GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
GoogleDoc Tools For WASC Submitted to Dr. Cynthia Sistek-Chandler By Christian Nguyen In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Science in Educational and Instructional Technology National University 10/2010
1
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
The Capstone Project entitled GoogleDoc Tools For WASC by Christian Nguyen is approved by: Signature_______________________________________________ Date___________ Dr. Cynthia Sistek-Chandler, Capstone Faculty Advisor, School of Media and Communication
We certify that this Capstone Project by Christian Nguyen entitled GoogleDoc Tools For WASC, in our opinion, is satisfactory in the scope and quality as Masters of Science project for the degree of Master of Science in Educational and Instructional Technology in the School of Media and Communication, at National University. Signature_______________________________________________ Date___________ Cynthia Sistek-Chandler, Ed. D., EDT Lead Faculty, Department Chair Signature_______________________________________________ Date___________ Karla Berry, M.F.A., Dean, School of Media and Communication
2
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
Copyright © 2010 by Christian Nguyen All Rights Reserved
3
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
4
Table of Contents Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................. 4 ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................... 6 Chapter One: Project Introduction................................................................................................ 7
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................... 7 Background of Study.................................................................................................................................... 8 Statement of Instruction Training Problem.......................................................................................... 9 The Purpose................................................................................................................................................. 10 Delimitations............................................................................................................................................... 11 Definitions.................................................................................................................................................... 11 Summary....................................................................................................................................................... 12
CHAPTER TWO: Review of Literature......................................................................................... 13
Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 13 Adult-Education Learning Theory......................................................................................................... 14 Technology Trends and Impact on Higher Education..................................................................... 15 Web 2.0 Technology and The Change Distance Learning...............................................................16 Similar Courses........................................................................................................................................... 17 Summary....................................................................................................................................................... 18
Chapter 3: Project Design................................................................................................................ 19
Learning Theory......................................................................................................................................... 19 Project Design.............................................................................................................................................. 20 Front-End Analysis of Organizational & Audience Needs.................................................................................20 Course Goals and Target Audience........................................................................................................ 21 Educational Requirement........................................................................................................................ 21 Chunking of Learning Events & Scheduling........................................................................................ 22 Visual Design................................................................................................................................................ 23 Course Evaluations..................................................................................................................................... 24 Ethical Considerations.............................................................................................................................. 25 Summary....................................................................................................................................................... 25
Chapter 4: Project Evaluation and Discussion.........................................................................27
Introduction................................................................................................................................................. 27 Project Evaluation...................................................................................................................................... 27 Exploratory Test ........................................................................................................................................ 28 Heuristic Test............................................................................................................................................... 28 The Instructional Evaluation ................................................................................................................. 29 Discussion .................................................................................................................................................... 31 Limitations.................................................................................................................................................... 32
Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions........................................................................................ 33
Conclusions.................................................................................................................................................. 33 Implications for Teaching........................................................................................................................ 34 Implications for Further Research........................................................................................................ 35
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
5
REFERENCES........................................................................................................................................ 37 APPENDICES........................................................................................................................................ 39
Appendix A: Home Page............................................................................................................................ 39 Appendix B: GoogleDoc Overview. YouTube Video.......................................................................... 40 Appendix C: Visual Storyboard for Course Outline.......................................................................... 41 Appendix D: Week 1- GoogleDocs Spreadsheet to establish WASC Focus Groups..................42 Appendix E: Text Storyboard (1 of 7) .................................................................................................. 43 Course Goal........................................................................................................................................................................... 52 Appendix G: Testing Instructions.......................................................................................................... 52 Appendix H: Usability Evaluation Plan Interview Form ................................................................ 54 (1 OF 2).......................................................................................................................................................... 54 Appendix J: Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 Learning Survey.......................................................................... 58 Appendix K: Instructional Evaluation Survey ................................................................................... 59
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
6
ABSTRACT GoogleDocs For WASC was a four-week web-based Moodle course training designed for administrators and teachers to utilize GoogleDoc’s open-source Web 2.0 to write a WASC report. The course employed the adult-learning theory and the social constructivist leaning theory combined with 21st century skills to efficiently and effectively collaborate in crafting a WASC report in a school’s learning community so data, digital artifacts, and contents for a WASC report accurately reflects a school instructional operations and programs in self-study process that proves the structure of the school foster student learning for every student. This course addressed the gap-performance of school administrators and teachers. A rapid instruction design was developed to fill this gap. A review of literature, project design reflection, evaluations by the adult audience, and project conclusion measured efficient and effectiveness for usability and instruction goals and objectives.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
7
Chapter One: Project Introduction Introduction The purpose for the GoogleDocs For WASC online Moodle course was designed to train administrators and teachers to utilize GoogleDocs open-source tools to efficiently and effectively write, collect data, plan, and collectively collaborate, in a web-environment based in writing a Western-Association of Schools of Colleges (WASC) accreditation report for the California Department of Education. Multimedia and Web 2.0 technologies used to facilitate instruction and to develop the learning activities. This four-week asynchronous training course designed for administrators and teachers to be completed one-year prior to the WASC self-study process with the intent of sharing the body of knowledge and skills learned and gained to other members of the Focus Group team. Developing and writing a WASC report for accreditation is an ongoing continual collaborative effort by the school learning community, therefore, sufficient collection of data and evidence, and feedback from all members of the Learning Community is needed to develop and write a comprehensive report that record and document findings that represent how a school’s academic programs and operations fosters learning for every student (WASC, n.d., para). One challenge of today and in past times with training administrators and faculty was to facilitate in small groups, at a self-paced, and employ low-or-cost-efficient multimedia resources to engage multiple learning styles. The GoogleDocs For WASC online training course was designed to accommodate the adult-learners in Professional Learning Communities. The online training course had been developed to accommodate busy, inflexible schedules, and stimulate various learning styles with multimedia audiovisual to stimulate thing and provide an environment for active learning.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
8
Although the course was designed for the professional adult-learners a self self-paced, asynchronous, and in a web-space collaborative environment: there were however, a lack of face-to-face between peer-to-peer and student-teacher interactions that imposed as a barrier for simulate to a traditional classroom training environment, which as one of the variables for content assessments, content standards, and leaner attitudes. Because the learning activities called on the administrators and teachers to actively-participate, observable evaluations of learners’ engagement couldn’t be measured. What could be measured was thoroughness of completed tasks, for which the learners were held accountable in the four learning modules. A performance gap to utilize an innovative Web 2.0 tool, GoogleDocs, was ideal to meet the gap of knowledge and skills and to ease the school-wide daunting tasks of compiling data, evidence, finings, and collectively collaborate to write a report for the WASC committee. This web-based training course offered a possible solution fill-in this gap. Based on Malcom Knowles (1984) Orientation Learning assumptions, adults are motivated to learn if the performance tasks that are being taught will be used in life’s situations (Atherton, 2010, para). The GoogleDocs For WASC Moodle was course aimed to train administrators and teachers to narrow the performance-gap of utilizing the GoogleDocs open-source applications to involve all stakeholders in the learning community and to efficiently and effectively craft the most comprehensive WASC report to the WASC committee.
Background of Study Onsite WASC conferences provided training to structure school organization to foster learning and to gather findings to cover five indicators and criterion for a WASC accreditation
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC
9
exist; however, a course designed with an emphasis on utilizing Google-Docs tools to collaborate in writing a WASC report have not been published or released on the Internet. The Academic Resource Conferences in 2008 located in San Diego, Long Beach in 2009; and Hollywood 2010 trained school leaders to structure and design pedagogy, organization, and assessments focused on the changing needs of student learning. The workshops modules didn’t cover strategies or techniques for online collaboration in drafting and writing a WASC report. The GoogleDoc For WASC was made available as a web-based training so administrators and teachers can logon at any remote location with a computer with high speed Internet access. The process of coordinating administrators and teachers into one room and training them on how to use an open-source media tool for efficient and effective online collaboration and in multiple sessions is a daunting task that require lots of money, energy, and effort. This course allowed for administrators and teachers to stream and watch video lectures, actively participate with other participants using a Course Management System (CMS). The intent was an online environment to discuss and problem-solve web-collaboration share issues/concerns, engage in dialogues within professional learning communities, and actively reflect on the learning and training experience to reduce the high cost for training, the enormous facility, and the lack of equipment for the training.
