The Hottest Topics in Edtech for 2022
https://www.iste.org/explore/education-leadership/hottest-topics-edtech-2022
8. Augmented, mixed and virtual reality
7. Social-emotional learning
6. Equity and inclusion
5. Online tools and apps
4. Distance, online, blended learning
3. Computer science and computational thinking
2. Instructional design and delivery
1. Project-based learning
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5 Emerging Technology Trends Higher Ed Is Watching for in 2022
https://edtechmagazine.com/higher/article/2021/12/5-emerging-technology-trends-higher-ed-watching-2022
- Increased Adoption of Learning Analytics and Adaptive Learning
- Growth of Mobile Learning in Higher Ed
- Smarter Artificial Intelligence–Powered Tutors
- The Rise of Short-Form, Video-Based Learning
- Advanced VR and Immersive Learning Technologies
5 higher-ed programs using XR to transform how college students learn
Colleges and universities are using virtual and augmented reality in courses that range from human anatomy to media as a way to make education more immersive and inclusive.
medical school students at Colorado State University’s Clapp Lab reach for virtual reality (VR) headsets, which dangle from the ceiling of the 2,500 square foot facility.
Distance learning in VR
Building community and critical thinking skills
Exploring XR storytelling
Evaluating the influence of media in XR
At Syracuse University’s Newhouse School of Public Communications, Associate Professor T. Makana Chock is conducting research on storytelling in XR
++++++++++++++++++
More immersive and higher Ed in this blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=immersive+higher+ed
Digital Learning Compass: The Distance Education Enrollment Report 2017
https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/read/digital-learning-compass-distance-education-enrollment-report-2017
In higher education, 29.7% of all students are taking at least one distance course.
The total distance enrollments are composed of 14.3% of students (2,902,756)
taking exclusively distance courses and 15.4% (3,119,349) who are taking a
combination of distance and non-distance courses. The vast majority (4,999,112,
or 83.0%) of distance students are studying at the undergraduate level.
Almost half of the distance education students are concentrated in just five percent of the institutions, while the top 47 institutions, only 1.0% of the total, enroll 23.0% (1,385,307) of all distance students.
The total number of students studying on campus (those not taking any distance course or taking a combination of distance and non-distance courses) dropped by almost one million (931,317) between 2012 and 2015. The largest declines came at for-profit institutions, which saw a 31.4% drop, followed by 2-year public institutions, which saw a 10.4% decrease.
++++++++++++
2019 Online Education Trends Report
https://www.bestcolleges.com/perspectives/annual-trends-in-online-education/
69% of online students identified employment as their primary goal for entering a program. 17% are grad students.
Seventy percent of administrators said they launch new programs with enrollment growth in mind, while meeting marketing and recruitment goals was their top concern.
++++++++++++
2018 Student Guide to Online Education
https://www.bestcolleges.com/perspectives/annual-student-guide-to-online-education/
++++++++++++++++
2017 Online Education Trends Report
2017 Online Education Trends Report
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/survey/survey-faculty-attitudes-technology
++++++++++
more on distance education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=distance+education
Transactional Distance
online learning is most effective when the perceived pedagogical distance between the instructor and students in the course is minimized with increased interaction; Interaction occurs through learner-instructor communication, learner-learner collaboration, and learner-content engagement. All three levels of interaction have important implications for effective online learning
popular:
8 Tips To Minimize Transactional Distance In eLearning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transactional_distance
dissertations:
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cehsdiss/51
https://etd.auburn.edu/bitstream/handle/10415/5764/Dissertation_lebeck.pdf
http://faculty.jou.ufl.edu/mleslie/spring96/moore.html
Classes:
https://ci484-learning-technologies.wikispaces.com/Transactional+Distance+Theory
By M. Moore:
Moore, M. (1972). Learner autonomy: The second dimension of independent learning.Convergence, 5, 76-88.
Moore, M. (1973). Toward a theory of independent learning and teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 44, 661-679.
