X came to the not-so-sunny Sunshine State Tuesday to attend the ALN conference, organized by the SLOAN-C foundation for distance learning. Right now, I'm in the early phase of a workshop on innovative tools for DL led by Larry Ragan, Larry Cooperman and Ray Schroeder. Take a log at the guy's blog for tools you might use...I've already found one useful tool for myself - RSS-to-javascript.com, a freeware web-based tool that easily allows you to aggregate blog content into your personal blog. I'll put this on my "round to it" list to implement here in the future :-)
X
Wednesday, November 08, 2006
Monday, August 07, 2006
memory and multitasking study
A recent issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of the Sciences contained a study that measured the effects of competing simultaneous tasks on memory and learning. Russell Poldrack, co-author of the study, provided the following commentary in an interview:
"Multitasking adversely affects how you learn," said Russell Poldrack, UCLA associate professor of psychology and co-author of the study.
"Even if you learn while multitasking, that learning is less flexible and more specialized, so you cannot retrieve the information as easily. Our study shows that to the degree you can learn while multitasking, you will use different brain systems.
"The best thing you can do to improve your memory is to pay attention to the things you want to remember. Our data support that. When distractions force you to pay less attention to what you are doing, you don't learn as well as if you had paid full attention."
Tasks that require more attention, such as learning calculus or reading Shakespeare, will be particularly adversely affected by multitasking, he said.
Poldrack notes that multi-tasking while engaged in learning new material will likely have an adverse affect on learning. Hopefully, some empirical evidence regarding multi-tasking will cut through the myths regarding the "gaming generation".
"Multitasking adversely affects how you learn," said Russell Poldrack, UCLA associate professor of psychology and co-author of the study.
"Even if you learn while multitasking, that learning is less flexible and more specialized, so you cannot retrieve the information as easily. Our study shows that to the degree you can learn while multitasking, you will use different brain systems.
"The best thing you can do to improve your memory is to pay attention to the things you want to remember. Our data support that. When distractions force you to pay less attention to what you are doing, you don't learn as well as if you had paid full attention."
Tasks that require more attention, such as learning calculus or reading Shakespeare, will be particularly adversely affected by multitasking, he said.
Poldrack notes that multi-tasking while engaged in learning new material will likely have an adverse affect on learning. Hopefully, some empirical evidence regarding multi-tasking will cut through the myths regarding the "gaming generation".
Tuesday, July 25, 2006
Oh Brother X, Where Art Thou?
Well, now that they discharged X from the Home for the Temporarily Disgruntled, it's time to catch up a bit. Here's some breaking news and random thoughts:
- Carey Hatch has been named Interim Director of SLN. Carey brings years of coalition building experience, particularly regarding the creation of SUNYConnect. Welcome aboard, Carey!
- Ken Udas has announced his departure to assume a leadership role with Penn State's World Campus Online distance learning initiative. X has no doubt that SLN's loss will be the Nittany Lions' gain. You know, as an SU alumn I can't stand losing ANYTHING to Penn State...
- X's mild mannered alter ego will be presenting at the SLOAN-C International Conference on Asynchronous Learnining Networks this fall with his esteemed colleagues on the blended learning pilot program in process at our institution.
- SUNY Cortland joins the iTunes bandwagon - see e-literati Alex Reid's thoughts on integrating podcasting into his course. Note Alex's thoughts on coursecasting and the dialog that ensues in the comments section.
Friday, February 17, 2006
Ch-ch-ch-changes
I've found that the particular theme of a given post derives from the title. So, you might guess that selecting the title FIRST is a somewhat arduous process. I initially had "Another Brick in the Wall" in my head, but frankly, the overarching themes of paranoia and bleak finality are a bit...much...for a thematic convention here. So, that brought me to the Thin White Duke, Ziggy Stardust, aka David Jones and the classic line "turn and face the strain" in "Changes". Which is exactly what we've done as a community these past few days...
I don't wish to comment on any personnel issues, or reporting structure issues that were discussed, as (a) official announcements should be forthcoming and (b)my journalistic heart knows that writing anything that could be considered libel is just not a good thing :-)Suffice it to say that the key personnel who are the heart and soul of SLN will continue to do Good Works. What seems to be worth talking about is just where we're at now ("standin' at the crossroads.." crooned Robert Johnson), and just where the Hell we're going next.
