Technology Acceptance Model

While investigating the usefulness of a digital feedback tool in a practical lab setting and researching theoretical frameworks to guide my research I have landed on the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) initially proposed by Davis (1998). TAM considers two main factors that influence user’s attitudes about the adoption of a new technology, perceived usefulness (PU) and perceived ease of use (PEU).  PU assesses the user’s perception of the technologies ability to improve productivity or performance in the workplace.  PEU factors in the user’s perception of the effort required to adopt the new technology.  TAM states that a user’s perception of both PU and PEU will influence the acceptance of the new technology.  TAM will be used to guide the research as the implementation of a new technology will only be useful if the users see value in it and adopt it.


Davis, F. D. 1989. Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quart. 13 319-339


Where can I share?

Photo by Marcos Luiz Photograph on Unsplash

While thinking about my final research project I have been asked how I will disseminate my research findings.  The focus of my research has been using technology to increase the speed and quality of feedback in an experiential learning environment with a focus on skilled trades. You can read more about it in my previous blog post Improving Live Feedback.  While skilled trades faculty would be the main audience, I believe the application of this research goes beyond trades to anyone that teaches in a lab setting.

The obvious opportunity to share this research starts with professional development sessions held at my own college.  I would also like to find the opportunity to present this research at other conferences, as I feel like this could be beneficial to many other faculty.  This topic started as an area of interest as I looked to find ways to improve my own practice, and in having conversations with others I realized I am not alone.  I am not sure if this is research that I would feel confident to publish in a journal, but hopefully it has some merit to others.  As I have not attended many conferences in the field of learning and technology, I am wondering if anyone has any suggestions of conferences that may be a good fit for this?

Strategies to support the development of a Community of Inquiry

As a college educator in the non-traditional academic field of skilled trades, very few of my classes are hosted on-line.  These courses tend to focus on in-class, hands-on, experiential learning opportunities.  When developing on-line or blended learning classes for this specific group of learners, consideration must be given to their learning preferences.  In my experience, skilled trades students tend to prefer active learning and may struggle within a traditional academic learning environment.  A Community of Inquiry (CoI) is a collaborative group of learners whom construct meaning and understanding through reflection and critical thinking (Garrison, Anderson & Archer (2003).  Although a CoI is a non-traditional choice in skilled trades education, the benefits to the learner are the same as those in a traditional academic learning environment.

I developed this infographic to support faculty with implementing a CoI in skilled trades education.  It lists a variety of strategies and considerations to successfully implement a CoI in a blended or on-line course inspired by Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2003), Khoo and Bonk (2014), Van Schie (2008) and Vaughan, Cleveland-Innes and Garrison (2013).

The CoI framework is comprised of three components: social, cognitive and teaching presence.  While I identified alternate headings, each of the components is represented.  Garrison, Anderson and Archer (2003) define social presence as the learners ability to connect to others in a meaningful and safe environment.  Strategies to support social presence could include inspiring connections and relationships between learners while encouraging communication and allowing a community to develop through the use of on-line tools such as video introductions, discussion threads and communication applications.

Cognitive presence is the learners ability to explore, construct and apply knowledge gathered through reflection and interaction with the community (Anderson, 2018.) Cognitive presence could be developed through encouraging the learner to ask questions while inspiring curiosity, exploration and critical thinking skills.

Teaching presence refers to the “…design, facilitation and direction of cognitive and social processes…” while guiding the learner and community to meet the learning outcomes (Anderson, Rouke, Garrison & Archer (2001).  Facilitators can support learners through effective learning design, appropriate choices of technology, and by providing guidance. Additionally, facilitators can provide options to how learners gain knowledge and demonstrate their understanding.  Both learners and facilitators can strengthen the teaching presence as learners can assist in knowledge sharing with their peers.

If we inspire, encourage and support learners through the use of a CoI, a collaborative and effective community of learners will be developed.



Anderson, T. (2018). How Communities of Inquiry Drive Teaching and Learning in the Digital Age. Contact North.

Anderson, T., Rourke, L., Garrison, D. R., Archer, W. (2001). Assessing Teaching presence in a Computer Conference Environment. Journal of asynchronous learning networks, 5(2), 1-17.

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education model. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2-3), 87-105.

Garrison, Anderson & Archer. (2003). A theory of critical inquiry in online distance education. In More & Anderson, Handbook of Distance Education. (p. 113-127).

Khoo, E. G., & Bonk, C. J. (2014). Chapter 1: Introducing TEK-VARIETY (PDF) (pg 7-12).  Adding some TEC-VARIETY: 100+ activities for motivating and retaining learners online (PDF). Open World Books.

