Summary2

=﻿eCommunities: Analysis and Design of Interactive Learning Environments= =**Title:** eCommunities: Analysis and Design of Online Interactive Environments Summary = **URL:**  http://open.umich.edu/education/si/si529/winter2009

**Description:**  This LMS site, published September 6, 2010 and revised January 12, 2011, is from the University of Michigan’s School of Information graduate program. Content for the course is provided both through the institution’s Open.Michigan program of electronically shared resources and by a weekly face-to-face meeting. Study encompasses the functioning of online communities (eCommunities) which are described as people who interact over time for a purpose, such as a common topic or collaborative project, or individual usefulness. The environment in which the identified culture dwells is provided wholly, or in part, electronically by various technological means. Research conducted is to garner insight for future planners regarding social theories as to what is helpful to the members of these communities within specific contexts and with which specific technology.

Learning experiences here are a combination of traditional and distance education. Traditional methods employed are class lectures with discussions, personal presentations, and written papers. Electronic methods include: readings in e- books and articles; specific weekly tasks conducted through online forums; and active research of an eCommunity. The intended outcomes of “eCommunities: Analysis and Design of Online Interaction Environments” are those necessary to prepare the decision-making skills of online designers and managers. Inductive research conducted through recorded participation in the communities established by the course, provides knowledge toward the intended goals. There are two focuses: the first, identify research proven designs, tools and implications for specific populations; the second, design a start-up plan for an online community with justified social activities and technical features. Viewing the individual results of the shared experiences in this course will provide comparative information students can use in professional planning and managing projects.

**Strengths:** Overall the site was easy to follow and learners are able locate the required information. Based on the rubric, the two strongest areas were design and content. The syllabus was very detailed listing the objectives, course description, the prerequisites, any readings that would be completed during the course as well as other helpful information. The site itself was very well organized and the course, according to the instructor, can be designed to accommodate all learners.

**Weaknesses:** The following areas are found to be in need of improvement for this course. The instructor does not use multimedia instructional tools as indicated by pedagogy for highly engaged learning experiences. Except for one video, the only online listed resources are text which are delivered electronically.

The site use by the student is hampered by the lack of interactive links for topics listed within the schedule. There is no contact information for the instructor on this course syllabus but it is available on a link in the website.

There are no alternatives to the all-text content making the deliver of the content of the course limited. However, there is a statement on the syllabus asking students with special needs to self identify. If a student has a different learning styles, there is little evidence of student choice or alternative accessibility. Perhaps this is handled on a case by case basis. In order for this course to be accessible for the sight-impaired, for instance, students would need a screen reader or other electronic tool for different modes of learning.

This course was revised in January of 2011. It neglects to incorporate many of the collaborative and interactive tools that are elements of a well designed online learning community.

Course forums alone are available for sharing among students and/or faculty which does not provide experience with other forms as the objectives dictate. Student groups may be able to set-up their own online communities but there is no mention of this as a choice or requirement.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">Except for the PowerPoint class presentations, there is no reference to any other required multimedia project created by the students. Thislimits the means of expression for students against UDL guidelines. It is not understood how the intended learning about designs, tools and their implications will be provide except through stagnate readings.

<span style="background-color: transparent; color: #000000; font-family: Arial; font-size: 15px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; text-decoration: none; vertical-align: baseline;">media type="custom" key="9768770"