more on AI in this IMS blog
more on VR in this IMS blog
Far too often, cybersecurity awareness-raising training fails to account for how people learn and proven ways to change behaviors. The cybersecurity community too easily falls into the trap of thinking that “humans are the weakest link.” In this talk, Dr. Jessica Barker will argue that, if humans are the weakest link, then they are our weakest link as an industry. With reference to sociology, psychology, and behavioral economics, as well as lessons from her professional experience, Jessica will discuss why a better understanding of human nature needs to be a greater priority for the cybersecurity community.
Outcomes: Explore how we can apply knowledge from other disciplines to improve cybersecurity awareness-raising training and communications * Understand where the cybersecurity industry can improve with regards to awareness, behavior, and culture * Develop ideas to improve how you communicate cybersecurity messages and conduct awareness-raising training
more on cybersecurity in this IMS blog
eXtended reality (XR) technologies present opportunities to advance the higher education mission and prepare students for a new world of human/machine interaction. In this interactive session, we will explore what is being done today and what is possible in four key areas of XR: use, technology, content development, and gamification.
*Identify best-of-class tools and methods available for the design and support of XR in higher ed
* Explain to campus stakeholders the potential of XR to support pedagogy, research, and student success
* Understand the areas of focus of our growing XR community of practice and how you can participate
more on gamification in this IMS blog
Cross-Institution & Cross-Sector Collaboration Long-Term Trend: Driving Ed Tech adoption in higher education for five or more years
Although a variety of collaborations between higher education and industry have emerged, more-explicit frameworks and guidelines are needed to define how these partnerships should proceed to have the greatest impact.
links to the Webinar on the report:
link to the transcript: https://events.educause.edu/~/media/files/events/educause-live/2018/live1808/transcript.docx
Proliferation of Open Educational Resources Mid-Term Trend: Driving Ed Tech adoption in higher education for the next three to five years
The United States lags on the policy front. In September 2017, the Affordable College Textbook Act was once again introduced in both the US House of Representatives and the Senate “to expand the use of open textbooks
It is unlikely that ACTA will pass, however, as it has been unsuccessfully introduced to two previous Congresses.
The Rise of New Forms of Interdisciplinary Studies
Faculty members, administrators, and instructional designers are creating innovative pathways to college completion through interdisciplinary experiences, nanodegrees, and other alternative credentials, such as digital badges. Researchers, along with academic technologists and developers, are breaking new ground with data structures, visualizations, geospatial applications, and innovative uses of opensource tools.
Growing Focus on Measuring Learning
As societal and economic factors redefine the skills needed in today’s workforce, colleges and universities must rethink how to define, measure, and demonstrate subject mastery and soft skills such as creativity and collaboration. The proliferation of data-mining software and developments in online education, mobile learning, and learning management systems are coalescing toward learning environments that leverage analytics and visualization software to portray learning data in a multidimensional and portable manner
Redesigning Learning Spaces
upgrading wireless bandwidth and installing large displays that allow for more natural collaboration on digital projects. Some are exploring how mixed-reality technologies can blend 3D holographic content into physical spaces for simulations, such as experiencing Mars by controlling rover vehicles, or how they can enable multifaceted interaction with objects, such as exploring the human body in anatomy labs through detailed visuals. As higher education continues to move away from traditional, lecture-based lessons toward more hands-on activities, classrooms are starting to resemble real-world work and social environments
Authentic Learning Experiences
An increasing number of institutions have begun bridging the gap between academic knowledge and concrete applications by establishing relationships with the broader community; through active partnerships with local organizations
Improving Digital Literacy Solvable Challenge: Those that we understand and know how to solve
Digital literacy transcends gaining discrete technological skills to generating a deeper understanding of the digital environment, enabling intuitive and discerning adaptation to new contexts and cocreation of content.107 Institutions are charged with developing students’ digital citizenship, promoting the responsible and appropriate use of technology, including online communication etiquette and digital rights and responsibilities in blended and online learning settings. This expanded concept of digital competence is influencing curriculum design, professional development, and student-facing services and resources. Due to the multitude of elements of digital literacy, higher education leaders must obtain institution-wide buy-in and provide support for all stakeholders in developing these competencies.
