Upload
su-white
View
667
Download
17
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
presentation to fellow academics involved in Computer and Information Sciences, discussing current practice and future directions
Citation preview
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Share Collaborate and Exchange, reshaping education through technology: the EdShare experience
presentation to HEA-ICS Autumn 2009
Su White, Hugh Davis, Thanassis Tiropanis, Les Carr, Dave Millard
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The shape of this talk
1 – context and current practice
2 – room for change
3 – some (affordance led) change
4 –future and conclusions?
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
AND CURRENT PRACTICEContext
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Edshare – a preview
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Universities and knowledge
The Humboldtian Ideal
In universities, learning should not be [defined] in terms of the passing on of well established knowledge, but always in terms of not yet completely solved problems.”
Humboldt, 1807Thanks to Lewis Elton
Autumn 2009
Web 2.0
affordances
?
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Welcome to my world…
This course aims to develop critical thinking, effective working within teams, peer-learning and discussion, and individual responsibility as these are transferable skills that are essential within a highly competent technologist, computer scientist, software engineer or researcher”
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The home front
Early adopters
Vanilla web Information publishing Online Discussion Social networks YABB Network News
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Circa 1994-1996
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Actually…. Way back…
The cloud was Vicky – the department’s platform
Vincent was the fridge who emailed observations on
departmental politics
YABB and Network News Social networks were
technologically augmentedand
Technology Networks were socially augmented
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
1994 – TQA and social web
Autumn 2009
The TQA visit in 1994 used what Shirky in his much quoted post which describes as social software
After each observation, colleagues would leg it back to their computer and email colleagues explaining the way the review was going, what the reviewers were asking etc…
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The world has changed
True But… Digital immigrants vs digital natives is a naiive concept
Note - Universities continue flourish despite the long time existence of libraries
The academy exists/has existed in many different cultural contexts and traditions
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The world is changing 2
True But…
We need to beware of
being obsessed with the the leisure habits of young people
generalising the working habits of early adopters/evangelists
Attributing OU behaviours to the whole student population
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Our University has changed…
Local Early adopters Vanilla web Admin and info Wiki, Media Wiki Knowledge base FAQ …under development
EdShare Dynamic transcripts
with real time/collaborative editing
Institutional Portal ‘info’ blogs Gimmicky Web 2.0 VLE (Blackboard) Web 2.0 ‘Pod Casting’ Second Life
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The home front
Educational innovation (1990s->)Microcosm, notes
Authentic assessment Online open web exams Zappers - the teachers learn
Admin and Education (1998->) Skywriting Wiki for advice Wiki for knowledge capture and sharing Wiki for assessment (them and us)
Latterly
Mixed Mode, mixed purpose ECS-TV, Student Blog Self study groups - mixed environments
Student practice (2007, 2008, 2009) Facebook, facebook, facebook Wikipedia Portal confusion/Portal distaste Del.icio.us, digg, cite-u-like etc
- small
It’s a learning journey Different times Different people Socially augmented communication
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
FOR CHANGERoom
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
From the well to Web2.0
“Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.”
- Tim O'Reilly October 01, 2005
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The world is changing 3
We need to Remember all we have
learned about how people learn
Stay true to our beliefs about how people can learn
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
The world is changing 4
True But acknowledge…
The half life of information is diminishing Working practices are changing We can harness technology in disruptive ways Affordances emerge!
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Life at the chalk face?
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Student/learner
Individuallecturer
Curriculum designer(s)
Classroom practice
VariousStakeholders
Accreditation
UK HE/PLC
Future Employers
Informal
learning
Formallearnin
g
Multiple perspectives
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Consider disciplinary differences
Survey(s) of students attitudes their experience and
perceptions of TEL
Identify user needs
Compare experience with theory
Because
Disciplinary differences literature
Ad hoc development of e-learning resources
Opinions on Web2.0 Cost of developing
TEL resources Sometimes structural
barriers to change
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Indicative Areas
Hard Soft
Pure
Applied
C. Scienceand Maths
S Sciences andHumanities
Nursing orEducation
Computingand Engineering
Biglan, 1973
Curriculum/content -> curriculum purpose -> assessment
Reflecting on Biglan “a sound understanding
of key aspects of teaching and learning must
depend on the recognition of the distinctive
features of different knowledge domains and
their social mileiux” (Neumann, Parry and
Beecher 2002)
Beware of generalising about 2.0
learningThink about your educational
objectivesHarness the technology affordances
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Curriculum/Content Assessment Cognitive Purpose
• Concepts and principles closely connected.
