Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Web2.0 hea ics-demontfortnov2009finalfinal
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Web2.0 hea ics-demontfortnov2009finalfinal

626
views

Published on

presentation to fellow academics involved in Computer and Information Sciences, discussing current practice and future directions

presentation to fellow academics involved in Computer and Information Sciences, discussing current practice and future directions

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
626
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • This talk is about the social web, web2.0, the read write web and the way in which you can do cool things and smart things by taking a strategic approach to using web resources in a Higher Education Context.The presentation gives an account of the way we go about working with the web smartly in one academic school, and in one university, but it also aims to explain how that approach can be taken at any university or other educational institution. This slide gives you a preview of the EdShare system which we have established as a place to put stuff (teaching stuff) so that we can do stuff (cool stuff) with a minimal effort. It will look at web2.0 in terms of what it and its successors can do for academics, and university admin, although all these activities are designed ultimately to benefit the student.Edshare is a project at Southampton, funded by JISC initially, but fully supported by the institution. The EdShare is a single secure place to store and share educational resources. Items stored in EdShare can be identified and their descriptions can be indexed by search engines such as google (although access rights are always specified by the depositor). By adding tagging and comments to the documents
  • Like many institutions we have designed administrative systems to support our different agendas, as an department who had a healthy chunk of research in hypertext and the web, we were there from the beginning with simple vanilla web applications which solved problems in a pragmatic way.
  • This use of web2.0 is actually in the spirit what clay shirkey was talking about as social software in this 2003 post on xxxx which is quoted at the beginning the HEFCE report
  • Surveys
  • Roots of online communities and social web lie in the deadheads who populated the well and endlessly discussed grateful dead….
  • Transcript

