Tuesday, October 27, 2015

Outcomes of Educational Technology
The second article conducted by López-Pérez et al. (2013) which hypothesized that: 1. Differences in the number of on-line activities performed by students are related to significant differences in the academic results they achieve, 2. The mean time employed by students in performing on-line activities does not influence the results achieved, 3. The mean frequency of the use of on-line technology by students does not influence the results achieved, 4. The degree of success in the on-line activities the students performed is positively related to the results they achieve.
The mixed learning experience was implemented in the ‘Introduction to Accounting’ course at the University of Granada, which is offered to first-year students in the next four undergraduate-degree courses of study: Business Administration, Economics, Business, Science, and the double degree in Business Administration and Law. The class was offered to 17 groups, with a sum of 1,128 students finishing the course in the 2009–2010 academic year. A student was regarded as to have ended the course when he/she took the corresponding final test. For the aims of this study, the students were distributed into two groups—one group that would finish on-line subject-related activities and a second group of students who would not. This second group represents the control. The teaching methodology included a mixture of face-to-face classes plus 30 activities intended to support the materials offered in the classroom and based on the Moodle platform.
The study results revealed that students who had not made the on-line activities (control group) got an average score of 5.66 out of 10, while those who did got an average score of 6.99. Regarding the control variables, the average university entrance mark attained was near to 7/10 for both groups. Moreover, both groups attended around 80 % of their classes and exhibited largely comparable levels of interest in the subject (3.18 and 3.60 out of 5, respectively).
To test Hypothesis 1, the researchers investigated if there were differences between the final marks got by students who had not made any of the on-line activities and those who had finished a given number of said activities. An analysis of variance showed that there were really significant differences between the results attained by students who had not made any of the on-line activities and those who had. Furthermore, the correlations elucidates the effect of the performance of on-line activities on students’ final marks. Moreover, the students’ final marks rest on certain variables, such as if the activities were made (ACTIVITIES), and on the students’ marks on the university entrance exam (BACKGROUND), their class attendance rate (CLASSES) and their interest in accounting as a subject (PREFERENCE).
The variable ACTIVITIES gives a positive and statistically significant relationship with the final marks attained. The students who did the on-line tasks got a higher final mark than did those who had not did said activities. Both study groups had alike backgrounds, rates of class attendance and subject preferences, but those students who finished the on-line activities attained better learning outcomes.
Also, students’ final marks were positively and significantly correlated with the scores they attained in the on-line activities. The students’ final marks gave a positive association, which was also significant, with their background knowledge, their class attendance rates and their definite level of interest in the subject. Furthermore, there was a negative and significant correlation between the final marks attained and the time given to each of the tasks.
Concerning the control variables, there was a negative and significant relationship between the time used by the students in activities and their background, which could imply that students with less preceding knowledge will increase the use of this type of supportive resource. There was also a positive relation between the score attained in the on-line activities and the students’ preceding knowledge, which implies that students with a better grounding in the subject achieved better results in the on-line activities. Ultimately, the time given to working with the on-line activities and the frequency of their use are not explanatory factors of the final results achieved.

López-Pérez, M., Pérez-López, M., Rodríguez-Ariza, L., & Argente-Linares, E. (2013). The influence of the use of technology on student outcomes in a blended learning context. Educational Technology Research & Development, 61(4), 625-638. doi:10.1007/s11423-013-9303-8
Outcomes of Educational Technology
Educational technologies have become usual, and both the on-site and distance student now network in a multidimensional learning environment. Educational technologies have inspired the world.  All at once, they have offered boundless challenges and prospects for educators and learners equally (Bastable, 2003).  The first article conducted by Willis, et al. (2013) to examine academic staff usage of electronic learning and teaching (e-L&T). The study results revealed that lecture recordings were the most usually adopted of the six e-L&T aids, with 67% of academics having utilized them. This extensive uptake was relatively because of their easy use and to their existence in most lecture theatres within the university. Although nearly all academics revealing positive experiences, there were also negative views, with three of the 21 academics studied (around 14%) having a poor or neutral experience. Also, screencasting and podcasting were used by about 40% of academic staff. Screencasting and podcasting express the provision of videos by file for on need playback and may perhaps be used along with, or as a substitute for, old-style lectures. Furthermore, the audience response systems (ARS) were barely utilized by one of the academics studied. ARS are planned to push participation, interaction and engagement by letting students transfer their perception of in-class questions. This permits the teacher to censor student knowledge instantly (sooner than after the ending of summative assessment) and possibly alter the lecture content to tackle any weaknesses.
Bastable, S. B. (2003). Nurse as educator : principles of teaching and learning for nursing. Mississauga, ON, Canada: Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Willis, C., Kestell, C., Grainger, S., & Missingham, D. (2013). Encouraging the adoption of education technology for improved student outcomes. Australasian Journal of Engineering Education, 19(2), 109-117. doi:10.7158/D12-012.2013.19.2