Van Schie, J. (2008). Concept map of community of inquiry. Retrieved from

Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Athabasca University Press. Chapter 3: Facilitation



Improving Live Feedback

Image by Peggy und Marco Lachmann-Anke from Pixabay

While pondering a change to my evaluation methods in a practical lab setting for LRNT 527 at Royal Roads University I was challenged to locate an empathy method that would allow me to create a digital learning resource to solve a problem I am currently facing.

As a culinary teacher, a tremendous amount of feedback I provide to students is verbal.  In a practical lab setting students are required to re-create a skill that has been previously demonstrated in a defined amount of time. As a faculty member, I assist students with practicing the skill and provide feedback as they complete the lab task. A major challenge is the time it takes to provide quality feedback.  For example, in a four hour class of 24 students, just 2 minutes of verbal feedback to each student uses 25% of the available lab time.  Deeley (2018)states that in order for a student to improve and correct their approach it is critical for students to have an opportunity to correct their errors (p. 440).  Without effective feedback students are at risk for repeating errors and not progressing or improving.  Dedicating time to provide effective feedback is an important part of a facilitators role and benefits the student’s learning experience.  My design challenge is to create a digital tool that will increase the efficiency and quality of feedback in a practical lab setting.

Using the bootcamp bootleg (Stanford University Institute of Design, 2016) as a guide I have identified a combination of two methods to use in creating empathy in design. The interview method is an obvious choice for gaining empathy with the user.  An interview allows an opportunity to better understand the persons perspective and assists in identifying their needs within the design (Stanford University Institute of Design, p. 8, 2016).  Empathizing with the user will allow the designer to create an effective solution. I will conduct a small group interview with teachers that face similar situations.  A second choice would be to use the critical reading checklist (Stanford University Institute of Design, p. 22, 2016). This checklist asks 4 key questions; What’s the point? Who says? What’s new? Who cares? These questions are used to evaluate the design by ensuring the point of view is valid and supported.  I have been gathering research in this area, so I will refer to that secondary research to identify if the design is valid and supported.

The major challenge to be faced is time. There is a short timeline to complete this assignment and there is much work to be completed.  The limitation on group size due to ethics approval will also be a challenge.  Being limited to three participants does not allow for a wide range of opinions, therefore I must select a group to focus on, either teachers or learners.  The last challenge I will face is how to limit my “perfect world” vision and focus on what is attainable in the limited amount of time and my personal skill level in this area.


Deeley, S.J. (2018). Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 439-448, DOI: 10.1080/02602938.2017.1356906

Stanford University Institute of Design. (2016). bootcamp bootleg. Retrieved from


Is there value in this credential?

While working on a critical inquiry of’s limitations as a one way learning platform, I decided to investigate a course I may want to use in a class I teach in the fall.  Although my focus of this inquiry has been the lack of assessment and feedback in the video library model I have encountered perhaps another limitation.

I was previewing this course, and reviewed sections that I may find useful in my classes.  I then became curious about how much of the content did I need to watch to complete a certificate of completion?  As it turns out…the answer is really none.  I watched less than one second of each remaining video clip, before clicking on the next.  I would suggest I had watched approximately 50% of the content on 1.5-2X speed.  The remaining I did not watch at all.

Upon further investigation I “completed” another course by merely clicking on every video in the series.  I did not even wait for one to finish loading, before clicking on the next.  After approximately 35 seconds, I had completed a second certificate.  Let me preface this by saying Adobe programs are something I know very little about.

If there is no assessment of learning, and no real guarantee I have even watched the content, my question is this:

Is there any value to a credential that does not assess your learning?  Would you post this on your LinkedIn profile or use it on a resume?



Limitations of

Screenshot – Editing Images Using Snapseed on

In LRNT 526 Inquiry into Contemporary Issues in Learning Technologies for the MALAT program at RRU, I have been working with Team LYNDAto complete a critical inquiry into the use of  Within my team we uncovered a host of questions about the use of as teaching tool that varied from identifying how experts are chosen, accessibility of the platform and content, to the use of in a flipped classroom.

While all of the questions we asked as a team are interesting and important, I wanted to focus my individual effort on the limitations of as a one way content delivery system. Team LYNDA participated in a course titled Editing Images Using Snapseed.  This is photo editing application for mobile phones with features similar to Adobe Photoshop.  After taking the course I wondered how I could assess my learning?  How will I know if my photo improved after applying the software?   Lack of assessment or feedback is a limitation of  Deely (2018) states effective feedback is required to guide students in improving their work (p.440).  As is only a one way tutorial video, how can they assess if the learner gained new understanding of the content?  Can be used as a stand-alone teaching tool, or is it only useful in a flipped classroom or guided learning situation?

As I have not personally used in my context, I am seeking feedback on how you have used it.  Were you able to use this as a stand-alone item?  Was it optional?  Was there value (marks) attached?  Was learning assessed?  How was feedback (if any) provided?  What other limitations did you experience?



Deeley, S. J. (2018). Using technology to facilitate effective assessment for learning and feedback in higher education. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 439–448.

Kozma, B., Stokes, D., Sharpe, M. Heck, T. (April 15, 2019) [blog post] To video or not to video…that is the question! Retrieved from (2019). Editing images using Snapseed | Retrieved April 9, 2019, from

Reflecting on LRNT 525

Image credit Pixabay

Looking back to my first post of LRNT 525 Change Management I  have discovered that my initial reaction has not changed.  As Biech (2007) states a passionate leader can inspire change. Passionate leaders are those that I am inspired to follow as well as one I aspire to be. I also referenced the need to involve stakeholders in the process of change to ensure success.  Weiner (2009) states that “Change efficacy is higher when people share a sense of confidence that collectively they can implement a complex organizational change” (p. 2). My management style has always included collaboration, and this course and assigned readings just further solidified my resolve for including others in change.

Moving forward I could lead change within my organization with greater confidence and a better understanding of project management. I have identified myself as an adaptive leader.  Khan (2017) defines an adaptive leader as one that focuses on relationships and considers many factors to identify potential issues.  Continued focus on collaboration is something that will continue to work in my organization.

Moving into the future I intend to lead a change in the way feedback is provided to students in a practical lab setting. This course has given me a set of tools to support this change within my organization.  It has also introduced me to the collection of data and the ethics surrounding that collection.  Zettlemeyer (2015) suggests that it is no longer acceptable for leaders to not understand the analytics behind the data.  This is an area I will continue to focus on as I move forward.

My ability to manage change will be a skill that I am continually developing.  I believe every change, organization and stakeholder situation may call for different methods and models of change.  Although it may have an element of trial and error, it will be coming from a foundation of knowledge that I have gained in this course.



Biech, E. (2007). Chapter 3: Models of change. In C. Russo (Ed.), Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s Practical Guide to Change Mastery (pp. 21-32). Alexandria, VA: American Society for Training & Development.

Heck, T. (2019). Change Management [Blog Post]. Retrieved from

Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or transactional leadership in current higher education: A brief comparisonThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning18(3).

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for changeImplementation Science4.

Zettelmeyer, F. (2015, May 1) A leader’s guide to data analytics. Retrieved from



Managing Change in Digital Learning Environments

There are a variety of methods used to manage change in digital learning environments in education in Canada.  After completing an external scan, I received responses from six colleagues that work in education from primary school to college level organizations across the country.

Each of the situations differ in both scope and type of organization, but they had many common themes.  Each of the cases shared a change to learning environments using a response to advances in digital learning technology.   The changes were made in response to students needs and individual budget requirements.  While each project varied in size from classroom level, to a change that affected the entire organization, they were all implemented to support student learning.

  • “James” – His organization made a budgetary decision to combine both the IT and Media departments at his school after identifying similar and crossover roles in the two areas.
  • “Jennifer”– In response to a lack of available physical space to create a new computer lab, her organization created a “mobile” iPad lab.
  • “Angela” – Her organization has been transitioning traditional F2F classes to online or blended courses over the last 7 years.
  • “Lisa” – Her district school board is piloting a program for students in grades 7-12.  All students will receive a tablet to eliminate handouts and increase students use of digital technology.
  • “Jason” – Reflected on the implementation of an LMS for the first time 20 years ago.
  • “Amy” – Discussed the development of course shells and content for use by part time faculty to increase student engagement in area that her organization identified as a shortfall.

The starting point for change in each of the respondents situations was different.  In Jason and James’ case, leadership determined the need for change through the help of outside consultations.  A decision was then made and implemented without consultation with internal stakeholders. This involved combining an existing information technology department with a media department or an organizational decision to implement a learning management system.  In James’ case, this method of change most aligns with Lean Thinking or Six Sigma which focus on streamlining processes and reducing waste (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015).  In Jason’s case, the Kanter, Jick and Stein method (1992) was most closely followed.  This method follows 10 phases, starting with a strong vision and using change agents to assist in the implementation.  (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 250).  As the decisions were made with outside consultation and little or no input from internal stakeholders, unique challenges were presented as there was resistance from those affected which resulted in low morale.  James identified that the lack of communication and stakeholder input made the implementation of change less successful.

The most successful examples of change management started with consultation with all stakeholders during the design and implementation process.  Jennifer, Angela, Amy and Lisa all identified successful change within their organizations when they were able to participate and give input on the change.  In each of the cases adaptive leadership was present.  Adaptive leadership theory provides flexibility towards change and allows a response to change in new technology, funding, student demographics and globalization (Khan, 2017, p. 182).

