BreakDrink, EdTech, Higher Education, Podcast

@BreakDrink Podcast, Episode No. 5: Digital Redlining with @hypervisible

In @BreakDrink episode no. 5, we chatted about LOADS of things related to our assumptions about access, policies, and practices in have higher education, specifically with regards to technology and learning. Last year for 2016 #OLCInnovate, I invited Chris Gilliard to share his work on Digital Redlining for a short “Ignite-like” talk. Why do we assume everyone has access to the Internet? Or a device? Or access to the same digital learning resources? What do we know or care about privacy and our data? Thanks for joining us to podcast on the topic, Chris. We suspect you’ll be back to chat more with us sometime about similar issues… and anime, of course

Here are a few show notes, ideas, and resources shared in @BreakDrink episode no. 5 with Chris:

Information Literacy, Filtering & Access

Online Access & Web Architecture

Do you KNOW what limitations to your search or access to your knowledge is like at your institution? Understanding Google Search Algorithms & SEO

Journal Access & Journal Databases: What are your resources or limitations? What can you not find that is not accessible on Google Scholar?

  1. Scholar Buddy Search – Find a friend at a larger university/college + ask them to search a topic (or borrow a password) to compare search results
  2. #icanhazpdf hashtag – Ask a friend on Twitter to email you the closed or pay-for-play publication
  3. Alternative creative ways to search: Find a romantic partner at a larger institution; academic citizenship acquisition? Or other ways to search for journal articles and here.

Searching Online & Information Literacy

The process of how information is shared needs to be explained. There are issues with walling-off information, the privatization of knowledge, and those who are moving towards a blockchain in higher ed. – explain what this means for limitations to information/knowledge.Do we teach our students to go beyond the first page hits on the Google search page? Do you know How Google Search Works? Much of our civic online literacy skills could be developed in order to hold ed tech & technology companies more accountable

Technologies in higher ed have many inequalities and technology is not neutral. Want to get more political for higher ed & #edtech? I’ll let Audrey Watters take this one: The Politics of Ed Tech Issues in higher ed are real for all of our campus stakeholders — students, staff, and faculty. These issues are around privacy, cyberbullying, trolling data security, and more. We need to be asking more about the technologies to learn what is ethically right and the limitations to these platforms, applications, and digital resources.

For a start, why don’t we learn more about privacy. Perhaps, it’s time we take a “short course” on privacy and what it means to be online, connected now. Check out the Privacy Paradox created by Note To Self. There are 5 podcasts and actions you do to take back your privacy & data. BONUS LISTEN: Privacy, Data Survivalism and a New Tech Ethics

We Need To Ask More About…

  • Do we really care about privacy online? Are we putting thoughts into the spaces and places online we are working with our learners?
  • Pew Research – State of Privacy in America  & Online Privacy & Safety articles
  • Do we know how our learners access educational materials and resources at our colleges/universities?
  • Cell-phone dependent students: the learners’ main access for Internet is their mobile device which is problematic as this is their main way to complete coursework, assignments, projects, etc.. (e.g. Educause 2015 mobile study & Case Study from Australia)
  • Do we think about the digital divide when considering our practices in higher ed for teaching, service & support?
  • Are we thinking about the platforms & apps we’re requiring our learners to use and how these technologies might be “sucking up their data”? We should.

@BreakDrink Books for Recommended Reading:

Here’s how to connect with Chris Gilliard to learn more about his work and this topic:

@BreakDrink Podcasts Shoutouts/Recommendations:

If you have comments, questions, or feedback about this podcast episode, please feel free to post a comment below, or follow us on the following the “BreakDrink” podcast channels:

We welcome banter & comments there. If y’all listen to the podcast via iTunes, please consider leaving us a rating and review.

EdTech, Learning Technologies

Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

With so many possibilities for digital learning, selecting media and technologies for appropriate course instruction is a very complex process. Although there are a wide range of options in the ed tech realm, pedagogical considerations should always come first. Instructors should reflect on the learning objective and desired outcomes for their subject matter before identifying identifying technological applications for the course.

