Choosing Tech Tools to Support Learning

I did an analysis to see if the introduction of technology could improve a face-to-face intensive program. The program incorporates an active learning approach designed to take full advantage of the wealth of skills and experience that participants and facilitators bring to the program. It is currently offered in a very low tech environment.

Audience segment: Participants are professional leaders, highly educated, and (generally) non digital natives with ready access to technology. A review indicated the program could better engage and promote learning for this audience in three ways:

  1. Create a community that connects learners prior to, during, and after the learning experience;
  2. Enable more active learning that is guided by facilitator expertise; and
  3. Provide an environment where it is safe to share and discuss real-life professional challenges in a confidential manner.

Using Bates’ SECTIONS model, three tools were analyzed for their potential to address these improvements: Twitter, WordPress, and a Learning Management System (LMS).

1.  Community Building

All three tools could contribute to the development of ‘community’ before, during, and/or after the intensive offering:

twitter-logoTwitter – An excellent tool for student collaboration, networking, making course announcements, announcing program changes, research, networking through hashtag chats, and sharing information. Ideal choice for in-person group collaboration, research, and sharing of information during case study exercises, and for sharing information post-program. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, with very transferrable skills. Seems best suited for supporting learning during the program and networking after.

wordpress-logoWordPress –   With the ability to created a resource hub, invite members, hold discussions, post announcements, and post media, this tool would enable a one-stop shop. Facilitators and participants could begin creating an online space can get to know one another prior to the face-to-face program and subsequently share videos, links, agendas, notifications, and resources. Discussions could also take place prior to, during, and after the program, and the site could remain ‘live’ for as long as participants were interested in contributing to it. WordPress can be password protected, which could provide a level of security, but confidential content could not be shared. The benefit of ‘open content’ this tool provides is not a consideration for this audience. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, with very transferrable skills. Ideal for all but confidential sharing of personal information or materials.

Cms AbbreviationLMS – This is not a very user-friendly tool for any audience. In fact, two of the most common complaints from the digital native perspective (traditional undergraduate students) is the poor design of the user interface and the lack of flexibility within the environment. In fact, many instructors move outside of the LMS to enhance the learning experience through the use of blogs, virtual meeting spaces, etc. If participants will not take the time to familiarize themselves with the tool, or even worse, become frustrated with it, facilitating communication and building community will not happen. And finally, the learning management system’s unique characteristics will likely not result in much value as senior administrators are unlikely to use it in the future.

» Best option: WordPress blog with limitations (no sharing of confidential information).

2.  Facilitator Guidance

Facilitators play a huge role in guiding participants to resources, assist with problem-solving, and act as mediators during group work. The schedule of an intensive program, however, is jam packed with presentations, speakers, and related events, so there is limited time for one-on-one or group facilitation. Technology could assist tremendously in helping facilitators respond during live group sessions and by answering questions that could be centrally posed in a forum for discussion.

   twitter-logoTwitter – By creating a relevant hashtag, participants could be connected to facilitators and fellow students whenever needed. Facilitators could answer questions, conduct surveys, provide and share resources either live or at the end of a session, host a TwitterChat and act as resources if they are not in the same space as groups conducting work. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, the tool could also inform participants on new ways to gather research.

 wordpress-logoWordPress – With its strength as a resource hub, WordPress could be used to make announcements, gather and post resources, and host discussions. However, Twitter is nimbler for instant communications and resource sharing and accessible according to hashtags. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, with very transferrable skills.

Cms AbbreviationLMS – Facilitators could post materials prior to the program commencement, open and encourage discussion groups, and respond to group questions. The LMS, however, does not lend itself to the immediacy of social media and requires a higher level of technical savvy to comfortably navigate through.

» Best option: Optimally, Twitter, with WordPress site containing an embedded version of the tool.

3.   Confidential Environment

Guaranteeing that confidential information is kept within the confines of the program is one of the most important considerations for this audience. While it may not appear to be a true pedagogical factor, if participants are unwilling to contribute because of confidentiality concerns, the foundational assumption of the program will be compromised. Therefore, any tech tool used to share confidential information must be highly secure.

twitter-logo Twitter – As a microblogging site, Twitter’s main advantage is to provide users with the ability to openly share information. While there is an option for private messaging amongst users, confidentiality, even with messaging, cannot be guaranteed. It would provide a high level of transferrable skills to an industry whose practitioners widely utilize the tool. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, with very transferrable skills (many in higher education use Twitter).

wordpress-logoWordPress – Even with a password, WordPress is not a secure environment. Much information can be shared, but not all that is critical to learning can be. It would provide a high level of transferrable skills to an audience whose practices are moving more and more towards this tool. Relatively user-friendly for a non digital audience, with very transferrable skills.

Cms AbbreviationLMS –  A university LMS provides the highest level of information security in all of the tools that that I analyzed. However, it is also the least user-friendly, and far less nimble than WordPress.

» Best option: LMS, because of the high level of security it provides, virtually assures  a confidential environment.*

*The security benefit is likely outweighed by the challenges for use by this audience segment (account creation and access, learning to navigate a system that few will use again, few likely transferrable skills).


