The design of blended learning curriculum will be more diversified and personalized with the integration of creative in-class active learning strategies and innovative educational technologies, such as adaptive learning, virtual reality, mobile technologies
Quality assurance is the biggest challenge with implementing blended learning in the higher education environment today. I would propose institutions to adopt evidence-based standards for course evaluations. For instance, the OLC Quality Scorecard for Blended Learning Programs
Wang, Q., Quek, C., & Hu, H. (2017). Designing and Improving a Blended Synchronous Learning Environment : An Educational Design Research. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 18(3), 99-118
Definition: blended synchronous learning has attracted much attention and it is often labelled with synchronous hybrid learning (Cain & Henriksen 2013); synchronous blended learning (Okita, 201 3 ); multi – access learning (Irvine, Code, & Richards, 2013); or simultaneous delivery of course s to on – campus and off – campus students (White et al ., 2010). Adapted from the definition given by Bower , Dalgarno, Kennedy, Lee, and Kenney (2015), blended synchronous learning in this paper is defined as a learning method that enables online students to participate in classroom learning activities simultaneously via comput er – mediated communication technologies such as video conferencing . By following this approach , on – campus students attend F2F le ssons in the physical classroom. M eanwhile, online students who are situated at multiple sites participate in the identical class room learning activities via two – way video conferencing in real time .
With regard to educational benefits , blended synchronous learning can help to establish rich teaching presence, social presence, and cognitive presence ( Garrison, Anderson, & Archer, 200 0 ; Szeto, 2015 ). A BSLE provides a mimic classroom environment (White et al. , 2010) , where teachers ’ direct instruction and facilitation can be easily carried out a nd the teaching presence is hence naturally established.
“overcome achievement gaps, drive engagement and personalize learning”
The funding, which goes the school, not the individual recipient, is expected to be used for technology, professional development, curriculum and related resources.
Using laptops in class harms academic performance, study warns. Researchers say students who use computers score half a grade lower than those who write notes
findings, published in the journal Economics of Education Review in a paper, based on an analysis of the grades of about 5,600 students at a private US liberal arts college, found that using a laptop appeared to harm the grades of male and low-performing students most significantly.
While the authors were unable to definitively say why laptop use caused a “significant negative effect in grades”, the authors believe that classroom “cyber-slacking” plays a major role in lower achievement, with wi-fi-enabled computers providing numerous distractions for students.
meetings with Chief Learning Officers, talent management leaders, and vendors of next generation learning tools.
The corporate L&D industry is over $140 billion in size, and it crosses over into the $300 billion marketplace for college degrees, professional development, and secondary education around the world.
Digital Learning does not mean learning on your phone, it means “bringing learning to where employees are.” In other words, this new era is not only a shift in tools, it’s a shift toward employee-centric design. Shifting from “instructional design” to “experience design” and using design thinking are key here.
1) The traditional LMS is no longer the center of corporate learning, and it’s starting to go away.
LMS platforms were designed around the traditional content model, using a 17 year old standard called SCORM. SCORM is a technology developed in the 1980s, originally intended to help companies like track training records from their CD-ROM based training programs.
the paradigm that we built was focused on the idea of a “course catalog,” an artifact that makes sense for formal education, but no longer feels relevant for much of our learning today.
not saying the $4 billion LMS market is dead, but the center or action has moved (ie. their cheese has been moved). Today’s LMS is much more of a compliance management system, serving as a platform for record-keeping, and this function can now be replaced by new technologies.
We have come from a world of CD ROMs to online courseware (early 2000s) to an explosion of video and instructional content (YouTube and MOOCs in the last five years), to a new world of always-on, machine-curated content of all shapes and sizes. The LMS, which was largely architected in the early 2000s, simply has not kept up effectively.
2) The emergence of the X-API makes everything we do part of learning.
In the days of SCORM (the technology developed by Boeing in the 1980s to track CD Roms) we could only really track what you did in a traditional or e-learning course. Today all these other activities are trackable using the X-API (also called Tin Can or the Experience API). So just like Google and Facebook can track your activities on websites and your browser can track your clicks on your PC or phone, the X-API lets products like the learning record store keep track of all your digital activities at work.
3) As content grows in volume, it is falling into two categories: micro-learning and macro-learning.
4) Work Has Changed, Driving The Need for Continuous Learning
Why is all the micro learning content so important? Quite simply because the way we work has radically changed. We spend an inordinate amount of time looking for information at work, and we are constantly bombarded by distractions, messages, and emails.