In order to set a course, pick a direction, and find out who we want to be when we're all growed up requires a decision by a committee. Before we veer off into committees, horses, and camels, I'll note that there is an apparently honest attempt at broad representation across the SUNY landscape. Since it is nearly overwhelmingly executive representation, there was an obvious concern voiced about listening to not only us- the resident Geek Squad- but also the faculty and our students. Whether we'll actually get this level of democratic involvement is an unknown at this stage.
Then there's the matter of the timeline. It seems maddeningly, dangerously short- but you have to stop and consider the alignment of the stars, Cassandra. ESC is on amazingly short timeline to evaluate their RFP responses and come to some decision of their own. Would it surprise any of us, then, if the Administration's need to get off the pot coincided with ESC's timing?
Speaking of ESC- we should all tip our hats to our colleagues for the incredible piece of work that they've accomplished- generating a well thought out, detailed map of all our requirements - and for the work that lies ahead, in evaluating vendor responses (are you guys going to sleep at all during this period?).
And what's my take on where we should go? Ah...all two of you who read this blog have already heard my thoughts. No, I'm not being coy; I've already expressed my thoughts publicly that an open source LMOS could indeed be a viable solution - once it reaches maturity. And I really do think that we should stop trying to teach this pig called Notes to sing/ It's time to find the tool that was intended for our purposes; rather than continuing to try to drive nails with a 2x4, we should be looking for a hammer. Yes, we could try to continue to develop the missing critical functionality, and we probably could keep the current system on life support beyond the projected three years, but would that truly serve our faculty users? Don't they deserve an interface that doesn't force them to learn arcane procedures just to publish their content? Shouldn't we be focusing on helping them *design* effective courses, rather than camouflaging holes in the LMS and writing that off as pedagogical issues (I'm talking about the criminal lack of a test engine here, folks)?
Well, here's my crackpot idea: We all would agree that our revenue stream of asynchronous learning needs a stable platform. We would probably agree that we're still groping the elephant when it comes to developing a systematized approach to blended learning. So, why not take a bi-directional approach? Phase in the new LMS, whatever it may be, for the fully online component. Continue to use Notes in the non-mission critical function of blended and web-enhanced learning. Develop an open source approach that will replace the Notes platform over time. As the open source LMS matures (and one would hopefully agree that noodling around with it in blending is non-destructive testing) we could offer asynch courses on eitherplatform. And everybody wins :-)
Of course, thinking aloud like this obviously demonstrates why X should not be in charge of technical thought leadership for this project:-)
Changing gears here at the end - these times when we can all come together in one place, to compare plans, tactics, annoyances, hopes, dreams, fears- this is the true essence of our community. If for no other reason than this, we should turn around and lock eyes with our Albanian delegation and say "thank you". United we stand, divided we fall. To our brethren late of The Tower, I say - you guys have extreme intestinal fortitude. I've rode the dot com roller coaster through boom and bust, and I've honestly lost count of how many leaders I've seen consigned off to "special assignment" gulags, waiting for their parachutes to deploy. I know what it feels like to walk around under a cloud, not knowing whatmight transpire the next time you set foot in the office. But hang in there, brothers and sisters, people get ready, there's a train a'comin...
I don't wish to comment on any personnel issues, or reporting structure issues that were discussed, as (a) official announcements should be forthcoming and (b)my journalistic heart knows that writing anything that could be considered libel is just not a good thing :-)Suffice it to say that the key personnel who are the heart and soul of SLN will continue to do Good Works. What seems to be worth talking about is just where we're at now ("standin' at the crossroads.." crooned Robert Johnson), and just where the Hell we're going next.
In order to set a course, pick a direction, and find out who we want to be when we're all growed up requires a decision by a committee. Before we veer off into committees, horses, and camels, I'll note that there is an apparently honest attempt at broad representation across the SUNY landscape. Since it is nearly overwhelmingly executive representation, there was an obvious concern voiced about listening to not only us- the resident Geek Squad- but also the faculty and our students. Whether we'll actually get this level of democratic involvement is an unknown at this stage.
