Conole keynote paper


Published on

  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Conole keynote paper

  1. 1. 1Trajectories of e-learningProfessor Gráinne ConoleDirector of the Institute of Learning InnovationUniversity of LeicesterEmail: http://e4innovation.comSlideshare: http:// website: International Conference On Quality Assurance in Post-SecondaryEducation, Damman, Saudi Arabia27th – 29th April 2013AbstractThis paper will critique the affordances (Gibson 1979) that social andparticipatory media offer in terms of promoting different forms of interactionand communication. It will explore in particular the nature of digital identity andpresence. It will argue that there is a complex interconnection between us andthe digital environment we inhabit, and that this relationship is constantlychanging and adapting. In terms of harnessing this for learning, teachers need todevelop a complex set of digital literacies (Jenkins 2009) and need to adopt newapproaches to design that go beyond content to the activities that learnersengage with. It will conclude with a description of the 7Cs of Learning Designframework, which aims to help teachers make more informed design decisionsthat are pedagogically effective and make innovative uses of new technologies.It will describe a set of theoretical constructs that can be used to describe andunderstand our interactions online: the notion of digital identity and presenceand digital performance, our evolving rhizomatic digital network, harnessing theaffordances and new media and the associated digital social milieu, and thenature of our digital traces and the associated digital panoptican.IntroductionClearly technologies offer a rich variety of ways in which learners can interact,communicate and collaborate. They can support a variety of differentpedagogical approaches from independent learning to inquiry learning todialogic learning. Einstein once said that education is not the learning of facts,but the training of the mind to think. Good teaching fosters the following aspectsof learning:Encourages reflection
  2. 2. 2Enables dialogueFosters collaborationApplies theory to practiceCreates a learner community of peersEncourages creativityMotivates the learner.Social and participatory media have a number of key characteristics that makethem distinctive from the so-called web 1.0 technologies (Conole and Alevizou2010). These include: open practices, distributed cognition, networking andinterconnection, complex and evolving interactions, and the development of apersonalised digital landscape. These characteristics enable us to interact withothers on an unprecedented global scale.Developing the digital literacy (Jenkins 2009) skills needed to be part of this‘participatory culture’ is a key challenge facing education today. These skills areway beyond simple notions of ICT literacies and are more about harnessing theaffordances of social and participatory media. Skills like: play, transmedianavigation, judgement, and distributed cognition. The extent to which anindividual has these skills will impact on how they interact with others throughthese media. Rheingold1 argues that social media enable people to socialise,organise, learn, play, and engage in commerce. The part that makes social mediasocial is that technical skills need to be exercised in concert with others:encoding, decoding, and community. He identifies five social media literacies:attention, participation, collaboration, network awareness and criticalconsumption.1
  3. 3. 3Today’s digital landscapeFigure 1: The E-learning timelineFigure 1 shows the key technological developments that have emerged over thelast thirty years. Starting with multimedia authoring tools like Tookbook andAuthorware in the late eighties, which enabled users to create rich andinteractive multimedia resources. The Internet emerged in 1993 and wasinitially a very static interface, unable to handle large amounts of images ormultimedia because of poor bandwidth. In the mid-nineties, practitioners startedto talk about the notion of learning objects (which were precursors to theconcept of Open Educational Resources) and the aspiration to create and sharelearning materials in a vibrant educational marketplace or digital economy(Littlejohn 2003).At about the same time Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) /LearningManagement Systems (LMSs) started to appear. These were significant in tworespects. Firstly, institutions started to realise that technologies were core fortheir learners and established committees to evaluate different VLEs/LMSs andto instigate VLE/LMS policies. Secondly, they mimicked established teachingpractice and hence provided a safe nursery slope for practitioners to experiment.Practitioners could upload content, make announcements, set up discussionforums and provide mechanisms for their students to upload assignments. Thefirst generation of mobile devices emerged in around 1998; although they hadvery limited capacity and it was hard to see what they could offer for learning.Learning Design2 emerged as a research field as a counteraction to the longestablished field of Instructional Design. The focus was on the creation of toolsand resources to help practitioners make more informed design decisions.Around 2000 gamification emerged and in particular how games could be usedin a learning context (de Freitas and Maharg 2011). The Open Educational2
