An interactive discussion on the Innovating Pedagogy 2019 report from The Open University
About the Guest
Rebecca is a senior lecturer in the Institute of Educational Technology (IET) at The Open University in the UK and a senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy. Her primary research interests are educational futures, and how people learn together online and I supervise doctoral students in both these areas.
Rebecca worked for several years as a researcher and educator on the Schome project, which focuses on educational futures, and was also the research lead on the SocialLearn online learning platform, and learning analytics lead on the Open Science Lab (Outstanding ICT Initiative of the Year: THE Awards 2014). She is currently a pedagogic adviser to the FutureLearn MOOC platform, and evaluation lead on The Open University’s FutureLearn MOOCs. She is an active member of the Society for Learning Analytics Research, and have co-chaired many learning analytics events, included several associated with the Learning Analytics Community Exchange (LACE), European Project funded under Framework 7.
Rebecca’s most recent book, Augmented Education, was published by Palgrave in spring 2014.
Mor, Y., Ferguson, R., & Wasson, B. (2015). Editorial: Learning design, teacher inquiry into student learning and learning analytics: A call for action. British Journal of Educational Technology, 46(2), 221–229. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12273
Hansen, C., Emin, V., Wasson, B., Mor, Y., Rodriguez-Triana, M., Dascalu, M., … Pernin, J. (2013). Towards an Integrated Model of Teacher Inquiry into Student Learning, Learning Design and Learning Analytics. Scaling up Learning for Sustained Impact – Proceedings of EC-TEL 2013, 8095, 605–606. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40814-4_73
how to decolonize educational technology: MOOCs coming from the big colonial powers, not from small countries. Video games: many have very colonial perspective
strategies for innovative pedagogies: only certainly groups or aspects taking into account; rarely focus on support by management, scheduling, time tabling, tech support.
Coiner of the term “Digital Native” and author of seven books and over 100 essays, Marc has spoken in over 40 countries, and his writings have been translated into a dozen languages. He currently promotes a new civilization-level alternative in global education, championing an emerging new “Real-World-Impact Education” paradigm that more directly benefits students and the world in which they live.
Previously in his career Marc taught French, mathematics and music and headed an alternative school in New York City, worked as a consultant at the Boston Consulting Group (and was its first Product Development Director), and founded and ran a computer game company. Marc holds an MBA degree from Harvard, with distinction, and a Master of Arts in Teaching degree from Yale.
his new education plan would work in practice. What would it take to get there from here?
Bryan Alexander’s Future Trends Forum with Guest Sue Bohle, Serious Play Conference
An interactive discussion on gaming in education
January 17, 2 – 3 PM (EST)
Sue Bohle, Executive Director, Producer, Serious Play Conference, for a lively discussion on gaming in education.
Sue is a leader in the space and has seen tremendous growth and potential of serious games in corporate training and eLearning. The interview has been edited for clarity and length.
++++++++
notes from the webinar:
i had issues connecting and the streams of the guest speaker (Sue) and Bryan will stall when each of them were talking.
examples for formally learning through games
I’d love to hear Sue chat about: Students as game authors, what do you do to encourage reflection on game events?
Dan LaSota:
Is there any intersection between “Minds on Fire” from Mark Carnes, https://reacting.barnard.edu and your conference?
Dan LaSota
To me “simulation” means some scenario that can be rapidly run again and again, with the user/player tweaking variables and seeing what happens. If it’s “fun” there is more of an intersection with games. If not so fun, it might be considered by most more of a model. Computers can and do help with the iteration process because they can reset to T=0 much quicker than human players. Although “role play” is also a kind of simulation.
Facebook group the Tribe:
Minecraft in education.
John Gould with Drexel: he is going now after the school boards about games in education
Noreen Barajas Horizon Project Director, Educause
AI book integrated in junior high Seattle Michelle Zimmerman, article in Forbes,
Keven Diel Lockhead expert on AI, military
gaming as a way to bypassing the metacognitive (thinking about thinking). Without teaching about learning. Number of libraries Nebraska State: games are developed by libraries.
Tobee Soultie gaming industry. National Intelligence Agency for first response and refurbished for teachers and bullying.
Are you seeing enrollments change? Which technologies hold the most promise? Will your campus become politically active? What collaborations might power up teaching and learning?
the big technological issues for the next year?
robotics? automation in education? big data / analytics?
organizational transformation. David Stone (Penn State) – centralization vs decentralization. technology is shifting everywhere, even the registrar. BA – where should be the IT department? CFO or Academic Department.
difference between undergrads and grad students and how to address. CETL join center for academic technologies.
faculty role, developing courses and materials. share these materials and make more usable. who should be maintaining these materials. life cycle, compensation for development materials. This is in essence the issues of the OER Open Education Resources initiative in MN
BA: OER and Open Access to Research has very similar models and issues. Open access scholarship both have a lot of impact on campus finances. Library and faculty budges.
Amanda Major is with Division of Digital Learning as part of Academic Affairs at UCF: Are there trends in competency-based learning, assessing quality course and programs, personalized adaptive learning, utilizing data analytics for retention and student success? BA: CBL continue to grow at state U’s and community colleges.
BA for group discussions: what are the technological changes happening this coming year, not only internally on campus, but global changes and how thy might be affecting us. Amazon Dash button, electric cars for U fleet, newer devices on campus
David Stone: students are price-sensitive. college and U can charge whatever they want and text books can raise prices.
The survey findings are from the responses of 109 deans of four-year colleges and universities in March and April 2017. Of the respondents, 61 percent were from public universities and 60 percent have been in their jobs at least five years.