The SECTIONS model, developed by Tony Bates (2015), is a pedagogical framework for determining what technology, specifically how this technology will be appropriate for instructional approaches. This might include identifying and determining pedagogical characteristics of text, audio, video, computing, and social media. With this framework, Bates (2015) asks five critical questions for teaching and learning for technology and media selection:

  1. Who are the learners?
  2. What are the desired learning outcomes from the teaching?
  3. What instructional strategies will be employed to facilitate the learning outcomes?
  4. What are the unique educational characteristics of each medium/technology, and how well do these match the learning and teaching requirements?
  5. What resources are available?

In thinking about the interplay of technology and learning, higher education courses will need to consider how this design process is developed. In this book chapter, Bates shared an alternative approach to the ADDIE model for instructional design – Learning + Technology Development Process Model (Hibbitts & Travin, 2015).

Learning + Technology Development Process Model (Hibbitts & Travin, 2015)

Regardless of the model for learning design, it will be important to assess how technology will impact the pedagogy. The SECTIONS model is an effective framework to best inform instructors when deciding what media or technology to use for face-to-face, online or blended learning courses:

  • Students
  • Ease of use
  • Costs
  • Teaching functions (including the affordances of different media)
  • Interaction
  • Organizational issues
  • Networking
  • Security and privacy

I would encourage you to utilize Bate’s (2015) Questions to Guide Media Selection and Use, to support your learning design when consider technology adoption for teaching. This open, shared educational resource will provide you with a broader reflection on issues and considerations for your digital pedagogy. Here is an abbreviated checklist for selecting technologies for learning I adopted for a learning module. It was developed for faculty who would like to consider the broader issues for teaching with technology, and how to navigate this course planning process for digital/media inclusions.

Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

STUDENTS

___Review accessibility mandate or policy of your institution, department or program.

___Determine demographics of the students and appropriateness of technology.

___Consider student access to technologies, both off campus and on campus.

___Determine digital skills and digital readiness of your students with learning expectations.

___Justify students’ purchases of a new technology component (if needed) for learning.

___Assess prior learning approaches & how technology can support student learning.

EASE OF USE

____Select the technology for ease of use by instructor and students.

____Identify technology that is reliable for teaching and learning.

____Verify the technology set up, maintenance and upgrade is simple.

____Confirm the technology provider/company is stable to support hardware or software use

____Outline strategies to secure any digital teaching materials you create should the organization providing the software or service cease to exist.

____Locate technical & professional support, both in terms of the technology and with respect to the design of materials.

____Determine technologies to best support edits and updates of learning materials.

____Outline how the new technology will change teaching with to get better results

____Assess risks and potential challenges for using this technology for teaching and learning.

COST & YOUR TIME

____Consider media selection by the length of time and ease of use during course development.

____Factor the time it takes to prepare lectures, and determine if development of digital learning materials will save time and encourage interaction with students (online and/or face-to-face)

____ Investigate if there is extra funding for innovative teaching or technology applications; if so, determine how to best use that funding for learning technologies.

____Assess the local support from your institution from instructional designers and media professionals for media design and development

____Identify open educational resources for the course, e.g. an open textbook, online videos, library page of articles, or other potential OERs.

TEACHING & EDUCATIONAL FACTORS

___Determine the desired learning outcomes from the teaching in terms of content and skills.

___Design instructional strategies to facilitate the learning outcomes.

___Outline unique pedagogical characteristics appropriate for this course, in terms of content presentation and skill development, specifically for:

____Textbook, readings, or other online text materials;

____Audio, such as podcasts, streaming audio from news, etc.;

____ Video, such as slide presentations, lectures, tutorials, and screencasts; and

____Social media, such as blogs, wikis, microblogs, photo sharing, curation, etc.

____Plan learning aspects that must be face-to-face (in-person or online).

INTERACTION

___Identify the skills for development and interactions that are most to determine the best type of media or technology to facilitate this learning.

___Determine the kinds of kinds of interaction to produce a good balance between student comprehension and student skills development.

___Estimate the amount of time the instructor will be interacting personally or online with students, and the type of medium for this interaction. 

ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUES

____Determine institutional support in choosing and using media or technology for teaching.

____Identify if the institutional support is easily accessible, helpful, and will meet the needs for the learning technologies for the course.

____Determine if there is funding available to ‘buy me out’ for a semester and/or to fund a teaching assistant so I can concentrate on designing a new course or revising an existing course.

