Reflect of 2019 Penn State Symposium for Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT).

The cold weather seemed not affecting the heat of the symposium. I enjoyed the keynote speech with good bacon. The six tricks of a sticky idea were delivered with simple but unforgettable examples, and Dan is a master of manipulating words, for sure. In his speech, SUCCES is the results of Simple, Unexpected, Concrete, Credible, Emotional, and Stories. Without fancy terminology and complex definitions, the speech kindled the thoughts of how to effectively deliver the knowledge to the audience. The Next session I attended was Technology Hacks for Cementing Learning. The time was limited for a full introduction of all tech hacks updates, but applying IT in each step of teaching a course would reduce the stress of students and helping teachers create various modules that tracking students attention. Open Educational Resources (OER) innovation was the following session and it introduced several updated practices of applying open sources in teaching. The application of BBookX can create a textbook that fits a specific, new frontier subject. I was also interested in providing video materials to enhance the teaching procedure. After the exciting open innovation challenge, two presentations I went were both introductions of new technology: Kaltura which introducing video into a course for both teachers and students, and GIKS writing-to-learn tool which can help teachers and students to assess the learning.

Learning some new idea in a single day was great, but concerns accumulated while I reflecting the symposium afterward. The six tricks of making an idea sticky are quite helpful for teaching a concept or a fact, and it will be a challenge to apply them to all courses and disciplines. In a course needs critical logical reasoning, or a pure theoretical course, like math or statistics, the tricks may not help much to teach calculating equations. Besides, instructors need to pay their major attention to the knowledge that students need to learn. If a teacher spends too much time on designing an idea sticky, the class may turn to a sideway of amusing students instead of teaching. The technics introduced in the symposium are fancy at first glance, and I believe they will accelerate students' learning. However, my concern is whether fast learning is better than the conventional way of learning like reading? The social media spreads immediate news and messages that can be swallowed in seconds, gifs and short videos can stimulate brain within a minute, these are the new ways to access information but are they effective in learning all course and disciplines? New technics will make it easier to access knowledge for students, and students may be satisfied with finishing watching a video or completing a quiz, but never come back. Learning is never a once-for-all deal. The conventional ways of learning, like reading, may not excite learners as much as new tech does, but old-fashioned ways can slow minds down and let the learner digest information.

New technology is always welcomed in the classroom, but they are just vehicles that deliver knowledge. We should not evaluate a teaching and learning process just based on how "fancy" of a class. By the way, advanced technology means a high investment of equipment in classrooms and some times the extra cost of students. This may also lead to educational inequity between students or schools, especially in developing countries.

In general, applying new techs in teaching and learning is exciting for all participants, while we should keep in mind that teaching and learning procedures are designed and built for the learners, not for showing new techs.

What I learned from creating a Syllabus and peer review

In the second assignment, we tried to design a syllabus for a course that we would like to teach. My plan was that building a syllabus for an introductory course of horticulture, HORT 101. With the help of materials and instructions offered in AEE 530, the basic outlines of the assignment were listed. After the detailed information added on, it looked like an organized course plan with all the information that students need to know.

The first draft of the assignment was reviewed by class and it turned out that something important missing in it. The syllabus was created as an assignment instead of student-orientated course instruction.  The reviewers' suggestion helped me to understand that the syllabus should effectively deliver the information of a course as well as being interesting to students. The tone of a syllabus could influence the willingness of students learning. So I adjusted some directive sentences into a more suggestive mode and explained the benefits in detail.

Another advice for modifying the draft is to clarify the learning goals with positive and active verbs. In the first version, the course objectives were described by unclear and difficult assessing words, like "knowing". This would make students misunderstanding the acquirements and hard to make an assessment of how students perform. Therefore, the revised draft used more specific verbs in the word list to make the teaching objectives clear and solid.

Two of my reviewers complained about the structure of my syllabus that some related information was distributed into separated sections. So in the revised draft, I gathered similar information and listed in one block. The structure of the whole syllabus was modified to make sure every information easy to access for students.

Besides the suggestions from the viewers, I learned a lot from reviewing others' syllabus drafts is that using an appropriate strategy to lead students learning instead of driving them. In some of the syllabus I reviewed, I could get the message that "you will enjoy learning this course" between lines. This helps me to memorize that the syllabus is not only a course plan but also a method of communication between students and teachers.

