Category: Collaboration

miriam klous
1-1-1, Assessment, Collaboration, Faculty Technology Institute, Google Apps, Innovative Instruction, Pedagogy, TLT, Video

PollEverywhere and Google Moderator to Increase Student Engagement

Mendi Benigni

This week’s guest blogger is Miriam Klous in Health and Human Performance.

In May 2013 I attended the Faculty Technology Institute (FTI) training. We learned about new technologies that could be useful in a classroom setting, research or service. In my classes, I have been trying to increase the interaction with the students and particularly between students. Through the FTI I learned new iPad applications that could help me increase this interaction. One of the applications that was very helpful is ‘PollEverywhere’ and in another project I have been combining Google Moderator and video creation apps.

Many times in my classes when I ask questions, the same students answer. Of course there are several ways of dealing with this, but I found ’PollEverywhere’ to be an effective tool to influence this. Basically, I create questions online with the app ‘PollEverywhere’ and provide them with multiple answers (true-false and open-ended questions can also be created). The students have to text or email a number representing the answer they pick to a (phone) number. You are able to follow the voting directly on screen, and it can be anonymous.  For me it is a great way to see if students have difficulty with a question/content. If everybody answers the question correctly, I know I can move on with other content. If the answer to a question is very diverse, additional explanation of the topic may be necessary. Besides, the student can see that he/she is on the right track or, if not, that he/she is not the only one choosing that answer (while staying anonymous). When discussing the question and the topic after the vote, I perceive more interaction with the students. It seems like students trust asking follow-up questions now that they know they are not the only one that picked a certain answer. The questions can be created very easily and quickly and could be done in class. I prefer to prepare the questions ahead of time and login to ‘PollEverywhere’ to provide them to the students.

In addition to ‘PollEverywhere’, I also wanted to develop a project that makes students work together outside class time. Previously I had students writing research papers/labs together, but I was looking for a project where I could implement sophisticated technology. Therefore, in my EXSC 433 ‘Research Design and Analysis’ course I had students work together on a video project with the topic ‘How are we all consumers (users) of research?’. Students at an undergraduate level seem to have difficulty understanding why learning about research is important/exciting.  However, research is all around us, it is a part of our daily life. My goal was to make students more aware of research in our daily life by letting them make a video on this topic. Most students really enjoyed the assignment and I believe they received a better understanding of how research is integrated in society and it will be part of their life even if they don’t have a research job. In the FTI I learned about making videos and editing. This experience in FTI made me comfortable enough to implement this in my class, knowing I could help the students when it was necessary.  Students first received feedback on their storyboard before they started creating the video. In this project I also implemented the Google Moderator app. I wanted students to be involved in the development of the rubric. The students could make suggestions on aspects of (creating) the video that they believed were essential for a good video and thereby required for successfully fulfilling the assignment. Therefore, I created a rubric and placed it on Google Moderator. Students could log on to the Google Moderator and vote on the items if they believed were important aspect of (creating) the video. They could also reformulate items or add items and other students could vote again on those items. I assigned class time for students to spend 5-10 to do this, to make sure they knew how to vote or add items/comments. I received great feedback on time restrictions for the video and suggestions to reformulate certain items. Based on the feedback I created the final rubric. This strategy helped to have the students be aware of the aspects they would be assessed on and also to have them agree on the assessment of their assignment.

I see the benefit of the FTI training. The interaction between students in my class and myself definitely improved. Of course there were some issues along the way with students not doing their part, but this would probably also have been the case in more traditional group work. I definitely will keep on using those apps, and hope to implement other applications that I learned during the FTI training.

TLT logo
Collaboration, Innovative Instruction, instructional technology, Pedagogy, Research, Round Table Discussion, Share, TLT

Polling and Poll Everywhere Faculty Roundtable Discussion Recap

Mendi Benigni

At TLT’s latest Faculty Roundtable Discussion, held on Monday, February 24th, faculty discussed their use of polling, in particular Poll Everywhere, into their teaching to increase student engagement and assess understanding.   Poll Everywhere is an online polling and quizzing app that works like an audience response system (clicker) but using the student’s cell phones, computers, and mobile devices.  A university-wide license for Poll Everywhere is available to all CofC faculty, staff and students.  If you are interested in trying Poll Everywhere after watching the Roundtable recap contact your Instructional Technologist.  We’d like to thank Sarah LeBlanc (Communication), Ryan Milner (Communication), Cynthia Hall (Geology), and Brooke Van Horn (Chemistry) for giving their time and expertise to this conversation.