____Locate institutional funding or resources for any learning technology or media production.

____Review the ‘standard’ technologies, practices and procedures for teaching and learning, to verify requirements for utilizing institutional technology resources, i.e. the learning management system, lecture capture system, etc.

____Determine if the institution will support trying a new technological approach to learning, and will support innovative media or digital design.

NETWORKING

____Outline the importance for learners to network beyond a course, i.e. with subject specialists, professionals in the field, and relevant people in the community

____Identify how the course or student learning can benefit from networking and learning from external connections.

____Determine the appropriate network and/or social media space to integrate for your learners to network with each other and connect with external community members.

____Integrate these networking mediums with standard course technology.

____Delegate responsibility for its design and/or administration to students or learners. 

SECURITY AND PRIVACY

___Determine the student information you are obliged to keep private and secure.

___Identify the institutional policies for security and privacy for teaching & learning.

___Outline potential risks and challenges of using a particular technology where institutional policies concerning privacy could easily be breached.

___Identify who at your institution could best advise you on security and privacy concerns, with regards to learning and teaching technologies.

___Itemize the areas of teaching and learning, if any, available only to students registered in the course.

___Identify the types of technologies to best restrict or limit access to course materials (if any) for my registered students.

 

Interested in reviewing your own learning design further? DOWNLOAD the Checklist: Selecting Technology for Learning

Reference:

Bates, A. W. (2015). Chapter 8: Choosing and using media in education: The SECTIONS model. From Teaching in a Digital Age. A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. Retrieved from http://opentextbc.ca/teachinginadigitalage/

Hibbitts, P. D., & Travin, M. T. (2015). Learning + technology development process model.

EdTech, Higher Education, Online Learning

Research Wanted: Distance Education & Technology in US Higher Ed #DETAsummit

Last week, I was invited to join a group of educators, researchers, practitioners, leaders, and more before #eli2015 to discuss the state of online and blended learning at the DETA Summit (#DETAsummit), hosted by the National Research Center for Distance Education and Technological Advancements (DETA). With the primary role of the DETA Research Center “to promote student access and success through evidence-based online learning practices and learning technologies,” the morning’s agenda was full and the purpose of the DETA Summit meeting was to:

  • Gather key partners and research experts to generate of ideas
  • Brainstorm crucial issues in conducting research and developing coherency in the field of distance education
  • Discuss ideas relating to competency-based education, accessibility, and distance education support

The DETA Research center has desired outcomes that focus on access, satisfaction and learning/instructional effectiveness – read more about these from the grant HERE:

Desired Outcomes

At the #DETAsummit a wide variety of folks gathered with interest to discuss what research should look like for technology and distance education. Looking around the room, it was like a tweet up of all online learning  levels of support, instruction, development, planning, and research from around the US.  The focus of the meeting was to work on the DETA Yea 1 goal: Develop a research model.

Research Model

In facilitating one of the many round tables discussions, our group swapped ideas about potential research questions that should be asked, common definitions under the distance education umbrella, standard variables to measure, known frameworks for inquiry, and shared models being used for online/blended learning assessment. Although we were only given about 3 hours in total, I think the entire room was buzzing with ideas and wanted to continue talking. The conversations were driven to list our top choices on large post-its and vote on top our top choices after seeing what other groups discussed [See post-it voting from my Flickr album]. For the short amount of time, I think the #DETAsummit  was a very productive, and we managed to gain some broader insight into what a research model could look like. With a mixed participant list, there were insights and questions  from varying perspectives and it was rather REFRESHING.

Based on the small group discussions and voting process, the research questions selected are:

  • What are the definitions of success from student’s perspective? | 33 | Wicked Hop
  • What patterns of behavior lead to increased student learning for different populations? | 26 | Safehouse
  • What are the different design components (content, interactivity, assessments) that impact student learning? | 29 | Rochambo
  • How can we define and measure student success beyond traditional outcomes (learning and competency)? | 25 | Benelux

If you are interested in distance education research (e.g. online learning, blended learning, hybrid pedagogy, etc.) I would suggest digging into the conversation and resources from the #DETAsummit. The DETA group is very open and transparent with their development process, as you can find our discussion notes shared in Collaborative Google Docs, listen/view the G+ Hangout Recording, and check out the Presentation Slides that give an overview of the day.

