Wednesday, June 6, 2012

Instructional Tool Review


I have conducted an instructional tool review of the web tools created for faculty at my school.  Below you will find a video presentation and an article on this topic.






Note: This blog post was created in response to an assignment in a graduate course.  While I am an employee of Darlington School, my work here should not be considered an official representation of Darlington policies, practices, or philosophy.

Instructional Tool Review: Darlington School’s Faculty/Staff Pages
When I arrived at Darlington School, the college-preparatory day and boarding school at which I teach, I was taught and required to use functions of our website that help the school run more smoothly.  Unlike many such systems, this one was developed by Darlington staff in response to the school’s specific needs. Garrison and Vaughan discuss the importance of a framework to connect practice to theory, lest practitioners charge forward blindly, not understanding why some efforts succeed and others fail.  Darlington’s development of its own learning management system, while not planned carefully ahead of time, has grown organically from a community of inquiry comprised of IT staff, faculty, and administrators.  When faced with a choice between adopting tools created by others based on presumed needs and developing their own tools based on known needs, the Darlington staff have chosen the latter because their (probably unrecognized) framework allowed them to connect practice to theory.
As I have progressed in my own pedagogy and learned more about distance and blended learning, I have begun thinking of the tools in our system as avenues for instruction, not management alone.  As such, our system has moved me toward blended learning, which Garrison and Vaughan define as “a thoughtful fusion of face-to-face and online learning experiences” (5). Here, I will offer an overview of the system as well as reflect on ways to reap fuller benefits of distance learning through it.
In the management system, the most important features appear in the menu on the left-hand side.  The first of these is the faculty/staff home page.  This page includes links to administrative tools, forms, and information, from work order requesters to the dorm duty calendar to personal leave forms.  Of interest among these is the IT Support Request tool, which allows users to submit a request categorized by type (laptop, software, printer, instruction need, and so on), and then sends an email to the IT staff member who specializes in that area.  The IT department seeks to address and close requests quickly, and they are evaluated based on their problem resolution.  Thankfully, Darlington’s IT staff, perhaps because several of them are dedicated to education as much as to their technical work, actually does work with teachers in the way Brabazon describes as rare at best.
The next three features in the menu to the left are a group email function, a reports page, and access to student files.  The purpose of the first is obvious.  The latter two offer extensive access to data; this resource is very rich but not directly relevant to the use of the system for instruction. 
The remaining tools in the menu relate to courses.  First, the gradebook offers the same functions as would appear in many course management systems, with an important addition: a tool that allows teachers to create a submission form linked to a specific assignment.  For instance, in English 1, I might create a new assignment titled “Writer’s Memo,” then create an online submission form for it, including a due date.  When students in that class checked their assignment pages, they would see a link reading “English 1: Writer’s Memo” that would take them to the submission form.  They could type in a text box or attached a file to submit their work, which I could then access, comment on in my own text box or attached file, and assign a score, all from the same page within the gradebook. The feedback function allows the gradebook to be used as an instructional tool in addition to a performance record, since students can monitor patterns in feedback or easily refer to feedback on a previous essay as they prepare to write the next one.
As in other LMSs, the site offers forums. The current view allows users to read the entire conversation growing from a post, which might be cumbersome in very long discussion with many offshoots (a rare occurrence in most classes).  Because some teachers do not prefer this view, next year IT will offer options for viewing threads.  Forums were the first true instructional tool to be added to the Darlington system, and my first to use, as well.  In the past, my forum prompts have not sufficiently encouraged expression and interaction, essentially inviting (or commanding) students to perform. I plan to incorporate some of Scott Warnock’s suggestions to better use this tool for informal writing and feedback.  I am especially interested in his suggestions regarding progressive prompts and peer review.
The following three functions, comments, attendance, and coach class, operate primarily as ways to communicate with administrators and parents and therefore offer less than other tools in the way of instruction.
Finally, the assignments and links pages offer the most untapped potential as instructional tools.  Because most secondary classes meet daily, teachers rarely distribute a complete assignment calendar at the beginning of the term; instead, they distribute plans weekly or daily, often writing them on the white board for students to record in their own planners.  At Darlington, the online assignment page allows teachers to post daily plans and homework assignments on students’ home pages, eliminating the need for transcription and the excuses that come with it.  Once posted, the assignments roll over from year to year, allowing teachers to tweak their plans without having to retype them. Further, teachers can add links to sites on the web or files placed on a special drive in our network, a function I will discuss more below. 
Thus far, I have used the assignment page as a communication vehicle. The tool allows me to ensure that, despite my forgetfulness about in-class announcements, students know what work is expected of them every day.  I find that I sometimes write more on my assignment pages than other teachers; I give advice, remind students of an assignment’s goal, or explain complex requirements.  Communicating small goals and establishing my teaching persona, the assignment page acts as an instructional tool that reaches every student and can be adjusted quickly in response to student needs. Because students check their assignment pages regularly (unlike email), the page can be used to briefly transmit information not only about expected work, but also about rationale and even theory.  The key word here, however, is “transmit”: the assignment page is useful to make sure that students receive helpful information, but it does not act as an open line of two-way communication; students must still use email or chat for that.
The function that takes the assignment page beyond these limits as an instructional tool is the ability to link and organize resources.  Like the assignment page itself, I primarily use the link function for the administrative task of distribution, and I have done so for two reasons: if the resource is available only digitally (such as a website), and if I have failed to distribute the document in hard copy during class.  In considering my use of the link function, I notice several patterns.  First, I often use digital tools to remediate my own weaknesses, such as a poor memory and lack of time.  Second, the linking of resources to the assignment page hints at this tool’s potential as an instructional tool. 
When adding links to the assignment page, the user can (but is not required to) create custom categories into which to place them (such as readings, assignments, support websites, and so on).  These links and categories appear not only on the specific days on the assignment page, but also on the links page, with the categories as headings for groups of links. Although the links page’s performance has been spotty in the past, next year it will be revised and expanded.  Instead of growing form the assignment page, it will be a repository that the teacher can organize as desired, linking resources to specific days in the assignment page or not, as appropriate.
In a distance course in writing, which may not rely on a content-heavy text, a combination of the assignment page and the more robust links page could operate as a custom textbook creator.  For instance, I could organize my course into units, and then use those units as categories for links to documents, videos, and sites (both on the web and of my own creation), so that my resource page becomes a clickable table of contents.  Further, one link can be placed in multiple categories, creating an alternate index in addition to that table of contents.  For instance, a link to Diana Hacker’s Research and Documentation website might be categorized into “Unit 5: Documenting Sources” but also into the category “Research Resources,” making it appear twice on the resource page, as both an informational site in unit 5 and as a resource to be used on any research project. Hantula and Pawlowicz discuss the book as a technology that allowed greater distance between the instructor-author and his student-readers, but of course in most cases today, the author and the instructor often combine (or compete) to teach a course; this method of creating a custom resources page may actually return to an earlier conception of a single author-instructor.
The beauty of working with an IT department who creates our system in-house is that some of these possibilities have occurred to me, and I’ve then communicated them to IT, while others have grown from the IT staff’s own ideas, and still others, like the digital textbook idea above, have developed during conversations between the two of us.  Thus, what began as a suite of administrative tools has expanded to include many true instructional tools that respond to institutional needs and goals.  Hantula and Pawlowicz, like many others, imply that the goal of technological teaching tools is to replicate the richness of face-to-face instruction, but the varied and synergistic nature of the functions in Darlington’s system implies that the tools can create a richness whose nature is distinct from and in addition to that of face-to-face teaching.

No comments:

Post a Comment