Search News


Browse Archives

News

The Human Element

March 29, 2010

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Douglas E. Hersh’s close crop of auburn hair and neatly trimmed goatee are clearly visible in an expandable window on my desktop. So are his light tweed blazer and matching tie. On a table behind his desk sits a purple orchid, lending color to his office -- 2,600 miles away from mine.

The technology that allows me to see Hersh’s face as he speaks to me is not new. But Hersh, dean of educational programs and technology at Santa Barbara City College, believes it may hold the key to solving an old problem that has plagued distance education since its beginnings: the retention gap.

A growing body of research has all but obliterated the notion that distance education is inherently less effective than classroom education. But even the most ardent distance-ed evangelists cannot deny persistent evidence suggesting that students are more likely to drop out of online programs than traditional ones. The phenomenon has many explanations, not least the fact that what often makes students choose the flexibility of online learning -- being too busy to enroll in a classroom course -- can also make it harder for them to keep up with their studies.

But Hersh believes there is another major factor driving the gap between retention rates in face-to-face programs and those in the rapidly growing world of distance education: the lack of a human touch.

And unlike the reality of adult students’ busy lives, Hersh says the human-touch problem can be solved. In fact, he thinks he knows how.

Hersh’s solution is to incorporate more video and audio components into the course-delivery mechanism. Most professors who teach online already incorporate short video and audio clips into their courses, according to a 2009 survey by the Campus Computing Project. But it is rarer, Hersh says, for professors to use video of themselves to teach or interact with their online students -- largely because the purveyors of major learning management systems do not orient their platforms to feature that method of delivery.

That is why Hersh convinced Santa Barbara in 2008 to abandon Blackboard, the LMS industry leader, in favor of Moodle’s open-source platform, which he used to build the straightforwardly named “Human Presence Learning Environment.” The interface is designed so that professors can deliver lessons and messages using videos recorded with a Webcam. It also shows students who among their instructors or classmates are logged into Skype, the video-chat service, in case they want to have a live, face-to-face conversation. As an alternative to text, students using computers that have built-in recording equipment can post audio responses to discussion threads.

Hersh says he is in discussions with other California community colleges to adopt the platform and will gladly give it away to any other institutions that want to adopt it.

Blackboard has recently incorporated a text-chatting feature into its system, and allows its professors who also teach classroom courses to post videos of their lectures on their course pages. But according to a spokesman, the company is less focused on audio- and video-based interactivity than on promoting “engagement in general,” in accordance with numerous studies that link high engagement to low dropout rates.

For Hersh, engagement goes hand-in-hand with audio-visual communication. The more that exchanges occurring within an online learning environment resemble those that occur in classrooms, he says, the more that students will feel connected to their professors and classmates, and the more likely they will be to stay in a program.

John Bourne, executive director of the Sloan Consortium, an online-education research and advocacy group, says "social presence" does stem dropout rates in online programs. “There is no question in my mind, based on work on social presence over 15 years, that if you increase interaction between humans, you can increase and enhance engagement, comfort and, eventually, retention,” Bourne says, adding that he has spoken to institutions that have been displeased with the limited degree of social presence in the major commercial learning management systems.

“I think as we go forward with more and more workforce education and pulling students up to higher levels of productivity, there are often people at lower levels of the education chain who have trouble keeping on task and working through,” he says. “So the more we can do to retain them through online methods,” the better.

Hersh says he has proof that his system, in particular, works toward this goal. As part of his 2009 dissertation for Argosy University, Hersh studied the satisfaction and completion rates of a sample of 145 students in his “presence”-oriented learning environment compared to a similar sample taking their courses through a “traditional” LMS. That research “demonstrate[d] that students feel more satisfied in their online courses when they feel engaged through human presence design,” Hersh wrote in a summary provided to Inside Higher Ed. “Further… students who find intrinsic satisfaction in their human presence courses tend to complete them at higher rates and with higher levels of academic success.”

