Open Courseware

 Open Courseware & Planning

I evaluated a history course distributed through Yale University (2009) in a series of audio/video podcasts that I found through Open Culture (2012). The link to the course is:  http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL023BCE5134243987&feature=plcp

 Simonson et al (2012) state the components of an effective podcast as (pg. 97):

·         A single idea that can be expressed verbally, or if necessary, with audio and appropriate still or motion pictures (not a face talking).

·         3 to 10 minute long recording

·         Part of a series

·         Learning object made available in MP3 format

·         Stored on a website

·         Current and changed frequently

To start, the podcast was recorded in very long segments (30 minutes to 1 hour), and the video portion of the lecture consisted of the lecturer speaking into a microphone. The podcast lacked any still pictures, objectives, or key vocabulary on the screen. As stated by Schlosser & Anderson (1994), “One thing that has been repeatedly demonstrated through research is that lecture, or the ‘talking head’ approach, is the least successful strategy to employ distance education, (pg. 159).

While it was very hard to not fall asleep the first ten minutes of the podcast, and the professor’s throat clearing was getting more and more distracting, I was able to pause, rewind, fast forward, or stop the podcast at any point. In regards to Dale’s Cone of Experience (1946), the learner participates in a single observation task throughout each podcast, but then has the chance to read the additional course materials, or purchase the course texts. According to Dale’s Cone of Experience (1946), learners remember 10% of what they read, and 50% of what they see and hear. Learners remember 90% of what they do, and this course does not allow for the participant to participate in asynchronous activities related to the podcasts, other than reading the course text resources.

In terms of dialoge, the course did not seem to analyze the potential for any type of learner interactivity, except for the general comments that can be left on the YouTube® or iTunes® page. The course resembles production features similar to Fordism.  Fordism courses are mass-produced, without consideration for individualization, (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, Zvacek, 2012). We know that when it comes to truly effective distance learning, interaction is very important, (Bates, 2003).  For a highly interactive course, these features are recommended (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2012), (pg. 182):

1 module/ lesson per week

Instructor e-mail to students each week

1 synchronous chat per week

2 to 3 threaded discussion questions per topic, or 6 to 10 questions per week

Instructor comments on discussions as part of threaded discussion board

Progress reports (grades) submitted to students every 2 weeks

With the distribution of this course through iTunes ® or YouTube®, the content is broadcast to anyone with internet and the capability to host iTunes® or YouTube® software. With this in mind, the course did appear well planned in terms of technology, because the required software is accessible, and free. However, as stated by Bates (in Foley, 2003) “Technology is not the issue. How and what we want the learners to learn is the issue, and technology is the tool, (pg. 833).”

The other features of course planning that were discussed by Simonson et al (2012), such as evaluation, and effective teaching strategies were not evident in the final course product. First of all, participants are not evaluated by themselves, an instructor, or their peers. Important teaching practices that are lacking from this course are: the use of multiple forms of media (print, audio, graphics), and discovery learning opportunities or learner choice, (Simonson, Smaldino, Zvacek, Albright, 2012).

Overall, the course that I chose to evaluate did not model a learning environment that required a lot of planning by the instructional design team. I believe that the content being presented by Professor Kagan, could be divided into interactive modules, with many collaborative, discovery learning opportunities, as well as, meaningful assessments or projects.

Resources

Schlosser, C. & Anderson, M. (1994). Distance education: Review of the literature. Ames, IA: Research Institute for Studies in Education.

Foley, M. (2003). The Global Development Learning Network: A World Bank initiative in distance learning  for development. In M.G. Moore & W.G. Anderson (Eds.), Handbook of distance education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dale, E. (1946) Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: The Dryden Press.

Kagan, D. (2009). Introduction to ancient greek history. Yale university courses.  Podcast. Retrieved on May 29^th, 2012 from: http://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL023BCE5134243987&feature=plcp.

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