  4. 4. 4Resource (OER) movement took the ideas around Learning Objects a stagefurther in 2001. Promoted by organisations like UNESCO and the Flora andWilliam Hewlett Foundation, a core principle was that education is afundamental human right and that educational materials should be freelyavailable. UNESCO estimate that there are more than 100 million people whocannot afford formal education; OER offer them a means of getting an education.3O’Reilly defined the term ‘web 2.0’ to distinguish the emerging tools andpractices associated with the web, which were more participatory, social andparticipatory (OReilly 2004; OReilly 2005). This term morphed into the term‘social and participatory’ media, which is a central focus of this paper.Virtual worlds, such as Secondlife, gained popularity in around 2005; manybelieved they offered immersive and authentic 3D environments, which couldpromote pedagogies such as role play, Problem-Based learning and situatedlearning (Childs and Peachey 2011). This was followed by a second generation ofmobile devices; in particular e-books, tablets and smart phones. These made themantra of ‘learning anywhere, anytime’ a reality. Finally, the next phase in thecontinuum of Learning Objects, Open Educational Resources (OER) was theemergence of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), with thousands of peoplesigning up to participate. Two distinct types of MOOCs have now evolved: i)cMOOCs promoting connectivist learning (Siemens 2005) and ii) xMOOCs, whichare more linear and didactic, such as those offered by Coursera, Udacity, EdX andmost recently, Futurelearn.So it is evident that technologies are transforming everything that we do. Theyprovide mechanisms to enable new forms of communication and collaboration,along with providing rich multimedia presentation of information. There arenow a wealth of tools to find, create, manage and share knowledge. We areoperating in a networked, distributed, peer reviewed and open environment,which is complex, dynamic and evolving.Figure 2 provides a nice illustration of the relationship between differenttechnologies and traditional ways of communicating. So for example, LinkedInequates to a professional contacts list, wordpress to a reflective diary, andTwitter to post it notes. Social and participatory media have a number of keycharacteristics, such as: being open, distributed, networked, participatory, social,complex, distributed and dynamic.3
  5. 5. 5Figure 2: Mapping technologies to traditional forms of communication4The annual New Media Consortium Horizon reports5 list the technologies thatare likely to have the most impact in one, three and five years’ time. In the one-year timeframe Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs) and tablets are listed ashaving the most impact in education. In the three-year timeframe,games/gamification and learning analytics will have the most impact. Finally, inthe five-year timeframe, 3D printing and wearable technologies will have themost impact. A recent study6 looked at emergent technologies across foursectors: schools, tertiary education, the Vocational and Training (VET) sector,and adult education. They catagorised the use of technologies as follows:Productivity and creativityNetworked collaborationContent creationVisualisation and simulationLearning Management SystemsLearning environmentGamesDevices, interfaces and connectivity4
