Professor Curt Bonk has produced many resources pn blended learning I attach some video links below
“Video Primers in an Online Repository for e-Teaching and Learning” (V-PORTAL)
- Watch & Find Resources (Firefox preferred):
- For faster access, watch in Bonk’s YouTube Channel (use any browser
- Read about Possible Uses
- Planning an Online Course
- Managing an Online Course: General
- Managing an Online Course: Discussion Forums
- Providing Feedback
- Reducing Plagiarism
- Building Community
- Building Instructor and Social Presence
- Online Relationships: Student-Student, Student-Instructor, Student-Practitioner, Student-Self
- Fostering Online Collaboration/Teaming
10. Finding Quality Supplemental Materials
11. Blended Learning: General
12. Blended Learning: Implementation
13. Blended Learning: The Future
14. Online Writing and Reflection Activities
15. Online Visual Learning
16. Using Existing Online Video Resources
17. Webinars and Webcasts
18. Podcasting Uses and Applications
19. Wiki Uses and Applications
20. Blog Uses and Applications
21. Collaborative Tool Uses and Applications
22. Hands-On/Experiential Learning
23. Coordinating Online Project, Problem, and Product-Based Learning
24. Global Connections and Collaborations
25. Assessing Student Online Learning
26. Ending, Archiving, Updating, and Reusing an Online Course
27. Trends on the Horizon
Note: These 27 video primers designed during 2009-2010, finalized and announced October 2010.
Important Acknowledgment: I want to acknowledge and publicly express thanks to the School of Education at Indiana University in Bloomington which funded this highly valuable and momentous production effort. In particular, the IU School of Education Instructional Consulting office and the Instructional Systems Technology (IST) Department played key roles in their planning, generation, and dissemination.
Permissions Note: You have permission to make a Web link to these videos, share information about these contents with others, or translate the contents to another language, as long as the contents (i.e., the movies) included here abide by the Creative Commons license notes below. As a courtesy to the Indiana University School of Education and Dr. Curt Bonk, the host of the 27 video primers, please send an e-mail to Professor Bonk (cjbonk@indiana.edu) to let him know how you are using these learning resources (i.e., the intended purpose) as well as who is using them. Thank you.
These videos are available under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 license. For more information, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Alternative Access Sites:
King Khalid University, Abha, Saudi Arabia; http://elc.kku.edu.sa/en; http://elc.kku.edu.sa/en/27-videos-for-teaching-online
Amended Recommendations following meeting on 26/7/10
Technology to Support and Enhance Learning REVSD RECOMMENDATIONS.docx
Please send comments, revision, further suggestions to david.longman@newport.ac.uk
Summary Report submitted 23/7/10:
Technology to Enhance and Support Learning Report.doc
Please send comments, revision, further suggestions to david.longman@newport.ac.uk
Technology to Enhance and Support Learning (TEL)
There are several key elements of TEL that must be taken account of in developing our pedagogy in order to meet the needs of work-based, flexible, part-time and diverse students.
These elements are presented in no particular order but they are presented as problematic. TEL is frequently treated as a list of useful, often gee-whiz examples of clever technologies that do all sorts of marvellous things (see here for a useful list ). It is that of course, and we have to be impressed by the fantastic array of what are basically pedagogical devices that aid and support communication and self-expression in almost any way that can be conceived of - and the field is still evolving.
The problem of definition
Most definitions of TEL are in fact circular, usually of the form: "Technology enhanced learning (or TEL) refers to the support of any learning activity through technology" (Wikipedia). Put like this, all learning, everywhere at any time is enhanced by technology, whether that be language itself, pebbles in a sandbox, paint daubed on a wall, marks made in a wax table or whatever. However, we usually take the 'technology' to refer to digital technologies of various kinds, and usually in turn this is taken to refer to the World Wide Web.
