LDT Seminar – Week 7 – Problem Statement

Reuben came over to talk about our Learning Problems – very productive talk that guided us further down the rabbit hole : )

Started a new document to gather my thoughts on a possible masters project.

This is what I’ve got so far:

Problem Statement

Communities, companies and countries have to be able to share knowledge and educate their peers in order to thrive. The traditional methods of doing so are through books, talks, documentaries, and interviews. We want to learn from the best, understand how they do it and be more like them. But sometimes we just want to talk to someone, interact with them – learn from a human being – even if it is not the expert – maybe even better if it is someone who speaks more like I do. How can technology enable this?

Research Question

How might we scaffold “experts” to create engaging hybrid courses?


  • Hybrid Online Learning
  • Instructional Design
  • Train the Trainer
  • Professional Development
  • TPCK


  • how to extract value from experts
  • how to identify what an expert knows that is of interest
  • how to ask for knowledge from an expert
  • time based courses are the ones that perform better
  • TMS – Teaching Management System
  • Manage/meet expectations of stakeholders e.g. school owner then students


  1. Candace Marie-Thille
  2. Anna Proteus
  3. Sarah Rutheford-Quach
  4. Karin Forsell

To Research

  1. Evidence Based Learning
  2. Hebert Simon
  3. Professional Development: look at Jeff Zwier’s work: http://www.jeffzwiers.org
  4. Jonathan Osborne: course design and interaction.
  5. Technology Integration Planning Model ( Robyler, 2006)
  6. Systematic ICT Integration Model ( Wang & ve Woo, 2007)
  7. Apple Future Classes Model (Dwyer, Ringstaff, Sandholtz & Apple Computer Inc., 1990)
  8. Social Model (Wang, 2008)
  9. Enhanced Pearson Model (Woodbridge, 2004)
  10. Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge [TPACK] model (Koehler & Mishra, 2005). Koehler and Mishra (2005)


“While students rated the instructors very positively, the results also indicate that instructors still need to have their roles transformed pedagogically, socially, and technologically if they are to establish a more engaging and fruitful environment for online learning.” – Liu, X., Lee, S., Bonk, C., Su, B., Magjuka, R. (2005). Exploring Four Dimensions of Online Instructor Roles: A Program Level Case Study. Online Learning Consortium http://onlinelearningconsortium.org/sites/default/files/v9n4_liu_1.pdf

“This study found a change in the beliefs and teaching presence of the instructors from their initial resistance to online teaching to an approach which is mindful of the student experience and promotes a dialogical approach to online learning.” – Redmond, P., (2011) From face-to-face teaching to online teaching: Pedagogical transitions. ascilite 2011 Hobart: http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/hobart11/downloads/papers/Redmond-full.pdf

“In spite of the proliferation of online learning, creating online courses can still evoke a good deal of frustration, negativity, and wariness in those who need to create them.” – Vai, M. & Sosulski, K. (2015). Essentials of Online Course Design. A Standards-Based Guide, 2nd Edition. Routledge https://www.routledge.com/products/9781138780163

“Technology alone does nothing to enhance online pedagogy. According to Jacobsen, et al. (2002), the real challenge is to “develop fluency with teaching and learning with technology, not just with technology, itself” (p.44).” – Keengwe, J. & Kidd, T. (2010). Towards Best Practices in Online Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/keengwe_0610.htm


Essentials of Online Course Design https://www.routledge.com/products/9781138780163

Towards Best Practices in Online Learning and Teaching in Higher Education http://jolt.merlot.org/vol6no2/keengwe_0610.htm

EXPLORING FOUR DIMENSIONS OF ONLINE INSTRUCTOR ROLES: A PROGRAM LEVEL CASE STUDY https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB4QFjAAahUKEwjQ4te54tfIAhUL1GMKHcGSCxA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonlinelearningconsortium.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Fv9n4_liu_1.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHtnYf76HkFI-YrIcLhxBWoNPXhRw&sig2=RQVCKYoBJvqv-Gtu8oyCdw

(MY) THREE PRINCIPLES OF EFFECTIVE ONLINE PEDAGOGY http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ909855.pdf

Source Effects in Online Education http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/um/people/thies/las15-source-effects.pdf

The Five stage Model http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html

From face-to-face teaching to online teaching: Pedagogical transitions http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/hobart11/downloads/papers/Redmond-full.pdf

From On-Ground to Online: Moving Senior Faculty to the Distance Learning Classroom http://er.educause.edu/articles/2017/6/from-onground-to-online-moving-senior-faculty-to-the-distance-learning-classroom

Why some distance education programs fail while others succeed in a global environment http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1096751609000281

Case Study: Challenges and Issues in Teaching Fully Online Mechanical Engineering Courses http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-06764-3_74

TPCK and SAMR – Models for Enhancing Technology Integration (2008) http://www.msad54.org/sahs/TechInteg/mlti/SAMR.pdf

SAMR and TPCK in Action http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2017/08/28/SAMR_TPCK_In_Action.pdf

SAMR: Beyond the Basics http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2017/08/26/SAMRBeyondTheBasics.pdf

From the Classroom to the Keyboard: How Seven Teachers Created Their Online Teacher Identities http://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/download/1814/3253

A structure equation model among factors of teachers’ technology integration practice and their TPCK http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131515000949

