Learning from the past

SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES
Interesting enough, I initially believed both Case-Based and Cog-Flex to be mostly similar in nature.  The basic jist of the two being that they each rely on cases and situations from past circumstances as a means to teach, adapt, resolve, and move forward any type of problem encountered.  However, as I read and listened and re-read the information, I came to understand that use of previous cases were but a portion of how the two models work; they now appear mostly different.

For instance, the biggest two differences I noted are that case-based is best design in a team setting because of how extensive and vast the design process is.The second is that case-based appears more structured than Cog-Flex. Where case-based simply employs a story or series of stories to be discussed and conclusions made, cog-flex is more ill-structured and designed to allow the student to come up with his or her own thought process, form a solution, then if need be (depending on the circumstance), review the same information and provide solutions from a different context.  Basically, cog-flex is more "flexible" in allowing learners to process and reprocess information to solve an issue.  As noted by Jonasson (2002), I agree that unlike a structured enviroment, having an issue with no rhyme or reason and or offers a great deal of tid bits that may or may not be related leads to a more open-ended, multiple-solution problem that may or may not have several underlying issues to go with it.  To me, this is more "real world", especially in the field of medicine...which leads to my reactions.

REACTIONS
I very recently observed a dear uncle of mine deal with what he and his doctors initially thought was Lymphodema.  All the visible signs were present and internally, when certain organs were tested to confirm this condition, the doctors found success; this 74 year old, non-smoker, that loved sweets had Lymphodema.  Approximately 6 months into treatment, the methods of relieving his body of the fluid became unsuccessful. Another month in the hospital, a liver biopsy, and some extensive research and tests showed that is was not Lymphodema, but rather Amyloidosis--a rare blood disease. He had had the perfect storm of problems brewing in is system for months and it was just laying in wait. Unfortunately, the timeliness of the diagnosis was too late for him to recover. This situation, to me, is a good example of the difference between what could possibly be the effectiveness of the two learning models.  I may be off in my thinking and a bit biased, however, I believe it applies.  The bit of information the doctors had at the onset, I compared to the case-based model---small town doctor, given the symptoms, a few cases and some prior knowledge, the diagnosis was simple, Lymphodema. But wait, using the cog-flex model and examining all the many different pieces to the same puzzle over a two year period, coming up with new ideas, the making comparisons to see if there are connections in order to get possible solutions, I believe, would have been a more effective and timely model in getting an accurate diagnosis. as underlying symptoms presented themselves at different times for the duration of this year-long illness. This may be a stretch, but I believe my uncle's situation is a very good learning experience and a case to be studied using either model.

With that in mind, having been a believer in using the case-based model in past years, I now tend to lean more to cog-flex as it provides a means to be more open-minded and flexible in possibilities.

ANY BARRIERS?
As with any distance education technology or teaching model, there are sure to be barriers.  For the case-based model, the largest possible barrier I note is resources. This includes the time, the people, the cases, and finances.  As mentioned in our lectures, case-based learning is geared more for a team effort in getting the program developed due to the complexity and the vast amount of work that goes into designing a cased-based course.  I see a great deal of time consumed in efforts to make the class as well-rounded as possible by including enough of the "right" cases to be able to draw from and discuss. With cog-flex, the same holds true but may be just a bit easier to assemble the sources of information from which students will draw thoughts and examine.  Where I see case-based as needing to be somewhat complete in the sources participants will study, cog-flex only needs information that is related, but not necessarily complete--allowing students to make up their own conclusions from "implied" information.  A person is not limited in the possibilities with cog-flex because of what can be "implied". As for the people and finances, the barrier may present itself by having limits on both; the manpower and manhours needed for development may not be there to allow design and implementation in a timely manner.

