Having the highest levels of skills in problem solving using ICT (information and communication technologies) increases chances of participating in the labour force by six percentage points compared with adults who have the lowest levels of these skills, even after accounting for various other factors, such as age, gender, level of education, literacy and numeracy proficiency, and use
of e-mail at home.
As a PhD, you can think of research as one of your many useful skills, but it is not necessarily your primary identity.
One of the brow-furrowing moments for me when I read articles on doctoral education or participate in panels is when the idea that “PhDs are researchers” comes up. It’s common for commenters to refer to PhDs in this way.
This is often an intentional move, one that pushes the conversation forward from the limiting notion as PhD as protoprofessors.
In that way, it’s a welcome intervention. The idea is to help doctoral graduates see how their skills and experiences have broader relevance and value. In the U.K. and Europe, “early-career researcher” and “early-stage researcher,” respectively, are used to refer to individuals currently undergoing doctoral studies and/or within the first few years of obtaining the degree. If you think of a PhD as a “research degree” this of course makes perfect sense.
If thinking of yourself as a researcher frees up your imagination and helps you move toward a fulfilling career, then by all means embrace the term. But if it leaves you as cold as it does me, I’m giving you permission to jettison it.
Why do we study student technology choices and preferences? With the first student study launched in 2004 we had an instinctive sense of why the exercise was valuable. Several campuses had been collecting data on student technology use - some of them for quite a while - but this included little broad and generalizable data about how students in higher education were adapting to and using technology.
Students' relationship with technology is complex. They recognize its value but still need guidance when it comes to better using it for academics. The affinity of undergraduates for multimedia, mobile devices, and multitasking is well documented. What is less well recognized is the circumspect way in which students think about integrating technology into their academic lives, a characteristic of college students that has persisted for many years.
According to recent forecasts, in just a few yearsâ€™ time, almost one in three students in American schools will be
English language learners. Many schools that once had only a handful of students new to this country and to the English language are now facing an influx of students for whom English is a second language. The No Child Left Behind Act officially made English learners a potentially significant subgroup for measuring Adequate Yearly Progress, a key accountability
measure for schools and districts. Rapid mastery of the English language is key for students to succeed in the K-12 education program. Reading, writing, listening and speaking are all core areas of learning a language. Each of these skills, of course, lies at the heart of basic K-12 educational programs and are assumed competencies at the higher education level. Academic success within an educationalprogram ultimately requires mastery of content that is more often than not delivered in English-based materials.
Computer and communication technologies have a central role to play in facilitating that rapid mastery. With guided, self-paced instruction that allows repetition and personalization, English learners in todayâ€™s K-20 classroom are strides ahead of their counterparts years ago. Whether teaching students within the classroom or adult learners at home or at work, technology-based materials and media have become the delivery medium of choice. Programs specifically focused on English learners, as well as advances in computer-based translation programs, have opened up virtually all electronic content to the English learner.
One-to-one computing is getting a boost from an emerging technology model that combines cloud computing with easy-to-manage laptops called Web clients. The result: Some school districts say technology is finally shedding its disruptive impact on classrooms.
This year is my second year in a tenure-track position at a small liberal arts college. I love my job, but I’m writing you because we just started the term and an ugly argument has already erupted over the department listserv. It’s both sad and a reminder that last year I spent a lot of time in these types of exchanges. I lost too many hours reading aggressive emails, crafting written responses and talking about the emails with my friends at other colleges.
I don’t want to spend my time this way anymore. What can I do to break the cycle?
Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) are online courses that cater to a huge population. MOOCs have been around for quite some time; however, they have begun to gain importance only in recent years. With technologyinfused classroom instructions on the rise, techno-savvy students with little patience for hour-long (or even longer) lectures and the necessity to earn has led to the popularity of online courses among the student population. The obvious benefits of taking up online courses include, among others, self-paced learning, and learning while earning, and learning from absolutely anywhere. An upcoming form of online learning is the massive open online courses (MOOCs). This paper discusses the concept of MOOCs, their history, and their need in the present scenario. This paper also focuses on the benefits and the possible challenges that MOOCs face.
A continued need exists for community college administrators to develop and implement strategies to ensure sufficient staffing to meet demand for online courses and promote student success. The problem this study addressed was threefold. First, online instructors in the local setting are overextended and are consequently unable to implement best practices. Because overextended online instructors cannot offer the presence and feedback needed to promote success, online student performance as measured by final course grades suffers. Another problem was that the current institutional system encourages overload teaching assignments. Finally, increased teaching loads can have negative ramifications on online instructor attentiveness, student performance, and academic rigor. The purpose of this descriptive quantitative study was to collect relevant data to examine the relationships among (a) online instructor employment status, (b) online instructor teaching load, and (c) online student performance at a community college. The study used both comparative and correlational research designs to address the research questions using ex post facto data. No statistically significant correlations were found between student success and employment status. However, a negative correlation was discovered between course overload and
student success as measured by final course grades and completion rates. Recommendations for future
research include an examination of seniority and tenure status of faculty and a wider geographic and
institutional type study to ensure generalizability of the results.
Ensuring students with special needs are receiving the best education is one of the greatest challenges facing school districts around the country. It is a challenge to organize, staff and operate successfully. It is a challenge to determine how best to provide the required curriculum and content but ensure that it is individualized to meet the instructional needs of the student with special needs. It is a challenge to determine how best to evaluate and assess progress. And it is a challenge for the bottom line â€” special education programs are expensive. Teachers must have better tools if they are to cost effectively engage and teach students who have special learning needs. The toolkit needs to be well stocked with a variety of capabilities to meet the needs of students across the disability spectrum. The breadth and depth of the toolkit allows for teachers to effectively differentiate instruction for students.
