Expression of Myself


A place for thoughts and views. My perspectives ... My eyes to your eyes. A little piece of me for everyone to see and a place for us to come together. Please stay as little or as long as you want but come back often for so many wonders of the world has yet to be discovered!


Saturday, October 11, 2014

RSS Feed and too much Feeds

The question at this point is how I organize my online reading and my point of view of RSS Feeds. I am very strategic in my online readings and I tend to have my set (book marked) online sites.

Honestly, I do not like RSS feeds and I do not like notifications. I actually have all of my notifications turned off and my phone is on silent all the time. What I do is I pick and choose sites and the information I want.




I check my emails, news information, sports information - football, ice hockey, basketball and rugby (in this order) and then I start reading journal articles. I try to limit the items and information that are pushed to me and this is not because of how busy I am with school and work but I have always set up my online items this way.

There are so much information out there and it is no longer about gathering information. However, it is more about how we manage and use these information.

Short but sweet this week.



The RAT, SAMr and the mLearning Journey

A few weeks back I ran into this blog while I was searching for mLearning theoretical framework for a special project that I am working on and found it quite helpful in identifying categorical differences between RAT and SAMR. I was looking for different substitution teaching strategies applicable to mobile learning. 





This Digital Literacy Blog was extremely helpful because it simply analyzed and compared the differences between RAT and SAMR. However, the author was a bit more partial toward RAT and enjoyed the simplicity of the RAT framework. McHugh (2014), simply stated that it gets to the point and it gets the job done. Hence, possibly the reasoning behind his Occam's Razor reference.

I must admit though, the simplest explanation sometimes tends to be the best possible solution. I must admit as well, I do like the RAT framework more than SAMR. See bellow.


R :: replacement | redundant | retrograde
A :: augmented | average | acceptable
T :: transformed | terrific | tremendous

VERSUS

Substitution  

Augmentation 

Modification 

Redefinition

Replacement, Amplification and Transformation (RAT) is an educational technology integration framework that explores the critical decision-making process pertaining to the utilization of technology in classrooms. RAT, according to Hughes, Thomas, and Scharber (2006), apprise technology and determines if (a) replaces the current means of learning without changing instructional practice and student learning, (b) amplifies instructional and learning efficiency and (c) transforms and redefines learning and teaching to a more collaborative and transformative way learning. RAT is not about replacing a particular teaching tool with an emerging technology but rather it explores the purpose of the technology system and how it is integrated in the pedagogy.


Simple and Exciting is what I always say

When adopting a technology in your lesson plan always examine the purpose and functionality of the technology system. I am a firm believer of adopting technology to assist and enhance teaching and learning. When we are spending more time learning the system instead developing and learning the objectives of the course then dump that technology system. 

Adopting and incorporating the system must be simple to use and don't forget that level of excitement when we are using the system. Once again, simple and exciting.

For more information regarding RAT please see below.

Replacement, Amplification and Transformation (RAT)

Hughes, J., Thomas, R. & Scharber, C. (2006). Assessing Technology Integration: The RAT –
Replacement, Amplification, and Transformation - Framework. In C. Crawford et al.
(Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference 2006 (pp. 1616-1620). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Friday, October 3, 2014

Hello? Is It Me You're Looking For?

Hello My Blog and Friends,

It has been ages since my last blog. If you do not remember me, my name is David L. San Jose and I am currently working on my Ph.D. in Education specializing in the use of technology in education.

I have some good news to report - My concise paper regarding Phase 1 of my study was accepted to the ascilite 2014 conference in Dunedin, New Zealand. The acilite 2014 conference is focusing on Critical Perspectives on Education Technology. Very fitting for my topic (I think) and I am extremely excited to be accepted. I will be attending my first conference this year and I will be more than happy to report my experiences. Please see below for my notification of acceptance and a quick screen shot of the paper I submitted. Actual paper will be posted during the ascilite 2014 proceedings.


