It is an absolute truism that the best curriculum innovations emerge when academic staff are enthused and driven to change their current practice. However, this is rarely (if ever?) enough in its own right. Back in the mists of time (2000ish) we asked staff what were the main barriers to change, in this case, to make greater use of technology in LTA design. They gave us five "wishes": time (of course), confidence in a robust and reliable infrastructure, institution provide appropriate support ie put money where mouth is, provide technology that they can "own" (putting the door back on the classroom and putting the emphasis on their relationship with the students) and, very importantly validation that this is a valid thing to spend time on ie clear executive sponsorship. There are so many conflicting demands on staff time and we needed to make it clear that this wasn't something you were expected to do in your own time as your hobby but was a legitimate..(maybe some day soon even essential) part of academic life. One of the things I really like about my own institution is the high level commitment to supporting innovation.
Fast forward seven years and we are experiencing a lot of success in e-learning and the senior managers are still supportive but asking questions like "what's it all about?", "where are the benefits", "is it value for money?" "what will the future look like?" It's easy to see the dilemma - governors ask questions about costs...and benefits, students really like it and expect it, but are also wanting more contact time, staff are all progressing at a different pace. The solution...no, not soultion...our approach was to run a "future of e-learning engagement" for the senior management group - a traditional discussion paper, a 6 week Bb course and a highly participative workshop. There is a LOT more information about this at http://sheffieldhallamuniexec.pbwiki.com/
Was it worth it - definitely - it enabled us to get a few things back on the radar at the senior level as well as a commitment to support growth rather than cut back. The important message (not rocket science for people reading this, I'm sure) was that to get the best out of the technology it isn't the technology that needs the investment but the people... the birth of our digital fluency initative. Other follow-ons have included the importance of expectations (students and staff), the tower and the cloud debates and how we might better join up e-supported LTA and how technology supports the broader student experience. Solutions? no. Challenges? yes....but at least something to get our teeth into ;-)
Showing posts with label digital fluency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label digital fluency. Show all posts
Saturday, 12 April 2008
Friday, 21 March 2008
Hackneyed phrases and new and emerging hackneyed phrases
Recently I blogged a response to George Siemens' weariness of the concept of "Pedagogy first" and it made me ponder what I phrases feel weary of when I hear them. I find that these are particularly prolific in conference presentations, educational developer/learning technologist meetings and (increasingly) job interviews. Following George's example I'm going to endeavour that this doesn't become a rant but considers the "what lies beneath" of the hackneyed phrases.
1. "I'm looking forward to the day we can drop the 'e' and just talk about learning" usually followed by a mexican wave of nods around the room (and a sigh from me). To me this is a "so what" sort of comment, of course I recognise the sub-text of not treating e-learning as a novelty or needing special attention, but I personally think it is interesting enough to generate a rich seam of conversation in its own right - just before it starts to become ordinary something new and exciting come along to refresh thinking. This is not restricted to e-learning, I've also heard "let's stop talking about assessment/teaching/student support/transition and just talk about learning." Of course everything is a subset of learning but do we really want to just describe everything with one word and start every conversation with totality? Will that really advance our cause? Is it a good measure of impact? What's wrong with using language to shine a spotlight?
2. "technology is just another tool in the academic's toolkit that they may or maynot choose to use and I'm OK with that" this is usually an ed dev/learn tech comment and makes me want to ask a whole host of follow up questions - is technology one tool? in this day and age is there a legitimate opt out? in what circumstances might they choose not to use anything at all? and is it really OK to be OK with it? - where are the parallels? - would a librarian declare the same level of comfort if an academic opted out of using any information resources? I realise that I am going against conventional wisdom here, but I don't subscribe to the toolkit perspective. I think about living, learning, working in a digital age (in a world immersed in technology), I think about authenticity to discipline and/or professions, I think about the rich learning opportunities technology can offer and then I wonder in what context is it [yawn yawn] "just another tool"?