 



Loading the player …



		


			
		
	






			

			
							
		

	
	

		1-1-1, Collaboration, Faculty Technology Institute, Google, Google Apps, TLT
Faculty Guest Post: Using Google Apps for Collaboration
	


	

							

			 Chris Meshanko		
		
		

			
Our guest blogger is Jessica Smith, Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication.  Jessica attended the Summer 2013 FTI.


Think of any movie that features scenes of the college classroom.  Hollywood portrayals typically include the archetypal professor, wearing glasses and chalk on the sleeve, standing before a theatre-style hall, lecturing from a podium.  When I first began teaching, I had visions of Robin Williams, in Dead Poets Society, serenading his students with lessons about love and life.


These Hollywood fantasies were quickly crushed my first semester teaching.  Students slept, read newspapers, worked on homework, and gazed out the window.  Now, they text their friends and surf the Web on their laptops.  Despite my frustration over their lack of engagement, I was determined to craft lectures that would rouse my students to declare “Captain, my captain” while standing on their desks.


I didn’t realize until after that first semester that my steadfast commitment to becoming a “sage on the stage” was actually preventing me from inspiring and motivating my students.  I have since dedicated myself to learning about innovative methods for engaging students, including the latest education technology tools.  One such tool is Google Apps for Education, a suite of web-based applications.


Since the College has a site license, many students and faculty use this free resource for individual academic pursuits.  But I believe Google Apps was especially designed for use in the classroom, allowing students and faculty to collaborate on projects, activities, and assignments.  This semester, I have made a concerted effort to use Google Apps more frequently and creatively in my classes.


In this post, I’ll address how I use Google Apps for various forms of collaboration, including:


    

  1. Workshopping and peer editing
    2. 

  2. Collaborative writing and peer instruction
    3. 

  3. Brainstorming and crowdsourcing
    4. 



I teach in the Communication Department, so my students complete numerous writing assignments throughout the semester.  One of the most important phases in the writing process is revising and Google Docs is ideal for workshopping and peer editing.  Students compose their writing assignments in Google Docs (or upload their document to their Drive) and share it with their classmates and me.  I ask students to focus on two or three specific tasks (such as reviewing APA format or critiquing thesis statements).  To teach students how to effectively edit, hold them accountable, and assign participation points, I track my students’ comments on their classmates’ documents.  Kaitlin Woodlief, one of our TLT gurus, taught me how to comment in Google Docs: Students select the text they’d like to comment on then go to Insert > Comment > type their feedback.  The comment will be saved with the student’s name and date/time.  This allows me to keep track of students’ comments so I can ensure they are truly doing their best to help each other improve their writing. 


After workshopping with their classmates, I then have students edit and revise their papers independently.  I have them follow the same commenting procedure and ask them to make notes about their revisions (e.g., explaining why they did or did not accept a classmates’ suggestion).  This not only helps students think more critically about the evolution of their writing, but also helps me evaluate their revision skills.


Google Docs is also fantastic for collaborating during class on low-stakes writing assignments, which prepare them for their larger papers.  For example, I have pairs of students compose “summarize and respond” paragraphs together.  I ask them to bring laptops or tablets to class so they can work simultaneously on the same document (TLT Tutorial: http://youtu.be/xLN7hTlzrtc).  For students who don’t have access to a laptop or forget theirs, I bring my own devices for them to use.  This type of collaboration presents students with a useful challenge—learning to write together.  I’ve also witnessed many instances of “peer instruction” as one student teaches another about a concept or technique.   To read more about collaborative writing, visit: http://wac.colostate.edu/intro/pop2l.cfm.


