The topic of interaction was quite educative. I learned the concepts of designing the Interactive Learning Resource around the interaction of students. More so, Bates (2019) says that there are three methods of interaction: learner-content, student-student, and teacher-student. In addition, I was able to go through several posts submitted by my classmates. They increased my knowledge on how interaction could be used.
Looking at the work of Enze, I agreed with most of the post:
Enze’s interactive learning resource involves learning on mean, median, and mode. I agreed with Enze that the video would require a learner-content interaction. The learner will be able to watch the content and comprehend the concepts shown in the video. However, Enze should have identified whether the interactive characteristics of the media, that is, whether it is inherent interactivity, designed interactivity, or user-generated interaction. Still, the post identifies the activities to be completed by students. The activities involve break-out rooms, forming groups, and solving math questions. Finally, the post identifies ways that Enze would overcome the lack of inclusivity. The teacher (Enze) would record the video and upload it to the workshop for those who cannot access it directly in YouTube. In addition, Enze would offer a different video for colorblind students.
Omar’s blog was interesting. I think I could also add some ideas to Omar’s blog:
I agree with Omar that the video does not force the learner to respond. It only encourages the learner to leave a comment. Therefore, I would like to add to Omar’s post that the technology used is ‘designed interactivity’. Additionally, I would also like to add that the interaction of this video is learner-content interaction. More so, the video can be inbuilt into a teachers designed activities that allows for the student to be assessed. Just like the Omar says, the tasks should align with the outcomes.
Leave a Reply