Group items tagged

Four faculty members from Ferris State University share their experiences integrating technology into their classrooms, usingto the Faculty Center for Teaching and Learning. The Center assists faculty members in learning technologies to enhance their lesson plans. All four faculty members insist the technology is easy to learn and use as enrichment to coursework. The technology allows the faculty members to establish a presence, both online and on-ground, all while using technology their students are already familiar with. Faculty members, as well as information technology employees, at higher education institutions are the intended audience for this video. Each faculty member described a different technology he or she uses within the classroom (both online and on-ground). The four technologies described include Adobe Connect, iTunes U, CPS pulse clickers, and Poll Everywhere. Adobe Connect is a way for students and faculty members to engage online, including back and forth real-time discussion. iTunes U allows faculty members to share podcasts of lectures and lessons for students to listen or watch at their leisure. CPS pulse clickers enable students to take tests and quizzes during class and receive immediate feedback and grades. The CPS pulse clickers also let the professor know what material students have or have not mastered, dictating the rest of the lecture. Finally, Poll Everywhere allows faculty to poll students before, during, or after class, increasing student engagement, as cell phones are typically used to poll.

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.

MIT - center for information systems research research. Some interesting topics on governance of IT in systems. Some good policy application.

The author is Associate Provost and Executive Director of the Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship at Georgetown University. The author refers to Clayton Christensen's "disruptive innovation" term to refer to the recent changes in higher education. The author argues that a key source of disruption in higher education is coming not from the outside, but from internal practices. This administrator points to the increase in experiential modes of learning, how education is moving from "margin to center", which proves to be powerful in the quality and meaning of the undergraduate experience as well as the way business is conducted. The author refers to the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) and its publishing of a "high impact practice" list, strategies which are connected with high retention and persistence rates, such as undergraduate research, service/community-based learning, and global learning. These practices also have a significant influence because they increase (according to George Kuh) student behaviors that lead to meaningful learning outcomes. The author summarizes how technologies can play a key role as new digital, learning, and analytics tools make it possible to mimic some features of high impact activity inside classrooms, changing when and how students can engage in course content. Since the greatest impact on learning is in the innovative, integrative, and socially networked experiences, then the author argues that faculty and staff need to re-create dimensions of these experiences by bridging the classroom with life outside of it. He concludes that connections between integrative thinking, or experiential learning, and the social network should no longer be an afterthought, but the connection that should guide and reshape learning in higher education. This article would be most useful for administrators and faculty who inform decisions related to technology infrastructure and tools for teaching and learning.

This blog post can be viewed as a supporting material to aid a reader in understanding the 2014 Horizon Report. Blog authors at Columbia's Center for New media Teaching and Learning review the Horizon Report and summarize its findings along with thoughts for application at Columbia. This summary of the report and insight from a prestigious university may aid a researcher in understanding perspectives on emerging technologies. The value here is in the author's perspective as an educational technology professional who manages campus technology and partners with faculty in adopting emerging tools and resources. He includes examples of past experience in technology adoption alongside thoughts about Columbia's opportunities to adopt new tools. For example, he describes the challenges associated with hybrid and flipped model teaching in response to the Horizon Report's concern for adoption and adaptation to emerging models and technology.

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. 

PRWeb assists companies and organizations release news on their products and services, with extended reach through online searches. LoudCloud Systems, the creator of LoudCloud Learning Ecosystem, for Higher Education, promoted an enhanced version of their current product through PRWeb in July of 2012. The new LoudCloud Learning Ecosystem, for higher education, includes greater flexibility for teachers and administrators; a task centered design, a redesigned behavioral reader, and enhanced analytics on students, administration, and teachers. LoudCloud Systems establish themselves as an emerging leader in learning management systems in 2010, and has continued to impress the education industry with new products and upgrades. The learning solutions offered by LoudCloud are intuitive, collaborative, adaptive and intelligent. The system collects data on users and personalizes their learning experience based on each individual's learning styles. LoudCloud Learning Ecosystems, for Higher Education now offers more than 100 discreet rights, but also allows for segmented branding within one system for larger institutions.  LoudCloud Systems offers services for higher education and K-12 institutions. Administrators and information technology personnel are the intended audience for this article. The reader should remember LoudCloud wrote the article, with supervision by PRWeb. 

