Education 3.0: From Here to There


Published on

This is a presentation that I gave to the Hong Kong Vocational Training Council Learning and Teaching Steering Committee. I was asked to present on the Learning Management System, Education 3.0 and future directions in eLearning. I tied it all together by presenting Education 3.0 as the driver to change the past (LMS) into the future (open, mobile learning supported by learning analytics).

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

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

No notes for slide

Education 3.0: From Here to There

  1. 1. Education 3.0: From Here to There Dr. Iain DohertyDirector, eLearning Pedagogical Support UnitCentre for the Enhancement of Teaching and Learning The University of Hong Kong March 2013
  2. 2. eLearning Pedagogical Support Unit 2
  3. 3. Introduction• eLearning at The University of Hong Kong• The LMS and eLearning Pedagogies.• Education 3.0.• What’s Around the Corner with eLearning? 3
  4. 4. The LMS and eLearning Pedagogies 4
  5. 5. HKU eLearning Strategy• HKU has an eLearning strategy endorsed by Senate.• It’s a long document  but in essence  it says this: “The aim of an eLearning strategy is to enhance students learning experiences through the creative, appropriate and effective use of technologies”. 5
  6. 6. HKU eLearning Strategy• The strategy talks about 3 different levels of eLearning activity 1. Teaching and learning is assisted by technology for efficiency and cost-effectiveness. 2. Teaching and learning is enriched by technology to enhance teaching and learning. 3. Teaching and learning are taken to new heights through the use of technologies. 6
  7. 7. HKU eLearning Strategy• The strategy does not restrict faculties to using Moodle as the LMS.• Nor does the strategy place any restrictions on the sorts of technologies that can be used in teaching and learning.• Fair to say that at an institutional level it is the LMS that is predominantly used to support teaching and learning.• This will continue to be the case for quite some time. 7
  8. 8. Information Transmission• LMS has in the main been used for information transmission (Beer, Jones, & Clark, 2009; Malikowski, S.R., 2011; Browne, Jenkins, & Walker, 2006).• There are lots of reasons why this has been the predominant use of the LMS and these reasons need to be addressed.• However, we can say quite clearly that it is not the LMS that is at fault.• The LMS can support rich interactions . . . 8
  9. 9. LMS Issues• So where do the issues lie with the [mis] use of the LMS?• This is a big question but at a strategic and operational level we are concerned with change and change management = complex!• What factors militate against change and what factors support change?• In this presentation I am going to look at just one aspect of change – changing teaching practices. 9
  10. 10. Changing the Way that Teachers Think “Even when they use e-learning products and devices, most faculty still teach as they were taught—that is,they stand in the front of a classroom providing lectures intended to supply the basic knowledge the students need. Hence, we see the success of course management systems and PowerPoint— software packages that focus on the distribution of materialsrather than on teaching itself . . . E-learning will become pervasive only when faculty change how they teach— not before”. (Zemsky & Massy, 2004) 10
  11. 11. Effecting Change in Teaching• The strategy has to focus on teaching and learning first and technologies second. – Operations have to be grounded in the same understanding of being learning led and technology enabled. – This means that the Unit responsible for operations must understand teaching and learning and that technologies must take second place to good teaching and learning practices. 11
  12. 12. Teaching First, Technologies Second Teaching Intended Assessmentand Learning Learning Tasks Activities Outcomes 12
  13. 13. Teaching First, Technologies Second Teaching Intended Assessmentand Learning Learning Tasks Activities Outcomes Technologies 13
  14. 14. Teaching First, Technologies Second• Working with teachers necessarily entails looking at: – A philosophy of teaching i.e. how do we think people learn? – A pedagogical approach e.g. problem based learning, collaborative learning etc. – A strategy for making use of the technologies e.g. judicious use of the discussion forum. – Tactics to make it work e.g. support, guidance, encouragement.• Good instructional designers are invaluable. 14
  15. 15. Teaching• If we can get teachers thinking about their teaching then effective use of technologies can follow.• Change is happening: – Sage on the Stage (King, 1993) – Guide on the Side (King, 1993) – Meddler in the Middle (McWilliam, 2008)• Think of the flipped classroom for an instantiation of these changes. 15
  16. 16. Technological Support / TrainingTechnical training without pedagogy may not be the wayto go . . . 16
  17. 17. Pedagogical Support / TrainingWorkshops with a pedagogical focus will likely be moreeffective in getting teaches to change their teaching. 17
  18. 18. Pedagogical Support / Training• From an operational point of view professional development can be offered: 1. Across the University as a whole 2. Across an entire Faculty 3. At a departmental level 4. At a program level 5. To individuals in their offices• Each level is important for different reasons and each has advantages and disadvantages. 18
  19. 19. Education 3.0 19
  20. 20. Education 3.0• In the previous section we talked about the need for teachers to change how they teach if technologies are going to be used appropriately for teaching and learning.• This means a driver around teaching change . . .• Education 3.0 might be considered as the concept to drive changes in teaching i.e. the required sense of urgency identified by Kotter (1995) as essential to achieving successful change. 20
  21. 21. Education 3.0• Education 3.0 (Keats & Schmidt, 2007) is a term that has multiple meanings: – Broadly speaking the term refers to the nature of a transformed education system suitable for 21st century learners. – Transformation takes into account both discipline knowledge and skills and more general attributes that learners will need. – The transformation also takes the ubiquitous nature of technologies into account. 21
  22. 22. Education 3.0• Not sure that there is anything new in the concept of Education 3.0 as the key ideas have been expressed in other contexts (The National Leadership Council for Liberal Education and America’s Promise, 2007).• Perhaps Web 3.0 is a useful way to capture some key ideas to embody a perspective on what 21st century education might look like.• HKU / other institutions are certainly changing with 4 year curriculum, OBL, Experiential Learning and eLearning strategy. 22
  23. 23. Education 3.0• Whilst there have been major educational changes i.e. changes in what is taught and how it is taught there is a question whether these changes will be sufficient in the longer term to deliver a relevant education.• Are institutes of higher education moving at a pace that will allow them to keep up with the nature of “knowledge” in the 21st Century (Siemens, 2005).• We can explore this through looking at what’s around the corner with eLearning. 23
  24. 24. Future Directions in eLearning 24
  25. 25. Openness, Mobility, Analytics• We might point to three trends in education that are currently significant: – Open content refers to the availability of courses and other educational resources available to anyone who wants to make use of them (Seely Brown & Adler, 2008). – Mobile learning so that learning can happen anytime, anywhere. – Analytics to monitor and support students during the learning process. 25
  26. 26. Openness, Mobility, Analytics• We are talking about more than technologies here.• In the bigger scheme of things knowledge is being produced, distributed and consumed in different ways.• Together, openness, mobility and analytics could re- define what it means to get an education.• Institutes of higher education – some at least – may find themselves competing with alternative providers valued by employers. 26
  27. 27. MOOCs 27
  28. 28. MOOCs• It is unclear what impact Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) will have on the educational landscape.• Whatever the reality turns out to be, Clay Shirky may be right that there has been a fundamental paradigm shift in our understanding of how education can be delivered.• Think Napster and then transpose to the educational system. 28
  29. 29. iTunes U Application
  30. 30. iTunes U 30
  31. 31. iTunes U 31
  32. 32. iTunes U Application “The free iTunes U app gives students access to all the materials for a course in a single place. Right in the app, students can: play video or audio lectures, read books and view presentations, see a list of all the assignments for the course and check them off as they’re completed. When teachers send a message or create a new assignment, students receive a push notification with the new information”.• 32
  33. 33. YouTube Channel 33
  34. 34. YouTube Edu 34
  35. 35. YouTube Edu• Create a YouTube Channel.• Become a YouTube Channel partner.• Self-identify in the partner application process as an educational institution.• Content is then automatically considered for inclusion in YouTube Edu.• Is this more than lecturing online?• What are the drivers here – open source content / marketing? 35
  36. 36. Agile Devices and Applications 36
  37. 37. Agile Devices and Applications• “I am using the term ‘agile’ here to signal a new technology space in between handheld and portable. Devices which fit this space are particularly useful for teaching and learning purposes, as they offer the flexibility needed for modern learning practices. It has taken the iPad to really cement this space although there will be countless others arriving in the market fairly soon. Whether or not they will offer the right blend of features successfully of course remains to be seen” (Wilson, 2012). 37
  38. 38. Agile Devices and Applications• There is a lot of hype and a lot of subjectivity in claims made about the value of the iPad in education.• Only a limited number of the 200, 000 + applications are specifically educational.• Whether there is actual educational benefit still has to be shown through scholarly research.
  39. 39. Agile Devices and Applications “Our study suggests that there is a paucity of applications that truly extend capability, much of what these application allow can be done with other devices, and this leads us to conclude that the current trajectory will not revolutionizeteaching and learning. The lack of collaboration capabilities underlie this point, as do the overwhelming number of application that are simply drill and practice or focused on delivering content for consumption, not creation or re-use” (Murray and Olcese, 2011).
  40. 40. Pocket Body by Pocket Anatomy 40
  41. 41. Pocket Body by Pocket Anatomy 41
  42. 42. Pocket Body by Pocket Anatomy• University of California, Irvine, School of Medicine 2010 medical students given an iPad.• New iMedEd Initiative at UCIrvine to develop a fully digital curriculum.• Trying to blend technology into an innovative and interactive learning environment to facilitate a move away from traditional lecturing model. 42
  43. 43. Pocket Body by Pocket Anatomy• Loading relevant software to facilitate the learning of anatomy.• Enabling students to share documents with themselves, other students and faculty from inside the lab.• Internet enabled so that students can access external resources and update installed apps. 43
  44. 44. Learning Analytics 44
  45. 45. Learning Analytics• E2Coach is built on the Michigan Tailoring System (MTS), an open-source software system built to enable tailored communication. 45
  46. 46. Learning Analytics• E2Coach draws data from many different sources. Primarily, they survey the students at the beginning of the course to find out important academic information, goals for this course, and psycho-social factors.• Additionally, real-time data is fed into E2Coach as the semester progresses. This includes exam scores, Mastering Physics scores, iclicker scores, and enrollment data.•• 46
  47. 47. Learning Analytics• When they combine this knowledge with detailed information about students, including their current status in courses, MTS enables them to deliver individually personalized content to every student – to say to each what they would say if they could sit down with them for a personal chat.• 47
  48. 48. Learning Analytics• Content of the messages is based the collective expertise of students, instructors, and behavior change experts.• They have extensively reviewed literature from the Physics Education community, on Behavioral Change theory, and the Tailoring community.• 48
  49. 49. • Beer, C., Jones, D., & Clark, K. (2009). The Indicators Project Identifying Effective Learning : Adoption , Activity , Grades and External Factors. Same places, Different Spaces. Proceedings ascilite Auckland 2009 (pp. 60–70). Auckland, New Zealand: ascilite. Retrieved from 49
  50. 50. References• Browne, T., Jenkins, M., & Walker, R. (2006). A Longitudinal Perspective Regarding the Use of VLEs by Higher Education Institutions in the United Kingdom. Interactive Learning Environments, 14(2), 177–192.• Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age. Retrieved from 50
  51. 51. References• King, A. (1993). From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side. College Teaching, 41(1), 30–35. Retrieved from• Keats, D., & Schmidt, J. P. (2007). The Genesis and Emergence of Education 3.0 in Higher Education and Its Potential for Africa. First Monday, 12(3), 2007. Retrieved from fm/article/view/1625/1540 51
  52. 52. References• Kotter, J. P. (1995). Why Transformation Efforts Fail. Harvard Business Review, March/April(61), 59–67. Retrieved from change/ar/1• Malikowski, S. R. (2011). A Three Year Analysis of CMS Use in Resident University Courses. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 39(1), 65–85. 52
  53. 53. References• McWilliam, E. (2008). Unlearning How To Teach. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 45(3), 263–269.• Murray, O. T., & Olcese, N. R. (2011). Teaching and Learning with iPads, Ready or Not? TechTrends, 55(6), 42–48. 0540-6 53
  54. 54. References• The National Leadership Council for Liberal Education and America’s Promise. (2007). College Learning For the New Global Century. A Report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education and America’s Promise. Washington DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Retrieved from inal.pdf 54
  55. 55. References• Seely Brown, J., & Adler, R. P. (2008). Minds on Fire: Open Education, the Long Tail, and Learning 2.0. Educause Review, 43(1), 17–32. Retrieved from education-long-tail-and-learning-20 55
  56. 56. References• Zemsky, R., & Massy, W. F. (2004). Thwarted Innovation - What Happened to e-learning and Why? A Final Report for The Weatherstation Project of The Learning Alliance at the University of Pennsylvania in cooperation with the Thomson Corporation. (pp. 1– 76). Pennsylvania: The University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from innovation-what-happened-e-learning-and-why 56