Skip to main content

My quick thoughts, back stage, and rants as I try to Teach kids about the Web while learning how to help others build a better Web.

IndieWebRing

Come Journey Through the IndieWeb Sites

🕸💍

Greg McVerry

@sunnydeveloper And don't make schools make you prove a negative. They say we need to for engagement demand to see the research showing faces improves engagement (hint not one study in 30 years of research has this finding)

Greg McVerry

OnTask looks cool. Good engagement platform. Flexible APIs

Greg McVerry

You can just remove the whole counting and competition layer and just encourage engagement later on in a classroom or in participant lifecycle. Check out what does with with daily creates

Greg McVerry

Thinking about some of tools we use in community like indiewebifyme https://indiewebify.me/ and how stuff like webmentions could be used as tool to drive engagement by also encouraging participants to display buttons

Greg McVerry

An Autoethnography on Learning About Autoethnography

I can write this down now. It has been swirling around in my head for a month, the readings mixing with my thoughts and reactions, but I did not know just how to put it down on paper. So much of what I want to say about autoethnography is about me, not it.

Okay maybe I am on the write track. I kinda wanna lose the traditional research headings. Gonna keep them for planning so the semantic sturcutre lies beneath and through whatever blanket of truth I weave.

reflexivity and voice, various vague approaches to autobiographical inquiry, validity and acceptability, defences and criticisms, and a wide range of published personal narratives, the typical product of autoethnography.

keeping with the essence of autoethnography, I finally came to the realization that I could share my experience of learning about autoethnography and, in the text, co-mingle me and it.

Philosophical and theoretical foundations for autobiographical methods

Think we can skip the whole positvist and post modern debate.

feminist researchers “emphasize the subjective, empathetic, process-oriented, and inclusive sides of social life” (Neuman, 1994, p. 72).

Stivers (1993) has stated that a vision of universal truth is really just a dream of power over others and that liberatory, emancipatory projects are better served by alternative knowledge production process.

Taking the question of voice and representation a step further, we could argue that an individual is best situated to describe his or her own experience more accurately than anyone else

The potential power of autoethnography to address unanswered questions and include the new and unique ideas of the researcher is inspiring to me as one who wishes to find my niche and make my own special contribution.

They noted, however, that the term autoethnography has been in use for more than 20 years (originated by Hayano, 1979) and has become the term of choice in describing studies of a personal nature (Ellis, 2004;Ellis & Bochner, 2000).

The basic design of a heuristic research project involves six steps: initial engagement, immersion, incubation, illumination, explication, and culmination in a creative synthesis (Moustakas, 1990)

Although these phases, as described by Moustakas (1990), strike me as quite idealistic and abstract, they do set the tone for a very nontraditional form of study that “engages one‟s total self and evokes a personal and passionate involvement and active participation in the [research] process” (p. 42).

autobiographical research methods have become increasingly known as “autoethnography” and have been promoted, influenced, and developed by Ellis and Bochner (1999, 2000).

Muncey (2005) added some concrete assistance to the question of “how to do” autoethnography. She suggested the use of snapshots, artifacts/documents, metaphor, and psychological and literal journeys as techniques for reflecting on and conveying a “patchwork of feelings, experiences, emotions, and behaviors that portray a more complete view of . . . life” (p. 10).

A third widely discussed approach to the researcher‟s use of self is personal narrative. Personal narrative is often presented as a typical product of autoethnography but is also proposed as a method unto itself.

Autoethnographers tend to vary in their emphasis on auto- (self), -ethno- (the cultural link), and -graphy (the application of a research process) (Ellis & Bochner, 2000, paraphrasing Reed- Danahay, 1997).

Holt (2001) published an autoethnography that is similar in approach to Sparkes‟s (1996), although it deals with a very different topic. Holt told his story about becoming a graduate teaching assistant in a university and using a three-level reflection strategy to refine his teaching methods.

Duncan, autoethnography was a method of inquiry in which the inner dialogue of the researcher was considered valid, that encouraged systematic reflection, offered an organized and traceable means of data analysis and resulted in a scholarly account (p. 3). Rigor in the research process (“-graphy”)

On the other end of the continuum are a number of examples of personal narrative that rely almost exclusively on a highly personal, evocative writing style, focusing on the auto-, omitting any reference to research conventions, and leaving the reader to make his or her own societal or cultural applications. An essay called “A Choice for K‟aila” (Paulette, 1993) is a mother‟s story about her decision not to permit her infant son, with terminal liver disease, to have a liver transplant.

Despite their wide-ranging characteristics, autoethnographic writings all begin with the researcher‟s use of the subjective self. By using self as a source of data, perhaps the only source, autoethnography has been criticized for being self-indulgent, narcissistic, introspective, and individualized (Atkinson, 1997; Sparkes, 2000).

