TeleLearning in Practice: What is the Business Case?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

TeleLearning in Practice: What is the Business Case?

on

  • 1,749 views

A presentation from 1998 on the business case for TeleLearning. This presentation used H.G.Wells work from 1938 to highlight early thinkers - pace of educational change.

A presentation from 1998 on the business case for TeleLearning. This presentation used H.G.Wells work from 1938 to highlight early thinkers - pace of educational change.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,749
Views on SlideShare
1,743
Embed Views
6

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
16
Comments
0

3 Embeds 6

http://www.linkedin.com 3
http://www.cirip.ro 2
http://cristinacost.posterous.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-ShareAlike License

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

TeleLearning in Practice: What is the Business Case? Presentation Transcript

  • 1. TeleLearning in Practice What is the Business Case? Sylvia Currie, scurrie@sfu.ca Research Associate TeleLearning•NCE Simon Fraser University
  • 2. Why me? Work life
    • Post Secondary Administration
        • curriculum development
        • educational advising
        • admissions and transfer (residency requirements, prior learning assessment)
    • Educational Technology
        • technician
        • instructional support
        • research and development
    • changed jobs 7 times in past 10 years
  • 3. Why me? Student life
    • TeleLearning reason I returned to SFU to pursue graduate work
    • First hand experience using as a student using online technologies
      • enrolled in first SFU FirstClass course
      • enrolled in first SFU Virtual-U course (1995)
    • Research Associate - Virtual-U Project
  • 4. Virtual-U Project
    • Field trials began in 1996 across Canada
      • Data collected from 14 sites, 229 courses
    • Virtual-U web-based software
      • Tools and resources to design, manage, and evaluate online courses
      • Supports active, collaborative learning
      • Designed by educators
  • 5. What is unique about Virtual-U?
    • Flexible framework to support varied content and instructional approaches
    • Emphasis on user involvement in designing learning environments
    • Focus on understanding new roles, techniques, and teaching models
    • Environment for design, management, and evaluation
  • 6. Consequences of not involving educators
    • Technology designed to teach specific skills or content
    • Cookie-cutter approach to online course design
    • All resources devoted to software
    • Educators not involved in research and design
    • Teacher replacement
    • No flexibility of use
    • No pedagogical support
    • No advancement of use
  • 7. My observations
    • Focus on consumer model of telelearning (quantity, convenience, access, cost)
    • Focus on specialized training for job-related skills
    • Not enough focus on telelearning as a new environment to improve quality of learning
  • 8. “ Current” Problems with Universities
      • “ ...relentlessly inelastic packing-case”
      • “ We seem to have multiplied [universities] greatly in the past hundred years, but we seem to have multiplied them altogether too much upon the old pattern”
    • H.G. Wells (1938) World Brain
  • 9. Levels of Intellectual Development of Adult Learners
    • 1. Keeping up-to-date
    • 2. Learning with initiative and from new experiences
    • 3. Accumulate, rectify, and change human experience
    • H.G. Wells (1938) World Brain
  • 10. Socialization (tacit to tacit) Internalization (explicit to tacit) Externalization (tacit to explicit) Combination (explicit to explicit) Nonaka’s Spiral of Knowledge The Knowledge Creating Company
  • 11. Downfalls: Traditional Models
    • People deluged with highly specific information
    • Individuals discouraged or inhibited to share knowledge
    • Measurement of success is quantitative
    • Equate information flow with solution for a knowledge society
    • Focus on “know what” instead of “know how”
    • Private nature of work
    • Inequality among participants
  • 12. What works? Socialization
    • “ Combination” is not sufficient
    • Many new technologies attend to individuals and explicit information that passes between them
    • Ease of creating and sharing knowledge is a reflection of its social context
    • Online environment contributes to more reflective and in-depth discourse
    • For organizational knowledge to be created, tacit individual knowledge must be shared
    • Equity in participation / freedom to articulate ideas
  • 13. What works? Externalization
    • Multimedia representations
    • Portfolios of work
    • Documentation of experiences (writing as a heuristic)
    • Translating knowledge in understandable formats
    • “ Repurposing” (I repurposed this word from Curtis Bonk’s presentation)
  • 14. What works? Strategic rotation
    • Exposure to multiple perspectives
    • Understanding contributions of others to achieving goals
    • Rely on individual expertise in new situation
    • Logic of redundancy
  • 15. What works? Team Approach
    • Develop different approaches to same problem
    • Synthesize
    • Participation not limited to project members
    • Participants take on more responsibility
  • 16. What works? Changing Roles
    • Instructor (manager) as facilitator
    • Participant rather than provider
    • Ask questions rather than give answers
    • Provide conceptual framework
    • Equity in participation
    • Increased expectations of participants
  • 17. What works? Add Value to Information
    • Enhance “combination” typical of traditional models
    • Store and reconfigure information
    • Sort and categorize
    • Annotate
    • Information distributed in a purposeful way
    • No discrimination in access of information
    • Leads to new knowledge (e.g. CSILE)
  • 18. “ Current” Solutions
      • “ I imagine…something added to the world network of universities, linking and coordinating them with one another and with the general intelligence of the world”
      • H.G. Wells (1938) World Brain
  • 19. Summary: Learning Networks
    • Challenge existing organization boundaries and hierarchies
    • Make knowledge accessible within and outside of organizations
    • Provide equity of access to all participants
    • Support sustained engagement for knowledge creation to occur
    • Enable external input to propel knowledge creation
    • Prepare learners with a different set of skills
      • to communicate, work collaboratively, solve problems, think critically, and cope with change
    • Provide unique opportunities for lifelong learning
  • 20. References
    • Brown, J.S. & Duguid,P. (1998) Organizing Knowledge, California Management Review 40 (3)
    • Keating, D. (1996) Habits of mind for a learning society: Educating for human development. In D.R. Olson & N. Torrance, The handbook of education and human development: New models of learning, teaching, and schooling, Cambridge, MA: Blackwell Publishers
    • Nonaka, I. (1991) The knowledge-creating company, Harvard Business Review, Nov.
    • Wells, H.G. (1938) World Brain, Freeport: Books for Libraries Press