Group items tagged

meaningful for everyone

These technologies become so complicated to use, that people simply don’t use them.

“the system does this, but I want to do that.”

What if a technology is so specific, it’s designed for just one person – yourself?

postal correspondence

three (or more) overlapping generations

mass media including television, radio and film.

interactive

Indeed, though the authors of this paper are not in complete agreement about this, it is possible to think of pedagogies (considered as the processes and methods used in an attempt to bring about learning) as technologies, integral parts of a technological assembly that must work together with all of the other technologies to bring about a successful outcome

technologies evolve not through adaptation but by assembly, incorporating pieces of earlier designs

We will see that the ubiquitous capacity of the Internet is creating very profound opportunities for enhancing the effectiveness and efficiency of all three pedagogical models.

instructional designer

positivist research paradigms and methodologies.

From behaviourist pedagogy emerged the cognitive learning theories that focus on how processing within the individual brain effects comprehension, understanding, storage and retrieval of information. Cognitive pedagogies arose partially in response to a growing need to account for motivation, attitudes and mental barriers that may only be partially associated or demonstrated through observable behaviours – yet they are directly linked to learning effectiveness and efficiency.

empirical testing

Methods that relied on one-to-many and one-to-one communication were really the only sensible options because of the constraints of the surrounding technologies.

“scientific models”

that guided the development, application and assessment of learning.

CB-based distance education is often developed in the suggested order

The model begins with designers selecting instructional goals. Instructional designers identify goals in discussion with subject matter experts with an eye to finding deficiencies in learners’ behaviour that can be rectified by new learning.

This is particularly salient when applied to a new generation of large scale MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses)

ext and usually multi-media learning content. The effort and cost of “developing and selecting instructional

creation of brainstorming lists of possible goals, documentation of subject matter priorities, flow charts, gathering of lists

Today each of the instructional design activities (see figure Figure 1) is enhanced by a host of Web 2.0 tools.

f primary use are distributed text tools such as Google Docs, DropBox and wikis

As importantly, collaborative work and negotiation is not confined to text. Collaborative graphic tools, concept and mind mapping tools allow graphic representations of ideas and processes.

Low cost distributed project management tools allow teams to design, create, produce and distribute content at costs much lower than in pre internet days.

gh quality content defines CB models of distance education, its effective management and control is extremely important

the capacity to re-use content created by others is compelling – if not without its challenges.

multiple ways of sharing content

blogs to Facebook to YouTube and content management systems

Perhaps of deeper concern is the reluctance of distance educators to consume and customize content already created by others.

Many content developers define and pride themselves on the production of quality content – not by the consumption and customization of works that they did not produce.

The final affordance of the net – with tremendous, if as yet little demonstrated capacity to improve CB distance education pedagogy – is learning analytics.

mining information about patterns of behaviour in order to extract useful information about learning which can then be applied to improve the experience.

In this model, CB pedagogy may be adapted to service the unique learning needs, style, capacity, motivation and goals of the individual learner.

strive to create instructional designs that change and morph in response to individual learner’s needs and behaviours.

Open Learning Models (Bull & Kay, 2010; Kay & Kummerfeld, 2006) increase learner control and understanding of the system. Open models can also be used by teachers and other support staff to better understand and respond to individual learner needs, although there are potential and as yet unresolved issues with making such models intuitive to understand and control effectivel

important source of data to constructing the model is the user’s current and past activities with content in the learning context.

data minin

data mining

From the brief examples above we can see how technologies and especially the Net afford multiple ways in which CB pedagogies and related instructional designs are enabled, enhanced and made more cost effective.

MOOCs

CB models are inherently focused on the individual learner. While there is a tradition of cognitive-constructivist thinking that hinges on personal construction of knowledge, largely developed by Piaget and his followers (Piaget, 1970), the roots of the constructivist model most commonly applied today spring from the work of Vygotsky (1978) and Dewey (1897), generally lumped together in the broad category of social constructivism.

groups of learners, learning together with and from one another.