He credits these improvements to the “illusion of non-mediation,” a term he borrowed from virtual-presence scholars Matthew Lombard and Theresa Ditton. When students are able to see the face of the instructor who is guiding them through a course, they are more likely to trust that professor, and they feel more invested in the course, Hersh says. The same applies to classmates in an online program, to the extent that future learning environments enable visual contact among them.

Hersh admits that this return to the emotional dynamics of face-to-face learning may come at a cost: The text-based medium that currently dominates online learning environments may eliminate the prejudices and distractions inherent to visual communication, making conversations in text-based learning environments more focused.

But communicating solely via text is also alienating, says Hersh. Weighing the theoretical advantages of purely textual discourse against the demonstrated engagement benefits of presence-oriented teaching, the latter wins, he says.

Reggie Smith, president of the United States Distance Learning Association, says that based on his experience, “The learner-instructor interaction is the most critical one to the success of the learning experience,” for not only instructional but also emotional reasons. But while he said that Hersh’s customized learning environment “looks great,” he warned that the overall design of online courses — not just the tools involved in delivery — still have the greatest bearing on whether a course is effective.

“We are seeing more and more [instructors] make use of video and audio within their environments, but using it to just add some flash does not make it award-winning content or instructionally sound by design,” says Smith.

“While student-instructor and student-student dialog is important and can support learning outcomes, it is not a required… ingredient for success in an online course.”

Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on The Human Element

  • Posted by Ed Nuhfer on March 29, 2010 at 7:45am EDT
  • I think Hersh is on the right track here. When we hear statements: "A growing body of research has all but obliterated the notion that distance education is inherently less effective than classroom education" it is fair to ask: "Students may learn 'as much,' but as much of what?" If the interpersonal factor of face to face communication really improves retention, then it is reasonable to conclude that the "growing body of research" missed something significant.

    The case stories found if one Googles at the ELIXR MERLOT site (http://elixr.merlot.org/) shows that faculty developers discovered the enhanced power of video mixed with text and graphics as a powerful way to increase instructional and assessment skills of professors, faculty developers, and college administrators.

  • Moodle versus ANGEL?
  • Posted on March 29, 2010 at 7:45am EDT
  • How does ANGEL compare with Moodle in this regard? Just curious.

  • Posted by Mike Burke , Asst prof, English at St Louis CC-Meramec on March 29, 2010 at 8:15am EDT
  • While Blackboard may be a clunky, text-oriented interface, it has the undisputed virtue of being easy to use--at least for basic functions such as posting assignments and handouts, receiving papers, sending them back, and communicating via email with students. It works on multiple platforms with no special technology required by the student other than a computer and an Internet connection. Both students and instructors can navigate it fairly easily. I hasten to add it is not perfect and has many drawbacks, but overall it can do about 80% of what these other (better) technologies can do, with very little training required. The platforms in the article, while exciting and interesting--and which likely do everything they are said to do--will require more training, more tech support from institutions, and no real 100% guarantee they will work across all possible student platforms at all times.

    This really illustrates some of the many drawbacks to online education--if, as the first commenter says, increasing F2F time expands online the learning experience, and if increasing that time requires more and more sophisticated technology at both ends, at what point do the institution and the student decide that the on-campus in-classroom experience is much better/simpler/easier? And the cost, remember, is the same to the student.

  • Elluminate
  • Posted by JM on March 29, 2010 at 9:30am EDT
  • Elluminate.com, can be used with Blackboard (Moodle) to provide human contact at a distance. But as noted at the end above, "looking great" is hardly sufficient in itself. We need to move beyond a collection of anecdotes as evidence on distance education.

  • Posted by Eric on March 29, 2010 at 10:15am EDT
  • I like the notion of this article. It is the human element that brings about effective online (and face to face) learning. It's not about computer-based "go-it-on-your-own" learning here... It's about facilitating learning and connecting students and the instructor together. It can also be said that there is more student to student and student to instructor interaction in an online class since the interactions happen outside of the limited face to face in person classroom time - extending the boundaries of the brick and mortar environment.

    For those using Blackboard, you may want to check out Wimba Pronto. This is a free instant messaging client that is tightly integrated into Blackboard with "presence/awareness" features built-in along with the ability to start a text chat with an individual, setup a group, and also start an audio communication as well.

