Archives For Learning

Ever since Jason Hiner posted his speculations on the convergence of the PC and mobile in Utopian convergence of PC and mobile: How far away is it? I have been thinking about how that applies to my new situation at Concordia. The questions of convergence of the PC and mobile is really only significant to those who have fully committed to using laptops and now mobile devices. For those who are still anchored to a desktop PC and only use a cell phone or even a smart phone as a phone this is a moot point. Let me explain…

In meetings at the Adams Center at Abilene Christian University (ACU) most people brought their laptops to meetings and more recently we started to see tablets replace the laptops. Everyone had a device and at minimum people fell back on their smartphones. During the meeting you would hear the steady tapping of keys and the regular beeping or buzzing of smart phone or iPad signalling incoming emails and text messages. All meetings rooms had either a projector or in the case of the Adams Center a flat screen TV that people would use to show agenda items, videos, and work out task lists, action items and much more.

The meeting were more of a collaborative work session then they were traditional meetings because everyone was able to immediately do something related to what was being discussed. Many action items were immediately taken care of, files were immediately shared and many decisions were made on the spot. It was also not uncommon for people to pull up a google doc and collaboratively generate a plan or other document immediately rather than waiting to go back to their respective offices to do the work that was discussed.

If one was not used to working in this type of setting one could assume these meetings were too unruly and that most people were not paying attention because they were spending more time looking at their laptops or tablets then the one who was chairing the meeting. For the most part you would have a hard time telling who was chairing the meeting because there was so much peripheral activity. The traditional worker would be right–not much traditional work happened in those meetings because we were not working on business processes, we were working on the innovations that we hope could transform education and the world. We were dreaming of building the most effective learning environment.

I am not the only one who is working this way or who is noticing these significant changes. Mark Dean, Chief Technology Officer IBM Middle East and Africa, is one of a dozen IBM engineers who designed the first PC and who is now part of the IBM leadership that is moving IBM toward the Post-PC Era. Not only has Mark moved away from the PC to a Tablet as his primary computing device but he is predicting an even further move away from and emphasis on devices to what people do with devices. He states in his blog post IBM Leads the way in the Post-PC Era:

PCs are being replaced at the center of computing not by another type of device—though there’s plenty of excitement about smart phones and tablets—but by new ideas about the role that computing can play in progress. These days, it’s becoming clear that innovation flourishes best not on devices but in the social spaces between them, where people and ideas meet and interact. It is there that computing can have the most powerful impact on economy, society and people’s lives.

The best technology is the technology that has disappears or that no one even knows is there. It is not the technology that is important it is what you can do with it. Those noisy, rambunctious social interactions at the Adams Center at ACU that most traditional business people or academics would hesitate to call meetings are really just the cutting edge of where we need to go to really start making changes to our systems, our institutions and our society. Innovation will flourish when you bring people together and equip them to scheme and dream. If the technology is good enough that you don’t need to focus on it but you can use it to help you build those dreams then the sky is the limit.

Unfortunately, there is not much dreaming that goes on when people are tethered to their desktop PCs. Not much dreaming goes on when people scurry from their offices or cubicles with steno pads into media-less conference rooms and shuffle paper and check off processes and then scurry back to their offices or cubicles to transpose the meeting notes. Not much dreaming goes on when you only use computing technology to serve the administrative process of an institution.

Fortunately, we can start to change all this because the technology has matured to the point where it can really be used to help fill in those spaces between the social interactions. Our use of technology must also mature to the point where we take advantage of all this potential. This will be the subject of part 2.

Clayton Christensen and Henry Eyring offer some salient points on how to save the traditional university. Their recommendations include:

    • The people inside the higher education community are the best suited to decide what is best for the university.
    • Not every university can be Harvard so institutions must find what they do best.
    • Online and hybrid learning is a viable options many students are pursuing and expecting.
    • Focus on undergraduate students rather than limited graduate students
    • Less is move–cutting back on majors and programs will help an institution focus on what it does best.

    The following statement provides the best perspective on what universities must do to survive:

    make focused choices in three critical areas: the students it serves, the subjects it offers, and the scholarship it performs.

    I have been reading Christensen’s work for many years now and I keep on going back to it time and time again because he states the obvious uses a common approach. This commentary really offers no new ideas but common sense that faculty, staff and especially university administrators should act on.

    Read the full commentary…

    If you hold to the notion that learning is all about pushing content to students then you will be excited to hear about Blackboard’s recently announced collaboration with the text book publishers: Cenage, Macmillan, Pearson and John Wiley & Sons.

    In contrast if you believe that education needs to move from the passive educational environment of main lecture points, content dumping, rubrics, individual competition and standardized testing to an active educational environment of interactive presentations, critical and analytical thinking, collaboration and meaningful projects then this announcement will actually be viewed as an example of a market leader taking potentially disruptive innovations like online learning and electronic content and deploying them in sustaining ways. History has shown that educational institutions at all levels are too quick to jump on the band wagon and simply accept a sustaining innovation that does little to improve learning.

    While companies like Blackboard attempt to hide behing labels like Learning Management Systems (LMS) their products have very little to do with learning and everything to do with course and content management. While there are exceptions on how they are used, CMS like Blackboard, Moodle and the like are primarily used for content delivery, assessment and grades assignment and general course administration. As Jeff Young points out:

    For professors, the new links will make it easier to push students’ grades on online quizzes from the publishers’ e-textbook systems to the gradebook they use on the Blackboard system.

    Automating testing and grade assignment is not going to do anything to improve learning and the easier we make it to use automated testing and grading the less progress we are making toward truly reforming education. Technology today offeres education so much potential, yet we struggle to move beyond 19th and 20th century thinking and methodologies.

    Randy Muller challenges IT professionals to have the the same level of skill of an average high student student. I would argue that educators, and anyone else involved in preparing our learners for the 21st Century should have most if not all these skills.

    The list includes:

    1. Blogging
    2. Linux
    3. Programming
    4. Game Consoles and on-line games
    5. Hardware
    6. Texting
    7. Twitter
    8. Web design & Multimedia
    9. Facebook
    10. Tech Support

    OK not everyone needs to program or be a Linux guru but having a fundamental understanding of these disciplines would be very helpful. I also question whether the average high school student is playing with Linux and not every high school kid programs. But everything else on the list makes sense.

    If you consider yourself an IT professional or an educator then do your skills match up?

    Read the full article…

    In the article What we say is not what we do: Effective evaluation of faculty professional development programs. Ebert-May and her five coauthors reveal that after attending a workshop and learning about inquiry-based learning 75% of attendees were not using what they had learned in the workshop but were still using traditional styles of teaching. The study looked at:

    1) How learner-centered was the pedagogy that faculty implemented following PD? and,
    2) What variables predict teaching practice by faculty following PD? Videotapes of faculty teaching were analyzed using the Reformed Teaching Observation Protocol (RTOP), a reliable instrument that defines and assesses learner-centered teaching.

    What is preventing these college faculty from implementing student centered learning. Participants in the survey reported:

    that having insufficient time was the main impediment to their revising their teaching.

    This issue of faculty not having enough time to implement effective teaching strategies keeps on coming up and yet very few people have really explored how we deal with this issue. If faculty need more time to be able to develop effective teaching strategies then what can we do to make this happen? Perhaps we need to look at just how much time traditional instruction takes compared to student centered learning. I know from personal experience that active, inquiry, and project based learning environments will take more time to develop initially but once they are up and running they are much more efficient than traditional methodologies. Perhaps we need to look at our educational systems as a whole and start asking questions that will result in radical change as opposed to looking at ways to improve our current system which many argue is fundamentally flawed.