Artifact 5 - Course Enhancement Proposal

The final artifact which I would like to introduce is a course enhancement proposal I completed as part of my learning in MDDE610 – Survey of Current Educational Technology Applications during the Fall 2019 semester.

For this assignment, I had to think of an existing course which I thought could benefit from the incorporation of one or more technologies.  To accomplish the proposal, the assignment was broken down into three components:

Part 1 – Problem Identification

Part 2 – SECTIONS Analysis

Part 3 – Briefing Note

Problem Identification

At the outset of this assignment, I felt slightly uninspired and as a result, I do not feel that the argument I submitted in my 'problem identification' paper was my strongest.  Part of this was due to the fact that I was feeling a little discouraged - I perceived that I was basically the only one in my class who was not [professionally] an educator, and so I felt I didn't really have a "teaching/learning" context from which I could choose a course in need of enhancing (2.1).  I had a couple of ideas which I thought could be worth focusing on - English as a second language (ESL) courses, workplace professional development, among a few others.  However, I didn't have any direct experience with ESL courses so I felt a little out of my zone to propose technology enhancements in that area, and workplace professional development courses felt too broad (I've taken so many).  I wanted to focus on a very specific course, so I made the decision to focus on a course which remains one of my most memorable learning experiences (and not in a positive way, largely because it was so challenging and I remember feeling very discouraged when taking it) – Grade 11 Functions and Applications for University/College Preparation (2.1).  For context, this course was one which focused on advanced mathematic concepts such as Quadratic, Exponential and Trigonometric functions designed to prepare students for entry into technology-based programs in the college setting as well as preparing students for grade 12 university-level math, this was often listed as an admission requirement to many undergraduate university courses. 

As I sat down to formulate my paper, I reminisced on my number one weakness in school throughout most of my life: mathematics.  As I pointed out in one of my earlier artifacts, math has never been my strong suit - I always preferred English, history, the so-called "right brained" strengths.  And this is precisely how I opened my argument in my paper for this assignment as to why I was choosing to look at my grade 11 math course for the course proposal.  Though I do believe there is some truth to the left-brain/right-brain train of thought, I recognize now that I was probably being a little too anecdotal...the sources which I used were probably less than 'scholarly' - for example one of them was an article from a magazine.  I remember trying to find peer-reviewed journals on the subject and was having quite a hard time, likely due to the fact that there hasn't been too much research done to substantiate the left-brain/right-brain idea (I did find some research-based information, mind you) (1.4).  Though I still did reasonably well on the problem identification paper and managed to maintain an academic tone through my writing, I wished I had approached my argument differently (4.1). 

Still feeling a little discouraged, I continued on with my plan to enhance the Grade 11 Functions and Applications course.  Thinking back to my experience in the course, I thought about the graphing calculators which were provided to each student and smiled at the attempt by educators (and perhaps the government, more broadly) to incorporate technology (1.12; 2.1).  For those who were mathematically inclined, the use of a simple graphing calculator may have been viewed as sufficient, however I  (personally) didn't find it provided much utility for my learning (1.1).  This was further exacerbated by the fact that the content taught in the course was almost completely devoid of any real explanation as to how the course concepts were applied in real world settings (1.2; 2.7).

Recognizing that it had been quite some time since I had taken that course, I wondered if the curriculum had been updated to include any further advances in technology.  Optimistically, I looked to the Ontario Ministry of Education’s website to locate the math curriculum; the course hadn't been updated since 2007 (1.4; 2.7). 

Proposed Change

Given that the last time this course was revised was in 2007, I felt that it would be beneficial to create a course enhancement proposal for it which would include a greater use of technology, ideally a technology which would lend well to creating a dialogue about why the content is important/useful and how it can be applied to real world situations (4.2; 4.3).  In doing so, my hope was that students would emerge from the course with an enhanced understanding of not just the mathematical concepts themselves, but also the ability to visualize the application of those concepts (1.9; 1.12). 

To address this, I proposed a course enhancement plan which would incorporate the use of one of two types of technology: instructional videos or web-conferencing (2.4; 2.6).  Initially these two types of technology might not appear to be beneficial to a course like this, but I felt both had the potential to help students achieve a greater understanding of the value and importance of concepts taught in the course in every day life (1.8; 1.9).  Instructional videos would provide a great opportunity for the educator to help students think about real-life application of the course content with the added benefit and ease of being able to replay lessons in whole or in part to aid in their learning (1.6; 1.7).  Alternatively, web-conferencing would create an open line of communication for educator-student and/or student-student discussion about the concepts taught within the course and the ability to work through content in a communal way with the aim of producing greater learning outcomes (1.6; 1.7).

