Wednesday, September 24, 2008

Wowwee! I did it! Adobe Connect!

Tonight was the big night! I really thought I might go "round the bend" preparing for my first synchronous online presentation to the class. I decided to use PowerPoint 2007 software to create my slide presentation and then to throw it up onto Adobe Connect. Well, after tweaking my slide, I decided to load the file into the University of Minnesota adobe connect site--UMConnect. Of course, as a procrastinator of some practice, it was a last minute upload. Well, as Murphy's Law is always rearing its little grin--Adobe Connect (at least on the UMConnect site) doesn't accept PowerPoint 2007 file types. So, I remember that fact, vaguely, from another class, and resaved the file into PowerPoint 97-2003 format (PPT). It finally uploaded.

Of course, I had already preset my Meeting site rooms with various pods and tools and links. I also made certain that the audio wizard was run and that I could both hear and deliver my presentation. I decided not to use my camera--because for some strange reason it wouldn't engage properly. Oh well...

Overall, the presentation went well, however, I would do a few things differently next time. I would have a separate room for each discussion question so that it would be easier for students to see the discussion comments. In addition, I must work on the slide presentation to figure out how to turn on navigation for students and to give then the ability to see the navigation side-bar. I thought it was working as no one told me it wasn't, but when I watched the recording of the presentation, it had not worked at all. Odd...

Thank goodness the recording worked--and it was so simple to use. Just clicked record session on the menu bar and there it was--a recording of the entire presentation. The link for the recorded version of the presentation is https://umconnect.umn.edu/p45718567/

I am quite happy now--and relieved that the presentation was successful, for the most part.

The one thing that was so great was that the other students in the course were so supportive and gracious for my first synchronous-Live experience. Thanks you guys!! I really appreciated all the positive feedback! I wonder if other presenters miss that, too. No body language or smiles or frowns or any interaction than text and an occasional smiley to cue any student emotional response. So, it was a very over the top, wonderful gesture to get all the good rah-rah support.

While I was investigating UMConnect, I found another application from Microsoft that delivers courses, Microsoft Officee Live Meeting. Several of the CoP presentations I have attended have been delivered through Live Meeting. It is very similar to Adobe Connect.

I have another presentation to do that will be asynchronous and I plan to run around the net to find a tool that could work that is different than WebCT. Well, best get running....

Friday, September 19, 2008

Running Around the Internet...Again....

Been doing a lot of reading for CI 5323 and will soon have the opportunity to present an article review and discussion online. I have decided to use Adobe Connect since it has not been used in the class yet and I don't want to forget how to use it. Besides, it provides a way to deliver a synchronous lecture and follow-up discussion with ease. I am going to use UMConnect, which should work just fine. I have already set up the meeting and have my URL and invitations sent out to the participants.

As for the Scardamalia and Bereiter article, Computer Support for Knowledge-Building Communities, I have read it thoroughly once and will read it again while summarizing it. I have gotten the PowerPoint started and have Adobe Presenter installed. I wanted to find some exhibits or sites that utilize CSILE, Computer supported intentional learning environments, but found few. Part of the reason is that CSILE has evolved into other projects that have other features. CSILE, while still providing rich inquiry learning experiences, has been expanded upon by other newer knowledge-building projects. CSILE was one of the first projects to reframe inquiry learning within a knowledge-building context.

I did find some photos of CSILE projects in classrooms after looking for them most of the night and found examples of both low tech and high tech classroom projects. A low tech example might be shown as sticky notes with facts about particular topic stuck to a white-board where students can continually reconstruct category contents; high tech, an online constructed cmap that is available for ongoing public modification.

Monday, September 15, 2008

The RTI CoP Works for Me...

Today was the day. Today the RTI Community of Practice hosted a conference call--a presentation by Ed Shapiro, a professor from Lehigh University, who spoke about the evaluation of RTI. This worked out well for me as I received information in the presentation that will assist in directing my M.Ed. paper on RTI. At first I was rather dismayed that I had joined a Community of Practice that utilized such old technology to host distance presentations. I remember conference call-in methods in the 70's and 80's--before the internet. I decided to stick with this online community as I wanted to get the RTI information that this group might offer me--and I am so glad that I did.

Instructions and handouts. I joined the RTI Community of Practice through the TACommunities.org and promptly received an email thanking me for joining and an invitation to today's conference call presentation with instructions, phone number, and identification code. I visited the site today before the conference and found the PowerPoint presentation was available for download as well as a flier about the conference. I downloaded the presentation, printed off slide handouts, and familiarized myself with the topic prior to the conference. It was great! I loved the opportunity to prepare questions from the handouts before the conference started and to look over the content, too.

