• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version
 

Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version

on

  • 3,048 views

This presentation was delivered as the keynote at a conference held at Pace University, New York in March 2013. It examines blended learning and MOOCs as harbingers of education's digital future.

This presentation was delivered as the keynote at a conference held at Pace University, New York in March 2013. It examines blended learning and MOOCs as harbingers of education's digital future.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
3,048
Views on SlideShare
3,048
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
5
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Udacity established by Sebastian Thrun and colleagues from Stanford edX established by M.I.T. and Harvard Coursera – consortium of over 30 universities (Feb. 2013) are members.
  • The increased enrollment since 1996 is in part due to the large-scale entry of for-profit colleges into the higher education market.
  • The increased enrollment since 1996 is in part due to the large-scale entry of for-profit colleges into the higher education market.
  • Allen & Seaman Annual Survey of Chief Academic Officers – For 2012 - 4,527 institutions were surveyed; total of 2,820 responded were included in the analysis, representing 62.3 percent of the sample universe. This year’s survey finds only 2.6 percent report they currently offer MOOCs and slightly less than ten percent (9.4%) have plans to offer them. An additional one-third of all institutions report they have no plans for adding MOOCs (32.7%), leaving the bulk of all institutions (55.4%) still undecided. Matching the pattern of offerings of online courses and programs over the last ten years, it is the public universities that currently have the higher rates of offering MOOCs (4.7%) and the private, for profit schools are most likely to be in the planning stages (15.0%).  
  • When examined by Carnegie classification, it is the research universities (Doctoral/ Research institutions) that are in the lead. They are almost twice as likely to be offering MOOCs or planning to offer MOOCs (9.8% vs. the next highest of 4.5% for Specialized institutions in offerings and 21.4% vs. the next highest of 11.8% for Master’s level institutions for planning).
  • Allen & Seaman Annual Survey of Chief Academic Officers – For 2012 - 4,527 institutions were surveyed; total of 2,820 responded were included in the analysis, representing 62.3 percent of the sample universe. This year’s survey finds only 2.6 percent report they currently offer MOOCs and slightly less than ten percent (9.4%) have plans to offer them. An additional one-third of all institutions report they have no plans for adding MOOCs (32.7%), leaving the bulk of all institutions (55.4%) still undecided. Matching the pattern of offerings of online courses and programs over the last ten years, it is the public universities that currently have the higher rates of offering MOOCs (4.7%) and the private, for profit schools are most likely to be in the planning stages (15.0%).  
  • WRITING AND LEARNING It occurred to us that asynchronous written dialogue is just as rich and as evolved a communication art form as verbal discourse, which was analyzed by Goffman (1967) and Gumperz (1982) in detail from a sociological perspective. The notion that written interactive dialogue can be an effective learning opportunity for adults is supported by the hypothesis of Davydov (1990), who proposed that conceptualization must come before visualization in human thought and meaning making, and by Vygotsky (1978), who suggested that conceptualization comes better through writing than speaking. A simple example of such a conceptualization process can be seen in our daily lives. Sometimes when we want to concentrate on our thoughts and try to articulate accurately what we really think, we lower our head or break our eye contact from others because the visual eye contact becomes a distraction rather than stimulation of an attentive thought. Only when we have completed forming the thought do we feel the satisfaction of the eye contact in the dialogue. This hypothesis is also intriguing because oftentimes, we try to concretize and visualize a subject matter to help people learn. Yet we are also familiar with instances when concrete or visual objects limit our imaginations, and we sometimes must distance ourselves from them in order to acquire a more flexible and in-depth understanding of the subject matter. In addition, Vygotsky (1962) pointed out that one of the difficulties that a learner has in writing is that he or she addresses “an absent or an imaginary person or no one in particular” and thus has no motivation or feels no need to write, whereas in oral conversation “every sentence is prompted by a motive” (p. 99). We can probably all recall a difficult experience writing an essay or book report in school. However, the writing is different in the online learning environment. The writing is usually intended for a finite number of participants and with particular purposes; the writing becomes a tool for exchanging information, interacting with the others, and challenging opinions among a group of learners. The dialectic and complex relationships between visualization and conceptualization, between spoken and written languages discussed by Davydov and Vygotsky provide us with food for thought when we look into how adults learn through online asynchronous written dialogue. As we become accustomed to the use of many different channels for communication (such as face-to-face, regular mail, phone, cell phone, video-teleconference, email, blog, wiki, and chat), the paradigm becomes not necessarily one of obvious downgrading of preferences, but rather one of availability, convenience, and effectiveness, as long as both parties are equipped with the tools. As a result, we flex to the channel that is available or often open two or more channels at once: simultaneously surf online, chat through instant messenger, and talk on the phone. In these formats, learners do not currently enjoy many of the basic characteristics of copresence such as being able to see body language or facial expressions or hear the intonations in the voice, as highlighted by Boden and Molotch's “compulsion of proximity” (1994, p. 258). However, there are distinct advantages of communicating through asynchronous written dialogue (Lin & Cranton, 2004; Yoon, 2003). Some include: • Allowing the writer to clarify thoughts before stating his or her points • Allowing participants to review previous dialogues, examine what has been said, make new discoveries, and share their meanings in a deeper and clearer way • Allowing time for participants to support a point of view with new or compelling information through various resources including the Internet • Allowing for reflection Although these points highlight only a few benefits of learning through asynchronous written dialogue, they invite reflection on how the online environment influences traditional practices. When moving from a physical to a virtual space, the learners are subject to a change in context as well as a change in the principles and premises of being and acting. Lin, L., Cranton, P., & Bridglall, B. (2005). Psychological Type and Asynchronous Written Dialogue in Adult Learning. Teachers College Record Volume 107 Number 8, 2005, p. 1788-1813 http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 12096, Date Accessed: 1/25/2008 3:15:54 PM Copy kept as Adult Learning in CUNY ITP Folder

Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version Presentation Transcript