To determine which technology type would be better, I completed two SECTIONS analyses – one for the technology type (i.e.: instructional videos versus web-conferencing), and upon making a decision, a second analysis which compared two different applications (i.e.: Zoom versus WebEx) (1.6; 3.5).  The SECTIONS analysis technique is one which looks at 8 factor areas (Students, Ease of Use, Costs, Teaching & Learning, Interactivity, Organizational Issues, Networking, and Security & Privacy), each of which has a unique subset of considerations; a prescribed importance level (low, medium, or high); and a 'notes'  area where further consideration is required (3.4; 3.5).

SECTIONS: Technology Type

When assessing the overall technology type (i.e.: instructional video versus web-conferencing), I had to think broadly about the advantages and disadvantages of each option as I went through each category of questions, provided an importance rating (high, medium or low) for each subset item, and then added additional notes wherever possible so that I could conduct a final review prior to making a decision (3.4; 3.5).  For this SECTIONS analysis, I had to make reasonable assumptions based on the how well each technology type met the needs of the each factor and in relation to the desired end result (3.5; 1.8).  To make these assumptions, I thought critically about what I saw as advantages and disadvantages for each technology type and, through envisioning the use of each technology type in this course, determine whether it would accomplish the goals I established for the course redesign (1.6; 1.7).

 Alt-Text: Screenshot of SECTIONS Analysis comparing technology types in chart format with responses included.

After completing a SECTIONS analysis for the technology type, I took some time to review my inputs before making a decision (1.5; 5.10) .  With the exception of a few 'low importance' items in the analysis , the responses to most of the questions were identical between the two technology types.  Given that [where there were differences] they were on items which I had assigned as 'low' importance, I felt my decision was relatively 50/50 and so I made the choice to proceed with web-conferencing (3.4; 4.3).  I felt that web-conferencing was the ideal choice because it promoted and encouraged communication, collaboration, and information sharing among classmates and with the teacher (1.8; 2.3).  In doing so, I felt as though web-conferencing would also be the most ideal way to create conditions for greater knowledge transfer, while also spurring student confidence in the learning material, thus contributing to  better learning outcomes (1.7; 1.8).
 

SECTIONS: Application Choice

Once I had decided on web-conferencing, however, I proceeded to work on completing a secondary SECTIONS analysis comparing two different applications (3.5; 1.6).  For this analysis, I chose what I felt were the two most commonly used web-conferencing programs at the time: Zoom and WebEx (1.5).  Just as in the first SECTIONS analysis, I answered all of the subset questions for each factor, assigned an importance rating, and made notes about additional considerations wherever needed ((3.5; 3.5).  To do so, I consulted the official websites for each of the applications I was investigating, but also downloaded and tested each application individually in an attempt to understand each of them from a user experience stand point (1.4; 1.6).  Below is a screenshot of a portion of the SECTIONS analysis I completed to compare the two applications.  

 Alt-Text: Screenshot of SECTIONS analysis for comparing technology types in chart format with responses populated.

 Upon completion of this, I reviewed the entire SECTIONS analysis responses I had input for both applications and began my decision making process once again 3.5; 5.10).  As I reviewed my inputs, one item which I had identified as 'high' importance was different (1.6; 1.1).  This item was regarding the ability to retrieve learning material/discussions in the event of a device failure or replacement, and seeing as the purpose of choosing web-conferencing technology was to allow for greater information sharing, I viewed this misalignment between the two applications to be a deal-breaker (1.2; 3.5).  To add to its importance, I considered the fact that information sharing taking place in this course via the web-conferencing platform would likely include important information needed to complete assignments and/or collaborative team projects (2.4; 3.5).   

After taking all of the above into consideration between both WebEx and Zoom, it appeared to me at the time that Zoom was the most appropriate choice because it was the only one which automatically prompted host users to save the recorded sessions to their personal computer which could then be stored on a backup drive (if needed) for future retrieval (4.3; 3.2).

Alt-Text: Screenshot of SECTIONS analysis with responses populated, highlighting decision point between two applications.

The rationale I submitted to conclude my SECTIONS analysis is shown below (1.6; 3.2):