Then there's the matter of the timeline. It seems maddeningly, dangerously short- but you have to stop and consider the alignment of the stars, Cassandra. ESC is on amazingly short timeline to evaluate their RFP responses and come to some decision of their own. Would it surprise any of us, then, if the Administration's need to get off the pot coincided with ESC's timing?
Speaking of ESC- we should all tip our hats to our colleagues for the incredible piece of work that they've accomplished- generating a well thought out, detailed map of all our requirements - and for the work that lies ahead, in evaluating vendor responses (are you guys going to sleep at all during this period?).
And what's my take on where we should go? Ah...all two of you who read this blog have already heard my thoughts. No, I'm not being coy; I've already expressed my thoughts publicly that an open source LMOS could indeed be a viable solution - once it reaches maturity. And I really do think that we should stop trying to teach this pig called Notes to sing/ It's time to find the tool that was intended for our purposes; rather than continuing to try to drive nails with a 2x4, we should be looking for a hammer. Yes, we could try to continue to develop the missing critical functionality, and we probably could keep the current system on life support beyond the projected three years, but would that truly serve our faculty users? Don't they deserve an interface that doesn't force them to learn arcane procedures just to publish their content? Shouldn't we be focusing on helping them *design* effective courses, rather than camouflaging holes in the LMS and writing that off as pedagogical issues (I'm talking about the criminal lack of a test engine here, folks)?
Well, here's my crackpot idea: We all would agree that our revenue stream of asynchronous learning needs a stable platform. We would probably agree that we're still groping the elephant when it comes to developing a systematized approach to blended learning. So, why not take a bi-directional approach? Phase in the new LMS, whatever it may be, for the fully online component. Continue to use Notes in the non-mission critical function of blended and web-enhanced learning. Develop an open source approach that will replace the Notes platform over time. As the open source LMS matures (and one would hopefully agree that noodling around with it in blending is non-destructive testing) we could offer asynch courses on eitherplatform. And everybody wins :-)
Of course, thinking aloud like this obviously demonstrates why X should not be in charge of technical thought leadership for this project:-)
Changing gears here at the end - these times when we can all come together in one place, to compare plans, tactics, annoyances, hopes, dreams, fears- this is the true essence of our community. If for no other reason than this, we should turn around and lock eyes with our Albanian delegation and say "thank you". United we stand, divided we fall. To our brethren late of The Tower, I say - you guys have extreme intestinal fortitude. I've rode the dot com roller coaster through boom and bust, and I've honestly lost count of how many leaders I've seen consigned off to "special assignment" gulags, waiting for their parachutes to deploy. I know what it feels like to walk around under a cloud, not knowing whatmight transpire the next time you set foot in the office. But hang in there, brothers and sisters, people get ready, there's a train a'comin...
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
of cabbages and kings
Well, ol' X has ruminated some, and perhaps its time to speak of the SLN dilemna. Now, don't go expecting any "Albany Insider" expose, here, people. I simply want to frame some of the issues that are on the table, causing much gut wrenching angst amongst my colleagues.
SLN, for those of you that don't know, has existed since its inception on a Lotus Notes platform. Yes, you heard me correctly; stop laughing. You have to recall that at this particular point in time Web-based learning systems were in their infancy. In fact, some of the prime contenders from that day and age have since disappeared (go dig up my sparkling review of TopClass from that era if you want a chuckle). So, given the systems at hand, and apparently at least a smidgeon of Notes development know-how, SLN was born.
Now, generally speaking, we all grow and mature over time. Software does this too, though often in ways that are described as "software bloat" (cf. any Microsloth app you can think of). SLN, because of it's unique neither fish nor fowl deployment of Notes as an LMS, has existed in a bit of a Bizzaro World parallel universe ("Bizzaro World Learning System am painful and non-intuitive for faculty users. Bizzaro LMS am complicated, thus good"). Possibly recognizing this, but more importantly realizing that IBM is finally letting the sands of time run out on Notes, SLN launched and RFCPR2D2 (ok, I can't really think of what to label it, got it?) that outlined the proposed structure of SLN 2.0. In what some might deem a clear case of hubris, the Albanian Faction came up with an amalgam of best of breed components to comprise an open source learning management system. Other than the fact that I keep hearing the Johnny Cash song "one piece at a time" in my head (Cash's character builds his own "dream car" by brining home components from the assembly line where he works), the plan as described needed a lot of stars to align in a big hurry. While I think there is great promise in the LAMS interoperability framework and other open source LMOS intiatives that has been proposed, a standard doth not a product make. Anyone ever measure the life cycle of an Internet standard?
