Educational Technology and Change Journal

The Problem of Prerequisite Skills

She was a grade 5-6 multi-age teacher, and she was frustrated. She had just graded a basic multi-digit multiplication test. Most of the students had done well, but a large number had done poorly. There was no one in the middle. She suddenly had a revelation. All the students who did poorly were new to her this year—all the rest had been with her the year before. She looked at the poor tests more carefully and then realized those students were mostly missing the same questions.

What could it be about those questions? She studied them and realized that they all had a 0 (zero) somewhere in the digits. It only took a few more minutes to realize that the students were all treating multiplication by zero as if it were multiplication by one. She realized that she had not taught the zero multiplication rule to this group. She took them aside and gave them a quick lesson, after which they repeated the test with high scores.

How much student failure is caused by teaching students something that assumes they already have skills they do not indeed have?  As this true story above illustrates, sometimes a very small and easily-taught skill can be all that is required to lift a student from failure to success. Unfortunately, few of us have the time that this teacher took on this one test, and even then, it took a certain amount of luck for her to spot the problem. How many similar potential revelations passed by her unnoticed?

Although intelligent curriculum design can solve many of these problems, this is the area where developing technology may be able to do the most good in the coming years.

One of my first reviews of an online curriculum was for AP Language and Composition, a course students frequently take in their junior year. In the very first unit, the students did a reading, after which they were required to write an essay in which they explained the author’s use of rhetorical devices in the piece. The unit had no instruction in rhetorical devices.  This curriculum writer was from a prestigious, high achieving school so, perhaps, he was used to students walking into his class with the ability to complete this assignment, but I would bet that at least 90% of the juniors in America have never seen the phrase rhetorical devices before.

A little common sense in curriculum design goes a long way—don’t expect too much prior learning before a course begins. Once we pass that hurdle, though, we see how technology can help. If we can examine every course and lesson we teach and identify the prerequisite skills, we can then create a list of those skills. If the course writer expects students entering a class to be familiar with rhetorical devices, then that should be included in the course plan. Once we have such a list, we can create pre-tests to ensure students have the necessary skills to complete the course.

A Technological Solution

This is where technology can really help. We could create a library of learning objects for these critical skills. Students who need assistance with a prerequisite skill would be directed to a lesson to bring them up to speed as quickly as possible. A curriculum designer planning a lesson would identify the skills necessary for success. Some of them would be taught in the lesson itself, but others that should have been learned previously would be omitted. When students have not had the prior learning, they would be directed to the necessary learning object for remediation.

Ultimately, in many cases, the technology would make this happen automatically. Someday a computer analysis of a multiplication test will be able to indicate that students failed because they did not know how to multiply by zero, and it will direct those students to an appropriate lesson.  We have some basic programs in math and reading that do some of this already, but this feature is rarely integrated into regular online classes at this time. Furthermore, it usually requires students to leave the regular class and enter a separate program, a process that does not work well for a variety of reasons. In the future, all such learning must be integrated into one learning package.

But even with today’s technology much of this can be done.  We can create that library of learning objects easily right now, and we can direct students to appropriate lessons right now. We can adopt instructional policies that reward students who use these processes to reach higher levels of achievement rather than punish them for starting at a lower level.

All we need is the will to do it.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »

By Tom Preskett

I’ve been reflecting over the last few days on common questions I’m asked as I go about my job as a Learning Technologist. Questions like “I don’t have time to think about this” or “Why should I use this?” come up a lot. It’s clear to me now that a key skill in my role is to be able to respond to these questions effectively, in such a way as to cause the questioners to rethink their position and open up to a new viewpoint. I can tell you now that this isn’t easy. Here are some pointers:

In my education context, the worst thing you can do is throw blame around and talk about “what we need to do” rather than “it’s terrible that we don’t do such and such.”

Another important point is to relate your talk to your audience. There are many reasons for this. Firstly, among educators in 2010, understanding of learning technology is low so talks about it may be confusing and off-putting. Also, you want to be talking about processes and value they understand and can relate to. Further, it should always be about how the technologies fit into the bigger picture and if you just bang on about the ICT it’ll feel alien to their world.