3. "technology is fine, but it isn't appropriate within my subject/discipline" obviously an academic comment (well, you know, ed dev/learn tech don't have the monopoly on hackney). I don't really have much to add to this one - its ??? is absolutely explicit. Is there really a subject or discipline in which learning cannot be enriched by thoughtful application of technology or that doesn't have a real world technology component worth embedding? If there is I haven't come across it yet, but if others have, please share...or (I like a challenge) suggest one and let's see if we can't prove/disprove this once and for all.
New and emerging hackneyed.... well "new and emerging" is probably a good candidate in itself, others might include "e-portfolios are the true personalised learning environments", "wikipedia is damaging students' ability to research", "we need to take learning to where the students are, Facebook, MySpace etc". The recent ELI Spring Focus Session with a focus on authenticity through "learning by doing or learning by thinking like.." offered a range of candidates for the coming soon "hackneys" (I even found myself trotting out a refreshed version of 1 above for which I am eternally sorry - "stop talking about them as students but as engineers, psychologists, nurses etc" - oh dear, oh dear) but for now, for the new and emerging ones, I'm not going to fret they are afterall not established yet and as long as they still offer opportunities for conversations and encourage everyone (whatever their role) to re-consider their practice to be more student-focused then I'll stick behind them for a while.
Your comments are most welcome on any of the above together with, if you wish, suggestions for phrases to put in the "Hackneyed Hall of Yawn"
1. "I'm looking forward to the day we can drop the 'e' and just talk about learning" usually followed by a mexican wave of nods around the room (and a sigh from me). To me this is a "so what" sort of comment, of course I recognise the sub-text of not treating e-learning as a novelty or needing special attention, but I personally think it is interesting enough to generate a rich seam of conversation in its own right - just before it starts to become ordinary something new and exciting come along to refresh thinking. This is not restricted to e-learning, I've also heard "let's stop talking about assessment/teaching/student support/transition and just talk about learning." Of course everything is a subset of learning but do we really want to just describe everything with one word and start every conversation with totality? Will that really advance our cause? Is it a good measure of impact? What's wrong with using language to shine a spotlight?
2. "technology is just another tool in the academic's toolkit that they may or maynot choose to use and I'm OK with that" this is usually an ed dev/learn tech comment and makes me want to ask a whole host of follow up questions - is technology one tool? in this day and age is there a legitimate opt out? in what circumstances might they choose not to use anything at all? and is it really OK to be OK with it? - where are the parallels? - would a librarian declare the same level of comfort if an academic opted out of using any information resources? I realise that I am going against conventional wisdom here, but I don't subscribe to the toolkit perspective. I think about living, learning, working in a digital age (in a world immersed in technology), I think about authenticity to discipline and/or professions, I think about the rich learning opportunities technology can offer and then I wonder in what context is it [yawn yawn] "just another tool"?
3. "technology is fine, but it isn't appropriate within my subject/discipline" obviously an academic comment (well, you know, ed dev/learn tech don't have the monopoly on hackney). I don't really have much to add to this one - its ??? is absolutely explicit. Is there really a subject or discipline in which learning cannot be enriched by thoughtful application of technology or that doesn't have a real world technology component worth embedding? If there is I haven't come across it yet, but if others have, please share...or (I like a challenge) suggest one and let's see if we can't prove/disprove this once and for all.
New and emerging hackneyed.... well "new and emerging" is probably a good candidate in itself, others might include "e-portfolios are the true personalised learning environments", "wikipedia is damaging students' ability to research", "we need to take learning to where the students are, Facebook, MySpace etc". The recent ELI Spring Focus Session with a focus on authenticity through "learning by doing or learning by thinking like.." offered a range of candidates for the coming soon "hackneys" (I even found myself trotting out a refreshed version of 1 above for which I am eternally sorry - "stop talking about them as students but as engineers, psychologists, nurses etc" - oh dear, oh dear) but for now, for the new and emerging ones, I'm not going to fret they are afterall not established yet and as long as they still offer opportunities for conversations and encourage everyone (whatever their role) to re-consider their practice to be more student-focused then I'll stick behind them for a while.
