11th lesson report 4th April 2007

Starting from this point lesson plans and reports are posted as one entry.

Scope of the lesson was creation of project time plans in teamwork:

1. time plan for event preparation in MS Project environment,
2. event schedule in freely selected environment.

Because duration units for preparation and event are different, schedules must create and stored in different Google Docs files. It was suggested that team will share the workload – one subgroup creates the schedule for preparation period, other for event. Some of the groups worked in this way, some don’t:

In the team of the 1th September event one team member sit behind the computer and created both of the schedules. Other members sit behind his back and did … It’s not clear what they did. I should check. This team had lot of problems with using the MS Project. All members were missing from last lesson. They did not know what to do with MS Project. The schedule (timetable) of event was OK because they created this in Spreadsheet environment. The Gantt chart of the preparation tasks was lousy. Idea: MS Project and other specific software programs must be introduced in different lessons and with different exercises.

In the team of the summer party project 2 students sit behind the same computer and created both of the time plans. What did the rest of the group I don’t know. I’m sure, they did not play games but did they share ideas. I wonder how less I care about the creation process! Why I’m mostly interested if results? I should change this. Idea: observe the creation process in team.

Both of the schedules were created in MS Project. The quality of event was very high. They even asked and implemented solutions that we did not studied in last lesson. The quality of preparation period is not so high because team was running out of time.

In the school graduation event project team the workload was shared. The two of them – the most clever ones – started with event schedule. Then they delegated the task to other members of this team and continued with preparation period schedule. The quality of both schedules is high.

Team complained that some of the team members (Tanel Erik, Aadu, Kristella) do nothing. They even don’t visit the lessons. I must contact with them.

For conclusion this lesson was quite OK. All the teams worked as they wanted and desired documents were created. Although this time the quality of results varies and the grades are different from team to team. If team finished the task earlier they were allowed to leave from the classroom.

Overall rate for lesson 5.

9th lesson report 14th March 2007

Lesson was running as planed.

 

We synchronized the del.icio.us user names and students’ real names. Now all students in the class have accounts in del.icio.us. I took so long time – 2 months L. Mostly the reason is my absents and virtual lessons.

 

We repeated the grading rules and methods and corrected the tagging errors. It seams that they got it. I was surprised that they did not start to argue against the assessment rules. Those rules are new and unusual. Maybe they like that. I should ask feedback from them. Evaluation idea: create feedback questionnaire, and ask how they like learning content, materials, tools and assessment rules and methods. This evaluation form must be e-formular and students can earn some extra points by filling in the questionnaire.

 

The concept map exercise was successful. Students created very nice maps (e.g. http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dg9qq2v4_1cc9vt5). CmapTools is excellent software.

 

The biggest problem was upload of maps to the Google Docs environment. At first map must be saved as image. Some of the students did not get it. Software development idea: it would be nice to have uploading function that converts files to images automatically. Upload file as image. So when students upload Cmap file to Google Docs, it converts this to image automatically.

 

The second problem was the size of the map inside of the Google Doc. User can use Upload function directly from Google Docs file management list. Then the image new document is created and image is inserted automatically but the system does not ask the new dimension of image. It has default (very large) size. Better solution is Image – Insert function inside of document. Then the system let users to define the width and the height of the image. This was also to complicated task for some students. Most of the students succeeded with uploading there personal maps (5 students + 2 from last lesson out of 10 who were present this time). All teams finished the WBS.

 

Students seam to like the concept map method. Research questions: Interesting do they like it more than tagcloud method? Do different students prefer different methods?

 

Teaching of new method is necessary – concept maps created by students during my presentation have better quality than those that are created at home as result of individual work.

 

We did not have time to start with MS Project.

 

Some students had nothing to do in the computer lab because they already created the maps at home. Most of the students worked hard until the end of the lesson. Some of them did not upload the map in to Google Docs because they still have not activated there Google user account (they did not had access to verification letter).

 

Overall rating to lesson 5.

5th lesson plan 7th February 2007

Scopes:

1. Approving the skills of using the learning tools (del.icio.us and Google Docs).
2. Learning the new topics of Project Management (project problems, ideas, scopes and charter).
3. Practice the work in team and management of team.