Social-constructivism does not provide the detailed and prescriptive instructional design models and methodologies of CB driven distance education.

efines social constructivist learning contexts as places “where learners may work together and support each other as they use a variety of tools and information resources in their guided pursuit of learning goals and problem-solving activities

eachers do not merely transmit knowledge to be passively consumed by learners; rather, each learner constructs the means by which new knowledge is both created and integrated with existing knowledge.

New knowledge as building upon the foundation of previous learning Context in shaping learners’ knowledge development Learning as an active rather than passive process, Language and other social tools in constructing knowledge Metacognition and evaluation as a means to develop learners’ capacity to assess their own learning A learning environment that is learner-centred and recognises the importance of multiple perspectives Knowledge needing to be subject to social discussion, validation, and application in real world contexts (Honebein, 1996; Jonassen, 1991; Kanuka & Anderson, 1999).

learning is located in contexts and relationships rather than merely in the minds of individuals.

leave more room for negotiation about learning goals and activities among teachers and students.

less prescriptive

Social-constructivist models only began to gain a foothold in distance education when the technologies of many-to-many communication became widely available,

that being the loss of freedom associated with a commitment to meeting at a common time.

Time constraint issues are especially important to distance students, most of whom are juggling employment and family concerns in addition to their formal course work.

ata mining and learning analytics are not only used to support independent study based on CB models but are being utilized to support and enhance group work.

extract patterns and other information from the group logs and present it together with desired patterns to the people involved, so that they can interpret it, making use of their own knowledge of the group tasks and activities” (Perera et al., 2009).

LMS Moodle

Standard Moodle analytics allow teachers to view contributions or activities of individual learners

Google Analytics

Constructivist pedagogies use the diversity of viewpoints, cultural experiences and the potential for divergent opinion that is best realized through interactions with group members from other cultures, languages and geographies.

Naturally, technological affordances of most relevance to constructivist pedagogies focus on tools to support effective establishment, operation and trust building within groups. The technologies that support rich social presence, including full range of audio, video and gestures, are associated with enhanced trust development and increasing sense of group commitment

connectivism

learning is the process of building networks of information, contacts, and resources that are applied to real problems.

communities of practice

Connectivist learning focuses on building and maintaining networked connections that are current and flexible enough to be applied to existing and emergent problems.

capacity to find, filter and apply knowledge when and where it is needed

The crowd can be a source of wisdom (Surowiecki, 2005) but can equally be a source of stupidity

iticism of connectivism as being merely an extension constructivist pedagogy and those who argue that it is not really a complete theory of learning nor of instruction

gain high levels of skill using personal learning networks that provide ubiquitous and on demand access to resources, individuals and groups of potential information and knowledge servers. The second is the focus on creation, as opposed to consumption, of information and knowledge resources.

Bloom’s (1956) cognitive taxonomy place creation at the highest level of cognitive processing

elies on the ubiquity of networked connections – between people, digital artefacts, and content, and thus can be described as a network centric pedagogy and thus may be the first native distance education pedagogy, without previous instantiation in classrooms.

Effective connectivist learning experiences demand that learners have the tools and the competencies necessary to effectively find, sort, evaluate, filter, reformat and publish content on the net.

hese capacities rely on effective tools, high skill levels and a developed sense of network efficacy.

individuals and groups are helped to create and continuously augment, adapt and use a personal learning environment (PLE)

second key defining characteristic of connectivist pedagogy is the import placed on creating, sharing and publishing learner artefacts.

Connectivist learning designs, like constructivist ones, often involve collaborative or cooperative work between many learners. However, contribution often grows beyond the group to further encourage collaboration across time and space.

eyond the tools of creation instantiated within a PLE is an understanding of the technical and legal means to distribute work, while maintaining appropriate privacy levels and not infringing on the copyright nor plagiarizing the work of others.

The only solution to the privacy dilemma is to let each student and teacher set the level of access that they feel is most appropriate for them and more explicitly for the nature of the content being distributed.