Is there a cost? A critical reflection of TLT Symposium

As I continue to turn over the ideas and technology presented at the Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT) symposium, I always have some point of concern. The keynote speaker gave the traits of "sticky" ideas, among them being simple, unexpected and concrete(sensory). My concern is rooted in technology magnifying the two latter, potentially at the detriment of the first. In other words, it seems that technology main be applied and cause shock and ah without bringing the learner to question. The questioning or huh moment as the keynote phrased it, is why unexpected is listed as a trait. Also, in trying to make an idea concrete by not only using sensory language but engaging multiple senses with multimedia or virtual reality(a favorite in the innovation challenge) is there not a risk of loosing the learner to sensory overload? In a sense, taking in all the details of the trees while missing the forest which is that learning goal we should be focused on helping our students achieve.

To clarify, I am not against integration of technology into teaching environments. I am merely cautioning that, as with all things, it can be mis- or over-applied producing unwanted effects. Most of the ideas presented in the innovation challenge as given in 5 min showed great potential to fall into the pitfalls mentioned above. This may be due merely to the brevity of the presentations not allowing for the full rational design to be articulated. There were technologies showed cased that touched on this idea of being careful and intentional in technology application. The first which comes to mind is the presentation on teaching design with addictive manufacturing (3-D printing). During the discussion of the learning goals for the 3-D printing courses at different levels (freshmen, upperclassmen and graduate students), the speaker made it clear that he needs to help students to see a 3-D printer as a manufacturing tool and active research area, not just a novel piece of tech. for printing figurines. Thus, he recognizes the ah and glitz of 3-D printing, but works to guide his students past that to learn its practical applicability in design as well as its limitations. This example speaks to the awareness of pitfalls mentioned above and intentionally structuring the course to avoid them.    

The Cranial Wall: Making it Stick

 After a hectic week of work of being a 4-H Educator, I sit down Friday night reviewing the schedule of events for the symposium for Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT). I know that Saturday will be a crazy day for me, with having to get up at 4:45 AM to pick with the 4-H Livestock Judging Team to get them to the Snider Arena for the Spring PSU Judging Contest by 8 AM, along with rushing to the Penn Stater to attend this conference by 8:30 AM.

Photo Image: https://lafayettecc.org/

A chatty van ride up with mostly teenagers, made me oddly excited to attend this symposium to learn new tips, hacks and ideas to bring back to my 4-H program. Quickly checking in at the Penn Stater, name tag tossed around my neck, I rushed into the President Hall to find my colleagues seated dead center to the stage. Taking a deep breath, as they announced the key note speaker, Dan Heath, I opened my notebook to take notes on his presentation.

Dan Heath walked briskly on stage and began to give his presentation on "Sticky Ideas". His energy and non typical PowerPoint was immediately captivating. His acronym of SUCCES, was broken down into morsel size pieces that was easy to understand his theory behind making ideas stick. It brought attention that most of today's education is not designed to make learning objectives stick, and things that often stick are simple, unexpected, concrete, credible, emotional and a story (SUCCES). During his presentation, his one segment really had me spellbound. He mentioned about the Dream Course, that had professors attend to help revive their class syllabus. The question along the lines of "aving your dream student, what would they recall from learning from your class in 3-5 years? Most professors listed many things they wanted their students to know. Then the question was asked, how do these items are embraced in your syllabus? Everyone in the audience gasped and had the "Ah-Ha" moment.

This really struck me, as I think back to my 4-H programming I've developed and taught to many youth. How much information did they actually learn? What main points did I make "stick" with them? As Dan worked through the slides of how teachers create lectures by taking the text book, take the chapters, and break them into lectures by chapter topic, it began to make sense that most teachers have taken the wrong approach to teaching. This was eye opening, to think back to all of my undergraduate classes that were mirrored off the textbook. I think this presentation was extremely informative and eye opening in helping teachers/educators/instructors think about lesson planning.

I plan to take the key message of Dan Heath's presentation and apply it to my profession as an Extension Educator. Now, I am challenged to think first about what I want to "stick" with my students, then work towards the methods of how to make it stick.