Your comments are most welcome on any of the above together with, if you wish, suggestions for phrases to put in the "Hackneyed Hall of Yawn"
Tuesday, 11 March 2008
Future of student learning
All UK HEIs have to do a Corporate Plan for the funding council (a strategic document that sets direction for next five years). Please forgive the corporate language a necessary element of the piece. Here are some things we are kicking around in our drafting group comments/ observations welcome - Does it reach as high enough, too high, too tame, too jargony, ???
Firstly sometimes the most basic assertions can be the most powerful:
Students are our core business. Enhancing the student experience, with learning and teaching at its heart, is the foremost strategic priority of the new Corporate Plan.
What might it look like:
Engaging with the learning process
Learning opportunities are most effective when they are authentic to the relevant discipline or profession, underpinned by research and requiring active engagement by students. Wherever possible the curriculum design should encourage social and collaborative learning, recognising the importance of the cohort/course experience and the opportunity to learn, not just with, but from peers. The learning experience should be rich and distinctive, providing students with opportunities to engage in the process of enquiry and participate in a vibrant academic community.
Becoming effective learners
Successful study in higher education is primarily about engaging with learning and scholarship. Students will be supported to develop the skills and attributes of learner autonomy and digital fluency that enable them to engage actively and creatively with their learning. The University's pioneering learning centres serve students' needs, delivering access to books, journals and online information sources. The University will continue to respond to the changing balance between information sources providing a rich range of resources in a variety printed and electronic formats.
Firstly sometimes the most basic assertions can be the most powerful:
Students are our core business. Enhancing the student experience, with learning and teaching at its heart, is the foremost strategic priority of the new Corporate Plan.
What might it look like:
Engaging with the learning process
Learning opportunities are most effective when they are authentic to the relevant discipline or profession, underpinned by research and requiring active engagement by students. Wherever possible the curriculum design should encourage social and collaborative learning, recognising the importance of the cohort/course experience and the opportunity to learn, not just with, but from peers. The learning experience should be rich and distinctive, providing students with opportunities to engage in the process of enquiry and participate in a vibrant academic community.
Becoming effective learners
Successful study in higher education is primarily about engaging with learning and scholarship. Students will be supported to develop the skills and attributes of learner autonomy and digital fluency that enable them to engage actively and creatively with their learning. The University's pioneering learning centres serve students' needs, delivering access to books, journals and online information sources. The University will continue to respond to the changing balance between information sources providing a rich range of resources in a variety printed and electronic formats.
Sunday, 24 February 2008
Digital fluency initiative at SHU - some notes
Digital fluency at Sheffield Hallam University is characterised by the fluencies necessary "to live, learn and work in the digital age." Encompassing information literacy, IT competency, online interaction and critical thinking, it is suggested that digital fluency should underpin the academic experience at Sheffield Hallam. It is directly aligned to theme 1 of the University’s LTA Strategy, “promoting vibrant and challenging learning opportunities” and enables students and staff to maximise their engagement with “learning opportunities that integrate e-learning, promote learner autonomy, and embed employability”.
The Digital Fluency Initiative will focus upon raising the profile of digital fluency at Sheffield Hallam, recognising it as a core graduate attribute and a key element of professional development for staff. The Initiative will explore how we might enhance the digital fluency of students and staff, in the context of blended learning opportunities designed to draw upon high quality interactions and information resources, and with specific consideration of the fluency requirements of an increasingly social, participatory and collaborative online environment. Its inception is not intended to supersede any work already underway in developing information literacy, IT competency, online interaction and critical thinking, but recognises that to develop high levels of digital fluency it is important to consider these attributes holistically, considering how the elements interrelate and where there may be opportunities for synergy, coordinated development and integrated support. The Initiative will assess and inform institutional readiness for embedding digital fluency within the academic experience, recognising and sharing existing elements of good practice, proposing a holistic developmental infrastructure and exploring innovative ways to empower students and staff as they enhance their own digital fluency.
