Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Blended learning pace march 2013 slideshare version

on

  • 3,591 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
3,591
Views on SlideShare
3,591
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

  • Blended Learning Meets MOOCs:Education’s Digital Future presentation at Pace University March 2013 Anthony G. Picciano CUNY Graduate Center
  • Presentation Outline .Introduction .Teaching and Learning in 2012 – Scenarios .Blended Learning .Blending with Pedagogical Purpose .Enter the MOOCs .Education’s Digital Future .Questions 2
  • Teaching and Learning in 2013 – Different Scenarios! 3 View slide
  • Teaching and Learning in 2013 – Different Scenarios! 4 View slide
  • Blended Learning Conceptualization BlendedConventional FullyFace to Face OnlineClassroomSource: Picciano, A.G, & Dzuiban, C. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, MA:The Sloan Consortium.http://www.sloan-c.org/publications/books/index.asp
  • Blending with Pedagogical Purpose: A Multimodal Model Content (LMS/CMS/Media/ Games/MUVE) Reflection Social/Emotional (Blog,Journal) (F2F) Blending with Purpose Dialectic/Questioning Collaboration/Student (Discussion Board) Generated Content (Wiki, Mobile Tech) Synthesis/ Evaluation (Assignments/Assessment) Papers, Tests, Student Presentations (PPT, Youtube), E-Portfolios Source: Picciano (2009).
  • Blending with Purpose – The Multimodal Model Content (LMS/CMS/Media/ Games/MUVE) Reflection Social/Emotional (Blog,Journal) (F2F) Blended Ecosystem Dialectic/Questioning Collaboration/Student (Discussion Board) Generated Content (Wiki, Mobile Tech) Synthesis/ Evaluation (Assignments/Assessment) Papers, Tests, Student Presentations (PPT, Youtube), E-Portfolios
  • Blended Learning as Ecosystem As blended learning matures and develops, it is evolving into a seamless, organic environment or ecosystem It is the artful design of a teaching and learning experience that leverages instruction, technology, administrative and support services, into a natural experience for learner and teacher. 8
  • Enter the MOOCs – Massive Open Online Courses .The term MOOC is used for the first time in 2008 at the U. of Manitoba. .Sebastian Thrun offers a MOOC in 2011 at Stanford University and 160,000 students enroll. .MOOC consortia/companies (Udacity, edX, Coursera) are formed. .Millions of students are now enrolling every year in MOOCs. 9
  • MOOCs - Pros and Cons! Pros ConsWorldwide student access Taking a course is not equivalent to an education to courses and materials Some MOOCs are poorly designed and lackScalability will drive substantive interaction down higher education costs High attrition rates (as much as 90%) Financial sustainabilityConvenience for adults/ (most MOOCs are free). 10
  • The Future of Technology - Easy to Get it Wrong!"I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." – Thomas Watson, Chairman of IBM, 1943"There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home." – Ken Olson, president, Chairman Digital Equipment Corp., 1977 "640K ought to be enough memory for anybody." – Bill Gates, Chairman of Microsoft, 1981 11
  • The Future – Higher Education Source: U.S. Department of Education - NCES (January 2013). Projections of Education Statistics to 2012. 12
  • Non-Traditional Students are Now Traditional! SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, “Fall Enrollment Survey” (IPEDS-EF:94–99), and Spring 2001 through Spring 2009; Enrollment in Degree-Granting Institutions Model, 1980–2008; and U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Current Population Reports, "Social and Economic Characteristics of Students," various years. (This table was prepared February 2010.) 13
  • The Future - One Size Does Not Fit All! .Different strokes for different folks. .Different types of schools will approach Blended Learning and MOOCs differently. .Different programs/disciplines/courses will approach Blended Learning and MOOCs differently. .Different students will approach Blended Learning and MOOCs differently. 14
  • The Future – Allen & Seaman Survey of Chief Academic Officers (N=2,820) 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. 15 Source: Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2013).
  • The Future 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). 16 Source: Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2013).
  • The FutureOverall, academic leaders are split in their opinions about MOOCs as a sustainablemethod for offering courses with 27.8 percent agreeing, 27.0 percent disagreeing,and most Chief Academic Officers (45.2%) neutral. 17Source: Allen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2013).
  • The Future – Large Lecture Courses Will Pave the Way! .Put lecture part of the course in online/MOOC environment .Put discussion/recitation part of the course in blended environment. 18
  • The Future – MOOCs -> OCs .San Jose State University enters into Agreement with Udacity to develop remedial and introductory courses (2013-2016). .Courses will be limited to 300 students. .Tuition will be $150. per course. .Provision for faculty involvement in a blended format. .Efforts will be made to overcome the biggest failure of MOOCs — their 90 percent dropout rate. 19
  • Summary/Questions? 20
  • Visit me at: anthonypicciano.com 21
  • ReferencesAllen, I.E. & Seaman, J. (2013). Changing course: Ten years of tracking online education in the United States.Wellesley, MA: Babson College Survey Research Group.Knowles, M., Holton, E.F., & Swanson, R. (1998). The adult learner. Woburn, MA: Butterworth-Heinemann.Lin, L., Cranton, P., & Bridglall, B. (2005). Psychological Type and Asynchronous Written Dialogue in AdultLearning.Teachers College Record Volume 107 Number 8, 2005, p. 1788-1813http://www.tcrecord.org ID Number: 12096, Date Accessed: 1/25/2008 3:15:54 PMPicciano, A.G. & Dzuiban, C. (2007). Blended learning: Research perspectives. Needham, MA: The SloanConsortium.Picciano, A.G. (2009). Blending with purpose: The multimodal model. Journal of the Research Center forEducational Technology, 5(1). Kent, Oh: Kent State University.U.S. Department of Education - NCES (January 2013). Projections of Education Statistics to 2012.U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated Postsecondary Education DataSystem, “Fall Enrollment Survey” (IPEDS-EF:94–99), and Spring 2001 through Spring 2009; Enrollment in Degree-Granting Institutions Model, 1980–2008; and U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, Current PopulationReports, "Social and Economic Characteristics of Students," various years. (This table was prepared February2010.) 22