I also like to stress the the possible incorporating of learning technologies is an element of the learning design process. So, as an organisation, the key is to value learning design; to value giving time and space to reflect and think about how you teach. The potential use of learning technologies is part of this process in the sense that they exist as tools in the toolbox from which you pick and choose. I spoke about the tools in the toolbox metaphor a few days ago. Valuing learning design is key, and it comes from the educators themselves and the management of organisations. So the subtle difference here is that you are NOT pushing e-learning because it ticks a box that needs to be ticked, but you ARE promoting good teaching and learning by engendering a culture of giving time and space to reflect on learning design.

Yes, there is learning to be done. But I think a good quality educator should be prepared to continually learn and adapt. Learning and adapting is an important part of living.

Learning online isn’t different to learning offline. Learning is the same as it’s been forever.

The change isn’t so drastic. Learning online isn’t different to learning offline. Learning is the same as it’s been forever. Learning strategies may change as we have more options (more tools), but the end result is the same thing you’ve always been asked to deliver. All you need to do is understand how to work the new tools and, more importantly, understand the values behind each.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

If you’ve been paying attention to online education, you’ve seen the hype about how great it is. You may also have noticed that Arne Duncan, the Secretary of Education for the Obama administration, is a big fan of online education. He sees it as a source of new ideas.

Online learning certainly is revolutionary as was steam power, for example, or electricity. But it’s what we do with it that will make the difference. Suppose that you had the opportunity to create a new online learning school. A venture capitalist has provided you with funds, and now you must decide how to proceed. What will you create?

Each choice you make will impact the quality of education that your students receive and will also impact your bottom line. You choices will also affect the teaching experience in your school, your ability to hire good people, the quality of your Internet connection, and so on. Consider these as secondary issues when compared to product quality (i.e., how well your students are educated) and profitability. I focus on these two because they often are at odds with one another.

Online technology promises great education everywhere at low cost. The Internet is becoming ubiquitous. Even very poor countries around the world now have improved Internet access as fiber optic cables are laid to reach them. Here, in the United States, although we lag behind some industrialized nations, access is improving, and most rural locations receive some form of Internet access at a reasonable cost.

Because the cost of servers and broadband access is much lower than that of buildings and buses, the cost of delivering online education must be lower than that of traditional education. As better software tools become available, online teachers will be able to handle as many students as, or more than, their traditional counterparts with equal or better attention to individuals. As a side benefit, these teachers also do not have to commute, saving energy and carbon emissions.

Just imagine that you have no limits on spending and are allowed many years before profitability becomes an issue. You could find the best software for tracking student progress and providing just-in-time intervention if a student has problems. You could locate the best social networking software for allowing productive discussions about the current class topics. You could create curricula that engage students with creative thinking rather than memorizing for tests. You could use the newest multimedia technology to deliver compelling lessons – even in 3-D and Dolby sound. Teachers would become guides, coaches, and mentors helping students to find their own way. Course software would automatically determine when students must have more help and provide it if available or inform the teacher to take action. The software would also inform administrators about these incidents so that new learning threads could be created.

The combination of great teachers, well-trained in online instruction, dynamic software, worldwide social interaction, a database of all student online activity, data mining software that seeks out patterns in that database, and dedicated creative administrators might just build the best education system imaginable. Current traditional classroom education could not hold a candle to it.

However, we don’t live in this utopian world. The bottom line pulls like an albatross and constantly deflects our trajectory. In education, you have little ability to raise your prices. Charter schools, for example, have a fixed amount they receive per student. Even private schools have to deal with competition. Online schools do not have century-old tradition and decades of alumni to attract students and contribute in fund-raising drives. The quest for more profit must focus on costs.

Your school can achieve tremendous cost savings simply by not giving classes. You may laugh before you realize that some online diploma mills are giving diplomas for “life experience.” The highest costs for running online schools appear to be course creation and teacher salaries. The former occurs at the beginning, and the latter is recurring. You can reduce your start-up costs by hiring teachers who already have the courses designed or simply follow a textbook. The latter costs may be reduced by hiring teachers as 1099 employees who contract with you and are paid based on some formula related to the number of students. That way, you don’t offer benefits.

If you pay your teachers W2 salaries, then you reduce costs by increasing the number of students supervised. You also can avoid assigning students to a particular teacher. Instead, the first available qualified teacher handles the next student question. You can reduce or eliminate moderated discussions in classes so that teachers can deal with a larger number of students.

In short, you can minimize the costs of your online school by emulating the worst practices of traditional schools and then finding ways to make your education product even lower in quality than possible in such classes. You’ve turned your class into an online version of Princeton Review or Barron’s review notes and practice exams.

With online classes about to be at least a partial school experience for half of our students and with online tools becoming widespread even in traditional classrooms (sometimes as homework), it’s critically important that we, as a society, work for the best outcome.

I have found science courses offered by online schools that have no lab experience at all, not even virtual. Because few standardized tests actually test for the learning that should take place with such lab experience, it’s not surprising that these online science classes can produce good scores on standardized tests. The courses present the science concepts that will be tested, allow students to memorize them, and provide practice in preparation for the tests. They do not develop the students’ concept of the nature of science and do not exercise scientific reasoning skills. They certainly don’t allow students to collect or even work with empirical data. They’re just “teaching to the test.”

With online classes about to be at least a partial school experience for half of our students and with online tools becoming widespread even in traditional classrooms (sometimes as homework), it’s critically important that we, as a society, work for the best outcome.

At this moment in time, we have a choice. We can have the best of education, better than previously possible for large numbers of students, or we can have the worst of education, worse even than failing schools in large urban districts. We get to choose, but only if we act for our future, which depends on the quality of our education system for every student, and if we don’t get caught up in any “back to basics” movement. Our success lies in the future and not in the past. We need to use the best ideas available, many very old (e.g., Socratic method), and the newest technologies, but we should use these technologies with care and not just because they’re new and exciting.

Internet technology provides the biggest change to education since the invention of the printing press. Let’s use it well!

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

By Judith McDaniel
Editor, Web-based Course Design

An important part of my face-to-face classes now is to allow students a research choice of creating a blog site and posting their research on it for public comment. Since actually getting the “public” to comment on a blog, even on exciting and current topics like “Is there a gay gene?” or “Is Gardasil a good thing or not?” is nearly impossible, I require everyone in the class to post comments on three different blogs other than their own.

As I read through the posts, comments, and author responses to the  comments, I am reminded over and over again that I am not the only person in this classroom with important information. Each of these students has life experience and some have knowledge that is relevant to this subject. From the student with a gay friend to the young woman who was given the Gardasil vaccine without being told what it was, their information is pertinent and—most importantly—it is very important to and valued by their peers. They ask questions in these comments as well as respond to the information, and some of the conversations that result are far more intellectually demanding than the course syllabus.

I still allow a research option that is “just” a traditional research paper. But for the first time, I asked everyone who chooses to write an essay to post it on our discussion forum for comments. Everyone in the class also posted a comment about two research papers.

How did that work?

Every paper had at least one comment, which surprised me, but several topics were very popular. “Women’s reproductive rights” was a topic that received a lot of comments, but the one I want to mention particularly was “Obesity and You.” Although obesity would be a logical topic in a class on Science, Health, Gender and Race, it was not one that I had included in the list of possible research topics—either for the blogs or the papers. When a student approached me about this subject, I was nervous but let her take it on.

Why was I nervous? Obesity is a topic that is emotional, personal, and difficult to talk about in an objective manner—which is what I require for a research paper. The student did a good job on the paper, and when she posted it online for comments, I tracked the responses.

The first was fine: “I found your paper to be very informative on the topic of obesity. Obesity is such a sensitive subject for those that are over weight; however it is such an important topic that needs to be dealt with. I liked all of the statistics that you used throughout your paper. These helped me realize just how obese our world is becoming and how we need to do something to stop it.”

The author expressed surprise and pleasure that someone had actually read her paper (“I didn’t think anyone would”) and found it helpful. Other comments continued to be thoughtful and respectful. Readers asked for more information on connections between genetics and obesity, race and obesity—and the author responded to them all with more information and always thanked them for reading her paper.

I realized that while obesity might be a difficult topic when students are discussing it in person, online offered a medium for a more thoughtful exploration.

What did I learn? Several things. I realized that while obesity might be a difficult topic when students are discussing it in person, online offered a medium for a more thoughtful exploration. No one was casual or thoughtless or cruel in this discussion. While I can’t generalize too much from this particular experience, when I think back to all of my online discussions, I realize that I have seldom had a comment that I needed to correct or censor for tone. Wherever they learned it, my students seem to have netiquette down pat.

I also learned that I was right—students want feedback from their peers, and they are good, conscientious and careful about giving feedback to others.

And the discussions and further research that resulted also contributed to the learning experience.

This is an assignment I will use again.

Filed under: Uncategorized | 1 Comment »

The person who can smile when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on.

I got that saying off of a coffee mug years ago, but I think it more accurately sums up the most prominent thinking of American educators than any other statement I know. Sure, we know of the well-documented problems with the results of our educational system, but no matter who we are, we can identify someone else, often several someone else’s, who is really at fault. We ourselves would be doing a topnotch job if not for . . .

And a lot of that is true. There is plenty of blame to be spread around the system. The problem is that since we are surrounded by such wonderful scapegoats, it is easy to feel comfortable in our own processes, even when the people and forces we are blaming are in turn pointing their fingers at us. Even worse, a corollary to the statement from the mug might be that if we know ahead of time that we have someone to blame, we really don’t have to make any effort to succeed.

Perhaps the most thoroughly blamed individuals are the students themselves. Oh, what wonderful educators we could be if only the students would come to the classroom properly prepared and motivated! Once again, much of that is true. Teachers in inner city schools struggle with horrific challenges, and it would be easy to develop a “What’s the use?” attitude, give up, and just go through the motions. Ironically, the opposite is also true. Many teachers in affluent communities can essentially phone in their lessons with the knowledge that the students will still somehow succeed without us, at least by our conventional standards of measure.

But studies over the last two decades have shown that individual teachers are succeeding far beyond their peers in the same troubled schools with the same students, year after year after year. Studies over the past two decades have shown that in many affluent high schools with impressive achievement results, the students actually lost ground when compared to their level of achievement when they entered the schools.

Educational leaders today call in unison for teachers to adapt their teaching to meet the educational needs of the students, but that call is not well heard in a typical classroom, especially at the secondary and post secondary levels. There the dominant mode of instruction is still generic delivery of information with the hope that the student will somehow master most of it. Before we can truly begin to meet the needs of our students, we must have the will to do so and the belief that it matters. Once we have that, we can begin to talk about the instructional strategies that can make it happen.

If online education is to realize its potential, it cannot have a goal of creating pale imitations of failed classroom practices.

Technology, especially the technology related to online education, is often touted as the great hope for meeting the needs of a diverse student population. It does indeed have that potential, but before it can do that it must understand those needs and find new and innovative ways to meet them.

One of the first commercially developed online education programs created videotapes of college professors lecturing in huge lecture halls, with their presentation slides taking up much of the screen and their talking heads streamed in the upper corner. It was a predictable failure–predictable, at least, to people who understand the needs of students.

If online education is to realize its potential, it cannot have a goal of creating pale imitations of failed classroom practices. It must instead use its resources to create a totally new approach, one that accentuates the positive of its approaches and eliminates the negative to the greatest degree possible. In this column I hope, in effect, to create a generic RFP for the kind of educational services we need in the future of online education. I may not have all the answers, but I do hope I can ask some of the right questions.

Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »