Survey Analysis

What did the survey reveal? What was good and bad about your presentation? What did you learn from the survey results? What will you do differently with your next presentation?

 

The results of my survey revealed that the power point presentation was engaging and the content of the presentation was helpful. In regards to second life and screencast, the survey revealed that navigating second life and screen cast was somewhat difficult. The survey revealed that the preferred training method was split between virtual reality and blended method. The respondents agreed that VR and simulation enhanced learning and that using technology to learn a new skill was important. Neither of the respondents were eager in wanting to use second life as a teaching tool. In regards to the respondents comfort level in using technology, the survey revealed that they were comfortable in using technology.

If I were to change anything in my next presentation, I would probably add a short video clip to make it more engaging and maybe add a few multiple choice questions to make the presentation more interactive and I would elaborate more on the content being presented.

Validating the Credibility of Websites

 

Blog Topic: Your neighbor has just been diagnosed with Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). He has a lot of questions regarding the disease and treatment options. He has gone to the following websites (see below) to do some research and now has come to you to ask for your educated opinion. Compare and contrast these sites in regard to the validity and reliability of their information. What credible resources might you advise your neighbor to review? How can you validate the credibly of a website?

www.wikipedia.org

www.webmd.com

www.cdc.gov

 

According to McGonigle & Mastrian (2015) “clinicians should be cautious when recommending websites to patients and families, because not all sites are reliable or valid” (p. 295). It is important for the clinician to know how to identify websites that are credible and to recommend websites that can meet the learning needs of the patient. One such resource that is used to identify credible websites for health information is the Health on the Net (HON), which was created as a platform to distribute quality health information to patients, healthcare providers and the public as well as provide access to the most up to date medical data via the internet (HONcode, 2015).

Comparing and Contrasting Websites

In comparing and contrasting between Wikipedia, WebMD, and the CDC, Wikipedia- is a free encyclopedia that can offer valuable and accurate information, but does not guarantee that the content presented has been reviewed by experts and it cannot guarantee the validity of the information. Wikipedia doesn’t offer any formal peer review of the content, nor does it provide professional advice (Wikipedia, 2015).  WebMD on the other hand, is certified by Honcode, is Urac accredited, and the privacy of information is certified by Truste.  WebMD provides credible, original and timely health information content by well know providers. The contributors to the site are board-certified physicians, award-winning journalists, and trained community moderators. The qualifications of all medical professionals on the site are verified; including health professionals, experts, editorial professionals and contributors with a specialty license (WebMD, 2015). The CDC is a website that offers information that increases the health security of our nation by putting science into action and by providing health information that will protect us against unnecessary and dangerous health threats (CDC, 2014).

Credible Resources

Some common domains used for websites are .edu - education sites, .gov - government sites, .org - organization sites, .com - commercial sites, and .net - network infrastructures (Montecino, 1998).  In recommending a credible website for the neighbor to use to research his condition, I would recommend using government sites that use the domain .gov, such as the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ health finder site (www.healthfinder.gov), the National Institutes of Health (http://www.nih.gov) and Medline Plus (www.medlineplus.gov) (McGonigle & Mastrian, 2015, p. 296).

Validating Websites

To validate whether the website is credible, I would direct him to examine the web domain or URL address, and to look for the credentials of the author or organization. According to Lane (2010) “the author or organization should be clearly displayed on the website. If the credentials are missing, consider this a red flag” (p. 12). I would also direct him to determine if the website has been updated regularly and to determine what the websites intent is, such as, is it to inform, instruct, or is it to persuade and does it have advertisements (Lane, 2010, p. 13). Many websites that are considered reliable will have a seal of certification from a trusted accrediting organization such as the Health on the Net Foundation (HON). This seal of certification verifies the websites transparency of information regarding the authority, authorship, confidentiality, funding, and that it is up-to date, and honest about advertising and provides a clear distinction between advertisement and editorial content (HONcode, 2015). Doing these things can help in determining the quality of the information presented as well as help to ensure that the information is credible.  