  6. 6. 6So it is evident that technologies are having an increasing impact on educationand provide a variety of mechanisms for fostering communication andcollaboration, and to enable learners to interact with content. The next sectionprovides a meta-model of learning, which can be used to map how technologiescan be used to foster different elements of learning.A meta-model for learningFigure 3 shows the meta-model for learning (Conole, Dyke et al. 2004). Themodel consists of three dimensions of learning:Learning individually or learning sociablyLearning through information or through experienceNon-reflective versus reflective learning.Figure 3: The meta-model of learningNon-reflective learning needs unpacking. If I am driving across America, sub-consciously I am learning about American culture. If I am sitting in a bar in Spain,I am improving my Spanish through the conversations going on around me. It iswhat Jarvis calls ‘pre-conscious’ learning (Jarvis 2004). The model can be used intwo ways. Firstly, as a means of mapping an activity using a particular tool. Forexample a reflective blog would be individual, experience-based and reflective,whereas a group blog aggregating resources for a course would be social,information based and reflective. Secondly, it can be used to map differentpedagogical models. Jarvis’ notion of pre-conscious learning (Jarvis 2004) mapsto individual experience-based and non-reflective learning. Dewey’s reflective
  7. 7. 7learning maps to individual, experience-based and reflective learning (Dewey1916). Finally, Laurillard’s dialogic learning maps to social, information-basedand reflective learning (Laurillard 2002).Four examples of how technologies can support different pedagogicalapproaches are now provided: drill and practice, mobile learning, situativelearning, and immersive learning.Drill and practice is an important approach to helping learners develop theirknowledge. It is important, for example, in language learning in terms of learningvocabulary and conjugating verbs. There are now a range of tools to enablelearners to work through interactive materials and get feedback on assessmentof their learning. For example, the Open University, UK using Moodle as theirLearning Management System (LMS). They have developed an e-assessment toolcalled OpenMark, more information about OpenMark and examples of how it canbe used are available online.7 The OU UK claim that OpenMark differs from othere-assessment tools in the following ways:The emphasis placed on feedback. All Open University students aredistance learners and the university emphasises the importance of givingfeedback on written assessments. The design of OpenMark assumes thatfeedback, at multiple levels, will be included.Allowing multiple attempts. OpenMark is an interactive system, andconsequently students are asked to act on feedback given there and then,while the problem is still fresh in their mind. If their first answer isincorrect, they can have an immediate second, or third, attempt.The breadth of interactions supported. The OU aims to use the fullcapabilities of modern multimedia computers to create engagingassessments.The design for anywhere, anytime use. OpenMark assessments aredesigned to enable students to complete them in their own time in amanner that fits with normal life. They can be interrupted at any pointand resumed later from the same location or from elsewhere on theInternet.There are now a rich range of sites to support language learning, which providelearners with rich interactive multimedia resources, assessment and feedbacktools, and mechanisms to engage with other language learners. These includelivemoch,8 babble,9 duilingo,,10 and busuu.11Mobile learning and the ability to learn anywhere, anytime is now a reality withsmart phones and tablet devices. At the University of Leicester, our Criminologydepartment has issued iPads to all their Masters’ students. These students areworking in dangerous parts of the world, where access to the Internet is often7 http://duolingo.com11
  8. 8. 8limited. All the materials the students need for their course are available on theiPads. Our Archeology department is using tablet with their students to enablethem to collect data when they are doing fieldwork. The Personal Inquiry projectdeveloped a inquiry-based learning, derived from an extensive review of theresearch literature. This formed the basis of a toolkit, the nQuire tookit, whichcould be loaded on tablet devices and used by students as they undertookinquiry-based learning whilst doing a Science investigation.Virtual worlds, such as Secondlife, provide rich, authentic 3D environments,which can be used to support role-play and situated learning. The Swift project12developed a virtual Genetics laboratory in SecondLife, where students can learnthe basics of laboratory safety and also engage with virtual instruments to collectdata. The jibbigo App13 can be used on a mobile device to provide instanttranslation of one language to another, both in text and audio.Finally, in terms of immersive learning, Google have a tool called immersion,14which translates parts of a web page into another language, you can oscillatebetween the language you are learning and your native language by hoveringover the text.The social milieuThe social environment, social