There is an ancient Indian proverb, Knowledge is Structured in Consciousness. During the past six weeks, I have slowly become more conscious in my own teaching practices, in my awareness of what it means to teach online and how that relates to my understanding of teaching models and theories. Looking at new topics each week has given me the opportunity to think about the many facets of online learning to determine what is important to me as a student and as a teacher. It has also provided greater understanding of the individual needs of other online learners which, I believe, is an important quality when teaching in any environment.

As I read, for the third time, Tony Bates's (2015) chapter on Epistemologies and Theories of Learning, I found myself asking new questions and reflecting again on my own practice. Rereading my initial 503 philosophy paper, I touched only briefly on Constructivism and Connectivism learning theories. To describe my learning theory most accurately, I would call myself a Constructivist with Social Cognitive and Connectivist influence. To begin with, I would like to acknowledge the cognitive model. The identification of mental processes through Blooms taxonomy plays an important role in where I focus my attention when designing learning outcomes. Where I differ from Cognitivism, as Tony Bates did in his article (2014), I believe we do not have a fixed learning state. Rather, we construct our knowledge by connecting it through prior experiences reflecting and developing personal meaning. Although this model might be an effective process of learning, it is not one that comes easily or naturally to everyone.

Modelling and guiding are important teaching strategies to help students learn and develop critical thinking skills. Demonstrating how to relate new information to prior knowledge and how to connect and reflect on learning is essential. The teacher/guide needs to be aware of a variety of classroom aspects. Because learning is a social process, and each student is unique in their experiences, learning needs, and reactions in social interaction, we need to create a fluid and changeable dynamic learning environment. The influence of Seimen's (2005) Connectivism theory that I incorporate is providing students with fundamental skills and allowing them to make connections to other information sources, ideas, concepts and different perspectives. In comparison, I have a harder time understanding Downes's (2007) idea that we do not construct, transfer or build knowledge. From my experience, that is exactly the process of knowledge acquisition. Another puzzling idea states, that learning can take place in a non-human appliance. My question is, can learning take place there or is knowledge accumulated and synthesized only to then be read, connected and understood by the individual?

During 501, we had the opportunity to study many different instructional design models for online learning. While I can see a useful application to parts of them, my models of choice are Salmon’s (2002) Five Stage Model of Online Teaching and Learning, and Community of Inquiry theoretical framework (Garrison et al, 2000). The five stage model provided an outline to scaffold our seminar focusing on both the role of the E-moderator and the type of technical support with which our group used to communicate.


Photo: http://goo.gl/gp9ihE

The Community of Inquiry Framework (CoI) (Garrison et al, 2000) complements and works harmoniously with Salmon's 5 stages. As Wright (2015) points out, Salmon’s model provides the 5 stages for students to work through using a variety of E-activities. The CoI focuses on three integral overlapping learning design components used in developing a cohesive community. It’s through connecting that collaboration and E-activities can support and sustain higher order learning processes. Reflection plays an important role in both deeper learning and learning from our peers. Korthagen’s (2004) onion model offers a reflective framework through guiding questions that helped me figure out why I believe, think, and teach the way I do. It was through this model that I understood, at a personal level, the significant importance of connecting to a learning community to share my journey. It is because of this I chose seminar four, Building Virtual Communities.

In Salmon’s (2002) 5 stage model, the first stage, Access and Motivation, happens before the course begins. Our group chose to make personal welcome videos providing CoI (Garrison et al 2000) teacher presence to create an inviting environment. I found this extremely beneficial in 502 when I received an initial video. I found my stress level after reading the course outline drop drastically after physically seeing and hearing the instructor. As this was a continuing course, we had the luxury of knowing that all students could access and use the technology we incorporated.