Statement of Instruction Training Problem
There are usually no training a group of teachers and administrators face-to-face required a spacious facility, time, and money. Schools must have a spacious facility with enough computer stations for all attendees; computer equipment (e.g., LCD, overhead projector); and money to
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 10 cover the cost for the trainer and substitutes. A web-based course was the most adequate solution to educate administrators and teachers, and to also alleviate the lack physical space for training and reduce the financial cost of an on-the-ground training. Participant attitudes could have imposed an issue. Participants who were unfamiliar with online learning or haven’t adapted to technological changes in the web environment may resist this training method. This course was designed as an asynchronous learning situation to socially construct a body of knowledge and skills to employ GoogleDoc to collaborate and was highly dependent on self-assessments and peer-assessments to measure learning outcomes. The most authentic types of assessments are ones that could be measured and observed. Authentic-assessments could only be measured when the course participants are able to transfer the knowledge and skills of using GoogleDoc tools on-the-job at their school site.
The Purpose The purpose of this training was to employ the Malcom Knowles adult-learning theory and the social constructivist leaning theory combined with 21st Century Skills to train administrators and teachers to use GoogleDoc tools to efficiently and effectively in collaborating in webenvironment so carefully craft a WASC report so data, evidence, and finings, and report content could sufficiently and accurately reflect how the school operations and programs foster learning for every student.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 11 Delimitations
The four-week training was aimed at training a group of adult-participants to use a free open-source media tool for web collaboration, and rather covered what to gather an how to cover exact data and fins to meet the criterions for each section of the WASC report. Any author could use either a pen or a word processor to write, but true craftsmanship and the value of its content lie within the intellectual thoughts and ideas that go on the paper. This required participants to bring prior knowledge of their school’s operational systems and academic instructions in order take part in the learning activities. In order for a web-based training on collaboration to be effective, course participants had to complete their assigned tasks. Failure to compete the set of tasks by deadlines would have resulted in a poor mock report write-up. It was expected that the course participants complete their assigned task to combined individual works to team product. Consequences for incomplete works weren’t addressed, so standards and quality of learning outcomes could have been addressed
Definitions •
ADDIE- is the acronym that describes the 5 phases of instructional design. The five phases are: (a) analysis, (b) design, (c) development, (d) implementation and, (e) evaluation
•
Andragogy (a.k.a) andragogy. (Since most of research for the review of literature for this project turned up as “andragogy” when typed in the keyword “androgogy”. Andragogy was word choice used to described Knowles adult-learning theory. Andragogy is an adult-learning theory developed by an influential professor Malcom
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 12 Knowles in 1984. The four assumptions of andragogy are: (a) adult need reasons why they need to learn something, (b) adults learning through experimentation, (c) adults perceive learning as problem- solving, and (d) the learning can be applied to life’s situations •
Course Management System (CMS- a software that manages course content information other over the Internet or Intranet to facilitate training or learning.
•
CRAP is an acronym stands for the four-of-six web principles for visual design developed by William and Tollett (2006). The principles in CRAP are: contrast, repetition, alignment, and proximity.
•
Direct-Instruction- A teaching theory based on Zig Engelmann’s theory of instruction. It’s teacher-directed with a structured with specific steps to achieve clearly defined learning outcomes. (TeAchnology, 2010)
•
Instructional Design is a systematic approach to design a training to meet the needs of the trainee and the organization, with the aim of being efficient and effective as possible. (Piskurich, 2006)
Summary The design and development for this Moodle course underwent front-end analysis and research to avoid a recreation of similar product. Organizational needs were defined and an audience profile was analyzed to help make appropriate selections to deliver instruction to fillthe-gap achievement. The GoogleDocs For WASC alpha-prototype training course used the ADDIE model to design, develop, test, and evaluate for usability and instructional efficiency and effectiveness.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 13 CHAPTER TWO: Review of Literature
Introduction A literature review was completed to examine effective teaching methodologies for the adult-learners and to explore how innovative technology influence changes in education and in collaboration to support an web-based training course that was aimed to teach a Professional Learning Community to utilize GoogleDocs Web 2.0 open-source applications to collectively collaborate in writing an accreditation report. A study of adult-leaning assumptions by Macolm Knowles (1984) was important to choose appropriate multimedia to deliver and facilitate instructions to meet the goals and objectives for the target audience of administrators and teachers. This literature investigates and compares: (a) pedagogy versus andragogy; (b) technology influences on adult-learners at colleges and universities and; (c) how new technology media contributes to a dynamic web-environment for collective collaboration. Academic and training courses are designed to meet learners’ achievement gaps, whether it’s knowledge or skills, or both; therefore, knowing and understanding the target audience is key to successful Instructional Design (Pirskurich, 2006,p.77). The GoogleDocs For WASC webbased training course was initially designed with employing Direct-Instruction teaching pedagogical approach, developed by two Oregon State Professors, Siegfried Engelmann and Dr.Wesley Becker. After further research into adult-learner by Malcom Knowles (1984), the androgogy teaching methodology deemed as more appropriate for the target audience. A comparison between Direct-Instruction (DI) pedagogy versus andragogy showed distinctive differences in learning theories and audiences. The National Institute for Direct Instruction, in Oregon (n.d.), described DI pedagogical approach as effective teaching for
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 14 children that are structured, systematic, delivered in small chunks, and explicit. Pedagogy is the art and science of teaching; it’s the craft of design skills and practice in teaching, and the shared body of knowledge passed on from teacher to student. (General Teaching Councils For Teaching, 2010, para.) In 2010, Roger Hiemstra, Professor and Chair at Syracuse University, reiterated “…pedagogy is derived from the Greek word ‘paid’ meaning child and ‘aogos’ meaning leading (Moving From Pedagogy, n.d., para). In his online article, he described pedagogy is commonly known as teacher-directed instruction. Since the GoogleDocs For WASC online training course was created for a Professional Learning Community of high schools teachers and administrators, adult-education had to be researched and examined in order to successfully plan, design, develop, and employ the most suited instructional methodology and emerging multimedia resources to best facilitate the learning experience for adult-learners.
Adult-Education Learning Theory
Andragogy is a theory that identifies the assumptions for effective teaching for adultlearners developed by influential professor Maclom Knowles in 1984. In Knowles’ book, Modern Practice, he advocated, adult-learning is the process of self-directed instruction that is guided through self-inquiry; with resources of the teacher, peers, and instructional materials, and with the learning experience being not imposed upon the student (Knowles, in Carson, 1989). Instructional System Design consultant, Don Clark, clarified that andragogy is based on the principles that instruction is “designed and managed as a process for facilitating acquisition of content by the learners (2004). The guiding principles behind andragogy are: •
Adults are involved in the planning and evaluation of instruction
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 15 •
The experience (e.g., errors, mistakes) is the basis learning
•
Subjects taught relevant to their job or life
•
Problem-centered, rather than subject-centered (Clark, 2004)
ID requires thorough analysis through an investigative understanding of instructional methodologies that are effective for the target audience to yield best learning results. An online learning course designed to fill-in a gap performance of using multimedia for web-space collaboration for administrators and teacher called for the adult-teaching approach and technology trends that impacts the learning this type of audience.
Technology Trends and Impact on Higher Education
A review of technology trends in higher education, gave us a border look at how innovative new technologies have made an impact for learning and teaching. In 2007, Cisco Internet Business Solutions Group pointed out that college students between the ages 18-26 enter school bring with them new technologies and expectations that the infrastructure school campus supports the latest technologies. Web 2.0 and social networking tools such as wikis, blogs, Flikr, Facebook, etc. are opening up new levels for content delivery. In 2008, the University of Melbourne, in Australia, was one top the universities in the country, that served 44,500 students. It believes that using technology ‘extended-teaching boundary’ by being able to transfer content information and increase in community involvement. Linda O’Brian, the university’s vice-principle, affirmed the university’s participation in digitalizing rare audio recordings have drawn many attention from the field of anthropology and medicine (The Economist, 2008, p.12).
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 16 Open University of Catalonia’s in Spain, consisted of 45,000 students in 45 countries. In its existence for 14 years, UOC leads in educational technology initiatives and innovations. According to Llorenc Leverde, UOC’s vice-rector of technology, UOC have moved from recording videos and posting them online to creating an active and interactive environment to allow the students to be in control of their academic program. UOC’s virtual desktop allows for the learners to navigate by using with tabs for features such for planning, scheduling, communicating to teachers and classmate, and accessing digital library resources or testing tools for assessments (The Economist, 2008).
Web 2.0 Technology and The Change Distance Learning
According to Berners-Lee (1999), the Internet has changed since it emerged from the CERN laboratories fifteen years ago. The World-Wide-Web have evolved into are more interactive experience for the global community. A comparison of Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 features provided a helpful insight as the changes have occurred. The table on the next page illustrates differences between Web 1.0 from Web 2.0.
Table1: Comparisons of Web 1.0 & Web. 2.0 Web 1.0 Web 2.0 Editing and changes is one-way Editing and changes is two-way Content development is authoritative Content development is democratic User participation is passive User participation is more active Static Dynamic Edits, modifications, and authorship is Edits, modifications, and authorship is closed collaborative Source: Vovici Corporation
Both versions are able to support audio, text files, graphics, photos, animations, and
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 17 videos learning objects; however, obvious differences between the two is the features for Web 2.0 provides multiple authorships to content, socially network, and dynamically collaborative exchange of knowledge and ideas. In April of 2007, the Transportation and Safety Administration (a.k.a. TSA) launched IdeaFactory an Intranet site to share information and ideas with its 43,000 front-line employees to gather suggestions to improve security features. In 2006, the Central Intelligence Agency developed and launched Intellpedia, which allowed employees with appropriate clearance to post comments and ideas for analysts and managers. Intellpedia rapidly increased speed and interaction among the intelligence community. The Los Angeles County Fire Department use Twitter as a powerful communication tool for “situational awareness” to gather and send information or reports about fire locations, car accidents, and overcrowded nightclubs. Twitter has become a critical tool for both speed and rapid two-way communication. Following Hurricane Katrina, 600,000 people used PeopleFinder to locate missing loved ones (Linden, 2010, para.). Web 2.0 are powerful open-source tools for rapid communication and a resource for instant real-time information transfers for learning and for training.
Similar Courses There were no online courses developed to train administrators and teachers so a research of published online WASC accreditation reports using Web 2.0 tool had to be explored and examined employ the latest and most recent Web 2.0 tools to collaborate and draft a WASC report. The following is list of high schools with an online publication of a WASC report. •
Marina High School, 298 Patton Pkwy, Marina, CA- had a hyperlink to the full WASC report in MicrsoftWord document
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 18 •
Mc Lane High School, Fresno, CA- had a full report in a PDF with webpage on the school’s website dedicated to the WASC self-study process.
•
Piedmont High School, Piedmont, CA- had a hyperlink to the full WASC report in PDF format
•
Santa Rosa High School, Santa Rosa, CA- had separate hyperlinks to each chapters of the WASC report
•
Paradise High School, Paradise, CA- had individual HTML webpages for each chapter of the report.
The one source that provided the most inspiration for the development of the GoogleDocs For WASC web-based training course was: West Hills High School, San Diego, CA. West Hills High School employed a diverse set of Web 2.0 tools was used as a product for an online collaboration resource tools and also a product for online publication of the WASC report. The site could be found at: •
http://sites.google.com/site/westhillshighschool/Home
Summary This review of literature provided into andragogy provided: the instructional theory to teach the adult-learner; helped in the selection of new technology trends and multimedia tools for the most effective training. A research of similar courses made it evident the online training for a web-space collaboration in writing a WASC doesn’t exist, and also gathered sources that will be used for the training. West Hills High, in San Diego had the most diverse Web 2.0 tools for collaboration and publication and resource for the training.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 19 Chapter 3: Project Design Learning Theory The GoogleDoc For WASC training course integrates Knowles’ (1984) andragogy learning theory, Mayer’s (1998) cognitive theory of multimedia for learning, and Vygotsky (1932) social constructivism to facilitate a web-based training for administrators and teachers to utilize powerful innovative Web 2.0 tools for online collaboration on developing and crafting the most accurate report, not only by Focus Group leaders, but also by members of the school learning community. Digital multimedia served as the primary resources for the participants in this course. Designed as an asynchronous and self-paced course, participants are able to access and complete each four learning modules at their convenience with a one-week time frame to complete lecture review and problem-based projects. Individual tasks were assigned and to completed the individual learner and combined with other course team members’ tasks to create both are rich, social-constructivist learning experience with a dynamic web-based collaborative environment.
The five principles that were kept in mind during design and development were to chunck learning objectives to align with the learning theories. The four-week training modules were designed with video lectures, interactive lessons, and wiki/forum-discussions so: (a) the learning could be self-directed, (b) the individual learners are contributors for some of the resources and content, (c) individual learner tasks and responsibilities led to the overall team product, and (d) the course instruction was shift from subject-centeredness to problem-centeredness (Knowles, in Deis and Thompson, 2004, para). Participants were assigned learning activities to be completed
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 20 by ending of each week. Web 2.0 learning objects embedded into lectures and activities stimulated visual and auditory processing. While video lectures called on the adult-participants to hone in on cognitive processing. There was a shift from learning knowledge-based content to interactive performance tasks for meta-cognition. Social collaboration took place when learners were asked to jointly merge individual assigned performance-based tasks and activities using GoogleDoc tools, covered in each week and mesh them with other course participates to cohesively construct and assess learning outcomes at the end weekly learning module. The review of literature on the anadagogy played a pivotal role in the design and development phases to guided teaching and learning for the training. A shift from pedagogy to andragogy was necessary to structure content delivery for the adult-audience.
Project Design Front-End Analysis of Organizational & Audience Needs Effective instructional design begins with defining the organizational and target audience needs (Lee & Owens, 2004, pp.15-18). The course developer and designer noticed a huge gapperformance and inefficiency in utilizing emerging technologies to share, dissimilate, record, document face-to-face focus discussion, and collaborate in the WASC self-study process in the Sonora High School learning community. Hundreds of multiple-pages of hardcopies of the Sonora’s CST data, previous WASC reports, criterion guidelines, and agendas were painstaking Xeroxed copied and distributed to focus group leaders an dissimilated to stakeholders before each WASC focus group meetings. This method of distributing WASC data and information was time consuming, costly, and inefficient because stakeholders either misplaced or forgot to bring them to succeeding focus meetings. Dialogues shared in each focus group meetings was limited
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 21 the group, unless the focus leaders typed and sent out a massive e-mail to the learning community that reported on the dialogues that took place during meetings. This ultimately led to inadequate collection data, evidence, and digital artifacts, and inefficiently involved the whole learning community. With the gap-defined a web-based training had to develop to eases this daunting process.
Course Goals and Target Audience This project was designed as a four-week asynchronous e-training Moodle course for administrators and teachers to fill-in the gap performance of utilize GoogleDoc tools to help ease the planning and writing processes for writing the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) report. The an short title of this web-based training course was narrowed down to “GoogleDoc Tools For WASC�, which included four modules that covered how to employ GoogleDoc open-source tools for planning, writing, sharing, and reporting of data, digital artifacts, evidence, and relevant contents for crafting a WASC report for all stakeholders in the Sonora Learning Community. Writing a WASC report for accreditation is an ongoing continual collaborative effort by the school community; therefore, sufficient collection of data and evidence, and feedback from all members of the Learning Community must be comprehensively compiled and gathered to best represent how the schools’ programs and operations fosters learning for every student (WASC n.d.). GoogleDoc Tools For WASC is a distance-training course designed primarily for high school administrators and teachers prior to the first of year of writing a WASC Report. Educational Requirement The current and common methods used for writing WASC reports are typewritten reports
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 22 done word processers (e.g., Microsoft Word, Microsoft Works) with printed draft versions distributed to stakeholders in the learning community. Hardcopies of each phase of the writing process was needed to share and provide just-in-time input and feedback from members of focus groups and subject-area department; however, once modifications and editing changes were made, there was usually a significant downtime to distribute and share edited drafts or written dialogues from WASC focus and home group meetings. Only a handful of high school faculty members know about Web2.0, GoogleDoc open-source tool. Moreover, administrators and teachers had limited or no training to fully implemented GoolgeDoc tools for writing a WASC report. Due to the lengthily time gap that it took to share and distribute data, evidence, and discussions from focus group and department meetings to members of the Learning Community, the GoogleDoc Tools For WASC web-based training course was designed to teach and train administrators and teachers to close the lengthily time gap to: (a) share and distribute information, (b) collectively and effectively coordinate and plan focus group/department meetings dates and agendas, and (c) use a web-space for a dynamic collaboration in writing the report.
Chunking of Learning Events & Scheduling The Moodle course contained a course overview with four learning modules that included a video lecture, interactive lessons, and wiki/forum discussions covering each GoogleDoc tool and how it could be used in writing, planning, or collecting data or information. Adult-learners need to why this course is relevant to life’s situations; thefore, the Home page consisted of a text with a welcome blurb, a tagline, and a Web 2.0 VOKI avatar, arranged symmetrically across the Home page, to capture the participants’ attention. (See Appendix A) The course logo, tagline,
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 23 and welcome blurb had to be static objects to draw the center- of-focus to the VOKI player to get a verbal reinforcement of course goals and objectives. In additional to the visual and text assets on the Home, the last sentence from the avatar gave direct verbal instructions where to navigate next. The Voki last sentence ends with “Now, click on Googledocs overview”. Additionally, there were links to the Instructor Introduction page and an image file of the Visual Storyboard to provide the course overview to illustrate what will be covered in the four-week training sessions. (See Appendix B & C) The four week-learning modules were systematically sequenced to avoid audience intimidation. Week 1 started the collaboration process by having the participants create a Gmail account. In this week, the facilitator would compile and start a group-share for the course team-members to actively engage participants in establishing focus group leaders using GoogleDocs Spreadsheet. See screen captures for weeks 3-4 for visual layout in Appendix D. A text storyboard was created to provide a more structure format to build and scaffold knowledge and skill to the final collaboration activity in week four. (Appendix E)
Visual Design The CRAP visual design principles by William and Tollett (2006) were implemented in the design phase to create an easy navigation web-interface. Contrast of colors and sizes were considered for visual clarity to avoid less clutter. The color selection had to be limited to the National University Moodle shell’s earth tone shades for the Home page with supporting graphic assets that were analogous or compliments of earth tone shades of browns. Text sizes were methodically chosen for visual hierarchy. The JPEG image for the “Introduction” was inserted and placed at the middle the Home page and was subordinate-focal point to Web 2.0 Voki audio introduction. Once the participants complete Voki Introduction they’d to switch form the
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 24 auditory processing mode to a reading mode to read the instructional contents and why the course designed for the target audience. Repetition was key in organizing and presenting the instructional materials. Instructions were presented with lectures using professionally created YouTube videos, followed by an active participation using the GooledDocs open-source application covered particular week. Closures for each week’s unit ended with a discussion in a wiki/forum on the topic posted by course facilitator. This sequence of learning events were presented in similar repetitive and methodical pattern to program the learners to understand the order that needed to be follow for each module. Alignment was crucial for separating instructional materials for the CMS assets from the Moodle assets. The main course overview was left-justified, and the hyperlinks below which navigated to lectures, lessons, and discussions were aligned with an extra one inch margin to better identify the leaning activities and components to be completed for the week. Almost all of the embedded text instructions for the learners each Moodle web page were left-aligned with a text-wrap so the paragraphs or sentences could be resized to fit within the browser windows for easy readability, if users wanted to resize the browser window. Proximity was an instrumental principle for designing a functional navigation and to also circumvent visual clutter. One of Krug’s (2006) three laws of usability was used for proximity. All valuable contents for each lesson were no more than three clicks away. Lectures, lessons, and links to GoogleDoc files were nested within each web page was just one click away. This allow for users click on the backward button on the web browser to go back to the Home page.
Course Evaluations There three types of evaluations with three different testing instruments used to test
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 25 evaluation the instructions and user interface. Both evaluation types will be covered in Chapter 4. A reflection of the evaluation process will also be covered. This course ws design for the Professional Learning Community, so each participant had to complete a accountable for the learning outcomes. Participants had to perform a self-assessment based on a 10 questions available with GoogleDoc Forms in Week 4.
Ethical Considerations It’s easy to publish intellectual property on the World Wide Web, and it’s also easy to download and reuse digital objects. When digital objects are reused, whether for educational or for leisure; its out of common courteously, respect, and Best Practice to acknowledge the author or creator. When the actual launch of the Google For WASC course must include authors and creators of all Web 2.0 text, audio, graphics, and videos. The any embedded learning materials will require permission from the original author or creator before its published. This was an alpha-test of the Moodle course; therefore, all contents are only to be used for the Master of Science in Educational and Instructional program at National of University.
Summary Instructional Design begins with a gap-performance and organizational needs. When a need analysis is addressed and the gap-achievements are pinpointed, goals and objectives are
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 26 defined. The instructional designer then determines the most efficient and effective ways to fill the achievement gap. If training is required, then the designer must decide on the most accessible and the most cost-efficient training that will yield the highest level of return. The ADDIE model and learning theories must be factored into the design and development equation in order to create a structured learning environment and experiences for the audience to achieve meaningful and effective learning outcomes.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 27 Chapter 4: Project Evaluation and Discussion Introduction Evaluations were an important process to measure the overall success of the instructional content and web-interface usability. There were three evaluations types administered with three different testing instruments. Sonora’s High School Self-Study WASC Planning Coordinator performed the Instructional Evaluation to measure the course goals and objectives, and three teachers performed the usability tests. Evaluations are important for two reasons: (a) because others may want know whether the design was effective, and (b) because the designer wants to know. The key to a good evaluation is to know what to evaluate (Pirskurich, 2006, p.268). This chapter covered the analysis of data results from the all the evaluators and discussions from the results.
Project Evaluation The Usability Evaluation (UE) and the Instructional Evaluation (UE) both played a vital role in testing web functionality and measured how the content materials aligned with the course goals and objectives. Three UE tests were administered to three teachers; one was a Focus Group leader and the two others were members of two different WASC focus groups. The subject-matter expert (SME) was the Self-Study Planning Coordinator and the Dean of Academics at Sonora. All evaluators were hand-delivered the Letter of Invitation, for one of the two tests, and Login Instructions. (See Appendices F and G) The evaluators were given a oneweek advanced to complete the test with a two-day window for testing the course product.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 28 Exploratory Test The International Organization for Standardization (2004) defines Usability as “…the extent to which the product can be used by the specified users to achieve goals with effectiveness, efficiency, and specified context of use”. Five attributes of Nieslon’s (2005) for usability testing are: (a) error-tolerant, (b) provide reasonable feedback, (c) makes objectives obvious, (d) efficient and, (e) helps users recover form errors. The (ET) was performed by the JROTC teacher and instructor, Mr. Fritz Saalmann. According to Bach (2003), he described ET as to a way “… simultaneously learn, test the design, and test execution. The results from the evaluation received marks between 4s and 5s without suggestions to improve the design interface, but appraisal for good visual presentations. See Appendix G and H for the testing instrument. He was pleased an impressed by the Voki and the embedded Web 2.0 GoogleDocs slide presentations of the school’s ESLRs and School’s Achievements overview. Mr. Saalmann will later be identified as UE1 on the Usability Data Analysis Table to be covered later.
Heuristic Test Nielson’s (2005) heuristic evaluation require three or more set of testers, due to time constraints of finding an extra tester, only two testers performed the heuristic test. The testing instruments used for the heuristic evaluation can be located in Appendices G, H, and I.. Focus Group Leader, Ms. Sue Singh, evaluated the course and scored 5s all across the board and commented “...Excellent effort! We applaud Christian’s dedication”. No suggestions for usability improvement were given. Mr. Fernando Perez evaluated and rated each area with either a 4 or 5. He noted a few errors with the course activities sentence structure, the guides were WASC informative, and had clear website structure. Mrs. Sue Singh will be identified as UE2
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 29 and Mr. Fernando Perez UE3 on the Usability Data Analysis Table below. The UE testers evaluated the course using a scale score of 1-5 with “Strongly Agree” as 5, “Agree” as 4, “NA” as 3, “Disagree” as 2, and “Strong Disagree as 1. Table 2. Usability Data Analysis Table Question
UE1
UE2
UE3
Is the homepage is attractive? The overall site is attractive? Are the site's graphics are pleasing? The site has a good balance of graphics versus text. Are the colors used throughout the site are attractive? Does the homepage's content make you want to explore the site further? It is easy to find my way around the site? Can you get to information quickly? It is easy to remember where to find things? It is clear how screen elements (e.g., pop-ups, scrolling lists, menu options, etc.) work? Is the information is easy to read? Is the information relevant to your WASC report writing needs? The site is designed with the in administrators and teachers in mind? The site has a clear purpose Total
4 4 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5
4 5 5 4 4
5
5
4
5 4 4 4
5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4
5 4
5 5
5 5
5
5
5
5 64/70
5 70/70
5 62/70
The Instructional Evaluation Sonora High School’s Dean of Academics Services and WASC Self-Study Planning Coordinator, Mrs. Magdalena Villalba conducted the Instructional Evaluation (IE). Mrs. Magdalena served as the WASC subject-matter expert: therefore, she was the most qualified candidate for the IE. See Appendices G, J, and K for the testing instruments. Her assessment and comments were instrumental to measure how well the instructional components aligned with the course goals and objectives. She completed the Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 Pre-test Learning
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 30 Survey prior to the evaluation and another post-test using the Evaluation Survey at the end of testing session. Her comments were analyzed and actively reflected upon. She stated the learning materials needed more step-by-step written documents for learners who don’t learn well from videos. She also stressed that her responses were biases because she’s learns more efficiently in a traditional learning environment. The tables below are data results from her responses: Table 3. Kirkpatrick’s Learning Pre-test Learning Survey I am able to perform the following: a. b. c. d.
Documents Presentations Spreadsheets Forms
Upload WASC Reports created in Microsoft Word to GoogleDoc Documents. Create and edit the WASC Report in GoogleDoc Document. Import existing graphs and charts from MS PowerPoint to GoogleDoc Presentations. Import photos and images to the GoogleDoc Presentations Use GoogleDoc Forms to create online surveys or questionnaires for data gathering. Preview respondents’ results from GoogleDoc Forms. Add a hyperlink to a text or an image to interlink GoogleDoc files. Add a hyperlink to a text or an image to interlink GoogleDoc files. Send out e-mail invitations to preview or review GoogleDoc files. I can engage and collaborate in an online writing process of a WASC Report TOTAL
YES
NO
X
X X X X X X X X X X 3
8
The data above demonstrated a gap-performance in the knowledge and skills to utilize GoogleDoc tools; and the “Yes” marked in the three areas was because the Instructional Designer for the course had already have trained the use of GoogleDoc Documents for the
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 31 WASC Chapter 2 write-up for a writing session one week prior to the GoogleDocs For WASC Instructional Evaluation. Analysis of the post-test provided an in-depth view and helped measured content and instructional effectiveness. The next table shows a broader view of how the course content was aligned with the goals and objectives. Table 4. Instructional Design Survey I am able to perform the following:
Excellent
Overall, how would you rate the design of the learning activities in this course? Clearly stated learning objectives The amount of time allowed for this presentation. Supplemental learning materials provided for participates. The instructional materials used by the facilitator. The order in which the learning activities were presented. Learning activity for GoogleDoc Documents? Learning activity for GoogleDoc Presentations? Learning activity for GoogleDoc Spreadsheets? Learning activity for GoogleDoc Forms? Learning activity for GoogleDoc collaboration share features?
X
TOTAL
Good
Avg.
Below Avg.
Poor
0
0
0
X X X X X X X X X X 9
2
If we let “Excellent” equal to 5, “Good” equal to 4, “Average” equal to 3, “Below Average equal to 3, and “Poor” equal to 1 it would be more appropriate to tally evaluation the data 53 out of 55 for numerical consistency with the usability evaluations.
Discussion This was an alpha-test product so the timeframe given for the evaluations for both the UE and IE testers were insufficient to for the evaluations process, so accuracy and truth for data collection for the Usability and Instructional evaluation processes was put at a disadvantage. Since continual revisions and editing changes were being made to the Moodle course, it limited
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 32 the testers to a two-day window to complete the test so they can evaluate time was inadequate to go over all learning events, learning objects, and multimedia assets.
Limitations The limitations to the evaluation were the timeframe for the evaluation process and ongoing changes that had to be made to the Moodle course during the evaluation week. Since ongoing changes were made after the evaluation process, the finished alpha-prototype could’ve had better results. Additionally, the course designer rapport and relationship with the testers may also could’ve yield bias responses.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 33 Chapter 5: Summary and Conclusions Conclusions The GoogleDocs For WASC Moodle course followed the ADDIE model of Instructional Design to create a training course to fill-in the gap-performance of using the a powerful Web 2.0 to collaborative tool in writing a WASC report. The Professional Learning Community of adultlearners used carefully designed survey questions and evaluated alpha-prototype for efficiency and effectiveness in areas of usability and instructions. The data from the evaluations indicated areas to imrpove word-structure digital text instructions and also suggested to include downloadable written documents to foster the linguistic learners to read and cognitive process information. A review of literature on andragogy, technology trends, and distance learning guided the design and development process of the course to assure that the Moodle course was not a recreation of another product with similar instructional goals. The andragogy learning assumptions developed my Malcom Knowles provided the most appropriate teaching methodology for the targeted audience of adult-learners. An investigative research on technology trends at the highereducation level opened up new ideas that helped incorporate the latest multimedia to not only facilitate instruction, but also as tools for a self-paced, active-participation, and dynamic webenvironment collaborative learning experience. The research of distance education gave multiple perspective look at advantages and disadvantages of delivering instruction using the Internet, and suggestions to improve instructional efficacy and content standards.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 34
Implications for Teaching This course was designed to meet the needs of administrators’ and teachers’ busy schedules, but unfavorable attitudes toward online/distance education or technology use could impact participants’ psychological and emotional drive to complete the course. Online education has gained drastic momentum in recent years. According to Sloan Consortium Survey of Online Learning collected in 2007, in 2500 colleges and universities, over 39.4 million students were enrolled in a least one online courses. Since it’s a current trend in education, it’s anodyne to state that high school administrators and educators, whom of which are from the Baby Boomer Generation and Generation X, have had limited exposure to an online learning experience because they’ve been accustomed to the traditional, face-to-face classroom. Consequently, these potential pool of future course participants, could resist this type of training because the have yet to adapted to continual change in technology use for education, while others remain optimistic of its limitless potential. It’s the pool administrator and teacher trainees who resist technological change, who are the most challenging group of individuals to encourage to take part on an online training course. As the SME evaluator for the GoogleDocs For WASC web-based training course have stated, “I learn more effectively in a traditional classroom”. This type of mindset has been programmed by years of face-to-face, traditional, learning environment. Ultimately, in order for the adult-learners to engage and adapt to the web-learning environment, they must go through a culture of technological assimilation that Digital Natives have been born and raised into for a web-based training course to have the upmost meaningful impact.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 35
Implications for Further Research
The Web 2.0 learning objects, especially the professionally created GoogleDoc YouTube videos and Voki assets, allowed for a rich multimedia web- training experience. Disabling access the YoutTube and automatic installation of JAVA script to run the Voki would be similar to cutting audio and video broadcasting the training process. Quite a few school districts restrict school employees from visiting YouTube or have completely blocked the site, and have disabled automatic installation of supporting freeware to run Web 2.0 applications. This may result in inadequate accessibility to the instructional audio and videos that are instrumental for content delivery. An in-depth evaluation of district guidelines must be considered to maximize digital learning object use. School district’s technology regulations must be reviewed and analyzed before selecting the multimedia for design and development for a web-based training course. It’s time inefficient to design and develop a training course with dynamic Web 2.0 components if the trainees are unable to access them. There are millions of YouTube videos created for learning. If a school district blocks the YouTube site, other options must be considered to facilitate instruction. A possible solution is to download the videos, with the consent of the creator, and then upload the video to a sever that accessible is at the school site. This could be a cumbersome task, as the designer would have to wait for the creator’s approval and deal with the lengthy time to upload the videos. For example- the Fullerton Joint Union High School District have blocked access to YouTube, but allows the faculty and staff to access TeacherTube. This process also must take into account intellectual property Fair Use Laws and Best Practice so ethics are not
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 36 violated. Interoperability could pose another variable that must be plugged into the equation when designing, developing, and implementing a web-based training course. Audiovisual media stimulates multiple senses and offer tools for learning that overcome limitations of textbooks and lectures (Januszewski & Molenda, 2008, p.27) Districts with outdated and limited access to technology equipment provided limited access to innovative technologies for professional development training. Optimal use of audio and video media in Moodle, require a Broadband or DSL Internet connection. Schools that run on T1 lines rather than T2 lines may experience an extreme lag-time when streaming audio or visual media resources. This could lead to online web-based training dissatisfaction. A thorough front-end analysis must be performed not only to get a broad perspective view on the human users, but also on the constraints of accessibility to strategically employ functional multimedia to stimulate and engage the adult-learners.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 37 REFERENCES Athernton, J.S. (2010) Learning and Teaching; Knowles' andragogy: an angle on adult learning [On-line] UK: Retrieved http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/knowlesa.htm on October 26, 2001 Atherton, J. (2003). Knowles' Andragogy. Retrieved from Bach, J. (2003). What is usability testing? And how it differs from scripted testing. Retrieved from http://www.stickyminds.com/sitewide.asp? Function=edetail&ObjectType=COL&ObjectId=2255October 31, 2010 Berners-Lee, T. (1999). Weaving the Web: The past, present and future of the world wide web by its Inventor. London: Orion Business Books. Clark, D. R. (2004), Instructional System Design Concept Map. Retrieved from http://nwlink.com/~donclark/hrd/ahold/isd.html October 24, 2010 Deis, M.; Thompson, A. M (2004). “Andragogy for the adult learners in high education.” Retrieved October 27, 2010. From http://www.sbaer.uca.edu/research/allied/2004/financialStudies/pdf/33.pdf General Teaching Councils For Teaching (2010) Retrieved from http://www.gtce.org.uk/teachers/pedagogy/whatisped0610/ October 22, 2010 Hiemstra, R., & Sisco, B. (1990). Moving From Pedagogy To Andragogy. Retrieved from http://www-distance.syr.edu/andraggy.html October 24, 2010 International Organization for Standardization, (2004). Usability evaluations. Retrieved from http://www.itl.nist.gov/iad/IADpapers/2004/Usability Evaluation_rev1.pdf on October 31, 2010 Januszewski, A. & Molenda M., (2008). Educational technology. A definition with commentary. New York, NY. Taylor & Francis Group, L.L.C Lee, W. W. & Owens, D. L. (2004). Multimedia-based instructional design. 2nd Edition. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer Linden, R. (2010). Using Web 2.0 to support collaboration. Retrieved fromhttp://www.dmu.ac.uk/~jamesa/learning/knowlesa.htm on October 18, 2010 Mayer, R. E.; R. Moreno (1998). “A Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning: Implications for Design Principles”. Retrieved from http://www.unm.edu/~moreno/PDFS/chi.pdf, on
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 38 October 25, 2010
Nielsen, J. (2003). Usability 101: Introduction to Usability. Retrieved October 31, 2010, from http://www.useit.com/alertbox/20030825.html. Nielson, J. (2005). Then usability heuristic. Retrieved from http://www.useit.com/papers/heuristic/heuristic_list.html , on October 31, 2010 Piskurich, G. (2006). Rapid Instructional Design (2 ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer. Sloan-C Consortium, (n.d.) Online surveys. Retrieved from http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/index.asp. October 31, 2010 Teachnology, (2000). What is Direct Instruction? Retrieved from http://www.teachnology.com/teachers/methods/models/direct/ on November 3, 2010. Tracey, W. D. (2007). The 21st Century learning environment: Next-generation strategies for High Education. Retrieved from http://ftp.ucv.ve/Documentos/Evento_Cisco/The_21st_Century_Learning_Environment_pa per.pdf on October 28, 2010, WASC Accrediting Commission. (n.d). About WASC accreditation: and why accreditation. Retrieved From http://www.acswasc.org/about_why.htm October 26, 2010 Williams, R., & Tollett, J. (2006). The Non-Designer’s Web Book (3rd ed.). Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 39 APPENDICES Appendix A: Home Page
Appendix B: GoogleDoc Overview. YouTube Video
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 40 Appendix B: GoogleDoc Overview. YouTube Video
Appendix C: Visual Storyboard for Course Outline
Appendix D: Week 1- GoogleDocs Spreadsheet to establish WASC Focus Groups
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 41 Appendix C: Visual Storyboard for Course Outline
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 42
Appendix D: Week 1- GoogleDocs Spreadsheet to establish WASC Focus Groups
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 43
Appendix E: Text Storyboard (1 of 7) Course Title: Moodle GoogleDoc Tools for WASC Overall Course Objectives: 1. Identify the functions of GoogleDoc’s open-source applications: Documents, Presentations, Spreadsheets, and Forms 2. Demonstrate the ability to upload written reports from a Microsoft Word files to GoogleDoc Documents 3. Demonstrate the ability to upload Microsoft’s PowerPoint files to GoogleDoc Presentations, and create dynamic graphs to illustrate school demographic, standardize tests results, and digital artifacts that supports student learning 4. Use GoogleDoc Forms to create online surveys and questionnaires to collect data the school’s programs and operations that foster student learning 5. Utilize GoogleDoc Spreadsheets to plan and coordinate meeting dates and agendas, and develop logistics for a WASC Report 6. Engage in dialogue, collaborate, and communicate with the Learning Community using GoogleDoc tools Assessments and evaluations will be based on each unit’s assignments, activities, and BLOG discussions submitted to the instructor. Similar to collaborating with the Learning Community in creating and developing a WASC Report, course participants will collaborate with other participants in this course to share issues, concerns, and challenges that pertains to utilizing GoogleDoc tools for writing a WASC Report during the four-week training period. Upon completing this course, participants with demonstrate mastery of utilizing GoogleDoc’s opensource tools for WASC planning, writing, sharing, digital artifacts, gather data and evidence, and report each developing stages the WASC Report to the Learning Community. Target Audience: 1. WASC Self-Study Coordinator(s), Administrators, and Teachers who serve as Leaders or Facilitators in each Focus Group
2. School faculty and staff member who wishes to utilize 21 st Century technology tools for the 21st Century Learning environments
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 44
Appendix E (2 of 7): 3. Administrators and teachers who would like fill the time gap in-between writing, distribution, and sharing of dialogues and discussion in Focus Groups and Home Groups (a.k.a Professional Learning Communities) to the school community 4. Participants may have basic-to-advance computer skills. Prerequisite skills to participate in this course includes: creating an e-mail account, navigating web browsers, and downloading and uploading document or image files. Teaching Style: The GoogleDoc Tools For WASC is designed as a self-paced, asynchronous, course for the extremely busy administrators and teachers to complete one year prior to writing the Self-Study WASC Report. This course utilizes the Moodle Learning Management System to deliver instruction, to create learning activities, and to share dialogues among the instructor-toparticipants or participants-to-participants. Digital learning objects such as: videos, audio, and other Web 2.0 open-source tools will be used to accommodate all the visual, auditory, linguistic, and kinesthetic learning modalities. Course Materials: Participants must access to the following: 1. A computer with at least 512RAM and at least 40Gigabytes of hard drive. 2. A high speed Internet connection. (Broadband or DSL) 3. Computer must be equipped with the Microsoft Office Suite: Word, PowperPoint, and Excel
Syllabus & Schedule: Each week will include an overview, learning objectives and activities, and a BLOG. (Lecture #1)
Course Overview and Objectives:
o This is a four week course to teach and practice using GoogleDoc’s open-source tools o Describe tools and connect similarities to Microsoft Office Suite applications to GoogleDoc open-source office tools o Introduction and explanation of the need for GoogleDoc tools for writing a WASC Report Why use GoolgeDoc open-source office to write, share, and collaborate?  Save time from having to make paper draft copies of each stage for each Focus Group
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 45
Quickly dissimilate written Focus Group and Home Group dialogues and discussions. Fill-in the time gap of distributing, sharing, and communicating information from WASC team members to members of the Learning Community or vice-versa.