Privacy concerns are also being recognised by the social networking giants.

Connectivist designs also involve the discovery of and contribution to new learning communities.

Learners are encouraged to make themselves, their contributions and their personal learning environment accessible to others. T

create and rate bookmarked resources t

hat others find useful, document their learning accomplishments via blogs, and share their discoveries and insights via micro blog feeds. In this manner they create and sustain learning networks that begin at the course level, but grow and evolve as the course of studies ends.

the emphasis is far more on the individual’s connections with others than with group processes designed to enhance or engender learning.

arder to apply analytics than in the more contained contexts of CB and social constructivist models.

There is no central course, few common materials, no central binding point where interactions can be observed apart from each individual learner.

edagogy is, at heart, entirely focused on the individual learner.

The bottom three of Blooms original levels of learning – acquiring knowledge, coming to understand something or some process and applying that knowledge to a context – are clearly within the domain of CB pedagogies.

Moving up to the analysis, synthesis and evaluation levels brings us to the need for social perspective. This is often acquired through group and networked interactions characteristic of constructivist and connectivist pedagogical models.

Creation can be entirely original or as is more usual, creation involves the building upon, reinterpretation and contextualized application of older ideas to new contexts. Creation, the highest level of cognitive functioning usually requires mastery of the lower levels but, in addition, requires at least a small flame of creativity and insight.

Obviously the focus of connectivism with its inherent demand for students to create and distribute for public review and augmentation, fits well with the final creation level of the revised taxonomy.

here are many domains of knowledge in which creation of new knowledge is of much less importance than remembering and being able to apply existing knowledge.

No single generation has provided all the answers, and each has built on foundations provided by its predecessors rather than replacing the earlier prototype (Ireland, 2007).

As new technological affordances open up, it becomes possible to explore and capitalize on different aspects of the learning process.

For each mode of engagement, different types of knowledge, learning, and contexts must be applied.

students be skilled and informed to select the best mix(es) of both pedagogy and technology.

from the student-content interactions of cognitive-behaviourist models to the critical role of student–student interaction in constructivism, and finally, to the deeply networked student–content-teacher interrelationship celebrated in connectivist pedagogie

which students become teachers and teachers become students,

Connectivism is built to some degree on an assumption of a constructivist model of learning, with the learner at the centre, connecting and constructing knowledge in a context that includes not only external networks and groups but also their own histories and predilections.

he late Boston scholar Father Stanley Bezuska assembled a series of humorous quotes (see http://www.slideshare.net/committedsardine/funny-predictions-throughout-history) illustrating the doomsday predictions of teachers as they have been forced to deal with educational technologies.

Traditional, lecture-based classrooms are designed as passive learning environments in which the teacher conveys knowledge and the student responds (Chen, 2009).

"He or she supports the students in their search and supply of relevant material, coordinates the students' presentations of individual milestones of their projects, moderates discussions, consults in all kinds of problem-solving and seeking for solutions, lectures on topics that are selected in plenary discussions with the students and conforms to the curriculum" (Motschnig-Pitrik & Holzinger, 2002, p. 166).

scaffold the learning process

Examples of emerging web applications for each of these categories are highlighted. The Networked Student Model establishes a baseline that begins to address what level of structure is needed to facilitate networked learning while providing a foundation for greater student control over the personal learning environment.

Networked learning, constructivism, and principles of connectivism inform the instructional design and provide a foundation on which future studies can explore the impact of networked learning on K-12 students and teachers.

It is the combination of these connections, especially in concert with human to human contact, that provide the most powerful learning potential (Goodyear, 2005).

The significant connections in Couros' view of the network include colleagues, popular media, print and digital resources, the local community, blogs, wikis, video conferencing, chat/IRC, social networking services, online communities, social bookmarking, digital photo sharing, and content development communities (Couros, 2008).

The networked student follows a constructivist approach to learning.

The Networked Student Model of constructing personal learning environments is reflected in many connectivist principles.

