Technology as a Tool for Effective Teaching and Learning

1. Technology as a Tool for Effective Teaching and Learning Chuck Dziuban University of Central Florida

2. The University of Central Florida

3. A value-added model of technology-enhanced learning Learning Management Systems Fully Online (W) Technology Augmented (E) Blended (M) Access and Transformation Lecture Capture Engagement Enhancement FacultyInitiative Institutional Initiative Web 2.0

4. Technology Enhanced Learning as a Boundary Object Evaluators Journalists Presidents Students Vice Provosts Faculty TEL Deans Provosts CIOs Department Chairs Librarians InstructionalDesigners

5. Shirky, C. (2009)

6. An Evaluation Plan

7. Distributed Learning Impact Evaluation Faculty Students Online programs Success Writing project model Satisfaction Demographic profiles Retention Higher order evaluation models Reactive behavior patterns Strategies for success Theater Student evaluation of instruction Information fluency Generational comparisons Large online classes

8. Student Success

9. Success rates by modality Spring 2009 through Summer 2010 F2F (n=618,899) M (n=39,021) W (n=109,421) Percent Summer 09 Fall 09 Spring 10 Summer 10 Spring 09 Term

10. Colleges

11. Success Rates by Modality for the College of Education Spring 09 – Summer 10 F2F (n=42,411) M (n=7,580) W (n=12,186) Percent

12. Success Rates by Modality for the College of Sciences Spring 09- Spring 10 M (n=8,012) F2F (n=164,775) W (n=29,475) Percent

13. Success Rates by Modality for the College of Health & Public Affairs Spring 09 - Summer 10 F2F (n=37,456) M (n=6,093) W (n=35,833) Percent

14. Predictors

15. Domain Prediction for Success and Withdrawal in Online Learning Domains Dependent Ethnicity Age, Gender, Etc. Success & Withdrawal SAT/ACT GPA

16. Domain Prediction for Success in Online Learning (n range 32,000- 72,000) Domains Dependent Ethnicity Age, Gender, Etc. r2 = .02 r2 = .01 Success SAT/ACT r2 = .37 GPA

17. Domain Prediction for Withdrawal in Online Learning (n range 33,000- 73,000) Domains Dependent Ethnicity Age, Gender, Etc. r2 = .01 r2 = .01 Withdrawal SAT/ACT r2 = .04 GPA

18. Student Satisfaction

19. Student satisfaction in fully online and blended courses Fully online (N = 1,526) Blended (N = 485) 44% 41% 39% Percent 38% 11% 9% 9% 5% 3% 1% Very Satisfied Neutral Very Unsatisfied Satisfied Unsatisfied

20. Student satisfaction with online learning • Convenience • Reduced Logistic Demands • Increased Learning Flexibility • Technology Enhanced Learning Reduced Opportunity Costs for Education

21. Students’ problems with online learning • Reduced Face-to-Face Time • Technology Problems • Reduced Instructor Assistance • Overwhelming • Increased Workload Increased Opportunity Costs for Education

22. The Ambivalence Dimension Ambivalence Satisfaction Dissatisfaction

23. Sources of Ambivalence Change Complexity ? Incompleteness Ambiguity Pluralism Uncertainty

24. Derived Model Yields 8 Dimensions of Student Perception of ALN Ambiguity Ambivalence Information Fluency Engagement Commitment Responsiveness Expectations

25. Web 2.0

26. DisruptiveInnovation! There’s one in YOUR future!! And another one right behind it! Wayne Hodgins, 2007

27. Web 2.0 Audio Facebook Semantic Web Wikis SlideShare Ajax Digg Technorati Zude Del.ico.us Skype YouTube Pandora tagging XHTML Flickr Blogs Wikipedia RSS Social Networking Podcasting MySpace Video Folksonomy

28. The Generations

29. Some characteristics of the generations Matures (prior to 1946) Dedicated to a job they take on Respectful of authority Place duty before pleasure Baby boomers (1946-1964) Live to work Generally optimistic Influence on policy & products • Generation X (1965-1980) • Work to live • Clear & consistent expectations • Value contributing to the whole • Millennials (1981-1994) • Live in the moment • Expect immediacy of technology • Earn money for immediate consumption

30. Net Generation: Marc Prensky – Learning Preferences Multitasking Twitch Speed Active Learning Graphics Connections Technology is my Friend Gaming and Fantasy

31. Net Generation: Howe and Strauss – Lifestyle Sheltered Conventional Confident Special Team Oriented Achievement Pressure

32. Net Generation: Twenge (Generation Me) – Lifestyle Self Focused Artificial Self Esteem Cynical Anything is Possible (unrealistic) Yeah Right Life by Lottery

33. Students who were satisfied by generation (non ambivalent) 55% Percent 38% 26% Boomer 1946-1964 n=328 Generation X 1965-1980 n=815 Millennial 1981-1994 n=346

34. Because of the web I changed my approach to learning (non ambivalent) 51% Percent 37% 23% Boomer 1946-1964 n=328 Generation X 1965-1980 n=815 Millennial 1981-1994 n=346

35. Student and faculty generations in blended and online learning Faculty Student Mature 1% Millennial 1% Baby Boomer 6% Mature 11% Gen X 33% Gen X 11% Baby Boomer 55% Millennial 84% N=689 N=26,823

36. Student Ratings

37. A decision rule for the probability of faculty member receiving an overall rating of Excellent (n=1,280,890) If... Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Facilitation of learning Communication of ideas Respect and concern for students Then... The probability of an overall rating of Excellent = .97 & The probability of an overall rating of Fair or Poor =.00

38. A decision rule for the probability of faculty member receiving an overall rating of Poor (n=1,280,890) If... Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor Facilitation of learning Communication of ideas Respect and concern for students Then... The probability of an overall rating of Poor = .90 & The probability of an overall rating of Very Good or Excellent =.00

39. A comparison of excellent ratings by college unadjusted and adjusted for instructors satisfying Rule 1 (n=1,280,890) Overall If Rule 1 College % Excellent % Excellent Education 58.6 97.9 Molecular & Microbiology 49.9 97.6 Health & Public Affairs 49.8 97.6 Arts & Humanities 49.1 96.7 Arts & Sciences 45.1 97.0 Sciences 44.5 96.8 Hospitality Management 44.1 96.6 Business Administration 39.5 96.9 Engineering 39.0 96.8

40. A comparison of excellent ratings by course modality--unadjusted and adjusted for instructors satisfying Rule 1 (n=1,171,664) Course Overall If Rule 1 Modality % Excellent % Excellent Blended 48.9 97.2 Online 47.6 97.3 Enhanced 46.8 97.5 F2F 45.7 97.2 ITV 34.2 96.6

41. Reactive Behavior Patterns in the Blended Learning Environment

42. Research on reactive behavior patterns • Theory of William A. Long, University of Mississippi • Ambivalence brings out behavior patterns • Provides a lens for how “types” react to different teaching styles • All behavior types and traits are “normal”

43. Resources • Personality • Emotional maturity • Sophistication level • Level of intellect • Educational level • Character development

44. Aggressive Independent high energy action-oriented not concerned with approval speaks out freely gets into confrontational situations Passive Independent low energy not concerned with approval prefers to work alone resists pressure from authority Aggressive Dependent high energy action-oriented concerned with approval rarely expresses negative feelings performs at or above ability Passive Dependent low energy concerned with approval highly sensitive to the feelings of others very compliant Long behavior types

45. Phobic exaggerated fears often feels anxious often sees the negative side does not take risks Compulsive highly organized neat, methodical worker perfectionist strongly motivated to finish tasks Impulsive explosive quick-tempered acts without thinking frank short attention span Hysteric dramatic and emotional more social than academic artistic or creative tends to overreact Long behavior traits

46. Students satisfied (non ambivalent) with online learning by Long type Percent 39% 33% 32% 24% (N = 168) (N = 204) (N = 458) (N = 122)

47. Changed approach to learning in online class by Long type Percent 40% 37% 34% 25% Aggressive Independent n=120 Passive Independent n=83 Aggressive Dependent n=285 Passive Dependent n=28

48. Technology Enhanced Education Black Swans

49. What could this be??? .0000000000000000000001049

50. Taleb: The Black Swan Retrospective Prediction Monumental Impact Unpredicted 9/11 Technology Enhanced Learning Market crash Google Back-Filled Narrative Harry Potter Undetectable Outliers Y2K