In the fall, I will most likely be teaching the survey
online. One of the difficult parts of
teaching a a large lecture course online or onsite, when both time constraints
and classroom size discourage discussion, is ensuring that students are doing and
understanding the reading. While some
instructors prefer to simply wait for paper assignments and exams to check up
on their students, I’m a bit too obsessive for that approach. One solution is to offer brief quizzes,
possibly in a multiple-choice or word identification format. In the physical classroom, it’s easy enough
to pass out and collect the occasional quiz, and with technology-assisted
courses, both on-site and online, there are usually tools built in to whatever
technological platform one is using, such as Blackboard or Angel. However, I find the latter difficult to work
with. Furthermore, I’m not aware of any
such platform that takes advantage of the collaborative capabilities of Web 2.0
in the way that, say, wikis do. It’s
nice to be able to work with other instructors to refine and improve our diagnostic
tools, but I don’t know of many good online tools for that purpose.
So I was pleased to learn of a tool that Google has recently
and quietly announced, called Oppia. At its most basic, Oppia allows one to create
web-based testing tools and learning modules quickly and easily, so long as
those tools can be graded according to an easy set of rules (e.g.
multiple-choice questions, ID questions, the ordering of events along a
timeline, but not essays). However, one can
also add more layers of interactivity. I
see this as useful in a couple of different scenarios. If a student answers a multiple-choice
question correctly, in other words, that can prompt a second and more difficult
question that provides a better sense of how much the student knows, or which
can be used to offer extra-credit unavailable to students who failed to answer
the first question correctly. (Many
computer-based assessment tests, such as the GRE, operate on this principle, of
course, which boosts their accuracy.)
Furthermore, if a student inputs a partial sense of the answer, the instructor-programmed
learning module can prompt the student to be more specific; this potentially
resolves one of students’ most frequent complaints, i.e. expecting full credit
for an incomplete answer.
The second advantage of Oppia is that it allows educators to
collaborate in designing testing and learning modules. I’m a big believer in online collaboration, and
I think it’s particularly helpful for teachers confronted with the challenge of
covering a huge amount of course material.
I always find myself realizing after the fact that I hadn’t covered a
particular important topic, at least not in the depth I’d wanted. Being able to share and build off existing testing
tools allows us as educators to avoid such oversights, and to overcome the
biases inherent to our own training and research interests. It also allows us to individualize our
courses in ways that are discouraged by the online tests provided by textbook
publisher websites. In effect, Oppia allows
us to do for certain formats of tests what collaborative projects such as The
American Yawp are doing for textbooks.
I haven’t yet designed any Oppia modules, but I plan to
incorporate the platform into my teaching in the near future, and will be sure
to provide an update when I do. In the
meantime, I’m curious to know what others think of Oppia and other web-based
collaborative tools out there for designing learning and testing materials.
No comments:
Post a Comment