Steve Kolowich, a technology reporter for Inside Higher Education, discusses the learning management systems (LMS) of the future. The article, geared towards an audience of higher education professionals, as well as those interested in higher education technology, highlights three up and coming LMS providers: Coursekit, Instructure Canvas, and Chegg. Instructure Canvas is an open-source LMS, offering its services to more than 100 institutions, including Brown University and Auburn University. The program is marketed to administrators, as well as individual instructors. Coursekit, another LMS, is free and currently only markets to individual professors. In addition to course management, Coursekit plans to offer students assistance in locating books and homework help, in the future. A significant difference between Coursekit and other LMS is their creation of a social network oriented around education.  Chegg, formerly a solely text rental organization, has rebranded the company into a social education platform. Although Chegg is not a LMS, some of the services offered are similar. Students can search texts associated with courses at their institution, utilize a homework help center and speak with a tutor in India, and buy and sell notes through Notehall. Based on Kolowich's description of three promising LMS-like services, Blackboard (the current majority LMS market shareholder) should be prepared for a new wave of competition.

The authors of this article work for the Center for Teaching, Learning, & Technology at Washington State University. They looked at learning management systems and how currently they do not accurately capture what students have learned. Both authors discovered that the majority of assignments that make up students' experience with the higher education curriculum do not ask them to think, but to recall lectures, text, or both, which may be why LMS are designed to reflect this idea. They examine the concept and perception of a learning environment from the classroom to the internet and their relationship to views of teaching and learning. Examples and research, including an example of a Web 2.0 pro-social effort, are used to demonstrate the difference between the current state of teaching and learning, and an emerging vision. The authors refer to Educause Center for Applied Research, Morgan's (2003) study. Morgan reports, faculty were gaining, at least one key principle of good practice from LMS, increased feedback to students (Chickering & Gamson, 1987) through the use of the online gradebook. According to Morgan (as cited by Brown and Peterson, 2008) this was an outcome that "alters" faculty relationships with students and students with their own work. The authors predict that the successful LMS application of the future will be a gradebook that accommodates shifting ways of receiving feedback. The authors believe that a successful gradebook will be recognized as a communication tool that allows faculty and students to have a variety of communication options (faculty to student, faculty to groups of students, etc.). They point to the instructional challenge of guiding the tool discussion toward issues related to outcomes and what quality performance looks like. The authors refer to the LMS of the future capturing not in our learning about, but in learning "to be". Faculty are seeking a place for students to learn and operate which complements student im

This case study breaks down IT costs into simple easy to read tables, and the author provides insight and background on the IT budget restructuring project he undertook at his university between 2007-2008. This case is important because it is centered during a financially difficult time in higher education, when IT costs were steadily increasing due to higher demand from all campus users and budget cuts were imminent due to the global financial crisis at the time. Perhaps not a definitive case study, it is worth a read to develop more familiarity with IT portfolio management.

The authors of this article, all leaders in higher ed IT, argue that a CIO is the center of campus information technology (IT) and therefore a "change agent" that has an opportunity to contribute and have an impact in all areas of campus business. The article has several different topic sections that include quotes and commentary by the authors about being a CIO and working with the CIO. Topics include: leadership qualities of the CIO; operating a service department within the organization; initiating change on campus (ie technology project management); and contributing to the academic mission of the university through partnerships and collaborations with other executives. The web version of the article includes embedded video of the authors describing topics in greater detail. While interesting, the primary value in this article are the topics which are good fodder for one-to-one conversation and inquiry with CIOs. It would be interesting to use the article as a reference and use the topics as the foundation for interview questions. When interviewing more experienced CIO's it would be interesting to find out what has changed over time. Younger CIO perspective may be similar to the author's.

Weiss' dissertation topic centers on the required skills and knowledge of a higher ed CIO. Her research examines CIO titles, roles, responsibilities, professional development and formal education and training. Her aim was to define a process by which to evaluate the performance and success of a higher ed CIO. While I do not agree that CIOs can be assessed equally, I think the inquiry conducted by Weiss yields a valuable trove of information with which to illustrate the functional responsibilities of a CIO. She looks at the role of CIO from the perspective of campus IT stakeholders and makes an assessment based on their view and opinions of competency in a CIO. This differs from literature on the subject told from the CIO perspective, thus has value in subsequent research on the topic of CIOs.

This article describes the value of having a "service lens" in strategic implementation of technology in higher education. The authors view higher education as a co-created set of activities and experiences, having value only in their use over time, which is a shift from traditional thinking. They share that this strategy requires a belief in service systems existing in order to serve consumers, employers, and society at large. A service lens puts the consumer (the student) at the center of improvement and innovation initiatives, considering the consumer's experience to be a foundation for looking at how to make important changes in higher education. The authors argue that service blueprinting can be used to transform a traditional course to an online course while enhancing efficient delivery of content, the student experience, and student learning outcomes. Several examples are shared from the authors' institution, Arizona State University, with evidence pointing to an increase in student success, achievable learning outcomes, and reducing cost. This article would be most helpful for faculty and staff looking to take a strategic approach in making decisions about technology based on the student experience.