Saturday, October 24, 2015

Outcomes of Educational Technology
            It is essential to determine the impact of using technologies on the outcomes of an educational program, especially at educational institutions.  Due to the fact that the world is continuing change and develops, and educational institutions are considered just one part from the world; so, it is important to assess and evaluate how technologies affect the performance of students and outcomes of an educational program.  Through reviewing different articles, I chose two articles, which were related to the unit objectives.  The first article was published by Johnson and Mejia in (2014).  This article presented the performance of students in online courses at California’s community colleges.  The results that mentioned in this article explained that students were failed in short term educational courses, because they did not find enough time to achieve goals of education.  While, students were success in long term courses, because they could find enough time to use different tools and technologies to achieve goals of the educational courses. 
            The second attracted article was published by Roblyer, McDaniel, Webb, Herman, and Witty in (2010).  This article presented the use of Facebook in education.  Results of this study presented that students are more likely to use Facebook than educators, and this social media can promote the communication and collaboration among educators and students, which might lead to positive outcomes of educational programs.  But this technology should be controlled to avoid any negative consequences.
            The attached files are the articles that presented above, and you can take benefits from their reviewing.
References:
Johnson, H. P., & Mejia, M. C. (2014). Online learning and student outcomes in California's community colleges. Public Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/report/R_514HJR.pdf

Roblyer, M., McDaniel, M., Webb, M., Herman, J., & Witty, J. V. (2010). Findings on Facebook in higher education: A comparison of college faculty and student uses and perceptions of social networking sites. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(3), 134-140. Retrieved from http://u.osu.edu/granello.1/files/2011/09/Facebook-and-Public-Image-22dkj6l.pdf

Monday, October 19, 2015

Unit 4- Heather Campbell




I explored “Educause” and found that the library on the site had great resources.  I found a video highlighting eight musts for online teaching.  To summarize these important tips from the experts teaching online.

1.      High touch is more important than high tech. 
When a student is struggling and reaching that “freak out” moment that we know happens to the majority of nursing students, making it personal by a phone call can be a solution.  A email is impersonal, and during stressful times students still need a personal touch.
2.      Make a social presence through story telling.
This was explained as giving a personal touch, by relating the instruction/ teaching to a story format. How interesting… sounds like a case study.
3.      Use technology intentionally.
This is pointing out that with all the technology available, it can be easy to get lost in the technology and forget the learning objectives for the course. This reminds me of what students consider “busy work”, and reminds me to “keep it simple” when possible.
4.      Power of external resources.
This point reminds us of the vast amount of reliable information on the internet if the time is taken to find relevant information.  This helps teach students to explore these options of learning when needed. This reminds me of our medication books that are online now and what a great resource they can be in the clinical setting.
5.      Making your expectations explicit.
As we all have experienced, online learning can be difficult to manover in some courses. This point was that it should be “easy” for the student to access information, turn in assignment, etc.  Making resources and instructions easy to read and follow will help the student be successful.
6.      Fun and playfulness and the unexpected.
The experts point out that learning should still be fun. One way to engage students can be the presentation of the learning. This is a great place for story telling, and as far as nursing education, this could be a simulation, or role play.
7.      Login regularly at least 5 days a week.
I understand this from being an online student of OCU, I am so grateful, that feedback and responses are answered timely.  This provides an environment of trust and reliability.
8.      Personal feedback.
Take the time to make the feedback not only timely, but also with a personal touch, not a generic response.  For example, pointing out the highlights of the assignments, and also give feedback related to personal experiences.  This is much more personal than, “Great work”.


Atomic Learning

This site www.atomiclearning.com provides students as well as faculty easy access to technology guidance when they need it, 24/7, and in a non-intimidating way.  There are self-paced training and assessment tools both formative and summative.  These tools can assist instructors in identifying where each student may need help.  Lots of interactive tools to use and explore. I think this is a great site to bookmark as faculty.