Deans were divided on whether faculty members get enough support in teaching courses online–43 percent said faculty are getting shortchanged in how much help they get in rethinking their courses and teaching with technology, while 40 percent said they believe they are getting enough support and 14 percent are neutral.
One-third of deans agree online courses are comparable to face-to-face courses, and roughly the same proportion said they disagree.
Thirty-seven percent of college deans surveyed described the pace of change at their own institutions as “too slow.” Deans surveyed cite lack of money being the biggest hurdle to change, followed by resource constraints on faculty and staff and a resistance or aversion to change.
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.
Future Trends Forum hosted by Bryan Alexander will address the most powerful forces of change in academia. The founder of the online blog Future Trends in Technology and Education will begin a weekly forum taking place on Thursdays at 2:00 p.m. EST. The goal of the forum is to advance the discussion around the pressing issues at the crossroads of education and technology. Future Trends Forum will feature weekly online video chat conversations where practitioners in the field can contribute and share their most recent experiences in technology and education.
As the cost of sensors and the connectivity necessary to support those sensors has decreased, this has given rise to a network of interconnected devices. This network is often described as the Internet of Things and it is providing a variety of information management challenges. For the library and publishing communities, the internet of things presents opportunities and challenges around data gathering, organization and processing of the tremendous amounts of data which the internet of things is generating. How will these data be incorporated into traditional publication, archiving and resource management systems? Additionally, how will the internet of things impact resource management within our community? In what ways will interconnected resources provide a better user experience for patrons and readers? This session will introduce concepts and potential implications of the internet of things on the information management community. It will also explore applications related to managing resources in a library environment that are being developed and implemented.
Education in the Internet of Things Bryan Alexander, Consultant;
How will the Internet of Things shape education? We can explore this question by assessing current developments, looking for future trends in the first initial projects. In this talk I point to new concepts for classroom and campus spaces, examining attendant rises in data gathering and analysis. We address student life possibilities and curricular and professional niches. We conclude with notes on campus strategy, including privacy, network support, and futures-facing organizations.
What Does The Internet of Things Mean to a Museum? Robert Weisberg, Senior Project Manager, Publications and Editorial Department; Metropolitan Museum of Art;
What does the Internet of Things mean to a museum? Museums have slowly been digitizing their collections for years, and have been replacing index cards with large (and costly, and labor-intensive) CMS’s long before that, but several factors have worked against adopting smart and scalable practices which could unleash data for the benefit of the institution, its collection, and its audiences. Challenges go beyond non-profit budgets in a very for-profit world and into the siloed behaviors learned from academia, practices borne of the uniqueness of museum collections, and the multi-faceted nature of modern museums which include not only curator, but conservators, educators, librarians, publishers, and increasing numbers of digital specialists. What have museums already done, what are they doing, and what are they preparing for, as big data becomes bigger and ever more-networked? The Role of the Research Library in Unpacking The Internet of Things Lauren di Monte, NCSU Libraries Fellow, Cyma Rubin Fellow, North Carolina State University
The Internet of Things (IoT) is a deceptively simple umbrella term for a range of socio-technical tools and processes that are shaping our social and economic worlds. Indeed, IoT represents a new infrastructural layer that has the power to impact decision-making processes, resources distribution plans, information access, and much more. Understanding what IoT is, how “things” get networked, as well as how IoT devices and tools are constructed and deployed, are important and emerging facets of information literacy. Research libraries are uniquely positioned to help students, researchers, and other information professionals unpack IoT and understand its place within our knowledge infrastructures and digital cultures. By developing and modeling the use of IoT devices for space and program assessment, by teaching patrons how to work with IoT hardware and software, and by developing methods and infrastructures to collect IoT devices and data, we can help our patrons unlock the potential of IoT and harness the power of networked knowledge.
Lauren Di Monte is a Libraries Fellow at NC State. In this role she develops programs that facilitate critical and creative engagements with technologies and develops projects to bring physical and traditional computing into scholarship across the disciplines. Her current research explores the histories and futures of STEM knowledge practices.
I’m not sure if the IoT will hit academic with the wave force of the Web in the 1990s, or become a minor tangent. What do schools have to do with Twittering refrigerators?
Here are a few possible intersections.
Changing up the campus technology space. IT departments will face supporting more technology strata in a more complex ecosystem. Help desks and CIOs alike will have to consider supporting sensors, embedded chips, and new devices. Standards, storage, privacy, and other policy issues will ramify.
Mutating the campus. We’ve already adjusted campus spaces by adding wireless coverage, enabling users and visitors to connect from nearly everywhere. What happens when benches are chipped, skateboards sport sensors, books carry RFID, and all sorts of new, mobile devices dot the quad? One British school offers an early example.
New forms of teaching and learning. Some of these take preexisting forms and amplify them, like tagging animals in the wild or collecting data about urban centers. The IoT lets us gather more information more easily and perform more work upon it. Then we could also see really new ways of learning, like having students explore an environment (built or natural) by using embedded sensors, QR codes, and live datastreams from items and locations. Instructors can build treasure hunts through campuses, nature preserves, museums, or cities. Or even more creative enterprises.
New forms of research. As with #3, but at a higher level. Researchers can gather and process data using networked swarms of devices. Plus academics studying and developing the IoT in computer science and other disciplines.
An environmental transformation. People will increasingly come to campus with experiences of a truly interactive, data-rich world. They will expect a growing proportion of objects to be at least addressable, if not communicative. This population will become students, instructors, and support staff. They will have a different sense of the boundaries between physical and digital than we now have in 2014. Will this transformed community alter a school’s educational mission or operations?