How can we use technology to help students review a course’s foundational knowledge?

Yesterday, March 16^th, I attended Penn State’s 2019 Symposium for Teaching and Learning with Technology (TLT; search “#TLTSym” on social media). It was a great day, with an awesome keynote presentation and a full day of sessions focused on how different technologies can be applied to transform education!

One of the sessions that I attended was “Creating digital content to engage students in prerequisite review”. I had selected this TLT session because many of the courses I have been a student in built upon knowledge from previous entomology, biology, chemistry, leadership, or other courses. It was important to recall information from these courses in order to understand the new class’s material. Most of the time, if I or another student needed to review something from a previous course, we would look back at our notes, presentations, or other materials from those classes. I also believe that courses I may lead in the future will also rely on prerequisite material, at least at some level. I was interested in seeing what types of digital content could be created to facilitate students’ review of material and the processes for making them.

Prior knowledge has been shown to predict student achievement and the depth of prior knowledge plays a role in future success. New knowledge is also influenced by prior knowledge and each student in a class comes in with a different background. The process for creating prerequisite review material should start by identifying the content to include. In other words, you need to decide what the students in your class need to know beforehand in order to succeed. The TLT session I participated in started with a simple, yet profound exercise for deciding this – answering three questions:

1.      What are 1-3 objectives that you expect students to have met before starting your course?

2.     What do you expect students to be able to do with this knowledge?

3.     How will you know what the students know?

Once you have outlined your objectives and expectations for incoming students, and you know how you can evaluate their competency of each area, you can begin to create review content that reaches these goals. As demonstrated in the TLT session, review modules in a class can consist of three parts:

1.     Content: videos and text that explain the prerequisite concepts, embedded with questions based on this material for self-testing.

2.     Practice Problems: a quiz consisting of 5-8 questions per objective (and drawn from a larger pool of questions) that students can take an unlimited number of times within the first two weeks of the course. The highest score on the quiz is retained and makes up 50% of the student’s grade for the prerequisite review assignment.

3.     Summative Assessment: a quiz, taken only once and either in class or at a testing center, that makes up the remaining 50% of the student’s grade for the prerequisite review assignment.

Since the Content is the most extensive part of the review module, I’m going to spend a lot of time describing it here. Content is created in a Kahn Academy (https://www.khanacademy.org/) like-style, using videos that can be recorded at Penn State’s One Button Studio (https://onebutton.psu.edu/). Other university systems or libraries may have resources available, or be able to obtain them for this purpose too.

In my opinion, the coolest technology used in the content creation example during the TLT session was a Lightboard. While you can record PowerPoint presentations, be shown in front of a greenscreen, or write on a chalk or whiteboard while being videotaped, there is evidence that videos made using Lightboards increase student engagement with the video (1). This is because a Lightboard is a large, clear pane of glass that you can stand behind and write on while recording. The recording is converted to a mirror image, so that students can see your face and the content you’re sharing with them simultaneously! This format simulates instructor presence. See it in action at this link (https://mediacommons.psu.edu/faculty/lightboard/) or by clicking play below:

Each content video is 5-10 minutes long, once edited using Adobe Premier or another software, and they are also interactive. At intervals throughout each video, the presentation of content is broken up with a self-testing quiz, which mimics a clicker quiz that students might have in class. This is done using H5P (see an example here: https://h5p.org/interactive-video), but other applications may have this function as well.

The Content portion of the module should also contain information about how the material in each module relates to the current course, to help students make and retain connections in what they are learning. Instructors can also include examples of learning strategies that students can use throughout the course as a part of their prerequisite content.

Students in the example used during the TLT session have the first two weeks of class to complete the prerequisite review assignment. However, they are encouraged to use distributed practice by instructor-set goals and incentives within this time frame. An example of this might be “complete half of the Content by X date and you’ll get X number of points toward the assignment”. This way, students review and learn a little at a time, and at their own pace to an extent, instead of cramming everything at once before the deadline. During this time, they are also learning new material as a part of the current course. Then, they can complete the Practice Problems potion of the review for one week, before taking the Summative Assessment at the end of the first two weeks of class.