5) Spaced Learning Has Arrived
If we consider the new world of content (micro and macro), how do we build an architecture that teaches people what to use when? Can we make it easier and avoid all this searching?
“spaced learning.”
Neurological research has proved that we don’t learn well through “binge education” like a course. We learn by being exposed to new skills and ideas over time, with spacing and questioning in between. Studies have shown that students who cram for final exams lose much of their memory within a few weeks, yet students who learn slowly with continuous reinforcement can capture skills and knowledge for decades.
6) A New Learning Architecture Has Emerged: With New Vendors To Consider
One of the keys to digital learning is building a new learning architecture. This means using the LMS as a “player” but not the “center,” and looking at a range of new tools and systems to bring content together.
On the upper left is a relatively new breed of vendors, including companies like Degreed, EdCast, Pathgather, Jam, Fuse, and others, that serve as “learning experience” platforms. They aggregate, curate, and add intelligence to content, without specifically storing content or authoring in any way. In a sense they develop a “learning experience,” and they are all modeled after magazine-like interfaces that enables users to browse, read, consume, and rate content.
The second category the “program experience platforms” or “learning delivery systems.” These companies, which include vendors like NovoEd, EdX, Intrepid, Everwise, and many others (including many LMS vendors), help you build a traditional learning “program” in an open and easy way. They offer pathways, chapters, social features, and features for assessment, scoring, and instructor interaction. While many of these features belong in an LMS, these systems are built in a modern cloud architecture, and they are effective for programs like sales training, executive development, onboarding, and more. In many ways you can consider them “open MOOC platforms” that let you build your own MOOCs.
The third category at the top I call “micro-learning platforms” or “adaptive learning platforms.” These are systems that operate more like intelligent, learning-centric content management systems that help you take lots of content, arrange it into micro-learning pathways and programs, and serve it up to learners at just the right time. Qstream, for example, has focused initially on sales training – and clients tell me it is useful at using spaced learning to help sales people stay up to speed (they are also entering the market for management development). Axonify is a fast-growing vendor that serves many markets, including safety training and compliance training, where people are reminded of important practices on a regular basis, and learning is assessed and tracked. Vendors in this category, again, offer LMS-like functionality, but in a way that tends to be far more useful and modern than traditional LMS systems. And I expect many others to enter this space.
Perhaps the most exciting part of tools today is the growth of AI and machine-learning systems, as well as the huge potential for virtual reality.
7) Traditional Coaching, Training, and Culture of Learning Has Not Gone Away
8) A New Business Model for Learning
he days of spending millions of dollars on learning platforms is starting to come to an end. We do have to make strategic decisions about what vendors to select, but given the rapid and immature state of the market, I would warn against spending too much money on any one vendor at a time. The market has yet to shake out, and many of these vendors could go out of business, be acquired, or simply become irrelevant in 3-5 years.
9) The Impact of Microsoft, Google, Facebook, and Slack Is Coming
The newest versions of Microsoft Teams, Google Hangouts and Google Drive, Workplace by Facebook, Slack, and other enterprise IT products now give employees the opportunity to share content, view videos, and find context-relevant documents in the flow of their daily work.
We can imagine that Microsoft’s acquisition of LinkedIn will result in some integration of Lynda.com content in the flow of work. (Imagine if you are trying to build a spreadsheet and a relevant Lynda course opens up). This is an example of “delivering learning to where people are.”
10) A new set of skills and capabilities in L&D
It’s no longer enough to consider yourself a “trainer” or “instructional designer” by career. While instructional design continues to play a role, we now need L&D to focus on “experience design,” “design thinking,” the development of “employee journey maps,” and much more experimental, data-driven, solutions in the flow of work.
lmost all the companies are now teaching themselves design thinking, they are using MVP (minimal viable product) approaches to new solutions, and they are focusing on understanding and addressing the “employee experience,” rather than just injecting new training programs into the company.
Some of the most outstanding findings we found in this report are:
• Despite the prevalence of social networking, online study tends to be a solitary activity: 79% of people choose not to study collaboratively when they are online.
• Students are using online platforms as an additional source to help with difficult subjects Students from non-native English speaking countries are more likely to use online tools for language learning than native English speakers are.
