • @ONE workshops OR
    • Adopt the same course management system across all colleges for standards, for ease of students, to collect data
    • Participate in the OEI consortium along with the Exchange
  • “Online is not as good as face to face” is throwing access out – time to quit comparing. If we want to compare, compare fully resourced online programs vs non-resourced shoestring programs. We need to fund student success.
  • Providing resources to colleges to allow for the addition of quality online courses.
    • Online Readiness (Quest Program)
    • Recommended Library Services
    • Online Test Proctoring and Plagiarism Detection
    • Accessibility Support and Universal Design
    • Online Tutoring 24×7 and Platform
    • Embedded Support for Underperforming Students
    • Online Counseling Network and Platform
    • Professional Development and Course Design Rubric
    • Common Course Management System
  • Student equity in online education: Goal to decrease success rate gaps in online courses.
  • SmarterMeasure is being piloted for student readiness
  • Course design rubric is used and based on the Blackboard Exemplary Course rubric.
  • Encouraging course refresh – shifting the culture, migrating to a new system, shared design strategies, standard course design criteria

“Students are more likely to pass newly designed courses vs old courses”

  • Additional resources are available here: http://ccconlineed.org/

#EDU16 – Rethinking Academic Technology for 21st-Century Teaching and Learning

Session Description: Pedagogical and technological changes are upsetting the status quo of course delivery. To remain relevant, academic technologists must be responsive, agile, and forward-thinking within a context of rapid change, high demand, and limited resources. Learn how one academic technology unit strategically prioritized and responded to these challenges in today’s climate.
Outcomes: Articulate tactical work in response to the strategic goals of your institution and department *Redefine priorities in response to technological and pedagogical change *Retrofit Brown’s reflexive model to fit your own institutional culture

Speakers:

  • Hong Chau

    Instructional Designer,Brown University
  • Catherine Zabriskie

    Director, Academic Technology Services,Brown University

Notes:

  • Short Term – Improve the current situation with painpoints.
  • Long Term – Confirm our Vision
    • Instructional Technology Group
    • MM Labs
    • Classroom Technology
    • Media Product
  • Question: What do you spend your time on everyday – does that link to the vision?
  • Question: What are the 5 most important things that you do – why is that important to the insitution?
  • Session Materials
  • Technology Themes
    • Moving Forward and Looking Ahead
    • Responding University Needs
    • Making Connections
    • Partnering
    • Empowering Individual Growth
      brownthemese
    • Process for Visioning
      • Step 1 – Defining the work: Where are we now?
      • Step 2 – Understanding the work: What are the values/benefits of the work we do? Map the work to the themese/priorities and is there anything missing?
      • Step 3 – Where are we going? What should we stop, start, or do better and how?