This is problematic because, lacking precision, we usually find we are talking about our preferences rather than a systematic overview of how technology in general, and digital technology in particular, enhances learning. The problem of definition is a real one and it affects our how orgnaisational and pragmatic responses. For the present discussion it is assumed that TEL refers to the use of online, networked communication tools and processes combined with resource creation and distribution, and supported by management tools of varying sophistication (record-keeping, assessment, tracking etc.). There is a wider discussion to be developed based on a typology of different types of applications and assistive devices that can combine with these applications to provide not 'just' tools, but also intellectual and affective augmentation, new kinds of activity contexts for practical learning (e.g. new kinds of games). Finally, of course, technology is an important object of study in its own right (indeed, an essential object of study).
Staff Development
Staff development needs in 2010 are different from those of 2006 (obviously). They will be different again in 2014. As the general culture of ICT evolves, awareness and expectations are changed, almost without any direct and active intervention. Technology is 'normalised' but volatile. What we accept today as part of the 'background' of our technological norms is radically different from even a few years ago.
Staff development may be the wrong level of focus. It usually implies that teaching staff are the ones who need the change, the development. But in institutional terms it is equally true that senior management, administrative staff, and support services need to 'get with the programme'. Indeed, it may be more important for the effectiveness of pedagogy that the organisational infrastructure promotes, enables and requires the use of technology routinely, in quotidian fashion. It is not enough for teaching staff to be required to work in technologically enhanced ways. Everyone must do so.
Technological change
TEL is far from static. It moves so rapidly that no sooner have we got a grip on one set of tools than they are superseded, re-versioned or yet new tools come into play. This presents a development problem because we cannot rely on the formation of internal, institutional norms for TEL. We may think that a centralised, portal style VLE/MLE is a good thing (Moodle, Blackboard etc.) but only because we have learned to tame it and bring it under our control (and of course we may debate extensively as to how effectively we have tamed and domesticated such tools). Meanwhile the world of digital pedagogy just keeps moving and very soon what we are doing now seems dated and probably not even fit for purpose. Here, email could well be a paradigmatic example of a technology that in its day was a breakthrough but which is now quite widely regarded as antiquated and part of the problem rather than a solution. (See for example Google's advertising promotions for Google Docs that do just this).
Information overload
Technology has dramatically increased enormously the quantity of information that is out there to be processed, synthesised and integrated by teachers and students. In almost every discipline and in almost every form of educational practice there is radical and exponential proliferation of ideas, debates and sources. This is compounded by the constant proliferation of new tools that appear to help us manage this overload - it's a double overload: more data and more new tools to manage the data (e.g. look at Pivot). This is the phenomenon of information overload coupled with channel overload. It relates back too to the first element, the problem of staff development, which is not only an issue of 'skills' training but also an issue how we think about what we do, about the domain content in which we work, and how, to put it simply, we learn to cope with this exponential growth in the content and form of our disciplines.
Myth of the Disappearing Teacher
TEL is dogged by complex rhetoric about student-centredness, about constructivist approaches to learning, collaboration, personalised learning, the independent learner, the lifelong learner, the student as customer and of course 21st century skills and so forth. In the rhetoric the role of teacher often fails to get a look-in, appearing no more strongly than the ‘guide on the side’.
For example, see the programme details for the JISC Learning in Digital Wales conference. Hardly an explicit mention of teachers and teaching in the entire programme - yet without teachers and their concerns in the foreground we can have no education system of any real value, notwithstanding the School of Everything, or NotSchool which of course rely on teachers. And in HE the 'lecture' is often used as an emblem of everything that is supposedly bad about teaching (authoritarian, non-participative), yet in most implementations of (so-called) e-learning the lecture model still prevails, even if only tacitly or in disguised form.
The teacher remains at the centre of the teaching-learning nexus and as long as we deny the pivotal role of a teacher-centred pedagogy TEL cannot work. Indeed, TEL may depend on it. For it is in the nature of learning that there will always be experts and novices, teachers and students. If we subscribe too completely to the myth of the disappearing teacher, that learning is something that only learners do, and if we add to that the idea that technology reduces still further the guiding, steering, exemplifying role of the teacher then we have put technology on a pedestal it does not deserve.