Appendix E (3 of 7):
Efficiently and effectively plan, coordinate, and communicate the WASC Self-Study Planning Process meeting times and agendas
Ease the process of collective collaboration and collection of digital artifacts
Week #1: Access and plan Focus Group meetings and agendas with GoogleDoc Spreadsheet A. Overview and Objectives: During this week, participants will a create a G-mail account, access a fictitious GoogleDoc Spreadsheet with WASC Focus meeting times and agendas, and create one spreadsheet file to share with a Focus Group of the agenda for the first WASC meeting. (Lecture #2)
B. Lectures, Lessons, and Learning Activities: (Lesson #1) Create G-mail account to access GoogleDoc’s open-source office and send the address to the instructor. The instructor will compile an e-mail list to share with all class participants.
(Lesson #2) Access the course’s GoogleDoc Spreadsheet to obtain the content for the
Focus Group meeting times and agendas and create the first Focus Group meeting date and agenda.
(Lesson #3A) Using the contents available and the GoogleDoc’s Spreadsheet, the
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 46 participants will create a new spreadsheet for their first Focus Group meeting. An example will be provided.
Appendix E (4 of 7): (Lesson #3B) Participants will list their roles and responsibilities below the agenda;
save it as first (Name of your group) Focus Group Meeting; and send a copy of the link to the instructor.
C. BLOG Discussion: Unit Closure (Discussion #1) Participants
will use the BLOG tool in Moodle to write about an area concern or issue a user may face when using the open-source tool Spreadsheet and what could be done to overcome the area concern or issue.
Week #2: Share data, information, and adjust share features to collaborate with GoogleDoc’s Document
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 47
A. Overview and Objectives: Send a Focus Group or a Home Group report of dialogues, discussions, and data to stakeholders and Learning Community is one of the most important components of the collaboration. Participants will be able to demonstrate send a report to a specific audience to view or edit, or both. This daunting task will be covered this week.
B. Lectures, Lessons, and Learning Activities: (Lecture #3) Identify who the WASC team members are, and who’ll have editing and
viewing privileges to each report
» Who is the school’s Self-Study Coordinator? » Who is the Assistant-Principal in charge of the WASC Self-Study Planning Process? » Who are the Focus Group Leaders/Facilitators? (This title may vary from school-to-school.)
(Lesson #4) Using
GoogleDoc Documents, the participants will copy and paste the following tiles below and type the names of the WASC team members who responsible for each role: o Self-Study Coordinator: o Administrator/Assistant-Principal in charge of the Planning Process: o Leaders/Facilitators for each of the following Focus Groups:
Curriculum
Culture
Instruction
Assessments
Leadership
Appendix E (5 of 7):
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 48
Type two fictitious student names at the bottom, save the file as [WASC Team Members], and e-mail the GoogleDoc Document’s link to the instructor. (Lecture #4) (Podcast) Instructor will provide suggestions to monitor and maintain the
integrity of Focus Group reports. Self-Study Coordinators and Assistant-Principals should have all editing access to WASC Report writing content should be classified as the Main Information Distributors (MID’s) and Focus Group Leaders/Facilitators could be classified as the Intermediate Information Distributors (IID’s). The IDD’s will have editing access to their designated Focus Group Report with view privileges to all Focus Group reports. Explain the color-coding technique to identify authors and editors.
(Lecture # 5) (Vimeo Vodcast) Video presentation on GoogleDoc share features
o Change and modify owner, edit, and view options o Notify editors and viewers via e-mail about report updates or modifications o Send report as a Microsoft file, GoogleDoc open-source document, or a PDF file
(Lesson #5) Participants will modify the share feature to the GoogleDoc Document’s
WASC Team Members file, so the Self-Study Coordinator and Assistant-Principal have full viewing and editing privileges, and make adjustments so all other WASC Focus Group Leaders and have only viewing privileges.
C. BLOG Discussion: (Unit Closure)
(Discussion #2) All
participants who are Focus Group Leaders or Facilitators will write and post a BLOG explaining how they’ll plan on reporting Focus Group and Home Group dialogues and discussions using GoogleDoc Documents.
Week #3: Create a California State Test (CST) graphic slide presentation; and collect digital artifacts and evidence using GoogleDoc Presentation and Form A. Overview and Objectives:
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 49 Participants will use GoogleDoc’s Presentation to import a pie or graphic chart representing a school’s sub-group that demonstrates an area that needs growth and
Appendix E (6 of 7): create an online form to gather evidence, using GoogleDoc Form to demonstrate a need for growth. B. Lectures, Lessons, and Learning Activities:
(Lecture #6)(Vodcast) Lecture on when and why to use GoogleDoc Presentation.
Emphasize on operability and accessibility.
(Lesson # 6) Participants will use the GoogleDoc Presentation and a pre-existing CST
graphic chart, provided by the instructor, to create a two-slide presentation for a Focus Group to analyze a school’s sub-group data. One slide will present a graphic chart and a second slide will present questions that’ll inquiry areas of growth from members of a Focus Group to be used later in the school year. Participants will name, save, and send a link of the Presentation to all participants in the course to view.
(Lecture #7)(Vodcast) Lecture on when and why to use GoogleDoc Form. Emphasize on
operability and accessibility.
(Lesson # 7) Participants will use GoogleDoc Form to create an online survey to collect
and gather data or evidence in the areas that require department or school-wide growth. The survey will contain a minimum of six to seven questions that inquires measureable and observable data from the Learning Community.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 50 C. BLOG Discussion: (Unit Closure) (Discussion #3) All participants will actively engage in a BLOG discussion on how they
will distribute their online survey to the WASC stakeholders. Participate will be as to discuss other methods to collect data and evidence will also be asked.
Week #4: Evaluate and certify participants’ merit of knowledge and skills for operating and using GoogleDoc open-source tools to write their assigned section of a WASC Report A. Overview and Objectives: Participants will respond to a course questionnaire to assess their learning results for each GoogleDoc open-source office application. Participants will generate a report on the course strengths and weakness.
B. Lectures, Lessons, and Learning Activities: (Lecture #8) Lecture on importance of technology, evaluations, and assessments
Appendix E (7 of 7): o Stress the importance of how administrators and educators need know technology knowledge and skills for the 21 st Century to enhance pedagogy
o Decrease the time gap to write and collect report on data or evidence and to effectively and efficiently communicate, share, and distribute to the Learning Community o Why schools evaluations and assessments are important to the learning
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 51 process. o Look at areas in this course that were effective and ineffective
All participants will use an online questionnaire to conduct a selfassessment of learning outcomes. Participants with respond to questions to test their knowledge and skills for each GoogleDoc tool, and reflect on areas that require further training. (Lesson #8)
(Lesson #9) All participants will use a Google Doc’s Document to generate a brief two
paragraph written report on areas that were effective and ineffective in this. Participants will type the name of their Focus Group at the top to identify the group from which they belong.
