Archive

Archive for the ‘Future of Education’ Category

Playing Doctor – Simulations A Big Help In Medical Training

April 23rd, 2010 Jack McShea No comments

When should simulations be used in class? Do they matter or are they eye candy, empty demonstrations and a waste of time? A recent study published in Medical Teacher suggests that medical students benefit significantly in both learning and retention when high fidelity simulations are used in training. Authors Corey Heitz, Ashley Brown, James E. Johnson & Michael T. Fitch of Wright State University and Wake Forest University School of Medicine, compared the educational effects of a 90-minute live simulation to a traditional lecture.

A team of physicians assisted the in the presentation by acting the roles emergency medical staff, nurses and even family members. A computerized Laerdal SimMan(tm) was programmed to represent the patient who displayed symptoms like nausea, mental confusion and vomiting. As reported in Heitz, et al. (2009) the students were immersed in a theatrical enactment of the medial crisis:

“A Laerdal SimManTM was transported from the simulation center to the medical school lecture hall where a prerecorded EMS radio call announced the arrival of the fully clothed simulation mannequin. Resident physician actors portrayed EMS provi- ders, nurses, and family members. Student volunteers ran the case as emergency physicians and patient management decisions were guided by class input. The clinical scenario was enhanced with group discussion of the relevant basic science mechanisms underlying the autonomic nervous system, neurotransmitters, receptors, and neuropharmacology.” – Heitz et al. (2009)

The authors note that one of the key differences in this trial was the size of the group – 112 students in two groups. The live simulation was based on a clinical scenario designed to bring out basic concepts in neuroscience already presented in a lecture several days earlier by a participant who was unaware of the study.

Results of the training were measured using four multiple-choice pre-tests and post-tests.

“The primary study outcome was this comparison of student performance on a pretest compared to a posttest administered immediately after the simulation session, and participants were significantly more likely to get all four posttest questions correct after experiencing the simulation.” Heitz et al. (2009)

A follow-up post-test was given to students eleven days later to assess retention. The researchers suspect that immersion in the simulation contributed to recall:

“The concepts presented during our simulation session improved student testing immediately and may have facilitated performance on an examination 11 days later.”  - Heitz et al. (2009)

The authors conclude that the use of simulations of this kind can be valuable in medical education:

“The students not only felt the simulation experience correlated well with basic science concepts, but also showed statistically significant improvement on the pre- and posttest examinations. Our results show that this type of learning exercise may provide an alternative for ‘‘typical’’ lecture-style education.” – Heitz et al. (2009)

References.

Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center (2009, July 14). “Simulating Medical Situations Helps Students Learn, Retain Basic Science Concepts”. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 22, 2010, from http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090714085822.htm

Heitz, Corey , Brown, Ashley , Johnson, James E. and Fitch, Michael T.(2009) “Large group high-fidelity simulation enhances medical student learning”, Medical Teacher, 31: 5, e206 — e210

Emergency Simulations at Wake Forest University School of Medicine

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

All They Need Now is a Football Team – iTunes U Passes Big Milestone

December 23rd, 2009 Jack McShea 2 comments

openu_610x276According to technology blog CNET, the educational content wing of Apple’s iTunes Music site, iTunes University,  passed a milestone of over 100 million downloads this week. iTunes University is part of a mobile learning and content distribution service available through Apple’s iTunes application. As stated by Apple on their mobile learning site:

“Today’s students expect constant access to information—in the classroom and beyond. Which is why more and more faculty are using iTunes U to distribute digital lessons to their students. And now, with the 3.0 software update for iPhone and iPod touch, iTunes U is directly accessible over both cellular and Wi-Fi networks through the iTunes Store.”

Interestingly, according to CNET, one of the most popular draws on iTunes University’s bandwidth is the much esteemed Open University (OU) in the UK that had earlier tried and failed to launch an American campus in the late 1990s. A brief report of the OU’s foray into the American educational market is provided here.

The Open University is incorporated by Royal Charter in the United Kingdom but operates internationally. According to its web site the OU serves over 150,000 undergraduate and 30,000 postgraduate students. 25,000 are outside the UK. It is generally considered “the world’s first successful distance teaching university” and the United Kingdom’s only university dedicated to distance learning.