These are the original notes scoping out the initiative - the only significant change to scope is the proposed move from IT competency to IT confidence - how do we get people into a place where they are confident to cope with perpetual change?
The Digital Fluency Initiative will focus upon raising the profile of digital fluency at Sheffield Hallam, recognising it as a core graduate attribute and a key element of professional development for staff. The Initiative will explore how we might enhance the digital fluency of students and staff, in the context of blended learning opportunities designed to draw upon high quality interactions and information resources, and with specific consideration of the fluency requirements of an increasingly social, participatory and collaborative online environment. Its inception is not intended to supersede any work already underway in developing information literacy, IT competency, online interaction and critical thinking, but recognises that to develop high levels of digital fluency it is important to consider these attributes holistically, considering how the elements interrelate and where there may be opportunities for synergy, coordinated development and integrated support. The Initiative will assess and inform institutional readiness for embedding digital fluency within the academic experience, recognising and sharing existing elements of good practice, proposing a holistic developmental infrastructure and exploring innovative ways to empower students and staff as they enhance their own digital fluency.
These are the original notes scoping out the initiative - the only significant change to scope is the proposed move from IT competency to IT confidence - how do we get people into a place where they are confident to cope with perpetual change?
Friday, 22 February 2008
My work is a paradox - pure and simple
It takes a little while for me to "come down" from attending ELI, my mind is full of discussion points - some received, some generated, some still emerging. The conversation is full and vibrant and this year I was struck by the sense of two groups "thought-duelling" with all the intensity of dance duels, respect for each other, passion for what they do and energy...yes...energy. Each session attended represents that group's "top game" pushing the other group to do better, try harder in the next one. The two groups? Well, I've articulated these before elsewhere but in a nutshell:
the "run as fast as we can towards web2.0" group extolling the virtues of SecondLife, WoW, croquet, twitter, mashed up maps n IM, gaming, Facebook etc etc (and of course that VLEs (esp Bb) are inherently evil) - all based on the premise that the kids are leaving us behind and we need to be where they are and know what they know to enable education to keep up with social uses of technology.
the "digi-fear, the technology is OK but what about the people" group asking challenging questions about who the kids are and how confident are they really, how do staff become more digitally fluent to embrace these new technologies when CMS/VLEs still scare them and what are the true tower and cloud implications of the brave new world.
So what is the problem? I want (need?) to be in both groups!! Is that a problem?
I spend most of my brainspace tap-dancing betweeen the two. I believe passionately in the power of web 2.0 - I love the social, participatory, collaborative and user defined principles on which is based. I love the power being in the hands of the learners and the undeniable opportunities for community beyond your immediate reference. At the moment, I'm enjoying, personally, the way twittering enables me to connect quite lightly with others who share my interests, and I have a huge interest in ARGs as a philosophy with as yet untapped potential. On the other hand, (for example) I'm still not buying the potential for learning that Second Life might offer - I want it to be big and transformational, I want it to rock the foundations of the comfortable world of academe, but what do I see, people building virtual campuses that look like real ones, "gatherings" that look to me like the lowest form of knowledge transmission...the lecture. Oh dear. I want to believe, I do, I do...but right now...I don't...not yet, anyway.
I'm lucky that my role leading Academic Innovation at Sheffield Hallam University (UK) enables me to have an academic team that areconstantly looking at and researching new and emerging technologies (and new applications of existing technologies) and how they can be used to support, enhance and, ultimately, transform learning within higher education. They think a lot, they experiment a lot, they track the evangelists - we are so so lucky to have this space. I love this part of my job - what's new? what do we think? what could we do? let's leap into the brave new world!! I also love the people this connects me with - ideas, enthusiasm, energy (yes that word again).