context, socio-cultural context, or milieu, refers to‘the immediate physical and social setting in which people live or in whichsomething happens or develops. It includes the culture that the individual waseducated or lives in, and the people and institutions with whom they interact’.15So the digital milieu is a combination of the affordances of new media and anindividual’s personal competences and preferences; each person has to find theirown ‘digital voice’ and personal digital environment. They need to be able tonavigate across the digital landscape; being clear about how different media areused. So interactions in facebook will differ from those in Twitter or VirtualWorlds. We each create our own ecological niche, we connect with differentpeople for different reasons; each of us has an inner core of ‘friends’ and an outerset of acquaintances forming three different types of interactions, what Dron andAnderson refer to as Groups, Networks and Collectives (Dron and Anderson2007). Goffman in particular stresses the deeply social nature of the individualenvironment and talks about the notion of ‘interaction rituals’ (Goffman 1976).He talks about the concept of ‘performance’, the way in which we interact andcommunicate with others online is a form of performance and relates to how weare perceived by others; each of us has an individual digital identity, which is theculmination of our interactions across different media.12
  9. 9. 9We leave visible digital trails as we interact online; a digital equivalent ofFoucault’s concept of the ‘Panopticon’ , which refers to the concept of a designwhich allows a watchman to observe (-opticon) all (pan-) inmates of aninstitution without them being able to tell whether or not they are being watched(Foucault 1995). In the digital landscape our identity is fragmented acrossdifferent media, we are connected in a complex set of social interactions withothers, ranging from loosely connected to tightly bound communities.Digital identity and presenceDigital identity is about how you present yourself online and how othersperceive you. It emerges from the way you interact and communicate withothers. Weller (2011) argues that digital identity has the following facets:reputation, impact, influence, productivity, and openness. Our professionalidentity has changed as a result of our interactions online. In the past a researchpaper published in a closed journal might only have a handful of readers. Articlespublished online can be access by hundreds, if not thousands of people. Andthere is a blurring of our personal and professional identity, particularly in siteslike facebook. Weller (2011) argues that:A key element to realising a strong online identity is an attitude ofopenness. This involved sharing aspects of personal life on social networksites, blogging ideas rather than completing articles and engaging inexperiments with new media.He goes on to argue (2011: 99) that digital identity is both distributed acrossmultiple channels as well as usually having a central place (such as a blog). Andhe argues (2011: 136) that there are a number of facets associated with yourdigital identity: reputation, impact, influence and productivity.So what is presence? Dictionary definitions include: i) The state or fact of beingpresent; current existence or occurrence or ii) Immediate proximity in time orspace.16 Neither of these really captures what I understand by presence. I think itis something more than this. This definition comes closer: ‘the bearing, carriageor air of a person; especially stately or distinguished bearing’.17I am interested in the difference between presence face-to-face and online. In aface-to-face context presence is related to a number of factors. It’s aboutsomeone’s aura, their stance. It might be that someone has presence becausethey are tall, attractive, have a deep voice or it might be related to their intellect.We have all experienced the feeling of being effected by someone, being veryaware of them, feeling a connection with them on a sub-conscious level.In the digital world presence is very different, it is conveyed primarily throughtext. Presence is channelled through your words and associated emoticons, etc. Ioften wonder how I am perceived online. What people make of the things I say,the pictures I post. What is my digital personality and how is it different from the16
