Understanding Student Use of Digital Learning Resources Glenda MorganChuck Dziuban Patsy MoskalFlora McMartin Alan WolfJosh Morrill Copyright G. Morgan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
1 Effective Feedback to the Instructor from Online Homework Michigan State University Mark Urban-Lurain Gerd Kortemeyer.
Advertisements

How Faculty Like to Learn And What Should Be Done About It Carl Berger Jeff Bohrer Cheryl Diermyer Copyright by the authors, This work is the intellectual.
DSpace: the MIT Libraries Institutional Repository MacKenzie Smith, MIT EDUCAUSE 2003, November 5 th Copyright MacKenzie Smith, This work is the.
Copyright Policy Copyright Cathy O’Bryan This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared.
While You Were Out: How Students are Transforming Information and What it Means for Publishing Kate Wittenberg The Electronic Publishing Initiative at.
Online and on-campus: Proximity and Empowerment for Learning ELI Annual Meeting 2006 Advancing Learning: Insights and Innovations Louise Thorpe and Paul.
Copyright statement Copyright David Consiglio, Pattie Orr, and Andrew White, This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is.
TESL Ontario Conference October 28 & 29, Project Team Project Lead - Carolyn Cohen Research Lead - Antonella Valeo Research Consultants - Sheila.
Flexible Information Literacy Alternatives for Independent Learners Suzanne Hayes March 17, 2003 Copyright Suzanne Hayes This work is the intellectual.
Intellectual Property in the Digital Age Series “Don’t I Own My Own Work?” Negotiating to Keep Your Copyright Intellectual Property in the Digital Age:
Method: systematically gather citations by KU faculty and approach those faculty for permission to deposit on their behalf articles published in journals.
The Milliennial Instructor The Milliennial Student... and now... The Milliennial Instructor? Carl Berger Copyright by the author, This work is the.
Customized Library Resources for Learners Educause Midwest Regional Conference March 18, 2008 Library Course Pages Marc Boucher, Patricia Fellows, Mark.
FOCUS GROUP by Dotan and Acadia. Objectives To collect, analyze, and interpret data about students’ opinions of the AUP library website in a focus group.
Chatham College Community and Computers Pervasive Computing at a Liberal Arts College Charlotte E. Lott, Ph. D. Lynda Barner West, Ed. D. Copyright Charlotte.
Summer Online Courses A Distance Learning Alternative for Traditional Campuses North East Regional Computing Program Annual Conference (NERCOMP) Boston.
Flora McMartin - Broad Based Knowledge Alan Wolf - University of Wisconsin - Madison.
National Research Agenda to Support Transformation National Learning Infrastructure Initiative Focus Session June, 2003 Copyright Jillian Kinzie, 2003.
NLII Mapping the Learning Space New Orleans, LA Colleen Carmean NLII Fellow Information Technology Director, ASU West Editor, MERLOT Faculty Development.
Betty Collis University of Twente, The Netherlands Copyright Betty Collis This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted.
1©2002 Outsell, Inc. The Voice of the User: Where Students and Faculty Go for Information Leigh Watson Healy Vice President & Chief Analyst October 2,
Intellectual Property Protocol and Assessment for Distance Learning Liz Johnson Project Manager Advanced Learning Technologies Board of Regents of the.
Learning technology center Preparing Faculty and Students for Hybrid Courses Copyright Alan Aycock, Carla Garnham & Robert Kaleta, This work is the.
The Team Approach: A Paradigm Shift for Designing Successful Online Courses NERCOMP 2005 College for Lifelong Learning, Manchester, NH.
UNC’s Digital Library Project: Current Initiatives, Future Plans Megan Winget Academic Technology Specialist Office of Arts & Sciences Information Services.
Preparing for and Teaching Hybrid Courses Midwest EDUCAUSE March 25, 2003 Mary Sudzina, Ph.D. University of Dayton Robert Kaleta, Ph.D. & Carla Garnham.
Julie Evans, Project Tomorrow CEO Speak Up 2012 Results Online and Blended Learning Views of Ohio’s K-12 Students, Parents, Teachers and Administrators.
Serving MERLOT on Your Campus Gerry Hanley California State University and MERLOT Seminars on Academic Computing August 7, 2002 Snowmass CO Copyright Gerard.
Copyright Jack Chambers, This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non- commercial,
Making Big Classes Small: Penn State’s Blended Learning Initiative Renata Engel John T. Harwood January 30, 2006 Copyright Penn State, This work.