    You can also do whiteboard, video, and application sharing with the full version of Pronto. It also has chat queuing (for office hours), help desk/tutorial lab features, reports on usage, and also an institutional messaging feature. Since Pronto is integrated into Blackboard, there is no need to share Skype usernames/alias's, as Pronto automatically connects classmates to each other and the instructor by automatically setting up and displaying the classes.

    Also, since Blackboard provides an open API system through Building Blocks, a college could also conceivably write an integration with Skype.

  • Innovation
  • Posted by PS , Director on March 29, 2010 at 11:15am EDT
  • I am thrilled to see any innovation that can engage the learner and create real improvements in learning outcomes. Innovation always elicits response and thought and elevates consideration of important topics: Human touch in online education is sorely lacking and oftentimes, I see it is just easier to target the low-hanging, motivated fruit for your programs and retention is seen as a marketing requirement more so than an academic requirement.

    Students learning and applying knowledge really matters. But is that what we are teaching when we design our courses?? I have seen that oftentimes, we assess whether the student posts X times to the threads and relate that to a learning outcome: Nonsense, in this vein we are teaching students how to use our rubrics to earn a grade. We are telling the student that the outcome is the grade, not the education. We become grade/degree-sellers, not education-promoters.

    I have seen in the online environment that we have open-book tests that enable students to regurgitate content. They may get the A but have they really learned the material? Some test creators have carefully crafted questions so as to avoid this by requiring the student to integrate two or more unrelated concepts or "apply" them to a case. This is not often the situation, and even in carefully crafted questions, the time allowed is often great enough for the student to simply restate text principles on the divergent topics and then make a hasty conclusion: The online faculty who manages 30+ students in a course must wade through these essays and decide what grade to give the coursetaker and it is usually nearing 100% because they have components of the question spewed forth. But has there been real learning? Retention of the material?

    Sure, many online universities have "capstone" courses that are supposed to require knowledge of the entire scope of the program. But what happens more often than not is that the student entering the capstone has been an "A" or "B" student all along the way..... doing what is asked by posting 3X week and earning 100% on open-book tests and getting by on team projects. They enter the capstone and God-help-the-Professor who sees now, late in the game, that this student was shortchanged in retention and application of knowledge.... The student has perceived what is "education" incorrectly because the outcomes were geared to grade-earning, not learning. And on that CPA exam, there is no open book. On the PMI exam, likewise.

    But, what are we to do? Asked to manage 30+ students in a classroom and you get what you pay for, a professor who is constrained to teach to the rubrics with open-book tests. He/She may have the student for maybe 5 or 8 weeks and they can only do so much. Independent Contractor professors have little means to collaborate with each other to discuss real solutions and they are constrained by the for-profits that typically prefer to watch the financials versus the academic quality. Yes, I do think it is time for real change and real innovation with high touch LMS. But more importantly, it is time for academicians to stand up and recognize the weaknesses in the online, for-profit system of education that compromises learning with each ROI calculation.

     

     

     

  • Posted by John Thompson on March 29, 2010 at 10:15am EDT
  • The "human element" (a k a "social presence") can be demonstrated in multiple ways, not just by adding audio, MM, and synchronous meetings. The choice of words makes a difference. Instructors can project a certain image through their word choice. The human element can be enhanced by an active presence (participation, not lurking) in online course discussions. Students really appreciate an instructor's active participation in the online course discussions. Dumping Bb to go with Moodle because of Moodle's supposed capabilities is not necessary. If a CMS like Bb becomes too restrictive, the instructor can simply bring technology into the course in a variety of ways. E.g., the instructor can use an avatar to deliver a podcast (see voki.com) to spice things up and cast him/herself in a certain way. Supplying an Internet link to a "homebrew" video of the instructor uploaded to YouTube can be done with any CMS or in any F2F course, too.

