MnSCU Faculty Workshop, 2008

1. Understanding the Changing Landscape of Learning Technologies Online Faculty Community WorkshopMSCTC Fergus Falls December 5, 2008 Lesley Blicker Director of IMS Learning and Next Generation Technology Academic Innovations

2. Wanted… Visionaries looking towards the future of eLearning delivery models People interested in the state of learning management systems, immersive learning environments, interoperability, Web 2.0, and how it all fits into T&L Academics wanting to close the gap between current baby boomer teaching practices and next gen student learning styles

3. The Bar, Presently Student centered, constructivist environment Scaffolded and/or quest-based learning Critical thinking Knowledge construction Application, Synthesis Problem-based learning; solving real world problems Skills Imparting knowledge Analysis Concepts Faculty-driven content environment (primarily or exclusively)

4. Raising the Bar with the Help of Technology Student centered, constructivist environment Knowledge Construction Critical thinking Scaffolded and/or quest-based learning Problem-based learning; solving real world problems Application, Synthesis Skills Imparting knowledge Analysis Concepts Faculty-driven content environment (primarily or exclusively)

5. What are You Doing to Raise the Bar to Improve Learning Outcomes?

6. Topics Today Understanding of the significance of Web 2.0 in teaching and learning Assess effectiveness and limitations of some of the current technologies and see where things are heading: The 3Ws (wikis, widgets, and webtops) 3D immersive learning

7. Two Videos http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRBW8eJGTVs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VnHdqpE4RM&feature=related

8. One-Way vs. Two-Way Sends Web 1.0 (IMS or elearning 1.0) Web 2.0 (IMS or elearning 2.0) Linking to static web pages, linking to documents Linking people

10. It is dynamic - world of bits that can go in all different directions at the same time, content can come to you (RSS feeds)

11. Applications run through browsers (Flickr, YouTube, Google Docs, Gliffy)

14. Plagiarism software

15. Videos (some streaming)

16. Podcasting

17. Simple games and simulations, and early use of ILEs

18. Content authoring tools (lodeStar, Raptivity)

19. Web conferencing tools (WebEx, Elluminate, Adobe Connect)

20. Wikis, blogs, RSS feeds

21. 3D imaging software (Autodesk) and spatial technologies (GIS)

22. Learning Objects/Repositories and Emergence of federated search capabilities

24. Current IMS (CMS) – What’s the Beef? Unilateral publication formats Labeled as false start; replicated existing classrooms Assumes more passive consumer of information Monolithic and they don’t play well with others (API’s not truly open) – lack of interoperability Scott Leslie’s Video: The Future CMS slide 34 – 35 http://www.edtechpost.ca/gems/TheFutureCMS3.htm

25. Wikis, Widgets and Webtops

26. Wikis Student Group Project Example 1 Student Group Project Example 2: http://omblicker.wetpaint.com/

27. Widgets Look to Wikis or Facebook as examples for adding widgets Defn Wikipedia: A web widget is a portable chunk of code that can be installed and executed within any separate HTML -based web page by an end user without requiring additional compilation .

28. Webtops (iGoogle, Netvibes, PageFlakes)

29. The Webtop Phenomenon to Create a Personal Learning Environment A Portal to Media Literacy, M. Wesch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4yApagnr0s – min 27

30. My Predictions for the Future IMS We won’t see the innovative products turning into enterprise applications anytime soon for complex reasons The enterprise application will be part of a mix of systems for tracking learning experiences which will: Run side-by-side with more flexible and interoperable approaches. Faculty will invent their own PLEs (personal leaning environment) I.e., g, M. Wesch using NetVibes) Recede in importance as the primary unit of the virtual course site and will morph to an LMOS (Learning Management Operating System), maintaining administrative functions for enterprise systems (e.g., SIS integration, managing grades) and would provide the backbone for layering (instructional software living on top of the IMS) Not likely to do it all (incorporate enough open API/integration with other technologies and remain reliable and able to integrate with SIS, core technologies needed for student integration)

31. Virtual Worlds

32. A Couple Easy Tools SitePal.com http://3b.net/browser/newhome.html

33. Immersive Virtual World Options Second Life Croquet Sun Microsystems Wonderland Johnson Center for Virtual Reality EON Reality http://www.eonreality.com/index_full.html

34. Second Life http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMGR9q43dag http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfsSGBraUhc

36. Continued exploration in immersive virtual worlds as learning environments

37. Growth in number of products which have 3D “engines” built in (e.g., Second Life, Lively, 3B, EON Reality)

38. More 3D modeling, robotics, holographic software used in education

39. Increase in use of Webtops (PageFlakes, NetVibes, iGoogle)

40. Repurposing of the IMS* as we know it

41. Emergence of startups with radically different IMS concept, but focused on single course, not enterprise or integration with SIS, LDAP

42. ~10-15% of faculty experimenting with tools outside of IMS to accomplish more student centered learning and digital content creation

43. Attempt to layer interactive tools on top of IMS

44. Move towards building and sharing 3D learning objects

45. No let up in plea for open APIs and interoperability

46. 7-8 years – primary Web interface begins morphing to 3D; 2D lives alongside 3D or in it for a while

47. Increased use of Open Source products for enterprise applications* Instructional Management System © Lesley Blicker

48. Lesley Blicker Director of IMS Learning and Next Generation Technology Academic Innovations W: 651-201-1413 C: 651-269-0107 lesley.blicker@csu.mnscu.edu Lesley’s Blog: http://lblicker.wordpress.com/