Recent advances in technology, and the accompanying curricula that utilize these advances, are rapidly filling that
toolkit with programs that can provide benefits to students with special needs.
Kids today spend their lives outside school surrounded by video whether on their TV screens, tablet PCs, laptops or
smartphones. Too often, the video stream shuts off inside theclassroom doors. But if students are given access to video tools in core classes â€” especially tools that allow them to produce their own videos â€” they are not only more engaged in their coursework, but learn valuable 21st-century skills. On average, one-third of high schoolers today donâ€™t graduate; the number is 50 percent or higher for African-Americans and Hispanics. Studies show that one key contributor is lack of engagement:
Students donâ€™t like school and report being bored. According to the 2010 High School Survey of Student Engagement, 55 percent of students said projects involving technology would help them feel more interested in school (49 percent said art and drama would help; 60 percent said group projects).2 Creating video in the classroom often taps all of these interests.
Video technology can also help foster vital skills needed for the 21st century. The 21st Century Framework (see graphic below),
developed by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills, sets forth standards for student achievement to ensure success in today's
technological world. The framework includes skills that are reinforced by student video creation such as creativity, communication and media mastery.
Adoption of the learning management system can affect areas of higher education such as student engagement, classroom anagement, and online courses. Likewise, lack of adoption can impede the success of using the tools available to higher education. This whitepaper will explore Roger’s Theory of Diffusion use with adoption among faculty.
D2L believes when one faculty adopts the technology, another faculty member who might resist will soon follow. Students, in turn, will use the platform for classes and are usually not the issue when adopting technology.
Inside Higher Ed’s fourth annual survey of college and university faculty members and campus leaders in educational technology aims to understand how these groups perceive and pursue online learning and other issues related to technology-enabled education.
At institutions of higher learning, there is an increased demand and need for online courses. However, the number of faculty developing and teaching these courses does not match the growth in online education. The purpose of this study was to determine the perceived barriers to online teaching experienced by various faculty groups at a public institution located in the southeastern United States using a new survey instrument, which was developed from recent research findings. This study sought to identify the most prevalent barriers to online instruction for the faculty group surveyed. In addition, these findings may identify prevalent barriers for faculty groups in an effort to inform administrative decisions concerning policy, training, and compensation as well as to facilitate involvement for specific types of online instruction for faculty development. A number of novel and important differences were found in the perceived barriers that exist between faculty groups on four constructs identified through an exploratory factor analysis. The factors found were: (1) interpersonal barriers; (2) institutional barriers; (3) training and technology barriers; and (4) cost/benefit analysis barriers. The results of this study may be of use to other institutions as they develop online instruction training programs.
Keywords: online ed cation, instructional technology, perceived barriers, survey research, online faculty
So here’s an interesting question: How do you effectively connect with students, form relationships, and be present in their lives in an online platform? Community is such a valuable commodity that is often overlooked. Students want to know their facilitator will support them, be active in their course, and create a sense of belonging. “Instructorstudent relationships lie at the heart of humanizing, serving as the connective tissue between students, engagement, and rigor” (Pacansky-Brock, Smedshammer, and Vincent-Layton 2020, 2). We must never underestimate the impact of authentically relating to our online students.
Online learning can feel very isolated and stressful for our learners. Many are raising families or are single parents working full or part time jobs, dealing with aging parents or sick siblings, or working through a major crisis in their life—all while completing their education in a virtual setting.
“Write an initial post and then reply to two of your classmates.” These are the standard requirements for students participating in online course discussions. Discussions in an online course play a vital role in creating substantive interactions, aiming to capture the spirit of discourse in face-to-face settings. This, however, can look and feel like busy work, making the purpose of online discussions unclear to students.
The standard blueprint is safe but has been exhausted. “Initial posts” can be counterintuitive—in essence, they require students to complete small writing assignments individually before giving other students feedback on their work (Liberman, 2019). How can we think outside of the box of posting and replying when it comes to these discussions? One way is to use online discussions as an opportunity to promote student autonomy and ask students to be active participants not only in how they respond to class discussions, but how they initiate them. Here are five considerations for promoting student autonomy while also
breaking the online discussion mold:
Higher education officials intend to invest in both audiovisual (AV) and unified communications (UC) technologies in the classroom to better meet student needs, but their plans don’t end there, according to a survey commissioned by AVI-SPL and conducted by the Center for Digital Education (CDE).
New thinking about course scheduling policies and practices makes student needs a top priority
At the turn of the century there were many companies in business providing the delivery of ice blocks to people’s homes. Then electricity became prevalent, and the refrigerator was invented. Shortly thereafter, these ice block delivery companies went out of business. What they failed to realize was that they were not in the ice block delivery business – they were in the business of delivering personal cooling – for people’s chicken, eggs, and soft drinks. Organizations that design, develop, and deliver training are at the same precipice. If we think that we are in the business of only delivering formally developed, instructionally sound, objective-laden, extremely vetted content in extended chunks, then we will also go the way of the ice-block delivery companies. We are in the business of impact – impact for the learner and the business – in terms of behavior, performance, and, ultimately, the bottom line. Any means in which we are able to provide that should be our focus.
The quick transition to remote and hybrid learning in higher ed has highlighted needs that only technology can address.
When face-to-face learning and teaching screeched to a halt back in March, educators did their best to cobble together digital tools to get them through the spring’s online teaching sprint. Now, with the pandemic’s end nowhere in sight, that educational mad dash has Custom content sponsored by Microsoft turned into a marathon. And just like endurance runners, educators are discovering they need top-notch equipment to help them stay the course.