  • While video helps, Bell's invention can seal the deal.
  • Posted by John Locke , Director of Instructional Design at Keuka College on March 29, 2010 at 10:45am EDT
  • We are having great success in reducing the dropout rate in our online classes. While video is playing a significant role, we have also found that when the instructor takes the time to actually call each student a week before the course starts, the rate of anxiety is greatly reduced and the student realizes that there is, in fact a caring, feeling person who is also an expert in his or her field on the other end of the connection. We have also had excellent results using a product called dimdim, which allows our instructors to set up "virtual office hours" and study groups for students. This service provides a video feed for the instructor and a text-based chat application through which students may interact.

    We are also transitioning many of the techniques we develop in the online environment to our face to face delivery of our accelerated adult programs, meaning it is quickly evolving into a hybrid program.

  • Posted by S Collins on March 29, 2010 at 10:45am EDT
  • What about convenience for the instructor? Online students can be very demanding. Because they have around the clock access to classrooms, many of them think that means 24-hour access to instructors. Video lectures, chats, face-to-face chats and the like require more of an instructor's time and energy. Many online instructors teach at several institutions. Many do not want to be camera-ready or voice-ready, primarily because they do not work typical hours. How course-effective is this approach? Will online instructor's receive more pay for being available to students practically all of the time? If students want one-on-one, face-to-face, verbal placating, maybe they should not take online courses.

  • I agree with you PS
  • Posted by VF , adjunct at independent on March 29, 2010 at 12:30pm EDT
  • I agree with so much of what you say PS - my experience teaching online has been -so far - that most students simply regurgitate what they read in both the discussion forums and on the exams or papers. Indeed, a recent experience has illuminated this even more as a student of mine, one I thought was really "getting it" - was actually just regurgitating from diverse sources without attribution. It is impossible to know this with online discussions and open-book exams (unless they are submitted to a plagiarism service which is not usual for exams). At least in a classroom this can not happen. What to do? I really do support online education - but how are we going to get around this? Will some of this new "face time" technology help? I don't know....

  • Illusion of Proximity
  • Posted by hal , Grad Design on March 29, 2010 at 10:15pm EDT
  • Combining video with text and a modest amount of interactivity has been shown in years past to help with comprehension of material. This is regardless of the framework that this content is represented in. Most of interactive education content is built on this basic principle.

    However, to assume that inset video of an instructor is going to make some deep connection to a student is of course a false assumption. The sense of intimacy is fake. It is still a one to many model with no ability for synchronous feedback - in either verbal form (questions) or even in physical feedback via body, eye contact or proximity. It is a glass half full scenario.

    This explains the fascination that education has/had with Second Life. It promised to alleviate the lack of physical proximity in a distance education course. But it is in itself a fake environment, still divorced from the most subtle of cues that people give each other when in a conversation.

    I still take stock in hybrid courses because there is the potential to turn class time into something more than a brain dump. Education is about access to resources, facilities and expertise. I think there is value in presenting some materials in an online fashion, but to simply mirror a traditional lecture model with some online quizzes is not progress. It is, in my opinion, a half-way thing, like a television program that is really just a radio program with some moving pictures. The medium is not being used effectively at all.

    As far as arguing about a LMS - these are not inert containers that be molded into whatever the instructor needs. They are, Moodle included, a computerized manifestation of mass-production education. LMS's scale because the instructor and students must conform to the way they work, not the other way around. At their best, they handle housekeeping chores and reduce tedium for the instructor. They have forums, places to upload homework, online quizzes and so on. It is pretty much the base level of what could be expected in an online course. Adding some video with the instructor talking to the students is a very modest improvement.

    If I sound harsh it is because I expect so much more. When we look outside of education we see incredibly rich experiences. LMS's simply perpetuate an institutional view - education is inside the box, not outside. I think for it to be ultimately effective that line has to be erased.

  • Posted by Carol on March 30, 2010 at 5:00am EDT
  • "However, to assume that inset video of an instructor is going to make some deep connection to a student is of course a false assumption. The sense of intimacy is fake. It is still a one to many model with no ability for synchronous feedback - in either verbal form (questions) or even in physical feedback via body, eye contact or proximity. It is a glass half full scenario.