The iTunes University download service is popular among many other universities as well. Contributors include: Stanford University, Princeton, Yale, MIT, UC Berkeley, and the New Jersey Institute of Technology. A partial (and growing) list of schools providing content can be found here. Given it s recent growth and overall wide acceptance, iTunes University appears to have become a standard tool for distribution of audio and video content among American colleges and universities.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

The Inverted Classroom

November 14th, 2009 Jack McShea 2 comments

The Inverted ClassroomI’m tired of talking. Let me explain. One of the basic rules of thumb for adult learning says that a class should be a little more than half practical application and workshop material to appeal to the audience. That aside, classroom (or instructor-lead) training has become expensive, and managers and consumers have become vocal in letting us know that they want to make sure it’s worth their time and money. To be plain, are we doing all we can to make the trip worthwhile?

I have always been an advocate for lots of hands-on activity in class, probably because it matches my own learning style but also because the majority of the attendees enjoy it. Not surprisingly, in the midst of teaching a class a few years ago, I started to wonder if I could get more time for discussion and activities, and lessen the burden we all felt in getting through the lecture pieces to the workshops. In this particular case the lecture was preparatory to the workshops and provided necessary background required to complete the labs and assignments. Fortunately, in addition to instructor-lead courses, I also work on web-based training and have done many voice over and narration tracks for online and computer-based presentations. Eureka! I found a way to off-load all the passive broadcasting of background material and recoup the time for projects, experiments, discussion and debate–the things that make class interesting and engaging. Although I didn’t have a name for it, I adopted the Inverted Classroom and have since learned that many others have had, either from desire or need, their own Eureka! experiences.

The “Inverted Classroom” as coined by professors Lage, Platt and Treglia in a paper presented to the Journal of Economic Education, Winter 2000, moves away from the traditional lecture. In it they describe how they saw a need to serve a wider variety of learning styles in class:

“Recent evidence has shown that a mismatch between an instructor’s teaching style and a student’s learning style can result in the student learning less and being less interested in the subject matter (Borg and Shapiro 1996; Ziegert forthcoming). This finding implies that either educational administrators should strive to ensure a good match between the instructor’s teaching style and the students’ learning styles (a difficult task) or that concerned instructors should use a portfolio of teaching styles so as to appeal to a variety of student learning types. Unfortunately, a majority of introductory economics courses are taught using only one teaching style–the traditional lecture format (Becker and Watts 1995).”

Lage, Platt and Treglia define the inverted classroom in simple terms:

“Inverting the classroom means that events that have traditionally taken place inside the classroom now take place outside the classroom and vice versa.”

What this means is that the class is designed in such a way that “passive” activities (such as listening to a lecture) are done outside class and what was lecture is replaced by workshops, discussion, and activities that require interaction. In theory this should increase the value of class time and provide more time for new and additional material. Educators are still unsure how to optimize the inverted classroom, but what seems clear is that inverted classes will use of a mix of technologies like podcasts, DVDs, PowerPoint, text, video and interactive media in conjunction with hands-on projects and group activities.

Researchers Gerald C. Gannod, Janet E. Burge and Michael T. Helmick of Ohio’s Miami University are carrying out a study to evaluate the design and delivery of inverted classes in computer engineering. In a work-in-progress report delivered to the ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, 2007, Gannod states:

“Based on the SGID analysis performed on the course, student acceptance of the inverted classroom process has been well-received. Over eighty-five-percent of the students (in a class of twenty) have responded favorably to the inverted classroom structure, while over ninety-percent prefer the short learning activities over more prolonged assignments. In regards to the use of podcasting as a lecturing medium, students have indicated that the ability to use the play, pause, reverse, and fast-forward capabilities of the podcasted videos beneficial to their ability to learn the material.”

From the standpoint of instructor overhead, questions remain concerning the difficulty in designing, deploying and maintaining an inverted class. Certainly, the initial chore of creating podcasts (if they are used) may be considerable. Further, a sufficient number of high-quality projects and activities are required (vapid “busy work” may be less tolerated than boring lectures). Finally, the students must rise to the new class format and, to use an expression from the past, “come to class prepared.” Gannod plans to address issues of faculty overhead, podcast production and course maintenance in an upcoming report.

References.

Lage, Maureen, J., Platt, Glenn, J., and Treglia, Michael, “Inverting the Classroom: A Gateway to Creating  an Inclusive Learning Environment”, Jnl of Economic Education, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Winter 2000), pp. 30-43.

Gannod, Gerald, C., Burge, Janet, E., Helmick, Michael, T., “Using the Inverted Classroom to Teach Software Engineering”, Technical Report MU-SEAS-CSA-2007-001, Miami University, Department of Computer Science and Systems Analysis, School of Engineering and Applied Science, 2007.

Gannod, Gerald, C., “Work in Progress – Using Podcasting in an Inverted Classroom”, 37th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference, October 10-13, 2007.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

New Science Points To New Classrooms

September 19th, 2009 Jack McShea 1 comment

PD*27323236

In a note that could have been taken from one of Maria Montessori’s books, researchers in neuroscience, machine learning, education and psychology have convened to show that findings from a joint study suggest that “the prepared environment” might be supported by new scientific data.

The ‘prepared environment‘ is Maria Montessori’s concept that the environment can be designed to facilitate maximum independent learning and exploration by the child.”

Terrence J. Sejnowski, Ph.D, researcher at the Computational Neurobiology Laboratory at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies and co-director of the Temporal Dynamics of Learning Center (TDLC) at the University of California, San Diego, echoes Montessori in his team’s findings. As quoted in Science Daily:

“To understand how children learn and improve our educational system, we need to understand what all of these fields [neurobiology, psychology, education, machine learning] can contribute. Our brains have evolved to learn and adapt to new environments; if we can create the right environment for a child, magic happens.”

The cross-disciplinary research points to a new science of learning that might influence the way classrooms are organized and run in the future. In particular, three guiding principles (or concurrent processes) emerge from the study:

  1. Learning is computational
  2. Learning is social
  3. Learning is supported by neurological (perception-action) circuits

Research in machine learning and developmental psychology illuminate the computational complexity employed by learners who use statistical patterns and probabilistic models to infer rules of logic, relationships between words, syntax, and causal dependence between objects in the physical world.


Evidence that the three component processes happen concurrently is supported by the fact that learners do not calculate and compile statistical models of the environment
indiscriminately but throttle the process using social cues from the people around them. Further, animal studies point to the presence of certain neurosteroids secreted during social interaction that promote learning.

Imitation also comes into play as a key factor:

“Imitation [presumably from others in the environment] accelerates learning and multiplies learning opportunities. It is faster than individual discovery and safer than trial-and-error learning.”

In essence, a social context fosters learning.

Brain circuits that support both actions and perceptions are directly involved with learning. As seen in language learning, for example, there is a complex mix of imitative, computational and articulatory processes that come into play as learning proceeds that might be further facilitated or enhanced at specific developmental periods. In general, neuroscientists have determined that there is considerable overlap in the systems brought into play during learning that support both perception and action. From Science:

“For example, in human adults there is neuronal activation when observing articulatory movements in the cortical areas responsible for producing those articulations. Social learning, imitation, and sensorimotor experience may initially generate, as well as modify and refine, shared neural circuitry for perception and action.”

Finally, experts in machine learning and artificial intelligence are taking advantage of the recent findings in social learning, computational modeling and the plasticity of the brain to design software that monitors and uses social cues and environmental factors to enhance learning. In the future this software may be used in tutorial programs or embedded in instructional robots that are specifically “tuned” to enhance teaching practices in classrooms.

References.

New Science Of Learning Offers Preview Of Tomorrow’s Classroom

Foundations for a New Science of Learning

New science of learning offers preview of tomorrow

From baby scientists to a science of social learning

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

Top Ten Things Learned from K-12 Students About Educational Technology – But Were Afraid to Ask

July 15th, 2009 Jack McShea No comments

Tsunami Warning! Head for the High Ground.

Julie Evans of Project Tomorrow delivered a talk at The Future of Education web site on the findings of Speak Up, an annual national research project sponsored by her organization. Titled Top Ten Things We Learned from K-12 Students About Educational Technology in 2008, the report is a real eye-opener and should be of great interest not only to high school and college instructors but also corporate, government and military trainers who need to prepare for the educational tsunami that is forming. A table of findings from the survey are presented below. Many of the issues reported in the summary are already being seen in adult training venues. Others, no doubt, are just over the horizon and will certainly become standard topics of sundry research reports, conference talks, and blogs like this in the near future.

Item Clarification
Digital Divide is Alive & Well The digital divide between students and adults (including teachers and parents) continues to widen – despite all of the investments and professional development, our students are still powering down to go to school and powering up after school to re-enter the digital world.  Other digital divides exist as well between segments of the student population including gender, technology skill self-assessment and age.
Spectrum of Digital Native-ness Don’t assume all digital natives are the same.  The Speak Up data reveals that there is a spectrum of “digital native-ness” today with younger and older students exhibiting increasingly divergent tech behaviors as well as very different attitudinal views on technology within learning.  Case in point – a 5th grader is almost 5X more likely to participate regularly in a virtual world than an 11th grader.
Explosion of Access to Mobile
Devices
Today’s K-12 students are carrying “multiple computers in their pockets and backpacks” everyday.  Highlights from the data include:  almost 40% of K-2 students have their own cell phone, about half of students in Gr 3-5 have their own MP3 player and almost 24% of middle and high school students are carrying around a smartphone or PDA.
New Obstacles to Tech Use @ School Technology use at school is still a major frustration/disappointment factor for the overwhelming majority of students.  #1 obstacle to effective tech use (for the 5th year in a row) is school filters and firewalls – of course. But the real surprise was this year’s #2 obstacle – teachers that limit our technology use.  The students told us in focus groups that they had better access to technology before their teachers received training on technology use!
Let Me Use My Own Devices! So, what advice do students have for their schools about improving technology access at school? Across the board, the students say “let me use my own devices at school!”  Students want to be able to use their own laptops, cell phones, MP3 players and Smartphones for a variety of applications within instruction.  They, of course, want access to the network as well – from anywhere on campus and from home, too.
Online Learning –Defying
Conventional Wisdom
One-quarter of all high school students have already had experience with an online class – and that experience most likely was self-initiated by the student, not the school or the teacher. Adults say that students want to take an online class for scheduling or convenience reasons or to get college credit.  However, we find that the students have different motivating reasons.  Today’s middle school students tell us that the #1 reason they would like to take an online class is as a supplement to their traditional class, not in place of that class.  They want additional help in a subject where they are struggling.  What is that subject?  Math – the new frontier for online learning.
21st Century Skills & Gaming Students say that the incorporation of gaming technologies within instruction will help them better develop skills in critical thinking, decision-making, teamwork and creativity.  How do they know that?  From their own “learning” experiences with all kinds of digital and online games outside of school.  Over 2/3 of all K-12 students are regularly  interacting with some kind of electronic games, averaging 8-10 hours a week in game play.  The devices vary greatly by user profile however.  Girls are most likely to enjoy computer based games; younger students thrive in a cell phone game environment.  Gaming is not just for high school boys anymore!
Technology & Student Social
Activism
While the majority of social network fans are using their MySpace or Facebook sites for standard communications (email, IM) 10% of students in grades 6-8 told us that they have created a special interest group on their personal website about an issue that they were interested in, 15% have participated in an online poll about world issues and 17% regularly use the Internet to research local or world problems.  Activism and technology goes hand in hand even in middle school today.
Wake Up Call for Our Nation’s
Schools
The greatest divide amongst students today in terms of their behaviors and attitudes about technology use, in school and out of school, is reflected in their own self-assessment of their tech skills.  The students that perceive themselves as technology advanced compared to their peers (average tech users and beginners) have dramatically different views on technology across the board.  This self-assessment divide follows through when we polled students about their own school’s ability to prepare them for the jobs and careers of the 21st century.  While less than half of the students in grades 6-12 said that their school was doing a good job preparing them for the future, only 23% of the technology advanced students held that same view.  This should be a wake up call to all educators – our most technology advanced students are giving our schools a failing grade!
The New Face of Personalized
Learning – the Free Agent Learner
The #1 trend we saw in 2008 from our Speak Up data analysis work and our focus group discussions with students all across the country is the emergence of the “Free Agent Learner.”  This Free Agent Learner is un-tethered to traditional school institutions, is engrossed in developing their own content for learning, regularly creates new communities for knowledge exchanges and social interaction, and is an expert in data aggregation to drive experiential learning.  The Free Agent Learner believes that he or she must be responsible for their own learning destiny since their school is not meeting their needs, and is empowered by a wide variety of emerging technologies to do so.  The Free Agent Learner is as we write and speak defining the new face of education for the next generation and still, with few exceptions, our schools do not even realize this new style of learner exists – at least not yet. Welcome to 2009!

A Word file of the top ten findings can be downloaded here.

A PowerPoint file of Julie Evans’ talk at the Future of Education web site can be gotten here.

An audio recording of Ms. Evans’ talk can be found here.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

The End of the LMS? Oy vey!

July 8th, 2009 Jack McShea 14 comments

This video was embedded using the YouTuber plugin by Roy Tanck. Adobe Flash Player is required to view the video.

Recent talks and presentations by Google engineers on Google Wave stirred up quite a bit of anxious chatter in training and education circles. Google Wave is a novel and thought-provoking development project that addresses the question “what would email be if it were invented today?” Naturally, the Google answer is a web-based application that (maybe not so naturally) resembles a chat server on caffeinated steroids. Its strengths at threaded media-rich multi-user communication is so impressive that comments on education sites started popping almost immediately on whether the LMS is doomed and if Blackboard and Moodle have finally met their matches.

Frankly, not being a big fan of the LMS, I proffer a view more like that of Godrey Parkin:

“To corporate decision-makers, the treasure map of e-learning has an island in the centre, seductively illuminated by those clever marketing folks of the learning software industry, with a big X over the Learning Management System (LMS) right in the middle. Outside of that island is blank space populated only by ‘here be dragons’ warnings.”

And Parkin continues:

“… an LMS, as available today, is not a universal solution for a corporation’s e-learning problems. In fact, an LMS is often the albatross around the neck of progress in technology-enhanced learning.”

Indeed, the biggest problem confronted by many teachers, instructional designers and trainers is how to work within the confines of the LMS. It’s a classic tale of man serving technology rather than the other way around. Parkin feels the pain as well:

When your concept of learning is LMS-centric, you look for opportunities to implement ‘a solution’ that conforms to that concept, and ignore or marginalize all else. An LMS is, of course, a relevant tool for certain applications. If you want to track learner activities, you need some kind of system. And if you want to make use of much of the available e-course content, you have no choice but to use an LMS – not because the learning requires it, but because the established architecture of the ‘learning supply chain’ requires it.”

When all you have is a hammer, you treat everything like it’s a nail.

George Siemens at elearnspace.org puts it another way:

“Learning Management Systems (LMS) are often viewed as being the starting point (or critical component) of any elearning or blended learning program. This perspective is valid from a management and control standpoint, but antithetical to the way in which most people learn today.”

I would add that not only is it “antithetical to the way in which most people learn today” but also antithetical to the way in which most people teach. Neither side of the educational equation is true.

Meanwhile back at the issue, it takes quite a bit of effort to slog your way through the one hour twenty minute presentation on Wave and its features. It is impressive nonetheless. As noted on bavatuesdays:

“In fact, it goes a step further and makes online conference/meeting tools like Eluminate, Adobe Connect, etc. all but irrelevant, for live video and voice can’t be far behind the instantaneous chat, document editing, map embedding, video watching, presentation sharing, and on and on and on.”

Is Google to be the next international online University? Maybe. The problem though is that this is all being orchestrated by an advertising agency. The open web, with it potential for open learning, might very well be the Google version of the open web. Jim Groom at bavatuesdays goes on:

“I still have no doubt that David Wiley’s assessment is right on, especially given the API will soon be unleashed upon an open web full of developers. I know that Google didn’t re-invent the LMS quite as I joked, but what they did is actually make it all but irrelevant by re-imagining email and integrating just about every functionality you could possibly need to communicate and manage a series of course conversations through an application as familiar and intimate as email. Genius, horrifying, but genius.”

A glimmer of hope remains however. Google promises to release the software into the public domain so that anyone will be able to operate their own Wave server. The API will also be published for developers to expand upon. And, hopefully, someone will attend to the matter of content which is where all too often the process breaks down anyway.





Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

Will Open Source Textbooks Mean More Opened Textbooks?

June 17th, 2009 Jack McShea 6 comments

textbooks

One of the students in Michael Wesch‘s video “A Vision of Students Today” holds a sign that reads “I buy hundred dollar textbooks that I never open.” Well, a small group of renegade publishers plans to fix that on both counts.

Flatworld Knowledge is one such attempt to “open source” the textbook industry. Founded by ex-pat textbook publishers, Flatworld is offering textbooks free of charge:

Our books might feel like your current book – for a minute. They are written by leading experts and are peer-reviewed, edited, and highly developed. They are supported by test banks, .ppt notes, instructor manuals, print desk copies, and knowledgeable service representatives. There the similarity ends.

Instead of $100 plus, our books are FREE online. We don’t even require registration! Students enter the URL they’re given by their instructor and start reading. It’s that easy. No tricks. No popup ads. No “a premium subscription is needed for that”. In fact, our free online books go beyond what standard print editions provide with integrated audio, video, and interactive features, powerful search capabilities, and more..

Even better – include the book where the rest of your course is! If you are an instructor using an Course/Learning Management System (like Blackboard, Angel, etc.) you will be able to integrate our book (and our instructor supplements) directly into your LMS (beginning March 09). Yep. Still free.

It is what it is. Just great books, by great authors, at a great price – zero. But we are NOT an eBook publisher… Don’t want to read online? Don’t. Read “Convenient Choices” below to learn about the convenient and affordable choices we offer students.

Flatworld allows students to read the books online for free, download audio or PDF versions, or buy printed copies:

Some will read online. Some won’t. Some want print books. Some don’t. We’re not smart enough to figure it out. So we won’t. Now there’s a novel idea. Let instructors adopt the best book for their class. Let students adopt the best format and price for them.

Kayo doesn’t read books online. She orders the black and white softcover for about $29 bucks. It shows up in a few days. Too bland for her friend Sam – he orders the color edition for $59. Not Sharon. She commutes everyday, so nothing but the audio book on her iPod will do. Then there’s Chaz. He’s indecisive. He decides, well, not to decide. He’ll order the self-print .pdf chapters when he needs them for $1.99 per chapter. Cool. And don’t forget Tessa. She never has enough time. She’ll cut to the chase with our mp3 study guides, mobile flash cards, and online practice quizzes with feedback. That’s convenient. That’s choices. That’s Flat World Knowledge.

Textbooks can be built to order and customized for a particular class or application:

Use our books “off-the-shelf”. After all, they’re crafted to meet market needs. But when was the last time you thought of yourself as “the market?” We thought so. So go nuts. Use our “build-a-book” platform. Drag-and-drop chapters into a new table of contents that suits your syllabus. Don’t cover the last chapter? Trash it with a click. Beginning Summer 09, you will be able to edit Flat World open textbooks down to the sentence level. Replace our example with one of yours. Add a paragraph on your pet research topic. When you’re done, click “adopt” and we’ll give you a special URL for your students. If they buy a print version, it’ll be of your unique book. Thank you print-on-demand technology! And thank you, Creative Commons. That’s our open license that allows you to do everything above and more, without any special permissions.

The current catalog is small but interesting. Titles like “Introduction to Economic Analysis,” “Risk Management for Enterprises and Individuals,” and “Project Management in a Virtual World” are available. The feeling you get from visiting their web site (and thinking back on buying textbooks in college) is that they are on top of an idea whose time has come.

Another novel venture called Scitable by Nature Education is offering mix-and-match articles on genetics that are coupled with social networking tools and content uploads from instructors and authors so that custom course materials can be dynamically fashioned as needed by teachers and presenters.

It will be interesting to see if these ideas and others like it spill over to other technical and scientific subjects and maybe even get adopted by corporate training departments that always seem to need training materials on fundamentals and industry standards.


Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

The End of the University as We Know It

June 12th, 2009 Jack McShea 5 comments

univ

The University is doomed. At least from some accounts. Recent articles and blog posts claim that both educational consumers and producers have deep concerns over the state of its health and projected longevity. For example:

What seems clear from all this discussion is that life in electronic world has shifted the ways in which we learn, teach, work and relate to one another, and these ways are not reflected in the mainstream educational institutions that presently exist.

Naturally the roles played by the University are varied. David Wiley at “Hacking Education” by Union Square Ventures offered five basic components of a college or University:

  1. Content provisioning
  2. Research – conducted, archived, disseminated
  3. Help provided to a student with a question on content
  4. Social life
  5. Issuing credentials

Note these might just as well be extended to the high school or the entire K-12 educational system as most points overlap secondary and college systems. A point of departure among students and critics (often unspoken) is that most or all of these essential services can be gotten from outside formal schools. Once upon a time there was a notion that schools centralized scarce information and formed a focus or concentration of knowledge that modern learners no longer regard as necessary or true. To a modern learner the “information is out there” all around us. What they need are tools and techniques for harnessing, interpreting and applying ubiquitous information.

The discussion about how education must or will change in light of the modern electronic environment goes back quite a few years. A casual glance at Marshall McLuhan‘s writings on education will turn up articles and interviews from over forty years ago. One such article co-authored with George Leonard for LOOK Magazine (Feb. 21, 1967) is titled “The Future of Education: The Class of 1989.” With the exception of professorial tenure, McLuhan and Leonard address the same points that current writers wrestle with:

  • Schools are preparing students for a world that no longer exists.
  • Classrooms have not changed substantially over the last century.
  • Mass education is a product of the mechanical age and the production line.
  • Education was designed to slow and control the processes of personal growth and change.
  • Students are furnished with rigid and isolated “bodies of knowledge.”
  • Competition is the chief motive force in mass education.
  • The lecture system, the “…least effective [mode] ever devised by man, served well enough in an age that demanded only a specified fragment of each human being’s whole abilities.”
  • New technologies are not as central to tomorrow’s schooling as are new roles for student and teacher.
  • There will no distinction between work and play as the student will be totally involved.
  • The main work of the future will be education.
  • The University will become an integral part of the community offering degrees of “membership” corresponding to varied levels of participation.

Given the essential and ongoing nature of education to the modern learner (or consumer) certain changes in approach can be expected:

  • The learning process must be interactive or two-way.
  • Learning styles must be taken into consideration.
  • Standardized one-size-fits-all courses are out. Same for tests and evaluations.
  • The University (read: curriculum or degree program) should not have walls.
  • Learning should be asynchronous.
  • Courses must be timely, relevant and engaging.
  • Failure is part of the learning feedback loop; not an end of the process.
  • Responsibility for learning will be shifted away from the student and towards the instructor or institution.
  • Portfolios are more important than letter grades.
  • Certifications are static and local and therefore have little lasting value.

There are several compelling reasons why we can expect consumers to prevail over the Universities and win these changes. First, students are coming to school steeped in electronic communications media and want to continue learning as they live, with full involvement. They will not accept that they have to “power down” to go to class. Educators will have to embrace new methods and techniques if they are to engage modern learners. Michael Wesch is a good example of a university teacher who accepted the challenge with his classes at Kansas State University only to write a new chapter in undergraduate pedagogy.

This video was embedded using the YouTuber plugin by Roy Tanck. Adobe Flash Player is required to view the video.

Secondly, education is expensive. The current average cost of a private university in the US is about $25,000.00 a year and is growing faster than inflation or medical care. Several generations of Americans have been to college since the Second World War and have grown to accept that in most cases a degree or two are essential to membership in the middle class. That said, these same middle class folks are also steeped in the most commercially oriented culture in history and are now becoming more consumer oriented concerning education. Part of this consumer oriented pressure will be in the direction of getting an education that fits their goals and lifestyles. Already we have seen the rise of non-traditional online Universities that focus on older students already in the workforce. No doubt others will rise to furnish the needs of other groups. If the Universities don’t change, students will vote with their feet (and checkbooks).

One other factor that is influencing modern students’ perception of the University is cultural, verging on mythological. Many top business/media/technology leaders like Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Richard Branson and Michael Dell  do not have college degrees. This sends a powerful, if silent, message to many. Consider the story of Rob Kalin at “Hacking Education” mentioned above:

“I graduated high school with a D minus average. …My guidance counselor said ‘drop out of high school, you’ll have an easier time getting into college if you just get a GED.’ I [decided] to graduate with this D minus and see what it does for me. I didn’t get into any accredited school . I got into a diploma program in an art school in Boston, and it was near MIT. … I used the art school to make a fake ID to go to MIT. Someone said [college is] expensive. I said no, it’s free, you just won’t get credit for it.”

“Today, no one is going to ask Rob for his college transcript. His credentials are the companies he has created.”

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

21st Century Societal Pressures on the University

June 7th, 2009 Jack McShea No comments

Given that a college degree or two is considered in many developed nations as a basic requirement of most working adults, the roles of the University are particularly key in helping to provide an economic foundation to most countries. Calculating the trajectory of the University in the 21st century, researcher John Brennan of the Open University in the UK, along with a multinational team, have produced a report of the Higher Education Looking Forward Project that considers how institutions of higher learning no longer enjoy the geographical and cultural isolation that they once had and must contend with globalization like many other industries.

Brennan is quoted as saying:

“Universities are constantly rethinking their strategy in the light of globalisation. But the expectations of universities are growing all the time and there are some pressures that are hard to balance. For instance, higher education institutions are being asked to produce more research, and also to teach more students in a more personal way. Perhaps more importantly, universities do not exist just to produce economic benefits. They are also important in providing equity, social cohesion and social justice. How can they do this on a world scale?”

Brennan and his team conclude that further research is required to clarify the ways in which higher education meshes with modern societies:

“…the purpose of researching higher edu-
cation is not just to make higher education ‘better’
– although hopefully it will also do that – but to enhance
our understanding of contemporary societies and the
futures that are available to them. The parts that learn-
ing, knowledge and science in all their forms and in
all their organisational settings have to play in achiev-
ing such understandings and in shaping such futures
deserve, we believe, to have a central place in social
science endeavours.”

Two reports of the HELF Project can be found at the European Science Foundation in PDF format.

A review of the research is also provided here.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

‘Collaboratory’ Technology and the New Humanities

June 5th, 2009 Jack McShea No comments

Commenting on the popular rise of collaborative technologies in higher education, Richard Miller of Rutgers University illustrates the effects that group communications media are playing on the development of creative writing and written expression. He goes on to speak about the role of “collaborative composition” in creative writing and its place in the proposed Center for the New Humanities at Rutgers University. From the presentation:

The most significant change in human expression in human history.

We are no longer grounded in the printing press.

We now live in this Read/Write world.

We have imagined a space where students can work on multimedia composition.

You have to excel in the use and manipulation of images.

This is all building towards a larger vision that involves re-imagining the Humanities for the 21st Century.

This video was embedded using the YouTuber plugin by Roy Tanck. Adobe Flash Player is required to view the video.

The URL for the presentation is here.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

IT & 21st Century Learning

June 4th, 2009 Jack McShea No comments

Educational Origami is a wiki site dedicated to bringing the classroom into the 21st Century. It’s a bit “busy” but well worth the effort combing through its many winding links and pages. One of the main features of the site is the update of Bloom’s Taxonomy for the modern electronic learner.

Diagram of Bloom's Taxonomy

Diagram of Bloom's Taxonomy

Other notable topics include: the 21st Century Teacher, the 21 Century Learner, ITC and Learning Style, and Web 2.0 Tools and Resources.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]

Social Networking Sites Good for Learning

June 3rd, 2009 Jack McShea No comments

A recent research effort from scholars at the University of Minnesota concludes that social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook do have a positive effect on learning and can foster creativity:

The study found that, of the students observed, 94 percent used the Internet, 82 percent go online at home and 77 percent had a profile on a social networking site. When asked what they learn from using social networking sites, the students listed technology skills as the top lesson, followed by creativity, being open to new or diverse views and communication skills.

The study supports findings by teachers using Web 2.0 technologies in class who report that often students do not know how to use social media for educational purposes:

Interestingly, researchers found that very few students in the study were actually aware of the academic and professional networking opportunities that the Web sites provide. Making this opportunity more known to students, Greenhow said, is just one way that educators can work with students and their experiences on social networking sites.

The report goes on to cite that findings of a “digital divide” between low-income students and others might be overstated:

The study also goes against previous research from Pew in 2005 that suggests a “digital divide” where low-income students are technologically impoverished. That study found that Internet usage of teenagers from families earning $30,000 or below was limited to 73 percent, which is 21 percentage points below what the U of M research shows.

Further information on the findings can be found here.

Rating 3.00 out of 5
[?]