In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote

1,812 views

Published on

Web 2.0 tools are of great value for various e-learning scenarios, however, do they make the centralizes and managed learning management system (LMS) at the universities irrelevant? I don't think so. In this talk I will give you some hints why the LMS will remain the future base of e-learning in universities.

This talk was a part of a keynote speech I made with Andrea Back with the title: "Do LMS have a Future? A Conversation between Criticism and Defense of today's LMS"
http://www.slideshare.net/andreakback

Published in: Education
1 Comment
3 Likes
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,812
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
10
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
2
Comments
1
Likes
3
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
  • \n
  • I have 1000 tools, how are they held together\nHow do I implement a learning context\n- course structure\n- what didactical concept\nWhere is the root point of my lecture?\nAnd how is the lecture embedded in the context of the university?\n\nMany opened questions, picked four areas where LMS perform a lot better that I find important\n\n
  • What if your lecture was based on DimDim?\n\nSalesforce buys Dimdim for $31 million, bolsters Chatter collaborationJanuary 6th 2011, www.zdnet.com\n
  • Data is save, protected, backed up\nTools are managed and operated\nScaling of decentralized architecture is difficult\n\nNetwork outage, Power outage, vgl. Japan, Unterseekabel\n\nInstitutional: You are at university, it‘s official, it‘s the real deal. It‘s no game\n\n
  • But for users, it is all free. Hm...\n\n
  • Advertisement in the lecture room?\nViagra commercial during medicine lesson?\n\nNo financial dependencies to external tool provider\n\nTeaching is a core competency, don‘t rely on external financing/infrastructure\n\nYou‘re not doing your lecture in a public coffee or a train, you go to the lecture room that offers the right context\n
  • Slide Share business: could also include a selling business\nSlides could be sold, mixed with other stuff, royality-free\n\nCan be used in advertisement\nCan be remove without notice (e.g. also during the semester)\n\nThe point is: I don‘t understand those terms. Do you? Do your students?\n\n
  • Students have a right to get education, credit points.\nThey have a contract with the university, university law\n\nCan you as a teacher force students to accept third party usage terms that might conflict with swiss data protection law? \n\nTeacher as obligation to user tools that conform with university law and swiss data protection law\n\n
  • Experiment by journalist Michael Arrington, October 2010\n\nFacebook auto - address book scanning feature used to connect to hundreds of top shots\n\n
  • follow on twitter does not implement this role. everybody can follow everybody\n
  • All I said applies mainly to the official teaching/learning process.\n\nStudents have no choice, they must use the tools the teacher dictates to get the ECTS points\n\nDifferent in self driven learning process, user has a choice\n\nDifferent in research, researcher has a choice\n
  • Bad news for the prosumer theory: wikipedia has trouble finding those active users\n\nBolder the fear that ...\nEverybody syndicates, aggregates, remixes, mashes up existing content - but who creates the new knowledge (e.g. Gutenberg doctoral thesis)\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • LTI: Learning Tools Interoperability\nIMS: Global E-learning consortium\n\nCentral services to support management, content creation/distribution, assessment, didactics\nMust not be one large LMS, but controlled by university\n\nlearn from web 2.0: API‘s, more user interactivity\nrespect users choices of social networks, integrate them but don‘t rely on them\n
  • Web 2.0 research and learning from universities for universities\n
  • In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote

    1. 1. In the age of Web 2.0, dowe really need an LMS? eduhub days, march 2011, Lugano Florian Gnägi, frentix GmbH
    2. 2. Management Summary: gnaegi t weets: Yes, of course!*eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com *but what the heck is it good for?
    3. 3. Bio: Florian Gnägi Founder team OLAT LMS 12 years e-learning frentix GmbH e-learning, olat, development soft ware developereduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com entrepreneur gnaegi@frentix.com
    4. 4. eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools
    5. 5. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools B AT T L E O F TH E TOOLSeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com
    6. 6. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools File and folders dropbox.com Documents docs.google.com Learning units openlearn.open.ac.uk Blogs blogger.com Wiki wikispaces.com Calendar calendar.google.com Study groups groups.yahoo.comeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com AAI openid.org Video streaming youtube.com Course participants list facebook.com
    7. 7. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools File and folders dropbox.com Documents docs.google.com Learning units openlearn.open.ac.uk Blogs blogger.com Wiki wikispaces.com Calendar calendar.google.com Study groups groups.yahoo.comeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com AAI openid.org Video streaming youtube.com Course participants list facebook.com SCORE: 97 WINNER ==> SCORE: 100
    8. 8. Cool, the Web 2.0 stuff does everything the LMS did in the 1.0 age!eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com It must be the future!
    9. 9. eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com BUT WAIT! not so fast!
    10. 10. eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Build on stable tools
    11. 11. Who is in charge? Management is a university core business: learners, lectures, assignments, credits etc. Implement organizational workflows Availability, reliability, interoperabilityeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Credibility and public perception LMS is of strategic importance manageability control stability availability reliability
    12. 12. It is all about business Facebooks value swells to $50bn after Goldman Sachs investment January 3rd 2011, www.guardian.co.uk Twitters Value? Up To $10 Billion, Wall Street Journal Reports February 10th 2011, online.wsj.comeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Tiger Global Said to Invest in LinkedIn at $2 Billion Valuation February 10th 2011, online.wsj.com
    13. 13. Who is paying the bill? milton friedman t weeted 1975: Theres No Such Thing As Free Lunch „free“ Web 2.0 ser vices sell ads or your data Outsourcing of vital teaching infrastructure including financing and control over dataeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com LMS is a centralized university service sustainability independence service infrastructure
    14. 14. Lawyer PhD required „By submitting [...] to SlideShare, however, you hereby grant SlideShare a worldwide, non- exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Submissions in connection with the Site and SlideShares (and its successors)eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Site (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels [...].
    15. 15. Lawyer PhD required „By submitting [...] to SlideShare, however, you hereby grant SlideShare a worldwide, non- exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Submissions in connection with the Site and SlideShares (and its successors)eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Site (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels [...]. http://www.slideshare.net/terms
    16. 16. Who checks for legal issues? University law vs. Google usage terms Universities must conform with swiss data protection law Force students to accept third party usage terms to get ECTS points is questionableeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com LMS offers a legally secured teaching environment credibility trust security ects
    17. 17. eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Trust me, I‘m Eric!
    18. 18. Who is who? Know your students and your teachers Are students and teachers buddies? Implement real-world roles in tool Fake personalities and multiple personality disordereduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com LMS deals with authentication of users and data and implement roles credibility identity authenticity manageability
    19. 19. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers?eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com
    20. 20. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers?eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com
    21. 21. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers?eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_Trends_Study
    22. 22. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers? Alternate question: „In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need a university?“eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com vs. „iLike“ social credits* University ECTS credits** *valid world-wide **valid in Europe or so
    23. 23. Conclusion: gnaegi t weets: LMS provide a save and stable learning context with didactical guidelines and basic tools. This context is necessary for ECTS relevant teaching, learning and assessment processes. Tags for LMS: Rating: security stability availability controleduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com reliability sustainability manageability context identity authenticity service credibility independence interoperability trust infrastructure ects didactics
    24. 24. eduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Syntheses
    25. 25. LMS 2.0 Focus on management, content, assessment and didactics, not coolness Provide robust solutions for collaboration Integrate web 2.0 tools using IMS LTIeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Offer public REST and JavaScript API‘s Connect with social net works
    26. 26. University 2.0 Distributed inter-university research and knowledge net work, social, open Based on trust, credibility and open content Funded by universities, not advertisementeduhub days 2011, Florian Gnägi, www.frentix.com Connectors to commercial social net works Integrate with LMS

    ×