    This explains the fascination that education has/had with Second Life. It promised to alleviate the lack of physical proximity in a distance education course. But it is in itself a fake environment, still divorced from the most subtle of cues that people give each other when in a conversation."

     

    I wondered when someone would bring up Second Life - and there you are, hal! I worked in SL for 2 1/2 years as a consumer health librarian, paid by grants from the National Library of Medicine. My charge was discovery and education. I disagree that this environment is 'devoid of the most subtle cues' available in f2f. In fact, avatars employ and are aware of body language, conveyed through surrogates. What happens is that discussion goes meta - we end up discussing what we're discussing and discussing how we are discussing it - potentially, a step beyond what is commonly done in the f2f classroom or the Blackboard course site, especially when you consider that participants are likely to be in very different locations. It's a cultural salon, and should be valued as such.

    With regard to the comment that SL's a 'fake' environment... well, yes - and the oval seminar table is itself an attempt to construct artificial and temporary community, bounded by the deliberate structure of academia - not itself guaranteed successful, and not replicated in quality or intimacy by larger classes (another cost-savings effort that should be examined). The academy itself is an agreed-upon construct.

    If technology is bringing us to someplace different, should education not also shift and adapt? I agree that much online education is plain bad (I've been there myself as a student and an instructor) and much of it is due to the failure to a) play with tools and b) engage the students in participating more fully in the teaching/learning process.

    Here's where I could really get on a soapbox and rant about in-person and virtual 'group projects' completely devoid of any preparation for group work, resulting in frustration. Like group work, online education isn't just a widget, it's a platform/playground/experiment - and we're all in it together.

    Yet many instructors, with too little time, perhaps, attempt to port in-person teaching methods into an online class just as they use group work without going the whole route, making it an empty exercise. In Second Life, I saw many IHEs and corporations attempt to bring real-world structures into the new environment and I (and others) can say to you that it does not work.

    Online is collaborative. Online flattens hierarchy. Online (particularly Second Life) is fast-moving, speed-of-light--and it frequently fails because we don't yet know how to handle this new culture that we are still in the process of becoming.

    Our students exist all along the continuum (regardless of age) from digital near-native to digital naif. In an online learning environment, much like SL, part of the discourse must be about this changing culture, but too often, it is not. There's no time, so all of us (including the teachers) are dismayed at the gaps between intention and execution.

  • Enhancing Social Presence Builds Community
  • Posted by Michelle Pacansky-Brock on March 30, 2010 at 2:15pm EDT
  • Thanks for this terrific article and discussion...what a great way to start my day! I believe this dialogue is truly getting to the heart (sorry for the pun) of where we need to be taking online learning. Clear, solid course design is foundational to quality learning but enhancing social presence through video/audio is an integral element of building community. Both are keys to providing students with high quality online learning experiences.

     

    I have experience "reconfiguring" Blackboard in ways that allow options for increasing social presence. I also teach a 4-week online class for online instructors, Building Online Community (through @One in CA), which is largely anchored by the topic of "social presence," as a fundamental building block for developing trust and fostering a community of learners. Participants evaluate the effectiveness of audio and video vs. text communications in conveying social presence. I agree with the comments made about BB's flat, text-based learning environment and I'd like to share my strategies for overcoming them, which I also share with my own faculty participants.

     

     

    First, as intuitive and fluid with visual/audio communications as Hersh's LMS is, it's not realistic for individual faculty members to expect their institution to turn around and adopt a new LMS. And remember, a large percentage of faculty today are part-time and teaching at multiple institutions, sometimes with more than on LMS. Therefore, instead, we need to identify feasible strategies for faculty to infuse their existing learning environment(s) with a dynamic social presence. Here is how I succeeded with BlackBoard.

