What
does
the
future
of
design
for
online
learning
look
like?
Emerging
Technologies,
Openness,
MOOCs,
and
Digital
Scholarship
George
Veletsianos,
PhD
Assistant
Professor
of
Learning
Technologies
hCp://www.veletsianos.com

#icemcy12

My
research:
Students’,
Instructors’,
and
Scholars’
experiences
and
pracPces
in
digital
learning
environments.
To
design
engaging
and
effecPve
learning
environments.

Emerging
Technologies
•
May
or
may
not
be
new
technologies
•
Evolving,
“coming
into
being”
•
Go
through
“hype
cycles”
•
Not
yet
fully
understood
•
Not
yet
fully
researched
•
PotenPally
disrupPve
(but
potenPal
is
unfulfilled)
•
NegoPated
relaPonship
between
tech
&
pedagogy
(Veletsianos,
2010)

Myths & Assumptions
Myth #1: Face-to-face education is more effective/
engaging than online education.
Myth #2: Effective teaching and learning only occur
within universities/institutions.

Actual
&
potenPal
insPtuPonal
reacPons
to
MOOCs:
• Join
them
because
they
can
be
a
•
worthwhile
markePng
effort
•
a
way
to
provide
free
educaPon
•
Build
upon
emerging
business
models:
•
Accredit
MOOC
learning
•
Provide
mentoring
services
•
Reject
them
as
not
applicable
(e.g.,
different
focus)

1.
Online
EducaPon.
Check.
BUT…
I
am
concerned.

Two
Dominant
NarraPves
(that
remain
relaPvely
unquesPoned)

Dominant
NarraPves
(that
remain
unquesPoned)
1.
The
latest
technology
as
a
panacea

Dominant
NarraPves
(that
remain
unquesPoned)
2.
Online
educaPon
=
efficient
mode
of
delivery
to
large
numbers
of
students

“Strong
pressures
to
produce
mediocre
instrucPonal
products
based
on
templates
and
preexis3ng
content.”
Wilson,
Parrish,
&
Veletsianos,
2008

“Strong
pressures
to
produce
mediocre
instrucPonal
products
based
on
templates
and
preexis3ng
content.”
Wilson,
Parrish,
&
Veletsianos,
2008

“Examples
of
outstanding
[online]
instrucPon
are
hard
to
find.”
Wilson, Parrish, & Veletsianos, 2008

1. Online
EducaPon
2.
Delivery
Designing
Learning
Experiences

Our Challenge
To design learning experiences and
opportunities that can be fulfilling,
meaningful, and inspiring.

How?

CharacterisPcs
of
engagement,
meaningful
interacPon,
(&
tension)
when
parPcipaPng
online:
The
case
of
“digital
scholars”

From
digital/open
scholarship
to Networked Participatory Scholarship
The practice of scholars’ use of participatory technologies and
online social networks to share, reflect upon, critique, improve,
validate, and further their scholarship (Veletsianos & Kimmons,
2012)

From
digital/open
scholarship
to Networked Participatory Scholarship
The practice of scholars’ use of participatory technologies and
online social networks to share, reflect upon, critique, improve,
validate, and further their scholarship (Veletsianos & Kimmons,
2012)

What
do
scholars
do
on
TwiCer?
Veletsianos (2012) – Constant comparative analysis of 45
scholars’ tweets.
Faculty use these Twitter to:
Share information, resources, and media
“Open” classrooms
Expand opportunities for students’ learning experiences
Request teaching-related and research-related assistance
Manage their identities

Crowdsourcing
science

Design
consideraPons
#1
-­‐
We
co-­‐opt
technologies
for
educaPonal
and
scholarly
purposes
-­‐ Openness
&
serendipity
(in
sharing
ongoing
work,
in
seeking
to
engage)
-­‐
Value
in
fluid
networks
vs.
staPc
groups
(e.g.,
courses)

What
is
the
experience
like?
Veletsianos & Kimmons (in press) – Phenomenological
study of lived experiences in SNSs
• Process of establishing professional and personal
boundaries
• Maintaining appropriate and meaningful
connections
• Structuring participation so that others see me in a
certain light

Scholarly
IdenPty
&
ParPcipaPon
“My position [as a professor] is building a community of teachers
that I talk to ... where you can share, and so [participation in these
spaces] makes total sense.”
“I made it [Facebook] this hybrid space ... and sometimes it's
really annoying. … I keep thinking I should be writing or looking at
data, and I'm doing this! … I created the conundrum that I live in
now.”
“All the [expletive] is not really worth it. … I think that it's okay for
students to not know everything about their professor. … [These
practices] add to the complexity of those who struggle with the
home-work balance and the ... technology pull. … I don't have
time for you. “

Design
consideraPons
#2
-­‐
We
co-­‐opt
technologies
for
educaPonal
and
scholarly
purposes
-­‐ Openness
&
serendipity
(in
sharing
ongoing
work,
in
seeking
to
engage)
-­‐
Value
in
fluid
networks
vs.
staPc
groups
(e.g.,
courses)
-­‐
ApplicaPons
have
embedded
assumpPons
that
we
adopt.
Are
these
congruent
with
educaPonal
ideals?

ConsideraPons
for
engagement
&
inspiraPon:
The
case
of
Adventure
Learning
through
Water
and
MOSS
&
Project
Engage!

What
is
Adventure
Learning?
An
approach
to
the
design
of
educaPon
that
provides
learners
with
opportuniPes
to
explore
real-­‐world
issues
though
experienPal,
collaboraPve,
and
inquiry-­‐driven
environments
(Doering
2006,
2007;
Doering
&
Veletsianos,
2008;
Veletsianos
&
Kleanthous,
2009)

What
does
it
look
like?
(Doering
&
Miller,
2009)

2009 2006
Nunavut, Canada ANWR, Alaska
2010
Greenland
2007
Chukotka, Russia
2008
Fennoscandia

Adventure
Learning
through
Water
and
MOSS
h4p://3nyurl.com/mossadventure

Project
Engage!
h4p://3nyurl.com/projectengage

What
do
these
projects
have
in
common?

Design
Considera3ons
#3
-­‐ NarraPve
&
Storyline
-­‐
Sharing
with
others
-­‐
Design
opportuniPes
that
allow
engagement
beyond
course
acPviPes
(interacPon
with
experts,
authenPc
contribuPons)
-­‐
Design
for
intrigue,
risk-­‐taking,
and
challenge
-­‐
Design
for
reflecPon
(Veletsianos,
2011)

Your
gir
for
aCending!
Download
my
book
for
free:
h4p://3nyurl.com/book321
Thank
you!
hCp://www.veletsianos.com/
publicaPons
veletsianos
@
utexas.edu