NERCOMP 2002, College for Lifelong Learning What Students, Faculty and the College are Learning about Teaching and Learning Online Managing the 24x7 Classroom.
BACK TO THE BASICS: Library Instruction Redux. BRENT HUSHER MELISSA MUTH FU ZHU0 University of Missouri–Kansas.
Julie Evans, Project Tomorrow CEO Speak Up 2012 National Findings June 26, 2013 Speak Up Findings & Trends: Informing the changing role of educators 9.
Lowering the Technology Barrier: Assigning Collaborative Web Projects Scott E. Siddall Denison University Copyright Scott E. Siddall, This work is.
Inspiring the Next Generation of Innovators: Students, Parents and Educators Speak Up about Science Education National Report Release NECC – July 1, 2008.
Managing Intellectual Property for Distance Learning Liz Johnson Project Manager Advanced Learning Technologies Board of Regents of the University System.
“Would Someone Say Something, Please?” Increasing Student Participation in College Classrooms Jane L. Kenney & Padmini Banerjee Presented by Amy Stonger.
The Millennial Instructor The Net-generation Student... OK, but the Net-Gen Instructor??? Carl Berger Copyright by the author, This work is the intellectual.
ONLINE VS. FACE-TO-FACE: EDUCATOR OPINIONS ON PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT DELIVERY METHODS BY TERESA SCRUGGS THOMAS Tamar AvineriEMS 792x.
Pedagogic Service Project: Enriching the MERLOT Collection Ellen Iverson Science Education Resource Center, Carleton College Scott Cooper University of.
Librarian Perceptions of the Function of the Academic Library: Summer-Fall 2006 Kevin Guthrie Roger C. Schonfeld December 4, 2006.
Implications of the Net Generation Diana G. Oblinger, Ph.D. Copyright Diana G. Oblinger, This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission.
Copyright Copyright University of Washington This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be.
Overcoming Barriers to Access and Use of Digital Learning Materials by Instructors in Higher Education Alan Wolf, University of Wisconsin - Madison Flora.
Gouri Banerjee, Ph. D. Dept. Math & IT, Emmanuel College Boston, Massachusetts. 1 Gouri Banerjee Blended Learning Environments, 2010.
Evaluation & MathDL Flora McMartin Broad-based Knowledge MathDL Workshop, October 2008.
Open Educational Resources: How are US Faculty Using Them? Flora McMartin, Broad-based Knowledge Alan Wolf, University of Wisconsin - Madison.
Copyright [Dr. Michael Hoadley, Chat Chatterji, and John Henderson ] [2004]. This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is granted.
Student Learning when Teaching with Technology: Aligning Objectives, Methods, and Assessments Copyright Information Copyright Karen St.Clair & Stan North.
Student Learning when Teaching with Technology: Aligning Objectives, Methods, and Assessments Copyright.
EDUCAUSE 2006 Electronic Portfolios, A Perfect Solution to Assessment in an Online English Composition Course Dr. Mary Jane Clerkin Copyright Dr. Mary.
Motivating adult learners can sometimes be a challenge. This module will provide you with information on how to design instructional content that will.
Motivating adult learners can sometimes be a challenge.
EDUCAUSE 2003 Copyright Toshiyuki Urata 2003 This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared.
Developing Strategies to Encourage Use of Digital Learning Materials Alan Wolf - University of Wisconsin - Madison Flora McMartin - Broad Based Knowledge.
COUNTING NEW FORMS OF SCHOLARSHIP TOWARD TENURE AND PROMOTION Peter Angelos and Linda Deneen University of Minnesota Duluth October 2010 This work is the.
Improving Campus IT Accessibility Dr. Jonathan Lazar Dept. of Computer and Information Sciences Towson University Copyright Jonathan Lazar This work.
© Scottsdale Community College Leveraging the Power of E-Learning Taking your course to a higher level Presented by Sidne Tate Director, Instructional.
Top 10 Challenges of the Academic Technology Community Veronica Diaz, John Campbell, Dennis Trinkle Wednesday, October 24, :50 p.m. - 4:40 p.m.
Understanding Student Use of Digital Learning Resources
Understanding Student Use of Digital Learning Resources
How many of you use Blackboard?
Researchers (in alphabetical order)
A Tale of Two Contexts: Student Perceptions of Adaptive Learning
Redesigning College Teaching at Sacramento State University
Educause Learning Initiatives (ELI) January 20-22, 2009
Open Educational Resources
Faculty use of digital resources and its impact on digital libraries
The Future of The Library
Factors Motivating Use of Digital Libraries
Presentation transcript:

