After the bank holiday weekend, I am in catch up mode this week (as its “reading week”). So, apologies for the late post. I reviewed the following…..
Khan Academy’s YouTube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2IfWIGby7K0
ElearningExamples:Candidate Match Game II mainly
iEthiCS simulation: Introduction to the Andy Dufrayne Case http://www.elu.sgul.ac.uk/iethics/
1) What elements of these do you think are appealing to different learners?
The YouTube videos appear to be designed for a younger audience with the use of simplistic examples and characters/voices that younger audiences are likely to relate to. I only watched a couple of videos (incl. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VIi4kxbbqw) but I certainly got the impression that the target audience was definitely a younger audience. The videos would appeal to learners who are patient and are willing to spare the required time. However, the videos are of high quality and are very well put together with good onscreen explanations and audio. Learners would require good internet connections and also possibly headphones for the audio (depending on where the learner is). This means these videos are probably not accessible to everyone – although I have not tried the videos on a phone.
The ELearningExamples games were very interactive and were again of a very high quality. They were designed to be informative (especially the Candidate Match Game). The game gave learners the opportunity to find out about where both candidates in the last US presidential election stood on various policies. This would ultimately help people choose which candidate to vote for (I am guessing). Users had a choice of simply getting a snapshot of where each candidate stood on a particular issue or the user could read more about what the candidate said/why/where/when etc. This kind of learning would suite someone who had a bit of a background about the subject area and were looking to learn more and thus make informed choices.
iEthiCS: This resource was very interesting especially since it allowed laymen (like me) to get a bit of a glimpse into the medical world. However from a technical standpoint, I thought the resource could have been better. Though videos are used, the material didn’t seem to flow in a logical manner. However, the way that the outcomes of various actions were explained through text and the use of scenarios would certainly benefit medical professionals in my opinion.
2) What learners, if any, would they be inappropriate for and why?
These materials may not work for learners who don’t have access to good computing power because almost all the resources use videos, animation and audio. The learner also needs to pay attention, engage with and spend time on the resources in order to get the most of the resources. So, the learners have to be really interested in the subject matter. Otherwise, they may not gain anything from the resources as the subject matter is almost always very specific.
3) How do each of these resources differ from that of the resources we’re using in ocTEL? Do they promote social learning, re-use of their materials, or open access?
These resources are similar to the ones being used in OCTEL. Some of the resources do encourage social learning (like the YouTube videos) and there is no reason the materials cannot be re-used.
4) What ways can you see to improve the effectiveness or potential reach of these resources? Effectiveness can be considered as allowing students to work at their own pace and review areas they need to, providing a richer learning experience by expanding the range of expertise which students will confront, or providing a range of materials in different media formats to suit students’ different learning preferences.
Making the materials compatible with mobile devices would make the resources accessible to more people. Organising the resources better (like maybe sub categorising the Youtube videos) and creating a better flow like with the iEthiCS resource will help enhance of the effectiveness of the materials in my opinion.