The networked student constructs knowledge that can be built upon in other contexts. That knowledge resides within the network to be activated by the learner at any time in the future. There is always the capacity to add nodes to the network (Siemens, 2009).

Ultimately, meaningful learning occurs with knowledge construction, not reproduction; conversation, not reception; articulation, not repetition; collaboration, not competition; and reflection, not prescription (Jonassen et al., 2003).

Learning potential exists in what the student does with the compilation of content and how it is synthesised.

exploring problems, asking questions, making discoveries, achieving new understanding and fulfilling personal curiosity" (National Science Foundation, as quoted by Chang & Wang, 2009, p. 169)

The networked student test case follows a single iteration, design based research process (Ma & Harmon, 2009) for analysing a problem, developing a solution, testing a prototype, and reflecting on the results.

The students had never participated in networked learning, so a significant amount of time was allotted at the beginning of the project to address digital literacy as well as task and organisational skills that would be required in the online environment.

The process and tools are overwhelming to students if presented all at once.

Achieving the delicate balance between teacher control and student autonomy is an ongoing challenge when facilitating student use of new technologies for self-regulated learning

poll.

“Attempts at integrating technology within education, however, have often focused on enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness of the status quo, replacing traditional instructional approaches with ones that are technologically reinforced, yet qualitatively similar” “Research continues to show that access to technology alone has limited impact on learning outcomes and instructional methods and is often used to support passive, teacher-centered, and didactic instruction”

learning is often seen as a single and sporadic classroom activity as opposed to an endeavor that is ongoing, lifelong, and independent of educational institutions and age

it is important for learners to understand, and instructors to acknowledge, that knowledge is distributed and that the instructor is not the sole source of knowledge on a topic

We should aspire for learning that changes the ways a learner acts in the world. We want learners to talk, discuss and share their learning with family and friends, rather than compartmentalising

“transformative learning experiences cannot be”imposed” on learners.” invited, and encouraged, and facilitated.

Siemens (2005) describes the following characteristics of connectivism: Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions

Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources

The near infinite potential of dancing with anyone, anywhere, anytime coupled with the vast sound tracks and light shows (open educational resources) accessible on the Net, demand that learning be an experience of connecting and applying resources, rather than memorizing particular tunes or steps. The art of improvisation, of learning to dance, becomes the life learning skill – accumulating static data or memorizing scripts becomes obsolete.

When I reflect on other courses of formal study that I have undertaken at this university there are a diverse array of online teaching practices evident. Some model, facilitate and challenge learning just like this one; while others have an approach of ‘here is the assessment, good luck…see you at the end’. I need to make sure that all of my teaching is supportive and challenging to students learning – there is limited learning with the ‘here is the assessment…enjoy’ approach.

‘As Student’

“It is through writing our ideas down that we make what we learn explicit, thus enabling us to “reflect upon it, and reanalyse it in light of new and sometimes conflicting information” (Goal et all., 2008).”

Riel and Polin reading is that we are a knowledge-based community given we “construct, use, reconstruct, and reuse knowledge in deliberate, continuous cycles” (p. 32).

‘As Student’

sharing our ideas in PCP is not scary and threatening, but can help ourselves and others. Everybody’s ideas seem obvious to them. What is obvious to me is amazing for someone else.

I continue to do my work, I tell my little tales and share my point of view. Nothing spectacular, just my little thoughts.

‘As student’ I was initially hesitant to share my thoughts opinions and ideas because I wasn’t sure if they were worthy of sharing. They are nothing different or innovative. But through engagement in Blogging and the non-threatening nature of the task – just blog, it doesn’t have to be perfect – has assisted a great deal. Overtime I have noticed that I am more comfortable sharing ideas.

feeding forward’, as identified by Downes (2011).

“We suggest three distinct but overlapping forms of learning within communities (task-based, practice-based; knowledge-based learning) and discuss practical design implications of these distinctions.”

learning theory has evolved from a cognitive theory of acquisition of knowledge to a social theory of increased participation in activity (Bruner, 1973; Cole, 1988; Lave, 1988; Mehan, 1983; Nonnan, 1980; Rogoff, 1994; Wertsch, 1997).

ntellectual development becomes a process of negotiation of meaning in everyday practice with others (Dewey, 1916; Vygotsky, 1978).