My thoughts about technology

As you all know, I am a big believer of using technology with a purpose. Technologies are tools we create and unlike what Marshall McLuhan ("We shape our tools and then our tools shape us") once said these tools does not shape us. It does not shape or determine our identity, our relationships and our culture. Sometimes a reminder of this allows us to understand that we have the power to create who we are and the tools we use to create our surroundings. Remember to always "know thyself".

Technology and Education

A technology system cannot just be a useful tool. Students and educators must be satisfied in their use and likewise deliver positive learning and teaching outcomes when utilizing a system. The functionality of the system cannot be overly complex and lead learners astray  from creating productive work (Ssemugabi &de Villiers, 2010).  In essence, technology has to become invisible to users so that the attention is on achieving the intended learning purpose of the software and not the technology system (Hattie, Brown, Ward, Irving, & Keegan, 2006). Otherwise, intended goals of improved learning and teaching may be subverted by the interaction of human abilities and attitudes with the technological characteristics. 

The use of technology once again must lead us to our intended learning needs and goals. We pick and choose which technology to use and we use these technologies to help enhance our learning and ultimately, make learning fun and easy. It is time to learn, unlearn and relearn. 

Please note - Don't forget to click on the hyperlinks for more information.

Thank you and MABUHAY!
David 

The Programme Committee has reviewed your revised paper Does Technology Matter? Students’ and Teacher’s Experiences of Electronic Portfolio (E-Portfolio) Systems in Teacher Education. and accepted it as a Concise Paper for presentation at ascilite 2014



 

Monday, June 2, 2014

Analyzing eTechnology and Student-Learning Outcomes Through Students and Teachers’ Usage of ePortfolio in Higher Education

Educators and researchers are looking for new ways of developing student-learning outcomes. Thus, as new technologies continue to engulf our culture, a convergence between Information and Communication Technology (ICT) and education has been a popular solution to improving outcomes. However, it is important that any eTechnology (a) is easy to use, (b) produces a beneficial user experience technology, and (c) does not distract or prevent users from achieving intended purposes (Hattie, Brown, Ward, Irving, & Keegan, 2006). Furthermore, technology must reflect real world applications to enable meaningful learning from users (Kumar, 2010). Otherwise, intended goals of improved learning and teaching may be subverted by the interaction of human abilities and attitudes with machine characteristics. 

Within this context, teacher education is using eTechnology as a means of helping students prepare portfolios of their learning as prospective teachers. These electronic portfolios are evaluated since they serve to document achievement of the Graduating Teacher Standards and to assist in job hunting. However, research elsewhere has identified problems with the technological features of some electronic portfolio platforms (Deneen & Brown, 2013) and with the supposed formative benefits of teacher-student interaction around portfolio development (Struyven, 2012).

Hence, the deployment of an eTechnology to solve educational problems is not straightforward. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of electronic portfolio (ePortfolio) assessment systems in contributing to student-learning outcomes by taking into account students’ and teachers’ technology competencies and beliefs, alongside the technological qualities of the ePortfolio. The study will analyze the usage of ePortfolio systems in higher educational institutions, seeking empirical insights in how ePortfolios affect students and their learning outcomes. The study will provide Faculty teacher education staff a user evaluation of a sample of ePortfolio platforms that may contribute to the deployment of ePortfolios being used to meet Graduating Teacher Standards. The key consequence of the study is not just an evaluation of current technology platforms and a greater understanding of user perceptions, but rather an enhanced teaching and learning environment in which both teaching and learning is improved.

The study is planned in four phases. Phase 1 will evaluate a variety of ePortfolio technology platforms (e.g., Mahara, Wordpress, etc.) being used in the University of Auckland. Each ePortfolio technology will be evaluated with the User Information Satisfaction (UIS) framework (Bailey & Pearson, 1983) and Learning Usability Evaluation Method by collecting student user experiential feedback about each system and by directly examining the functionality of each platform. Phase 2 will examine students’ perceptions, attitudes, and experiences of ePortfolio systems, with a special attention to platforms used in the Faculty of Education. Phase 3 will examine teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and technology competencies as to incorporating ePortfolios in their curriculum. Phase 4 will explore the relationship of ePortfolio attributes with student and teacher technology attitudes and competencies as predictors of the quality of work in ePortfolios.