Examining Technopedagogical Knowledge Competencies of Teachers in Terms of Some Variables http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877042815006990/pdf?md5=1d1ccf6d1fb7088d7fda105f66d677c6&pid=1-s2.0-S1877042815006990-main.pdf

The Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge-practical (TPACK-Practical) model: Examination of its validity in the Turkish culture via structural equation modeling http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131515001189

Using TPCK as a scaffold to self-assess the novice online teaching experience http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01587919.2015.1019964#aHR0cDovL3d3dy50YW5kZm9ubGluZS5jb20vZG9pL3BkZi8xMC4xMDgwLzAxNTg3OTE5LjIwMTUuMTAxOTk2NEBAQDA=

What Is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge? http://www.editlib.org/p/29544/

The role of TPACK in physics classroom: case studies of preservice physics teachers http://ac.els-cdn.com/S187704281201779X/1-s2.0-S187704281201779X-main.pdf?_tid=cf1faf84-81bf-11e5-8938-00000aacb35f&acdnat=1446509831_08753d5dcf76ed3f790bd4382aae1e31

Handbook of Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPCK) for Educators https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=lEbJAwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=tPCK&ots=-p0TWk4RCI&sig=FElDYqBq7xyKcFWehvVRZ91LrNE#v=onepage&q&f=false

When using technology isn׳t enough: A comparison of high school civics teachers׳ TPCK in one-to-one laptop environments http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0885985X14000229

Systematic Planning for ICT Integration in Topic Learning http://ifets.info/journals/10_1/14.pdf

What Is Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge http://www.citejournal.org/articles/v9i1general1.pdf



Effect of a TPCK-SRL Model on Teachers’ Pedagogical Beliefs, Self-Efficacy, and Technology-Based Lesson Design http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-8080-9_5

Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge as a Framework for Integrating Educational Technology in the Teaching of Computer Science http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-1-4899-8080-9_11

Instruction: A Models Approach, Enhanced Pearson http://www.pearsonhighered.com/educator/product/Instruction-A-Models-Approach-Enhanced-Pearson-eText-with-LooseLeaf-Version-Access-Card-Package/9780134046884.page





Intro to Teaching – Week 7 – Reading Notes


  1. PTFCW, Ch. 7: pp. 232-255
  2. Goldenberg, C. (2013). Unlocking the research on English learners – What we know and don’t yet know about effective instruction. American Educator, 37(2), 4-12.
  3. Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into practice, 31(2), 132-141.
  4. Delpit, L. (1995). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. In Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom (pp. 21-47). New York: The New Press.

Class Notes: 

IMG_1002 IMG_1003 IMG_1004 IMG_1005

Tech 4 Learners – Week 7 – Assignment Prototype Tests 1


Test your top ideas with your learner.  Report on what you did, what you learned, and where you will go from here.


Team SAL: Soren, Alex, Lucas 

Our learner is Achu. Achu struggles with verbalizing his thoughts spontaneously. While he has a good vocabulary, and no motor skills problems that might impede his speech, he does not usually use words with a few exceptions, often repeating what other might people might have said. To assess what he is learning, teachers and instructors ask him a binary choice question (is the answer to the question I am posing, option A or option B).

Our Idea: Our goal was to get Achu to verbalize more and more words – and we wanted these words to be generated by him (not merely repeated after another person). Our assumption is that, as he generates more and more words and sequences of words, he will both gain more comfort with doing that, as well as find that his words have value and positive consequences.

Our Prototype: We dream was to create an app, whereby Achu might watch a video that he enjoys, and getting him to narrate the video, while recording his narration.

To prototype this, we used the Wizard of Oz technique. We showed Achu two videos that he really enjoys (A basketball themed one and a Hot Wheels themed one). We used those two videos to trigger his interest (using the 4 Phase Development of Interest framework). We asked him to say what he saw. First we modeled it for him, with Soren acting as the instructor, and one of the two of us acting as the learner and narrating the video. Second we asked Achu to do it – as various videos were rolling, Soren, in the role of the instructor, would ask him “Achu, what is happening now?” accompanied by a light tap. In the third iteration, the instructor-Soren asked Achu only lightly tapped Achu, as a prompt to tell us what was happening in the video. Finally, after each viewing, we played it back to him – celebrating with Achu the power of his words – and letting him hear himself “narrate” the key moments.

What happened: We came in fully prepared that this might not work – that Achu might not react at all to either us or the videos. We were pleasantly surprised that during all of the iterations (both the verbal prompt and the light tap), Achu said words that he had generated himself (not repeated) that were related to the video such as “Score”, “Dribble”, “Car”, “Train” and even the phrase “Fell down”, which were all accurate and linked to the narration.

Our insights & debrief with Marina: We were very excited about the outcome, and we think this could be a potentially very good app that prompts Achu to generate his own words, and in the future, through scaffolding, his own phrases and longer text.  

Marina had mixed reactions because 1) in some sense this work is very similar to the work that logotherapists have done with Achu over time; 2) it still requires prompting (i.e. does not fully solve the problem of lack of prompting). We think however, that given that in his daily instruction, Achu only chooses an A or B option, this could be a complementary tool. It would supplement the ongoing work that the instructors, the logotherapist and other caretakers are doing with Achu and allow him to generate more of his words than he is right now.

For the next time: We are debating whether to go with an improved version of this prototype (a higher resolution version or potentially something that might push him further to generate more sentences beyond words) or whether to try something else.