Staff Induction Techniology Input

Yet another staff induction workshop successfully under the belt! This was a two-day workshop and a condensed version of a much longer one. The staff moral is a lot different here 'cause they are new to our teaching and learning environment and one can only hope that it stays that way for years to come. I do my regular input on technology, focusing especially on what is freely available (OpenSource)...no-one really wants to pay for the stuff especially if you using it for work. Most of our participants are new lecturers and comes from the corporate world.

My colleague shares some amazing online info re: clickers and demonstrates how it works. Looks like they are sold on the ideas. The site is a.naiku.nethttp://a.naiku.net/ and another screencasting software that's called screencast-o-matic. The latter is probably developed by Americans judging my the name. I do my input and add some new sites to my regular PowerPoint (seems like people never gets tired of it) like Asana.com which offers a really slick project-management solution. The coolest feature? It has a built in reminder and it is cloud-based. Ok, that two features. There was lots of debate about our Biggs video; on the Roberts and the Susan's and how with the correct learning task you can change the Roberts into Susans. I do have my doubts...after all we all different. We resist change for different reasons and if there is one thing we often overlook, then it's the power of the medium that carries the message. Sometimes it's not just what is being said but who says it. There is no one solution to address the issues around engaging learners, whether they are staff or students. So we really need to take the time to know our learners, what their needs and even preferences are. What motivates them and how authentic am I as the messenger? What resources do students have access to and how reliable are those sources. How do we encourage agency with students so they understand their responsibility for their own success. Moreover, and especially where technology is concerned, we often teach HOW we do things using specific tools rather than WHY we decided to use a certain tools. While the HOW is important, I've found that with technology that the WHY helps with transferal of skills to different contexts.

Two days is probably way to short a time to make any significant impact on teachers because we are dealing with mindsets and it is so easy to revert back to our default settings which we are so familiar and comfortable with. At the very least we can  address the challenge of lack of awareness and hope that at some level participants have been inspired but even then there is no guarantee that our interventions will translate into implementation. Would the information that we share be better communicated in the form of a course then? At least it promises sustained contact for the duration thereof. Perhaps one should then ask whether attending courses actually change the way we act or react. Perhaps, its intended to give us the tools to act and the mind-shift happens somewhere down the line... Only time will tell.