Endicott College EDL762

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?

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.  

The authors collected data from first-year students at the University of Illinois in relation to their iPad 2 use in academic and non-academic settings. The intended audience is librarians and faculty members interested in incorporating tablet technology in the classroom or other learning environments. The study results found the iPad 2 to be helpful to students when searching the internet, viewing course management pages, and utilizing apps in connection with course materials. The students also used the iPad 2 to listen to music, watch videos, use social networks, and Skype. After using the iPad 2 for one week, the students made suggestions for new apps that would helpful to them. The student suggestions included a campus map app, a contact info for faculty app, an app to help in selecting future courses, and an app to help monitor grades.  The authors concluded that tablets, specifically the iPad 2, have a lot of potential to improve teaching and learning methods within higher education, however, there is much progress to be made. While the drawbacks to the tablet are somehow limited (no keyboard, need wireless connection, etc), the number and scope of apps need to be increased. Students expressed interest in using apps in connection to academic work, but most of those apps have yet to be created. 

The article gives a basic explanation of a few useful technologies to be used within an academic setting. First, a case is built for how technology can increase engagement and learning within the classroom, whether on-ground or online. Then the use of the internet, cloud computing, and multimedia are described. The authors highlight audio (podcasts and live chats), video (simulations, films, streamed videos, and screencasts), and blogging as multimedia options to be added to the classroom. In addition to multimedia, classroom learning can occur in a more mobile fashion. Many of the previous methods mentioned are use on desktop, laptops, and tablets. More and more students are utilizing their smartphones to access academic information. BlackBoard and eCollege both offer smartphone applications, which allow students and professors to access their course management sites through their phones. iPads are mentioned, but academic uses for these devices are yet to be determined. Finally, some institutions are offering degrees through Facebook, the social networking site. The Global MBA and The University of Whales in England, both offer MBAs through courses taught using Facebook. The article nicely summarizes a few technologies to be used within the classroom to enhance the students' experience. While the list is limited, and already out of date a few months after publication, the notion of using technology in the classroom to create a more dynamic experience is conveyed. The conclusion is a call for more research and study into making technology more effective within the classroom. 

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. 

The notion behind Professor Direct is to offer instructors the opportunity to teach courses online while determining the price or worth of the class, decreasing the cost of college courses drastically. Unlike other massive open online courses, Professor Direct calls their courses "ultra-affordable," averaging $99 a course. The instructor decides the cost of the course, in addition to office hours, communication (email) speed, tutorial options, and enrollment caps. Accessibility to the instructor, such as office hours and prompt email responses, allows professors to justify an increase in the cost of the course. Professors even receive commission for recruiting new students to their courses.  While there are a variety of benefits to enrolling at Professor Direct, few colleges and universities will accept transfer credits from the institution. Professor Direct also does not offer degrees, which prevents the organization from becoming accredited. The courses are, however, approved by the American Council on Education's College Credit Recommendation Service. Young alludes to an educational revolution if Professor Direct gained regional accreditation, a paradigm shift for higher education. For now, Professor Direct, and a similar organization called Udemy, are not accredited and are working to increase both their student populations and reputation within the higher education world. 

Coursera, one of the largest education companies offering online courses, claims to be content in building their user base without earning profits. Venture capitalists continue to invest in massive open online classes, however, without generating revenue, the investments may begin to wane. For now, elite colleges and universities, in addition to for-profit educational companies, will continue to offer online classes for free, while searching for a margin for profitability. A few sources for revenue have been considered. One of the most promising sources is the payment of licensing fees paid by other institutions to use "courses in a box" or video tutorials complementing currently offered courses. Another possible source of revenue is the sale of high-achieving student data. Corporate employers, such as Facebook and Twitter, can buy information on high-performing students studying specific subjects. A third option for profit generation is charging for credit-baring courses. The American Council on Education is reviewing a variety of courses offered through Coursera to determine if the courses are college credit worthy.  No steady revenue source has been identified in connection with massive open online classes, yet. While different organizations and institutions continue to find a way to profit from highly accessible online education, the user base will continue to increase. Hopefully, in addition to finding a mode of revenue, courses may be offered for college credit and the completion rate of MOOCs will increase. The current completion rate of MOOCs is 10%. 

The article touches upon topics relevant to all Americans, creating a large audience. Anyone influenced by higher education should be interested in Carlson and Blumenstyk's perspective.  While hype surrounds MOOCs and instructional technologies today, others are arguing for investment in brick and mortar colleges and universities. Patricia McGuire, the president of Trinity Washington University, believes those who stand to profit most from MOOCs and other forms of online education have created most of the hype.  Trinity Washington University is full of students receiving Pell Grants and a sub-standard high school education, students who need face-to-face instruction and tutoring more than most other students.  McGuire and other higher education officials listed in the article argue the online education movement is creating a wider gap between those that can afford an on-campus college experience and those that cannot. Unfortunately those that cannot afford to live on-campus and attend an elite university need the resources offered at brick and mortar institutions the most. While enhancement to teaching and learning may come from the development of online education, MOOCS, and new instruction technologies, an emphasis must be put on making on-campus education affordable. If face-to-face instruction is made inaccessible for most Americans, the country will suffer greatly, mainly by a wide divide between the haves and the have-nots within the working word as well as in higher education.

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.

Ben Showers, the author, admits to keeping the projections optimistic, and avoiding the issues of privacy, protection, and data shadow.The article describes five changes to mobile technology that will influence higher education into the future. The first change is mobile devices as a platform for learning and courses. Currently, mobile applications are more of a stepping-stone to larger course-management sites. In the future, students will desire actual learning platforms on their mobile device. The second change focuses on mobile realities. Augmented reality on mobile devices now allows the digital world to overlap with the real, physical world. Higher education institutions are able to use these new augmented reality technologies to aid students in find resources and information on-campus. The third mobile technology to affect higher education is mobile form. In the future, mobile devices will become more personalized and much smaller. As devices are created within glasses, earpieces, and sensors, higher education will have to adapt to those changes. Mobile scales are the fourth change to mobile technology Showers highlights. Large universities will have the ability to personalize each student's experience, offering an educational concierge service never before imagined. Finally, mobile disconnectedness will influence higher education. As students' lives become infiltrated with information via mobile devices, using the Internet, campuses should offer wifi coldspots. Wifi coldspots will offer students and faculty an opportunity to detach from the online work, taking a break from the academic world. 

Introduction to the open learning world. The author shows how students in various locations can participate in active learning through blogs.

best online colleges with a link to Open education database (OEDB)

Best technology site you will find - gets my endorsement for all-around ed-tech site.

the mother of clearinghouses -  universal design (and UDL) and accessibility in higher education.  

tech for individuals with disabilities in a learning environment.

How the use of mobile devices is changing the look and feel of teaching and learning. Points to the shift of focusing on what is coming from students on their devices instead of just what faculty are teaching. 

Conversation among faculty from several institutions about the benefits for students who become engaged differently in courses through technology.

Effective ways to create community through technology in a traditional academic course