ETT 743 Seminar: Instructional Technology Problems

Instructor: Lisa C. Yamagata-Lynch
Office: Gabel 101E
Office Hours: Arranged by appointments
*Upon further consideration and discussion with students, the instructor reserves the right to make revisions to the course stated in this document

Course Description

Before becoming a member of this course you have already engaged in the following activities in the previous seminar courses:
  • ETT 740—studied the foundations of instructional technology, including the history of the field, early hardware and software, founders, and early definitions;
  • ETT 741—studied various theoretical perspectives relevant in our field and applied it to a topic of your interest in a literature review format; and
  • ETT 742—studied various methods for conducting research in our field and conducted a literature search in preparation for a proposed study.
The focus of this course is for members to engage in active reading, discussing, and writing of critical issues, trends, and problems in educational technology and identify how they are related to history and definition of the field, predominant theoretical frameworks, and research methods. As you participate in this course please aim to develop your own professional voice regarding course topics and share them in your writing and in-class discussions. This course will introduce you to the doctoral candidacy exam and there will be opportunities to engage in discussions and receive support from the instructor and your peers on the exam, but please note that the completion of the exam is just a portion of the course expectations. At the same time, please note that many of the activities in this course are self directed and you are expected to take the initiative and engage in activities that meet both the course requirements and the expectations for your candidacy exam.

Course Objectives
  1. Describe a range of problem areas/current issues in the field of instructional technology from a variety of critical perspectives
  2. Discuss the problem areas/current issues of the field, especially as presented by authors read and shared in class
  3. Define the problem areas/current issues in the field from your research interest area 4.    Develop a working set of readings in preparation of your dissertation
  4. Develop an essay discussion on the historical and current definition of the field, the
  5. theoretical foundations of the field, and a critique of the literature of the field in a chosen topic area
Course Format
This course will be primarily face-to-face. As you are a graduate student, I am going to assume you are a professional and I will treat you as such. That means I am not going to tell you what you need to know, check attendance or try to motivate you. I assume that you are going to take responsibility for your own learning in this course.

I expect you to engage in a critical review of the literature and your own writings related to problem areas/current issues in our field. It is critical that you come to class prepared by having read the readings and by bringing your writing samples. You also need to be prepared to receive feedback on your writing and revise your work accordingly.

Texts

Required
  • Spector, J. M., Merrill, M. D., van Merriënboer, J., & Driscoll, M. P. (2007). Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (3rd ed.). New York: Erlbaum Associates.
Recommended
  • American Psychological Association. (2009). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, Sixth Edition (6th ed.). American Psychological Association (APA).
  • Januszewski, A., & Molenda, M. (2007). Educational Technology: A Definition with Commentary (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.
LiveText
  • You will submit your Candidacy Exam on LiveText
Assignments

 1. Course Participation  300
 2. Writing Samples  200
 3. Candidacy Exam Draft Submission  100
 4 Candidacy Exam Submission 100
 5 Annotated Bibliography  200
 6 Problem Areas and Current Issues Presentation 100
  Total 1000

Course Participation 300 points (75 points * 4)
During each class session, you are expected to come to class prepared by having read the materials, by identifying 2 to 3 questions that may lead course discussions, and by participating in discussions initiated by others. The discussions during class will stem from the readings and are intended to help you identify broad implications of problem areas/current issues that impact our field from a foundational, historical, theoretical, and research perspectives.

Issue Introduction Days

On days in the schedule designated as Issue Introduction, the discussion will focus on 2 starter articles selected by the instructor. On these days you need to come to class after completing the following activities:
  • Read the starter articles;
  • Prepare 2 to 3 discussion questions;
  • Be prepared to participate in class discussions;
  • Conduct a search of peer-reviewed journal articles that are theoretical or empirical and
  • obtain at least 2 articles that relate to the starter articles;
  • Prepare a 3 sentence summary per article that describe the main argument of the article and why it is important for educational technology/performance technology professionals. This short summary ought to be based on the review of the abstract and the examination of the major headings in the article; you do not need to read every paragraph of the obtained articles. In class, your instructor will demonstrate how to prepare these summaries; and
  • Share the APA reference, article full text access URL, and the 3 sentence summary using the designated blog space provided by the instructor. See the Annotated Bibliography requirements for further detail.

In class, you will introduce your summaries of the two obtained articles. As a class, we will choose two articles from those obtained by the class to read for the following week, designated as Issue Follow-Up Day on the schedule.

Issue Follow-Up Days
On the Issue Follow-up days, you will come to class after you have:
  • Read the 2 articles chosen by the class the previous week;
  • Prepare 2 to 3 discussion questions;
  • Be prepared to engage in a discussion of the topic for further examination of its impact to
  • our field; and
  • Prepare a 3 page double-spaced writing sample of your past writing, new material related to course topic, or new material you prepared for your candidacy exam.
The purpose of our discussions on the Issue Follow-up day will be to engage in a synthesis of information we learned about the topic and find broad connections that exist between the topic and the foundation, history, theory, and research of educational technology/performance technology.

