StoryBoard

My First Project- 5/29/13

StoryBoard Resubmission

StoryBoard

References Davis, L. (2011). Arresting Students Plagiarism: Are We Investigators or Educators? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(11), 160-163. This article discusses ways to manage plagiarism. Teachers should communicate with students the consequences of plagiarism and it should appear in the class syllabus. Having students turn in assignments to a plagiarism detection program will help lessen the possible plagiarism infractions. The article offered tips to prevent plagiarism such as, creating unique assignments, article writing, and teaching students the proper way to cite source. Hall, S. E. (2011). Is it Happening? How to avoid the Deleterious effects of Plagiarism and Cheating in your Courses. Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 179-182. The article discusses preventive and consequences of plagiarism. Make sure students are aware of the proper techniques to cite information. The article also explains that sharing work is also considered plagiarism. Hansen, B., Stith, D., & Tesdell, L. S. (2011). Plagiarism: What's the Big Deal? Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 188-191. This article focuses on the meaning of plagiarism and how to prevent it from happening. Some suggestions to prevent plagiarism is to create unique assignments, have students create a portfolio and allowing plenty of time for assignments to be worked on during class. Insley, R. (2011). Managing Plagiarism:A Preventative Approach. Business Communication Quarterly, 74(2), 183-187. The article explains common reasons that plagiarism occurs. It often happens for the following reasons: it’s done unknowingly, student don’t know the proper way to cite sources, waiting until the last minute to complete assignments,. It also explains ways to prevent plagiarism such as, having class discussions, turning a rough draft to be review before submitting the final paper. It briefly discusses consequences such as receiving a zero the assignment. Ma, H., Yong Lu, E., Turner, S., & Wan, G. (2007). An Empirical Investigation of Digital Cheating and Plagiarism Among Middle School Students. American Secondary Education, 35(2), 69-82. The article focuses on Middle School students and their reasons for digital cheating and plagiarism. The Internet has made digital cheating and plagiarism easier for students. The author conducted research at various types of middles schools. Through their studies the authors discovered that students were cheating because their peers were doing it, the lack of punishment, pressure to achieve, and students did not understand the concept of plagiarism. The study revealed that students knew very little about plagiarism. Singh, H., & Bennington, A. J. (2012). Faculty on the Frontline: Predicting Faculty Intentions to Address College Student Plagiarism. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 16(4), 115-128. This article focuses on the faculty beliefs on handling plagiarism. The study showed that most teachers think its important for students to cite their work. Over 90 percent of the teachers used in this study believed that students should be punished for intentional plagiarism. Over half of the teachers think that students may plagiarize unintentionally and that contributes to mix responses on punishment.

Static Verus Dynamic Technology

Technology tools can be placed into two categories static and dynamic. Static technologies are tools that do little to build the learners knowledge. Static technology are use to pass information along to the learner versus challenging them to think critically. Some examples of static tools are videos, and audios of information. Static tools are best to use when presenting students information. Dynamic technologies are tools that help the learner build new knowledge. It requires the learner to think critically about the content. An example of a dynamic tool is discussion boards. In order, for a learner to post to a discussion board he or she has to understand the content in-depth. This is also required when the learner responds to their peers. Through the use of dynamic technology the learner gains a deeper understanding of the content. I try to incorporate various forms of static and dynamic technology in the classroom. There has been a few times students had a difficult time with learning how to use a new tool. Due to time restrains I had to end the assignment and move on. Next school term, I plan on using Edmodo to communicate with my students, since social network are block at school. Moller, L. (2008). Static and dynamic technological tools. [Unpublished Paper].

Engaging Learners with New Strategies and Tools

In an online learning environment its important that students are aware of the learning objectives and how grades will be issued. Online classes should be rigors and to create a environment of rigor its important to implement the 21st century skills and problem base learning.

Communication between the instructor and students should occur on a weekly basis this can be done in various ways such as discussion board and wikis. Collaboration is the key to all learning environments through the process of collaboration students are able to share the knowledge with others and gain new knowledge as well. All three components plays a role in keeping students engaged. 