I really like this outline and set of methods for engaging students in prerequisite review. Technology is becoming more widely accessible and students are interested in using it. It seems like it could take a lot of time to create the Content and access to resources could be a potential challenge to this as well. However, the benefits of the review to student learning would be worth the effort and then, once established, modules could be reused/adapted from year-to-year. I’ll look forward to seeing how other instructors use these types of technologies to facilitate prerequisite review in their classes, and incorporating it in my own future courses as well! 

If you have any thoughts or suggestions, please post a comment below. Additionally, if you’re interested in learning more about the annual TLT Symposium or attending the event next year, please visit the event website: https://symposium.tlt.psu.edu/

1.     Stull, A. T., L. Fiorella, M. J.Gainer, and R. E. Mayera. 2018. Using transparent whiteboards to boost learning from online STEM lectures. Computers and Education, 120, 146-159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.005

Student Introduction: Tianmin Wang, MS student in Horticulture

My name is Tianmin Wang and I am an M.S. candidate of Horticulture. Dr. Reddivari is my P.I. , since she moved to Purdue, I am lucky to have Dr. Chopra as my co-adviser in Penn State. My project is focusing on how color-fleshed potatoes will influence intestinal inflammation and investigating whether and how gut microbiota involve in this procedure.

I come from Qinhuangdao. It locates on the coast of the Bohai Sea and not far from Beijing in the northern part of China. Since I wanted to have some different life experience, I went to Northwest Agriculture and Forestry University (NWAFU) in Shaanxi province for undergraduate education, which is about 1,000 miles away from home. My major was Enology and Viticulture and I studied in the top wine college in China. So I know something about the grapes and wine, which is the small branch of Horticulture. In the senior year, I got a chance to join a Masters' Degree program in Viticulture, so I took it and studied the nitrogen nutrition of grapevine.

After the graduation of M.S., my career life as an associate manager of a vineyard near Beijing began. Applying theories into real practice is never straight forward. Every vineyard has its own characteristics: temperature, rainfall, soil, and the surrounding environment. I learned a lot there and made efforts to produce high-quality grapes and wines. Because the vineyard is not far from the subway station, I could reach downtown of Beijing after work. It usually took almost two hours to get there. The huge difference between the atmosphere in the vineyard and in downtown Beijing inspired me and I realized this was not the job that I wanted to spend the rest of my life. So I quitted and try to find a graduate program in the U.S. to continue my academic career.

I got my luck to join Penn State University in 2017. Although the research topic was totally unfamiliar and the study subjects were mice, which I had never used, learning new stuff is always fascinating. In Penn State, I also enjoyed different life and culture. I watched football in the stadium, had BBQ in the summer, and drove to the stone valley to have a 

picnic. Now, I have AEE 530 to further understand learning and teaching. Although I am busy writing my thesis this semester, every week reading and practicing educational knowledge would be a good opportunity for me to learning something new and temporally get out of analyzing and explaining data. These theories and skills will help me to fulfill my duty of Teaching Assistant this semester. 

Student introduction: Mariana Fontana Westphalen, Animal Science M.S. Student

My name is Mariana Fontana Westphalen, I am on the second semester of a M.S. program in Animal Science, being advised by Dr. Tara. L Felix and focusing my studies on beef cattle nutrition. I am original from Brazil, my family has some agricultural background, my father is a farmer and so was my grandfather, and this might sound somewhat cliché but all that had some influence on me when choosing a career.

So, I decided to study agronomy. Last year I obtained my bachelor’s degree in Agronomic Engineering at University of São Paulo and came straight to State college in pursue of a M.S. degree. My interest in cattle begun during my second year of college on an internship with ruminant nutrition, where I had the opportunity to work both with sheep and cattle.

I met my current advisor in a beef and dairy conference in Brazil in 2015, I went to speak to her and  ended up in an internship under her supervision in Illinois, she was a professor there back then. After my internship I went back to Brazil, finished my undergrad and applied for a M.S. here.

I look forward to finishing my studies. In the short term I would like to work with extension, the academic world could be more appealing to me if I didn’t feel awkward teaching in a classroom environment, but I hope this class will help perhaps changing that, and in a longer term I see the possibility of going back home to work with my family.