 

References

About us: What we do for our users. (2015). Retrieved from WebMD: http://www.webmd.com/about-webmd-policies/about-what-we-do-for-our-users

General disclaimer. (2015). Retrieved from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer

HONcode. (2015). Retrieved from Health on the net foundation: http://www.hon.ch/HONcode/Patients/Visitor/visitor.html

Lane, R. V. (2010). Stop! Evaluate website before use. Dental Assistant, 79(4), 12-45.

McGonigle, D., & Mastrian, K. G. (2015). Nursing informatics and the foundation of knowledge (3rd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

Mission, Role, and Pledge. (2014). Retrieved from Centers for disease control and prevention: http://www.cdc.gov/about/organization/mission.htm

Montecino, V. (1998). Guidelines for critiquing www resources. Retrieved from Education & Technology Resources: http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/web-eval-sites.htm

      





MN531 U5 Educational Technology Survey

Surveys



https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Y6Q6GHL

Web-based surveys are becoming more popular due to their quick, low-cost, flexible way of obtaining the views of a study sample. They are useful in assessing opinions and views in business, commerce and education. There is almost no cost involved in the use of online survey tools and they can be embedded within social media sites, placed into websites and included in emailed links. An example of a web-based survey is the Survey Monkey. Survey Monkey is a very popular and well known survey tool that ranks highly on search engines. The basic package which is free offers the subscriber 10 questions per survey with a maximum number of 100 responses. It also provides examples of survey formats from a pre-installed library (Phillips, 2015).

Survey Monkey is an interactive site that can be used to set up questionnaires that offer a variety of responses using drop down menus and yes/no responses. Tutorials and information sheets are provided for those new to the site and services. This online web survey is also a great tool to use to conduct health research with appropriate ethical approval (Waclawski, 2012).

 

References

Phillips, A. (2015). OH research: How to conduct surveys. Occupational Health, 67(1), 27-30.

Waclawski, E. (2012). How I use it: Survey Monkey. Occupational Medicine (Oxford, England), 62(6), 477. doi:10.1093/occmed/kqs075

MN531 U4 Educational Technologies Screencast

http://www.screencast.com/t/LakqQWSro1x

According to (Hartley, Ludlow, & Duff, 2015) “virtual reality is a computer simulation of the real world in which users engage in actions and/or interact with others in life-like environments…” (p. 21). According to (Cooke-Plagwitz, 2009) (as cited in Hartley, Ludlow, & Duff, 2015, p. 21)  “SL contains the most critical components for successful virtual learning: an immersive environment for situated learning, an avatar that allows active learning, and text and speech interactions with other learners to enable socially constructed learning”.

Pros of VR

The pros to using the technology in Second life includes the following: it engages you visually and simulates reality, it provides “How To” instructions on how to use the different features, it offers the opportunity to interact and engage with other users in different environments or destinations and the option to share content.  According to Rahim (2013) “Second Life provides ample teaching and learning opportunities for learner-centered teaching and learning. It allows the flexibility for students to learn to create 3D objects on their own, supports virtual commerce, communication and interaction in an innovative 3D environment” (p. 2).

Cons of VR

 The cons associated with using Second life is that I found it difficult to navigate the site while using a laptop, it was a little easier to navigate using a desktop. Despite learning how to control the avatar, I still found it confusing as to how I was going to use the site to create a learning environment. The tutorial videos did not peak my interest to want to use the site. I did not find it very helpful. Also I found the site to be slow in uploading or sharing to screencast. Other cons or challenges associated with the site may include resistance to the technology, especially by those who have no experience working with virtual worlds, logistic issues related to transitions between activities (Hartley, Ludlow, & Duff, 2015, p. 23).

 

References

Hartley, M. D., Ludlow, B. L., & Duff, M. C. (2015). Second life®: A 3D virtual immersive environment for teacher preparation courses in a distance education program. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 34(3), 21-25.

Rahim, N. F. (2013). Collaboration and knowledge sharing using 3D virtual world on second life. Education for information, 30(1), 1-40. doi:10.3233/EFI-130928