Candidacy Exam Clinic Days
On the Candidacy Exam Clinic Days, you will engage in targeted activities in class with other participants and the instructors that will help you prepare material for the exam and receive feedback. We will discuss in to organize each clinic day to provide you with maximum support.

Writing Sample 200 points (50 points * 4)
On each Issue Follow-Up Day you are required to prepare a 3-page double-spaced sample of your writing and share it to the class using the Blackboard Discussion Forum. You can use a sample from your older papers, new material you wrote related to the course topic, or draft responses to the candidacy exam. In class you will receive feedback from peers and you will identify strategies for revising your work. There will be a total of 4 writing samples you need to bring to class. You will be provided with an example.

Candidacy Exam Submission Requirements 200 points

Candidacy Exam Draft
Submit your Candidacy Exam Draft on 3/1 to the instructor using the Blackboard Assignment Feature.

Candidacy Exam

Submit your completed exam due on 3/15 on LiveText to the instructor and your exam committee.

By submitting your draft and final exam, you will pass the submission requirements and automatically receive 100 point per submission and a total of 200 points toward the final grade for this course. The 200 points you receive in this class has no implication to your performance on the exam. Additionally, if your committee requires you to make revisions to the exam response they are due 5/3, but have no points associated to this class.

Annotated Bibliography 200 points (25 points * 8)
As a class, we will create an annotated bibliography of peer reviewed journal articles that is related to problems areas/current issues in educational technology/performance technology. You will be responsible to provide entries in the designated course blog space provided by the instructor. The annotated bibliography need to include all the information you provided in class on the Issue Introduction Day as possible readings. This information includes the APA reference of the article, full text access URL, and a 3 sentence summary that describe the main argument of the article and why it is important for educational technology/performance technology professionals to read the article. As you are required to share a minimum of 2 articles per issue on the Issue Introduction Day, by the end of the semester you will be contributing 8 entries in the annotated bibliography.

Sample Annotated Bibliography Entry:

Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 53-65. doi: 10.1007/BF02504718

http://www.springerlink.com/content/8l46x25p7tx8847p/

This article examines the shortfalls of traditional basic and applied research methods in contributing to the design and implementation of innovative collaborative learning environments. The authors propose development research as an alternative method to address this problem. The article ends with a proposal for a new research agenda of online learning environments for the next five to ten years.

Please note that when managing your reference database for your candidacy exam, dissertation proposal, and your dissertation, it is worth investing your time into learning how to use a commercial product such as EndNote or a free product such as Zotero. In this course, the instructor will demonstrate how to use Zotero.

You can obtain information regarding these products at: http://www.endnote.com/ and http://www.zotero.org/

Problems Areas/Current Issues Presentation 100 points

Each participant will choose a problem area/current issue that was most interesting to him/her and deliver a 15 minute presentation to the class during week 15. The rubric for this presentation will be provided at a later time.

Assignment of Final Grade
A = 1000-900; B = 899-800; C = 799-700; D = 699-600; F < 600 pts.

Criteria
A= Superior B= Satisfactory C= Marginal D= Deficient F= Seriously Deficient
For more information please visit: http://catalog.niu.edu/content.php?catoid=13&navoid=355&returnto=search#grad_syst

NIU Conceptual Framework
http://www.cedu.niu.edu/assessment/framework.shtml

NIU Disposition Assessment
http://www.cedu.niu.edu/partnership/dispositions

Writing Center
Students who would like assistance in or further developing their writing style and skills can do so through the NIU Writing Center located in Stevenson South Towers - Lower Level, 815-753- 6636.

NIU Academic Integrity Policy
To make authoritative statements without giving credit to the author of those statements is considered plagiarism and violates the academic integrity policy of Northern Illinois University: To make authoritative statements without giving credit to the author of those statements is considered plagiarism and violates the academic integrity policy of Northern Illinois University:

Good academic work must be based on honesty. The attempt of any student to present as his or her own work that which he or she has not produced is regarded by the faculty and administration as a serious offense. Students are considered to have cheated, for example, if they copy the work of another or use unauthorized notes or other aids during an examination or turn in as their own a paper or an assignment written, in whole or in part, by someone else. Students are guilty of plagiarism, intentional or not, if they copy material from books, magazines, or other sources without identifying and acknowledging those sources or if they paraphrase ideas from such sources without acknowledging them. Students guilty of, or assisting others in, either cheating or plagiarism on an assignment, quiz, or examination may receive a grade of F for the course involved and may be suspended or dismissed from the university.

For more information go to: http://catalog.niu.edu/content.php?catoid=13&navoid=355&returnto=search#acad_inte

Students with Special Needs

Northern Illinois University abides by Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which stipulates that no student shall be denied the benefits of an education solely by reason of a handicap. Disabilities covered by law include, but are not limited to learning disabilities and hearing, sight or mobility impairments.