WHICH MODEL IS FOR ME
As mentioned previous, while I have not totally loved case-based work, it does offer the opportunity to alleviate all the ground work in solving current issues.  In a sense, nothing is new.  There is or could always be a situation where an event or illness or class where the circumstances were very similar, if not exact, can be adapted for modern times.  I do believe case-based learning is an exceptional tool for students to see how history does indeed repeat itself and in doing so, it offers a means to learn from it, adapt it, and revise the solutions to lessen the impact and or prevent the issue from repeating itself yet again.  Cog-Flex has, over the duration of this class, become my favorite for this unit.  I'm glad I was allowed to actually participate as opposed to develop a cog-flex course. I did get a better idea of how to use the model and how it should be set up.  From the student perspective, I believe it a better model than case-based because in many instances, I had to put two and two together as well as five and seven together to come up with solutions and predictions that were close to being equal to four and twelve.  I surprizingly enjoyed having to analyse and compare the information for similarities.

TECHNOLOGIES
Due to the nature of case-based learning, I believe the technology used in creating the course can vary greatly. In general, I think, any learning software can be used. I have come to enjoy the simplicity of using Coursesites and the fact that it is free, however, the layout can at times be confusing. In this case, great care and diligence in laying out a case-based course will have to be taken to ensure to structure is sound, is not confusing, and participant can make for good discussion and learning. Personally, I would opt to build the class using a web site service such as Weebly For Education; an environment where I control the layout, design, and flow of the course. Cog-Flex, on the other hand is a great candidate for use with Coursesites. I base this on what I learned with the Plantations assignment. The varying types of media that can be linked to the main question for the study makes a way for easy access to all the content, cases, and discussion forums from a single application. In the event that interactivity is critical fkr thecourse, then Glogster is yet another technology I'd use. It allows varying media, tons of suitable templates, linking to other applications that can handle high amounts of content (a case database). Ultimately, there are numerous options for design; one last aspect to consider when selecting how to create a case-based or cog-flex learning environment is the subject matter and facilitator.  I, for example, would have difficulty teaching a course of solely content and a few images. The software should be one that compliments the learning environment, the topic, and the facilitator as well (if feasible).

Picture Me This & Picture Me That

SIMILARITIES & DIFFERENCES
This unit was definitely the most interesting to me.  I'm naturally a huge fan of embedding various types of media in order to enhance learning.  As a learning who excels in a "hands on " enviroment, I've learned to adapt and embrace visual aids when actually touching and feeling is not feasible.  Thus far, I've done well. 

In terms of likenesses and differences in the platforms, the first thing I noticed is that video is highly encouraged when designing all four. Video for the resources in GBS is a great way to visually aid "the scenario" on the subject for participants who prefer visual stimulation as opposed to only text-based facts and reading when conducting research.  That idea is summed up by Hsu & Moore (2010) when they acknowledge that "...the most important resources are stories that contextualize past experience.".  What better way to tell a story that will "stick" than in a video.  As with GBS, in Achored, I totally see is used in such a way as the movie Mission Impossible.  Give the scenario with a storyline, then leave it to the students to solve the issue based on the situation.  This also works exceptionally well with MOST because it benefits the student and teacher; the student for obvious reasons and the teacher because it can be used across the program as well as allow for a safe enviroment where lab tests must be conducted (Goldman, n.d.).  The most striking difference to me, is that GBS did not seem as conducive to working in groups as the others.

MY REACTIONS
At the onset of the these models, my mindset was on both learning of them and choosing which I thought would be best for our group project at the same time.  I must say that with each one I could easily think of a scenario or theme that I would use. For instance, a course that teaches the proper steps and strategies on tracking packages within FedEx or UPS came to mind with GBS. Anchored was a cool reminder of the Sci-fi books my brother and I read as kids. They offered different outcomes for the same situation. As the decisions were made, the situation and outcomes changed.  This is an awesome way to include the "what if" factor.  Of the four, AI appeared to be the model that allows learners to be the most open-minded and out-of-the-box thinking.  As for STAR, it appears to be an all around favorite model...easy to learn, easy to design.