Greg McVerry

Hey @scsu I wanted to share some insights we have had as we build and facilitate trainings to get ready for the 100% move online #edchat #literacies #edtechchat #highered

As our students will return to campus without setting a foot on campus we need to ensure we approach the week with care and compassion

3 min read

As our students will return to campus without setting a foot on campus we need to ensure we approach the week with care and compassion and then build out a space for learning using four better practices:

  • Use Asynchronous Communication
  • Use Simple Predictable Design
  • Focus On Teacher Presence
  • Provide Timely Feedback

Make Your Class Asynchronous

We have been providing training to many of you on two delivery methods:

  • asynchronous techniques using videos, readings, assignment, and Blackboard
  • synchronous techniques using chat and video apps like Microsoft Teams and WebEx

While as a faculty member you have the academic freedom to design your course in any manner that uses tools supported by the University we wanted to share some better practices:

The majority of your course should be asynchronous. While many faculty may want to just open WebEx or Microsoft Teams, launch the video chat, and teach during their assigned face to face class time this is not considered better practice.

  • Many of your students will be newly unemployed and have child care issues to figure out. Being available at specific times may not be possible to many. Conducting the majority of your classes asynchronously will help ensure every student can succeed.
  • Your synchronous chats should be used to supplement your class and increase your social presence. Better practice would not rely on live chat as your primary delivery system

Keep Your Design Simple

You need to keep your instructional design simple and predictable. For the next few weeks less is more. Provide as few tools to students as possible. Come up with a design for your modules (we made a course template) that you can repeat each week or each two weeks.

Focus on Teaching Presence

After simple design your teaching presence is the most important practice. Set aside 1-2 hours a day for teaching each class and another 1hour per class for delivering feedback. At a minimum you should post a note to each students' first post. Make sure you are posting a minimum of four days a week.

Try so send daily or weekly announcement. A short email, video, or audio announcement can help keep students engaged.
Email messages are very powerful. Send words of encouragement or feedback occasionally to student emails. Research shows this to be a very effective practice at increasing student engagement.

Timely Feedback

We are all worried about the increased work load but we know timely feedback ensures student success in online learning. First begin by asking if your assessments are important. Will they make a difference to student lives in 5 years. If you are doing the assessment for just a grade or accreditation it doesn't really serve a learning purpose and may not be needed.

Think about more frequent and shorter assessments. Use low stakes or ungraded assessments. Rely on peer assessments. Remember feedback, and not the assessment tools and grades we assign, drive learning.

Greg McVerry

The agency and artistry of meaning makers within and across digital spaces

artistry to meaning making that has more to do with the meaning maker than the technologies

It is a mistake to believe that there is some kind of precise “mathematic” or “formulaic” rendering that is possible. Meaning making is never precise; it is not a form of exact mapping of sounds or meanings onto text.

The skilled readers in our study engaged in a multi-layered inferential reading process that occurred across the three-dimensional spaces of Internet tex(Coiro & Dobler)

That is, the meaning maker is engaged in constructing selves or multiple persona in the company of others or a form of embodiment — a secondary engagement with or participation in the worlds constructed across or within or by layers of text and other media. The term embodiment is used to denote Csordas’ (1999) use of embodiment — “an existential condition” (p. 143).

we control navigation but new skills

Greg McVerry

Greg McVerry

Greg McVerry

How Video Production Affects Student Engagement:An Empirical Study of MOOC Videos

Our main findings are that shorter videos are much more en-gaging, that informal talking-head videos are more engaging,that Khan-style tablet drawings are more engaging, that evenhigh-quality pre-recorded classroom lectures might not makefor engaging online videos, and that students engage differ-ently with lecture and tutorial videos.

Engagement measured as minutes watched and problems attempted after video

Our script extracted 6.9 million total video watching sessionsacross four courses during the time period when they wereinitially offered in Fall 2012 (see Table 2)

Video length was by far the most significant indicator of en-gagement.

shows that median engagement time is at most6 minutes, regardless of total video length. The bottom box-plot (engagement times normalized to video length) showsthat students often make it less than halfway through videoslonger than 9 minutes.

For the five length buck-ets in Figure 2, we computed the percentage of video watch-ing sessions followed by a problem attempt: The percentageswere 56%, 48%, 43%, 41%, and 31%, respectively

Even at the highest levels on 52% attempted a problem on short videos. This is really low. Wonder what this means for including quizzes and things in videos

They found taking heads to be more engaging, but Mayer has always found this has not made a difference in learning

Resolution had no effect. Maybe encourage shooting in lower resolution to save post production time and to consider data rates

In tutorials "Khan type" screencast had more engagement. What does this mean for video walkthrough tutorials for writing? Was this a novelty finding from 2012? Still relevant todat?

Pre-planning improves engagement...in the no duh finding category

CLMOOC

Prev | Home | Join | ? | Next