Congratulations to the DETA Team (who I now call the #DETAdivas) on a successful start to the work you have ahead. I look forward to following along with your progress on the grant, learning how your group utilize these research questions, and, hopefully, contributing to a better way to measure/assess online and blended learning.

DETAdivas

Want to stay connected to the research?

EdTech, Horizon Report, Learning Technologies

What’s On the Horizon [REPORT] – 2015 Higher Ed Edition

The New Media Consortium (NMC) just put out the NMC Horizon Report – 2015 Higher Education Edition last week to share what is ahead in technology and learning in post-secondary for the next few years. This report identifies the trends, challenges, and specific technologies we might see in higher ed over the next 1-5 years.

 

TopicsHR2015

 

Image c/o Johnson, Adams Becker, Estrada, & Freeman (2015)

 

Key trends expected to be adopted in educational technology in higher ed (from the report) include:

  • Evolution of online learning
  • Rethinking learning spaces – what our learning environments and mediums are
  • Increasing focus on open educational resources (FINALLY. Hello, OER!)
  • Rise of data-driven learning and assessment (the good, the bad & the ugly)
  • Agile approaches to change (Really? Where? Sign me up, Higher Ed!)
  • growing important of open communities and university consortia (Looking forward to this)

Significant challenges impeding ed tech adoption in the post-secondary education realm include:

  • Adequately defining and support digital literacy
  • Blending formal and informal learning
  • Complex thinking and communication
  • Integrating personalized learning
  • Competition from new models of education (dare I say MOOCs)
  • Relative lack of rewards for teaching (duh!)

Important developments in educational tech for higher ed include:

  • Bring your own device (BYOD) – I think it’s because we had to…
  • Flipped classroom
  • Makerspaces
  • Adaptive learning technologies
  • The Internet of things

If you work in learning technologies or distance education, much of this report is not “new” – however it gives some insights and examples of what is ahead in the post-secondary landscape. If you working in higher education, I suggest you DOWNLOAD and review your own copy. Not all these trends and predictions are surprising  – but it is always good to know what others are working on in the field of #edtech. Happy reading!

Reference

Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., & Freeman, A. (2015). NMC horizon report: 2015 higher education edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.

EdTech, Higher Education, Online Learning

Online Education in the US [2014 Report]

As I am on my way to the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI & #eli2015), specifically to attend the National Research Center for Distance Education and Technological Advancement (DETA) Summit, I figured it was critical to review the 2014 Grade Level: Tracking Online Education in the United States just released from the Babson Survey Research Group (BSRG):

“The study’s findings point to a competitive marketplace, in which traditional institutions are gaining ground on the for-profits in online and distance education,” said study co-author Jeff Seaman, co-director of the Babson Survey Research Group. “While the rapid pace of online learning growth has moderated, it still accounts for nearly three-quarters of all US higher education’s enrollment increases last year.”

It is clear that online learning is on the rise in America – yet there is a vast difference between how administration and faculty view it. A majority of post-secondary education leaders (70.8%)  indicated that online learning is “critical to their long-term strategy;” however these leaders may struggle with online adoption as only 28% of their faculty find “value” and view online education as “legitimate.” A number of findings in this report show opposing views for online education. For example, these two factions of higher differ  by their awareness of open education resources (OER).

OER_FutureHE

There is much more of this narrative to tease out; and I would like to go through this report further (on the plane) and learn what others in the field have to say. For now I will leave you with some of the ‘quick facts’ shared, and encourage you to download and read through the FULL REPORT if you are in the online learning sphere:

Key report findings include:

  • The number of higher education students taking at least one distance education course in 2014 is up 3.7 %t from the previous year.
  • The year-to-year 3.7% increase in the number of distance education students is the lowest recorded over the 13 years of this report series.
  • Public and private nonprofit institutions recorded distance enrollment growth, but these were offset by a decrease among for-profit institutions.
  • The percent of academic leaders rating the learning outcomes in online education as the same or superior to those in face-to-face remained unchanged at 74.1%.
  • The proportion of chief academic leaders reporting online learning is critical to their long-term strategy reached a new high of 70.8%.
  • Only 28.0% of academic leaders say that their faculty accept the “value and legitimacy of online education.”
  • The adoption of MOOCs (Massive Open Online Course) is reaching a plateau, only 8.0% of higher education institutions currently offer one, another 5.6% report MOOCs are in the planning stages.
  • The proportion of academic leaders who believe that MOOCs represent a sustainable method for offering online courses dropped to 16.3%.