     

     

    When I began teaching art history, a VISUAL discipline with a focus on developing visual literacy skills, I quickly identified the BB learning interface as a road block to my students' success. I began infusing my learning units with interactive, visual VoiceThreads (www.voicethread.com). Each VoiceThread can be "embedded" in BB (see notes below) or linked to. VoiceThread provides me and my students the option to comment with a webcam video, audio (microphone or telephone) or with text. The VoiceThreads became interactive "learning spaces." From Tuesday through Monday students would come in, follow my clear instructions, and apply new concepts, terms and ideas to the images I shared on the VT pages. I would enter the VT mid-week and leave my video comment for students who had participated prior to the point. Students shared invaluable feedback with me, indicating on many occasions those video comments were more personalized and helpful to their understanding of our course concepts than any other instructor feedback they had received, even in a classroom.

     

     

    If you'd like to learn more about strategies for integrating VoiceThread into BB and listen to student feedback from my classes, feel free to visit this online presentation (made in VT): http://voicethread.com/share/945057/

     

     

    Beyond integrating web 2.0 tools into BB to provide interactive and socially presence learning activities, one can successfully embed webcam comments for students also. I realized this not long after I started using VT. I was regularly typing detailed announcements (which certainly did infuse my social presence, as much as text can do so) that were shared at the start of a new weekly unit. I elected to begin recording these announcements with my webcam and then I would embed them, along with the text transcript (for students who preferred or needed it and also providing a more effective way to reference/review the content later). At the end of a term, students frequently commented that seeing and hearing me each week at the start of a new unit was the feature that kept them connected and motivated. What was also fun for me was the first time an online student identified me in a crowd. "Hey, you're my online professor!" We had a great conversation and I truly felt like I had successfully made a significant improvement in this particular students' level of engagement and, overall, improved my chances at retaining more students.

     

     

    Here is how to embed a video (or any other content item with embed code) into Blackboard:

     

    1. Create a free account with an online video site that provides the option to record directly with your webcam (YouTube.com and Viddler.com both work well...but be aware of YouTube's 10-minute limit).

     

    2. Record your webcam video into the video site.

     

    3. Locate the "EMBED" code shared with you for your video. Copy all of this code to your clipboard.

     

    4. Return to Blackboard and create a new content item.

     

    5. Locate the editing toolbox above the textbox in which you type. Click on the "toggle to HTML view" icon which usually looks like this < >.

     

    6. Place your cursor in the textbox and PASTE your embed code there.

     

    7. Title your item and submit.

     

    (The file size of the video is not transferred into BB. The embedded video simply "mirrors" the content hosted on the video site. If you delete the video there, your embedded video will disappear.)

     

     

    Further, I wholeheartedly agree with the already shared perspective that quality online learning is not achieved through strong social presence alone. We, as online educators, need to crafting a learning environment with strong social presence around a solid course design anchored with clear learning objectives. And I would argue that this isn't really any different from a solid face-to-face learning experience either. Some professors have a stronger face-to-face "social presence" -- they share personal stories, identify students by name, create personalized experiences as students learn. We can all related to this as we reflect on our own experiences as students.

     

     

    Finally, yes, integrating social presence through video and audio requires new skills (enhanced training opportunities and more work) for the online instructor. Is that a reason to deny the exploration of enhancing social presence through video and audio? I certainly hope not. In my opinion, this dialogue is another validation of online instruction (quality online instruction) requiring more time, effort, and unique skills from face-to-face instruction. And our institutions will need to become actively engaged in this dialogue and make efforts to support faculty as they strive to create effective and high quality learning experiences for our students.

     

  • The Live Lecture: Presence? This Dialog: Inhuman?
  • Posted by Steve Eskow , Director, Office of External Affairs at Ghana Telecom University College on March 30, 2010 at 4:15pm EDT
  • Douglas Hersh is a neighbor of mine:I live a few minutes from SBCC. But I meet him here, online, and learn here--at a distance--that we have common interests. (See my work here):

    www.pangaeanetwork.org

    So:

    Would I have learned more about Doug's work if Steve Kolowich had met with him in a studio, interviewed him while a video camera was running, and I heard Doug talk about the "human element" via YouTube?

    Would I have learned more, enjoyed the learning more, if pictures of Doug and Steve were incorporated in the article? If all the comments--which I learned from as well as enjoyed---included the pictures of the commenters?