Angela and Amy’s organizations recognized a need to try something different to support student learning.  Hamels Insurrection Model (2000) was followed to design and implement the change needed.  The Insurrection Model uses innovative change that differs from the competition and implements it through 8 steps that start with a strong plan and support team (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 250).    Jennifer and Lisa’s organizations both followed the Leading Change Method proposed by Kotter in 1996.  This method responds to urgent need by building a trusted team to communicate the vision and implement the change (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 250).  Both of these methods include consultation with members and stakeholders, and support them throughout the change process.

Each of the respondents identified the element that had the largest impact was the leaders enthusiasm and support of the change.  “A leader’s passion often inspires others, drawing them into the excitement side of change” (Biech, 2007).   Although each of the cases had areas of challenge, the support and communication of the leader was crucial to the successful implementation of the change.   When organizational members feel confident and capable, change efficacy is higher (Weiner, 2009 p. 3).  All of the respondents agreed successful change was led by communication and support from leadership, and participants supported change when they had a voice.


Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: a model for successful changeJournal of Organizational Change Management28(2), 234-262.

Biech, E. (2007). Models for Change. In Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s Practical Guide to Change Mastery. Alexandria, VA: ASTD [Books24x7 database]

Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or Transactional Leadership in Current Higher Education: A Brief ComparisonThe International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning18(3).

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for changeImplementation Science4(67).



Change Management

Image credit: Pixabay

“Managing change effectively is the single most important element in organizational success” Biech (2007).  Change occurs every day, in every organization, in every context. How can it be implemented in a way that will be successful?  How can an organization be prepared for change? Organizational change does not happen overnight, therefore, planning for change is of great importance to increase the probability of success (Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 254).

Change management starts with organizational readiness. Weiner (2009) defines organizational readiness as the shared resolve and belief of members of an organization to be capable of implementing a change (p. 1).  As both an employee and manager that has experienced organizational change,  I feel like the success of change depends on the support of everyone involved.  Problems can arise when some members of an organization feel more committed than others (Weiner, 2009, p. 2).  Creating an environment where everyone is on the same page allows organizations to implement change.  Not every member needs to agree with the change, but they require an opportunity to understand why and how the change will happen.

Involving members in the process is crucial to the success of the change.  There are many models and theories around change management, used to assist organizations in being more successful when implementing change.  The Luecke Method (1990) uses consultation with employees to identify problems and solutions in a joint effort with leadership to create change (as cited by Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p. 250). Galpins (1996) Wheel Method takes into account organizational culture, policies and customs and involves people in the planning process (as cited by Al-Haddad & Kotnour, 2015, p.247). When members of an organization have the opportunity to contribute to the process of change through collaboration, the expectation of success is increased.  Allowing employees an opportunity to provide feedback on both the problem and potential solutions increases the probability of success. Change efficacy is high when members of the organization have confidence in their ability to complete the change considering time required and resources available (Weiner, 2009, p. 4).

Strong leadership is another element used to support change.  Biech (2007) states that a passionate leader can inspire and motivate employees, while creating excitement about the change (ch. 1, para 8).  However, If leadership communicates poorly or delivers an inconsistent message, organizational readiness is reduced (Weiner, 2009, p. 3). Change brings conflict and organizations need to be prepared to manage the conflict as well as the change itself.  Without the support of leadership, change can be unsuccessful.  Leadership sets the stage for change, and can encourage and support members throughout the process.

Speaking specifically about change in digital learning environments, change is happening at increasingly faster rates.  Al-Haddad and Kotnour (2015)identify that environmental factors are constantly changing and therefore change methods need to evolve continuously (p. 235).  Many traditional change management theories do not take into account the speed with which many changes need to take place.  Organizations may not have the ability to gain support from all members due to financial or time constraints.  Weller and Anderson (2013) suggest the resilience model analyzes how an organization is able to adapt without changing core identity or function (p. 9).  It allows for more rapid change without affecting the core of the organization.

Al-Haddad and Kotnour (2015) postit that the success rate of organizational change is <30 percent (p. 254).  Change, no matter how well managed, has a questionable success rate. Finding a successful method will vary from organization to organization, context to context.  I think open communication and support of the members will increase chances of success. What do you do in your organization to manage change?  What models and methods do you find successful?


Al-Haddad, S., & Kotnour, T. (2015). Integrating the organizational change literature: A model for successful change. Journal of Organizational Change Management28(2), 234-262.

Biech, E. (2007). Models for Change. In Thriving Through Change: A Leader’s Practical Guide to Change Mastery. Alexandria, VA: ASTD [Books24x7 database]

Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4(1), 1–9.

Weller, M., & Anderson, T. (2013). Digital resilience in higher education. European Journal of Open, Distance and e-Learning, 16(1), 53–66.