  10. 10. 10way I interact face-to-face? I find online interactions liberating and different tothe interactions I have with people face to face.Of course technology plays a part. The affordances of different media enable ordisenable certain types of interaction. So facebook is a good medium for sharingmultimedia, Twitter requires you to speak in a certain way, with its limit of 140characters. Virtual worlds provide a bridge to face-to-face interaction, via youravatar. The avatar you choose says something about you. Our digital presence isfragmented across these different media. The collective self is a culmination ofthese individual utterances. The way I speak on my blog is different to thepostings I put on facebook or Twitter. They have different purposes andaudiences. So what does ‘presence’ mean in a digital context? I think it is abouthow you are perceived by others through your interaction with them. Presenceonly has meaning in relation to others. It’s a social construct. For some peopleyou will have presence, for others you don’t. It is all to do with whether yourinteractions have meaning for others.Childs provides a useful overview of the concept of presence, along with relatedterms (Childs 2013a; Childs 2013). He defines immersion as the ‘sense of feelingsubmerged in an experience’. And goes on to suggest that immersion issomething that happens in your head; two people can experience the sametechnology and one can feel immersed and the other one not, whereas for mepresence is more about the impact someone has on you. As I have already said, itis socially constructed. I think this is closer to his use of the term ‘socialpresence’, which he defines as ‘what we project when we’re in an onlineenvironment about ourselves’. I think immersion has more to do with the senseof ‘being there’, whether it is immersing your self in a book or a film orparticipating in a Virtual World.He uses the term presence to describe the sense of being there. In particular, hesuggests that presence is a combination of: mediated presence (“being there” akaimmersion) + social presence (projection of ourselves, perception of others) +co-presence (being somewhere with others) + self-presence (or embodiment).Collins argues that place and presence become mixed up online (Collins 2008).She describes the ways in which we are digitally distributed:So many places I’m in at once, and that’s just trying to keep things simple– we’re not even including all the asynchronous options. But if you askedme “Where are you right now?” the answer I’m likely to give depends oncontext – if you called me on the telephone or sent me an SMS I’d say Iwas at home, but if you IMd me the same question in Second Life, I’d say Iwas in Chilbo, and if you asked me on Gtalk or AIM or Twitter, I don’t evenknow which way I’d answer. BUT, the truth is, I’m am in all those placesand locations and “mental spaces” simultaneously – and yet it’s notREALLY simultaneous because my attention can only be focused on one“space” at a time.. Or is that really true?
  11. 11. 11Moore (1989) lists three types of interaction: learner and teacher, learner andlearner, and learner and content. Hillman et al. (1994) add a fourth: learner andinterface.Figure 4 shows the relationship between digital identity, interaction andpresence. The figure shows how our digital identity will inform how we interactwith others. For example, the degree to which we are formal or informal and theextent to which we are open or closed in our discussions. This in turn will havean impact on how we are perceived by others, i.e. our presence.Figure 4: The relationship between digital identity, interaction and presenceRhizomatic learning and connectivismThe nature of our personalised digital landscape or network is not static; itchanges over time; we are constantly adapting and co-evolving with thetechnologies and through our network of peers. And as a result we develop, welearn, we adapt. Two key concepts in relation to our interactions online are theconcepts of Rhizomatic learning (Cormier 2011) and Connectivism (Siemens2005). In terms of Rhizomatic learning, Cormier argues that:A rhizome is a stem of a plant that sends out roots and shoots as itspreads. This is analogous to how we interact online and in particular theway that ideas are multiple, interconnected and self-replicating. Arhizome has no beginning or end… like the learning process.So we develop connections with people, who’s ideas are of interest to us. Thismight be through including them on a blogroll, facebook chatting ideas, liking orcommenting on posts, or retweeting in Twitter. We build up connections withthose that we have most in common with.Connectivism is a useful analytic framework for understanding our interactionsacross this digital landscape. Siemens outlines eight key principles ofConnectivism, how these apply to our interactions online are emphasised initalics:1. Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions. Online we interact andconnect with others through a variety of channels, co-constructing knowledge.
