Plagiarism and Cheating

What makes a person cheat?  This is a question I asked my students a couple of days ago.  Pressure to succeed, laziness, and ignorance are most of the reasons they gave, and I think this is supported in the conversation this week held by Palloff, and Pratt (n.d.).  I, like Dr. Palloff believe that students are not inherent cheaters.  Yes, I think the culture of education fosters cheating as opposed to authentic learning and collaboration; however, I do not feel we are born cheaters. 

Plagiarism, which is the use of another's writing as one's own (Jocoy, & DiBiase, 2006).  There is speculation that plagiarism is rampant in online education.  This is not really the case; studies show that this form of cheating is about as prevalent in online as it is in face-to-face education (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  The good news for instructors is there are tools available to help detect plagiarism in the online setting.  These tools include free options such as Google™ as well as commercial options such as Turnitin™, and Essay Verification Engine™ (Jocoy, & Dibiase, 2006).  These tools allow instructors to compare the work of their students to databases that can detect similarities (Jocoy, & Dibiase, 2006).

In regards to designing assessments and assignments that can mitigate the urge to commit academic dishonesty.  For example, Dr. Pratt (n.d.) suggests taking a closer look at the types of assignments and assessments.  He encourages instructors to create assignments and assessments that are more authentic in terms of reference material, and collaboration with others.  These authentic assessments require learners to apply what they know in a real-world situation.  It is much more difficult to practice academic dishonesty in a setting such as this (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.). 

As far as facilitation of an online class towards a climate of academic integrity, an instructor must make this a part of the planning process.  Addressing academic integrity and educating the learners on the definition of academic dishonesty is a way to help students understand the expectations in this regard. 
A final thought on academic integrity comes from the instructor establishing themselves as a trusted figure in the online learning process (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  As I stated in the first paragraph, there are many reasons students cheat.  If the instructor is on good terms with each of their students, they can more comfortably address integrity issues that may arise.  It is important for an instructor to confront these problems.  Academic integrity is an important factor in the validity of any academic program.  A firm but professional stance in regards to academic dishonesty is essential in the protection of the academic process.

References

Jocoy, C., & DiBiase, D. (2006). Plagiarism by adult learners online: A case study in detection and remediation. International Review of Research in Open & Distance Learning, 7(1), 1-15. Retrieved from http://www.citationmachine.net/index2.php?recount=+&lastName[1]=&firstName[1]=&yearPublished=&titleArticle=&titlePeriodical=&volumeNumber=&issueNumber=&pageNumber=&doi=&url=&reqstyleid=2&mode=form&minimode=citation&help=&nameCnt=1&more=yes&reqsrcid=APAJournalArticle
Palloff, R. (Writer), & Pratt, K. (Writer) (n.d.). Plagiarism and cheating [Web]. Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fblackboard%2Fexecute%2Flauncher%3Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D_1375244_1%26url%3D

Impact of Technology

1.  What impact does technology and multimedia have on online learning environmentsTechnology and multimedia have a huge impact on the online learning environment.  Web 2.0 technology allow for collaboration and interactivity (Palloff, & Prat, n.d.) that supports sound distance theory (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, (2012).  It also allows a wide-variety in terms of meeting the needs of learners.  Combinations of text, audio, and video can meet the cognitive needs of a diverse learner population (Simonson, et, al, 2012).

2.  What are the most important considerations an online instructor should make before implementing technology?When implementing technology into an online program, there are some important considerations.  For example an instructor must be thoughtful in the use of technology.  The technology must be purposeful in that it will help the learners meet the goals and objectives of the course (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Technology cannot be implemented just because it is there (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Purposeful planning in how the technology can enhance engagement and community must be built into the design (Simonson, et al, 2012).

3.  What implications do usability and accessibility of technology tools have for online teaching?When considering the usability and accessibility of technology tools, one cannot assume that everyone has the connectivity needed for the use of web 2.0 technologies (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  An instructor must needs to consider contingencies for those students who lack the necessary connectivity to interact with their classmates.  Other forms of communication (phone, and email) though not as efficient can still be used in order to create engagement for learners.

