Learning Technologies: Selection, Design & Application
ETEC 565A provided “several theoretical frameworks to assist educators in evaluating, selecting and using various learning technologies” based on relevant ‘digital age’ standards for education and literacy (Egan, 2014). The course provided hands-on experience with and management of various web-tools, spaces, places, LMS and CMS platforms. This was accomplished by immersing students weekly in a number of real-world problem scenarios.
Linking EdTech + Design Through Selection
ETEC 565A links closely with the selection phase of the design process when there are many alternatives, solutions, platforms or technologies to choose from. The most appropriate option needs to be selected to solve the problem at hand effectively, but this can be a fraught and complicated process.
Factors that can complicate the process of selecting, designing, or applying an appropriate tool, platform or learning technology include context, student needs, pedagogical goals, institutional resources, skills, learning curve, usability, feasibility, cost, practicality, affordances, etc. Bates and Poole (2003) assert that teachers need frameworks and approaches that “sensitize [them to] the key factors that need to be taken into consideration in what is usually an ongoing process of decision making during course development and design” and the subsequent frameworks provided in this course were extensive. I realized that I always wanted to have these frameworks handy in an electronic format for reference in any scenario.
Due to the complexity of the resources and readings, I decided to condense and curate these for future quick-reference. The artifact in the next tab is an example of selectional frameworks in note and point form organized into a multi-tab Google Spreadsheet. The document is made public for viewing purposes. This collection provides a quick-reference of each framework’s purpose but also hyperlinks to full notes, breakdowns, relevant scenarios and related resources (these are available for my internal reference only). Kept as a cloud tool, this functions as a swiss-army-framework-toolkit; it can be used anytime, anywhere. I’ve begun the process interlinking all of my MET resource libraries in Google Documents to make one big (growing) meta-resource. In short, my thinking has become very ‘meta’ which has enhanced my design and EdTech analysis skill. Meaningful interactivity with educational resources goes beyond simple reading, viewing and listening through the act of critical connection-making (Bates & Pool’s, 2003).
The resulting artifact helped inform my: practice quiz/exam, introductory module reflection, self-hosted Moodle module, digital story, scenario posts and several other projects. In these entries, you can see evidence of deeper, more integrated connection-making in my linking of theory to practice.
There are several tabs at the bottom of the window displaying notes on different frameworks. Open the full document here
Bates, A. W., & Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Education: Foundations for Success. Jossey-Bass, An Imprint of Wiley. 10475 Crosspoint Blvd, Indianapolis, IN 46256.
Egan, J. (2013). Module 1: Learning Technologies: Selection, Design and Application. [Lecture Notes]. Vancouver, BC: University of British Columbia.
Cross, N. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing (pp. 1-13). Springer London.