  12. 12. 122. Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources.We connect both with people and with resources. Appropriating them for ourown individual needs.3. Learning may reside in non-human appliances. So in addition to others, animportant part of our network are the tools and resources we use.4. Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known. So it isrecognising that we learn and develop through our network.5. Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continuallearning. Being part of a social network is about reciprocity; contributing to thenetwork, as well as using it.6. Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill.And as such we need to develop the types of digital literacy skills Jenkins talksabout, to harness the affordances of the media.7. Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivistlearning activities. The net offers a powerful mechanism for developing skillsand keeping up to date.8. Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and themeaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality.Which is about developing our own personal learning environment andcritically reflecting on its development.These concepts are particularly useful in terms of providing theoretical lenseswith which to describe the nature of online interactions and the ways in whichour online interactions change and adapt over time. They have been used inparticular to describe the patterns of behaviour we see in Massive Open OnlineCourses (MOOCs). MOOCs have no central site or learning pathway, participantscan interact with the materials in a variety of ways and can contribute to theknowledge poor through a variety of outlets, for example Google Apps, blogs,Twiter, facebook, etc. The OLDS MOOC18 on Learning Design, which ran betweenJanuary and March 2013, had the main content available in Google Docs, inaddition the Cloudworks19 social networking site was used, along with GoogleHangouts for weekly synchronous sessions.The Community Indicators FrameworkIn order to better understand interactions in social networks we have developeda Community Indicators Framework (CIF) (Figure 5) (Galley, Conole et al. 2011).The CIF is built around four key aspects of community experience:Participation, i.e. the ways in which individuals engage in activityCohesion, i.e. the ties between individuals and the community as a wholeIdentity, i.e. how individuals perceive the community and their placewithin itCreative capability, i.e. the ability of the community to create sharedartefacts, and shared knowledge and understanding.18
  13. 13. 13Each of these aspects is interrelated and the whole reflects the multifacetedcomplexity of what we experience as community. We have argued that theseaspects have a multiplicative effect on each other, in that the absence of oneis likely to significantly impact on the presence of the others.Figure 5 The Community Indicators FrameworkIn the paper we concluded that:The notion of ‘community’ is complex and nebulous, especially in relationto online, open and transient communities.And went on to state that:Finally, we believe the CIF may also prove effective as a framework forsupporting and guiding developing communities, as it expresses thetensions and challenges, which can emerge as communities evolve. Acritical approach to these tensions and challenges may help to manageand limit risk to the community as people debate, discuss and work tocreate new knowledge together openly and online. For example acommunity may reflect on its progression and development using a seriesof facilitative prompts, activities and tasks informed by the CIF.The paper up to now has critiqued the nature of online interactions, along withthe associated notions of digital identity, presence and immersion. It has alsoargued that teachers need to develop a new set of digital literacies to be able toharness the power of social and participatory media. Clearly these media offer awealth of ways in which learners can interact with multimedia, andcommunicate and collaborate with peers. However, the reality is that these
  14. 14. 14technologies are not being used extensively. The majority of use is replicatingbad pedagogy, for example using a Virtual Learning Environment (VLE/LearningManagement System (LMS) as a content repository. Teachers say they lack thetime to experiment with incorporating technologies into their teaching. Thereality is that they lack the necessary digital literacy skill to enable them toharness the power of social and participatory media. I have previously arguedthat designing for learning is the key challenge facing education today (Conole2013). Teachers need guidance and support to make pedagogically informeddesign decisions that make innovative use of technologies. The next sectionintroduces the 7Cs of Learning Design framework, which seeks to address thisissue.The 7Cs of Learning Design frameworkThis paper has described the ways in which we can interact online and thebenefits of social and participatory media for learning and professionaldevelopment. Clearly these media offer a rich set of ways in which learners caninteract, however in reality teachers are not using social and participatory mediaextensively for learning. They need guidance and support to make informeddesign decisions that are pedagogically effective and make innovative use oftechnologies to support interaction, communicate and collaboration.The 7Cs of Learning Design framework20 illustrates the key stages involved