Jon Mott writes this article to advocate the adoption of an Open Learning Network (OLN) as a way to merge the best features of the Learning Management Systems (LMS) and the Personal Learning Environments (PLE). Even though the use of LMS is prevalent in higher education institutions, LMSs have been come under increasing criticism for being too teacher-centric, inflexible, and not fostering a communicative and sharing learning environment. Consequently many students turn to other social media and communicative tools. Educators have touted the PLE as a platform to operate alongside the LMS, in order to provide the student-centered component that is missing from the LMS. Some institutions, teachers and students have created their own PLNs to incorporate the portability, flexibility, adaptability and openness, which the LMNs do not provide. Mott however points out that the PLEs have security shortcomings, and the most provident solution is to combine the best of both platforms to create an Open Learning Network (OLN) that is flexible, can incorporate new technologies that were not in existence when LMSs became operational, and strikes a balance between the institutional goals and the essential components of the cloud by keeping private data as secure as possible, and storing the rest in the cloud. Mott provides an illustrated framework, showing how an OLN can be created successfully, and adds that Brigham Young University in Hawaii is in the process of creating one. Mott concludes that institutions and educators need not be conflicted over the dilemma of having to choose either an LMS or a PLE. The best course is to help students become digitally fluent and the OLN provides an ideal tool that rejects the "tyranny of OR" and prefers the "genius of AND". This article is most probably directed at educational communities experiencing challenges with their LMNs and seeking alternative programs.

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.

This video was posted by Illinois worknet to acquaint education stakeholders with some of the technological advances being developed to address the challenges currently facing higher education. The short comings of what is available today include inability to support personalized learning; lack of educators skilled in the application of technological tools; constantly changing products; adaptability, appropriateness and validity issues; cost; and meeting sate standards. Technologies are now being designed and produced, to address those shortcomings by providing opportunities for personalized and student-centered learning experiences that are engaging, meet individual student needs, convenience, learning pace, and combine both online learning and face-to-face interaction. These hybrid models are being created in the short, mid and long-term horizon. Right now students have access to countless free applications. In two to three years, the article predicts that there will be an increase of learning analytics that collect and translate large amounts of data, as well as personalize the learning environment. In four to five years, it is expected that there will be gesture based computing and the Internet of things. The Learning Registry (LR) and the Shared Learning Collaborative (SLC) are technologies being developed to provide effective learning tools that provide filters for finding, interpreting, organizing and retrieving data. While the LR is currently in use, the SLR is in its pilot phase, and was introduced to five schools in the United States. The ultimate goal of these technologies is to use learning analytics that use rich data streams to inform and create personalized learning experiences and pathways.

This article by Glenda Cox highlights the concern for teachers' ability to implement and sustain the increasing use of technology to enhance learning, in a world where technology does not remain stagnant. From 2005 to 2011,the University of Cape Town, South Africa gave out small grants as incentives to teachers who employed the use of innovative technology. This article shows the result of a survey given to 30 recipients of the grant, to uncover the factors that compelled them to alter their pedagogical and teaching practices. The survey questions were centered on individual action and social structures. When asked why they altered their teaching to include technology, most of the teachers said it was their personal decisions, fashioned by pedagogical need to improve learning, and they received structural support in the form of money to purchase resources. Their responses also revealed that they enjoyed collaborating with their peers. The innovations continued to be sustained in the institution because they addressed real concerns. The motivation factor for these educators was not a desire try technological advances, but rather a desire to improve their teaching. Cox concludes by encouraging support for teachers who want to make such changes, because support creates awareness, leading to sustainability of innovations. Cox also stresses the need for more funding for innovations. This article is targeted at institutions wishing to support the advancement and sustainability of technological innovations.

Katrina Meyer voices growing concern about the ability of disruptive technology such as online education to produce the needed change in higher education. Disruptive innovation is a term coined by Clayton Christensen for innovations in technology that interfere with the current state of affairs. The term was originally coined to for the business realm, but began to be applied to education with the advent of innovations such as online learning, blogs, social media cloud computing and a host of others. While Meyer clearly states her belief in the potential of disruptive technology to encourage new thinking and learning approaches, she clarifies that she does not know how the change will occur. Higher education is grappling with declining governmental revenues, tuition increases and the call from stakeholders for more effective learning programs. On the other hand, enrollment in online programs has increased annually, and according to results released by the U.S Department of Education, students performed better online than in face to face learning with the largest gains achieved in courses that mixed both online and face-to-face instruction. . Meyer also adds that perhaps the inclusion of online components in college campus courses might be an indication that innovative disruption is finally making an entrance into campus based higher education. This article is targeted at higher education, and institutions are encouraged to incorporate online learning and other technologies into their repertoire in other to make learning more student-centered, motivating, choice enabling and providing connections to real life. Faculty must be willing to take risks and experiment with the knowledge that while some tools might be disruptive, not all of them are.

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.