Question:

Assignment 
– Just words as Discussion paper about Design of online curriculum materials.
Length: 2,000 words

This my assignment requires :

Imagine that you are a teacher of a sciTEX program which you would like to introduce this online learning tool to teach physics labs for a students who studing in high school. Before you are able to begin implementing this innovation, you need to get the approval of your (imagined) colleagues and/or a committee at the school / organisation where you are working. Prepare a discussion paper in which you outline the arguments why your colleagues and the organisation should support you with the innovation.

Purpose of this assignment

This assignment has been designed to give you an opportunity to propose and justify a blended e-learning program for a group of students in some form of virtual learning environment. To do this you need to draw on theories and evidence found in the e-learning literature.

In recent years, there has been a lot of enthusiasm for online learning and courses and programs have been modified or completely redesigned to be taught partially or fully online. However, it is not always clear why this is being done, nor whether it actual improves the quality of learning or delivers efficiencies or other claimed benefits. For example, it is often claimed that online learning is more engaging or that it offers greater choice to learners. However, the evidence to support these views is not always clearly articulated. Therefore, in putting forward a proposal for your innovation you need to find evidence to show you’re your design for incorporating online learning will actually allow you to do something in a way which benefits your learners. So, the purpose of this assignment is for you to consider why and how you can use virtual teaching and learning approaches to either enhance an existing learning situation, or to create a new learning opportunity for a particular group of learners.

Assignment instructions

• Examine and describe key elements of a teaching and learning program which you have either been involved in, are currently working in, or can imagine yourself working in.

• Identify an issue within the program that could be addressed, or a way to enhance student learning through the introduction of elements of online learning.

• Justify your choice of an e-learning solution to this issue with reference to theories of online learning.

• If possible refer to comparable learning situations where a similar solution has been used to positive effect.

This discussion paper will take the form of a formal written document that you would present to your colleagues. In addition to describing the innovation, you need to include in this assignment arguments and evidence that will justify your design based on the theoretical works of other educational researchers and practitioners. This means you will need to locate appropriate sources of information about the kind of innovation you are planning and to use the key findings of these works to explain to your colleagues the value to the learners in including the online elements to the program.

The structure for the discussion paper

Write your discussion paper as a single Word document. The first section should describe the learning context for your chosen learning design.

You need to then identify the issue or problem or situation that your online learning innovation will address. For example, this might be a solution to a lack of learner motivation, or an issue of access to a learning program or learning materials. This section should lead into a discussion of learning theories and approaches that are relevant to your chosen learning context.

Your discussion paper should give a clear outline of what the innovation is and how you see it will enhance the learning of your chosen group. 

You should briefly outline the steps and resources that will be required to plan and put into effect your innovation, as well as a process for evaluating it’s effectiveness during and at the end of the teaching period.

Readings and resources

Littlejohn, Alison and Chris Pegler. 2007. Preparing for blended e-learning. New York:
Routledge.
book chapters( I have uploaded them as pp 9-28, 29-48, 49-69, 70- 93 and 94-130 u don’t need to access to that e-book because it is in my uni library ), and other core articles are uploaded as well. also you should include a list of the journal articles * (they are in the end of this page ), that you refer to in the body of your paper. You need to refer to at least 20 different resources. (Your reference list will not be included in the word count). 

This assignment needs to be presented as a formally written document with an executive summary at the beginning (no more than 150 words). You also need to submit your completed assignment through Turnitin (a text matching program) to check that you have appropriately quoted and referenced information you have gained from other sources. 
*Following is Other journal online sources 

http://jolt.merlot.org/currentissue.html 
http://vels.vcaa.vic.edu.au
http://guidetoinnovation.ning.com/events/
http://www.education.vic.gov.au/researchinnovation/showcase/default.htm
http://australiaseries.wordpress.com/

 

Answer:

Discussion paper about Design of online curriculum

Executive summary

This purpose of this discussion paper is to propose an innovation known as the sciTEX program, meant for implementation in a high school physics class. The foundation of this e-learning program is blended learning, with both the tutor and learner being active participants in the process that will oversee a shift in pedagogical practices. The sciTEX program entails an elaborate transition process, whereby tutors stop being agents of transmitting information and start taking on new roles of facilitators, mentors, and managers of online interaction and collaboration among learners. The paper outlines the program before providing supporting theoretical evidence.