Your success as a student is of utmost importance to me. If you have a disability or any other special circumstance that may have some impact on your work in this class, and for which you may require special accommodations, please contact me early in the semester so that accommodations can be made in a timely manner. The NIU Center for Access-Ability Resources (CAAR), located on the 4th floor of the University Health Service (815-753-1303), is the designated office on campus to provide services and accommodations to students with diagnosed disabilities. You need to provide documentation of your disability to this office. For more information, visit the CARR website: http://www.niu.edu/caar/index.shtml.

Schedule
WeekDateCourse Topic/Activity
Readings/Assignments
 1 1/11Introduction Course Expectations
  • Course purpose, structure, and schedule
  • Introduction to issues in Educational
  • Technology/Performance Technology Introduction to Candidacy Exams
  • Distribute questions and rubric
  • Deadlines

 2 1/18Martin Luther King Day—No class meetings Online Activities throughout the weekWriting Sample 1
Post writing sample by 1/19 Provide peer feedback to writing sample by 1/21
 3   1/25On Writing well

Guest speaker from the writing center, go over a writing sample, respond to writing sample, and respond to feedback

Review peer feedback to your writing sample and identify how to respond to them.

Candidacy Exam Clinic 1—planning how to approach the exam
Bring writing sample with peer feedback to class
4 2/1Issue 1 Introduction: Collaborative Online Learning
  • Post information on 2 articles as annotated bibliography entries prior to class.
Starter Readings
Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004) Land, S. M., Draper, D. C., Ma, Z., Hsieh, H., Smith, B. K., & Jordan, R. (2009)
5 2/8Issue 1 Follow-Up: Further Discussions and SynthesisReadings

TBA


Writing Sample 2
6 2/15Issue 2 Introduction: Design-Based Research
  • Post information on 2 articles as annotated bibliography entries prior to class.
Starter Readings
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. (2005)
Brock, T. R. (2009)
7 2/22Issue 2 Follow-Up: Further Discussions and SynthesisReadings

TBA

Writing Sample 3
8 3/1Candidacy Exam Clinic 2—report on your exam progress and share with peersCandidacy Exam Draft Due on Blackboard
9 3/8Candidacy Exam Individual Work time You may schedule an appointment with instructor for individual feedback
10 3/15Issue 3 Introduction: Community of Practice (CoP)
  • Post information on 2 articles as annotated bibliography entries prior to class.
Starter Readings
Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002)
Nett, B. (2008).

Candidacy Exam Due to Committee and Lisa Yamagata-Lynch on LiveText
11 3/22Issue 3 Follow-Up: Further Discussions and SynthesisReadings
TBA

Writing Sample 4
12 3/29Issue 4 Introduction: Managing Information in Knowledge Building Communities
  • Post information on 2 articles as annotated bibliography entries prior to class.
Starter Readings
Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009) Hatala, J., & Lutta, J. G. (2009)
13 4/5Issue 4 Follow-Up: Further Discussions and SynthesisReadings
TBA
14 4/12Candidacy Exam Clinic 3—Examine Committee Feedback, Plan Revisions, and Moving towards a Dissertation Proposal
Check feedback on Candidacy Exam that will be provided no later than 4/2
15 4/19Issue 5 Participant Presentations
Problems Areas/Current Issues Presentation
 16 4/26 No class meeting work on any revisions to Candidacy ExamResubmit Revisions to Candidacy Exam by 5/3

Starter Readings in Order of Appearance in the Schedule
Week 4
  • Reeves, T. C., Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (2004). A development research agenda for online collaborative learning. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52(4), 53- 65. doi: 10.1007/BF02504718
  • Land, S. M., Draper, D. C., Ma, Z., Hsieh, H., Smith, B. K., & Jordan, R. (2009). An investigation of knowledge-building activities in an online community of practice at Subaru of America. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 22(3), 23-36. doi: 10.1002/piq.20049
Week 5
  • TBA
Week 6
  • Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5-23. doi: 10.1007/BF02504682
  • Brock, T. R. (2009). The backyard human performance technologist: Applying the development research methodology to develop and validate a new instructional design framework. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 22(3), 37-48. doi: 10.1002/piq.20059
Week 7
  • TBA
Week 9
  • Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., & Squire, K. (2002). Developing an Empirical Account of a Community of Practice: Characterizing the Essential Tensions. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11(4), 489. doi: 10.1207/S15327809JLS1104_3
  • Nett, B. (2008). A Community of Practice among tutors enabling student participation in a seminar preparation. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 3(1), 53-67. doi: 10.1007/s11412-007-9031-3
Week 8
  • TBA
Week 12
  • Zhang, J., Scardamalia, M., Reeve, R., & Messina, R. (2009). Designs for Collective Cognitive Responsibility in Knowledge-Building Communities. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(1), 7. doi: 10.1080/10508400802581676
  • Hatala, J., & Lutta, J. G. (2009). Managing information sharing within an organizational setting: A social network perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 21(4), 5-33. doi: 10.1002/piq.20036
Week 15
  • TBA
Last Updated January 7, 2011