Pass the SoLT

On the eve of Apple's announcement of their latest hardware device (some type of portable tablet), it's interesting to speculate how the ebook reader market will evolve over the next 12 months. Who will be the winners and losers? A recent article published on the BBC News website bets against ebook readers and reports an initiative to turn any device into an e-reader. The intention is to invent something that will run on all platforms. As Ray Kurzweil, famed for inventions like speech-recognition software, states:

"People don't want an extra piece of hardware. They want to take one device and do everything with it and they want colour screens."

Notably, the article reports Forrester Research estimate that Amazon's Kindle currently accounts for 60% of all e-readers sold in the US last year. Sony, which offers a competing Reader device, accounts for 35%. Some analysts claim that as many as 10 million e-reader devices will be sold in the United States in the coming year. What share of the market can Apple secure over the next 12 months?

Future developments in this area have particular significance for Massey University as we have a strong commitment to digitize our current print-based learning resources. In the next few weeks, Massey is about to start a formal pilot using An.notate as both a stand alone and integrated tool to work with Moodle. This tool will allow students to annotate online readings, and search and place markers for points of particular interest. Arguably, the tool will be even more powerful when students can access and make use of its functionality from portable devices. A formal evaluation of the Massey pilot will be undertaken over the next few months and I'll post an update of our findings in due course.

At the end of July, I presented a discussion paper at the joint University Council/Senior Leadership Team retreat. My brief was to look over the technology horizon and consider the implications for Massey University.

In preparing the paper, I drew on a number of seminal reports, including the Australia and New Zealand edition of the Horizon Report. I was also grateful for the assistance received from two groups of staff: (i) an expert group with strong interests in the use of new technologies in higher education, and (ii) recently formed Think Tank of Massey teaching award winners (TE@M).

The paper had two parts. Part one provided a brief review of progress on implementing Stream (Moodle) at Massey and described a number of forthcoming initiatives. To keep the paper manageable, the second part identified five major technology developments on the horizon with important implications for Massey. The five major trends are summarised below:

• Open Educational Resources - a new paradigm of open content is emerging (e.g., Wikieducator) which may erode the status and value of traditional study materials.

• Personal Learning Environments - universities have embraced Learning Management Systems (LMS) but a major gap exists between institutional spaces and online social places.

• Mobile Learning – although campuses are awash with mobile technologies they remain hidden in students’ pockets or reinforce conservative and regressive pedagogies.

• eBook Readers – a dynamic market of new digital reading technology is rapidly emerging with potential to transform the way students receive and interact with learning resources.

• Cloud Computing and New Cloudscapes – using cloud-computing efforts are underway to build systems that adapt to the learner providing ‘just in time’, ‘just enough’, ‘just in case’ and ‘just for me’ learning.

The list of major trends is not exhaustive but they collectively pose a number of critical challenges. One such challenge is managing the tension between supporting innovations in technology-enhanced learning at the same time as expecting staff to improve their research productivity.

After describing a number of additional challenges, I concluded by identifying three enduring principles: (i) the fluid nature of the technology landscape, (ii) there is no single super-technology that has all the answers, and (iii) the need to maintain focus on the end user, especially your learners’ needs and what you want them to learn—however unpopular that stance may become.

My central thesis and the key message for the SLT/Council was that a world-class centre of tertiary learning requires great people and great technology. This point acknowledges that the real value of technology is highly dependent on people and the instructional context. In this regard, we need to ask some of the following questions:

• Does our technology support the type of pedagogy and curriculum we want to promote?
• What pedagogical assumptions underpin the technology?
• What conditions are required for technology to augment an exceptional and distinctive learning experience—for all students?
• How easy is it for staff and students to use? Will staff be able to innovate more effectively? Is it scaleable and cost effective?
• Does it make us more responsive to our students?
• Does the technology allow us to grow? Are we able to achieve core functions more effectively?

Such questions recognise that universities will stand out for their quality of blended learning and distance education not because of the technology they have available, but the way they use it. Importantly, there are multiple uses of etools and Sfard (1998) shows no single pedagogy or ‘one size fits all’ model of learning exists. The key thing is to engage staff in serious and ongoing ‘quality conversations’ about the best learning designs and delivery blends for specific courses and programmes.

Finally, any prediction of the future requires a word of caution. The lesson from the past is that we should expect the unexpected and yet to be invented. When it comes to technology there are many forks, twists and potentially blind alleys.