 

Tasks and materials:

1. completing of del.icio.us user profiles – presentation of user full name in del.icio.us page.
2. Teamwork 2 – project problems (creation and publication of document in Google Docs environment and tagging in del.icio.us page).
3. Teamwork 3 – overall description of project result (Google Docs + del.icio.us).
4. 
   Reading – ideas for solving the problems and methods for generating the ideas (LeMill + del.icio.us).
5. Teamwork 4 – generation and selection of project ideas (Google Docs + del.icio.us).
6. 
   Reading – project scope (LeMill + del.icio.us).
7. Teamwork 5 – definition of project scope (Google Docs + del.icio.us).
8. 
   Reading – project charter (LeMill + del.icio.us).
9. Teamwork 6 creation of project charter (Google Docs + del.icio.us).

 

Here are many tasks but hopefully students can manage the workflow. Teamwork 6 will contain the results of all previous teamwork (from 1 [list of team members] to 5). Team can work together with every task or they can distribute each task to different team member and work separately.

 

The final formulation of project charter document will be the collaborative home exercise. It must be finished on next lesson (14^th of February 2007). Then the document will be presented to client – to school managers.

 

Ideas:

Why not to show the current blog to students? Maybe they will add some interesting comments. Those remarks can be in Estonian. Just for collecting some instant feedback.

 

One very interesting tool for del.icio.us user network visualization is http://www.twoantennas.com/projects/delicious-network-explorer/. Present this to students.

4th lesson report 31th January 2007

Too much tasks was planed to this lesson. Half of them were skipped. But that’s OK. The learning process was not affected and skipped tasks can be part of next lesson.

Skipped tasks:
1. Editing of the students’ profiles in del.icio.us – stays for next lesson.
2. Students’ networks creation in del.icio.us – the network was already built by students.
3. Exercise of definition of project problems – it is deleted from del.icio.us and will presented again for next lesson.

The tagging mistake is corrected. Still 3 students out of 13 don’t add tags or input separated words as one tag. Del.icio.us counts them as separated tags. Separator of tags is space.

Teams
The formulation of project team was taking place IRL. This process was a bit clumsy but still very interesting. It appeared that one of the elected project managers (X) was missing, and students started to fight against here. Probably X was afraid to visit the class.

What was the problem?
Students claimed that X was lobbing them to give their votes to here. It was previously none that other student (Y) wanted to become a project manager of same project (school end party). On Election Day Y was missing and students elected X to school end party manager and Y was elected to school start party project manager. Now they decided that this is wrong and X can’t be the project manager. They agreed that Y is the manager of school end party.

So the school start party project was with out project manager. I decided that student who collected second amount of votes will become a project manager. Two students shared second place, but one of them (W) was missing. One of them (Z) started to form the team. During the selection of team members appeared that most of the selected students did not wanted to work with him. Z is a boy, but most of the students are girls. Maybe this was the problem. But I did not let them to form the team only from bois. Z decided not to be the project manager. The school start party project manager was still needed.

Finally we went back to W who was missing. I asked, is there in the class any friend of W? V said that she’s a friend of W. I asked, is V ready to form the team for here? She agreed and the formulation of teams started.

Bloody soap opera! )

The process of team formulation:
1. At first the project manager (V), who collected the smallest amount of votes selected member to here team. She was first because I wanted the less popular (maybe also weakest) project manager to have strongest coworker.
2. Secondly the project manager (Y) who collected second amount of votes selected a team member from class students.
3. Thirdly the most popular project manager was making here chouse.

This process continued until all students were separated in to three groups. I was making the notes in to my computer who is selected in to what team and who is still free. In the end there was a bit inconvenient moment – nobody wanted to select last students. I decided that last two will join with summer party team because it’s the most difficult project and it needs more staff. It’s good to be a teacher and act like a God. )

From other hand it would be nice to present my notes about team formulation on screen. In this way students can see who is selected and who is left. From other hand maybe it would be embarrassing to them who are left to the end.
Document creation in docs.google.com
Some of students already had Google Docs account. Probably they have gmail account. Some of them didn’t finish the account registration. The account confirmation was sent to them by e-mail. In this e-mail there is a link where user must click to confirm the account creation. Some of the students were not able to read that e-mail because they did not remember the password of e-mail web client. This password is usually stored in user computer and at home they login automatically. I asked them to register Google Docs account at home. I’m not sure that they will.

The process of creation of document:
1. Each team collected together next to one computer (3 different groups).
2. They selected CIO who started the document (3 different CIO).
3. Based on my suggestions CIO typed the title of document.
4. CIO created the list of team members. Other students helped here to do that (they memorized the names of missing students).
5. CIO saved the document and shared it with team members (team members typed in there e-mail addresses).
6. Team members went back to there PCs and opened the shared document. They selected here names and typed in the rolls or responsibilities that they would like to have in this project.
7. CIO published the document.
8. CIO tagged this document on here del.icio.us page.
9. All members copied this bookmark to there personal del.icio.us page.

There were some technical problems because some of the students were enable to activate Google account. They continued the work with CIO. One of teams had management problems. They did not know how to share responsibilities. I explained that they can change the rolls later.
Software development idea: It would be nice to have complete list of course materials. Then students can see, what will happen on next lesson. Today I don’t have this list because I create materials on the run. On the other hand it’s very convenient, that del.icio.us starting page shows the content of today’s lesson. Maybe it is good to have two different interfaces – the course view and the lesson view. Now the course view is in LeMill and lesson view on del.icio.us. It would be also nice when the first task of lesson is in the top of del.icio.us page. Currently the chronological ascending and descending sorting is not enough.

Conclusion: The class was busy and they seamed to like the Google Docks (I asked). Nobody was complaining: “Why new software again?”

Overall rate to lesson 5-

4th lesson plan 31th January 2007

This lesson is dedicated to the training of software functionalities e.g. tagging and making notes in del.icio.us and collaborative creation of documents in gocs.google.com. The new content of project management subject is secondary goal. Formulation of project groups and first group tasks are also important topics of this lesson.

Lesson plan:

1. Org – Repeating the functions of del.icio.us.
2. Org – Input of additional data in to students profiles e.g. real names, e-mail addresses.
3. Text – project teams and rolls
4. Teamwork – formulation of project teams – IRL
5. Org – creation or completion of del.icio.us user network – every student must belong to his teams’ network.
6. Teamwork – creation and publication of first document in collaborative way – list of team members and responsibilities – in docs.google.com environment. After publication, students tag this document on there del.icio.us page. I can read the content of this document from Google Docs or from Del.isio.us environment.
7. Teamwork – collaborative creation, publication and tagging of report of projects’ problems.

Software development idea: Learning environment can have a function for collaborative or private document creation (e.g. integration of Google Docs in to del.icio.us). 

The creation on two documents in Google Docs is complicated and work-intensive task. Maybe this will be too complicated for students to use three different environments (del.icio.us, LeMill, Google Docs) on same time? Maybe it would be better to have centralized learning environment? From other side web is not centralized. We use many different tools in same time. Why not to teach this to students.

3th lesson report 24th January 2007

Some students don’t know how to tag. They just copy the content of learning material in to tag field. Because of that some student’s tag cloud is total rubbish. Fortunately the tag cloud of content is OK, because most of the students can tag and only most popular tags are presented in tagcloud (del.icio.us can cut the rubbish). This copy-paste thing is actually my fault. I asked them to copy the questions to the notes area and then answer to them. Now they copy everything to everywhere. I must correct this mistake. I believe that this correction can not be done virtually but in real teaching-learning situation. Luckily the next lesson is not virtual.

I must emphasize, that it’s not good to copy anything to del.icio.us notes or tag fields. They must enter info by typing or clicking on existing tags. If they continue coping, then they will not get grades.

Software development idea: teacher can decide, can the student copy something to tag field or not.

If this act does not effect the quality of tags then I must prepare the intermediate examination – interviews with students, where they must explain the meaning of their tagcloud. Maybe then they understand the meaning of tagging.

