During a Dec. 8 Future Trends Forum video chat hosted by futurist Bryan Alexander, several liberal arts technology leaders spoke about their efforts to define their colleges’ approach to digital innovation.
As an example of a more promising liberal arts partnership, Eshleman pointed to LACOL, the Liberal Arts Consortium for Online Learning. LACOL’s nine member institutions comprise Amherst, Bryn Mawr, Carleton, Haverford, Pomona, Swarthmore, Vassar, Washington and Lee and Williams. LACOL is an effort to create an experimental framework that supports project work across the nine campuses. There are interesting experiments happening on each campus, and LACOL provides opportunities to use a digital network to take those to a new level, said Elizabeth Evans, LACOL’s director, who joined Eshleman on the Future Trends Forum virtual stage to describe the consortium’s setup.
This involves a multi-campus team of faculty and instructional designers, all organized around a central project, which has its ups and downs, she added.
She said she has learned to keep the focus off of technology initially. She asks faculty members to think about what have they wanted to do around student learning and why. “It is about that first, and technology second,” she stressed, adding that she has moved away from quantitative evaluation of projects and more toward storytelling.
Disruptive innovation has been a buzzword since Clayton Christensen coined it back in the mid 1990s.
Here are four key things to remember when assessing whether the next new company is likely to disrupt your business:
1. The common understanding of disruption IS NOT disruption according to Christensen
A great article by Ilan Mocharidiscusses the misuse of the word disruption when referring to business. As he clarifies, disruption is “what happens when the incumbents are so focused on pleasing their most profitable customers that they neglect or misjudge the needs of their other segments.”
2. Disruption can be low-end or new-market
These differences are laid out in Disruptive Strategy with Clayton Christensen. Low-end disruption refers to businesses that come in at the bottom of the market and serve customers in a way that is “good enough.” In other words, they put their focus on where the greater profit margins are.
The main difference between the two types of disruption lies in the fact that low-end disruption focuses on overserved customers, and new-market disruption focuses on underserved customers.
3. Christensen’s disruption is a process, rather than a product or service
When innovative new products or services – iPhone, Tesla’s electric cars, Uber, and the like – launch and grab the attention of the press and consumers, do they qualify as disruptors in their industries? Writing in Harvard Business Review,Christensen cautions us that it takes time to determine whether an innovator’s business model will succeed.
4. Choose your battles wisely
If you are a current incumbent and want to be on the lookout for a possibly disruptive emerging business, the clarification of what disruption is certainly helps.
Understanding disruption is also helpful if you are looking for opportunities to start or scale your business
NoteBookCast is a free whiteboard tool that will work in the web browser on a laptop, iPad, Android tablet, and Windows tablet. NoteBookCast is a collaborative whiteboard tool. You can invite others to join your whiteboard by entering the code assigned to your whiteboard. You can chat while drawing on NoteBookCast whiteboards. In the video embedded below I demonstrate how to use NoteBookCast.
Web Whiteboard makes it easy to include a whiteboard in your Google+ Hangout. In the video embedded below I demonstrate how easy it is to use Web Whiteboard in a Google+ Hangout.
Stoodle is a free collaborative whiteboard tool hosted by the CK12 Foundation. You can use text chat while sharing your whiteboard. Registration is not required in order to use Stoodle. In the video embedded below I demonstrate the features of Stoodle.
The reputations of Asian universities, and Chinese universities in particular, are on the rise. China’s World Class 2.0 project, announced in August 2015, aims to strengthen the research performance of China’s nine top-ranked universities, with the goal of having six of those institutions ranked within the world’s top 15 universities by 2030.
After two decades in which China has been largely an exporter of students to Australia, Canada, the US and the UK, it is now increasingly attracting international students to study at its universities. And what is true of China is true of other countries too. Global flows of students are an increasing feature of the world’s higher education systems.
You can see the recruitment of international students as an exercise in soft power, in global engagement , in global citizenship, a great exercise in language learning , the practical application of a challenge thrown down by the great American social anthropologist Clifford Geertz.
Certainly, my friends who lead universities in Australia, Canada and New Zealand are delighted when they read politicians’ rhetoric about making it harder for international students to come to the UK.(my note, this is a Guardian article, but applies perfectly with Bush Junior politics and with the rhetoric of Trump)
The International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL) provides a forum for researchers in this field to share their knowledge and experience of combining e-learning and m-learning with other educational resources. Providing researchers, practitioners, and academicians with insight into a wide range of topics such as knowledge sharing, mobile games for learning, collaborative learning, and e-learning, this journal contains useful articles for those seeking to learn, analyze, improve, and apply technologies in mobile and blended learning. The journal spans theoretical, technical, and pedagogical issues in mobile and blended learning. These embrace comprehensive or critical reviews of the current literature, relevant technologies and applications, and important contextual issues such as privacy, security, adaptivity, and resource constraints.
Comprehensive or critical reviews of the current literature
Evaluation of mobile or blended learning in practice
Future of mobile or blended learning
Learner interaction/collaborative learning
Mobile games for learning
Mobile or blended learning applications
Mobile or blended learning applied at different levels of education from pre-school to tertiary and beyond
Pedagogical and/or philosophical underpinnings of mobile or blended learning
Privacy and security issues
Related research in learning, including e-learning and pedagogical approaches
Resource constraints in the delivery of mobile or blended learning
Reviews of the application of mobile or blended learning in multiple contexts
Role of Wikis, blogs, podcasts, messaging, other online tools, and Web 2.0 components in learning delivery
Roles of mobile, pervasive, and immersive technologies in education
Technologies that directly or indirectly support mobile or blended learning systems (devices, networks, tools etc.)
Theoretical approaches to mobile or blended learning solutions
Use of mobile or blended learning in professional environments
The primary mission of the International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning (IJMBL) is to provide comprehensive coverage and understanding of the role of innovative learning theory and practice in an increasingly mobile and pervasive technological environment. As technology enables a more seamless experience of device supported learning worlds that may integrate mobile, embedded, augmented, and immersive technologies, we may expect to see increasing interest and activity in blended approaches to learning. IJMBL brings together researchers at the forefront of this field, in both technology and pedagogical practice and assists them in the development and dissemination of new approaches to both mobile and blended learning.
long-time squabbles over promotions, resources and power create embittered workplace foes who would rather walk across the street than share a sidewalk with each other.” This is probably even more the case in government organizations than private ones, since in the private sector it is easier to get rid of problems by firing or reassigning people in dysfunctional relationships.
The first has the enormous virtue of being straightforward rather than devious or wily, tactics that always run the risk of backfiring, but even more so when relationships are already hostile. “Attempt to reconcile,” Perry urges. Try “the old-fashioned approach and sit down and propose a fresh restart,” he writes. “Bring your humility and focus on describing why a thaw is best for the team and firm. Once a détente is agreed upon, make certain to find ample opportunities to display good faith.”
seek to “partner with the adversary to navigate a crisis” as a way to repair a bad relationship.
overcoming this hostility was to put the boys in a situation where they could not deal with a problem with only the people in one group, but work by both groups was necessary. (so it is a management’s failure, what we have here, since the management does not even want to recognize that there is a problem)
The third piece of advice is to engage a broker. “Particularly for situations involving warring… senior executives,” Perry notes, “the temporary use of a broker or intermediary can facilitate progress on issues.”