No one tool meets all three identified weaknesses in the current program. However, in combination, they could largely address two of the three revision needs. Twitter would be most useful for the face-to-face experience and to encourage information sharing post-program; WordPress would enable facilitators and participants to jointly build a community of learning that begins prior to the programs continues beyond; and an LMS could provide a secure online solution to sharing confidential information (although its challenges may outweigh the benefits).


Bates, A.W. (2015). Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning. Vancouver, BC:  Tony Bates Associates Ltd. Retrieved from

Learning outcomes x technology tools matrix

Q:  What learning outcomes from the program of study  in your Problem Statement assignment could be addressed by integrating digital technologies, and are there any examples on UNSW Selecting Technologies website that could meet those needs?

The website of the University of New South Wales in Australia includes a worthy section on Teaching and Learning including matrices on selecting technological tools to match learning outcomes. The page on  Selecting Technologies includes a table that matches learning outcomes, rationales and activities. I completed the very useful exercise of identifying outcomes for the program restructuring I will be doing by situating it within the UNSW matrix (below). This is a wonderfully useful and relevant matrix; so great, in fact, that I have contacted UNSW to ask what the basis for the outcomes is.

Learning outcomes for my proposed program restructure as per UNSW matrix:


TweetChat #Edtechchat

I participated in my first TweetChat and actually really enjoyed it. I also collected a couple of interesting resources and followers. All in all, a worthwhile hour in the life of me. What a great way to get like-minded individuals or professionals together to discuss and share resources.


TweetChats arscreen-shot-2017-02-06-at-8-06-03-pme an organized conversation around specific topics that are facilitated using Twitter. They typically feature guest presenters who pose, or answer questions that participants post to Twitter. A standard TweetChat uses a Q1 and A1 format to differentiate different questions. During the chat, the moderator or guest presenter posts a question (i.e., Q1), and participants post their responses (i.e., A1). Participants search for the relevant hashtag (#), read the questions and other participants’ responses, and contribute responses, links to resources, or related information. Participants also pick up new followers during TweetChats, and find people of interest to follow.

There are a number of popular TweetChats that focus on education and educational technology, and by mere chance, I happily landed in tonight’s #Edtechchat’s TweetChat. I knew the topic of screen time was not a consideration in my area of focus (higher educational professionals) but I found it a great opportunity to learn about the issues surrounding technology and children.

#Rethinking Screen Time

I am continuously amazed by how much technology has changed since my sons were young (they are only 19 and 21). A trip to the grocery store when they were toddlers was a thrill all around, from the ‘coloury place’ (produce) to the endless rows of bread to the ‘shivery place’ (refrigerated aisles) to the apex of the visit: the bakery section that offered free cookies to tots. Today I see babies with iPads in the Superstore and I wonder how different they will be from my own kids who themselves are digital natives. Beginning at around age 6 and until they were around 12, they, and most of their friends, had a total of one-hour per day of screen time.

I happened into a thread about recommendations on limits and uses of technology for young children, and it was an interesting and helpful conversation. I also picked up a link to the Office of Educational Technology’s (U.S.) Guiding Principles for Use of Technology with Early Learners. All in all, a very interesting experience!



Education 3.0 –

I read a great article that suggests we have entered Education 3.0 – an era of resource abundance characterized by changes in the way we learn. According to C.J. Bonk, over the past 10 years, learning has changed in at least 30 different ways. Among these, learning is increasingly collaborative, global, modifiable, mobile, open, online, instantaneous, and personal. These 30 learning and technology-related changes reflect three distinct mega-trends: 

1.)  learner engagement,
the pervasive access to learning, and
3.) the customization and personalization of learning.

I illustrated the trends and changes in the table below.


Characteristics of useful edtech

screen-shot-2017-01-25-at-8-44-24-pmDifferent media can promote different outcomes and help students to learn in different ways. Selecting the right medium for the job, or utilizing the unique features of different media’ or ‘affordances’ requires an understanding of its best uses. Bates identifies three characteristics that influence the usefulness of an educational technology (209): Broadcast and Communicative Media; Synchronous or Asynchronous Technologies; and Media Richness. I would like to build a framework for best practices based on the following summary of Bates’ characteristics as I have illustrated above.


Reference: Bates (2015), Teaching in a digital age: Guidelines for designing teaching and learning (Chapter 6: Understanding Technology in Education).

Introduction via ThingLink

This is the excerpt for your very first post.

I am enrolled in a course titled Using Technology for Teaching and Training. The first tool we explored was ‘ThingLink,’ a platform for creating interactive images and videos for the web. We used it as a means of introducing ourselves, but there are several other ways educators can utilize this fun (and free) tool:

  1. As a curriculum launcher.  A ThinkLink graphic can provide background and challenges to students.
  2. To introduce a technology tool. An interactive graphic can contain a large amount of multimedia content and enable students to explore different areas of interest.
  3. To publish student work. Students or teachers can create content that reflects class work using ThinkLink.
  4. To create interactive reports. ThinkLink can provide an alternative to formal reports or academic writing.
  5. For  skills development. Innovative way to package tutorials, text, podcasts, web links, etc.

I created an introduction to the class using a photograph I took on the west coast of Ireland, which is where one side of my family is from. I inserted video, text, an Instagram account, and a link to my alma mater. My ThingLink introduction can be found at