Update:

A couple areas to note, and for further discussion this week at #eli2015 and the #DETAsummit (Follow @UWMDETA):

Pgs. 43-44: Discuss the undercount and overcount of distance education, i.e. for “fully online” enrollments – this seems to be hazy, as it might be as learning design for enrollment varies by student population type and course design delivery.

Pg. 44 – “The definition of ‘distance education’ is causing confusion”

There was an interesting segment in this report that struggled with the term “distance education.” This report takes into account distance education, when looking at “fully online” higher education programs. This part of the report reminded me about the Twitter debate of online learning, online education, distance education, and then some when trying to name an update to an edited book. Check out “The State of ______ Learning” thread on Storify to learn what was discussed. What terminology is best? How can we describe/define education that is delivered from a distance/online/on the web/virtually? Please advise.

EdTech, Horizon Report

VOTE for #18: The Technology Test Kitchen #eli2015 #edtech #satech

The ELI Video Competition: 2015 NMC Horizon Report from EDUCAUSE and the New Media Consortium (NMC) is underway. I need your help to cast your VOTE for the Technology Test Kitchen – #18: Michigan State University.

All 23 videos from 18 different institutions are great! Each video focuses on one or two of the six 2015 technologies in the upcoming Horizon Report:

  • Bring Your Own Device (BYOD)
  • Flipped Classroom
  • Makerspaces
  • Wearable Technology
  • Adaptable Learning Technologies
  • Internet of Things

Take a gander a the other videos (each video are 2 minutes each) for what is happening on the ed tech horizon, but then give a digital HIGH FIVE to #18 in your ONLINE VOTE. 🙂

18. Michigan State University

Category: Makerspaces
Contact: Patrice Torcivia Prusko

What the heck is the Technology Test Kitchen (TTK)? {you ask}

  1. A makerspace for sharing innovative tools and new media
  2. An open collaborative environment for hands-on exploration
  3. An engaging way to connect with your colleagues over emerging technology

how it works

The TTK ideas was created to bring faculty, instructional designers, researchers, and conferences participants together to get a hands-on experience with a variety of learning technologies. In the Test Kitchen, there are a number of “chefs” (volunteers who love applying media to learning) who are typically available to talk about design, discuss a “recipe” a.k.a. a quick how-to guide for a platform. The kitchen encouraged participants to explore apps, brainstorm teaching strategies, sharing curriculum ideas, and experimenting with new media for learning – both hardware and software. The 1:1, hands-on sharing is shared to you by Creative Commons in this latest compilation TTK Recipe Book:

DOWNLOAD your own Technology Test Kitchen Recipe Book from  #blend14  and #ALN14 to try out some new recipes for learning! Like what you see, check out the next TTK maker space happening with at #et4online in April here in Dallas, TX!

Voting is open from Friday, January 30 – Tuesday, February 10, 5:00 p.m. PST. Winners will be announced at the ELI Annual Meeting, Tuesday, February 10 th (#EI2015). VOTE NOW! {Psst #18}

EdTech

The 2015 #et4online Call for Presentations is now OPEN!

 

#et4online banner

Dear Colleagues,

The 8th Annual Emerging Technologies for Online Learning International Symposium (#et4online) provides myriad opportunities for you to share your knowledge and expertise in online teaching and learning. Our program includes pre-conference workshops, electronic posters, information sessions, and featured sessions along with extraordinary plenary speakers.

Share and learn about the innovative and emerging practices to enhance your research, student support, teaching, and learning at your institution. The call for proposals is open as of TODAY – October 1, 2014 until December 1, 2014.

