Introduction to checet 2012 course

1,187 views
1,156 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,187
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Emerging and new are not necessarilysynonomousWhile for example, Twitter may be an emerging technology, various practices on Twitter platform may already be establishedToday’s ET may become tomorrow’s fad – must remain sceptical about sudden transformation. ETs go through cycles of euphoria, adoption, use, maturity, impact, enthusiasm or even infatuation. Some will remain, others fade into backgroundCan’t yet fully understand the implications and what they offer teaching and learning, what they mean for educators and for institutions. It is not predictable we can’t determine in advance what will happen but only make sense of it after the event (Williams et al. 2011).Initial investigations often evangelical and describe superficial aspects of the technology without understanding the affordances of the technology and how these provide different ways to learn. Newer technologies can also be used in old traditional ways.Lack of research impedes disseminationAccording to Veletsianos (2010:17) emerging technologies are ‘tools, technologies, innovations, and advancements utlized in diverse educational settings to serve varied education-related purposes’. We are still learning and still learners with regard to the affordances of ETs. There is an absence of empirical work or practitioner knowledge base to explore enhancement of practice. Veletsianos (2010:17) personal technologies often sit uneasily with institutions; in some cases they are even banned within the university buildings and networks (Parry, 2005).
  • he latest hype cycle is below, and here are the descriptions of the major stages of it.1. Technology TriggerA breakthrough, public demonstration, product launch or other event generates significant press and industry interest.2. Peak of Inflated ExpectationsDuring this phase of overenthusiasm and unrealistic projections, a flurry of well-publicized activity by technology leaders results in some successes, but more failures, as the technology is pushed to its limits. The only enterprises making money are conference organizers and magazine publishers.3. Trough of DisillusionmentBecause the technology does not live up to its overinflated expectations, it rapidly becomes unfashionable. Media interest wanes, except for a few cautionary tales.4. Slope of EnlightenmentFocused experimentation and solid hard work by an increasingly diverse range of organizations lead to a true understanding of the technology’s applicability, risks and benefits. Commercial off-the-shelf methodologies and tools ease the development process.5. Plateau of ProductivityThe real-world benefits of the technology are demonstrated and accepted. Tools and methodologies are increasingly stable as they enter their second and third generations. Growing numbers of organizations feel comfortable with the reduced level of risk; the rapid growth phase of adoption begins. Approximately 20% of the technology’s target audience has adopted or is adopting the technology as it enters this phase.
  • New Media Consortium
  • Source: http://mediaexposure1.blogspot.com/2011_07_01_archive.html1.  Innovators- The adoption process begins with a tiny number ofvisionary, imaginative innovators2.   Early adopters: Once the benefits start to become apparent, earlyadopters leap in. They love getting an advantage over their peers and they have time and money to invest3.   Early majority: They are followers who are influenced by mainstream fashions and wary of fads. They are looking for simple, proven, better ways of doing what they already do. 4.   Late majority: They are conservative people who hate riskand are uncomfortable your new idea.5.   Laggards: They hold out to the bitter end. They arepeople who see a high risk in adopting a particular product orbehavior
  • Ernest Boyer and his colleagues at the Carnegie Foundation in the USA in 1990 developed the notion of SoTL in an attempt to transcend the research and teaching divide by redefining the nature of academic practice as ‘scholarly work’ (Brew, 2006:1).Evidence-based critical reflection on practice aimed at improving practice (Prosser, 2008:1)Transform curriculum development and pedagogy to impact on thought and practiceProbes relationship between teaching and learningTransmission of knowledge no longer valid – how students construct knowledge in an authentic context requires both pedagogical knowledge and content knowledge on the part of lecturers. How students learn is important. It is in the doing of the discipline that content becomes pedagogy and vice versa.Dialogic discourse – two way communication where participants support their own positions with justification and listen to others’ positions with the goal of mutual understanding (Innes, 2007:1)The teacher-scholar is both committed to scholarship in the disciplinary field and to successful student learning through teaching and effective institutional practices
  • Introduction to checet 2012 course