The reason of poor tagging can also be the task in itself. Tagging is a method of social software. In social space everything must come from bottom. I can’t force them to use something. Then it’s not social any more. But what can I do in learning process? It’s hard to find balance between freedom and rules in school. In the one hand it’s good to decrease learning barriers. On the other handit’s not good to fall to anarchy.

I asked students to answer the questions in del.icio.us notes area. If the answer is wrong or insufficient then I would like to add comments.

Software development idea: Instead of the notes area it would be nice to have comments field related to bookmark. And other users from network can comment  on the comments. Then this is like hybrid from book marking, tagging and bloging. Somehow it would be interesting to integrate wiki on it (I don’t know yet, how). So it is like social software in cube.

In the future I prefer not to study students’ tags so deeply. It is important in the beginning of course and for scientific reason (to collect information) but later it’s enough to evaluate students’ understanding by oral examination.

Overall rate to lesson 4-

2th lesson report 17th January 2007

The lesson was taking place without me (I was in the Stockholm in TLU Department of Educational Technology staff meeting). Luule Vain – the director of Audentes Secondary School – let students to computer lab. She was there 45 minutes. According to her students were working very intensively.To get an overview of who tagged what I clicked on link (next to bookmark) this link is tagged by X users. Then I can see the tagcloud of that resource, list of students who tagged it, their tags and comments. I had to do this with every bookmark. It was a bit painful process.  Software development idea: it would be nice to have functionality, that will create cross-table of bookmarks and taggers. Software can count the number of tags very easily. Although it can’t check the meaningfulness of tags. Software development idea: The tags created by the teacher should be hided (or teacher can decide, which tag can be seen to students and which is hided). The meaningfulness can be checked with comparing students’ and teacher’s tagclouds. Probably this does not fit with the social software ideology.

In the future, the meaningfulness can be evaluated by an interview, but current evaluation was needed to get overview what students did when the teacher was missing.

Students try to copy the content of learning object to notes area. They shoud input all notes and tags by typing or clicking in existing tags. Actually this is my mistake. I asked them to copy the questions to the notes area, and then type the answers. It would be enough to just type the answers. I must correct this mistake in the next lesson.

The election of project managers was not taking place, because I presented wrong URL. That sacs. Software development idea: In learning environment there must be description of user profile (e-mail included). Based on that information it is easy to send corrections and additional tasks (to all network or to one student). This time I could not get contact wit students.

Very difficult was to find connections between del.icio.us usernames and students real names. From other side, it’s flexible and good tool. From other side in the school there are some restrictions. Software development idea: user profiles.

Conclusion: there are 19 students in the group, 9 of them created bookmarks and tags, 4 of them created good tags.

Overall rate to lesson 4

1th lesson report 10th January 2007

0. It’s complicated to create a bigger collection in LeMill. When a user forgot to add content to collection immediately after creation, and does it later, then it’s almost impossible to reorder pieces of content in collection.
0. The creation of del.icio.us was easy. I decided to create a new username to separate my personal bookmarks from project management course stuff. Software development idea: It would be nice to have network management tool in del.icio.us or in new learning environment. User can group tags and build networks separately for every group. In learning environment, the groups of tags can be based on courses.
1. Presentation of first material in LeMill was OK.
2. Creation of cel.icio.us accounts by students was OK. Yes, it was impossible to install the del.icio.us toolbar.
3. The tagging in del.icio.us went OK.
4. Solving the first exercise in del.icio.us interface was NOT so OK. The notes area is to narrow. All answers did not fit to it. Software development idea: It would be nice to have a large area for adding notes or comments.
5. The creation of network was OK. Surprisingly students loved this functionality. Without giving them any orders, they started to build there own personal networks. They added their class mates to network.
6. The barrowing of bookmarks from my page and adding additional tags went OK.

Conclusion – lesson went very well. All, that was planed, was done. Students seem to like tagging.

Overall rate to lesson 5+

Remarks for the future – open space or tool is needed for collaborative creation of students homework. Students can’t use LeMill for creating project plan. Maybe Google doc is good tool.