But I have a guilty secret that I'm afraid to share with my n&et connections, I am also responsible for embedding mainstream e-learning across the institution and this involves me supporting, promoting, advocating Blackboard as a learning management system and academic portal. I know it isn't going to get me a seat on the cool kids table but I like Blackboard. It is an easy entry point for staff and students wanting to develop collaborative e-learning opportunities and so far does everything that most people need (and if it doesn't we've found it pretty easy to add something that does...or simply link out to the top shelf web2.0 stuff - not an either or for our users). Yes, the company is big, yes, the support can be hit and miss, but the product does what our community of users needs and having spent a huge chunk of time looking at other options recently, it is still the best solution for us. We have over 95% of our learners (undergrad and postgrad) carrying out some of their learning within that virtual environment - that's over 30,000 students and 3,000 staff and it is an achievement (by the staff supporting e-learning within my team and across SHU) that I am really proud of.
I feel good that the benefits are not just experienced by those students who happen to have highly innovative tutors but for all. I like the idea that (even though it isn't the sexiest feature of technology in learning) our students value the convenience and flexibility of being able to access their learning at a place and time that fits with their busy lives...yes (cliche alert) enabling learning for those who might not be able to participate traditionally. I love this part of my job - small steps but for everyone, how do we make it work for everyone? how do we build on what has gone to where we are going? Again I value the community around this world - sharing the hows and whys (and why nots) with the sense of conviction needed to encourage people to do something they don't have to.
So what on earth!?!? I love the pulsating potential of web2.0 but I also love the enabling power of a large-scale learning management system. I have my two communities and I try best to belong to both...am I being unreasonable?? Why do I feel I'm expected to fit into a box and stay put? I'm not going to! However it is a very different challenge within the institution where close physical proximity requires me to represent both simulataneously perceived interchangably as the face of the "large corporate monolith" and/or the "head in the clouds" lot trying to get us to do wizzy things that threaten us.
The whole of this, though, has just convinced me (more than ever) that all technology has great potential and appropriate application can be transformational but (and its a big "but"!!) only when the people involved feel confident, competent, comfortable, committed, compelled...
The importance in this context of digitial fluency (that we define as the fluencies needed to live, learn and work in the digital age and encompassing, for us, information literacy, IT competencies, online interactions and critical thinking). We need to support all our communities to feel at home in a digitial world, selecting the best tool/resource for the job, engaging whole-heartedly and being unphased by the only thing we can guarantee about the future...things are going to keep changing. The people stuff (hmmm) always the hardest to do, definitely the hardest to quantify but never the least rewarding. The work of the team (so far) of getting this onto the institutional agenda has been great! Now we look forward to the "making it real" phase of the activity.
I'm going to resist the urge to round this post of neatly, I want to just leave it hanging and come back to it later....but just to trail a soundbite that has been engaging me recently:
"you can't cross a chasm in two small steps"
the "run as fast as we can towards web2.0" group extolling the virtues of SecondLife, WoW, croquet, twitter, mashed up maps n IM, gaming, Facebook etc etc (and of course that VLEs (esp Bb) are inherently evil) - all based on the premise that the kids are leaving us behind and we need to be where they are and know what they know to enable education to keep up with social uses of technology.
the "digi-fear, the technology is OK but what about the people" group asking challenging questions about who the kids are and how confident are they really, how do staff become more digitally fluent to embrace these new technologies when CMS/VLEs still scare them and what are the true tower and cloud implications of the brave new world.
So what is the problem? I want (need?) to be in both groups!! Is that a problem?
I spend most of my brainspace tap-dancing betweeen the two. I believe passionately in the power of web 2.0 - I love the social, participatory, collaborative and user defined principles on which is based. I love the power being in the hands of the learners and the undeniable opportunities for community beyond your immediate reference. At the moment, I'm enjoying, personally, the way twittering enables me to connect quite lightly with others who share my interests, and I have a huge interest in ARGs as a philosophy with as yet untapped potential. On the other hand, (for example) I'm still not buying the potential for learning that Second Life might offer - I want it to be big and transformational, I want it to rock the foundations of the comfortable world of academe, but what do I see, people building virtual campuses that look like real ones, "gatherings" that look to me like the lowest form of knowledge transmission...the lecture. Oh dear. I want to believe, I do, I do...but right now...I don't...not yet, anyway.
I'm lucky that my role leading Academic Innovation at Sheffield Hallam University (UK) enables me to have an academic team that areconstantly looking at and researching new and emerging technologies (and new applications of existing technologies) and how they can be used to support, enhance and, ultimately, transform learning within higher education. They think a lot, they experiment a lot, they track the evangelists - we are so so lucky to have this space. I love this part of my job - what's new? what do we think? what could we do? let's leap into the brave new world!! I also love the people this connects me with - ideas, enthusiasm, energy (yes that word again).
But I have a guilty secret that I'm afraid to share with my n&et connections, I am also responsible for embedding mainstream e-learning across the institution and this involves me supporting, promoting, advocating Blackboard as a learning management system and academic portal. I know it isn't going to get me a seat on the cool kids table but I like Blackboard. It is an easy entry point for staff and students wanting to develop collaborative e-learning opportunities and so far does everything that most people need (and if it doesn't we've found it pretty easy to add something that does...or simply link out to the top shelf web2.0 stuff - not an either or for our users). Yes, the company is big, yes, the support can be hit and miss, but the product does what our community of users needs and having spent a huge chunk of time looking at other options recently, it is still the best solution for us. We have over 95% of our learners (undergrad and postgrad) carrying out some of their learning within that virtual environment - that's over 30,000 students and 3,000 staff and it is an achievement (by the staff supporting e-learning within my team and across SHU) that I am really proud of.
I feel good that the benefits are not just experienced by those students who happen to have highly innovative tutors but for all. I like the idea that (even though it isn't the sexiest feature of technology in learning) our students value the convenience and flexibility of being able to access their learning at a place and time that fits with their busy lives...yes (cliche alert) enabling learning for those who might not be able to participate traditionally. I love this part of my job - small steps but for everyone, how do we make it work for everyone? how do we build on what has gone to where we are going? Again I value the community around this world - sharing the hows and whys (and why nots) with the sense of conviction needed to encourage people to do something they don't have to.
So what on earth!?!? I love the pulsating potential of web2.0 but I also love the enabling power of a large-scale learning management system. I have my two communities and I try best to belong to both...am I being unreasonable?? Why do I feel I'm expected to fit into a box and stay put? I'm not going to! However it is a very different challenge within the institution where close physical proximity requires me to represent both simulataneously perceived interchangably as the face of the "large corporate monolith" and/or the "head in the clouds" lot trying to get us to do wizzy things that threaten us.
The whole of this, though, has just convinced me (more than ever) that all technology has great potential and appropriate application can be transformational but (and its a big "but"!!) only when the people involved feel confident, competent, comfortable, committed, compelled...
The importance in this context of digitial fluency (that we define as the fluencies needed to live, learn and work in the digital age and encompassing, for us, information literacy, IT competencies, online interactions and critical thinking). We need to support all our communities to feel at home in a digitial world, selecting the best tool/resource for the job, engaging whole-heartedly and being unphased by the only thing we can guarantee about the future...things are going to keep changing. The people stuff (hmmm) always the hardest to do, definitely the hardest to quantify but never the least rewarding. The work of the team (so far) of getting this onto the institutional agenda has been great! Now we look forward to the "making it real" phase of the activity.
I'm going to resist the urge to round this post of neatly, I want to just leave it hanging and come back to it later....but just to trail a soundbite that has been engaging me recently:
"you can't cross a chasm in two small steps"
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