Learning occurs through engagement in authentic experiences involving the active manipulation and experimentation with ideas and artefacts – rather than through an accumulation of static knowledge (Bruner, 1973; Cole, 1988; Dewey, 1916).

Wenger (2000) uses the metaphor of a garden to describe the nature of support that works for something as delicate as a community of practice. You cannot, he says, make the flowers grow by pulling on their leaves. You can, however, keep the flower beds free of weeds and pests, ensure there is water and sunlight, and you can even apply some plant food. But the flowers must do their own growing. What does that sort of support for the flowerbed look like in an isolated and troubled profession such as teaching?

‘As Student’

‘As Student’

sharing our ideas in PCP is not scary and threatening, but can help ourselves and others. Everybody’s ideas seem obvious to them. What is obvious to me is amazing for someone else.

feeding forward’, as id

We suggest three distinct but overlapping forms of learning within communities (task-based, practice-based; knowledge-based learning) and discuss practical design implications of these distinctions.”

earning theory has evolved from a cognitive theory of acquisition of knowledge to a social theory of increased participation in activity (Bruner, 1973; Cole, 1988; Lave, 1988; Mehan, 1983; Nonnan, 1980; Rogoff, 1994; Wertsch, 1997).

tellectual development becomes a process of negotiation of meaning in everyday practice with others (Dewey, 1916; Vygotsky, 1978).

Learning occurs through engagement in authentic experiences involving the active manipulation and experimentation with ideas and artefacts – rather than through an accumulation of static knowledge (Bruner, 1973; Cole, 1988; Dewey, 1916).

Wenger (2000) uses the metaphor of a garden to describe the nature of support that works for something as delicate as a community of practice. You cannot, he says, make the flowers grow by pulling on their leaves. You can, however, keep the flower beds free of weeds and pests, ensure there is water and sunlight, and you can even apply some plant food. But the flowers must do their own growing. What does that sort of support for the flowerbed look like in an isolated and troubled profession such as teaching?

d social bookmarking in t

“Learners need to find their own unique pathway to transformative understanding of networked learning. There’s no simple and straightforward way to mastery that can be taught.”

‘The past always looks easy and the future always looks challenging’.

Our information overload is a filtering issue and we are having filter failure.

lexibility is the greatest strength.

online learning is that it is asynchronous and students can participate and engage with content anywhere, anytime. I believe the f

Siemens (2004) also notes that learning occurs in informal and non-formal learning contexts.

“Knowledge is contained in the links between interconnected nodes and learning is the creation of these connections and the ability to traverse these connections. “For an individual this is about growing the connections in the mind by growing the connections.”

Alec Couros pointed out in a keynote from FUSION 2013 that – “There is strength in weak ties. Our acquaintances, not our friends, are potentially our greatest source of new ideas and information” (paraphrased from Gladwell, 2010).

are we preparing students to learn without us? How can we shift curriculum and pedagogy to more effectively help students form and answer their own questions, develop patience with uncertainty and ambiguity, appreciate and learn from failure, and develop the ability to go deeply into the subjects about which they have a passion to learn

writing blog posts

model the learning process together

Assessment changes as well. Donhauser says that the emphasis moves to assessing in the moment rather than at the end of a book or unit. "Rather than having a defined product that I receive from 25 students," she says, "I receive 25 individual assignments with their own unique content, insights, and styles." Using Google Docs, students continually update their progress, and she provides regular feedback. Students also give one another feedback on their plans as they go. Everyone follows a rubric that covers such areas as standards, learning outcomes, artifact explanation, blog posts, learning activities, work ethic, and research. Personalized learning like this requires students to reflect deeply on their effort and assess their work and progress, a fundamental part of developing the skills and dispositions to continue learning after the class ends.

the truly personal, self-directed learning that we can now pursue in online networks and communities differs substantially from the "personalized" opportunities that some schools are opening up to students. Although it might be an important first step in putting students on a path to a more self-directed, passionate, relevant learning life, it may not bring about the true transformation that many see as the potential of this moment.