4.  What technology tools are most appealing to you for online teaching as you move forward in your career in instructional design?As I move forward in my career, I would really like to increase my knowledge in terms of designing my own tools that incorporate technology.  Our text speaks to how most online instructors and designers rely on existing tools (YouTube™, CSM's, etc.) that allow us to implement technology (Boettcher, & Conrad, 2010).  Being able to design and implement my own tools would take my thinking and skills to the next level.  Though I have enjoyed the Walden Instructional Design and Technology program, I was hoping for a little more instruction on making these tools. 

References

Boettcher, J., & Conrad, R. (2010).  The online teaching survival guide:  Simple and practical         pedagogical tips.  San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Palloff, R. (Writer), & Pratt, K. (Writer) (n.d.) Enhancing the online experience [Web].  Retrieved from https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsptab_tab_group_id=2_1&url=%2Fwebapps%2Fbackboard%2Fexecute%Flauncher%Ftype%3DCourse%26id%3D1375244_1%26url%3D

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012).  Teaching and learning at a distance:     Foundations of distance education (5th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson.

3.....2....1....Ready to Launch!

                It seems fitting as I begin this blog, that I am watching Apollo 13.  I mean, if ever there were a film about the necessary preparation for a launch, it is this one.  This week's blog is about the launch (or the first few days) of an online course.  What are the considerations that one must consider in their design that will provide an experience that is engaging, and meaningful to the students?  Here are a few questions and answers that address the launch of an online course.

Why is it essential to communicate clear expectations to learners?

                If you do not know where you are going, how will you ever get there?  Attrition is a concerning factor in online education (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  If learners are frustrated because expectations are vague, then they are not likely to stay with the course.  Clear expectations are especially important for those who are new to the online environment (Conrad, & Donaldson, 2011).  Clear expectations are also a reflection of a high level of planning and reflect application of distance learning theory (Smaldino, Simonson, Albright, & Zvacek, 2011). 

What is the significance of knowing the technology available to you?

                Knowing the technology available allows the instructor to be creative in ways that can create an environment that is engaging and fun.  The experts in this week's video (Palloff, and Pratt, n.d.) speak to the importance of keeping the environment from being too serious.  Multi-media tools that allow for audio and video content can enrich the environment and keep learners engaged with the instructor and with each other (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Technology is also a way for online learners to protect their privacy if that is their desire.  Dr. Pratt mentions using an avatar in the online setting rather than one's actual picture (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.). 

What additional considerations should the instructor take into account when setting up an online learning experience?

                There is much to consider when setting up an online course.  Besides using technology and establishing clear expectations, the instructor needs to establish themselves in the course community in a way that makes them more relatable (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  The use of technology can help with this task.  Instructors must also take the time to get to know their students.  Something as simple as using the names of students in a post and remembering something about the students can make the difference for many (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Instructors must also create an environment where students understand their role in the community.  Asking good questions of students that move discussions forward and add depth to the conversations is an important job for an online instructor (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Finally, the online instructor must create an environment that is safe and respectful of the needs of students (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).

References

Conrad, R., & Donaldson, J.A. (2011) Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for 

     creative instruction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Howard, R. (Director) (19950. Apollo 13 [DVD].

Palloff, R., & Pratt, K. (n.d.). Launching the online experience [Web]. Retrieved from https://class.

     waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=2_1&url=/webapps

     /blackboard/execute/launcher?type=Course&id=_1375244_1url=

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance:

     Foundations of distance education (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson

Sitting alone, watching an online video about creating an online community. Hmmmmmm...........A bit ironic I think.