• Content typically fixed and cumulative. Quantitative.
• Teaching and learning activities are focused and instructive.
• Specific and focused exam questions.
• Objective tests relying on quantitative nature of knowledge
• Logical reasoning. • Testing of ideas in
linear form of argumentation.
• Reliance on facts, principles, and concepts.
• Concerned with the mastery of the physical environment.
• Focus is on products and techniques.
• Knowledge is atomistic and cumulative.
• Emphasises factual understanding
• Preference for exam questions, especially problem-solving
• Problem-solving and practical skills
• Emphasis on integration and application of existing knowledge
Hard Pure
Hard Appliede.g.Engineering
Hard Subjects…
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Disciplinary Differences Survey
Students in Hard areas valued online tutorials reference materials objective tests (also VLEs)
Support the mastery of facts, principles and concepts.
Quantitative, Closed
Students in Soft areas valued synchronous discussions role play and games access to open web Access to online journals
Support the development of argumentation skills and critical thinking
Qualitative Open
The responses were broadly consistent with knowledge framework.
Web 1.0 vs Web 2.0?and
Space for Web 3.0
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Our typical education mix…
students In Hard fields of study experience a heavy workload, so technology which offers affordance which save or optimise the use of time will be powerful
However from the point of view of the academic there is also a “high incidence of face to face teaching and concern for substantial coverage
Neumann Parry and Becher
Academics may be disinclined to invest
large amounts of additional time
preparing e-learning materials
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
TEL/Web2/Linked Data?
Blended/Web 2.0/Linked Data approaches…
allow systematic/automated selection of activities to best meet range of requirements
supporting student learning
making good use of faculty time
streamline administrative tasks
(monitoring and recording student progression and achievement)
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Our recent survey
Across Soton90% facebook, once a
week or more - check98% students use
textsConscious act not to
use them – not digital divide
In ECSMajority have laptops
– 2009: the year of the laptop
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
AFFORDANCE LED CHANGE
some
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
We use RDF – it saves time!
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
2009
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Add some student generated content
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Tie in with the wild web…
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Add some structure
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Edshare web science
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
CONCLUSIONSThe future and …
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Where the future lies…
Soft semantics Meaning in formats that
humans can process
Lightweight knowledge modeling in Web2.0
Hard Semantics Meaning in formats that
machines can process
Processing independent of specific knowledge models
Semantic Technologies for Teaching and Learning
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Learning and teaching opportunities
Transparent Data can assist Retention by monitoring
progress and empowering students
Visibility of programmes and research output, attracting funding
Workflows and collaboration across departments and institutions
Student recruitment Integration of knowledge capital,
cross curricular initiatives
Classroom contexts Assisting course creation and
deliver workflow Recommend relevant resources
and workflow Efficient accreditation processes
Critical thinking and argumentation support
Efficient personal and group knowledge construct
Group formation Assessment, certification,
countering/detecting plagiarism
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Thank You
Acknowledge:
Contributions of colleagues at our respective institutions
Questions?
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Thank You
Dr Su White
Learning Societies Lab
University of Southampton
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Major reference
Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report
Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report.
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
References
Boyer E. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate 1990.Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A
Blueprint for America's Research Universities. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 1998.Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education, Three
Years After the Boyer Report. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 2002.Brew A, Boud D. Teaching and research: establishing the vital link with learning. Higher Education. 1995;29(3):261-73.Carter J, Jenkins T. Gender and programming: what's going on? ACM ITiCSE. Leeds: ACM Press New York, NY, USA 1999:1-4.Committee on Higher Education. Higher Education: Report of the Committee Appointed by the Prime Minister Under the
Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, 1961-63. London: HMSO; 1963.Davis HC, White S. A research-led curriculum in multimedia: learning about convergence. 10th annual SIGCSE conference on
Innovation and technology in computer science education 2005; Lisbon, Portugal; 2005. p. 29 - 33.Davy J, Jenkins T. Research-led innovation in teaching and learning programming. ACM ITiCSE. Leeds, UK: ACM Press New
York, NY, USA 1999:5-8.Dempster JA. Developing and Supporting Research-Based Learning and Teaching Through Technology. In: Ghaou C, ed.