Assessing Collaborative Efforts

         Based on this week’s learning, there are various ways to assess students in collaborative learning environments. The assessment tool should be fair and able to assess the learning objective. A rubric should be developed for each learning task. The rubric is a tool that will display to the learner the requirements of each assignment. It can be used a checklist for the learner and a way for the learner to assess their own work before submission. Rubric helps to eliminate any misunderstanding because all of the requirements are listed for the learner. According to Pallof and Pratt, “This activity not only provides a realistic picture of how a student interacted with course material and their peers, it also reduces the possibilities of grade inflation, dissatisfaction and grade appeals by providing evaluative material that is objective and quantifiable”(2005,p.44).  The instructor can take into consideration the amount of contribution the learner added to the environment and the quality of the work the learner produce when assessing collaborative assignments, but it should be listed on a rubric as well. The use of a rubric is one of the best tools to used helps to eliminate the possibility of being graded objectively.

        When groups are form for collaboration roles should be assigned to each group member. Each member knows his or her responsibility for the group assignment. The instructor should be aware of each group’s member role. The instructor should monitor each group member’s participation regularly. If necessary the instructor will have to address a students lacks of participation.  Swan states, “ make participation in discussion a significant part of the course grades”(2004,p.2).  If its stated that participation will be a major part of the student’s grade may courage students to participate more.  Since participation is part of the rubric the student grade will suffer due to the lack of participation.

Palloff, R. M., & Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: Learning together in community. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Swan, K. (2004). Relationships between interactions and learning in online environments. The Sloan Consortium.

StoryBoard Draft

http://www.scribd.com/doc/135282520/Storyboard-Draft

Distance Education Communication

          Distance Education Communication

The way that people communicate is changing at significantly over the last decade. At one time there were very few methods for people to communicate via the Internet. People would send email and use instant messaging. Through the developments of social networking and face-time chatting it’s starting to change the way students in an online community communication with each other.According to Langton, "the online tools that are available today to help facilitate global interactions among learners are numerous”    (http://langstonnotes.blogspot.com/2011/12/module-2-assignment.html?showComment=1325309162482#c5823722556074796785).
Most of the course I took in the master’s program required students to create a blog. Through this blog students would communicate their ideas and views on a particular topic.  When assigned to work in groups sometimes the group members will befriend each other on a social networking site they have in common. This provides an easier to communicate and also allows the group members to learn more about it each other. There may be students have synchronous chats to collaborate and share ideas as well.

http://langstonnotes.blogspot.com/2011/12/module-2-assignment.html?showComment=1325309162482#c5823722556074796785

The Next Generation of Distance Education

Distance education and traditional education both have pros and cons to each. They are actual very similar. Both setting have an objective that the students must master. It how effective the learning assignments are that determines if the setting is effective.  

A traditional education is normally a very controlled setting and learning is based on collaboration and having oral class discussions. This environment may hinder some people from maximizing their potential. The teacher may not spend a lot of time on discussions that are not directly aligned with the standards or objective.

Distance education increases the learner-to-learner collaboration. This form of education has on going collaboration where the learner is not in a controlled setting. The learner is able to maximize their potential in this setting. The learner can conduct independent research to discuss with their distance education classmates. Distance education is mainly performance based. The learner independently learns the content and has to demonstrate their understanding of the information.

As stated before, one setting is not better than the other. I depend on the learner needs and preference.  Some people work well in a controlled setting and other does not.  It important to make sure that the content is delivered in a meaningful matter to meet the need(s) of the learner.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, May/June). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 1: Training and Development). TechTrends, 52(3), 70–75. Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's title.

Moller, L., Foshay, W., & Huett, J. (2008, July/August). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 2: Higher Education). TechTrends, 52(4), 66–70. Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's title.

Huett, J., Moller, L., Foshay, W. & Coleman, C. (2008, September/October). The evolution of distance education: Implications for instructional design on the potential of the Web (Part 3: K12). TechTrends, 52(5), 63–67.Use the Academic Search Premier database, and search using the article's title.