effective discussion and web 2.0 tools

18
CREATING A BRIDGE BETWEEN EFFECTIVE DISCUSSION AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS Wendy Grojean College of Education IDEAS Room Coordinator [email protected]

Upload: wendy-loewenstein

Post on 24-May-2015

322 views

Category:

Education


2 download

DESCRIPTION

MET Link presentation November 2011 UNO

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

CREATING A BRIDGE BETWEEN EFFECTIVE DISCUSSION

AND WEB 2.0 TOOLS

Wendy GrojeanCollege of EducationIDEAS Room [email protected]

Page 2: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

“Replace a paper and pencil with a laptop and online discussion and you may find that even the most reserved students are strong writing contributors. It is not the student. It is the tool. Find the right technological tool and writing now becomes fun, rather than a chore” (Rosen, 2010).

Page 3: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

GOALS OF ONLINE DISCUSSION

-Add depth to in-class discussion-Give voice to quiet students-Engage students throughout reading and writing process-Others?

Page 4: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

ONLINE DISCUSSION TOOLS

BlogWikiOthers?

Page 5: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

GOALS VS. TOOL

-Your goals need to stay at the forefront.-The tool must not be BIGGER than your goals-If the tool or assessment is too complicated, students spend more time navigating the tool than the content.

Page 6: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

BLOGS VS. WIKI

Communication & Discussion

Body of knowledge

One to many-Teacher control Many to many

Time sensitive & in-the-moment

Stable and lasting

News story Encyclopedia

Page 9: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

EXAMPLES OF EXPECTATIONS

1. The Do’s and Don’t of Online Communication –Collaborize Classroom2. The Core Rules of Netiquette-Albion.com3. Netiquette Guidelines-Paradigm Publishing

4. What expectations do you communicate with students?

Page 10: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

GOOD QUESTIONING

-Eliminates plagiarism-Facilitates good discussion-Leads to Higher-Order thinking and

analysis

Page 11: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

QUESTIONING RESOURCES

McKenzie “Questioning Tool Kit”Jamie Mckenzie questioning research article: "Questioning as Technology”

Page 12: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

BLOOMS TAXONOMY MEETS THE 21ST CENTURY

New Blooms Taxonomy“Bloom’s Taxonomy Blooms Digitally”

Kathy Schrock’s Bloomin’ Google

Page 13: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

IMPORTANCE OF QUESTIONING

“North American Schools are spending billions bringing networked computers into schools while neglecting the most important technology of all-the ability of students to make meaning by applying sharply honed questioning skills” (McKenzie, 2002).

Page 14: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

ASSESSMENT OF DISCUSSIONS

RubricsParticipation PointsWhat have you done? What works for you?

Page 15: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

RUBRIC RESOURCES

Sample Rubric –University of PittsburghTips and Rubrics-Middle Tennessee State UniversityRubric example-University of Wisconsin-StoutWhat type/style of rubrics work for you?

Page 16: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

REFERENCESChristopher, M., Thomas, J., & Tallent-Runnels, M. (2004, Spring). Raising the bar: Encouraging high level thinking in online discussion forums. Roeper Review, 26(3), 166-171. Retrieved from Teacher Reference Center database. Discussion board tips and pedagogy [Information Sheet]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 7, 2011, from Middle Tennessee State University website:

http://frank.mtsu.edu/ ~webctsup/ faculty/ manual/ WebCT_DiscussionBoard_Tips-Pedagogy.pdfFrey, B. (n.d.). Rubric for asynchronous discussion participation [Rubric]. Retrieved September 9, 2011, from http://www.udel.edu/ janet/ MARC2006/ ric.htmlIm, Y., & Lee, O. (2003-2004, Winter). Pedagogical implications of online discussion for preservice teacher training. Journal of Research Technology in Education, 36(2), 155-170. Retrieved from Teacher Reference Center database. McKenzie, J. (1997, November/ December). A questioning tookit. From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal, 7(3). Retrieved from http://fno.org/ nov97/ toolkit.htmlMcKenzie, J. (2003, April). Questioning as technology. From Now On: The Educational Technology Journal. Retrieved from http://questioning.org/ qtech.html

Page 17: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

REFERENCES (CONT’D)Nielsen, L. E. (2010). Discussion rubric for online class [Rubric]. Retrieved September 9, 2011, from University of Wisconsin-Stout website: www2.uwstout.edu/ content/ profdev/ rubrics/ discussionrubric.htmlOwens, R. (2009, July 23). Eight tips for facilitating effective online discussion forums. Faculty Focus. Retrieved from http://www.facultyfocus.com/ articles/ asynchronous-learning-and-trends/ eight-tips-for-facilitating-effective-online-discussion-forums/Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy [Guide]. (n.d.). Retrieved September 7, 2011, from Wayne County Schools website:

http://www.waynecountyschools.org/ 147210622111220523/ lib/ 147210622111220523/ Revised_Blooms_Info.pdfRosen, L. D., Ph.D. (2010). Rewired. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Ross, S. (2011). The core rules of netiquette [Guidelines]. Retrieved September 10, 2011, from Albion website: http://www.albion.com/ netiquette/ corerules.html

Page 18: Effective Discussion and web 2.0 tools

REFERENCES (CONT’D)

Rutkosky, N., & Seguin, D. (n.d.). Following netiquette guidelines [Guidelines]. Retrieved September 7, 2011, from Paradigm Publishing website: http://www.emcp.com/ college_resource_centers/ listonline.php? GroupID=6168Tucker, C. (n.d.). The do’s and don’ts of online student communication [Guidelines]. Retrieved September 8, 2011, from Collaborize Classroom website: www.wecollaborize.com/ pdf/ student- communication-online.pdf