Posts

Showing posts from 2017

The ISTE standards for students

I'm reading through Matt Bower's Design of technology-enhanced learning , and enjoying it as a refresher. It didn't take long to find a useful link, to the ISTE standards for students . I really, really like the potential of linking TEL practice with student digital literacy, and I think the ISTE standards (with their indicators) are an excellent reference for TEL designers. Weaving these standards into course design leads quite naturally into effective learning design, while contributing to digital literacy. ISTE aims to serve K12 teachers however its work looks directly relevant to all levels of TEL. In some of my own previous work I've talked about the merits of online education, compared with print-based course design . Now, I'm not suggesting that the ISTE list is, prima facie , suggesting online learning as a replacement for print-based material. It is interesting, though, to consider the merits of an online-based approach with the ISTE standards in mind

Micro-, meso-, macro-levels of TEL

Image
I’ve recently been thinking about TEL in the context of quality assurance and enhancement (QA and QE), partly inspired by trying to establish some TEL standards for learning design. It occurred early on that which standards might be appropriate depends very much on the level of practice you’re concerned with. The theme of the next EDEN conference in Genoa is “ Exploring the micro, meso and macro: Navigating between dimensions in the digital learning landscape ”. The three levels of micro, meso and macro encourage different views of practice which are extremely helpful. But what do these levels mean? Fortunately, the three levels can be made to apply to all types of products and services - making illustration easy. Consider your phone; it consists of many features (operating system, camera, storage capacity, etc) that combine to form a single product (your mobile phone), which operates within a given context (the 4G network of your telco). Or, your car; again, a collection of

Are you an online evangelical?

Image
What is your vision for online education? I've recently finished reading Edward Hamilton's Technology and the politics of university reform , and his position that there is nothing deterministic about online education, and how universities might apply it forces this question. At the heart of Hamilton's critique is, broadly, who should determine the application of online technologies to higher education: administrators, or faculties. I'll clumsily try to summarise how Hamilton contrasts the two: "Think": Brian Siewiorek, Flickr Administrators: Seeking efficiency and competitiveness (the evangelical discourse): Inevitability of change toward efficiency and access CAI (Computer Assisted Instruction) and automation The virtual university xMOOCs (illustra tive of paradigm) Faculties: Maintaining freedom and tradition Harnessing technologies to extend traditional academic role Experimentation based on faculty-driven innovation Blended learnin

Gains in online learning since 2010

TeachOnline.ca , a good source for online learning trends and info, has released a high-level view of what we've learned about online learning since 2010 . It's a good state-of-the-art summary, and a useful reference. The five questions are not my main interest here; what caught my attention is the "biggest gains in online learning since 2010" list: "Wider acceptance of online learning as being not significantly different in terms of learning outcomes than face-to-face learning", citing Russell's nsd work .  "A deeper understanding of the importance of instructional design and the ways in which course design can better engage students in their learning". "A strong investment in the professional development of faculty and instructors – more focused engagement in how best to leverage online environments for learning". "A renewed focus on learning outcomes and, more recently, competency- and capability-based learning." &

BERA Educational Technology SIG 7 April

Image
The BERA EdTech SIG met at the Open University on 7 April . It's taken a while to get to this post because of the holiday and return to work I had in the intervening time... This was the first SIG meeting for some time, and the central location (Milton Keynes) made it very accessible. The event was over-subscribed! No wonder it was popular. The theme of "Critical and theoretical approaches to research" is both timely and interesting, and the invited speakers - Prof Martin Oliver, Dr Sarah Hennessey and Prof Eileen Scanlon, with opening comments from Prof Jill Jameson - are quite a line-up. Jill started with some opening comments framing the day's theme. Drawing in particular on the works of Carr , Selwyn ( 1 , 2 ), Feenberg and Bulfin et al (all recommended reading!), Jill proposed that many in TEL reflect an "evangelistic positivism", and that much research can be described in terms of "a lack of problematisation, with superficial and naïve an

Myths about education... A counter-voice that gets you thinking

TEL isn’t just about the techie stuff, though I do like that. As I mentioned in the second post to this blog , TEL is predominately about learning, even though the ‘Learning’ part of TEL comes last. I try to read up on learning as much as I try to keep up with technological developments – and I admit that I often find the learning literature more interesting! A few years ago I purchased Daisy Christodoulou’s book Seven myths about education  (see The Guardian's review here ). The book is brief, authoritative, clear, and punchy. Christodoulou suggests that there are seven pervasive myths about how students learn, and how teachers should teach. The myths find their expression in education ministries, teacher's colleges, and right across the schooling system. I reckon the same myths are equally applied across the HE sector.  Critically, the myths are in opposition to good education practice. Her book is well worth the provocation; here’s a quick overview.  Myth

Kor blimey... Text on-screen?

Kortext have released a report, University of the Future: Transforming learning and improving value ( here to go straight to the PDF ). Main finding, from "the UK's leading provider of digital textbooks and learning solutions" is, surprisingly - " 89% of students would be more likely to attend a university that enables online collaboration and note sharing and access to the latest editions of textbooks". I wonder where they might find a vendor for such a service...? OK. Way too much sarcasm. Let's unpack the report. To begin with, the report has been researched independently by 3GEM . I have no doubts as to the validity of the responses. The headline findings are also arresting at first glance - until you try to extend some of them... "69% say that getting core textbooks included in course fees would represent greater value for money." So, 31% believe that spending on texts in addition to course fees would not represent greater value...? 

And, on the hardware side...

Image
I was fortunate to attend BETT late last month. I missed the speakers, as I could only attend one day and my primary interest wasn't software or education systems. I was interested in hardware developments . These, I think, represent very significant shifts in contemporary TEL. About a decade ago I was, I admit, somewhat bemused by the interest in mobile technologies. I was interested in the work of Traxler  and Herrington & Herrington , but these were the days before the iPad, and touch-screen technologies were not ready for everyday consumers. Talk of mobile learning was restricted to media availability through iPods; text message; and IM. Tablet technology was in its early stages, and laptops were still very bulky. There was potential, but it was, at least to me, piecemeal and multi-device dependent. Oh, how things have changed. Yes, we have had the recent explosion in iPad and Android tablets. Mobile phones are now incredibly powerful by processor, RAM, storage, screen

HEPI report - Rebooting learning for the digital age

Interesting to see this report just released from HEPI , with a focus on the use of technology in support of campus-based education. The reports makes seven recommendations: Higher education institutions should ensure that the effective use of technology for learning and teaching is built into curriculum design processes. This should include consideration of win-win methods, which offer both improved outcomes and lower costs. To support this, the UK higher education sector should develop an evidence and knowledge base on what works in technology-enhanced learning to help universities, faculties and course teams make informed decisions. Mechanisms to share, discuss and disseminate these insights to the rest of the sector will also be required. Institutions that do not currently have learning analytics in place should give consideration to adopting it at the earliest opportunity. Education researchers should consider how the learning analytics big dataset can be harnessed to provi