For Salmon's (2002) stage 2, Online Socialisation, we chose a few ice-breaker activities to support the sharing and collaborative experience we were hoping to infuse through the seminar. I find this stage is vital for creating connections and sharing on a personal level to build the amount of familiarity in order to work collaboratively. What I need to be cognizant of, is that not all students enjoy sharing personal information or want to feel a close connection to their learning community. During my experience as moderator for our synchronous class , I discovered that getting people to share information about themselves or their own experiences is far easier than getting them to participate and share their thoughts and ideas about the topic we are learning.

In thinking about designing our week, I considered the next three steps in Salmon's (2002) model. The third, focuses on Information Exchange. For organization and clarity of action, we developed a website detailing what our week would look like. Organizing the content on the website was an easy task for me as I am a visual learner and work well with structure. Making descriptions clear and testing each activity beforehand was a valuable approach. Creating exemplars and providing guiding questions provided support for students working through each task. I realized at this step, how quickly time gets taken up and how challenging it can be to focus activities on the intended outcomes. Although we would have liked to add a collaborative activity, we felt making the video to share and reflect on was a more valuable skill and connecting experience.

For Salmon's (2002) stage 5, Knowledge Construction, and with such limited time, we chose to support this process by providing all activities on the first evening class to allow students to work asynchronously. At the same time, activities were structured so there was a due date to assist with time management. Stage 5 of development was also reinforced by the students creating a personal reflection blog and sharing synchronously during the final evening of our week.

I stated in my previous paper, that two of my foundational beliefs are (a) that school should be learner and learning focused and (b)that building relationships are key to learning. Building this seminar was a fantastic way to focus on both of my beliefs. Our goal for the learner this week was to provide knowledge, and give opportunity for experience and reflection while encouraging relationship connection through community building activities. My framework of choice for constructing course objectives and lessons plans was the Understanding by Design framework (Wiggins et al., 2005). I found working from the intended goal backward to create activities that supported the goals and objectives was a logical process.

I previously stated, that I believe relationship building between teacher and student and student to student is a key element developing the essential component of trust for deeper learning to take place. I have seen and experienced this happen as we have come together as a cohort and have worked together collaboratively in groups. I have felt the development of connection and trust with instructors through their actions, words of encouragement and one-on-one guidance. I have also been able to connect and share on deeper level with my group members. When planning our week, we felt the role of the teacher was to provide a framework that would guide students instead of teacher led learning. We chose the challenging activity of making a profile video knowing that some students would have a difficult time. To support and guide the process, we each made an example video, provided ideas on how to construct dialogue, posted information on how to make the video and relevance on the importance of why we should make them to aid in helping get over the hurdle of seeing ourselves on video.

The week on information overload was enlightening and inspiring. I realized how little I know about researching and how much information there is on the topic. Muthler (2015) discusses the common complaint from teachers that students are unable to use multiple sources of research to support an argument. She points out that most students use the first search result that pops up on screen and there is a lack of awareness in knowing how and where to find information. Muthler suggest teaching students to develop the necessary skills of critical thinking to discover credible websites by teaching students first how to define what makes a good site. This is followed by experiencing and practicing with a partner using a guiding question worksheet and discussing as a group. As with any skill it takes time and practice to gain competency. Once the basic foundation skills had been modeled, taught and practiced, I would begin teaching strategies on how to get more out of searching. Levitin (2014) contends that the end goal of researching is to engage students to use the information gained in a creative way. He proposes that it is the daydream and downtime that provides our brains the critical space needed to weave together the fragments of information in a new and innovative way.

Week six was an important one for me. In our first activity, watching Tutkle’s (2012) Connected but Alone video, she proposes the opinion that our devices are redefining our personalities. This understanding struck a chord with me and is one I would like to explore into a Master’s Thesis. My reaction to the video is that Turkle is discussing two separate but integrated ideas. Her first concept is that technology has taken the place of real authentic connection between people. The second concept is that people are uncomfortable with solitude because they have not spent time cultivating connection within themselves. The concept that we spend so much time connecting through devices that we have lost the ability or desire to create authentic relationships intrigues me. How do we create the feeling of connection with other people? Do we constantly use our devices as a tool in the attempt to fill the void of being lonely and does it work? Have we created a culture of people who are not comfortable being alone or connecting to themselves? From my experience, being able to connect with one’s self is vital to being able to build connecting authentic relationships. As a future online teacher, I would like to give my students the opportunity and tools to experience and appreciate the meaning of self-connection. I would also like to support student growth and understanding by having them experience the difference of feelings between authentically connected and disconnected relationships.

