As many of you who know me are aware, I’m heading into my dissertation phase….so guess what? No more writing. Not for a while anyway. I’ll be writing for the next 18-24 months – so between work and teaching and my doctorate, I need to concentrate heavily on that piece of paper! I hope you’re all with me…sorry if you were a regular reader. But priorities are priorities 🙂 See you in a couple of years!
August 10, 2009
July 13, 2009
Assessing Creativity
Pick a number between 01 and 09. Got it? Multiply the number you chose by 9. (You may need a pencil or calculator for this…) You should now have a two digit number. Add these two numbers together. Subtract 5. Take this last number and correlate it to a letter of the alphabet. (1=A, 2=B, etc). Think of a country that begins that letter. Now think about the 2nd letter of the country’s name. Think of an animal that begins with that letter. Got one?
You now have a problem. There are no elephants in Denmark! (Impressive, eh?) So, approximately 94% of you came up with that answer. The rest of you probably had an ostrich in the Dominican Republic, but it’s a crap shoot at that point. 🙂
Do you think that attention getter is creative? I do. Audiences like it – if you can get them to participate. The payoff is when they realize you “read their minds” and they try to deconstruct it. But regardless of the math behind the trick, it’s a pretty creative way to get people invested in you as a speaker.
Creativity is a passion of mine. I am a big believer that we do not teach, nor do we encourage creativity in our classrooms. (Tell me you’ve watched Sir Ken Robison’s talk at TED on this subject: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY) Yet, what talents do we read about in newspapers, magazines, and journals that are said to differentiate successful businesses, inventions, or even countries? Innovation is often touted as what makes one business successful while another one fails. Inspired design is often how inventions are described. The United States likes to talk about our resourcefulness, imagination, and out of the box thinking that helps us stay ahead of other countries with regard to science, defense, and technology. But if creativity is so revered, and if innovation is what will change our future, why don’t we build an infrastructure of creative thought for our students?
I used to believe that educators were creative. I thought you had to be innovative to find ways to inspire and motivate while teaching foundational principles. But after 15 years in and around educators at all levels, I’m not convinced of that anymore. Don’t get me wrong, there are some tremendously imaginative people out there teaching and assessing our students. But, the percentage of creative people in education is probably the same as the percentages in industry, business, and the military. (I’d guess that percentage is around 5%.)
Don’t get me wrong. I think everyone has the propensity for creativity. Or at least a majority. But without those skills and attributes being nurtured by someone along the way, most people just do as their told and that creative inclination dissipates. Think about it – you are in 2nd grade and you’re asked to draw a picture of a farm. You grab your crayons and a big piece of butcher paper and start to work. A purple sun here, a blue barn there, a flying tractor that can transform into various vehicles – all in all a pretty imaginative farm! But then your teacher comes over and asks what you’ve done. They explain that our sun is yellow and that a typical barn is red. “Why?” you ask. No answer is given. It should be red because it should be red apparently. And of course tractors don’t fly. That’s just silly.
The end. Game over. Your attempt at something fun, cool, interesting, and creative was squashed and you soon understand that in order to succeed, you need to do things the conventional way. You need to follow the pack to show that you have learned.
Obviously, this is a super simplified example and I mean no offense to 2nd grade teachers. This could have been any level with any project. And therein lies the problem.
Think about what I call the triangle of teaching and learning. You have two foundation points – the outcome and the assessment. Then you have the tip of the triangle – the learning asset. (I am growing tired of the bastardization of words like “learning object” which now mean so many multiple things to different people, we can’t have an effective conversation anymore.) But let’s talk about each point.
The outcome: this is a constant. It should not change unless it becomes out dated. An outcome of students demonstrating writing skills or reading skills comes to mind. (Of course, the level of specificity is an important conversation – but one for another day.)
The assessment: this may change from term to term, class to class, or group to group, but essentially this stays the same for one instance of teaching. In other words, you should assess all students in the same way to promote fairness. (Ex: Don’t use a test for one student and a paper for another student.)
