In my world, there is a difference between work submitted on time and that which is submitted late. I tend to assign a lot of work in my classes, and I expect all of it to be submitted on time. Every time. In addition to my philosophical and professional reasons a student should submit work on time, I consider excuses – any excuse, really – to be lame.
In a previous post, I wrote about creating a simple e-learning module with Google Forms. Then I discussed sending students an immediate response when they completed that module, which is very helpful for record-keeping and for worried students who believe their responses are floating somewhere in cyberspace. To continue this line of thinking, what happens if students are required to demonstrate a certain level of competency in order to get credit for the learning module? Is there a way to automatically grade student responses and give them different feedback depending on whether or not they pass? Well of course there is! Keep reading …
If you have been a college instructor for any length of time, you have most certainly gotten this question from students: “Why did you take points off for _____?” This question is based on their assumption that they start at 100 rather than zero, which is where I believe they start before an assignment has been graded. If they fail to turn in an assignment, they are given the current point value, which is zero. I do not, in fact, take away all of their points as a fiery demonstration of my absolute authority in the classroom.
I have been a huge fan of Google Forms for quite a few years. I have used it for everything from collecting survey data, to getting feedback on a course, to polling students during a class. For me, it has become a necessity in the way I teach my classes. A couple of years ago, I began giving my students short, specific assessments over the assigned readings each week. Students would read an assigned article or chapter, complete some questions pertaining to the reading through a Google Form, and I would give their response a score.
This weekend I presented on gamification at the 2015 Teaching Professor Technology Conference in New Orleans. This is my second Magna conference, and it was fantastic. I met some wonderful people and learned some excellent strategies for using tech in my teaching. Below are my presentation materials.
Update: The Google Drive API previously mentioned in this post has been discontinued. This service continues to work using the www-drv.com service. There are some important changes to this service that resulted in significant changes to this post. In some ways, the process is much simpler, but other aspects of the process are significantly more complex.
As I have written about before, embedding Google Drive folders is a great way to manage content on your LMS. Rather than logging in, uploading, and waiting, you simply copy files into a folder on your computer, and they magically show up in your LMS for students to view.The only drawback was that last year Google blocked iFrame embedding on all Google Drive folders and Google Sites pages.
Turning something into a game does not necessarily mean people will suddenly like it. Atari learned this the hard way with their E.T. video game. It turns out that betting the farm on a mediocre video game based on a blockbuster movie is bad business.
The same is true with gamification, a term being thrown around a lot these days in education circles. The general idea behind gamification is that game mechanics can be used in non-game environments in order to get some of the same outcomes typically associated with games, such as engagement, problem-solving, cooperation, and motivation. Many teachers are applying the principles of game mechanics to course design in order to motivate their students in ways traditional instruction does not.
I will start by stating the obvious: There is a HUGE difference between learning to use technology for yourself and using it effectively in the student learning process. Both applications of technology have specific skill sets, they inform each other, and they are both important. In the educational technology world, you might see this dichotomy through various lenses: digital media literacy, TPACK, SAMR, or some other framework you’re fond of presenting at conferences.
Everyone is talking about the “flipped classroom.” I just attended a conference where this term was used approximately 57 times every hour for 4 days. My first response to this term was positive when I heard it a few years ago. The flipped classroom is a teaching approach where teachers provide resources for students to build their background knowledge outside of class and use class time on activities that leverage face-to-face interaction, such as discussion, group problem-solving, and collaboration. This contrasts with the “traditional” model, where instructors spend class time transmitting information, and then require students to engage in the aforementioned higher-level learning tasks on their own outside of class. This concept has so much curb appeal because students, generally speaking, don’t like lectures, and instructors don’t really like the behaviors associated with lecturing (e.g., falling asleep, playing on phones, doing homework for other classes).