1 / 21

FNDS 6010 Dr. Shumack Spring 2010

FNDS 6010 Dr. Shumack Spring 2010. Team Members. Course Management Options. Introduction. Delivery Methods. Syllabus. Visual Model. Online Course Content vs. Technical Environment Course Management System Function vs. Features Instructor Processes vs. Abilities Students

adelle
Download Presentation

FNDS 6010 Dr. Shumack Spring 2010

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. FNDS 6010 Dr. Shumack Spring 2010

  2. Team Members • Course Management Options • Introduction • Delivery Methods • Syllabus • Visual Model

  3. Online Course • Content vs. Technical Environment • Course Management System • Function vs. Features • Instructor • Processes vs. Abilities • Students • Pedagogy vs. Andragogy • Putting it all together

  4. Cam Studio • (asynchronous) Echo 360 (asynchronous) Wimba (synchronous)

  5. Blackboards largest competitor • Collaboration and Communication are key • Has discussion boards, chats, email • State of Alabama uses program for high school ACCESS • www.desire2learn.com • Free Course Management System • Designed with pedagogy as main focus • Has blogs, forums, and moodle-docs • Has free demonstration page to experiment with program • www.moodle.com

  6. REFERENCES • ACCESS: Alabama connecting classroom, educators, & students statewide. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from https://access.desire2learn.com/ • Desire 2 learn: innovative learning technology. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from http://www.desire2learn.com/ • Moodle. Retrieved February 20, 2010 from http://moodle.com/ • Bird, L. (2007). The 3 ‘C” design model for networked collaborative e-learning: a tool for novice designers. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 44(2),153-167. Retrieved February 8, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals. • Brinkerhoff, J., & Koroghlanian, C.M. (2007). Online students’ expectations: enhancing the fit between online students and course design. J. Educational Computing Research, 36, (4), 383-393. Retrieved February 15, 2010 from http://www.ebscohost.com • Carmean, C., & Haefner, J. (2002). Mind over Matter: Transforming course management systems into effective learning environments. EDUCAUSE Review, 37 (6), 26-34. • Green, J. (1998). Andragogy: Teaching adults. In B. Hoffman (Ed.), Encyclopedia ofEducational Technology. Retrieved February 1, 2010, from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/Articles/andragogy/start.htm • Kidney, G., Cummings, L., & Boehm, A. (2007). Toward a Quality Assurance Approach to E-Learning Courses. University of Houston-Clear Lake, USA. International JI. On E-Learning, 6(1), 17-30. • Kim, K. J. & Bonk, C. J. (2006). The Future of Online Teaching and Learning in Higher Education. EducauseQuaterl,y, 4, 22-30. • Krumsvik, R. J. (2008). Situated learning and teachers’ digital competence. Education Information Technology, 13, 279-290. doi: 10.1007/s10639-00809069-5 • Lane, L.M. (2009). Insidious pedagogy: how course management systems impact teaching. First Monday, 14, (10). Retrieved February 14, 2010 from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewarticle/2530/2303 • Lane, L. (2008). Toolbox or Trap? Course Management Systems and Pedagogy. EDUCAUSE Quarterly, 31 (2), 4-6. BIBLIOGRAPHY

  7. Malikowski, S. R. (2008). Factors related to breadth of use in course management systems. Internet and Higher Education, 11 (2), 81-86. • Meyer, K., & Smart, K. (2005). Changing Course Management Systems: Lessons Learned. EDUCUASE Quarterly, 28 (2), 68-70 • Oblinger, D. G. & Hawkins, B. L. (2006). The Myth about Online Course Development. Educause Review, January & February, 14-15. • Rughooputh, S., & Santally, M.I. (2009). Integrating text to speech software into pedagogically sound teaching and learning scenarios. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 57 (1), 131-146. Retrieved February 16, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals. • Seok, S. (2008). Teaching aspects of e-learning. International Journal on ELearning, 7(4), 725-741. Retrieved February 8, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals. • Swinglehurst, D., Russell, J., & Greenhalgh, T. (2008). Peer observation of teaching in the online environment: An action research approach. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(5), 383-393. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2007.00274.x. • Tastle, W.J., White, B. A., & Shackleton, P. (2005). E-learning in higher education: the challenge, effort, and return on investment. International Journal on ELearning, 4, (2), 241-251. Retrieved February 8, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals. • Williams, V. (2004). Teachnology: web-based instruction’s dual environment. International Journal on ELearning, 3, (4), 15-21. Retrieved February 8, 2010, from ProQuest Education Journals.

More Related