Skip to main content
David Swisher
    • I’m an educator with a ministry and technology background. In my primary role I serve as Senior Learning eXperience Designer in Innovation & Partnerships at Indiana Wesleyan Un... more edit
    As part of our coursework for the Doctor of Ministry program in Semiotics & Future Studies (Leadership in the Emerging Culture), lead faculty mentor Leonard Sweet asked us to write an essay describing how semiotics has changed us, our... more
    As part of our coursework for the Doctor of Ministry program in Semiotics & Future Studies (Leadership in the Emerging Culture), lead faculty mentor Leonard Sweet asked us to write an essay describing how semiotics has changed us, our thinking, and our
    ministry.  The intent was a "what have you learned in the program so far" reflection essay, but since for me the program drew connections back to my earliest interests in linguistics in High School coupled with my later research in communication theory, multimedia learning, and pedagogy/andragogy, and aligned them with my ministry passions (as any doctoral program should), I decided to take it a step further and explain my journey in that regard with its most important shaping influences.  Thus this Integration Essay explains how it all fits together for me.
    In recent years, our society has seen a proliferation of online courses, virtual universities, and open course initiatives. However, not everything done in the name of online education is necessarily an improvement, and in many cases the... more
    In recent years, our society has seen a proliferation of online courses, virtual universities, and open course initiatives.  However, not everything done in the name of online education is necessarily an improvement, and in many cases the quality of education received online is inferior to traditional classroom-based instruction.

    This presentation’s authors, a technology maven and an innovative instructor, contend that applying the University General Education (UGE) program’s core criteria – active learning, experiential context, and cross-disciplinary connection – to online courses would dramatically improve the learning received, whereas a proliferation of online courses which lack these essentials diminishes the quality of online education and weakens the College’s image. 

    Further, contemporary research suggests that this problem bears a direct correlation to retention in online courses and programs.  As more of our departments and faculty strive to develop online courses, and particularly as the UGE system evolves toward a whole-university mandate, it is vital that online course offerings that faculty prepare are not merely convenience-driven but actually enhance the quality of instruction we offer. 

    This presentation will discuss the pedagogical challenges inherent in moving courses to an online format in light of the three UGE core criteria; highlight relevant educational psychology research from Richard E. Mayer and Ruth Colvin Clark regarding applications of the Cognitive Theory of Multimedia Learning, which demonstrates that online instruction can enhance these vital UGE core components if done correctly and intentionally; and survey some best practices currently being utilized by Kansas State University instructors which make effective use of these components in online courses.
    Since the publication and wide dissemination of Mark Prensky’s (2001a, b) articles, the term “digital natives” contrasted with “digital immigrants” has become a de facto trope in educational technology literature and debates. It is clear... more
    Since the publication and wide dissemination of Mark Prensky’s (2001a, b) articles, the term “digital natives” contrasted with “digital immigrants” has become a de facto trope in educational technology literature and debates.  It is clear that those who grow up with technology are far more comfortable with it and learn it more quickly; it is equally undeniable that today’s student body is vastly different than the one our systems were designed to educate.
    However, as numerous practitioners have observed and several scholars have documented, the natives vs. immigrants distinction is based primarily on claims without evidence, and thus may be a false dichotomy.  Further, the delineation isn’t as neat and clear as when first proposed, since some technological commonalities transcend the dichotomy while other purported distinctions aren’t as clear.  So although much rhetorical effort has been contributed in the blogosphere critiquing or defending the characterizations, empirical and sustained critique has been minimal and impartial objective analysis is next to impossible. 
    This presentation proposes a new angle on the issue, in hopes of finding a more robust and viable approach to technology integration processes.  Following the logic of Prensky’s argument without the unsubstantiated baggage, and co-opting the concept of “immersion,” this research argues that technology is a language which can come with innate predisposition (ala Nativist theory) or be learned, and that the ease with which one becomes acclimated to it closely follows the principles outlined in the literature of “second language acquisition” (SLA).
    This approach sustains the concepts that even critics seem to agree on, rejects the claims that aren’t as clear-cut, and provides a better explanation for adoption challenges and resistance than the presumptive logic of behaviorism and the generational appellations that echo it.  There is also a sizeable body of literature on SLA (for example, Chomsky, Vygotsky, Bruner, etc.), which provides clear assimilation models and teaching methods which could serve well the challenges we face with technology adoption in higher education.