Despite its growing importance, it remains a complex topic that can be challenging to pin down. Vanderbilt University established an ad hoc group of faculty, administrators, and staff that created a working definition of digital literacy on campus and produced a white paper recommending how to implement digital literacy to advance the university’s mission: https://vanderbilt.edu/ed-tech/committees/digital-literacy-committee.php
Adapting Organizational Designs to the Future of Work
Technology, shifting information demands, and evolving faculty roles are forcing institutions to rethink the traditional functional hierarchy. Institutions must adopt more flexible, teambased, matrixed structures to remain innovative and responsive to campus and stakeholder needs.
Attempts to avoid bureaucracy also align with a streamlined workforce and cost elimination. Emphasis has been placed on designing better business models through a stronger focus on return on investment. This involves taking a strategic approach that connects financial practice (such as analyzing cost metrics and resource allocation) with institutional change models and goals.124
Faculty roles have been and continue to be impacted by organizational change, as well as by broader economic movements. Reflective of today’s “gig economy,” twothirds of faculty members are now non-tenure, with half working part-time, often in teaching roles at several institutions. This stands as a stark contrast to 1969, when almost 80 percent of faculty were tenured or tenuretrack; today’s figures are nearly inverted. Their wages are applying pressure to traditional organizational structures.Rethinking tenure programs represents another change to organizational designs that aligns with the future of work.
Organizational structures are continuing to evolve on the administrative side as well. With an emphasis on supporting student success, many institutions are rethinking their student services, which include financial aid, academic advising, and work-study programs. Much of this change is happening within the context of digital transformation, an umbrella term that denotes the transformation of an organization’s core business to better meet customer needs by leveraging technology and data.
added Nov 13, 2018
6 growing trends taking over academic libraries
Short-Term, 1-2 years):
(Mid-Term, 3-5 years):
(Long-Term, 5 or more years):
more on the NMC Horizon Report in this IMS blog
Notes from the webinar:
What is Digital Learning
Technology is a metaphor for change, it is also a metaphor for risk
technology is a means of uncertainly reduction that is made possible by the cause-effect relationship upon which the technology is based.
technology innovation creates a kind of uncertainty in the minds of potential adopters as well as represent an opportunity for reduced uncertainty.
The Diffusion of Innovations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion_of_innovations
technology is disruptive
as per https://www.amazon.com/Death-Dying-Doctors-Nurses-Families/dp/1476775540
The key campus tech issues are no longer about IT (in the past e.g.: MS versus Apple). IT is the “easy part” of technology on campus. The challenges: people, planning policy, programs, priorities, silos, egos, and IT entitlements
How do we make Digital Learning compelling and safe for the faculty? provide evidence of impact, support, recognition and reward for faculty; communicate about effectiveness of and need for IT resources.
technology is not capital cost, it is operational cost. reoccurring.
underlying issues; can i do this? why should i do this? evidence of benefit?
the more things change, the more things stay the same. new equilibrium.