We begin by copying successful practice, and then begin to modify that practice to satisfy our own particular circumstances and needs

In addition to being expert in the discipline of teaching and pedagogy, the educator is now expected to have up-to-date and relevant knowledge and experience in it. Even a teacher of basic disciplines such as science, history or mathematics must remain grounded, as no discipline has remained stable for very long, and all disciplines require a deeper insight in order to be taught effectively.

What's significant about these examples is not so much the new opportunities they offer students, though there is that. It's that all of them redefine the educator's role in some significant way. They create entirely new categories of educator, such as "online lecturer" or "scientist studying polar bears". Entire disciplines, far removed from traditional "instructional design", are being created and populated by people who direct online videos, design learning communities, program massive games like Evoke. And they create new categories of roles and responsibilities for in-person educators.

Historically, it has been impractical to break up the roles of the teacher. You need a certain scale even to have a separate person assigned as a librarian or an audio-visual coordinator. You need a much greater scale, not to mention much better coordination, to have separate people assigned as lecturers, coaches, theorizers and evaluators. Yet relatively few of these roles need to be performed in person, and most of them scale pretty well.

what I find as I offer more and more types and instances of learning, both online and in person, is that we can achieve much more efficient, effective and rewarding learning by organizing the educational system according to the sorts of educational services people might want and need, rather than by predefined collections of students assigned, almost randomly, to individual teachers

one thing I have been observing is that educators have been gravitating toward one or another of these 23 roles. Some of them, presumably the more extroverted, have taken on the role of lecturer or demonstrator. Others, who were perhaps more technically inclined, have become programmers or bureaucrats. Still others, those perhaps work best with presence or human contact, prefer to function as coaches or mentors. Not everybody can perform every role; not everybody wants to perform every role.

it is frustrating when people identify the role of the teacher as the central factor influencing the success or failure of a student's education. Leaving aside any influence of external factors, such a statement begs us to question what aspect of the educator's role it is that is so vitally important. And while the likely answer may be that they all are, or that it depends on the individual student, it seems clear that continuing to treat them as a single role, to be performed by a single person, increasingly defies the reality that is today's educational system

Though there may still be thousands of people employed today with the job title of "teacher" or "educator", it is misleading to suggests that all, or even most, aspects of providing an education should, or could, be placed into the hands of these individuals.

not every student wants or needs the services of every role

He acknowledges that there’s a human tendency towards homophily, flocking together in groups united by race, gender, belief, socioeconomic status, etc.

ooking for solutions and common ground by trying to get to the facts.

To have a good conversation, you need to have 99% similarity and 1% difference.

When data.gov released sets of government information, they didn’t clean or normalize it ahead of time – they released raw data. They concluded that it was better to put the data out there than to constrain themselves to information that was consistent and known, for the simple reason that this constraint would have slowed them down badly. Darwin would not have agreed – he spent seven years on one fact.

It may be the one approach that’s scaleable

why were old knowledge systems so fragile?

hese systems assumed knowledge was bounded, settled, orderly and proceeded step by step. But that’s not what knowledge feels like in the age of the internet. It feels unbounded, overwhelming, unsettled, messy, linked and governed by our interests. And those properties are the properties of what it means to be human in the world.

The wide range of approaches and learning paths that are available to redesign curricula cause friction for educators and instructional designers who are required to deliver course materials in accordance with learning outcomes prescribed and mandated by educational institutions.

Connectivism stresses that two important skills that contribute to learning are the ability to seek out current information, and the ability to filter secondary and extraneous information.  Simply put, “The capacity to know is more critical than what is actually known” (Siemens, 2008, para. 6)

The developmental implications of Downes’ definitions of learning and knowledge are far-reaching.  If learning transpires via connections to nodes on the network, then it follows that the maximization of learning can best be achieved through identifying the properties of effective networks, which is precisely what Downes sets out to achieve in Learning Networks and Connective Knowledge.