    Perhaps it would be useful to untangle more completely the two phenomena discussed under the common notion of "the human element."

    1. "Presence": the belief that Derrida named "the metaphysics of presence": that speech precedes, and is more "present" than writing, and thus communicates more than writing can. (Derrida calls this fixation on the human voice "phonocentrism.")

    This faith in "presence" may account for the survival of the "lecture": the belief that somehow the fact that the one person speaking and the 300 listening are physically "present" to each other results in deep learning, despite the generations of testimony to the contrary.

    So:I could not understand Steve's article if it was delivered as a lecture if he spoke at more than 125 words a minute, while I can read it at several times that speed, reread it...Would I really learn more if Steve and I were "co-present" and he spoke his piece?

    2. "Engagement" Steve, Doug, the commenters, and I are not "present" to each other. However: we are engaged: our writing is testimony to that engagement.

    Our engagement is visible. Does it result in less learning that would be the case if we were co-present in a classroom?

    Steve Eskow

  • John Locke brought up some interesting strategies
  • Posted by Shawn Moustafa , Director of Curriculum at California Coast University on March 31, 2010 at 1:00pm EDT
  • Engaging students starts before the first day of class. Having materials ready for students to review ahead of time is imperative and I really like the idea of having the instructor call each student before the first class. It is this “connection” that students appreciate and need. As great as embedded video and audio are, students are ultimately looking for that personal connection with their instructor. Furthermore, these types of engaging actions combat dropout rates and increase retention.

  • Apples and Oranges
  • Posted by Suzanne , Assistant Director, pICT at SDSU on April 1, 2010 at 5:45am EDT
  • Defining the characteristics of the “human element” is becoming an apples and oranges thing. Hal’s comments and Carol’s rebuttal to it make that clear. Each seem to orient to social presence from a particular position. Hal seems to be grounded in instructional media design, while Carol’s suggests some cutting edge phenomena on their way to maybe becoming grounded theory.

    I’m not a purist; I DO feel the presence of others in highly mediated environments like Second Life AND I do not equate it with face to face experiences at all. While I appreciate Carol’s assertions and I have fun in Second Life, I do not recommend it to our faculty as an online learning platform, but as a creative space for the kinds of high impact experiences students get in capstone and extra credit projects, and independent studies. (See our SL Initiative http://sdsu-aztlan.wikispaces.com/)

    The human element has many forms in mediated contexts, and involves instructor immediacy and transactional distance, to name a couple useful constructs. There’s ample research of online communities that suggests that people do feel connected and present and this has been the case for some time as evidenced in studies of text-based MOOs and MUDs of yesteryear.

    We’re all coming to grips with the idea that teaching and learning will be mediated in ever evolving ways. I think we differ widely in how that could and should look. That's nothing new though; educators have never agreed on praxis or theory.

  • Another LMS to consider
  • Posted by Renee , Community Relations at Haiku Learning Systems on April 14, 2010 at 9:30am EDT
  • What a great post and subsequent discussions! It's great to see such passionate ideas and conversations about education and technology.

    In the interest of openness, I should identify myself as someone who works with the maker of Haiku LMS, a learning management system that's built on the ideas of harmony, simplicity, and community. In more practical terms that means Haiku LMS:

    • Plays well with others (e.g. an Embed the Web feature enables educators to bring hundreds of third-party services like Skype, TokBox, Voicethread into their classes). Haiku LMS has a powerful core system, and educators can further extend it by pulling in additional services that are already working well.
    • Is easy to use. We believe in simple, clean interfaces and workflows and creating features that at least 80% of educators using Haiku will actually use; otherwise the LMS gets complicated and clunky.
    • Connects users and their ideas and work. Users submit feature requests in an open space where others can vote, and we take those requests and votes seriously as we update and upgrade Haiku LMS. Features like content sharing let educators make their course content available for other educators to use, too.

    If you have a few minutes, I'd encourage you to check out Haiku LMS. Features are listed here: https://www.haikulearning.com/features. This video gives an overview of what's possible in Haiku: https://www.haikulearning.com/video