Introduction

This paper introduces the sciTEX program, an online learning tool for teaching physics labs for students studying in high school. This program is based on the notion of blended learning, whereby online studying is undertaken with the assistance of tutors as facilitators. In this program, emphasis is on co-creation within courses that are very rich in online collaboration.

In this innovation, the concept of blending will be used in a variety of practical applications. It will entail access to a choice of alternative academic resources on the learner’s personal computer or laptop, drawn from various sources, ranging from international and institutional sources to digital repositories. The program will also entail the ability for high school learners to download content to a variety of devices, including mobile devices, e-books, and podcasts. This will entail the ability to access wireless connections for sharing notes in class, as well as making use of text messaging services for receiving updates whenever one is on the move.

The program will also entail the use of personalized content that is delivered through a highly customized user interface, complete with features for sorting out new content that is relevant to one’s individual interests. In this program, learners will be introduced to the concept of virtual learning environment, as described by Starr-Glass (2011). As Olesova (2011) points out, this environment will enable them access course materials as well as ask questions regardless of whether they are in campus or away from campus. Badge (2011) observes that in this same environment, the learners will be able to upload notes to their own blogs while lectures are in progress. Similarly, they will be expected to use their hand-held devices to provide instant feedback to their course instructor in the course of the class presentation. As Xie (2011) notes, learners will also be able to keep in touch with classmates in what will constitute a virtual classroom discussion.

The problem to be addressed

The main problem that the sciTEX program seeks to solve is a lack of online access to learning materials for physics lab high school students. Although these students are aware of the e-learning functionality and its highly-rated potential for bringing about many benefits, they have little hands-on experience on how to make the best use of the blended e-learning opportunities that are within their reach.

Many learners have access to personal computers, laptops, mobile devices, and hand-held computing gadgets, which can be of great use if used as tools of accessing learning materials. Whereas some students are unaware of this potential, others know about this advantage, only that they do not feel motivated to use them. The main reason for this lack of motivation is the lack of understanding of the concept of a virtual learning environment (Siragusa, 2007). Such students may be lacking the spirit of initiative to mobilize their classmates so that they can form virtual discussion environments.

Physics students in this high school also have a fundamental problem of access to knowledge. This problem is caused by a variety of factors, including reduced social interaction for academic purposes, difficulties in carrying out revision tasks, the need for personal agency in the learning process, and lack of cost-effectiveness in access to course materials (Fortune, 2011). It should be borne in mind that although e-learning can be very cost-efficient, it also has the potential to be extremely expensive. The most obvious reason why the costs can run high is the inability to exploit strategies of making the most out of the available resources through improvisation.

Outline of the innovation

This innovation involves blending different e-learning tools in a way that ensures that the highest number and quality of learning materials are accessed in the most cost-effective way possible. The first step will be centered on the instructor, who will carry out an audit of the e-learning tools that learners have or are able to access. These tools include laptops, personal computers, video cameras, still cameras, mobile computing devices, palm-tops, iPads, and e-books. The instructor will also carry out an audit of the reliability of the internet connection being used with each of these devices by the learners. The audit process will also entail candid suggestions from learners and the instructor on how to access reduce the deficit in access to these tools, as well as ways of sharing the available e-learning tools without compromising quality.

The instructor will then give the learners seven days to assemble their tools, after which a transition period will follow. During this transition, the instructor will put into consideration all the necessary measures and strategies to be put into consideration so as to integrate physical learning environments with virtual learning environments. According to Palloff (2003), emphasis here should be on ensuring that pedagogical richness is not compromised. Moreover, the instructor will assess the level of motivation among learners, all the while emphasizing those course-relevant things in which learners express most interest. The transition period will be an excellent opportunity for the instructor to wean the learners into the virtual learning environment. The instructor will inculcate discipline in the virtual learning environment so as to ensure that the learners are now awed by the freedom of interacting from remote locations to the extent that they end up straying from academic work to play irrelevant online games.