Siemens (2006b) highlights other factors that may inform the development of a new learning theory, namely “how we teach, how we design curriculum, the spaces and structures of learning, and the manner in which we foster and direct critical and creative thought in our redesign of education” (p. 6).

roponents of connectivism are “exploring a model of learning that reflects the network-like structure evident in online interactions,” (p. 12) but is this enough to constitute its formulation as a new learning theory, and does connectivism have anything new to offer?

the way in which global networks and communities of interest are currently being formed through emerging technologies is encouraging young people, in particular, to develop new, creative, and different forms of communication and knowledge creation outside formal education

A paradigm shift, indeed, may be occurring in educational theory, and a new epistemology may be emerging, but it does not seem that connectivism’s contributions to the new paradigm warrant it being treated as a separate learning theory in and of its own right.  Connectivism, however, continues to play an important role in the development and emergence of new pedagogies, where control is shifting from the tutor to an increasingly more autonomous learner.

e expected to be

The following are several specific examples of what the open standards and services must enable to make this new architecture for learning a reality: Digital content and applications must be easily, quickly (ideally, within a few minutes versus months), and seamlessly integrated into any platform that supports a set of vendor-neutral open standards and, importantly, are not trapped inside a single platform. User, course, and context information must be synchronized among selected applications so that neither the manual transfer of information nor multiple logins to different applications are required—thus making set-up and use of new software much easier for all concerned. Data that describes usage, activities, and outcomes must flow from learning content apps to the enterprise system of record, learning platforms, and analytics platforms. Systems, services, and tools must be virtualized and must increasingly move toward the elastic computing model that enables sharing scenarios across systems or other federations of users.Imagine what would happen if CIOs could safely add services and applications in a matter of days instead of months, if instructors could seamlessly combine these tools into their courses with one click, and if analytics data would begin to flow immediately thereafter. This new IT architecture would revolutionize the support for academic technology in the same way that the app movement has revolutionized what is available on mobile devices. A key difference with the new IT architecture, however, is that these educational apps are built using standards adopted and managed by the educational community and would be connected into the educational enterprise IT infrastructure.

The rise of the MOOC illustrates how important innovations often happen outside of established channels: by faculty who, interested in innovation, put together their own technology solutions outside their college or university. This should be a wake-up call for the higher education community to do better. Enterprise IT organizations need to enable such innovation, not stand in its way.

And it’s not just the quantity of information that makes true mastery impossible in the Age of the I

And just one more thing about these messy webs. They’re full of disagreement, contradiction, argument, differences in perspective. Just a few minutes on the Web reveals a fundamental truth: We don’t agree about anything. And we never will. My proof of that broad statement is all of human history. How do you master a field, even if you could define its edges, when the field doesn’t agree with itself?

Arisaka (2001)

The future development of educational technology will not be determined by the technology itself, states Feenberg, but rather the politics within the educational community and national political trends. In taking a dialogic approach, he stresses educational technology of an advanced society should be shaped by educational dialogue rather than the production-oriented logic of automation.

According to Feenberg (1991), critical theory explains how technology is embedded in society through ‘technological code’ that is dialectical, contextual, aesthetic, and humanly, socially, and ecologically responsible.

In summary, Feenberg (2002; 5) calls for a profound democratic transformation of technologies, asking “can we conceive an industrial society based on democratic participation in which individual freedom is not market freedom and in which social responsibility is not exercised through coercive regulation?” He argues a good society should support the personal freedom of its members enabling them to participate effectively in a range of public activities. This can be manifest in democratizing technological design; pursuing a ‘democratic rationalization’ where actors participate in the technological design processes. For Illich (1973), ‘tools of conviviality’ produce a democratic and convivial society in which individuals communicate, debate, participate in social and political life, and help make decisions. Convivial tools free individuals from dependency and cultivate autonomy and sociality.