Track Description
Organization, Leadership and Challenges for Innovation Proposals submitted to this track should relate directly to the role of institutional leadership for the strategic implementation of innovative online learning to reach institutional goals. Suggestions for this track include:

A. Leadership & Values: Innovation in management & timetables, monitoring quality, new trends & services, social entrepreneurship, social inclusion & equity

B. Agile Approaches to Change: For institutional-level online learning benefits, models, effective practices, and challenges from policy or governance

C. Solutions to Challenges: Digital fluency of faculty, rewards for teaching, competition from new models of education, scaling teaching innovations & expanding access, and relevant education models

Learning Environments and Frameworks Proposals submitted to this track should focus on effective and/or innovative course/program models and design(s), with an emphasis on research-based best practices, effectiveness, efficiencies, and scalability. Suggestions for this track include:

A. Infrastructure for learning environments: Information and communication technology (ICT) infrastructure, physical space, learning space, and platforms for education online

B. Development of learning space: Integration of online, hybrid, and collaborative learning, training and development required, or evolution to online learning

C. Research models: methods and evaluation of curriculum outcomes, design or development for learning environments and frameworks

Open and Collaborative Education Proposals submitted to this track should promote the production and use of open pedagogies and collaborative models for teaching and learning. This might include strategies and suggested practices for the following areas:

A: Content & Curricula: Development of Open Education Resources (OER) including open online courses both private and massive, cross and trans-disciplinary curricula, competency-based curricula, and student-developed content

B. Connectedness: Networking with real-world experts or professionals in the field, social networks, online learning communities and communities of practice, and learning events

C. Cooperation & group engagement: Growing ubiquity and use of social media, transmedia, socially constructed learning, gamification and badges for learning

Evidence-based Learning and Assessment Proposals submitted to this track should relate to learning analytics, institutional data, big data as related to, program outcomes, educational effectiveness, and enhancing the student learning experience. This track may include evaluation of student, staff or faculty course/program assessment. A focus on research is strongly encouraged and should include research design, methodology, results and applications to policy, practice and/or theory.

Suggestions for this track include:

A. Assessment: implementation of assessment plan, evaluation formats, formative/summative assessment, informal/non-formal learning for curriculum review

B. Research: Data collection and analysis methodologies, conceptual models, interventions and innovative approaches

C. Evaluation: Designing for learning analytics, and applications of big data

Effective Teaching and Learning Pedagogy Proposals submitted to this track should address the many facets online teaching and learning with an emphasis on pedagogical practice. Proposals should provide innovative approaches and methods for digital pedagogy and curriculum development. Suggestions for this track include:

A. Learning Practices: Producing authentic learning artifacts, exploration, creativity, and play. Peer-to-peer, self-regulated connected, interest-based, self-directed, and game-based learning

B. Teaching Practices: fostering social presence, balancing structure with student autonomy, designing multimodal learning experiences, and repurposing digital tools for learning

C. Supporting Faculty: instructional design approaches, faculty development programs and models, curriculum development resources, expediting the diffusion of innovative practices, and incentives for pedagogical innovation

Technology Test Kitchen Proposals for this track are unique from other program tracks at #et4online this year. The expectation for “test kitchen” is to create a space at the conference for hands-on, focused and practical applications of emerging learning technologies. The Test Kitchen station will feature expert “chefs” who will guide attendees, showcasing applications and tools for innovative, digital education. If your proposal is accepted, you will demo at least three (3) tools (15-20 minute demonstrations). Your proposal can include links to websites, videos (less than 2 minutes), or examples and a description of what you hope to accomplish in these mini-lessons.

The Technology Test Kitchen space will be similar to a learning lab, where conference participants will take advantage of the “bring your own device” (BYOD) format. If your proposal is selected, you will share a “Technology Test Kitchen Recipe” and demonstration. The recipe is a targeted “how to” guide for participants to learn and explore technology applications and ideas for learning. Suggested areas and applications may include:

A. Learning Technology Demonstration: General suggestions include audio, video, social media, collaboration, communication, presentation, 3D printing, and mobile apps.

B. Instructional Design Strategy & Implementation: Suggestions for this include the application of flipped learning, learning analytics, games and gamification, quantified self, augmented reality, and visualizations.

On behalf of the @OLCToday and the @MERLOTorg,  we look forward to reading your presentation submissions, and seeing you in Dallas for #et4online!

Laura Pasquini Jane Moore
Laura Pasquini, OLC Program Chair Jane Moore, MERLOT Program Chair
@laurapasquini
@janepmoore

P.s. Have you heard about the great keynote and plenary speakers we have lined up? I am looking forward to learning from @mizuko@bonstewart@GardnerCampbell and YOU!

LookWhosSpeakingET4Online