Google Images and Hangouts


My favorite 2 google platforms. Google images is fabulous for those rare but much needed photos to help with a visual students may need in learning. Google hangouts is a great alternate to Skype, you have a white board to write on, and can share screens to make online learning easier.  

Friday, October 9, 2015

Atomic Learning
            The Atomic Learning website is just like the atomic bomb, because it provides broad and expand teaching and learning programs that assist students, educators, and administrators.  This website begins with three different branches of educational program, including K-12 education, higher education, Australia education, and global education, which can be served 24/7.  It also provides career opportunities.  It provides remote education, learning, and training services.  It has more than one thousand training courses with different soft-wares.  This website provides different applications and educational programs that can be used in different technological facilities, such as tablets and smartphones to assist the attendees’ success in their work.  It is really great website that I will use in my academic journey. 

Google Website Search

            One of the most effective uses of Google website that I almost use in my education and teaching is the use of Google Scholar.  This application assists me in doing effective search about articles that I need to use in any topic.  It provides different selective options to narrow the searching engine with specific time and keywords.  Moreover, it provides the reference of any article with different forms, including APA, MLA, and Chicago.  Anyone can use this application effectively, which makes the research process more fruitful.  
Educause
            The Educause website is another example of using technologies in education.  This website provides valuable resources that can be used in academia, including articles, books, conferences materials, and other resources.  I reviewed two different articles.  One article was published by Garrett in (2014), which was talking about “Creating experiential learning spaces”.  The research showed that students’ engagement in classroom activities and their achievements would be higher through applying experiential learning and the best use of technologies.  Moreover, creating experiential learning spaces helps in preparing students to be prepared for work after their graduation.  Another article that I reviewed was established by Poster, Mancini, and Ganji in (2013), which was talked about the expanding online access for nurses.  In short, this article explained the benefits of expanding the online nursing educational program, which would increase incomes for educational institutions, and also, increase the number of graduate nurses. 
References:
Garrett, P. (2014). The evolving classroom: Creating experiential learning spaces. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2014/10/the-evolving-classroom-creating-experiential-learning-spaces

Poster, E., Mancini, M., & Ganji, D. (2013). MOOCs and more: Expanding online access for nurses. Retrieved from http://er.educause.edu/articles/2013/8/moocs-and-more-expanding-online-access-for-nurses
Teaching e-Portfolios
The use of technologies in education has been made a grant shift and change from traditional education to more developed, improved, and innovative education.  Both soft-wares and hard-wares are used in education, which facilitate and improve goals achievement of students, faculty members, and educational institutions.  Using different and mixed types of technologies could make the educational material and process more fruitful and attracted for students.  Examples of hard-wares technologies are, however not limited to, simulations, computers, and cellphones.  Examples of soft-wares are social media and electronic educational applications.  The most important point that should be considered to achieve the successful use of technologies in education is that both educators and students should know how to use the available technologies in education.  Moreover, all facilities and resources should be available to facilitate the use of technologies in education, effectively.  Otherwise, educators cannot ask students to achieve a specific goal when they cannot use technologies effectively.  This reflects that the use of technologies in education should fit with the educational program, the process of teaching, the availability of resources, and other factors.  The Education Week Organization (2011) stated that technologies provide rich contents that students can use effectively. 
The use of technologies in education is not limited to the educational process, but involves achievements of educational institutions’ works, such as annual evaluation process of faculty members and educational institutions’ performances.  Also, students’ performance can be assessed through the use of technologies.  Mastrian, McGonigle, Mahan, and Baxter (2011) stated that technologies can be used to assess and evaluate teacher’s performance, such as the use of teaching e-portfolios (TsPs).  Mastrian et al. (2011) said that “TePs are a potent way to assess the teacher’s progress, achievement, and development; they can reflect the teaching persona from the classroom through the attainment of career goals” (p. 255).  Sarkar (2012) said that “but with the world moving rapidly into digital media and information, the role of ICT in education is becoming more and more important and this importance will continue to grow and develop in the 21st century” (p. 30).  This reflects that technologies become part of our lives and influence our performance positively or negatively if we do not know how to use them. 
References:
Mastrian, K., McGonigle, D., Mahan, W., & Baxter. B. (2011). Integrating technology in nursing education: Tools for the knowledge era. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.
Sarkar, S. (2012). The role of information and communication technology (ICT) in higher education for the 21st century. Science, 1(1), 30-41.
The Education Week Organization. (2011). Technology in education. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/technology-in-education/