Don Ihde (1990)

E-learning literature increasingly perceives the role of the tutor as facilitator (Salmon, 2004), whilst in a connectivist learning environment, it may become further marginalised or even obsolesced (Siemens, 2004). This emphasis on informal and autonomous learning and student engagement with experts outside their formal educational institutions also recalls Illich’s (1970) community webs. Critical educators such as Freire and Feenberg are critical of the diminishing of critical engagement by the tutor and believe it is essential that teachers continue to have a directive role.

Friesen (2008) explores three myths pertinent to current e-learning literature: Knowledge Economy Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime Learning Technology drives Educational Change

Kellner stresses that multiple literacies, such as media, computer, and information literacies are required in response to emergent technologies and cultural conditions to empower students to participate in the expanding high-tech culture and networked society.

Karlsson (2002) however, suggests so called web literacies should be recognised and studied merely as print literacies that appear on the web. Feenberg (2002) reminds us arguments emerging around new educational technologies are nothing new. He suggests writing was one of the first (narrow bandwidth) educational technologies, and describes how Plato denounced writing as destructive to the dialogic relationship between teacher and student evident in spoken discourse. (Noble (1997) points out the irony in Plato using written text to critique writing, suggesting that similarly, the majority of current attacks on web-based media circulate online.)

What originated as a hastily-conceived title for a conference presentation has since become a catch-all term for a range of ‘ontologically non–compatible’ elements (Allen, 2008). In an attempt to conceptualize the meaning of Web 2.0, Allen identifies four key components: Technological implementations that prioritise the manipulation and presentation of data through the interaction of both human and computer agents. An Economic model. Using the Web to put people and data together in meaningful exchanges for financial gain. Users are perceived as active participants, engaged in creating, maintaining and expanding Web content. The politics of Web 2.0 are expressed in traditional democratic terms, which emphasises freedom of choice and the empowerment of individuals.

Under a critical perspective, the democratic forms of media consumption and production of Web 2.0 are challenged by the underlying “dictates of a neo-liberal socio–political hegemony” (Jarrett, 2008), as evidenced in the exploitation of user–generated content by major corporations (Petersen, 2008). As Silver (2008) reminds us, “when corporations say community they mean commerce, and when they say aggregation they mean advertising.” Scholz (2008) contends the Web remains largely the domain of “professional elites that define what enters the public discourse,” In addition, social conditions inherent in Web 2.0 practices such as personalization (Zimmer, 2008) and participatory surveillance (Albrechtslund, 2008) require a rethinking of traditional notions of identity, privacy and social hierarchies. As educationalists demonstrate an increasing determination to tap into the apparent technological and sociological affordances of Web 2.0, these are issues that cannot be ignored.

written exams will have been replaced by assessment through multimedia portfolios of student work. These will show not only students’ current knowledge and competencies, but also their progression over time, and a range of equally important skills, such as their ability to work collaboratively, self-management of learning, and general communication skills. Assessment will be mainly on a continuous, on-going basis.

Since content will be freely accessible, institutions’ reputation and branding will increasingly depend on the way they support learners. This will put much greater emphasis on instructors having good teaching skills as well as subject expertise.

t will become increasingly difficult for institutions to protect student data and their privacy. This may turn out to be the biggest challenge for students, institutions, and government

you are in a position to influence a different kind of vision

They will have lost students to more prestigious universities and high status vocationally oriented institutions using online and flexible learning to boost their numbers.

The Victorians were great engineers. They engineered a system that was so robust that it's still with us today, continuously producing identical people for a machine that no longer exists.

We know that people will work from wherever they want, whenever they want, in whatever way they want. How is present-day schooling going to prepare them for that world?

If you allow the educational process to self-organize, then learning emerges. It's not about making learning happen. It's about letting it happen.

The teacher sets the process in motion and then she stands back in awe and watches as learning happens.

We need to shift that balance back from threat to pleasure.

think we need a curriculum of big questions.