Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Enhancing learning through engaging academics as digital innovators
Diana Laurillard, London Knowledge Lab
Learning & Teaching Conference 2010
OutlineWhy is e-learning innovation so slow?
Why might we need learning technologies?
Realising their potential for learning and productivity
Making e-learning strategies work for academics
Planning the way forward
www.lkl.ac.uk
5 reasons why technology innovation is slow in education
[Laurillard, in Opening Up Education, 2008, MIT Press]
1) Digital technologies are too new, and they do everything
2) Education is a complex system of powerful, stable drivers, which do not embrace technology
3) Education leaders are not comfortable with technology as a component of strategy
4) Education is national, political, public service - not so subject to market forces, or investment in innovation
5) Lecturers have neither the motivation nor the means to innovate using technology
New media and delivery technologies for education – Recent history
Interactive computers
Local drives & discs
WIMP interfaces
Internet
Multimedia
Worldwide Web
Laptops
Search engines
Broadband
3G mobiles
Blogs
Wikis
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
- new medium for articulating ideas
- local storage with the user
- devices for ease of access to content
- mass production / distribution of content
- elaborated forms of content
- wide access to extensive content
- personal portable access to the medium
- mass delivery of messages
- easier access to extensive content
- rich content / immediate communication
- low-cost access to elaborate content
- personal mass publishing
- collections of knowledge
Writing
Paper
Indexes, paragraphs
Printing
Photos, sound, film
Libraries
Published books
Postal services
Bibliographies
Television, phones
Paperbacks
Pamphlets
Encyclopedias
0
1400s
1600s
1400s
1800s
1900s
1500s
1800s
1900s
1940s
1950s
1700s
1800s
- new medium for articulating ideas
- local storage with the user
- devices for ease of access to content
- mass production / distribution of content
- elaborated forms of content
- wide access to extensive content
- personal portable access to the medium
- mass delivery of messages
- easier access to extensive content
- rich content / immediate communication
- low-cost access to elaborate content
- personal mass publishing
- collections of knowledge
Old media and delivery technologies for education– Not so recent history
Writing
Paper
Indexes, paragraphs
Printing
Photos, sound, film
Libraries
Published books
Postal services
Bibliographies
Television, phones
Paperbacks
Pamphlets
Encyclopedias
0
1400s
1600s
1400s
1800s
1900s
1500s
1800s
1900s
1940s
1950s
1700s
1800s
Interactive computers
Local drives & discs
WIMP interfaces
Internet
Multimedia
Worldwide Web
Laptops
Search engines
Broadband
3G mobiles
Blogs
Wikis
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
Old media and delivery technologies against the new
Interactive computersLocal drives & discsWIMP interfaces
Writing
Paper
Printing
Published books
Indexes, paragraphs
Pamphlets
Photos, sound, film
Postal services
Encyclopedias
Libraries
Bibliographies
Television, phones
Paperbacks
0
1400s
1400s
1500s
1600s
1700s
1800s
1800s
1900s
1900s
1940s
1940s
1950s
2000s
Interactive computers
Local drives & discs
WIMP interfaces
Internet
Multimedia
Worldwide Web
Laptops
Search engines
Broadband
3G mobiles
Blogs
Wikis
1970s
1980s
1990s
2000s
30 years
Old media and delivery technologies against the new
5 reasons why technology innovation is slow in education
[Laurillard, in Opening Up Education, 2008, MIT Press]
1) Digital technologies are too new, and they do everything
2) Education is a complex system of powerful, stable drivers, which do not embrace technology
3) Education leaders are not comfortable with technology as a component of strategy
4) Education is national, political, public service - not so subject to market forces, or investment in innovation
5) Lecturers have neither the motivation nor the means to innovate using digital technologies
Why might we need digital technologies for learning and teaching?
• Student demand
• Strategic fit
• Learning value
• Productivity value
Not clear? Student preference – yes.
New strategic aims for university teaching
Independent learning; collaborative learning; 21C skills
Flexibility; wider reach; better use of teacher and learner time
“The key picture that emerges is that students are appropriating technologies to meet their own personal, individual needs – mixing use of general ICT tools and resources, with official course or institutional tools and resources”
[Student experiences of TEL Report, JISC, 2006]
Strategic fit
“Strategies are becoming much more embedded, with the biggest change since 2005 being the rise to prominence of e-learning strategies”. [UCISA Survey, 2008]
“Few examples of universities responding strategically, either at the level of rethinking knowledge practices in the curriculum, or at the level of integrating support for students’ digital literacies”. [Learning Literacies in a Digital Age project, 2009]
How are other HEIs doing?
• Support progression for students with diverse needs
• Enhance the profile of teaching and CPD
• Enhance links between research and teaching
Strategic fit – to Imperial
provide adaptive remedial tutoring, e.g. Maths, English e-portfolios to critique and track progress
build online communities of practice treat teaching as ‘engineering’, a ‘design science’
provide online access to authentic tasks and data use online collaboration for learners to build communities of practice
Learning value• Digital skills for work and life
• Independent learning
• Collaborative learning
Adaptive models and simulations with feedback on actionsFormative e-assessment with feedback on performanceOnline tools to structure students’ independent study
Online tools for discussion and sharing outputsInteractive simulations and modelling toolsE-portfolios for sharing and improving practice
Networking and information skills, data handling, online communication, content generation, design, presentation- For academic purposes, translating to work environments
Redesigning the university for the twenty first century
Web 2.0 provides HE with the opportunities
‘renegotiating the relationship between tutor and student…
‘each recognises and values the other’s expertise and capability’
‘drawing students into the development of approaches to teaching and learning’ (JISC 2009)
Comparing pedagogic value
F2F (N=5)
F2F (N=10)
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
100.00%
S % listeningS % speaking
Asynch (N=5)
Asynch (N=10)
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
S % readingS % writing
Tutorial with 5 and 10 students• Students spend more time
listening than speaking• Ratio worsens as group size
increases
Online tutorial with 5 and 10 students• Students spend more time
writing than reading• Ratio only slightly worse as group
size increases
E-Portfolios, Blogs, for collaboration
Impact of ‘e’ - Students can share, comment, adapt, improve
Achieving learning value
• Improvements in the quality of learning, and in student achievement are possible, but only if carefully designed
• Exploit the technology for its ability to promote active, personalised learning– Structure students’ independent collaborative work– Provide access to authentic tasks– Support adaptive and remedial tutoring– Support independent formative assessment
Productivity value• Better use of learner time
• Better use of teacher time
Support learners in their independent study
Mix face-to-face with online to achieve best fit to need
Provide access to authentic tasks
Automated formative assessment helps self-regulation
Create once – use many times
Work at scale with same quality
Encourage peer learning support
Build on and re-use others’ teaching designs (OER)
http://openlearn.open.ac.uk/
Modelling with differential equations: oscillations
A Learning Design Support Environment (LDSE) – LKL project
Build on the work of others – find relevant designs and patterns
Explain the rationale for a learning design
Compare alternative models of T & L
Edit and trial the learning design
http://www.tlrp.org/tel/ldse/
[Laurillard 2006]
T-L activities
Conventional model,
classroom based
Blended model, real and virtual,
local and global
Model returns effect of
design on ‘type of
learning’ elicited, ‘learning
experience’, ‘teacher
time’, and ‘learner time in class’
Modelling costs and benefits
Model
Staging the development
• Build on local knowledge, experience, and ideas• Adapt and build on what has gone before• Start with the simplest models with the best returns
Web presenceVodCasts Online discussion forums Web-based inquiry tools Online structured discussion groupse-PortfoliosInteractive formative assessment Collaborative simulations
www.lkl.ac.uk/ltu
Staging the development
Web presence
Online disc
ussion fo
rums
Web-based in
quiry le
arning
Online st
ructu
red discussi
on groups
Interactive fo
rmative asse
ssment
Collaborative sim
ulations0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Learning curvePreparation timeTeaching timePedagogic value
• Increasing pedagogic value correlates with worsening learning time• Teaching time needed is related to student numbers and ‘contact’ time
Model
Staging the development
• Suggests best place to start is interactive formative assessment
Web presence
Online disc
ussion fo
rums
Web-based in
quiry le
arning
Online st
ructu
red discussi
on groups
Interactive fo
rmative asse
ssment
Collaborative sim
ulations
Overall score
Overall score
Pedagogic ...
• Different orderings would be needed to prioritise pedagogic value
Preparatio...
or teacher preparation time
Achieving productivity value
• Improvements in the productivity of learning and teaching are possible, but only if carefully managed
• Exploit the technology for its ability to make better use of staff and student time– More peer-group feedback and collaboration– More online support for independent learning– Building on the work of others – re-use and
sharing
E-Learning Strategy Objectives (extract)
• monitor external and emerging developments in e-learning, with a mind to their incorporation into College programmes and educational initiatives
• identify examples and replicable models of effective e-learning by evaluating practice in learning, teaching and assessment
• monitor, share and co-ordinate where sensible e-learning developments across the College
…‘building on the work of others’…
E-Learning Strategy – a vision?
• treat teaching as a design science, more like engineering• expect it to be a continual iterative process of
improvement• use good pedagogy to challenge the use of technology• don’t expect proof that e-learning is more effective than
book learning, or any one method is better than any other – the point is to optimise
• enable academics to emulate the research model by building on each others’ work to: find, adopt, critique, adapt, test, redesign, publish
Giving academics the means to innovate with digital technologies:
ICT E-Learning Services
Educational Development
Unit
E-Learning at Imperial - roles
Developing the capability for e-learning
• Use technology for most difficult strategic aims
• Modelling the benefits and costs of time
• The means to build on others’ work
• Treat teaching as a form of engineering
• Exploit IT for active, collaborative learning
SEC
E-LSC
E-LSC
FTCs
Academics
SummaryBegin with ambitions, use technology to achieve them
Build on the work of others: share ideas, designs and tools
Plan to achieve both learning and productivity benefits
Make teaching more like design research: a learning process
Give academics the means for exploring new pedagogies
academics as digital innovators, treating teaching as a
design science