• Learning is lower down the list of priorities for users of mobile devices. Using mobile devices for education is quite low compared to other activities
• There is a strong trend towards visually engaging material , an area in which the offline world simply cannot compete with the online one
AECT-OTP Webinar: Digital Badges and Micro-Credentials for the Workplace
Time: Mar 27, 2017 1:00 PM Central Time (US and Canada)
Learn how to implement digital badges in learning environments. Digital badges and micro-credentials offer an entirely new way of recognizing achievements, knowledge, skills, experiences, and competencies that can be earned in formal and informal learning environments. They are an opportunity to recognize such achievements through credible organizations that can be integrated in traditional educational programs but can also represent experience in informal contexts or community engagement. Three guiding questions will be discussed in this webinar: (1) digital badges’ impact on learning and assessment, (2) digital badges within instructional design and technological frameworks, and (3) the importance of stakeholders for the implementation of digital badges.
Dirk Ifenthaler is Professor and Chair of Learning, Design and Technology at University of Mannheim, Germany and Adjunct Professor at Curtin University, Australia. His previous roles include Professor and Director, Centre for Research in Digital Learning at Deakin University, Australia, Manager of Applied Research and Learning Analytics at Open Universities, Australia, and Professor for Applied Teaching and Learning Research at the University of Potsdam, Germany. He was a 2012 Fulbright Scholar-in-Residence at the Jeannine Rainbolt College of Education, at the University of Oklahoma, USA
Directions to connect via Zoom Meeting:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/8128701328
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +14086380968,8128701328# or +16465588656,8128701328#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll) or +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 812 870 1328
International numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=EedT5hShl1ELe6DRYI58-DeQm_hO10Cp
Each student learns differently and assessment is not linear. Learning for different students can be a longer or shorter path.
representation graph:
assessment comes before badges
what are credentials:
how well i can show my credentials: can i find it, can i translate it, issuer, earner, achievement description, date issued.
the potential to become an alternative credentialing system to link directly via metadata to validating evidence of educational achievements.
DB is not an assessment, it is the ability to demonstrate the assessment.
They are a motivational mechanism, supporting alternative forms of assessment, a way to credentialize learning, charting learning pathways, support self-reflection and planning
The biggest Ohio e-school story over the past year: a push by the state education department to audit attendance at the full-time online schools using student-login records. A first round of reviews found that nine e-schools had overstated their enrollment by a combined 12,000 students. A Dispatch analysis of ECOT’s audit showed that nearly 70 percent of the school’s students missed enough school to be considered truant under state law.
Across the country, the question of how to best track and report student attendance in a full-time online school remains unresolved, contributing to the significant uncertainty around e-schools’ funding and performance.
When we first started in 1999, we included ~10 questions in addition to our standard questions that were different for online courses. This information was particularly useful as we grew our online offerings (i.e. Would you take another online course. 93-5% answered yes consistently. How would you rate the level of interactivity between you and the instructor? Between you and the other students?) These were administered via SurveyMonkey because there were no online evaluation services back then.
Now we have a single evaluation that is administered to all students regardless of the delivery format (online, hybrid, blended, F2F or intensive) The questions were designed to be relevant regardless of the delivery format. All of these evaluations are administered online…which has its downsides (e.g. response rate is less especially compared to what was captured in F2F classes in the past.) We continue to explore ways to increase the response rate.
Reta Chaffee Director of Educational Technology-Academic Affairs Granite State College 25 Hall Street Concord, NH 03301 (603) 513-1350
+++++++++++++++++++++
On Behalf Of Krajewski, Scott Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 1:00 PM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Course Evaluations
Hi Hala, We have a standard online evaluation form for all courses. We do add 3 questions to the sports courses but otherwise we’re 100% standardized. We have a ton of info at
Patrick Patrick R. Lowenthal | Associate Professor Educational Technology, Boise State University http://www.patricklowenthal.com
+++++++++++++++++++++++
On Behalf Of Rob Gibson Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 8:39 AM To:BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Course Evaluations
We use the IDEA evaluation framework combined with CampusLabs as the delivery engine.
IDEA is a well-established evaluation process dating back to the 1970s.
The CampusLabs delivery process (new as of about 2 years ago) provides students with a single URL to complete their evaluations – on-campus or on-line. Mobile friendly.
It uses the same base evaluation criteria across the university. (That’s how IDEA is able to substantiate reliability and validity.) IDEA is matched against a national database using a CIP code. Hence, faculty can gather comparative data of their course against other similar courses in the university, or at the national level.
While each department uses the same basic framework, there are modification that can be made. For example, custom questions can be added to the eval (these fall outside the scope of the comparative data) and the learning objectives can be modified by course, department, school, college. We have one School that has custom learning objectives for each course in their program. Objectives are set using a 3 point Likert scale.