BARRIERS...IF ANY?
Of the four models, MOST would cause the most issue in terms of design.  As one who loves design, I believe I'd find it difficult to find a "perfect" balance between the visual multimedia, the text content, and any software that allows student interaction through re-telling a story.  More specifically is the balance in text to video content. When I picture a person who just has a harder time understanding a topic than others, my tendency is to offer help. However, that good intention can get skewed by unintentionally gravitating out of the MOST model. As of this post, I've not yet come up with a solution for overcoming that barrier.  However, the biggest benefit would be the student gaining appropriate (if not exceptional) knowledge of the topic being covered if the course is designed properly by the designer that can keep it simple and design an effective MOST model online that flows smoothly while maximizing the students' information retention.

WHAT TO USE....HUMMMMMM.
As I mentioned previously, I am a lover of multimedia and use of various types of media within a course; it is what I learn best with so keeping in mind that it is easy to do what you love, I can easily see myself attempting use of each model--focusing on AI and Goal Based at the onset, then MOST.  The learning curve for STAR appears not-so-stiff and  my need and love of a challenge would reserve use of the STAR model in cases where the others are not necessary.  With the trouble of AI being that it is information-intensive, I'd search for some sort of modification in the amount of content required for the model.  My mind leads to a series of JAD sessions with the institution/company, for instance, in order to streamline the content.  Too much in-depth information not only costs time, it also costs interest.  For me, losing student interest is more harmful to a course than time consumption.

TECHNOLOGIES
I have been very fortunate to have been turned on to Coursesites by my teammate this semester.  This free online course creation software has proven indispensable when creating a course.  It allows for one-stop shopping for creating a course using a variety of structures/models.  There are tons of tools that can be incorporated without having to use a varying links to external sites for students.  This not only alleviates having to create multiple accounts and remembering multiple logins for students, but the same goes for teachers and /or designers as well.  For the purposes of context-based models, I would add one additional application as Coursesites does not (from what I see) have an internal video capture program.  For this, I would opt to use Debut Video Capture from NCH Software or CamStudio.  Both allow for capturing streaming video directly from your desktop/laptop.

Lions, Tigers, PBLs, and Guided Design! Oh My!

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES
This unit was a little tougher to keep all the strategies separated, nonetheless, I was able to pull a good deal of information from each section...beginning with the similarities.  What I found most similar is that although the names may lead one to believe otherwise, the four sessions all center around teamwork and working toward a goal with the assistance and or resources of others.  I enjoyed that there are models that are used that teach a person--who may not otherwise think so--to get out of his or her own way in order to achieve a goal for a group as a whole and ultimately themselves. With guided design, Casada and DeShazer (1995) stated from a book by Stephen Covey that to be an engineer you have to be trusted, you have to trust yourself to voice your ideas in order to be a integral part of the team.  That, to me, suggests that someone only interested in individual success would not do well in a collaborative environment.

I related Guided Design and PBL more similar to the others because they require some pre-exisitng knowledge whereas Cooperative Learning is based on the group venturing out and conducting research, then coming together as a collective and presenting the results.  This is similar to how University of Phoenix conducts its group projects--each participant takes a topic and researches it, they then return with the results, every topic is discussed and those agreed upon for the project as a whole is written and presented by the one designated to represent the group.  Everyone havin a part in the research makes for expanded knowledge for the individuals and the group. 

Although I initially resloved to not be fond of Situated Learning because of the level of assistance it appeared participants receive from teachers, after reading "Watch It, Do It, Know It", I've come to see it as more of a real world environment with real world experiences that carry a safety net for students to be able to learn through real world experience and also have the security of teachers to fall back on as a means of coaching/guidance.

ANY BARRIERS?
In terms of barriers, I can easily see where Guided Design and PBL would be a challenge for participants with limited or no knowledge of the topic discussed and having to work through a lesson from only what they know.  I tend to like a cooperative learning environment because I do enjoy conducting research then presenting my findings. I've found many times at University of Phoenix when I was in a situation of digging too deep for the topic being covered.  My need to learn as much as possible about those things I know nothing of most times lead to "too much" for the needs of the project.  The only barrier I see in a situated learning environment is the potential stress put on those individuals who wouldn't otherwise put themselves in a situation to--as the 'Watch It...' article suggests--conducting research out in the public eye.  With the attention given by the facilitator, it could easily be used as a tool for confidence boosting as well as learning.