    • 1. Share Collaborate and Exchange, reshaping education through technology: the EdShare experiencepresentation to HEA-ICS Autumn 2009
      Su White, Hugh Davis,Thanassis Tiropanis, Les Carr, Dave Millard
      Autumn 2009
    • 2. 1 – context and current practice
      2 – room for change
      4 –future and conclusions?
      3 – some (affordance led) change
      The shape of this talk
      Autumn 2009
    • 3. and Current Practice
      Context
      Autumn 2009
    • 4. Edshare – a preview
      Autumn 2009
    • 5. Universities and knowledge
      The HumboldtianIdeal
      In universities, learning should not be [defined] in terms of the passing on of well established knowledge, but always in terms of not yet completely solved problems.”
      Humboldt, 1807
      Thanks to Lewis Elton
      Autumn 2009
      Web 2.0affordances?
    • 6. Welcome to my world…
      This course aims to develop critical thinking, effective working within teams, peer-learning and discussion, and individual responsibility as these are transferable skills that are essential within a highly competent technologist, computer scientist, software engineer or researcher”
      Autumn 2009
    • 7. The home front
      Early adopters
      Vanilla web
      Information publishing
      Online Discussion
      Social networks YABB
      Network News
      Autumn 2009
    • 8. Circa 1994-1996
      Autumn 2009
    • 9. Actually…. Way back…
      The cloud was Vicky – the department’s platform
      Vincent was the fridge
      who emailed observations on departmental politics
      YABB and Network News
      Social networks were technologically augmentedand
      Technology Networks were socially augmented
      Autumn 2009
    • 10. 1994 – TQA and social web
      Autumn 2009
      The TQA visit in 1994 used what Shirky in his much quoted post which describes as social software
      After each observation, colleagues would leg it back to their computer and email colleagues explaining the way the review was going, what the reviewers were asking etc…
    • 11. The world has changed
      True But…
      Digital immigrants vs digital natives is a naiive concept
      Note - Universities continue flourish despite the long time existence of libraries
      The academy exists/has existed in many different cultural contexts and traditions
      Autumn 2009
    • 12. The world is changing 2
      True But…
      We need to beware of
      being obsessed with the the leisure habits of young people
      generalising the working habits of early adopters/evangelists
      Attributing OU behaviours to the whole student population
      Autumn 2009
    • 13. Our University has changed…
      Local
      Early adopters
      Vanilla web
      Admin and info
      Wiki, Media Wiki
      Knowledge base FAQ
      …under development
      EdShare
      Dynamic transcriptswith real time/collaborative editing
      Institutional
      Autumn 2009
    • 19. The home front
      Educational innovation (1990s->)
      Microcosm, notes
      Authentic assessment
      Online open web exams
      Zappers - the teachers learn
      Admin and Education (1998->)
      Skywriting
      Wiki for advice
      Wiki for knowledge capture and sharing
      Wiki for assessment (them and us)
      Latterly
      Mixed Mode, mixed purpose
      ECS-TV, Student Blog
      Self study groups - mixed environments
      Student practice (2007, 2008, 2009)
      Facebook, facebook, facebook
      Wikipedia
      Portal confusion/Portal distaste
      Del.icio.us, digg, cite-u-like etc- small
      It’s a learning journey
      Different times
      Different people
      Socially augmented communication
      Autumn 2009
    • 20. For Change
      Room
      Autumn 2009
    • 21. From the well to Web2.0
      “Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.”
      - Tim O'Reilly October 01, 2005
      Autumn 2009
    • 22. The world is changing 3
      We need to
      Remember all we have learned about how people learn
      Stay true to our beliefs about how people can learn
      Autumn 2009
    • 23. The world is changing 4
      True But acknowledge…
      The half life of information is diminishing
      Working practices are changing
      We can harness technology in disruptive ways
      Affordances emerge!
      Autumn 2009
    • 24. Life at the chalk face?
      Autumn 2009
    • 25. VariousStakeholders
      Student/learner
      Individuallecturer
      Curriculum designer(s)
      Classroom practice
      Accreditation
      Informal learning
      UK HE/PLC
      Formallearning
      Future Employers
      Multiple perspectives
      Autumn 2009
    • 26. Consider disciplinary differences
      Survey(s) of students attitudes
      their experience and perceptions of TEL
      Identify user needs
      Compare experience with theory
      Because
      Disciplinary differences literature
      Ad hoc development of e-learning resources
      Opinions on Web2.0
      Cost of developing TEL resources
      Sometimes structural barriers to change
      Autumn 2009
    • 27. Indicative Areas
      Pure
      Reflecting on Biglan “a sound understanding of key aspects of teaching and learning must depend on the recognition of the distinctive features of different knowledge domains and their social mileiux” (Neumann, Parry and Beecher 2002)
      C. Scienceand Maths
      S Sciences andHumanities
      Beware of generalising about 2.0 learning
      Think about your educational objectives
      Harness the technology affordances
      Hard
      Soft
      Computingand Engineering
      Nursing or
      Education
      Applied
      Curriculum/content -> curriculum purpose -> assessment
      Biglan, 1973
      Autumn 2009
    • 28. Hard Pure
      Hard Appliede.g.Engineering
      Hard Subjects…
      Autumn 2009
    • 29. Disciplinary Differences Survey
      The responses were broadly consistent with knowledge framework.
      Students in Soft areas valued
      synchronous discussions
      role play and games
      access to open web
      Access to online journals
      Support the development of argumentation skills and critical thinking
      Qualitative Open
      Students in Hard areas valued
      online tutorials
      reference materials
      objective tests (also VLEs)
      Support the mastery of facts, principles and concepts.
      Quantitative, Closed
      Web 1.0 vs Web 2.0?and Space for Web 3.0
      Autumn 2009
    • 30. Our typical education mix…
      students In Hard fields of study experience a heavy workload, so technology which offers affordance which save or optimise the use of time will be powerful
      However from the point of view of the academic there is also a “high incidence of face to face teaching and concern for substantial coverage
      Neumann Parry and Becher
      Academics may be disinclined to invest large amounts of additional time preparing e-learning materials
      Autumn 2009
    • 31. TEL/Web2/Linked Data?
      Blended/Web 2.0/Linked Data approaches…
      allow systematic/automated selection of activities to best meet range of requirements
      supporting student learning
      making good use of faculty time
      streamline administrative tasks
      (monitoring and recording student progression and achievement)
    • 32. Our recent survey
      Across Soton
      90% facebook, once a week or more - check
      98% students use texts
      Conscious act not to use them – not digital divide
      In ECS
      Majority have laptops – 2009: the year of the laptop
      Autumn 2009
    • 33. Affordance led change
      some
      Autumn 2009
    • 34. We use RDF – it saves time!
      Autumn 2009
    • 35. 2009
      Autumn 2009
    • 36. Add some student generated content
      Autumn 2009
    • 37. Tie in with the wild web…
      Autumn 2009