Moore, M. (1993). Theory of transactional distance. In D. Keegan (Ed.), Theoretical principles of distance education (pp.22-38).New York: Routledge.
Moore, M. G. (1989). Editorial: Three types of interaction. The American Journal of Distance Education, 3 (2), 1-6.
Moore, M. G. (2007). The theory of transactional distance. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook of distance education (2nd ed.), (pp.89-105). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Moore, M. G., (2013). Handbook of distance education (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge
Community of Inquiry (CoI)
The Community of Inquiry theoretical framework focuses on the degree of presence in the online learning environment. Presence is vital to student success in online courses. There are three types of presence that must be maintained: 1. Social presence to increase learners’ sense of community in the online environment, 2. Cognitive presence to enable learners to construct meaning from the online experience, and 3. Teaching presence to increase learner perception of the instructor’s ability to provide structure and direction in the online environment
popular:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_of_inquiry
https://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/Community_of_inquiry_model
https://coi.athabascau.ca/coi-model/
peer reviewed:
https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/18714/INTHIG%20369%20INTRO.pdf
https://www.academia.edu/398997/A_Constructivist_Approach_to_Online_Learning_The_Community_of_Inquiry_Framework
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED387454
By Garrison:
Garrison, D. R., & Akyol, Z. (2013). The community of inquiry theoretical framework. In M. Moore, Handbook of Distance Education (3 ed.) (pp. 104-119). New York: Routledge.
Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical inquiry in a text-based
environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2/3), 87-105.
Garrison, D.R. and Arbaugh, J.B. (2007). Researching the Community of Inquiry framework:
Review, issues, and future directions. The Internet and Higher Education 10(3): 157–172 (2007).
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. American Journal of Distance Education, 19, 133-148.
+++++++++++++++++++++
more on distance education in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=distance+education
I am including a couple whitepapers you can review and forward to all staff who may be curious about our teaching and learning tool and would be attending the demo on May 11th at 1.00pm
Please see the go to meeting instructions for our Bluepulse v1.5 walkthrough.
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/822849653
United States: +1 (312) 757-3126
Access Code: 822-849-653
As you mentioned faculty may be very interested in using Bluepulse, I wanted to include the link for our instructor video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgdpQT3jkBQ&feature=youtu.be
If you have any questions about the integration, training or implementation, please do not hesitate to email or call and as always I am more than happy to help.
Warm regards,
Nick Sankar
Bluepulse Account Manager
MY NOTES:
http://www.explorance.com/
harvest students; feedback – anonymous way to ask questions. D2L surveys offer already this opportunity; Twitter and other the free options for polling apps give the same option, e.g. Polleverywhere gives a word cloud option
the follow up q/n as demonstrated is limited to 160 characters. Why?
i like that it compartmentalize the anonymity but I really ask myself: would SCSU faculty go to such length?
presumptions: non-tenured faculty is interested in the top layers students and wants to find out what works for them best. this loaded, since, if there ARE different learning styles, then what worked for the top layer might be exactly what did not work for the bottom layer, but this approach will gave the faculty a justification to keep stratifying students, instead of thinking of diverse ways to approach all layers. this part of sale, not pedagogy. sorry.
weakness; the entire presentation is trying to sell a product, which might be good for different campus, but not for SCSU, where faculty are overworked, the class load is so great that going to such details might be questionable.
exporting CSV for data massaging is not big deal. indeed the easy of this particular software is admirable, but if the faculty has time to go into such details, they can export the data from D2L or Google Forms and open it in SPSS
Greg’s question: mobility.
libraries and services. pole users without being tied to course. again, that all can be done with other services in the library. if the library cares about it at all.
Please have a list of free and SCSU hosted resources for lecture capturing:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/10/31/mnscu-mediaspace-aka-kaltura/
http://media4.stcloudstate.edu
http://www.techsmith.com/jing.html
Other free, shareware and paid sources in our former IMS blog entry:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2013/10/24/whiteboard-screencasting-apps-please-enter-your-choices-and-suggestions/