You are here:

SOOC: A New Model for Online Professional Learning Communities Focus: Universal Design for Learning
PROCEEDINGS

, Director, Development and Research, TechACCESS of RI, United States ; , Chief Education Officer, Sublime Learning; U. of British Columbia, United States ; , Inclusive Learning Consultant; Apple Distinguished Educator, United States

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in New Orleans, LA, USA ISBN 978-1-939797-12-4 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), San Diego, CA

Abstract

The use of online tools in facilitating the professional learning of teachers has increased greatly, due, in part, to the recent rise of MOOCs in education. Researchers identify benefits, problems, and barriers in how technology is currently used to support professional learning. MOOCs reach large numbers of professionals, show promise for those who are intrinsically motivated, and have potential to integrate theoretical and practical knowledge, however ineffectiveness of peer assessment methods and low persistence rates pose significant challenges. The SOOC model is designed as an online alternative to the MOOC. Rationale and components of the SOOC, and outcomes from one SOOC that focused on Universal Design for Learning, provide a vision for more interactive, supportive, and participatory online professional learning in education. Recommendations for further SOOC development are provided.

Citation

Dalton, E., Grant, K. & Perez, L. (2014). SOOC: A New Model for Online Professional Learning Communities Focus: Universal Design for Learning. In T. Bastiaens (Ed.), Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning (pp. 454-462). New Orleans, LA, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved March 23, 2019 from .

Keywords

View References & Citations Map

References

  1. Becker, H.J., Ravitz, J.L., & Wong, Y.T. (1999). Teacher and teacher-directed student use of computers. Teaching, Learning& Computing Report 3. Center for Research on Information Technology and Organizations, University of California, Irvine. (November, 1999). Available at http://www.crito.uci.edu/tlc/findings/computeruse/
  2. CAST (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA.
  3. Corcoran, B. & Quattrocchi, C. (2014). How teachers are learning: Professional development remix. USA: EdSurge. Retrieved August 27, 2014 at https://d3e7x39d4i7wbe.cloudfront.net/uploads/report/pdf_free/6/PD-Remix-EdSurgeReport-2014.pdf
  4. Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2001, 38 (4) 813—834. Available online at https://www2.bc.edu/~peck/CubanKirkpatrickPec.pdf
  5. Ertmer, P.A. & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2013). Removing obstacles to the pedagogical changes required by Jonassen’s vision of authentic technology-enabled learning. Computers& Education 64 (2013) 175-182. 2012 Elsevier Ltd.
  6. Hardy, I. (2010) Critiquing teacher professional development: teacher learning within the field of teachers' work, Critical Studies in Education, 51(1) 71-84.
  7. Harwell, S. (2003). Teacher professional development: It’s not an event, it’s a process. Research paper. Waco, Texas: CORD. Available at http://www.cord.org/uploadedfiles/harwellpaper.pdf
  8. Killion, J. (2013). Words that fail professional learning. Education Week Teacher, March 29, 2013. Retrieved August 27, 2014 at http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/learning_forwards_pd_watch/2013/03/words_that_fail_professional_learning.html
  9. Meyer, A., Rose, D.H., & Gordon, D. (2014) Universal design for learning: Theory and practice. Wakefield MA: CAST.
  10. MOOC Research Initiative (2014). Grantee Final Reports. Canada: Athabasca University, G. Siemens P.I. Available at http://www.moocresearch.com/reports
  11. Murray, O.T. & Olcese, N.R. (2011). Teaching and learning with iPads, ready or not? TechTrends, November/December 2011, 55 (6). Retrieved August 26, 2014 at http://dawnbennett.wiki.westga.edu/file/view/teaching+and+learning+with+ipads.pdf
  12. Pappano, L. (2012). The year of the MOOC. New York Times, November 11, 2012. Retrieved August 28, 2014 at http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/education/edlife/massive-open-online-courses-are-multiplying-at-a-rapidpace.html?pagewanted=all & _r=0
  13. Parr, C. (2013). How was it? The UK ’s first Coursera Moocs assessed. Times Higher Education 18 April 2013. Available at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/news/how-was-it-the-uks-first-coursera-moocsassessed/2003218.fullarticle
  14. Peeraer, J. & Petegem, P.V. (2012). The limits of programmed professional development on integration of information and communication technology in education. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2012, 28(Special issue 6), 1039-1056. Retrieved June 5, 2014 at http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet28/ajet28.html
  15. Steeves, V. (2012). Young Canadians in a Wired World. Phase III: Teachers’ Perspectives. Ottawa, ON Canada: MediaSmarts. Retrieved June 2, 2014 at http://mediasmarts.ca/sites/default/files/pdfs/publication-report/full/YCWWIIITeachers-Perspectives.pdf
  16. Watters, A. (2012). Top Ed-TechTrends of 2012: MOOCs. Available at http://hackeducation.com/2012/12/03/top-ed-techtrends-of-2012-moocs/

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact info@learntechlib.org.

Slides