               The questions posed to us in this week's prompt have to do with what we learned this week about becoming a more effective online instructor.  The focus of this blog posting is a synthesis of a video about "Effective Online Communities" (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Ok, I am trying not to be overly critical here, but I have to admit.  I am feeling pretty grumpy about this assignment, and here is why.  To begin, based on what I have studied in the resources this week, and from the Walden distance learning course, as well as many books I have read for classroom instruction, I am being told again, and again that distance/online instruction must be engaging (Conrad & Donaldson, 2011), meaningful (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2012), and community driven (Palloff, & Pratt).  Well, as I watched the video of two people talking at me for 44 minutes, it occurred to me that even though the content was meaningful (in order for me to pass this course, and further my knowledge base), it was neither engaging, or community driven.  In fact, I feel that way about pretty much every video I have ever watched in the Walden video library. 

                Now, I understand the videos have a purpose in terms of establishing a base of knowledge in order to further the discussion that will follow in the online community.  My question to the group is why as an adult learner must I be subjected to such presentations?  Just because I am an adult does not mean that I love watching content like this.  The presenters in the video spoke of the concern of attrition with online learners (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.), Dr. Pratt even went so far as to say that some types of learners will never be able to succeed in the online environment (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Well, when I sit down and watch some of the content presented, it is not hard for me to understand why some people walk away.  Now, some folks might say that the content is not in itself the heart of the learning community; it is the members of the community that drive the content.  Well, I am going to have to disagree with you.  In order to be a solid contributing member of the community, one must know the content, which means reading the text, as well as watching and synthesizing the video content.  This is very difficult when the content presented is often dry, and extraneous. 

                So now what?  I think this week's video presentations have brought about a completely new set of questions for me as a future online designer and instructor.  For instance, how do I sustain an online community when the content is delivered in a way that is not satisfactory to the learners?  The short answer is design new content (I have included the video I made for my orientation to eighth grade distance learners that will be working with a group of classroom students.  I think it really sums up what an online community looks like through my eyes.).  However many online instructors are facilitating courses they did not design.  Maybe the answer comes down to the shared responsibility to the entire group.  Maybe that is the whole point to the dry content.  Maybe Walden feels like if we see this type of content enough we will come together as a community and find ways to help each other get through the content and create a greater learning experience (Palloff, & Pratt, n.d.).  Or maybe these videos are cheap to produce and if we really want to get through the program, we will sit, watch quietly and alone and then get on with our lives.

 

References

Conrad, R. & Donaldson, J.A. (2011). Engaging the online learner: Activities and resources for 

     creative instruction. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palloff, R. (Writer), & Pratt, K. (Writer) (n.d.).  Online learning communities [Web].  Retrieved from

     https://class.waldenu.edu/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab_tab_group_id=_2_1&url=webaps/ 

     blackboard/execute/launcher?type=Course&id=_1375244_&url=

Simonson, M., Smaldino, S., Albright, M., & Zvacek, S. (2012). Teaching and learning at a distance:

     Foundations of distance education (5th ed.) Boston, MA: Pearson

New State, New Job, New Course!

Hi All!

     Well here we go!  Week one of the Online Instructional Strategy course, and it's time to warm up the old blog again.  A lot has changed for me over the last couple of months, I have started a new job, moved back to MI, and am now starting another new class with Walden.  Looking forward to it, and hoping I can stay sane.  :)

Man, That's Creepy

Some Background

     In early December of 2011, an email went out to every middle school teacher in the district.  The email was a search for middle school science teachers who would be willing to serve on a district wide committee that would be responsible for choosing the new middle school science resources for the district.  The district secondary learning specialist, the math intervention-learning specialist, and the district school technology specialist would lead the committee.  The committee would be comprised of   two science teachers from each middle school. Ideally, each school would have enough teachers that an application process would take place and teachers would be selected from the application pool.  As it would turn out, only one teacher from my school volunteered to be on the committee, which still left one more person that would need to volunteer from my department.  When I proposed this to my department at our monthly meeting, there was no interest.  So being the department chair, I went ahead and volunteered to be the second representative.

Some More Background

     The expectation for teachers who are part of this committee would be several days off the floor in order to take part in committee activities.  These activities would include defining criteria of the resources to review, narrowing the resource publishers to no more than four by the end of December, review of resources and publisher presentations, and a recommendation of the chosen resource to the school board by the first week of April 2012. 

