Utilizing a Simulation within an Online School Technology Leadership Course
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v20i1.607Keywords:
Online simulation, diffusion of innovation, distance learning, virtual field experience, technology integration, engagementAbstract
Online courses and programs have grown to become and continue to be a popular option for students. As part of an online Master’s of Education in Instructional Technology program, students must complete a school technology leadership course. Leadership decision making, policy making, and how to have innovations take hold in a school settings are important things to learn about, but are even more important concepts for students to be able to practice. This case study details the reasoning behind, utilization of, adjustments to, and results from bringing a simulation into the program’s online school technology leadership course. Results show that students found the simulation to provide a mostly authentic experience and grew to understand that they should view the simulation as a system, but some students were averse to risk taking and were not always able to adjust to details within the simulation that challenged their existing schema regarding technology leadership and how innovations are diffused within a school setting.References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2014, January). Grade change: Tracking online education in the United States. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://www.onlinelearningsurvey.com/reports/gradechange.pdf
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2015, February). Grade level: Tracking online education in the United States, 2014. Babson Park, MA: Babson Survey Research Group. Retrieved from http://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/survey-reports-2014/
Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based
instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(1), 1.
Backlund, P., Engström, H., Gustavsson, M., Johannesson, M., Lebram, M., & Sjörs, E. (2009).
Sidh: A game-based architecture for a training simulator. International Journal of Computer Games Technology, 2009.
Becker, K., & Parker, J. R. (2009). A simulation primer. In D. Gibson & Y. Baek (Eds.), Digital
simulations for improving education: Learning through artificial teaching environments. Hershey, NY: Information Science Reference.
Ebner, M., & Holzinger, A. (2007). Successful implementation of user-centered game
based learning in higher education: An example from civil engineering. Computers & Education, 49, 873–890. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2005.11.026
Frick, T., Kim, K.-J., Ludwig, B., & Huang, R. (2003). A web simulation on educational change: Challenges and solutions for development. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association for Educational Communication and Technology, Anaheim, CA. Retrieved from https://www.indiana.edu/~tedfrick/aect2003/frick_kim_ludwig_huang.pdf
Huang, J., & Kapur, M. (2012). Learning innovation diffusion as complex adaptive systems through model building, simulation, game play and reflections. In J. van Aalst, K. Thompson, M. J. Jacobson, & P. Reimann (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2012 (Part 1, pp. 259–266). Sydney, Australia: International Society of the Learning Sciences. Retrieved from http://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstream/10497/14439/1/ICLS-2012-259-HuangJ_a.pdf
Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult & continuing education (3rd ed.). London: Routledge.
Johnson, L., Adams, S., & Cummings, M. (2012). NMC horizon report: 2012 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/publications/horizon-report-2012-higher-ed-edition
Johnson, L., Adams-Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2014). NMC horizon report: 2014 higher education edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium. Retrieved from http://cdn.nmc.org/media/2014-nmc-horizon-report-he-EN-SC.pdf
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1
Kovalik, C. L., & Kuo, C. (2012). Innovation diffusion: Learner benefits and instructor insights with the diffusion simulation game. Simulation & Gaming, 43(6), 803–824. doi:10.1177/1046878112444577
Kwon, S., Lara, M., Enfield, J., & Frick, T. (2013). Design and evaluation of a prompting
instrument to support learning within the diffusion simulation game. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 41(3), 231–253.
Lara, M., Myers, R., Frick, T. W., Aslan, S., & Michaelidou, T. (2010). A design case: Developing an enhanced version of the diffusion simulation game. International Journal of Designs for Learning, 1(1) 40–54. doi:10.2190/ET.41.3.c
LaPrade, K., Gilpatrick, M., & Perkins, D. (2014). Impact of reflective practice on online
teaching performance in higher education. Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(4), 625. Retrieved from http://jolt.merlot.org/vol10no4/Gilpatrick_1214.pdf
Leemkuil, H., de Jong, T., & Oates, S. (2000). Review of educational use of games and simulations. Twente: University of Twente. Retrieved December 5, 2014 from http://kits.edte.utwente.nl/documents/D1.pdf
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Molenda, M., & Rice, J. M. (1979). The diffusion simulation game. Simulation and Games, 10(4), pp. 459–467. doi:10.1177/104687817901000407
Peters, V. A. M., & Vissers, G. A. N. (2004). A simple classification model for debriefing simulation games. Simulation Gaming, 35(1), pp. 70–84. doi:10.1177/1046878103253719
Platt, C. A., Raile, A. N. W., & Yu, N. (2014). Virtually the same?: Student perceptions of
the equivalence of online classes to face-to-face classes. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 10(3), 489–503.
Roby, T., Ashe, S., Singh, N., & Clark, C. (2013). Shaping the online experience: How administrators can influence student and instructor perceptions through policy and practice. The Internet and Higher Education, 17, 29–37. doi:10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.09.004
Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). New York: The Free Press.
Roll, I., Yee, N., & Cervantes, A. (2014). Not a magic bullet: The effect of scaffolding on knowledge and attitudes in online simulations. In International Conference of the Learning Sciences.
Ross, D. B., & Exposito, J. A. (2014). A dual perspective in leadership and decision making through a distance learning simulated city. International Journal of Education and Social Science, 1(3), 1–13. Retrieved from http://www.ijessnet.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/1.pdf
Sadera, W., & Hargrave, C. (2005). Conceptual change in teacher technology preparation. In C. Vrasidas, & G. V. Glass (Eds.), Preparing teachers to teach with technology: Current perspectives on applied information technologies. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
Veenman, M. V., Bavelaar, L., De Wolf, L., & Van Haaren, M. G. (2014). The on-line assessment of metacognitive skills in a computerized learning environment. Learning and Individual Differences, 29, 123–130.
White, D., & La Cornu, A. (2010). Eventedness and disjuncture in virtual worlds. Educational Research, 52(2), 183–196. doi:10.1080/00131881.2010.482755
Whitton, N. (2010). Learning with digital games: A practical guide to engage students in higher education. New York: Routledge.
Wouters, P., & Van Oostendorp, H. (2013). A meta-analytic review of the role of instructional support in game-based learning. Computers & Education, 60(1), 412–425.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
As a condition of publication, the author agrees to apply the Creative Commons – Attribution International 4.0 (CC-BY) License to OLJ articles. See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
This licence allows anyone to reproduce OLJ articles at no cost and without further permission as long as they attribute the author and the journal. This permission includes printing, sharing and other forms of distribution.
Author(s) hold copyright in their work, and retain publishing rights without restrictions