Understanding Student Use of Digital Learning Resources Glenda MorganChuck Dziuban Patsy MoskalFlora McMartin Alan WolfJosh Morrill Copyright G. Morgan et al. (2012). This work is the intellectual property of the authors. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author. To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the authors."

Why Study Use of Digital Resources How people interact with scholarly content is changing Roots in NSDL and other digital library initiatives People had only studied how faculty used specific collections No one knew how faculty found & used materials But it gives us some provocative insights into how people work, and teach and learn and the implications of that knowledge is fairly profound

We Started Out Looking at Faculty Use of Digital Resources 2006 – 2009 – National survey of STEM instructors regarding their use of digital resources in teaching (n=4,439) 2009 – Large international survey of Physics instructors (n=9,275) 2011 – National study of Social Science faculty (n=1,037)

Research Questions - Faculty What do faculty members do with the online digital resources they find at digital libraries, online collections, etc.? Do faculty value digital resources? How do faculty use digital resources for teaching purposes? What are the barriers to their use of resources and digital libraries/collections?

How different are faculty from one another? When we look at traditionally identified faculty populations, we saw few differences. The type of institution where they serve The amount of time that they have been teaching Even discipline was less a factor than expected Differences in the types resources used As far as these traditional groups go, we have a homogenous population

Types of Digital Resources Type of Resource % Use Very FrequentlyHow Used Digital images - visual42Lecture Prof. Dev. as Teacher Animations11Review/Study aid Lecture Data Sets22Prof. Dev. as Teacher Research/PBL Teaching, Learning Exercises28Review/Study aid Lecture Online scholarly resources49Prof. Dev. as Teacher Grants, Scholarship

Digital Resources – other findings Google favorite starting point for searching Iterative process (satisficing) Tend to use DRs developed by others ‘as is’, regardless of the type of DR (digital image, data set, etc.)* Importance of Peer review – 50% Organized to find materials quickly – 40% Supplemental teaching materials – 8% Supplemental PD materials – 2%

Motivations Strong Agreement Top – Improve student learning (Social desirability?) Stay abreast of professional developments Keep material fresh Help students learn difficult concepts Agreement Incorporating DR’s in class is fun Saves time Ambivalent Accommodation for students with disabilities

Barriers to use Agreement More time More useful DR available More/better training in Ambivalent Institutional rewards for use Disagreement More dependable technology Not access to technology Greater priority to institution Photo Credit: Brandon

Physics & Social Science Instructors Results tend to parallel those of larger study All valued DRs highly Similar broad patterns of digital resource type – but some interesting differences across disciplines Barriers are the same regardless of demographic e.g. social science discipline, type of school

Frequency of Use of Digital Resource by Type Never UseRarely UseOccasionally UseFrequently UseMean Freq% % % % Use of Still Images/Photos Physics Social Sciences All Disciplines Use of Simulations Physics Social Sciences All Disciplines Use of Online Datasets Physics Social Sciences All Disciplines Use of Learning Exercises Physics Social Sciences All Disciplines Use of Videos and Animations Physics Social Sciences Use of Audio Physics Social Sciences = Never Use; 2= Rarely Use, 3 = Occasionally Use, 4= Frequently Use