The learning asset: this is where teaching creatively can come into play! How you get your students to the outcome can (read: should) vary within the same class / term and beyond! The learning asset may be a lecture, a widget, an exercise, a powerpoint presentation, a video, etc. (Creativity should be modeled!)
However, it’s the assessment that we’re talking about here. While you don’t want to change requirements for assessment on a student by student basis, what about trying this. Give your students the option to demonstrate understanding and application in their own way?! If your assessment gives the freedom for students to explore their own creative ideas in terms of submission – and as long as the objectives for the assignment are met – imagine the culture of creativity AND assessment you would be creating!
For example, most instructors ask for a paper on bigger, complex items. Why not ask for a presentation? This may be a paper, but it might also be a video. Students could use Zentation to combine a video with a powerpoint. They might even create a model on Excel or using another software that demonstrates the objectives creatively.
What about asking students from the start what ways they would like to promote themselves in terms of your outcomes and objectives? Creating a democratic classroom in addition to a creative assessment culture is also powerful! Students get to take more and more ownership of their learning and you get more and more ideas for future teaching modules!
Why not start assessing students through gaming devices? Games are powerful teaching and learning tools – and the assessment combines formative and summative effectively. There are a number of games already created online or in books, but you can certainly make your own (demonstrating your own creativity!).
There are ways to promote creativity. There are things we should do to suggest to students that innovation, invention, and inspiration are both valued as well as something we can develop! Think of the ramifications for our businesses, our culture, or our country around this powerful concept. While we believe ourselves to be decent problem solvers, this may lead to a whole new generation of problem finders (which is typically considered much harder…). Assessing creativity can happen. It can make learning more engaging. It can lead to stronger connections between content and application. It can happen. Good luck and good teaching.
Want to know more about creativity? Want to inspire your team to think outside of the box? Contact Jeff at jborden@jeffpresents.com for more information!
May 1, 2009
How NOT to build a course (Part I)
Letter To The Coures Editors – Part I: In my travels and dealings, I have seen thousands of online courses. Some courses are brilliant, while others leave much to be desired. Unfortunately, there is still a significant number of what I call, “Text Under Glass” – essentially courses that are all reading with little to no interactive content. Likewise, there are courses where the instructor has no presence – no immediacy, no communication, no evaluation…no teaching! I have also seen courses that aren’t really courses – they are incomplete from the traditional concept of a course. So, for the next two blogs, I’d like to present my letters to course writers. These letters are meant to both motivate and call out. See what you think.
Dear course developer –
I saw another of your courses today. Yikes! I’m not completely sure I would consider a course at all, but accreditors don’t seem to know the difference, so I guess you’re covered. Why wasn’t it a course, you ask? Well, it consisted of about 3-4 pieces of content every week. The basic outline went something like this:
Content Item #1 – labeled Readings: Here you told your students what pages or chapters of the textbook to read.
Content Item #2 – Discussion: Here you had a discussion area with a pre-populated discussion topic for the “instructor” to facilitate.
Content Item #3 – Assignment: Here you asked the student to submit a 5 paragraph essay on most any topic. The creation of a product (I’m assuming) gave you the feeling that you were assessing a higher level of Bloom’s Taxonomy.
Content Item #4 – Quiz / Test: In the weeks that had tests (not all did), the questions were purely recall, suggesting that memorization of terms from the textbook was essential.
That’s it. Don’t get me wrong – your course has plenty of structure and instructional design. And standardized nomenclature is a very good thing for an online course. When students click on “Discussion” they know exactly what you mean. The stock photos and newspaper like pages were easy to read, especially since there really wasn’t anything more than directions item after item. As well, your outcomes and objectives were impeccable. They weren’t necessarily important or practical, but they were spot on in terms of what you presented. You obviously mapped program goals to learning outcomes to course objectives – this should make for a great report to show accreditation groups or internal reviewers. However, when it comes to differentiation (Educational Variance), curriculum integration, immediacy, and lots of other important, academic concepts, you’ve missed the boat.
You may have noticed that I put the word instructor in quotes above. I know that seems harsh, but essentially the course that I saw from you made the teacher an overpaid grader – s/he wasn’t teaching anyone anything. For example, if the instructor asked a poignant question in the thread, students had absolutely no reason to answer that question. The explicit grading rubric, in and of itself a great thing, was clear. As long as students responded to the pre-populated topic and X number of their peers, then the student would earn all points for the week’s discussion. So, perhaps you would allow the instructor of the course access to add in a few quiz questions so as to keep students accountable to the expert you’ve hired to teach. Nope. The instructor was not allowed to add any assessment to the course. Only the development team could do that. So I say again, your course had no need for an “instructor”. (Other than the fact that accreditation requires it I guess…)
But where was the rest of it? If a traditional course, requiring contact hours + homework asks 45 hours of a teacher / student’s in class plus 3-5 times that outside of class, how does this course work? If ALL content is coming from the textbook, isn’t the textbook the teacher? Is that really the best education our students can get? No practical, real world instruction from an expert – but just textual theory from a bunch of graduate students who work for a PhD? Don’t get me wrong – I AM a doctoral student and I work my tail off to gather research and assemble journal articles. But my ability to write a textbook today would come from the last 15 years of communication teaching AND experience – I would not have been effective at that during my Master’s program!
Perhaps there is a shortage of quality instructors? People who you don’t trust to teach effectively? Surely there are ways to police that though. I know how hard it is to keep tabs on adjunct faculty teaching in the face-to-face classroom – I managed over 50 at a time when I coordinated public speaking at MSCD. But online is a different story, isn’t it? You see every communication, every thread, every document, EVERYTHING! You should be able to tell if quality instruction is happening. So I’m guessing that’s not it.
Hmmm. I guess it comes down to creativity, teaching, and other academic principles. The lack of web 2.0 concepts, the surface development of learning community, and the trust of content over teaching suggests a business decision, not an educational one. I’m reminded of a keynote address I heard recently by Dr. Mark Milliron. He said that research shows the #1 influencer of student success is a teacher. He also noted that the next 5 educational elements that influence success, when totaled, don’t equal the percentage of relevance a teacher has. Not standardized outlines, not repetitive agendas, and definitely not content. (Libraries have been around centuries yet we still need teachers to effectively teach us how to classify, interpret, and apply it, no?)
So, my friends, I’m left wondering what to do next. I work with many of you – I KNOW many of you. Some of you are excellent people with (uninformed) hearts in the right place. (I also know some “educators” who really only care about the profit involved. I have no problem with you – everyone has to make money and furthering education in the process is fine by me – but this isn’t for you. You’ll likely see this as silly and altruistic. No worries – find another blog.) But how do I fix this? It IS fixable after all. Content doesn’t have to be boring. Learning doesn’t have to exclude practicality, originality, and context. Learning doesn’t have to happen in a vacuum. Rigor is okay when accompanied by scaffolding, core knowledge, and scholarship. I know it might weed out potential unmotivated customers, er…students, but that’s okay too. Not every class is for every student and school isn’t for every person at every stage of life. Life-long learning doesn’t have to be formal – informal and nonformal learning are at work too.
Well, I’ll keep on speaking. I’ll put out the word and see if any of it sticks. I’m cynical, but not without at least a small degree of hope. Things can be changed. There IS a happy medium between the course I described here and the course created by a faculty member who is either uninformed or lazy. And the person who figures that out…watch out. It will change education as we all know it.
Want to hear more about building a better course? Need some help finding a balance between standardization and effective teaching? Contact jborden@jeffpresents.com for more information!
March 17, 2009
Innovations Conference Presentation
For anyone at the conference who attended my session – here you go! (This link will be good from 3/16 – 3/23 on YouSendIt)
Conference Presentation: How Virtual Learning Environments Could (And Should) Help Learners.
