Whew! I thought I’d never finished the require chapter readings for the week. It was quite lengthy and informative. I will share a few things that made me go “Hmmmm.”
Chapter 4 - Tutorials
I was surprised to read that, “Many commercial programs that identify themselves as tutorials…” are not truly authentic. Therefore anyone can crank out a program and call it a tutorial without any regards to the “rules of thumb”. There are no regulations on what is legal to advertise as tutorial. Making it even more important for parents and educators to do extra research on their own in order to truly weigh a product’s worth.
I found it interesting that “negative words” (p. 102) and phrases such as “None of the above” or “All of the above” should not be used in tutorials. Ironically the Financial aid Entrance Interview contained a question or two in which the correct answer was one of the phrases. So if this is the case in some instances, I wonder why it is cautioned against? I don’t find those questions easy to guess.
In previous classes, I’ve read that giving a student immediate feedback is best. The reading however suggested that in all cases, immediate feedback is not best. A delayed feedback, depending on the situation is a better choice. After thinking about it, it made sense to me. My view on returning feedback to students has expanded.
Lastly after reading this chapter I was puzzled as to the categorization of a program previously used in another Walden class. Do any of you remember using the online text by Trochim that we could only access through a site called “Atomic Dog”? Would you consider it a tutorial or something else?
Reference
Alessi, S.M. & Trollip, S.R. (2001). Multimedia for learning: Methods and development. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Hi Lori,
I remember using that Troichim resource. I guess the official term would be e-book, but it was quite interactive, wasn't it? I'm not sure that I'd call it a tutorial, perhaps because it wasn't teaching a specific task, but more theory. I hadn't thought of that one in this week's discussion. I'll have to think more about that one. Excellent question!
Hey Melanie,
I'm glad someone remembers. There were "tools" for the student to use. I remember the option of using a "notebook" to take notes and electronic highlighters, etc. which, call me a nerd ;o) I did use.
I remember using the Trochim text as well and I would agree with Melanie, it would be considered an eBook or electronic resource. The interactivity was good but you will laugh, or maybe cringe when I confess, I printed some of it because I just could not read it on the screen and remember it all. I am too old, gotta hold it in the two hands.
Hey Becky,
I completely understand. I believe I printed out some pages myself. Many times its best to work with the material in a hardcopy.
Hi Lori:
I still use the Trochim e-book. I always saw it as a non linear mode of addressing research material. I like the fact that you can just from topic as questions are raise from the reading. I'm always asking questions which are off the point or that get generated and I feel more comfortable when I follow up and answer them as I go. I really love the text.
Hi Frank,
Wow, still using it, huh? It was convenient and would make a great reference tool for me. Sometimes I experience memory lapses of many research (quantative and qualitative) terms. I need to see about getting my money's worth, too.
Post a Comment