inthe design process, from initial conceptualisation of a learning interventionthrough to trialing and evaluating it in a real learning context (Figure 6). Theframework consists of the following stages:1. Conceptualise: What is the vision for the learning intervention, who is itbeing designed for, what is the essence of the intervention, what pedagogicalapproaches are used?2. Capture: What Open Educational Resources are being used and what otherresources need to be developed?3. Create: What is the nature of the learning intervention the learners willengage with? What kinds of learning activities will the learners engage with?4. Communicate: What types of communication will the learners be using?5. Collaborate: What types of collaboration will be learners be doing?6. Consider: What forms of reflection and demonstration of learning areincluded? Are the learning outcomes mapped to the activities and assessmentelements of the learning intervention?7. Consolidate: How effective is the design? Do the different elements of thedesign work together?20 A slidecaste presentation on the 7Cs framework is available online In addition, the resources associated with the franework are alsoavailable online
  15. 15. 15Figure 6: The 7Cs of learning design frameworkFor each of the seven stages we have developed a series of conceptual designs,building on our work and that of others in the field. Four of these are describedhere: the course features view, the course map view, the pedagogy profileview and the storyboard. The first is the course features view, which isassociated with the conceptualise element of the 7Cs framework. This enablesteachers to think about the overall essence of the learning intervention and howit will be delivered and supported. Participants interact with a pack of cardsaround the following elements:1. Principles (Figure 7): What is the essence of the course, what are the coreprinciples? So for example cultural or aesthetic aspects may be important, theintervention may have a practical focus or be about applying theory topractice, it may be based on a professional community of peers or it might beimportant that the intervention includes elements of serendipity or even risk.2. Pedagogical approaches: What pedagogies are involved? For example is theintervention based on constructivist principles, is it problem or inquiry-based?3. Guidance and support (Figure 8): What guidance and support are provided?For example in terms of a website or module handout, or access to studymaterials.4. Content and activities: What kinds of activities are included and what contentwill the learners be using?5. Reflection and demonstration: Are the learners actively encouraged to reflectat key points? How are they demonstrating their learning? What forms ofdiagnostic, formative and summative assessment are included?
  16. 16. 166. Communication and collaboration: How are the learners interacting witheach other and their tutors? Are there any elements of collaborationincluded?Figure 7" The principles associated with the learning interventionFigure 8: Guidance and supportOnce the course features view has been completed, teachers can fill in thecourse views map, which considers what Guidance and Support is provided,what Content and Activities the learners will engage with, what forms ofCommunication and Collaboration are included, and the types of Reflectionand Demonstration. This includes details of which tools and resources areassociated with each of the elements and any notes such as details ofprerequisites required or a description of the philosophy underpinning thelearning intervention, for example it might be that peer interaction is deemedimportant or that learners are expected to generate their own materials.The third example is the pedagogy or activity profile view (Figure 9). Thisenables teachers to map the types of activities the learners will engage with.There are six types: assimilative activities (reading, viewing, listening),
  17. 17. 17information handling, communicative, productive, experiential (such as drill andpractice exercises) and adaptive (such as modeling or simulation). The profilealso indicates the amount of time spent on assessment activities. The profile isavailable as an online flash widget.21Figure 9: An example of a completed pedagogy profileStoryboarding is a well-established approach to visually representing a temporalsequence of activities. For example, it is used in the film industry to represent thekey sequences involved in a plot. Storyboarding is used in our Learning Designwork, as a means of representing the overall design. It enables theteacher/designer to see how the different elements of the design process fittogether. It consists of a timeline, with the activities included in the design alongthe middle (Figure 10). Learning outcomes are mapped to the assessmentelements. Above the activities any inputs to the individual activities are include:for example reading materials or listening to podcasts. Below the activitiesoutputs are listed, for example contribution to a discussion forum or creation ofa blog post.21
