Thoughts on Module 2a

June 22, 2010
Summary of Module 2a

It’s embarrassing to admit, but before enrolling in UMUC’s program I wasn’t familiar with synchronous or asynchronous technology. In fact, I don’t think I’d ever even heard the terms before, or if I had they didn’t mean anything to me. Therefore, almost everything I read and learned in Module 2a was new to me. I appreciated the McGreal and Elliot reading because the authors broke down much of the technology terminology into small chunks so it was easy for me to follow and re-read when necessary. I really liked the format they used, which mostly consisted of three parts: defining/explain the term; noting educational benefits and giving suggestions on how to effectively incorporate the technology for educational use; and recommended links. I clicked on some of the links that I thought would be helpful for my own personal use as an online instructor and my reading and searches eventually led me to the BBC website. On it, I found some great links to online games, some of which I am going to try to incorporate into the class I am teaching this fall. I also found another valuable website, http://www.edtechteacher.org/index.html created specifically by history teachers that I know I am going to reference a lot as I continue my studies and work to incorporate technology into the classes I teach.

I’ve always been interested in hybrid or blended classes so I particularly enjoyed the article by Pullen and Snow. In it, they detailed their experiences with teaching hybrid classes, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of using synchronous and asynchronous technology. One of their findings, that there was no significant difference in grades between in-class students and on-line students, surprised me. Until recently I held the opinion that online courses weren’t as effective as f2f classes, but the more I read and learn the more I realize how wrong I was. A quality online course can be just as effective, and perhaps even more so, than a traditional seated class. I do like the concepts behind the hybrid courses since they seem to combine the best of both worlds, however. But, their biggest drawback, and it’s a big one in my opinion, is the loss of student flexibility to complete the course work at a time that is most convenient for him. Even if the f2f meetings are just a couple times during the semester they are still scheduled meetings and at least to some extent they “defeat” the principle of flexibility.

This module ended with a voluntary Skype conference. I’d heard of Skype, but had never used it until I practiced with my husband the night before the class conference. When I called my husband we could see each other so I was surprised when this wasn’t the case during the class call. Gila or Jim said that video is only available on Skype when there are only two callers, but that with Wimba we would be able to see each other. I’ve never used Wimba before so I didn’t know this, but now I’m anxious to give it a shot so I can compare it to Skype. I enjoyed the conversation I had with Gila, Jim and Jodi. It was nice to put a voice (a face would have been better!) with each person’s name since I’ve been communicating with each of them for two weeks now. We did experience one of the inherent flaws of using technology during the conference, which was that Gila’s voice faded in and out during much of the call. Since it seems like I am constantly comparing my online experiences to my experiences in a traditional classroom I noted another difference during our call. With four of us online, we also talked over each another a couple of times because it was impossible to know when someone was going to start talking. There are certainly interruptions in f2f conversations, but I don’t think they are as common since one can read body language and thus know if someone is getting ready to speak. As long as all of the participants in a Skype call are willing to wait their turn to talk I don’t see this is a major problem, but it can be annoying.