Finally, Google Moderator provides yet another opportunity for collaborating (TLT Tutorial: https://blogs.charleston.edu/tlttutorials/2013/04/24/google-moderator). This is a crowdsourcing app that allows users to submit questions or ideas, vote on those submissions, and rank them by order of popularity.  When I teach argumentation, students submit resolutions they would like to debate, vote on their favorites, and watch the most popular resolutions rise to the top.  We then choose the resolution that received the most votes as the one we debate in class.  This allows students to brainstorm topics then pick the ones they actually are interested in researching and debating.


Since quashing my delusions of grandeur during my first semester teaching, I realized professors are no longer the center of the higher education universe.  Google allows students to fact-check lectures with just a few keystrokes.  They can crowdsource notes and help each other with projects using social media.  Massive open online courses like Kahn Academy and Coursera allow students to learn from some of the brightest minds in the world.  Therefore, professors must adapt their teaching styles from “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side.”  One way to accomplish this is to incorporate more collaboration into the classroom and Google Apps provide tools that make it simple and meaningful.

		


			
		
	






			

			
				CellyNewLogoTransparent2			
		

	
	

		1-1-1, Collaboration, Faculty Showcase, Faculty Technology Institute, Innovative Instruction, instructional technology, Mobile, Productivity
Faculty Guest Post: Paul Collins Talks about Students Helping Students with Celly
	


	

							

			 Amy Ostrom		
		
		

			
Our guest poster this week is Paul Collins, Assistant Professor in the Department of Theatre and Dance.  Paul attended the Spring 2013 FTI.




As part of the Scenery and Lighting Design and Production concentration in the Theatre major, students are required to take a course in which they learn Computer Aided Drafting and Design. The software on which the students learn is brand new to nearly all of them, and very complicated. We spend time in class going over the necessary skills and tools, but the students are then expected to complete exercises in the computer lab as homework. Because of the complexity of the software and the lack of experience that the students have with it, struggles are very real and frequent, and I spend a lot of time with individual students working through the process.


While I work closely with each of the students, I have also noticed in previous semesters that the students do a great job helping each other. Sometimes while I am working with an individual in class, another student has a question about something, but by the time I get to this student, a neighbor has helped to solve the problem. I encourage the students to work on their homework in the lab together so that they can take advantage of what I call ‘the collective wisdom of the class’.


During the Faculty Technology Institute (in Spring 2013), I was introduced to a tool that has allowed me to expand this ‘collective wisdom’ beyond the walls of the classroom. Celly (simply http://cel.ly/ in your web browser) is a kind of online discussion board, similar to other discussion boards that you may be familiar with (including the tool available in OAKS). However, the advantage that Celly has over traditional discussion boards is the ability for the user to receive and send messages in a number of different ways: via email, mobile app, online web portal or text. The text feature is what makes this tool truly powerful- by connecting the discussion to a cell phone, posts to the board are more immediately available both to the students and to me. A question can be put up on the Celly, and be responded to almost immediately by whoever gets to it first. Here is an example of one of the conversations (note… read the conversation from bottom to top)


 




 


In this situation, a student asked for clarification about a handout. Within a minute, another student joined the conversation to try to help, as well as giving advice on how to create the shape in question. I also was available to help at this time, and checked the handout so that I could answer the question. Within 8 minutes, I had the problem figured out, and posted a clarification to OAKS to clear things up for the whole class. This is only one example of what is a relatively easy question, but would likely have caused this student to either be unable to continue, or at the very least have to go back and make significant revisions. If the message had gone to a discussion board or email, the response time would not have been nearly as quick as the text message allowed.


There are a few things that I’d like to mention, though: First, this is a small class. With a larger group of active users, receiving the messages via text could quickly become overwhelming (especially if you do not have an unlimited texting plan). There is an online web portal which updates immediately, and you can receive the messages via email or mobile device, but this also brings you back to the response time issue that traditional discussion boards have. Each individual user (student and faculty alike) has the ability to set notification preferences to whatever combination of methods desired.


Celly also allows me to contact the class via text message without sending from my personal phone (and thus sharing my cell number with the whole class). I will send out a ‘how is the homework going?’ reminder message around Friday or so, as the homework is due on Monday. However, if this ‘reminder’ feature is the primary reason for using a service such as this, Remind101 is probably a more appropriate tool (as this service allows ‘outgoing’ text messages from teacher to student, but not vice versa).


Celly also has a ‘private messaging’ feature that allows users within the ‘cell’ to send messages to individuals rather than the group.


When this tool was initially introduced to me during the FTI, I did not think that it would be one that I would wind up using, but I’m glad that I gave it a shot this semester. I think that it is a powerful tool for those students who have chosen to participate, and I will continue to use it in the future.


And the best part: I get to be a robot.


 

		


			
		
	






			

			
				Dr. Kelley Mayer White			
		

	
	

		1-1-1, Assessment, Collaboration, Faculty Technology Institute, instructional technology, Mobile, Presentation, TLT, Video
Guest Post:  Comparison of two video projects in an undergrad and a grad class
	


	

							

			 Mendi Benigni		
		
		

			
Today our guest blogger is Dr. Kelley White, Assistant Professor in Teacher Education.




I was fortunate to have the opportunity to attend the summer 2013 FTI (Faculty Technology Institute).  It was a great experience for many reasons.  I met and collaborated with new colleagues and learned about several new tools that could enhance my teaching and research.  Based on what we learned about video projects, I decided to require students in two different courses to create videos as part of their final projects in the course.  In both classes, students were required to choose a topic of interest, read research on the topic and write an annotated bibliography.  Then, they were to choose an audience (parents, children, elementary school teachers, or community members) and create a video to share what they learned about the topic in a meaningful way.  I used a similar assignment in the past, but often simply required students to present their work using PowerPoint for the final presentation.  After seeing what other colleagues had done with video, I thought using video might challenge my students to present their work in a more creative way. I was particularly interested in how they would create the video with specific consideration of the audience they selected. A majority chose to make videos for parents or teachers, but I had one create a video for young children.


As far as tools go, I gave the students the choice of using iMovie, MovieMaker, VoiceThread or Splice, but a majority of the students chose to use iMovie. Honestly, I did not provide a whole lot of support to them in class in regards to use of technology or in creating the videos beyond providing them with a rubric. I did make myself available for individual meetings if needed, but very few requested them.  The majority of the rubric focused on evaluation of video content, implications and consideration of audience, but I also evaluated creativity, editing and video construction. Looking back though, the rubric needed to be much more specific in differentiating levels of quality in regards to “good editing” and “smooth transitions.” It’s also important to note that this criteria was worth only 15% of the grade on the project so it may have needed to become a more significant portion of the grade in order for students to better understand its importance.


As mentioned previously, I used different versions of this project in both a freshman class and a graduate course. In the freshman course, students worked collaboratively to create the videos.  In the graduate course, it was an individual assignment and the requirements for topic selection, length of video, annotated bibliography and sources were more rigorous.  As you might expect, the projects were fairly different in quality. The freshmen did not seem to be as concerned with quality of the video.  Several had major problems with audio and transitions. Whereas it was obvious that most of the graduate students spent a good deal of time editing and polishing their work.  The graduate students were also much more thoughtful in their consideration of audience and in how they integrated research and theory.


If I were to do this again, I would provide more support across the semester to the freshmen in particular.  I would require them to check in with me at least once prior to the end of the semester with a detailed plan for the video. Perhaps, requiring them to plan their video using a storyboard and incorporate it into their grade. I also would take more time to better review my expectations for quality of the video (beyond what I included on the rubric), show more examples, and spend more time in class teaching them how to appropriately edit.  Finally, I would also consider requiring use of a specific tool (Splice, for example) so we could troubleshoot and discuss video construction and quality together as a class.  Overall, it was a good experience for me and for the students and I would definitely try it again.


Rubric available upon request

		


			
		
	






			

			
							
		

	
	

		Assessment, Collaboration, Faculty Showcase, Google Apps, Innovative Instruction, iPad, Mobile, Pedagogy, Research, Round Table Discussion, TLT, Web 2.0
Winter Roundtable Discussion Recap
	


	

							

			 Chris Meshanko		
		
		

			
TLT’s latest roundtable session, on December 3, 2013, encouraged participants to explore five stations which focused on tools and best practices relating to research, assessment, and student learning.  TLT would like to recognize and thank Andrea DeMaria, Merissa Ferrara, Michael Hemphill, Mark Hurd, and Jessica Smith for presenting and sharing their experiences.


Below is a summary of the content delivered at each station:






 3 

Station 1 – Merissa Ferrara, Ph.D. | Department of Communication


Dr. Ferrara described how she used the app, “Scavenger Hunt With Friends Lite”, on the first day of class to establish a culture of collaboration, creativity, and acceptance.


Presentation Handout: Scavenger Hunt With Friends


2


Station 2 – Michael Hemphill, Ph.D. | Department of Health and Human Performance


Dr. Hemphill described how he uses the app, “Go Observe”, to evaluate students in both teaching methods and field experience courses. He also explained how his students use the “Observation, Analysis, and Recording System” (OARS) app to provide feedback to peers during student teaching.


Presentation Handout: Go Observe/OARS


1


Station 3 – Andrea DeMaria, Ph.D. | Department of Health and Human Performance


Dr. DeMaria described how she and her students use the app, “SoundNote”, to record notes that sync with the audio from a qualitative interview or focus group. Her students also use the app when taking notes during lecture.


Presentation Handout: SoundNote


4


Station 4 – Mark Hurd, Ph.D. | Department of Psychology


Dr. Hurd described how he uses the Web 2.0 tool, “Remind 101”, to alert students of upcoming assignments and exams via free text messages. He also shared how his students use the app, “Splice”, to create video documentaries on the various drug classes for Behavioral Pharmacology.


Presentation Handouts: Remind 101 | Splice | PSYC 386 Group Video Project


5


Station 5 – Jessica Smith, Ph.D. | Department of Communication 


Dr. Smith described how her students use Google Apps–specifically Google Drive and Google Docs. Students use Google Drive to store and evaluate their work (over time) as a digital portfolio. They use Google Docs to collaborate on group assignments, as well as to provide peer editing. Dr. Smith also uses the commenting feature in Google Docs to provide student feedback.


Google Apps are available to all CofC faculty and students.


Presentation Handout: Google Education Suite


For more information on these tools, please contact your instructional technologist and check the TLT Training Calendar for upcoming professional development opportunities.


 








		


			
		
	






			

			
				screenshot of the article			
		

	
	

		1-1-1, Collaboration, Faculty Showcase, Faculty Technology Institute, Innovative Instruction, TLT
Collaboration through Technology
	


	

							

			 Mendi Benigni		
		
		

			
Our  guest blogger this week is Tracey Hunter-Doniger in Teacher Education.




This year, the Faculty Technology Institutes focused on Engaging the #Tech Generation. TLT delivered sound

pedagogical practices, demonstrated technological tools, showcased experiences from CofC faculty, and provided a forum for open discussion. In these sessions I learned how to embrace technology through Twitter, Instagram, and other social media. I also learned how to get my students to work together collaboratively through a program called Popplet.


Popplet A VISUAL MAPPING TOOL


Screen Shot 2013-10-24 at 3.55.57 PMPopplet is a tool that allows users to visualize ideas though an organized mind map. A mind map is a diagram used to visually outline information for a project, an idea or research. It is often created around a single word or idea. From that central idea lines radiate in all direction to which additional ideas, works, phrases and images can be attached.


A single individual can design a mind map easily with a pen and paper; however, through Popplet technology the mind mapping becomes even more organized. What is more useful, classmates can “invite” their peers to join a Popplet and collaborate  simultaneously. This is useful when planning group projects. The students can work from a single location or from anywhere there is internet access.


Popplet in my Class


My students are required to create a cultural unit infusion the arts into their academic lessons. These groups of 4-5 usually find it difficult to schedule a time to plan their unit. Popplet has allowed my students to collaboratively work on their projects from across campus, while creating an aesthetically pleasing outline of their lessons. When they meet with me to discuss their lessons, it is well thought out, easy to follow and I can clearly see that each student participated in the process.


Click to view this article in its original format (pdf)