February 16, 2009
Online Security
Hi, I’m Dan Burrows. No, actually I’m Chase Larson. Ok, in reality I’m Suzy Patrick. I have been asked a LOT lately about how schools are going to deal with the new Higher Education Act of 2008. There is a very small paragraph in the 1200 page document that gives schools using the Internet a new directive. Prove that your students are who they say they are…
Ok, so forget the 27 year old student from a large, prestigious, R-1 institution I met on a plane who told me about how he paid for college by pretending to be rich kids. He would take the entire semester as that person, turning in work, taking tests, etc. Only one instructor in 8 years asked for ID which was easy enough to fake – school IDs aren’t Driver’s licenses after all. And, forget about the statistics that show ALL students (K-20) are cheating in record numbers on tests, papers, etc. Forget that any on-ground student could have a brother write a paper, a sister take a test, or a friend create a portfolio. And don’t get me started on twins!!! (Evil mimeographs…)
How would the Government like schools to do this? Of course, there will be entrepreneurs who will come to the rescue! It will cost a boat load of money, but they’ll try to help.
For example, one company uses credit-based questions for online students. When you login to the class or a test, the message says, ”You claim to be Jeff Borden. Jeff Borden lived at one of the following 4 addresses. Which one?”
Or another company that is using webcam technology to randomly capture images of students in a testing situation. They compare the instant photos to known photos of the students taken during registration and see if someone else is taking the test.
Of course both of these are easily cheatable for someone who really wants to. Just sit off camera or have the real person answer the questions as their friend types in the answers…
Another company feels they have it figured out. They provide a small globe that looks like a mini-disco ball. It captures finger prints, has a webcam, and a microphone. If anything unusual happens in the vicinity of the camera, finger prints are asked for, images are taken, and sounds are recorded. Big Brother 2.0! (Securexam – the company with the ball – costs the student about $150)
Other companies are using algorithms around student typing or average speed of answer to check for problems.
Some teachers have tried to figure things out on their own. A few phone calls throughout the term helps them determine if a person really understands the concepts they claim to. Checking for patterns with writing styles and skills in math are how some instructors are bridging the gap.
But ultimately it comes down to this. People will always cheat. You can make it as hard as you want, but people will do it. Remember the group who helped doctoral candidates cheat on the GRE? Encoded pencils gave answers to the paper based, highly secured test for years before they found out. (I wonder how my doctor did on his entrance exams…?)
People will always find a way around the rules. There is a group of people who cheat just for the thrill of cheating! Others are so pressured from various places they feel it necessary. And on and on…why people cheat is another blog article.
I guess I’m trying to say to Congress…take it easy. Policing is just going to cost a lot of money and make a lot of people who finally have access to education fail. Let’s look at real answers and solutions, not just knee jerk reactions to fear. It doesn’t have to be like that!
Ok…soap box #1 out of the way for 2009. Hope you enjoyed the rant. See you next week when I tackle the financial rescue package… 🙂
Want to hear more about online education? Interested in real solutions to cheating and plagiarism? Contact Jeff at jborden@jeffpresents.com for more information!
February 8, 2009
January 19, 2009
Stupid Questions
It’s getting to be that time of year…classes are starting. I have 60 speech comm students trying to figure out what kind of teacher I am, how they can try to get out of doing speeches, and how the heck you do public speaking online. But, it also means I get some great questions to answer. I know you’re not supposed to say that questions are stupid. It’s a very “non-PC” thing for a teacher to say. And I’ve heard the old phrase, “The only bad question is the unasked question.” But I’m going to go out on a limb here and tell you, unequivocally, there are stupid questions.
Come on, you’ve heard them! How about the guy in front of you at KFC saying, “Hmmm…what am I going to order?” I know! I know! CHICKEN! How about the sports reporter asking Evil Kneivel what was going through his mind when he realized he wouldn’t make the canyon jump? “I was thinking about puppies…” Have you ever had a cop pull you over and ask, “Would you like to step out of the car?” HECK NO! I’m just fine right here!
And I’m not just talking about my favorite teacher questions – the ones that you can’t believe a student would actually speak out loud. Like this:
- “Do I need to buy the book for this class?”
- “I’m going to be gone the first week of class. Will I miss anything?”
Ah, oldies but goodies! But when you infuse technology into the mix, things get even stranger. You’ve heard some of the old standards for tech questions, right?
- “I don’t have a cup small enough for this portable cup holder in my computer. Where do I get one?” (Yes, this is regarding the CD tray)
- “My computer says to press any key…where is the any key?”
So, let’s put the two together and see what we get. I’m about to share two ACTUAL questions from students. I’m NOT making these up. This is just to illustrate how far we’ve come. Check these out:
- “I won’t have a computer for three more weeks, how can I be successful in your online class until then?”
- “I can’t look at a computer monitor for more than 5 minutes without having a seizure, as my online teacher, what do you recommend?”
COME ON! Really? What advisor suggested either of these students should take an online class? And better yet, where did we miss the boat in terms of teaching them some critical thinking skills?
As funny as the questions are, they are a bit sad too. But I can’t focus on that…I’d go crazy. So, to all the teachers out there who get questions like these day in and day out, I salute you. So remember, when you’re in the midst of telling your students about the eclipse tonight and a student asks if it will be a solar eclipse…just grin. It will all work out in the end…right? They can’t be your student forever…
Looking for a humorist to talk with your group? Want to hear a cacaphone of “stupid questions” as they relate to education, communication, or just society in general? Contact jborden@jeffpresents.com right now!
January 15, 2009
The Hole-In-The-Wall Study
What would you do if suddenly there was a machine thrust into a building you passed every day. It was unlike any machine you had ever seen. It had strange buttons, strange visual presentation, and even stranger symbols all over it. But, you were free to touch it, bring friends to see it, and have groups try to figure out what it was and how to use it…
That is the hole in the wall study. Researchers took internet ready computers and cemented them into walls in countries where the people had no computers. Then they left and watched via remote cameras and data recording. What they found is inspiring! People (most often kids) learned to use the computer, with programming in a language other than their own (English) without any aid or any tutoring. In fact, they actually learned English so that they could successfully navigate the computer and the Internet effectively! While their pronunciation wasn’t great (for obvious reasons), their written / reading literacy was quite good.
Dr. Sugata Mitra is now an edu-vangelist regarding primary education and how technology can increase retention, comprehension, and outcomes based scores. In fact, Dr. Mitra argues that technology is MORE important in non-affluent areas as the students are typically lower achieving which will result in a more significant bridging of academic gaps. This study and this researcher are starting to have a real impact on how education is thought of globally.
Want a speaker who knows the latest trends in education? Need someone who can help your faculty get motivated, engaged, or involved in higher level learning? Contact Jeff at jborden@jeffpresents.com for more info!
January 7, 2009
New YouTube videos!
I’ve come across some more great vids on the YouTube site. I hope you all watched Ken Robinson, Randy Pausch, and the Kettering videos I suggested lat year. For ’09, take a look at these cool finds! (Remember, they may not stay up for long!!!)
- The Smart Table: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_FRmYXtneQ – what a cool concept to start kids learning new technology early! I know my daughter will likely not use a conventional keyboard like I do, but it’s so hard to wrap your brain around until you see stuff like this!
- The Paradox of Choice: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VO6XEQIsCoM – An older TedTalks video that shows how bad too much choice is. Our assumptions have been potentially wrong all this time!
- The Human Animal (4 of 6): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YozGxV0qVMU – I have used this video in my communication class before and I was thrilled to see it on YouTube. It’s particularly educational to watch how the magazine editors help the model look more youthful, more sexual, and more appealing with computers…(you can replace educational with disgusting as well…)
- Life In A Cell: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ukPD4G5eSw – Harvard’s Biovision is a fantastic journey into a cell. What a great tool for educators.
- Zack Kim playing Mario: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZpD0btOZx8 – pure fun – this video is quite frankly, amazing. This kid’s fingers move beyond that of a normal human!
June 16, 2008
Web 2.0
Web 2.0: I just returned from speaking at the EDEN conference in Portugal. First off, I must say that Portugal is a beautiful country! I plan to blog more about the sites and sounds of Lisbon in a later blog, but it’s worth mentioning right up front – Portugal is worth a visit from anyone!
The conference was a HIGHLY academic venture with well over 500 representatives from 42 countries. While the majority were from Europe, there were others from the United States, Mexico, Brazil, etc. It was a fantastic introduction to online education throughout the rest of the world.
Surprisingly, the conference attendees seemed to present a picture of online education that was well behind the curve based on my experience and understanding of the American market, the Japanese landscape, and even the South American culture. Most of the online education taking place in Europe seems to be hybrid in nature with great suspicion still being placed on the effectiveness of computer mediated courses. How interesting when the Open University in the U.K. actually had what most people believe was the first fully online class ever…in 1976!
But instead of focusing on online programs or how online can help a school, their students, or their financial models, the conference attendees seemed strangely centered on the mysteries and magic of Web 2.0 tools. Essentially a marketing strategy introduced by Tim O’Reilly, many argue that the term is ludicrous. It’s essentially the evolution of the Internet. Some liken it to naming our current existence as Humanity 11.1. What is the point of naming an iteration of ambiguity? But, semantics aside, many educators (throughout the world – not just in Europe) seem to be entranced by Web 2.0 concepts.
I actually wonder if these educators, many of whom are extremely slow to adopt other useful and important technologies, truly understand the implications of Web 2.0? It seems rare at the conferences I attend to hear actual descriptions of the breadth of Web 2.0 tools and even rarer to hear strategic uses of these tools in an educational context. The majority of teachers seem to focus on wikis and blogs, leaving hundreds of other applications off the PowerPoint slides.
Please know that I am a big proponent of social networking – which many people confuse as the only interpretation of Web 2.0. I twitter (bordenj), I Facebook, I’m linkedin, and so on. I’m very excited to use Twine as my entrance into Web 3.0! (The semantic web could take us all to a whole new level…) As well, I have found many uses for the collaboration of the collective intelligence in classroom settings. But it’s important to know that I don’t use these tools or techniques simply because my students do or just because they seem “neat”!
I believe that creativity is a cornerstone of teaching. These tools open up more creative ways to reach students through multi-modal (and multi-nodal) means. And the data that can be generated with these new tools can be powerful. In fact, it might be considered too powerful by some educators…I was approached by a Scandinavian teacher who was concerned with the way my company data-mines student activity in order to help retention and completion rates. He explained that the student has a right to keep their activity private and data-mining this information is unethical. Hmmm. P-D-R, right? (See my Perception Determines Reality blog for more info.)
What it comes down to at the end of the day is the difference between Jeopardy contestants and Wheel of Fortune contestants. Have you ever listened to the Jeopardy introductions? John Smith is a PhD in Astro-physics who writes sonnets for the blind and is trying to find a way to reuse fish bones to power a city. Contrast that with Wheel of Fortune: Bill Edwards is an out of work writer who likes fast food and is fascinated by small, shiny objects! Web 2.0 seems to be a “small, shiny object” to many educators who have missed the point and become enamored with wikis and blogs.
As Web 2.0 tools start to make headway within the corporate setting, and people in general become more adept at using them, eventually education will catch up. But I sure wish we could lead the way instead of reacting. We have a responsibility to help our students see “the future” of their world and many of these tools will be prevalent in that world. But let’s start to really take a look at the forest instead of a sapling. Let’s see if I can help you get started…
Yedda, Congoo, Oyogi, Shoutwire, Egosurf, Feedity, Vimeo, Flagr – these are just a few of the hundreds of Web 2.0 (concept) websites. They might all have academic, strategic uses…or they may not. What do you think?
Would you like to hear more about Web 2.0? Interested in how to make practical applications out of Web 2.0 concepts? Contact jborden@jeffpresents.com for more information!
jeffpresents.com - Jeff Borden's Weekly Weblog 