Frequency of Use of Digital Resource by Type There are significant differences in utilization of different kinds of resources This example is use of simulation:

Conclusions about Faculty Data are still relevant – Instructors change more slowly than the educational landscape? Need activation to overcome barriers and encourage adoption Knowing about & valuing resources does not always translate to use Intrinsic motivation is a powerful force (but people do not have limitless reservoirs) Students are a powerful extrinsic motivator Faculty tend not to turn to online resources that focus on teaching improvement

What instructors think of student use of resources? This question always sparks debate BUT …. For those who would like student use supervised, it is too late

But it does raise the question How do students use digital resources in their learning?

Student Study – Interviews & focus groups Qualitative data analysis Survey instrument development Survey Survey data analysis Follow up interviews & focus groups Case study of Physics students & other intensive users Summary Report & findings

Research Questions - Students Do student believe DRs contribute to greater learning? What are the circumstances that motivate students to look for DRs? Where to students start searching? What criteria to students use to assess DRs? What barriers to students face in finding & using DRs? What kinds of DRs do students prefer? How to DRs contribute to student learning? Do students value “collections”?

Qualitative Findings Students making far more independent use of DRs than anticipated Students desire content that is well organized and that teachers teach it to them They seek information/explanation when teachers are doing a poor job of it. Students seek video, but it is unclear if they prefer it Differences between recordings of full lectures vs. chunks. Students may be turning to new or different content providers faster than we discover them e.g. YouTube channels Students may value collections more than their propensity to turn to Google may indicate, especially when directed to ‘authoritative’ sources

How and Why Students Use Digital Resources

Formal Syllabus Learning happens both inside and outside Outside is the realm of the “free range learner” Learners have always been a bit “free range ” Hypothesis That we are seeing more free range learning – or a different type of free range learning Who are the free rangers? Are there different types of free ranger? Free Rangers Demographics Motivation Barriers Non Free Rangers Are there students who don’t free range, and why not? What are they doing to fill that role

Quantitative Data Collection Trying to determine what kinds of learners students are

Student Survey Lines of Inquiry Where do students turn when they run into problems with schoolwork Where do students turn when they are interested in a topic General motivations for studying and academic work Use of digital resources in class and students preferences

Student preferences about the “collection-ness” of data

Additional Lines of Inquiry Perceptions about college affordability Questions about textbook use and affordability Wikipedia use Technology ownership Demographics

Survey strategy

Survey Strategy Used data gathered from focus groups to formulate and refine questions Brainstorming sessions to tie the survey to our objectives and formulate a plan

Pilot survey Online survey Ease of data collection Ease of administration Conducting pilot Asked 2 faculty at UCF to advertise to their classes ~50 responses Asked students for feedback regarding questions that were confusing

Some preliminary pilot survey results

Likely to do the following to help with course material (n=51)

Use of technology in class (n=51)

Prefer frequent use in class Video/ Audio Wikis/ Blogs E-booksMobile Apps Simulations/ Online games Other Websites (n=51)

Steps taken in the past year to reduce textbook costs Shared book Checked out from library Didn’t buy book Borrowed book Rented book Found materials online Other (n=51)

Plan to purchase Technology Ownership 100 OwnHave access to (n=51)

Survey Strategy Using survey administration company Maintain large database of people Can pre-screen on demographics National sample Removes researcher pressure on participants Sample size of 10,000-20,000 Plan on 10% response rate

Questions Glenda Morgan Patsy Moskal Alan Wolf

Acknowledgements & Co- Conspirators Flora McMartin Josh Morrill Chuck Dziuban Ellen Iverson Lynette Hoeltter

Questions and Comments Glenda Morgan Or one of the other researchers on the project Chuck Dziuban, University of Central Florida, Flora McMartin, Broad-based Knowledge, Josh Morrill, University of Wisconsin at Madison, Patsy Moskal, University of Central Florida, Alan Wolf, University of Wisconsin at Madison, Support for this project was provided by the National Science Foundation DUE award no Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation