Group items tagged

The authors feel textbooks are outdated by the time of print, offer a limited perspective, force the reader to take on a passive role while learning, and are limited to their physical form. The four limitations of textbooks are adding to higher education's lack of active learning. Students today expect to be engaged while they learn, not to read from an outdated textbook or listen to static lectures. There is a potential for change, however, believed by the authors. An example is given from Old Dominion University. A team of faculty all assigned to teach the course Social and Cultural Foundations of Education to potential education students, created an assignment where the students would write their own textbook. The final result  (called a wikibook) was determined by the students and faculty using a grading rubric for each student submission. The best-written and supported sections were submitted to the final wikibook. The assignment was a huge success. A few years later when educational laws changed in Virginia, the wikibook was quite to adapt. The authors argue wikibooks may not be factually perfect, but there are quite a few benefits: a student-centered learning experience, skills are developed in researching primary sources, and the instructional design is extremely adaptive and flexible. In order for a wikibook assignment to be successful, the faculty member(s) must take a guiding approach to student learning, instead of lecturing. The conclusion argues for a pedagogical shift, not necessarily involving wikibooks, but a more general transition to faculty to encourage creativity and joy in teaching and learning. 

This is a guest post by Dereck Bruff, and assistant director at the Center for Teaching and Learning in Vanderbilt University, Dwayne Harapnuik, director of faculty enrichment at Abilene Christian University, and Jim Julius, associate director at Instructional Technology Services, San Diego University. The post is a summary of an interactive session of a Professional and Organizational Development (POD) Network conference to discuss the question of whether or not the technological revolution, characterized by social technologies and access to the web, can transcend the slow evolutional environment of Higher education institutions. 59 obstacles were identified as the culprits for hindering the advancement of higher education from the industrial model and teaching paradigm, to a learning paradigm. Six of the problems were named in the article are: faculty mistrust; lack of effective modeling; loss of faculty control during the shift to student centered learning; not enough emphasis placed on faculty development professionals; faculty closed off to being open to new technologies; and skepticism about the ability of technology to produce depth of learning. The authors and other POD members agreed that the solution would be to move from a faculty centered teaching mode to a student-centered one, and to encourage a culture of openness by encourage the sharing of effective uses of technology between faculty members. The article is directed at higher education institutions that wish to change their educational landscape.

Chris Proulx, the President and CEO of eCornell, wrote an article featured in Forbes magazine. The first technological influence is the growth of online education within top tier schools. Proulx believes the second impact technology will have on higher education in 2013 is increased innovation affecting the "flipped classroom." Students no longer rely on faculty members to provide them with information. In this model, group discussions and activities are used during class time to strengthen the students understanding of the material while engaging them fully.  Hybrid programs are the third technological change influencing higher education in 2013. 2013 will bring a focus on hybrid programs, courses balanced on-campus and online. Great technological advances can be made to improve hybrid courses for students and faculty members. Proulx believes a race is on for a new instructional model within higher education during 2013.  The fourth technology is the need for a new classroom-learning model. As faculty continue to teach in a flipped classroom, the peer-to-peer and peer-to-faculty models of instruction must change.  Finally, the fifth influential technology impacting higher education in 2013 is the potential for tuition costs to decrease. Proulx believes as technologies improve, faculty will be able to reach more students using the same amount of effort as in the past. While these technologies may not exist yet, as they begin to develop, the cost of education will slowly begin to decrease. Tuition may not drop in 2013, but the industry is likely to see some financial shifts over the next few years, in reaction to advanced technologies.

The chief privacy and security office at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Michael Corn, discusses the need for higher education to be less risk adverse. While the article is somewhat vague, anyone interested in general technology infrastructure for colleges and universities, has something to gain from reading it. Using his own experience to develop his theories, Corn explains faculty members and administrators need to re-evaluate their view on risk and how risk is accessed.  On most campuses, faculty members use third-party services without the knowledge or support of the institution. Using third-party vendors forces the faculty member to take on major personal and institutional risk, especially the security of data. Unfortunately, if the institution lacks updated technology, faculty members are put in a difficult situation. Colleges and universities are rather risk adverse. Corn argues colleges and universities need to re-access how risky some technologies truly are. The information technology department cannot transform the institution's culture on their own. All campus administrators, faculty, registrars must work together to be more transparent, accessible for students with special needs, thorough guidance for students, and increasingly accountable. When all members of the college community come together and work towards improved and "risky" technologies, the institution will benefit.

The author of this opinion article is a professor of philosophy at Ohio State University. He summarizes how in the past he had been resistant to teaching online, but has since realized the immense benefits and opportunities of e-learning, due to several cultural changes. For example, social media, e-mail, and texting have changed personal contact so that electronic media has become a standard way of communicating. This shift along with entertainment education (referred to at edutainment) has also resulted in student preferences toward online courses. Another benefit is access, as students often want to work while attending college, or they just want the flexibility of taking classes from home without a set schedule. The faculty member shares how he transformed his traditional teaching style and gives several examples, such as turning my paper handouts into electronic slides and board work into screen-capture videos. He also shares how to keep students engaged through his delivery of content, such as speaking without notes, so there is an element of suspense through an audio recording. Utilizing content in different formats also helped him to apply techniques in another direction, as he states that many of the video clips and visuals developed for online courses can be used in traditional courses. The author ends with sharing how online teaching has increased his communication with students, through direct e-mail exchanges and conversation on the course discussion board. He concludes that students report enjoying online courses and faculty and staff need to adjust to their demands and accommodate student preferences, which troubles many faculty members who resist to teaching online. This article would be most useful for faculty as well as senior staff in academic affairs who are looking to engage faculty in teaching online.

The author of this article is a writer for University Business, an online higher education publication. The article summarizes how lectures can not only be recorded digitally but also streamed live over the internet, with minimal effort by participants. Lecture capture systems (LCS) give the ability to slice and dice archived recordings into more manageable and meaningful segments. The author shares how as some lecture capture solutions have changed to software or web-based platforms, the definition is being stretched to include content faculty are producing at home, or even recordings of hybrid class sessions capturing both the in-class and online activity. Users see a partitioned screen displaying the presentation material and video feed, along with navigation options. Although video of the professor is thought to enhance distance learning sessions, it is usually skipped when the result is not interactive. In some situations, a video is used to display a demonstration, as often happens in medical classes. The author stresses that the audio is extremely important and if it is not great quality, it reduces the usefulness. Editing can be done to add title slides, remove dead time, or eliminate lessons that might have made sense during class but could be considered meaningless afterward. Long lectures can also be broken into shorter segments for students to use as study guides. Overall, the author suggests that faculty should keep the student as a user in mind when developing content. A helpful checklist is provided for administrators who are considering how to implement lecture capture: What is the institution's goal for having a lecture capture system? What needs are evident through observation of faculty? How involved will the IT staff have to be in training and using the system? Can faculty members operate it themselves? Will the system integrate with a course management system? Is the system scalable? How scalable does it need to be? Or is portability better? Wha

The author is a faculty member at the City University of New York. Through this article, she describes her interest in a question based on a study that was conducted with a college-wide committee of faculty, administrators, and staff in a survey method to discover the priorities of the faculty, in further development of excellence in teaching and learning. Of the 155 survey respondents, 22 selected a question, "In what ways do we weigh the political, ethical and economic implications of technological platforms against their pedagogical potential, and how can we model these kinds of complex decisions for our students?". Through this question, the author points out an existing challenge associated with the moral dilemmas emerging from the current increase of technological innovation, including the abuse of technology, as seen through revealing video postings, invasion of privacy, cyber-bullying, and identity theft. She continues to bring up that these challenges cause a harm to society and controversy among stakeholders. The author suggests that a new set of rules, laws, policies, and procedures should be created to guide and protect the rights of individuals in this new technological environment. The author recommends that higher education faculty and administration should take a leadership role in the study of applications of ethics in higher education. The author introduces two previously proposed bills, Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA, 2011) and Protect Intellectual Property (IP) Act of 2011, both of which were rejected by the American public because of the fear of censorship. According to the article, the 112th Congress postponed action on both bills. The conflict addressed by the two bills addresses financial accountability issues. Once settled, the bills will set the tone for how the next generation, of high school and college graduates will address copyright and intellectual property issues. The author proposes that administrators and faculty should guide the

This article reviews current research to explore how pedagogy has or has not changed. The author points out that most studies fail to contribute to knowledge about learning or teaching through technology specifically. This researcher believes that if professional development for faculty includes technological, pedagogical and content knowledge, (referred to as TPACK) grounded in a constructivist paradigm, it will lead to academic growth in those areas. The author argues that educators need to be mindful of various student learning needs and offer a range of learning opportunities to allow them to succeed. The author is a faculty member at Swinburne University of Australia, and states that academic lecturers who themselves were not students in a technologically rich learning environment, or who did not learn online, will continue to struggle in the 21st century where mobile learning, blended learning and online learning will become more prevalent. This article would be helpful for faculty development administrators who are looking for effective ways to incorporate technology conversation into topics related to effective pedagogy.

This article offers a theoretical perspective from authors at the University of Queensland in Australia to explain the complex nature of why faculty in higher education struggle with incorporating new technology and innovative teaching strategies into their existing coursework. First, the authors review current literature about emerging Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) capabilities. They also introduce Latane's (1981) Dynamic Social Impact Theory, which they have updated to introduce the special case of Dynamic Impact of Social Connectivity (DISC) theory and how it applies to this phenomenon of higher education academics engaging with ICTs. The authors conclude that higher education curricula must change sufficiently and sustainably to embrace emerging ICT capabilities, in order to maximize faculty connectivity and collaboration. This article would be helpful for administrators who assist faculty in further developing their teaching and familiarity with technology in their courses.

Most in attendance at the December symposium believe Kirschner and Stimpson would argue drastically different positions on online education. Both women attended online courses in an effort to better understand the experience, and were asked to reflect on those experiences at the symposium. Surprisingly, Kirschner and Stimpson felt similarly on a few major areas.  Stimpson completed a creative writing course through the University of Phoenix. Following her online experience, Stimpson argues the diminishing presence of faculty will deteriorate the dignity of the teaching profession and higher education as a whole. Those following trends and experts in higher education expected most of Stimpson's comments. Kirschner's role in the initial developments of online education led those at the symposium to expect her to fervently defend massive online courses. Surprisingly, Kirschner agreed with many of Stimpson's points, admitting face-to-face instruction is preferable to online education. Kirschner's comments alluded to her belief that brick and mortar institutions offer an educational experience superior to those offered through online programs.  Kirschner 's opinion differs from Stimpson only on her belief that technology and online education will make significant improvements over the years to come. Those improvements will aid in education instruction within online programs as well as on-ground courses. Stimpson believes the focus needs to be on the quality of instruction and presence of faculty support and communication, something not found in her online course. The similarities in both women's perspectives caught many at the symposium off-guard, but highlight the ever-changing nature of online education and its supporters.

Julie Phillips, an online instructor for Globe Education Network, shares an extensive list of suggestions for faculty members hoping to incorporate service-learning into an online course. On-ground courses have long included service-learning components at colleges and universities across the country. Over the past decade online programs have grown drastically, but have left the challenge of offering service-learning courses to online learners. Phillips offers a variety of suggestions to assist a faculty member or administrator develop an online course including a service-learning assignment. Below is a list of Phillips' recommendations: - Select an appropriate course - Establish clear expectations - Respond to email/outreach from students and community partners within 24-48 hours - Volunteering should align with course objectives - Identify challenges upfront - Communicate, communicate, communicate - Encourage reflection throughout the course - Listen to student concerns and work through them - Enlist feedback from students and community partners - Allow students to share their experiences - Requirements should be realistic - Never underestimate the power that hands-on experience has on student learning - Incorporate various resources into class to help guide students - Not all community partners are created the same - Get excited!

Ward's article touches on seven key points influencing the future of technology in higher education. Following the description of the seven points, Ward suggests where technology may be going in the future of higher education. The seven key areas listed by Ward include: - Technology is changing how we learn, college costs are ever increasing without necessarily justifying the increases - Online and hybrid courses are attracting students with convenience - Students are expecting faculty to connect with them digitally - More students than ever are able to access education online, including foreign and domestic students - For-profit colleges continue to compete with non-profit colleges for students and market share - Massive open online courses (MOOCs) are gaining in popularity and scaring college and universities into thinking about their own online programs - College budgets continue to decrease Ward believes these seven issues will be the most influential on the use of technology in higher education moving into the future. Online and hybrid classes will continue to grow, but Ward expresses a need for better programs and teaching aids to improve the quality and access to such courses.  The article focuses on technology, but credits the value of an on-campus educational experience within the final paragraph. After all of his points are made, Ward explains while online and hybrid courses continue to develop, many are still invested in the on-campus model of learning. The reader is left wondering, will the technological advances ever become fully adopted within the higher education world? Or will our antiquated model for learning continue to be used in most educational settings?

This article explores the gap between expectations of faculty and students by focusing on defining the online "student". The author looks at practitioner interviews to identify "ways of talking" about students and Annemarie Mol's (2002; 1999) concept of enactment to understand who students are and how they behave in the interactive spaces of online learning. The author's argument is that understanding the category of "student" in multiple ways offers faculty a way to approach the "potentially disorienting spaces" (Bayne and Ross, 2007) of online teaching practices. Online learning presents a different environment of interaction and engagement for teaching and this article states that in order to be effective, teaching online students requires new strategies for engagement. Some of the strategies outline developing a community of learners, treating students as customers, and considering students in the context of their digital generation. This article is helpful for those who are teaching an online course or considering how to design an online offering. The author is a curriculum and academic developer for LaTrobe University in Australia.

Published in a technology review journal through Massachusetts Institute of Technology, a marriage of technology and higher education is present. The intended audience is those interested in technology, as well as the world of higher education.  Although the article is titled The Crisis in Higher Education, a real sense of crisis is only found in the last few paragraphs.  Carr spends the majority of the article describing recent advances that have been made in technology influencing higher education. Two separate innovations and advances will soon combine in the future to bring online and technology-assisted education to a new level: massive open online courses (MOOCs) and software programs that collect data and analyze student learning behaviors in order to offer individualized teaching and tutoring.  While MOOCs, offered through organizations such as Coursera, Udacity, and edX, are testing the best way to present information to large groups of students located all over the world, they are also collecting learning behavior data at the same time. Software programmers are using their own data, combined with the data from MOOCs, to help develop more intuitive programs to aid in online learning. Critics argue that online classrooms cannot compare with conversations in on-ground classes or the relationship between a faculty member and a student on campus. The future of higher education is unknown, but Carr believes technology is leading the way. One of the main concerns regarding the adoption of new technology is campuses will rush into using it without researching the best options and ways to implement.  

In this case study, the author, a faculty member of a liberal arts college at a major university, explains how a near disaster influenced significant administrative change. Case studies like these illustrate not only the principles of managing technology but highlight the importance of aligning IT initiatives with administrative needs. When the campus advising office flooded, student records were in jeopardy. Not only were student files in danger of being lost due to water damage, services rendered by the department were affected by the loss of the work space. Digital file management and portability became part of a disaster recovery plan developed after the flood. The case also provides examples of how a shift in business practices opens avenues for further change, such as staff being able to meet with students outside of the office because of digital records being more portable and staffers being able to work from home which helped maintain productivity when the office was closed due to weather or other unforeseen circumstances.

This video archive presents a point/counterpoint debate of the challenges and opportunities afforded a campus CIO. Issues discussed include: the cost of and shrinking budgets for campus IT; service and support for students and faculty users; managing emerging technology, such as Second Life virtual worlds; and professional development for CIOs. Both panelists agree that a CIO needs to be both a strategist and a plumber, but this agreement is not reached until the conclusion. Value in this resource are the issues presented and frank and sometimes humorous discourse between the two CIOs. The debate occurred when campuses were battling increased use of technologies by all stakeholders and decreased budgets due to the global economic crisis. The viewpoints reflect that challenging time and serves as a basis for evaluation of CIO ability to manage effectively in a crisis when technology use cannot be curbed by budget cuts.

This article explains the need for e-portfolios, how they can be used as a tool, and several examples from colleges who have successfully implemented them with students. The author makes connections to the National Survey for Student Engagement (NSSE) survey, suggesting that e-portfolios may be associated with high-impact practices to improve engagement and retention. This new way of documenting evidence of learning and learning outcomes considers students as able to exercise their voice in presenting and representing their learning, with a focus on reflective learning. The author argues that since pedagogy and curriculums are changing, the way we assess students should also change to reflect this shift. This article would be most helpful for faculty and faculty development centers looking for concrete ways to implement and maximize the use of e-portfolios. The author is Vice President for Quality and Assessment at the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC & U) and writes from an assessment perspective.

Gordon Friedman, president of the non-profit National Laboratory for Education Transformation, employs metaphoric prose to portray the relationship between technological advances and faculty inertia that has hindered the advancement of higher education into the twenty first century. He uses the term cloud to refer to the virtual, server-based world, and fog to depict the technological apathy and bureaucratic red taped nature of higher education that refuses to tap into the data mine available through technological systems. The cloud offers a transparent and cost effective way to systemize institutional operations. Friedman clarifies that what he advocates is not mindless extrapolation of data, but rather a shift to embrace the reality of twenty-first century students, who exist in a world where their personal data is captured by the various web applications they routinely patronize. Unlike these applications that use captured data to construct the essence of their customers, higher education remains an impersonal enterprise that does not utilize the existing data to design a more personal learning process. To Friedman, online courses, digital curricula components and apps are not sufficient, because unlike the cloud, information flow is one directional. This article is directed at higher education institutions. To lift the fog, Friedman states that colleges ought to adopt three principles of the cloud namely: identity formation and management whereby students develop a sense of ownership through the maintenance of their own identities; social networks and learning communities where learning is student centered and self paced; and data mining and assessment faculty collect and use student data to monitor the teaching and learning process.

The author of this opinion article is a professor of educational technology and distance learning at the University of Alaska. This article describes the significant implications of the new version of the internet, also known as the "semantic web" for education. Three areas the author believes will be most affected are: knowledge construction, personal learning network maintenance, and personal educational administration. This information would be most helpful to senior-level administrators in higher education who make large-scale decisions regarding their college or university's technology. Under Web 3.0, the author predicts that personal learning networks (PLNs) will be built primarily around subjects, instead of services. The author goes on to describe how personal learning agents will identify relevant information from any source that is accessible and provide information on exactly what students and faculty desire to learn. The semantic web makes it possible for the internet to become an effective and focused information resource that can be tailored for specific content area objectives.The semantic web has the potential to challenge traditional ideas about the institution providing all of the knowledge to students by itself and instead connects information between institutions. The author anticipates that at some point, institutions will describe courses and degrees semantically, to help their own internal functioning, but with the effect of making many parts of education somewhat comparable across institutions. This article encourages faculty, staff, and students to join the discussion about semantic web in order to help Web 3.0 developers shape a tool useful and connected to the higher education environment.