change: from what did you do wrong to how do we do better. Use data as a resources, not as a weapon. there is a fear of trying, because there is no recognition or reward
Machiavelli: 1. concentrate your efforts 2. pick your issues carefully, know when to fight 3. know the history 4. build coalitions 5. set modest goals – and realistic 6. leverage the value of data (use it as resource not weapon) 7. anticipate personnel turnover 8. set deadlines for decisions
We apologize for the short notice, but wanted to make you aware of the following opportunity: provide
From Ken Graetz at Winona State University:
As part of our Digital Faculty Fellows Program at WSU, Dr. Kenneth C. Green will be speaking this Thursday, March 22nd in Stark 103 Miller Auditorium from 11:30 to 12:30 on “Innovation, Infrastructure, and Digital Learning.” We will be streaming Casey’s talk using Skype Meeting Broadcast and you can join as a guest using the following link: Join the presentation. This will allow you to see and hear his presentation, as well as post moderated questions. By way of a teaser, here is a recent quote from Dr. Green’s blog, DigitalTweed, published by Inside Higher Ed:
“If trustees, presidents, provosts, deans, and department chairs really want to address the fear of trying and foster innovation in instruction, then they have to recognize that infrastructure fosters innovation. And infrastructure, in the context of technology and instruction, involves more than just computer hardware, software, digital projectors in classrooms, learning management systems, and campus web sites. The technology is actually the easy part. The real challenges involve a commitment to research about the impact of innovation in instruction, and recognition and reward for those faculty who would like to pursue innovation in their instructional activities.”
Dr. Green is the founding director of The Campus Computing Project, the largest continuing study of the role of digital learning and information technology in American colleges and universities. Campus Computing is widely cited as a definitive source for data, information, and insight about IT planning and policy issues affecting higher education. Dr. Green also serves as the director, moderator, and co-producer of TO A DEGREE, the postsecondary success podcast of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. He is the author or editor of some 20 books and published research reports and more than 100 articles and commentaries that have appeared in academic journals and professional publications. In 2002, Dr. Green received the first EDUCAUSE Award for Leadership in Public Policy and Practice. The EDUCAUSE award cites his work in creating The Campus Computing Project and recognizes his, “prominence in the arena of national and international technology agendas, and the linking of higher education to those agendas.”
Casey’s most recent TO A DEGREE podcasts are available now: Presidential Leadership in Challenging Times and Online’s Bottom Line.
Hope to see some of you online and please forward this invitation to anyone who might be interested.
Ken Graetz, PhD, Director of Teaching, Learning, and Technology Services, Winona State University, 507-429-3270
Part 1: September 13, 2017 | 1:00–2:30 p.m. ET
Part 2: September 19, 2017 | 1:00–2:30 p.m. ET
Part 3: September 28, 2017 | 1:00–2:30 p.m. ET
Digital badges are receiving a growing amount of attention and are beginning to disrupt the norms of what it means to earn credit or be credentialed. Badges allow the sharing of evidence of skills and knowledge acquired through a wide range of life activity, at a granular level, and at a pace that keeps up with individuals who are always learning—even outside the classroom. As such, those not traditionally in the degree-granting realm—such as associations, online communities, and even employers—are now issuing “credit” for achievement they can uniquely recognize. At the same time, higher education institutions are rethinking the type and size of activities worthy of official recognition. From massive open online courses (MOOCs), service learning, faculty development, and campus events to new ways of structuring academic programs and courses or acknowledging granular or discrete skills and competencies these programs explore, there’s much for colleges and universities to consider in the wide open frontier called badging.
During this ELI course, participants will:
NOTE: Participants will be asked to complete assignments in between the course segments that support the learning objectives stated above and will receive feedback and constructive critique from course facilitators on how to improve and shape their work.
Jonathan Finkelstein, CEO, Credly
Jonathan Finkelstein is founder and CEO of Credly, creator of the Open Credit framework, and founder of the open source BadgeOS project. Together these platforms have enabled thousands of organizations to recognize, reward, and market skills and achievement. Previously, he was founder of LearningTimes and co-founder of HorizonLive (acquired by Blackboard), helping mission-driven organizations serve millions of learners through online programs and platforms. Finkelstein is author of Learning in Real Time (Wiley), contributing author to The Digital Museum, co-author of a report for the U.S. Department of Education on the potential for digital badges, and a frequent speaker on digital credentials, open badges, and the future of learning and workforce development. Recent speaking engagements have included programs at The White House, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Smithsonian, EDUCAUSE, IMS Global, Lumina Foundation, ASAE, and the Federal Reserve. Finkelstein is involved in several open standards initiatives, such as the IMS Global Learning Consortium, Badge Alliance, American Council on Education (ACE) Stackable Credentials Framework Advisory Group, and the Credential Registry. He graduated with honors from Harvard.