One key item of interest to the campuses should have factored into this recommendation: our track record on the existing SLN 1.0 as a revenue stream. My impression is that the SUNY community at large recognizes the alternative/additional/supplimental revenue that is generated by online courses. Thus, CIO's and other responsible parties are loath to place a key financial operation on an untried platform that has no second tier commerical support.
Thus, (don't you love paragraphs that start with "thus.."?), the largest system user of SLN, Empire State College, has opted to go out to bid with it's own RFP for an LMS. ESC provides the lion's share of online courses within the SUNY system, which isn't suprising considering that it always has been a "virtual university" since it's inception. The key question here is whether so goeth ESC, thus goeth the rest of the pack. (OK, too many "thuses" in one paragraph-it's starting to sound too Old Testament).
X can't offer any further insights, because X, like Mongo "is pawn in game of life". It would appear that other fellow MIDs feel much the same way; thanks to one comrade's bold charge, the Provost will be present at the AC/MID summit to provide a system update.
Will this provide earth-shattering news? Will our heros survive? Tune in again-
same bat time-
same bat channel
SLN, for those of you that don't know, has existed since its inception on a Lotus Notes platform. Yes, you heard me correctly; stop laughing. You have to recall that at this particular point in time Web-based learning systems were in their infancy. In fact, some of the prime contenders from that day and age have since disappeared (go dig up my sparkling review of TopClass from that era if you want a chuckle). So, given the systems at hand, and apparently at least a smidgeon of Notes development know-how, SLN was born.
Now, generally speaking, we all grow and mature over time. Software does this too, though often in ways that are described as "software bloat" (cf. any Microsloth app you can think of). SLN, because of it's unique neither fish nor fowl deployment of Notes as an LMS, has existed in a bit of a Bizzaro World parallel universe ("Bizzaro World Learning System am painful and non-intuitive for faculty users. Bizzaro LMS am complicated, thus good"). Possibly recognizing this, but more importantly realizing that IBM is finally letting the sands of time run out on Notes, SLN launched and RFCPR2D2 (ok, I can't really think of what to label it, got it?) that outlined the proposed structure of SLN 2.0. In what some might deem a clear case of hubris, the Albanian Faction came up with an amalgam of best of breed components to comprise an open source learning management system. Other than the fact that I keep hearing the Johnny Cash song "one piece at a time" in my head (Cash's character builds his own "dream car" by brining home components from the assembly line where he works), the plan as described needed a lot of stars to align in a big hurry. While I think there is great promise in the LAMS interoperability framework and other open source LMOS intiatives that has been proposed, a standard doth not a product make. Anyone ever measure the life cycle of an Internet standard?
One key item of interest to the campuses should have factored into this recommendation: our track record on the existing SLN 1.0 as a revenue stream. My impression is that the SUNY community at large recognizes the alternative/additional/supplimental revenue that is generated by online courses. Thus, CIO's and other responsible parties are loath to place a key financial operation on an untried platform that has no second tier commerical support.
Thus, (don't you love paragraphs that start with "thus.."?), the largest system user of SLN, Empire State College, has opted to go out to bid with it's own RFP for an LMS. ESC provides the lion's share of online courses within the SUNY system, which isn't suprising considering that it always has been a "virtual university" since it's inception. The key question here is whether so goeth ESC, thus goeth the rest of the pack. (OK, too many "thuses" in one paragraph-it's starting to sound too Old Testament).
X can't offer any further insights, because X, like Mongo "is pawn in game of life". It would appear that other fellow MIDs feel much the same way; thanks to one comrade's bold charge, the Provost will be present at the AC/MID summit to provide a system update.
Will this provide earth-shattering news? Will our heros survive? Tune in again-
same bat time-
same bat channel
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)