  18. 18. 18Figure 10: A Learning Design StoryboardEvaluation of the framework and the associated resources indicates that it iswelcomed and that the conceptual designs enable teachers to rethink theirdesign practice to create more engaging learning interventions for their learners.The conceptual views can also be used with learners, to give them an indicationof the nature of the courses they are undertaking. The activity profile isparticularly useful as it enables learners to see the mix of different types oflearning activities they will engage with.ConclusionTo conclude, I would like to argue that we need to move beyond the notion ofspace and time when describing our interactions online. The theoreticalconstructs described in this paper provide a richer means of representing andunderstanding how we interact online. Key challenges face education and indeedsociety more generally. Traditional boundaries of work and home life arebreaking down (Giddons), we now operate in a global society, where chances inthe economic or political context in one part of the world, can have a impact onanother part of the world. Education needs to prepare individuals for aconstantly changing environment. Individuals will need to develop new digitalliteracy skills and in particular skills that enable them to be able to adapt, toretrain, as most will have more than one career change. Social and participatorymedia have an important role to play; providing individuals with a rich,distributed ecology of resources and expertise that they can draw on. We arenow operating in a distributed context, where knowledge and understanding
  19. 19. 19resides in both our minds and our digital networks, what Salomon described as‘distributed cognition’ (Salomon 1993).It is evident that technologies provide a rich set of ways in which learners andteachers can interact with materials, and ways to communicate and collaborate.As this paper has shown, technologies can foster a range of different pedagogicalapproaches. The nature of our interactions online is complex and dynamic andrelated to our digital identity and presence. The nature of learning, teaching andresearch is fundamentally changing as a result of the impact of technologies. Thenature of education is changing as a result of free resources and expertise. Newbusiness models are emerging which are challenging traditional educationalinstitutes. In a world in which content and expertise is increasingly free, what isthe role of a traditional institution? We are adopting more open practices and arepart of a global distributed community of peers. We need to embrace the powerof new technologies and learn to adopt more open practices. The 7Cs of LearningDesign framework and associated tools described in this paper provides a meansof guiding teachers in their design practice, so that they can make informeddesign decisions, that are pedagogical effective and make good use of newtechnologies.ReferencesChilds, M. (2013). Immersion, presence and immersiveness, available at body electric.Childs, M. (2013). More on presence, available at The body electric.Childs, M. and A. Peachey (2011). Reinventing ourselves: contemporary conceptsof indentity in Virtual Worlds. New York, Springer.Collins, C. (2008). Public Twitter Station in Second Life: The “Presence” Problem.Fleeps deep thoughts.Conole, G. (2013). Designing for learning in an open world. New York, Springer.Conole, G. and P. Alevizou (2010) Review of the use(s) of Web 2.0 in HigherEducation.Conole, G., M. Dyke, et al. (2004). "Mapping pedagogy and tools for effectivelearning design." Computers and Education 43(1-2): 17-33.Cormier, D. (2011). Rhizomatic learning - why we teach? Daves education blog:education, post-structuralism and the rise of the machines. Freitas, S. and P. Maharg (2011). Digital Games and Learning. London andNew York, Continuum Press.
  20. 20. 20Dewey, J. (1916). Experience and Nature. New York, Dover.Dron, J. and T. Anderson (2007). Collectives, networks and groups in socialsoftware for e-Learning. Proceedings of World Conference on E-Learning inCorporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education Quebec. RetrievedFeb. 16: 2008.Foucault, M. (1995). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York,Vintage Books.Galley, R., G. Conole, et al. (2011). "Community Indicators: A framework forbuilding and evaluating communiyt activity on Cloudworks." InteractiveLearning Environments.Gibson, J. J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NewJersey, Lawrence Erlbaum Associated.Goffman, B. E. (1976). see especially Interaction Rituals, Garden City, NY: AnchorBooks.Hillman, D. C., D. J. Willis, et al. (1994). "Learner-interface interaction in distanceeducation: an extension of contemporary models and strategies forpractitioners." The American Journal of Distance Education 8(2): 30-42.Jarvis, P. (2004). Adult education and lifelong learning. London,RoutledgeFalmer.Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Mediaeducation for the 21st century, Mit Pr.Laurillard, D. (2002). Rethinking university teaching, Routledge %@0415256798, 9780415256797.Littlejohn, A. (2003). Reusing online resources: a sustainable approach to e-learning, RoutledgeFalmer.Moore, M. (1989). "Three types of interaction." American Journal of DistanceEducation 3(2): 1-6.OReilly, T. (2004). The architecture of particaption.OReilly, T. (2005). What is Web 2.0 - Design patterns and business models forthe next generation of software.Salomon, G., Ed. (1993). Distributed cognitions - pyschological and educationalconsiderations. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
  21. 21. 21Siemens, G. (2005). "Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age."International journal of instructional technology and distance learning 2(1): 3–10.Weller, M. (2011). The digital scholar - how technology is changing academicpractice. London, Bloomsbury Academic.