All Main Information Distributors (MID’s) will use the Google Doc‘s Document to gather all reports from each Focus Group Leaders/ Facilitators and put together a single report to distribute to all course participants. An option lesson will be taught for MID’s who wishes to add a table content into the report. (Lesson #9B) (Vodcast Demonstration)
C. BLOG Discussion: (Unit Closure) Write BLOG post on how this course could be improved for future participants.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 52
Appendix F: Letter of Invitation for Instructional Evaluation/ Usability Test Dear [Tester’s name here], I am cordially inviting you to participate in an Instructional Evaluation Test for a prototype GoogleDoc Tools For WASC online course I have created for my capstone project for a Master of Science in Educational and Instructional Technology degree at National University. The purpose of this Instructional Evaluation Test is to evaluate what works well and what needs to be improved before the course is released to the targeted audience of administrators and teachers. As a tester for this course, your role will be to perform the test as outlined in the “Assessment Test – Tester Instructions” which is located behind this letter. I will provide further instructions on the day of the test. Course Goal The goals for the course is to train administrators and teachers to gain the knowledge and skills needed to utilize GoogleDoc web-based tools to collectively write, distribute, share, and distribute data and evidence for a WASC report. Audience The audiences for this course are high school faculty and administrators. Most administrators and teachers have little or no knowledge and skills of using and accessing an easy-to-use open source tools such as GoogleDoc tools to create and develop a WASC report. This course will be offered online an asynchronous “as needed basis” to provide instruction on how to use various GoogleDoc tools to write, share, collect, and collaborate in a web-environment for the WASC self-study process. The training course and instructional materials are online and will be hosted on the National University’s School of Media and Communication Moodle server and available at any computer with a DSL or Broadband Internet connection. Test Schedule The schedule for the Instructional Evaluation Test will start [ENTER DATE] and it could be performed at any location where there’s a computer with DSL or Broadband Internet connection. I will send you an e-mail link via district e-mail one day prior to the evaluation test date. It should only take approximately one hour for you to perform the test. Your time will be very much appreciated. My sincerest regards, Christian Nguyen
Appendix G: Testing Instructions
Testing Login Instructions
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 53 1. Go to Internet Explorer or Firefox. 2.
Type in the web address: http://www.somconline.com/LMS/
3. Login the username: sonoratester
4. Type in the password: welcome
5. Click on: EDT693-695 August 2010 (Chandler)
6. Begin the evaluation. The main page should look like this: 7. Click on: GoogleDocs For WASC course
8. Begin the evaluation. The main page should look like this:
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 54 Appendix H: Usability Evaluation Plan Interview Form (1 OF 2) Consultant (User) Name: ____________________________________ Date: ___________________________________________________ Site URL: http://www.somconline.com/LMS/course/view.php?id=624 Time
Task Description
Comments/Concerns/Notes
Start: End:
(Describe the usability task to review here.) (Ex. Access the Home page of the URL.
Experience with the introduction page of each module:
Total:
_________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
How many times the users asked for help: _________________________________________________________
Areas where the users needed help: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
Development errors found: _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
Comments from users _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 55
Appendix H (2 OF 2)
Usability Evaluation Questionnaire The questionnaire will give you a series of statements about the GoogleDoc For WASC Moodle course. I would like you to rate your agreement with each statement.
Question
Strongly Agree
Is the homepage is attractive? The overall site is attractive? Are the site's graphics are pleasing? The site has a good balance of graphics versus text. Are the colors used throughout the site are attractive? Does the homepage's content make you want to explore the site further? It is easy to find my way around the site? Can you get to information quickly? It is easy to remember where to find things? It is clear how screen elements (e.g., pop-ups, scrolling lists, menu options, etc.) work? Is the information is easy to read? Is the information relevant to your WASC report writing needs? The site is designed with the in administrators and teachers in mind? The site has a clear purpose
Additional Comments:
Tester’s Name: __________________________________
Agree
NA
Disagree Strongly Disagree
5 5 5 5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
5 5 5 5
4 4 4 4
3 3 3 3
2 2 2 2
1 1 1 1
5 5
4 4
3 3
2 2
1 1
5
4
3
2
1
5
4
3
2
1
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 56
Appendix I: Testing Script (1 of 2): TESTING SCRIPT Please read the following carefully and review the key features that will be covered during this test. Things to think about during the test evaluation: Visual design look and appearance: a. Inviting b. Easy to read c. Design consistency d. Demonstrate sufficient use of graphics and Web 2.0 tools e. Organize without clutter f. Free from spelling and grammar errors Content: a. Content is presented in a logical and clear order b. Learning objects are relevant to the topic Navigation a. Simple an easy to follow The next page is a list of tasks we will go over. Task 1 Review: Introduction • Access the Home page by entering the URL. Directions are on the Instruction Sheet • Review the text on the page • Review all graphics Comments – please provide feedback as you go along, but if you need to compose your thoughts you can use the space below. Task 2 –Task #2: Week 1 • Access the Week 1 Learning Module Click the link for Week1. Directions are on the Instruction Sheet Appendix I (2 of 2) • •
Review the text on the page Review all graphics
Comments – please provide feedback as you go along, but if you need to compose your thoughts
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 57 you can use the space below. Task 3 –Review: Week 2 • Access the Week 2 Learning Module Click the link for Week2. Directions are on the Instruction Sheet • Review the text on the page • Review all graphics Comments – please provide feedback as you go along, but if you need to compose your thoughts you can use the space below. Task 4 –Review: Week 3 • Access the Week 3 Learning Module Click the link for Week3. Directions are on the Instruction Sheet • Review the text on the page • Review all graphics Comments – please provide feedback as you go along, but if you need to compose your thoughts you can use the space below. Task 5 –Review: Week 4 • Access the Week 4 Learning Module Click the link for Week4. Directions are on the Instruction Sheet • Review the text on the page • Review all graphics Comments – please provide feedback as we go along, but if you need to compose your thoughts you can use the space below.
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 58
Appendix J: Kirkpatrick’s Level 2 Learning Survey Participants Assessment Test: Pre-Test Learning Survey
MOODLE COURSE: GoogleDoc Tools For WASC Report Writing Kirkpatrick’s Level 2: Learning Survey
Evaluator: _______________________
Title: __________________________
To improve the design of this course, complete this survey prior to the first week of instruction and immediately after the fourth week of instruction. 2.
I am able to explain the functions for the following GoogleDoc open-source applications: (Check only the ones that are familiar to you.) a. Documents [ ] b. Presentations [ ] c. Spreadsheets [ ] d. Forms [ ]
Check the following skills that are you able or unable to perform in GoogleDoc. 3.
Upload WASC Reports created in Microsoft Word to GoogleDoc Documents.
[ ] yes [ ] no
4.
Create and edit the WASC Report in GoogleDoc Document.
5.
Import existing graphs and charts from MS PowerPoint to GoogleDoc Presentations. [ ] yes [ ] no
6.
Import photos and images to the GoogleDoc Presentations
[ ] yes [ ] no
7.
Create a new data spreadsheet using GoogleDoc Spreadsheets
[ ] yes [ ] no
8.
Modify names of spreadsheets within a single GoogleDoc Spreadsheet worksheet.
[ ] yes [ ] no
9.
Use GoogleDoc Forms to create online surveys or questionnaires for data gathering. [ ] yes [ ] no
[ ] yes [ ] no
10. Preview respondents’ results from GoogleDoc Forms.
[ ] yes [ ] no
11. Add a hyperlink to a text or an image to interlink GoogleDoc files.
[ ] yes [ ] no
12. Send out e-mail invitations to preview or review GoogleDoc files.
[ ] yes [ ] no
13. I can engage and collaborate in an online writing process of a WASC Report
[ ] yes [ ] no
Comments:
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 59 Appendix K: Instructional Evaluation Survey For Subject-Matter Experts
MOODLE COURSE: GoogleDoc Tools For WASC Report Writing Instructional Design Evaluation Survey Evaluator’s Name:________________________
Title_____________________
Directions: Please rate each of the following according to their effectiveness in helping the participants learn. Please place an X in the box to indicate your level of response. Below Excellent Good Average Average Poor
1. Overall, how would you rate the design of the learning activities in this course? How effective were the following: 2. Clearly stated learning objectives 3. The amount of time allowed for this presentation. 4. Supplemental learning materials provided for participates. 5. The instructional materials used by the facilitator. 6. The order in which the learning activities were presented. 7. Learning activity for GoogleDoc Documents? 8. Learning activity for GoogleDoc Presentations? 9. Learning activity for GoogleDoc Spreadsheets? 10. Learning activity for GoogleDoc Forms? 11. Learning activity for GoogleDoc collaboration share features? 12. Multimedia supported multiple
Excellent
Good
Average
Below Average
Poor
GOOGLEDOC TOOLS FOR WASC 60 learning styles/modalities? What did you like best about the course instruction? Identify ways this lesson could be more effective.
Comments: