A presentation provided to staff at the University of Queensland associated with 'Tech Week'. The presentation addressed issues such as: Microcredentials, Productivity tools and behaviours, Advances in AI in learning and teaching, Cheating vs Authentic Assessment and LMS and its evolution/ecology

1. CRICOS Provider No: 00300K (NT/VIC) 03286A (NSW) RTO Provider No: 0373 TEQSA Provider ID PRV12069
Student productivity and agency: New ways of
conceiving of technology enhanced learning
Professor Michael Sankey, Education Strategy
Director, Learning Futures and Lead Education Architect
Education Strategy
President, Australasian Council on Open Distance and eLearning (ACODE)
michael_sankey

2. Charles Darwin University acknowledges all
First Nations people across the lands on
which we live and work, and we pay our
respects to Elders both past and present.
2

3. 1. Microcredentials
2. Productivity tools and behaviours
3. Advances in AI in L&T
4. Cheating vs Authentic Assessment
5. LMS and its evolution/ecology
I’m going to cover
3

4. Microcredentials
4
https://bryanmmathers.com

5. 5
https://bryanmmathers.com

6. 6
https://www.dese.gov.au/higher-education-publications/resources/national-microcredentials-framework

7. • The framework defines microcredentials as a certification
of assessed learning or competency, with a minimum
volume of learning of one hour and less than an AQF
award qualification, that is additional, alternate,
complementary to or a component part of an AQF award
qualification.
Definition
7

8. This definition is supported by a number of unifying principles;
that microcredentials should be:
• Outcome-based.
• Responsive to industry-need.
• Tailored to support lifelong learning.
• Transparent and accessible.
Unifying principles
8

9. Proposed ‘Marketplace’
9
For illustration purposes only, not the real site
• First iteration went down like a led
balloon
• There is some hope, as there was
strong backlash from private sector
providing a way forward
• Still agreeing on some key
definitions
• Yet to resolve alignment with other
portals and programs
For illustration purposes only, not the real site

10. • The recommended standards necessarily consider portability
primarily amongst Australian institutions, for the benefit of
Australian learners. Relationships with international
qualification schema and/or industry credentials may be able to
be articulated in the future. While use of the guidance in this
document is voluntary and recognition of prior learning or
credit will remain a decision for individual universities, it is the
aim that microcredentials consistent with standards of
portability will be able to be quickly and simply assessed for
recognition by universities and other providers.
Need for portability
10
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/210929-Guidance-for-portability-of-Australian-microcredentials-UA.pdf

11. Principles (precis)
• Portability of microcredentials requires a set of minimum or baseline standards to enable easy
evaluation of a credential by parties other than the issuer.
• Aligned with AQF as governed by the Higher Education Standards (HES) defined the TEQSA Act
2011.
• Institutions decide if standards apply to non-award courses including microcredentials.
• The standards are principles-based.
Recommended Standards
1. Microcredentials have clear evidence of achievement or learning outcome;
2. Microcredentials have an understandable unit of exchange; and
3. Microcredentials are quality assured and verifiable, with sufficient, relevant metadata.
Recommended standards for
Microcredentials
11
https://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/210929-Guidance-for-portability-of-Australian-microcredentials-UA.pdf

12. • Institutional Student Management Systems (SMS) and Course
Management Systems (CMS) have not caught-up
• Alignment in these systems is key to sustainability
• We see a number of tools enter the market to help, but still
quite piecemeal at present
• Our ‘Traditional’ LMSs are not ideal for MCs (some have a short
course frontend)
• So, we have a bit of catch-up to play
Alignment with existing programs
12

13. Productivity tools and behaviours
13

14. BlackBoard
& associated tools
O365
& associated tools
Pre Uni Undergraduate Post-graduate Work
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3-4
Work focused patterns for student usage
Workplace technologies
O365
& associated tools
BlackBoard
& associated tools

15. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/11/artificial-intelligence-writing-universities-plagiarism
Advances in AI in L&T
15

16. • Writing assistance
• For example, if a piece of writing was 49% written by AI, with the
remaining 51% written by a human, is this considered original work?
• Grammarly, etc. Other cloud-based writing tools with automatic text
generation, extraction, prediction, mining, form-filling, paraphrasing,
translation and transcription, etc.
• Knowledge banks: Help with revision identifying
gaps targeting pre-produced sets of materials
• Tailoring exam Q’s
• We need to be really really interested
in this space before it over runs us
Yes and No
16

17. 17
https://intelligence.weforum.org/topics/a1Gb0000000pTDREA2?tab=publications

18. • There are 1281 sites associated with academic
fraud and contract cheating blocked by CDU.
• 84% provided by TEQSA represent.
• Its one thing to say we need to change assessment
to be more authentic, but we need to be able to
back that up in a consistent way.
• That means $’s
• Two steps: Teachers need a meta understanding
around how they are teaching, and
• Need assessment mentors to help them
Cheating vs Authentic Assessment
18

19. 19
3507
1570
853
1173
1698
10
3742
8060
3023
2690
8608
9971
9999
9117
1312
1278
3212
7533
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Month
2020
2021
2022

20. 20

21. Think:
Human voice
Images
Collaboration
Peer-review
Poster
ePortfolio/reflection
WIL
21

22. https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol19/iss2/02/
22

23. 23

24. 24
Breakout discussion. The #1 issue in
your mind (two heads are better than
one)

25. 1. What interests you enough in terms of using tech to
advance teaching or students’ learning?
2. State this issue as a question. If I did this would this…?
3. Who else may be interested in this with you?
4. Do you have access to existing data that can help you
address your question, or what data might you need to
collect?
5. What will I do on Monday? Note one thing
Planning Activity (what will I do on Monday)
25

26. 26
https://towardsdatascience.com/the-old-saying-two-heads-are-better-than-one-4c7d133e16a4
https://www.copperbottom.net/blog/2016/11/7/why-two-heads-are-better-than-one
https://www.teachwire.net/news/two-heads-are-better-than-one-why-teachers-should-talk-to-their-tas
• Learning Designers centrally/schools based and
• Learning design officers and Junior Learning Designers
centrally
• Education designers, focused on curriculum (non-
academic), centrally (ITaLI)
• Academic leads with a specific focus (academic roles)

27. “We are now realising that what was conceived as being
good online learning is being challenged by some of the
newer more student-centred approaches to learning and
teaching. Not the least of these being due to the
technologies that have evolved to allow us to be way more
collaborative.” (p.22)
Sankey 2022
Final word
27
https://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol19/iss2/02/
michael_sankey