Usability Evaluation Of Online Learning Programs. USA.: Information Science Publishing, Idea Group Inc 2003:128-58.Elton L. Research and teaching: symbiosis or conflict? Higher Education. 1986;15:299 - 304.Fasli M. On the Research Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor. 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information
and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 77-81.
Gibbs G. Institutional strategies for linking research and teaching. Exchange. 2002;3.Hatch A, Burd L, Ashurst C, Jessop A. Project Management Patterns and the Research-Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor.
8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 68-71.
Hattie J, Marsh HW. One journey to unravel the relationship between research and teaching. Research and teaching: Closing the divide? An International Colloquium; 2004 March 18-19, 2004; Winchester; 2004.
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Hattie J, Marsh HW. The Relationship between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 1996;66(4):507-42.
Healey M. Linking research and teaching: exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning; 2005.Hoare T, Milner R, eds. Grand Challenges in Computing: British Computer Society 2004.Jenkins A, Healey M, Zetter R. Linking of staff disciplinary research and student learning. York: Higher Education Academy; 2007.Jenkins A, Healey M. Institutional Strategies to link teaching and research. York: Higher Education Academy; 2005.McGettrick A, Boyle R, Ibbett R, Lloyd J, Lovegrove G, Mander K. Grand challenges in computing education: British Computer
Society; 2004.Neumann R. Perceptions of the Teaching-Research Nexus: A Framework for Analysis. Higher Education. 1992;23(2):159-71.Neumann R. The Teaching-Research Nexus: Applying a Framework to University Students' Learning Experiences. European
Journal Of Higher Education. 1994;29(3):323-38.Ramsden P, Moses I. Associations Between Research and Teaching in Australian Higher Education. Higher Education. 1992 April
1992;23(3):273-95.Roach M, Blackmore P, Dempster JA. Supporting High-Level Learning through Research-Based Methods: A Framework for
Course Development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2001;38(4):369-82.Strazdins P. Research based education in computer science teaching. Canberra: Australian National University; 2007.Thomas RC, Mancy R. Use of Large Databases for Group Projects at the Nexus of Teaching and Research. ACM SIGCSE
2004; Portland: ACM; 2004. p. 161-5 Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching
(SemTech) - JISC Report.Wirth A, Bertolacci M. New algorithms research for first year students. Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on
Innovation and technology in computer science education; 2006; Bologna, Italy: ACM Press New York, NY, USA; 2006. p. 128-32.
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of SouthamptonAutumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
NOT USED, BUT REFERRED
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Putative table
Collabroative authoring and annotation
Searching and matching
Repositories, vles and authoring tools
Infrastructural technologies for linked data and semantic enrichment
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
From semtech report
The initial value of semantic technology will be in scale first before reasoning
The emergence of linked data fields across related repositories could enable applications and value for the identified HE challenges
Semantic lools and services that map linked data to application specific ontologies will increase linked data value and impact
Encouragemen of community afreed ontologies to empower semantic applicationsalongside application specific ontologies
Empressive semantics to enable pedagogoy aware applicationsAutumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Challenges
Barriers to exposing institutional data in RDF
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Most of fhe identifired he challenges can be addressed by querying across institutional repositories (databases, web pages, VLSs)
Significant learning and teaching challenges can be addressed by accesing resources across departments, schools, institutions
Argumentation and critical thinking could benefit from advance reasoning over large scale of resources
Could we adopt a bottom up approach starting from linked data which can be related to (layers of) ontologies larer in the context of specific applications.
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Looking at our data
Autumn 2009
Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton
Further Questions
How can insight into disciplinary differences assist the selection of effective TEL (and therefore Web1.0->3.0) approaches?
How can understanding disciplinary preferences help identify ways of working with faculty to successfully embed TEL and develop blended approaches?
What are the technology affordances of e-learning which might best be used in computing, engineering and our cognate areas?
http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2006/papers/1784.pdf
Autumn 2009