The method. I was a little nervous about calling into the conference--I don't trust technology to work flawlessly--but the fact that this was over the telephone and that previous conference information had been posted made me feel more secure that even with a phone failure I could still get the presentation information. Well, fortunately, everything worked perfectly. At 1:58pm, I dialed the number given in the email, dialed in the code and WaaLaaah! at 2:00pm (3:00pm EST) I was connected to the presentation. The Conference was interactive over the phone allowing participants to ask questions a various intervals. In fact, Dr. Shapiro said that he would respond to questions throughout the presentation as well as at the end. Several times Dr. Sharpiro stopped and asked if there were any questions--but there were none--until the presentation was finished and it was the Q&A time. Then, participants asked many questions and received answers--even some of the questions I was going to ask were addressed.

The moderator. The moderator, Sarah provided "housekeeping rules" and made requests for emails from the partiicpants for attendance purposes. In addition, the moderator advertised future conference calls in the same topic area to the participants--thus marketing additional conferencing opportunities. The moderator was very skilled in using the technology for this conference call method and helped to solve technical issues that did arise for some participants; asking the presenter to repeat the last slide notes, mute and unmute, press certain keys to reset the microphone, etc. There were a few unexpected interruptions, such as the ringing of phone of various participants in offices or background noise, voices from participant locations. This situation seemed to cause the presenter some discomfort--as he commented, "I sure hope that phone gets answered soon." The moderator took care of technical problems for the presenter as they arose, calmly, and clearly providing instruction to keep things moving.


Paying attention. Having preprinted my handouts from the RTI online community document area I was able to pay attention to the audio conference and easily take notes. Participants were easy to hear, and the moderator and the presenter were very clear. The only thing that was difficult was that the presenter referred to the slides by number--and the slides were not numbered.

Body language, no problem. There has been a great deal of talk in CI 5323 about the lack of body language in online learning and how that can adversely affect understanding. I didn't find that I missed seeing the presenter or the other participants at all. In fact, it seemed natural to listen to the presenter and participants on the phone without seeing anything additional to the handouts. I think in this case, having the handouts and a picture of the presenter as well as having information about the credentials of Dr. Shapiro was all that I really needed. My intent was to get the topic content--and the conference call method accomplished that for me.

Audience intent. It occurred to me that the reasons for participation dictate the expectations for the presented content and that the method of presentation doesn't really matter as much as the clarity of content and the acceptance of the context. I was a newbie to this type of conference--but most of the participants had attended many of the previous conference calls. I was surprised that I was so comfortable with this method of attending a conference; it was a little like listening to a radio program. In someways, there was less interaction during the conference as very few questions were asked--with most participants waiting until the presentation was finished to ask questions. I didn't interact except to make my presence know when asked.

Final thoughts. All in all, this was a very pleasant experience for me and I got very specific information that can be useful in guiding my M.Ed. paper on RTI. I fully intend to participate in the Webinar that was advertised during the conference. In addition, now that I have looked around the site and the RTI Community of Practice pages, I have found previous documents and presentations as well as conference discussion notes that are made available for each community event. There are links to many resources that provide a wealth of information and leads for research projects and papers that are specific to literature search topic.

I might use this conference call method for delivery of specific inservice type content--it provided an easy, low tech context for busy people (educators, principles) to connect with needed content pertinent to their field of practice using any type of phone from any location. I am not sure what type of software or service was used to serve the conference, but I will find out from the moderator so that I can check it out for my own future use.

One drawback to this method, and a significant one, is that although the handouts and discussion notes were available as online, downloadable documents, the actual conference presentation using the LIVE conference call method would not be accessible to all participants. For example, participants with sensory, auditory, or information processing disabilities might find the technology used would exclude them from receiving the conference content. I don't remember seeing anything in the advertising that addressed providing needed accommodations to participants with disabilities. If this conference were provided as live online video and audio with closed captioning, it would be much more accessible during and after the presentation. It seemed rather strange to me that a conference presentation that deals with a special education topic would be delivered by a method that overlooks access to all.

Sunday, September 14, 2008

New Graphing Tool helps me find CoPs...

I have been checking out my communities--Disaboom and RTI Community of Practice this morning. I also was looking around the net to see what else I might google-up. Wow! I hit the motherload with a new graphing tool (well, new to me!). TouchGraph is an online java application that creates a concept map of google links for any particular topic. The tool comes up in your browser and the concept map is entirely interactive--meaning that you can click on any part of the concept map and find the URL and label for the site as well as expand each "bubble" into another concept map that is the result of another content google. It's free! It's relational!

Check out the free version of TouchGraph. This is a screenshot of the result of my TouchGraph search for CoPs.