    1. 1. Introduction to CHECET course Vivienne Bozalek University of the Western Cape
    2. 2. Welcome to the CHEC course on Emerging Technologies to improve Teaching and Learning in Higher Education!•
    3. 3. But what are Emerging Technologies (ETs)?http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/23/technology/personaltech/onlive-desktop-plus-pu DAVID POGUE, The New York Times, February 22, 2012.
    4. 4. Characteristics of ET1. May or may not be new technologies2. Evolving organism, that exist in the state of coming into being3. Go through hype cycles4. They are not yet fully understood5. They are not yet fully researched6. They are potentially disruptive, but that potential is mostly unfulfilled Veletsianos, 2010:13-17
    5. 5. Hype Cycle for Education 2011http://www.cloudave.com/14339/hype-cycle-for-emerging-technologies-2011-idea-management-enlightenment/
    6. 6. Johnson & Adams (2011:1)
    7. 7. What are you?Rogers (1995) Diffusion of innovations theory where he classified individuals
    8. 8. • ● One full-day face-to-face session (8 hours):2 May 2012• ● Two half-day face-to-face sessions (5 hours): 16 May & 6 June 2012• ● Three online sessions of at least 60 minutes each (9, 23 & 30 May 2012)• ● Self study (34 hours)
    9. 9. Communication via ET (practising what we preach)!• ●Facebook through the closed group CHECET 2012 http://www.facebook.com/groups/checet2012/• ● Course platform will be on Google’s Blogger: http://checet.blogspot.com• ● Wiki-site for technology tool repository: http://checet.wikispaces.com• ● Twitter hashtag for the course: #checet• ● Adobe Connect for web conferencing http://meeting.uct.ac.za/checet/• ● Pod-/ Vod-/ Screencasts published on blog and Facebook group• ● Google forms for survey
    10. 10. What do you have to do?• Individual and collaborative experiential exercises both f2f & in a social media space• Access and read relevant literature in the field• Exploring your own context and student needs• Design and develop a prototype of a technology enhanced• activity• Formatively evaluating this prototype• Present this to the course participants and facilitators• Reflect on your learning experience
    11. 11. Assessment tasks
    12. 12. Assessment marks and certificates
    13. 13. The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning Transcending teaching/research divide
    14. 14. Roger and Karin Moni presentation at UWC
    15. 15. We would like to research this course and would invite you too as well• Learn about the needs of higher educators• Improve our practice in facilitating courses with higher educators• Probe relationship between teaching and learning• Consider how higher educators experience various ETs• Transform curriculum and pedagogy• Engage in critical reflection on our practice• Share and disseminate with larger audience
    16. 16. Readings for the courseDabbagh, N & Bannan-Ritland, B (2005) Online learning: Concepts, strategies andapplication. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson. Companion website: http://www.prenhall.com/dabbagh/ollresources/
    17. 17. Readings for the course Bower, M (2008) Affordance Analysis – matching learning tasks with learning technologies, Education Media International, 45(1), 3–15.
    18. 18. Readings for the courseAnderson, T & Elloumi, F (Eds) (2004). Theory and Practice of Online Learning.Athabasca University,(online book). Available:http://cde.athabascau.ca/online_book/
    19. 19. Readings for the course Mehlenbacher, B 2010. Instruction and Technology: Designs for everyday learning. MIT
    20. 20. Readings for CourseSiemens, G & Tittenberger, P (2009). Handbook of Emerging Technologies for Learning.Availablehttp://www.scribd.com/doc/54496169/Handbook-of-Emerging-Technologies-for-Learning-Siemens-Tittenberger
    21. 21. Readings for the courseVeletsianos, G. (ed.) (2010). Emerging Technologies in Distance Education, (onlinebook). Edmonton: AU Press. Available:http://www.aupress.ca/books/120177/ebook/99Z_Veletsianos_2010-Emerging_Technologies_in_Distance_Education.pdf
    22. 22. Readings for the courseWeller, M. (2011). The Digital Scholar: How Technology is Transforming ScholarlyPractice. Bloomsbury Academic. Available:http://www.bloomsburyacademic.com/view/DigitalScholar_9781849666275/chapter-ba-9781849666275-chapter-013.xml
    23. 23. Recommended readingBeetham, H & Sharpe, R (Eds) (2011) Rethinking pedagogy for adigital age: designing and delivering e-learning. London; New York:Routledge.
    24. 24. Recommended readingsHarris, J, Mishra, P & Koehler, M (2009) Teachers’Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledgeand Learning Activity Types: Curriculum-basedTechnology Integration Reframed. Journal ofResearch on Technology in Education, 41(4), p393-416.
    25. 25. ReferencesJohnson, L. and S. Adams. 2011. Technology Outlook for UK Tertiary Education 2011-2016: An NMC Horizon Report Regional Analysis. Austin, Texas: The New MediaConsortiumRogers, E. 1995. Diffusion of Innvation. 4th ed. New York: Free.Rust, B., J-M. Lowendahl, R. Bonig and M. Harris. 2010. Gartner Report, 17 NovSharpe, R., Beetham, H., & de Freitas, S. (Eds.). (2010). Rethinking learning for adigital age: How learners are shaping their own experiences. London: Routledge.Veletsianos, G. 2010. Emerging Technologies in Distance Education. Theory andPractice. Edmonton: AU Press.

    ×