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
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
Kim,
ReplyDeleteI really like the point you make that “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...” I agree that building a sense of community is challenging with an online or automated course. In one of our readings, Billy Koen attempted this by creating a sense of “Presence” in online instruction through the use of webcams and the addition of readily available, live proctors. Fortunately, with the use of modern technology, a sense of community can now be developed through video chats, discussion boards, blogs, instant messaging, social media and other methods that allow for personal communication and community development. Of course, creating community in an online course is still challenging, and takes a fair amount of commitment, but it is much easier than it used to be – and the rewards of doing so are very great from the resultant exchange of ideas and learning experiences. Thanks for your post!
Marion
Hi Kim,
ReplyDeleteI think that your wanting to combine or synthesize the PSI and A-T models shows your understanding of the needs of online learners. As you say, adding a "twist" is the key, and every online course, topic, learner, etc. is different.
I think that both models offer the best for certain needs. I like that you used the case study to help make connections between the two models as well. I think it is important that we start by asking ourselves, as developers, what is the end result I am looking for? What do I want to accomplish? Then we can begin to investigate the best way to go about finding the answer.
Did you have a chance to look at the survey data on these two models? Did that help you with your opinions, or add to your sense of conflict over these two systems? Sometimes it can be difficult to know where to go with survey data, but it can be helpful in pinpointing what has been studied so far.
Thank you for your post!
Amanda C., your friendly TA :-)
Hey Amanda!
DeleteYou were reading my mind with the questions about the end result and investigating....that is always the beginning of my mindset. Look at where you are, then were you want to be, and work out the plan in the center to achieve the most productive, efficient, and cost effective (especially for the learner)result.
Yes, I did read the data. Having the numbers there did solidify what I was thinking about the model...it was kind of difficult to understand initially, but once it clicked, it was fairly easy understand the data.
I agree with you that the Morita case study was intriguing. I also understand your thoughts on loosing the emotion and atmosphere when using a computer system or program however, in my Distance Education courses here at NCSU I have found many courses that made me feel very connected. Obviously it wasn’t the same as sitting in a classroom, looking face to face with the instructor or other classmates, but a program such as Elluminate is useful in the way of collaborating and learning in a live situation. Another program that created that sense of gathering was Edmodo. Edmodo was not a live situation in where you could have instant chats, however it allowed for continuous discussion through posts. I agree with you that providing an outside resource for AT would help with retention and give students a better feeling of being connected.
ReplyDeleteHey! I so wish I had known to look into State prior to University of Phoenix at times. I think it was a combination of wanting to finish, finish, finish on top of hurry, hurry, hurry and get a design job. LOL! Don't get me wrong, we were pretty connected to be so disconnected in the classes there. There seemed to be TONS of military members that attend UOP. I think our groups tended to shy away from any sort of forum outside of the message board is because transcripts of every session/meeting had to be recorded and submitted to the facilitator. Frankly, no one was interested in doing all of that just to chat and have a conversation, so instead, we did loads and loads of talking through the message board.
DeleteBut I tell you, I really believe that being able to utilize some of those tools to communicate would have been very beneficial for those classes where there was a group member that wasn't satisfied unless there was an argument....yes, grown-ups arguing over assignments. My experience has alway been that you can be anyone you want to be behind a keyboard....good, bad, or indifferent. :-)
Kim, as a former military member myself, and as somebody who continues to work for the military, your comments on the military really hit home. I'm sure you are aware that the military is in the forefront of online technology used for instruction.
ReplyDeleteAs I've mentioned before, I teach online for the USAF. There are 3 online supervisory courses taught in my area and we put 8000 students/year through the three courses. That's a lot of students, but each course is completely different. One is an 8-hour a day/one day a week for 5 weeks course. That is typically the first course students take and that gets them used to online learning where an instructor is readily available. The next class is a short 16-hour course with a one hour a day synchronous webinar for 4 weeks with the asynchronous self-directed part for the remaining 12 hours. My course is a 26-hour course with 90 minute synchronous webinars once a week for 4 weeks with the remaining 22 hours as self-directed asynchronous work. I hold office hours 2x/week for 1 hour each but am almost always available to my students. We all teach students literally around the globe, but unlike the case study, all our students are Americans or naturalized citizens, so we don't have the barriers to overcome as mentioned in the case study. It is still a lot of work, but we are getting more and more students who like our format - Readings, podcasts, videos, reinforcement activities, quizzes, discussion boards, and a pre- and post-course assessment. Students rarely have to spend more than 10 - 15 minutes on any given reading, exercise, quiz etc., so they don't get bored and the various style offerings appeal to almost everybody.
The military is a unique environment, and so are all the students whether they are military members or government civilians working for the military and that has it's own challenges, but it is extremely rewarding and I couldn't ask for a better job. Less frustrating maybe, but couldn't work with a better group.
Wow! Such good information! I guess it just hadn't sunken in until reading your post, but I totally agree on the technology aspect in regard to the military. I'd love to talk with you more about what you do. That is totally awesome to me!
DeleteI aree with you that a combination of both theories of PSI and AT will produce a more robust training. althoug face to face is difficult to compare to distance learning, on line learning has come a long way. I was very surprised to find that these theories were from the 1960's but seemed like a good framework for distance learning. I think all the new Web 2.0 tools support this framework to help the interaction, but to me there is nothing to compare to face to face.
ReplyDeleteThanks
Gena Gutierrez