For example, Twitter is well-named for what it does - it informs but it does not educate. There are no teachers in Twitter - only crowds throwing pebbles back and forth. Or Wikipedia, sometimes put forward as an example of the wisdom of crowds, but by its nature it can make no new discoveries - it only repeats what is already known (though it is more accurate and reliable than many give it credit for).
Institutional conservatism
FE and HE need to old things in new ways but our institutions may be too slow to adapt. We may also need to do new things in ways we have yet to foresee. And all the while we aim to preserve our socio-political right to set standards and award degrees, even as the context for these standards is changing so rapidly that we can no longer be sure they are relevant (for a satire on this see The Saber-Tooth Curriculum – first written in 1939, so this is not a new problem). As outlined in The Edgeless University learning technology poses a threat to the 'cartel' of HE. We must take this threat seriously. (See also the Open Courseware ‘Movement’ - MIT, OU, or the illichian School of Everything).If we believe in the myth of the disappearing teacher, if learners really can learn by constructivism alone, then who needs a University anyway?
Real problems
TEL is inevitable and necessary – but it is not sufficient. If we rely solely on the wisdom of the crowd, or the ReTweet, then we are in danger of closing the Zone of Proximal Development to the point where we can all work unaided but we never venture into the unknown or the new. We can foresee a kind of pedagogical entropy arising, a sort of ‘heat death’ of the pedagosphere. If we abandon teachers as pivotal, causal agents, and if we allow them only a ‘facilitative’ role a possible consequence is that no new knowledge enters the cultural system – our ‘cultural capital’ is reduced to one huge, normative Wikipedia.
Thus there are some real educational issues that must be addressed by teachers, by lecturers, academics and researchers, if knowledge is to advance and if students and learners are to be equipped to take our society into the future and meet the challenges of an overpopulated, under-resourced planet. Here is just one, identified by the CLEX report:
“Information literacies, including searching, retrieving, critically evaluating information from a range of appropriate sources and also attributing it – represent a significant and growing deficit area.”
This view matches that of the CIBER group at UCL in their research ResearcheroftheFuture:
"... it would be a mistake to believe that it is only students’ information seeking that has been fundamentally shaped by massive digital choice, unbelievable (24/7) access to scholarly material, disintermediation, and hugely powerful and influential search engines. The same has happened to professors, lecturers and practitioners. Everyone exhibits a bouncing/flicking behaviour, which sees them searching horizontally rather than vertically. Power browsing and viewing is the norm for all."
Here is a concrete problem that must be addressed by all teachers regardless of discipline. What is the difference between ‘vertical’ and ‘horizontal’ search? Doe sit matter?
One way or another, the ‘new pedagogy’ underlying TEL must respond to these changes in how we get knowledge and how we corroborate knowledge. What is effective searching? What is effective evaluation? Bookish models (that even now tend to dominate HE) may no longer apply; even such hallowed formats as the Royal Society model of the scientific paper must gradually give way to something more appropriate to a more complicated, internetworked, hypertextual intellectual environment.
The Employer
It is of course essential that the 'employer' (whoever that is, and whatever type of business it is) realises that the boundary between education and work is now far more flimsy and permeable than ever it was. So, the employer too is a pedagogue and must contribute actively to the support of work-based learners.
This may be a critical aspect of the transformation in educational provision that we are seeking. If work-based learning is to success the employer must learn how to support, coach, mentor, drive the work-based learner. This must be dome in some kind of partnership with the education provider. And it cannot be a passive partnership. The ‘employer’ (admittedly a highly heterogeneous group) must participate actively in some form of pedagogy. (Perhaps here there is a place for an employer focussed training course).
Obvious resources suggest themselves. Employers must supply adequate ICT facilities in the work-place to include broadband access and video support for synchronous meetings. (Providers and employers should work together to describe a technology platform that should be provided).