Susan Manning, University of Wisconsin-Stout
In addition to helping Credly clients design credential systems in formal and informal settings, Susan Manning comes from the teaching world. Presently she teaches for the University of Wisconsin at Stout, including courses in instructional design, universal design for learning, and the use of games for learning. Manning was recognized by the Sloan Consortium with the prestigious 2013 Excellence in Online Teaching Award. She has worked with a range of academic institutions to develop competency-based programs that integrate digital badges. Several of her publications specifically speak to digital badge systems; other work is centered on technology tools and online education.
Repeatable for Credit: No
Mobile learning research, trends, instructional design strategies for curriculum integration and professional development.
Repeatable for Credit: No
Instructional design strategies that support a wide range of learner differences; create barrier-free learning by applying universal design concepts.
more on badges in education in this IMS blog
Direct to Full Text Report (49 pages; PDF)
> The post 29.126 has been niggling at me for days. I originally want to
> reply with a simple observation that the appeal to storytelling is
> cast in such a way to avoid the complications of narration’s relation
> to narrative (the telling and the told; shown and said). But it was
> the theme of “borrowing” from one domain by another that leads me to
> recall a counter-narrative where there is no need to borrow between
> domains since the military-industrial-entertainment complex is one entity.
> I contend that fundamental to human interaction is narration:
> attentiveness to how stories are related. Stories are for sorting and
> storing. *Sometimes this soothes paranoia induced by too much
> A while ago (1996), I explored recursivity and narrativity. My
> starting point was the ability to ask questions (and learn from one’s
> bodily reactions). The musings may or may not have military relevance.
> Judge for
> Pedagogical situations are sensory. They are also interpersonal.
> Because they are sensory this makes even learning by oneself interpersonal.
> Egocentric speech is like a dialogue between the senses. In
> Vygotsky’s and Luria’s experiments, children placed in problem-solving
> situations that were slightly too difficult for them displayed egocentric speech.
> One could consider these as self-induced metadiscursive moments. The
> self in crisis will disassociate and one’s questionning becomes the
> object of a question.
> Not only is the human self as a metabeing both fracturable and
> affiliable in itself, it is also prone to narrativity. That is, the
> human self will project its self-making onto the world in order to
> generate stories from sequences and to break stories into recombinant
> sequences. Its operations on signs are material practices with consequences for world-making.
> The fracturable affiliable self calls for reproductive models suitable
> to the interactions of multi-sensate beings, models that render dyads
> dialectical, questionable, answerable. Narrativity understood
> dialectically does not merely mean making sequences or strings of
> events into stories but also stories into things, strung together for
> more stories. From such an understanding, emerge non-dyadic
> narratives of reproduction, narratives where a thing-born transforms
> itself into an event, comes to understand itself as a process.
> Funny to consider that those remarks were based in a consideration of
> language and feedback mechanisms. Make me think that the storytelling
> as “potent form of emotional cueing” may be directed to undesired
> responses such as greater self-reflexivity. And depending on how they
> are parsed, Hollywood films can contribute to undesired responses
> including escape. 🙂
> Francois Lachance, Scholar-at-large
> to think is often to sort, to store and to shuffle: humble, embodied
> On Mon, 29 Jun 2015, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:
>> Sharon Ghamari-Tabrizi, in “The Convergence of the Pentagon and
>> Hollywood” (Memory Bytes: History, Technology, and Digital Culture, ed.