Reflection is an important part of growing, learning and moving forward. It is the process that transforms our actions making them more productive and supports us to confidently reach our goals (Stephano et al., 2014). Collaboratively creating and teaching a week long seminar provided an insightful opportunity to reflect. I was fortunate to be in a group that worked harmoniously, each bringing strengths to support our common goal. Being "at the helm", I found the most challenging part of the synchronous class was moderating student feedback. I knew this would be difficult for me, as I did not have the expertise on the topic or have the experience as a moderator. As Salmon (2002) postulates, “The E-moderator needs to know enough about the topic to provide the ‘spark’ for the online interaction and to enable development, pacing and challenge to take place” (p4). Through reflection and group discussion, I have come up with a list of ideas to help me feel more prepared and empowered to engage the class. For example, create a visual for the screen to prompt students into conversation, take notes during discussions to provide ideas for bridging comments, pick one thing that the student says that you can connect with and add a comment. Other ideas include planning interactive activities to get students engaged, thinking about the questions you will be asking with re-frame ideas in case participation level is low and being equipped with more activities than you will need. I also believe that time, experience, awareness and my personal participation during synchronous sessions will help to build my confidence for future moderating.

Bates, A.W. (2015) Teaching in a Digital Age Open Education Resource Retrieved from
http://www.tonybates.ca/teaching-in-a-digital-age/ , 2(52).

Bates, Tony. Learning theories and online learning (July 2014) Retrieved from:
http://www.tonybates.ca/2014/07/29/learning-theories-and-online-learning/

Downes, Stephen. (2007) What Connectivism Is Retrived from: http://halfanhour.blogspot.ca/2007/02/what-connectivism-is.html

Garrison, R., Anderson, T., Archer, W. (2000) CoI The Community of Inquiry. Retrieved from http://coi.athabascau.ca/

Korthhagen, F. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: towards a more holistic approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(1), 77-97. Retrieved from:
https://goo.gl/aGCjwp

Levitin, Daniel (2014)
Video The Organized Mind: Thinking Straight in an Age of
Information Overload. Retrieved from:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aR1TNEHRY-U

Muthler, Sarah (2015) Helping Students Become Better Online Researchers. Edudemic Connecting education and technology. Retrieved from:
http://www.edudemic.com/students-better-online-researchers/

Salmon, Gilly (2002) E-tivities: The Key to Active Online Learning. Retrieved from: https://etutors.wikispaces.com/file/vi/Etivities_Salmon.pdf

Siemes, C (2005).
Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved from http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism.htm

Stefano, G., Gino, F., Pisano, G., Staats, B. (2014) Learn by Thinking: How Refection
Improves Performance. Working Knowledge, The Thinking That Leads. Retrieved
from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/learning-by-thinking-how-reflection-improves- performance

Turkle, Sherry (2012) Video Connected, but alone? Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7Xr3AsBEK4

Wiggins, G., Wilbur, D., McTighe, J., (2005) Understanding by Design. Overview of UbD The Design Template. Retrieved from: http://www.grantwiggins.org/documents/UbDQuikvue1005.pdf

Wright, Phemie (2015) Comparing E-tivities, E-moderation and the Five Stage Model to the Community of Inquiry Model for online learning design. The online Journal of
Distance Education and E-Learning. V3(2). Retrieved from: https://www.tojdel.ne/pdf/v03i02/v03i02-02.pdf