The transition will give way to a full-blown blended e-learning process immediately learners realize the need for and get the motivation and initiative to mobilize each other to form virtual e-learning discussion forums. When these forums take shape and learners start discussing physics topics during their own free time and at their convenient remote locations, the program will be said to have been successfully launched. In concurrence with Albinsson’s (2011) observation, the role of the instructor at this stage will be limited to the provision of course materials, giving directions on curriculum issues, and evaluating the learners’ work both during and at the end of the teaching period.

How the innovation will enhance learning among physics students

First or all, it will improve pedagogical practices, mainly by triggering a shift from strategies based on transmission of knowledge to those based on interaction. The use of predetermined strategies during lectures will be a thing of the past. This, according to Achilles (2011) should give learners the freedom to exploit a myriad of e-learning materials that they come across during their interactions. Their duty will be to relate them to the course outline provided by the instructor. They will have to continually drop irrelevant materials and take up those deemed relevant.

The innovation will also increase access to materials as well as the flexibility with which they are utilized. Through e-blending of various information technology tools, the physics students will end up contributing immensely to the growth of a highly distributed learning environment. The learners will get the convenience of distributed learning without having to sacrifice the human touch and social interaction that they are used to in their face-to-face classrooms.

Cost will be a key factor in achieving success in this innovation. Therefore, the goal of ease of access to course materials will have to be achieved hand in hand with that of cost-effectiveness. There are many cost-effective strategies of blending e-learning strategies and this innovation will provide insights for learners to identify and exploit them for their own benefit, mainly in the form of resource-sharing and improvisation.

Steps and resources needed for planning and effecting the innovation

            To start with, each student will be required to have a portable computing device, which, in Lin’s (2011) assessment, should specifically be a laptop, a palm-top, an iPad, or a mobile phone with advance web-based features supported by an efficient operating system. According to Park (2011), such a mobile device should have the capacity to handle several applications, including video sharing, email, live chat, social networking, and features for uploading and downloading large multimedia files. In other words, there is a need for a careful blend of versatility and dedication to features with an academic leaning.

Upon ensuring that the learners have a starting point for the sciTEX program, the instructor will trigger a brainstorming session on the usefulness of these gadgets, how to enhance their functionality, how to improvise, as well as share both hardware and software. This session may have an air of informality, though it will soon turn formal as soon as the instructor starts noting down the most salient points and requests the learners to note them down. The instructor will synthesize these points in a coherent manner for use throughout the subsequent implementation stages.

During the stages that follow, the content of the physics class will be used to as a basis for pursuing goals of e-learning interaction and resource-finding efforts. At this stage, the instructor should expect the activity to be not only fun and exciting, but also highly informative. The second week will constitute a transition from a classroom setting to one that is exclusively based on blended e-learning. After the second week the instructor should find it easy to initiate e-learning discussions from a remote location. All learners should have found ways of navigating problems involving their laptops, chat, video and audio downloads, access to online libraries, and troubleshooting operating system problems. Therefore, they should not have any excuses for not uploading their duly completed assignments on the central physics course portal.

Process of evaluating its effectiveness

There will be two evaluation sessions for the sciTEX program. One will take place during the teaching period and the other at the end of the teaching period. During the teaching period, the evaluation will be in the form of what Salmon (2001) refers to as e-moderation. In line with Hu’s (2011) view, the instructor will have to play the role of the facilitator of all online interactions using the central physics course portal. This portal is essentially a website through which the instructor is able to monitor all chat sessions among students, to see the number of students who are online, to receive the assignments that students have uploaded, to update students on the course progress, and to respond to learners’ questions.

During the end of the teaching period, the instructor will assess the performance of learners in the new system compared to the traditional one as stipulated by (Wagner (2011). The teacher will relate this outcome to the level of motivation and access to learning materials among learners. On this basis, the instructor will be able to determine whether this innovation has fallen short of his expectations as well as those of his learners. This assessment will accord him an opportunity to put in place relevant pedagogical changes, particularly those relating to real-life learning contexts. Of particularly importance will be an assessment on the success of efforts to tutor, manage, and facilitate the transition from face-to-face classroom environment to the virtual blended e-learning environment.

Theoretical evidence to justify the design

Many educational researchers and practitioners have explored the topic of blended e-learning in great detail (Siragusa, 2006, Vlachopoulos & Cowan, 2010, Littlejohn & Pegler, 2007, Salmon, 2001). Although there is no consensus on how best to define blended e-learning, everyone agrees that there are numerous ways of blending e-learning approaches so as to deal with various pedagogical and instructional problems associated with virtual learning environments (Littlejohn & Pegler, 2007).

According to Graham (2006), a blended learning system bring about pedagogical richness, social interaction, personal agency, access to knowledge, ease of revision and cost-effectiveness. It is clear that blended learning systems are being used today for three main reasons: increased access and flexibility, improved pedagogy, and increased cost-effectiveness (Graham, 2006). In the present discussion, these three needs have adequately been put into consideration, meaning that the sciTEX program is worth implementing in the high school physics lab class.

In his work The E-learning Handbook, Lowerison (2008) revisits the learning theory as it pertains to e-learning. He observes that in recent years, applications of technology that are driven by learning theory have been shifting from behaviorist to constructivist. In the behaviorist perspective, the instructor’s role is merely to transmit information to learners while in the constructivist perspective, the instructor’s role is restricted to facilitation, that is, enabling the learner encode all new information and forming meaningful links with the knowledge that he already possesses (Bailie, 2011). In the sciTEX program, emphasis is on the role of the instructor as a facilitator and mentor. This is in line with the contemporary pedagogical paradigm shift towards constructivist and cognitive approaches to learning.

Conclusion

In summary, the sciTEX program is a highly innovative and practical approach to contemporary blended e-learning, which will no doubt enable learners to access new sources of reading materials and resources through the cost-effective use of a blended e-learning system. If implemented in the way stipulated in this discussion, this system will bring about pedagogical richness and greater access to knowledge among high school physics students.

References

Achilles, W. (2011) Engaging Students through Communication and Contact: Outreach Can Positively Impact Your Students and You! Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(8), 19-28.

Albinsson, P. (2011) Integrating Sustainability into the Business Curriculum through E-Learning, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 44-53.

Badge, J. (2011) Observing Emerging Student Networks on a Microblogging Service, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(5), 29-36.

Bailie, J. (2011) Effective Online Instructional Competencies as Perceived by Online University Faculty and Students: A Sequel Study, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 1-11.

Fortune, M. (2011) Students’ Perceptions of Online or Face-to-Face Learning and Social Media in Hospitality, Recreation and Tourism, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(14), 19-26.

Graham, C. (2006) The handbook of blended learning. London: Routledge.

Hu, R. (2011) Teacher Educators Teaching and Learning Together: A Collaborative Self-study of Support within an Online Literacy Learning Community, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 82-95.

Lin, Q. (2011) The Role of Web-Based Activities in Mediating Student Interaction and Engagement in Four Teacher Education Classes, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 20-43.

Littlejohn, A. & Pegler, C. (2007) Preparing For Blended E-Learning, New York: Routledge.

Lowerison, G. (2008) The e-learning handbook. New York: Foundation Press.

Olesova, L. (2011) Using Asynchronous Instructional Audio Feedback in Online Environments: A Mixed Methods Study, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(5), 96-105.

Palloff, R. (2003) The virtual student: A profile and guide to working with online learners, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Park, J. (2011) Expression and Connection: The Integration of the Reflective Learning Process and the Public Writing Process into Social Network Sites, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 72-81.

Salmon, G. (2001) E-moderating. New York: Penguin Books.

Siragusa, L. (2006) E-learning Groups and Communities, Singapore: Ascilite.

Siragusa, L. (2007) Designing quality e-learning environments in higher education, London: EBSCO Publishing.

Starr-Glass, D. (2011) Military Learners: Experience in the Design and Management of Online Learning Environments, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(1), 54-71.

Vlachopoulos, P. & Cowan, J. (2010) Choices of approaches in e-moderation: Conclusions from a grounded theory study, Active Learning in Higher Education, 11(3), 213-224.

Wagner, S. (2011) A Longitudinal Comparison of Online Versus Traditional Instruction, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(3), 29-39.

Xie, K. (2011) Relationship between Students’ Motivation and their Participation in Asynchronous Online Discussions, Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 7(8), 106-128.