    • 38. Add some structure
      Autumn 2009
    • 39. Edshare web science
      Autumn 2009
    • 40. Conclusions
      The future and …
      Autumn 2009
    • 41. Where the future lies…
      Soft semantics
      Meaning in formats that humans can process
      Lightweight knowledge modeling in Web2.0
      Hard Semantics
      Meaning in formats that machines can process
      Processing independent of specific knowledge models
      Semantic Technologies for Teaching and Learning
      Autumn 2009
    • 42. Learning and teaching opportunities
      Transparent Data can assist
      Retention by monitoring progress and empowering students
      Visibility of programmes and research output, attracting funding
      Workflows and collaboration across departments and institutions
      Student recruitment
      Integration of knowledge capital, cross curricular initiatives
      Classroom contexts
      Assisting course creation and deliver workflow
      Recommend relevant resources and workflow
      Efficient accreditation processes
      Critical thinking and argumentation support
      Efficient personal and group knowledge construct
      Group formation
      Assessment, certification, countering/detecting plagiarism
      Autumn 2009
    • 43. Thank You 
      Questions?
      Acknowledge:
      Contributions of colleagues at our respective institutions
      Autumn 2009
    • 44. Thank You 
      Dr Su White
      Learning Societies Lab
      University of Southampton
      saw@ecs.soton.ac.uk
      Autumn 2009
    • 45. Major reference
      Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report
      Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report.
      Autumn 2009
    • 46. References
      Boyer E. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate 1990.
      Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America's Research Universities. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 1998.
      Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education, Three Years After the Boyer Report. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 2002.
      Brew A, Boud D. Teaching and research: establishing the vital link with learning. Higher Education. 1995;29(3):261-73.
      Carter J, Jenkins T. Gender and programming: what's going on? ACM ITiCSE. Leeds: ACM Press New York, NY, USA 1999:1-4.
      Committee on Higher Education. Higher Education: Report of the Committee Appointed by the Prime Minister Under the Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, 1961-63. London: HMSO; 1963.
      Davis HC, White S. A research-led curriculum in multimedia: learning about convergence. 10th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education 2005; Lisbon, Portugal; 2005. p. 29 - 33.
      Davy J, Jenkins T. Research-led innovation in teaching and learning programming. ACM ITiCSE. Leeds, UK: ACM Press New York, NY, USA 1999:5-8.
      Dempster JA. Developing and Supporting Research-Based Learning and Teaching Through Technology. In: Ghaou C, ed. Usability Evaluation Of Online Learning Programs. USA.: Information Science Publishing, Idea Group Inc 2003:128-58.
      Elton L. Research and teaching: symbiosis or conflict? Higher Education. 1986;15:299 - 304.
      Fasli M. On the Research Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor. 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 77-81.
      Gibbs G. Institutional strategies for linking research and teaching. Exchange. 2002;3.
      Hatch A, Burd L, Ashurst C, Jessop A. Project Management Patterns and the Research-Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor. 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 68-71.
      Hattie J, Marsh HW. One journey to unravel the relationship between research and teaching. Research and teaching: Closing the divide? An International Colloquium; 2004 March 18-19, 2004; Winchester; 2004.
      Autumn 2009
    • 47. Hattie J, Marsh HW. The Relationship between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 1996;66(4):507-42.
      Healey M. Linking research and teaching: exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning; 2005.
      Hoare T, Milner R, eds. Grand Challenges in Computing: British Computer Society 2004.
      Jenkins A, Healey M, Zetter R. Linking of staff disciplinary research and student learning. York: Higher Education Academy; 2007.
      Jenkins A, Healey M. Institutional Strategies to link teaching and research. York: Higher Education Academy; 2005.
      McGettrick A, Boyle R, Ibbett R, Lloyd J, Lovegrove G, Mander K. Grand challenges in computing education: British Computer Society; 2004.
      Neumann R. Perceptions of the Teaching-Research Nexus: A Framework for Analysis. Higher Education. 1992;23(2):159-71.
      Neumann R. The Teaching-Research Nexus: Applying a Framework to University Students' Learning Experiences. European Journal Of Higher Education. 1994;29(3):323-38.
      Ramsden P, Moses I. Associations Between Research and Teaching in Australian Higher Education. Higher Education. 1992 April 1992;23(3):273-95.
      Roach M, Blackmore P, Dempster JA. Supporting High-Level Learning through Research-Based Methods: A Framework for Course Development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2001;38(4):369-82.
      Strazdins P. Research based education in computer science teaching. Canberra: Australian National University; 2007.
      Thomas RC, Mancy R. Use of Large Databases for Group Projects at the Nexus of Teaching and Research. ACM SIGCSE 2004; Portland: ACM; 2004. p. 161-5
      Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report.
      Wirth A, Bertolacci M. New algorithms research for first year students. Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on Innovation and technology in computer science education; 2006; Bologna, Italy: ACM Press New York, NY, USA; 2006. p. 128-32.
      Autumn 2009
    • 48. Autumn 2009
    • 49. Not used, but referred
      Autumn 2009
    • 50. Putative table
      Autumn 2009
    • 51. From semtech report
      The initial value of semantic technology will be in scale first before reasoning
      The emergence of linked data fields across related repositories could enable applications and value for the identified HE challenges
      Semantic lools and services that map linked data to application specific ontologies will increase linked data value and impact
      Encouragemen of community afreedontologies to empower semantic applicationsalongside application specific ontologies
      Empressive semantics to enable pedagogoy aware applications
      Autumn 2009
    • 52. Challenges
      Barriers to exposing institutional data in RDF
      Autumn 2009
    • 53. Most of fheidentifired he challenges can be addressed by querying across institutional repositories (databases, web pages, VLSs)
      Significant learning and teaching challenges can be addressed by accesing resources across departments, schools, institutions
      Argumentation and critical thinking could benefit from advance reasoning over large scale of resources
      Could we adopt a bottom up approach starting from linked data which can be related to (layers of) ontologieslarer in the context of specific applications.
      Autumn 2009
    • 54. Looking at our data
      Autumn 2009
    • 55. Further Questions
      How can insight into disciplinary differences assist the selection of effective TEL (and therefore Web1.0->3.0) approaches?
      How can understanding disciplinary preferences help identify ways of working with faculty to successfully embed TEL and develop blended approaches?
      What are the technology affordances of e-learning which might best be used in computing, engineering and our cognate areas?
      http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2006/papers/1784.pdf
      Autumn 2009