Another aspect of this relationship is that while work-based learning is intended to be flexible for the learner this should not mean that it is the FE/HE provider who provides all accommodation. 'Flexibility' is in fact a fairly complex idea - it should not mean for example that progress through a programme of learning can occur when and where it suits the individual entirely, otherwise we could end up with a burdensome administrative load and a highly individualised tutorial system (which might work for very small programmes but can't scale up). It should also mean that both the employer and the education provider maximise opportunities for learners to engage with their goals and tasks as required.
Technology can of course facilitate flexibility by changing the constraints of time and space so as to make access to essential tutorial support and guidance timely and relevant. But technology does not provide flexibility on its own. Flexibility is a social construct created by the employer, the student and the education provider.
Curriculum Insularity
Do disciplines and domains always know best what TEL they need? Should not a Learning Innovation Panel audit curriculum groups to ask: what is the pedagogy here; how will technology enhance the learning in your subject?
Draft Report on Technology Enhanced Learning (also in Staff Development)
=========================================================================================================================
Articles:
This is a few years ago, it could have been placed in pedagogy but thought it would be better here.
Changing role of the teacher final july 7th.doc
========================================================================================================
Palmer and Holt (2009) look at the positive impact that online learning environments, and especially online engagement can have from a learner and tutor perspective. It confirm the earlier work which has been done in showing not only engagement, but increasing performance for students using the medium.
================================================================================================================
Bibliography
Bradwell, P. (2009). [PDF] The Edgeless University: Why Higher Education must embrace technology. London: DEMOS. URL: http://www.demos.co.uk/files/Edgeless_University_-_web.pdf (Retrieved: 4/11/2009)
Buckingham, D. (2007). Children's Learning in the Age of Digital Culture. Cambridge: Polity.
Buckingham, D. and Willett, R. (eds). (2006). Digital Generations: Child, Young People, and New Media. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Ass.
CIBER. (2008). [PDF] Information Behaviour of the Researcher of the Future. London: University College London (UCL). URL: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/slais/research/ciber/downloads/ggexecutive.pdf (Retrieved: 15/9/08).
Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience (CLEX). (2009). [PDF] Higher Education in a Web 2.0 World: Report of an independent Committee of Inquiry into the impact on higher education of students' widespread use of Web 2.0 technologies. Bristol: Committee of Inquiry into the Changing Learner Experience. URL: http://www.clex.org.uk/CLEX_Report_v1-final.pdf (Retrieved: 8/6/09).
Franklin T. and van Harmelin M. (2007). [PDF] Web 2.0 for Content for Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. Franklin Consulting. URL: http://franklin-consulting.co.uk/LinkedDocuments/Web2-Content-learning-and-teaching.pdf (Retrieved: 30/3/10).
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2009). [PDF] Enhancing learning and teaching through the use of technology: A revised approach to HEFCE's strategy for e-learning. HEFCE. URL: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/Pubs/hefce/2009/09_12/09_12.pdf (Retrieved: 30/3/10).
Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE). (2005). [PDF] HEFCE strategy for e-learning. HEFCE. URL: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/hefce/2005/05_12/05_12.pdf (Retrieved: 30/3/10).
Higher Education Funding Council for Wales (HEFCW). (2008). [PDF] Enhancing Learning and Teaching through Technology: a Strategy for Higher Education in Wales. Cardiff: HEFCW. URL: http://www.hefcw.ac.uk/documents/publications/circulars/circulars_2008/W08%2012HE%20circ.pdf (Retrieved: 30/3/10).
Palmer, S. and Holt, D. (2009) Staff and student perceptions of an online learning environment: Difference and development. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology 2009, 25(3), 366-381. at http://www.ascilite.org.au/ajet/ajet25/palmer.html [Accessed 07/06/10]
Krause K. [PDF] Enhancing Student Engagement in the First Year: 10 Strategies for success. Queensland, Australia: Griffith Institute for Higher Education. URL: http://www.griffith.edu.au/gihe/pdf/gihe_tipsheet_web_ese.pdf (Retrieved: 30/3/10).
Mayes, T., Morrison, D., Mellar, H., Bullen, P. and Oliver, M. (eds). (2009). Transforming Higher Education Through Technology-Enhanced Learning. York: Higher Education Academy. URL: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/learningandtech/Transforming.pdf
Nicholas, D. and Rowlands, I. (eds). (2008). Digital consumers : reshaping the information professions. London: Facet.
Selwyn, N. (ed). (2008). [PDF] Education 2.0? Designing the web for teaching and learning: A commentary by the Technology Enhanced Learning phase of the Teaching and Learning Research Programme. London: ESRC/TLRP. URL: http://www.tlrp.org/pub/documents/TELcomm.pdf
=============================================================================
Glamorgan has spent a long time looking at the use of Technology to Enhance Learning and Teaching. (TEL)
In particular we have reflected on the way learning in the workplace can be mediated by TEL. This paper has its place in both the Learning through Employment section and this one. As it looks at the ways technology can be used to enhance learning in work based environments.
While Sugata Mitra's approach is specific to an Indian context it is not only innovative, but address the independent learning of young learners.
Effective Practice in a Digital Age http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/publications/effectivepracticedigitalage.pdf is designed for those in further and higher education who aim to enhance the student learning experience through apt and imaginative uses of technology. A visually rich publication, Effective Practice in a Digital Age outlines key aspects of designing learning in a technology-rich context and is structured to address the needs of experienced practitioners as well as those new to technology-based learning and teaching – the ten newly researched case studies offer a choice of pathways reflecting the diversity of approaches taken by practitioners in current UK practice. NB: This publication has also been cross referenced into pedagogical Innovation
The Higher Education Academy published the book Transforming Higher Education Through Technology Enhanced Learning in December 2009
http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/York/documents/ourwork/learningandtech/Transforming.pdf .
Although the book has its genesis in the e-learning Benchmarking & Pathfinder Programme led by the Higher Education Academy from 2005-2008 readers will find that the book contains a thought-provoking edited collection which offers far more than a straightforward account of outcomes of one national programme; you will find that it is both broad in scope and reflective in tone. You may also find the Glamorgan case study (included in Chapter 13) relevant to the issue of matching policy to student expectations.
========================================================================================================
The role of Web 2.0 in achieving Learning 2.0
The development of Web 2.0 as a support for learners is also an emerging field in TEL. GIven the pervasiveness of social netowrking, we need to consider its use in Learning and Teaching. The Educuase report Beyond the Campus highlights that "Higher education’s purpose is to equip students for success in life—in the workplace, in communities, and their personal lives. While this purpose may have remained constant for centuries, the world around colleges and universities is undergoing significant change. Higher education is under pressure to meet greater expectations, whether for student numbers, educational preparation, workforce needs, or economic development. Meanwhile, the resources available are likely to decline. New models, an intense focus on the student experience, and a drive for innovation and entrepreneurism will ensure that higher education continues to meet society’s needs. Information technology supports virtually every aspect of higher education, including finances, learning, research, security, and sustainability, and IT professionals need to understand the range of problems their institutions face so they apply IT where it brings greatest value. Creating this future will require collaboration across organizational and national boundaries, bringing together the collective intelligence of people from backgrounds including education, corporations, and government."
Alexander's (2008) article Social Networking in Higher Education makes the point that the ability to interact in the web 2.0 world is as important a literacy as reading and writing have been considered in the past.
I've mixed feelings about this. within the last two years I've co-authored a paper which argues we shouldn't go into the student learning space - Get out of My Space and another which argues that learning works more effectively when we are engaged within the learners' social communities - Facebook: Social or Learning Communities . As we say in the conclusion to the latter paper:
"This paper therefore suggests that it is not possible to create an overarching pedagogical conclusion about the effect of social networking in learning communities. Rather it argues that individual academics will need to make informed judgements in consultation with their students about the effectiveness of the use of social networking sites in particular learning contexts."
But in planning for delivery in 2010 and beyond we can not ignore the implication of Web 2.0 forms of interaction.
This useful blog post summarises the use of social networking for induction and socialisation. Given that we will be socialising students into HE in a variety of locations and with little or no previous experience of HE, this may be a key element for us to explore.
=========================================================================================================
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.