WHAT WOULD I USE?
I'm really fond of Cooperative Learning because it does give individuals the opportunity--with the Jigsaw strategy--to obtain and learn from other points of view. I love that someone can see a situation with a totally different eye than me!  It's the whole tom-a-to/tom-ah-to thing!  With that, I would definitely hope to use Jigsaw and Find the Fib--an interesting tactic to enhance analytical skills.

TOOL SUGGESTION.
In terms of applications I would use to translate this over onto the Web, I'd love to dive into the various software offered by Kagan.  There is a series called Instant Engagement that is designed for cooperative learning.  It can be used for Think-Pair-Share and also has software designed for use within teams.  It appears to be fun and easy to use.  This seems ideal until I could design my own application for such learning.

PSI vs. AT....Hummmmm

After the readings for the week and the lectures, I am left feeling a bit torn between PSI and AT.  For the most part, I saw the main similarities between the two being that of completing an objective, then being tested before being allowed to proceed as well as allowing for self-paced study.  I believe these stood out to me as they are elements that I tend to gravitate toward. On the other hand, the most noticeable difference to me was that of the AT method not having a means of allowing students to gain further instruction as PSI offers.  In my years as a work from home agent, I have had several training courses laid out in the AT method.  They were self-paced and also allowed for quizzes and for being tested on items deemed important for specific areas.  However, when information was conflicting, confusing, or just difficult to understand, there was no additional resource that could be contacted to assistance.

INITIAL REACTIONS

My initial reactions to these two models was, "OK, Personalized System of Instruction" is ok, but Audio Tutorials are what I've become accustomed to. I generally don't need much more assistance in processing and understanding as is offered in PSI. AT on the other hand, for me, is too prone to human error without having access to clarification."  I was especially intrigued about the use for PSI in the Morita case study.  Just judging form the initial participation levels of the Japanese students to the 10 the completed the course, there were clearly some roadblocks.  Aside from the issues mentioned--network problems and cultural differences--I also considered the attempt to give a Japanese student an online course that offered the feel of an American institution rather difficult.  There are just some things that a computer system or program just cannot convey; the emotion and atmosphere that a student gets from a college or university in the traditional classroom or an online course taught on-location is hard pressed to be relayed online.

The benefits of overcoming the network issues would be, more participation from the Japanese students and possibly less of an "other" incentive to participate could result. With cultural differences, I believe it works hand-in-hand with giving the course an American university "feel". By simply reaching out to one another, students are afforded the opportunity to get to know the folks from the Far East.  When there is back and forth dialogue, the atmosphere changes and the community grows.  The same goes for Audio-Tutorial.  Make it more personalized by giving access to an outside resouce for help and I think retention of information will be better and the course more well received.

FUTURE USE OF PSI & AT

Due to the demographic I hope to design for in the future, I believe either of the two methods would work for me. I would definitely attempt a hybrid of the two when doing so.  Because many disabled veterans are in a situation where the only thing they have known is the military, I truly believe it best to offer some sort of proctored instruction to learning a new skill set coupled with the AT model--only much more interactive for those who learn best when lectured.  The twist is the option to gain more insight from a proctor, if needed.

RESOURCES

Upon researching the tools that both my classmates and I have noted in the forum, there are a few I've tried and favored for the purposes I want to accomplish.

Since I am a designer and have built sites with both companies, I believe Webs.com and Weebly.com are awesome tools for to use for simulations and to help learners get a feel for designing with WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) software. Both are simple to use and free.

Using a tool such as Wink or Captivate for a base, I'd attempt some sort of collaboration between Jing for my screencasting segments, Fotobabble for making my images more interactive, and iSpring QuizMaker or ExamBuilder for test/quiz taking.

My thoughts.

Kim Cross