Creeping up.

     This project experienced several different forms of scope creep.  The first began after the second meeting in Mid December.  At the end of the second meeting, the teachers voted and approved a group of four publishers who would present their resources in mid January.  The scope creep occurred when our project manager informed us that two other publishers, who were not part of the original review, would be added to the presentations for review in mid January.  Because of the extra publishers, a second day of review and presentations would be necessary in order to gather needed information. 

     The second instance of scope creep occurred at the end of the second day of presentations and review.  At this time, the committee narrowed the choice down to two different publishers.  One that was technology based, and the other that took a more project based approach to science instruction.  At this time, the committee was asked by the committee leaders to pilot one group of resources or the other in order to gather data that could then be shared with the group in a meeting that would take place in early February of 2012.  This would add a considerable workload to the members of the committee, as they would need to incorporate these resources into lessons that had already been planned and designed.

     A third occurrence of scope creep took place when the committee met in February.  Despite the intention to pilot the resources, some teachers did not receive the resources from one of the publishers in a timely fashion.  As a result, a few of the committee members could not provide the feedback that was requested at the January meeting.  To go along with this, the committee leaders were informed by the head of the district learning services that the committee would need to do a full alignment comparison of each resource to the new state standards.  In the end, this alignment would mean yet another day off the floor, and would add yet more time to our timeline.  Already it was becoming obvious that we would not be able to meet the original district deadline of early April.

     Two final instances of scope creep would occur once we were finally able to complete the standards alignment comparison, and make the recommendation.  The first came once the recommendation had been made by the committee.  It was at this time we were informed we would need to take a much larger role in the presentation of our recommendation to the school board.  Originally, we were informed that all we would need to do was make our recommendation.  The school board revised this, because on the initial presentation by the committee leaders, the board decided they wanted to be able to question committee members and gain a greater understanding of our thinking behind the recommendation.  The second instance would come when our presentation was bumped from the meeting in early May to the end of May due to other district business.  In the end, our recommendation was approved over a month later than originally projected. 

Hindsight is 20/20

     From my perspective, I am not sure most of the scope creep could have been avoided.  I really feel like the project manager did an above average job of monitoring the project (Portny, Mantel, Meredith, Shafer, & Sutton, with Kramer, 2008) and trying to stay ahead the inevitable scope creep.  One might point to the addition of the two publishers as avoidable scope creep, however it would turn out the recommendation by the committee would turn out to be one of the resources that was added late in the review process.  As far as the other scope creep that occurred, those were instances that came from outside influences such as district superiors, school board requests, and the state department of education.  In the end, one change that could have been made in order to reach the original deadline would have been to start the process sooner.  The original delivery date of early April was going to be tight even without any type of scope creep.  Starting the process sooner seems like a logical, but it is unknown whether the leadership team was available to begin the project process sooner.

References

Portny, S., Mantel, S., Meredith, J., Shafer, S., Sutton, M., & Kramer, B. (2008). Project management:

     Planning, scheduling, and controlling projects. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Learning to Walk

 

            There are many areas in education and instructional design in which I feel very comfy.  Project management, and specifically the territory we are entering now (schedules and budgets) is like learning a new a new language for me.  From the start, this class has been intimidating.  Though I am getting more comfortable with the language and the thinking process, it has been a struggle.  Therefore, in my search for this blog assignment, I looked for web sites that cast a wide net when it comes to project management.  The two web sites below are sites that allow one who is new to project management to gain insight in a variety of project management topics and resources. 

Allabout project management

            The title of this web site pretty much tells the story.  It is a web site that covers the basic topics of project management, and breaks down each into various resources and sub topics.  There are also links to scheduling and budgeting tools that could prove to be very useful for a novice project manager.

Project Connections

This web site is also a jack-of-all-trades web site for project managers.  Though it does cover various PM topics, it focuses on articles written by project manager experts.  Though some of the articles are far beyond the scope of my knowledge and experience, I did find some articles and ideas that are more in tune with where I am as a project manager.