>> Rabinovitz and Geil, 2004), describes in some detail the adoption by
>> the U.S. military of the entertainment industry’s storytelling
>> techniques implemented by means of simulation. This chapter follows
>> on from her excellent “Simulating the Unthinkable: Gaming Future War
>> in the 1950s and 1960s”, Social Studies of Science 30.2 (2000). In
>> the 2004 piece she describes a U.S. National Research Council
>> workshop in October 1996 at which representatives from film, video
>> game, entertainment and theme-parks came together with those from the
>> Department of Defense, academia and the defense industries. There is
>> much about this convergence that we might productively take an
>> interest in. Let me, however, highlight storytelling in particular.
>> In a military context, Ghamari-Tabrizi points out, skilled
>> storytelling techniques are used to help participants in a VR
>> environment sense that they are in a real environment and behave
>> accordingly. Storytelling functions as a potent form of emotional
>> cueing that would seem to elicit the desired responses. But
>> especially interesting, I think, is the fact that “many conference
>> participants argued that the preferred mode of experiential immersion
>> in electronic media is not the unframed chaos of hypertext, but
>> old-fashioned storytelling.” She quotes Alex Seiden of Industrial
>> Light and Magic (note the date — 1996): “I’ve never seen a CD-ROM
>> that moved me the way a powerful film has. I’ve never visited a Web
>> page with great emotional impact. I contend that linear narrative is
>> the fundamental art form of humankind: the novel, the play, the film… these are the forms that define our cultural experience.”
>> Willard McCarty (http://www.mccarty.org.uk/), Professor, Department of
>> Digital Humanities, King’s College London, and Digital Humanities
>> Research Group, University of Western Sydney
issues related to MOOCs, such as intellectual property rights, privacy issues, and state regulations.
MOOCs have arrived on the scene at a time when many institutions of higher learning are in extreme financial crisis
OCLC conference, “MOOCs and Libraries: Massive Opportunity or Overwhelming Challenge? http://www.oclc.org/research/events/2013/03-18.html
The MOOC movement might change this copyright-ownership contract between university and faculty.
Stephens, M. m., & Jones, K. L. (2014). MOOCs as LIS Professional Development Platforms: Evaluating and Refining SJSU’s First Not-for-Credit MOOC. Journal Of Education For Library & Information Science, 55(4), 345-361.
xMOOCs. Using centralized learning platforms (e.g., Coursera),they emphasize individual learning usingautomated assessment tools.In contrast, cMOOCs stress the relationship between course content and a community of learners. Social learning, in thecase of cMOOCs, is emphasized through uses of distributed tools (e.g., a combination of a course site, student blogs, andsocial etworking sites) to build networks of knowledge and learners. Unlike their xMOOC counterparts, the role of an in istructor in a cMOOC is to be a “guide on the side,” a facilitator of the knowledge making process who uses connectivist learning theory (Siemens, 2004; Siemens,2012)
SPOC as the cousin of smartmobs (http://www.smartmobs.com/author/bryan/) and swarming (http://bwatwood.edublogs.org/2010/08/05/learning-swarms/)?… as per Bryan Alexander
Bryan Alexander forwarded the idea of swarming in education some 10 years go: synchronous online communication will break the brick-and-mortar classroom and must lead to offering a f2f class on a specific subject to “swarming” of interested students all around the globe around the specific subject. It was in an Educause article, which, of course, I cannot find now. The term comes from the 1999 riots in Seattle when protesters where calling each other on cells after the police hits them and were “swarming” to a different rally point.
Ah, there it is: http://www.educause.edu/ero/article/going-nomadic-mobile-learning-higher-education
Plamen Miltenoff, Ph.D., MLIS
From: Ewing, M Keith
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2013 11:55 AM
Subject: First MOOCs, now SPOCs
“Harvard plans to boldly go with ‘Spocs’”
SPOC = Small Private Online Course
Well, not so small and private—still large, but not thousands.
“The smaller class size will allow “much more rigorous assessment and greater validation of identity and that will be more closely tied to what kind of certification might be possible,” he [Prof Robert Lue] says.”
Previous 1 2