Pass the SoLT

This year's ascilite conference finished yesterday in Hobart and was attended by over 380 delegates. I'm pleased to report that next year's ascilite 2012 conference will take place in Wellington and I'll be leading a team from Massey University as the host institution to ensure we maintain the high standard set in 2011 and we have an exceptional event. Part of the 2012 conference team from Massey attended this year's conference in Hobart to promote the Wellington conference and here is a photo of our booth:

The conference theme for 2012 is: Future Challenges | Sustainable Futures

The theme recognizes that Education is facing a number of significant challenges. Recent waves of global uncertainty coupled with local crisis and government reforms are reshaping the tertiary education landscape. In the backdrop of these challenges new digital technology is enabling new models of teaching and learning. Yet, serious questions remain over the sustainability of these new models and the claims about the potential of new technology, especially in the face of deeper challenges.

The aim of the 2012 ascilite conference is to explore some of these challenges and to better understand the complexity of sustainability—in its widest sense. The basic premise is that what happened in the past is no longer a reliable guide to the future. There are three future-focused sub-themes:

• Learning for the future
• Teachers as future makers
• Leading in a climate of change

Ascilite 2012 will be held on the Wellington waterfront at the iconic Te Papa Tongarewa – National Museum of New Zealand. Enjoy the spectator views of Wellington Habour and take time to discover some of the rich history of Aotearoa/New Zealand. Wellington is an excellent conference venue with lots on offer including a lively nightlife and many tourist attractions within walking distance. Here is a brief and rather amusing video clip of why you need to come to Wellington in November 2012...

The standout theme over the last week has been the importance of communication. This topic has come up in several different contexts from questions about 'why do I blog?' to 'how come students don't seem to know important stuff?,' including how to access their online learning environment.

In a posting a few weeks ago, I mentioned how I regard communication as one of the most important components of good leadership and effective change management. This view is solidly backed up by the academic literature. Unfortunately, it's much harder to apply the principles and practices written about change and communication in large organizations when there are so many stakeholders and competing demands on our time. At best in my own work the art of effective communication remains a work in progress.

I'm certainly no expert on the topic but at a basic level there are two considerations that need to be taken in to account when thinking about developing a communication strategy: (i) the message and (ii) the mechanism. Alignment between the two 'm and ms' of communication (along with identifying the audience) is crucial as too often this is left to chance.

It may seem a bit over the top but in my own case I actually have a Communication Plan for this blog as when I first started 'Pass the SoLT' it was important for me to define what I was wanting to achieve, who was the audience, what was the message, etc. If I was going to devote valuable time to maintaining a blog then I needed to be understand 'why', especially if the initiative was going to be sustainable.

After all, we know the history of innovations in using new technology in education is littered with startup initiatives that people and institutions fail to sustain. In many respects, such initiatives do more harm than good as they reinforce the technology expectation cycle (Cuban, 1986). Put another way, they do nothing to break the cycle of hope and hype and send the message that teaching with technology is a fringe activity for those on the edges.

Importantly, for the record, one of the reasons I continue to blog is that I firmly believe we send mixed or even quite contradictory messages to our staff/students by expecting them to teach/learn in new ways with new technologies when we don't practice what we preach by using the same technologies. Moreover, it's not until you actually use a technology that you begin to better understand how the innovation can be used (or should not be used) for educational purposes.

My experience over the last year in using Twitter has certainly reinforced this point. In a similar vein, knowing how to use a new technology and modeling its use was why we felt it was important to use video to directly talk to potential participants for a research project that I'm currently leading on the experiences of first-time distance learners. This project involves distance students recording video diaries of their stories and experiences using Sony Bloggie cameras; and the following example was my crude effort a few months ago to introduce the project using the same technology.

Stepping down from my soapbox, but extending this theme, this week I came across the following two videos which underscore the value of effective communication and engaging directly with your key stakeholders. The first video is the latest edition of the Vice Chancellor's Youtube series targeted at Massey University students. Note how the message about the digitalization of the learning experience is positive, set in the context and language of students, and the video helps to maintain forward momentum, which is an important factor in John Kotter's principles and eight steps of successful change.

The second video comes from the Open University in the United Kingdom. The point I take from this video is the importance of proactive communication with your stakeholders and building a sense of anticipation around a proposed change or innovation. In my experience the 'no surprise policy' is always a good strategy along with keeping your 'customers' informed and 'on board'. Of course, the challenge is to deliver on any raised expectations as a result of this type of communication but I'm reliably told that institutional branding is more about image than substance.

Click here to view the video...

http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/11363089/peepz-movie

Finally, on a personal note, the reflective lesson or takeaway from this week is a pledge to think in more creative and innovative ways about how to communicate key information and the meta-level messages we want to convey to staff, students and the wider university community. To borrow an overused quote from Gandhi:

'You must be the change you wish to see in the world'

This series of webcasts produced by JISC Legal, picked up from Stephen Downs' OL Weekly, is particularly timely. Over the last few weeks I've been writing a comprehensive Policy for Recording of Scholarly Work, Student Work and University Guest Work, which aligns with the current Intellectual Property Policy.

The purpose of the policy is to establish the rights and responsibilities when scholarly, student and university guest work is recorded and distributed via audio and video for teaching and learning purposes. The terms "scholarly work" and "student work" are already defined in Massey University's Intellectual Property Policy but the concept of "guest work" is relatively undefined. Notably, the Policy goes much further than addressing lecture recording as the contexts and related issues are far more complex.

This coming week I'm meeting with union representatives to talk through the draft Policy and it will be interesting to see what issues require further discussion. The next step is to revise the draft Policy and develop a set of procedures and related guidelines. So it will take some time before we can 'sign off' on the Policy but I can see the suite of JISC Legal videos will be a valuable resource to include in the Massey Guidelines.

At Massey University we have been using Mediasite for lecture capture and web-based video for a number of years. Mediatsite was introduced as a pilot initiative sponsored by our Information Technology Services. The demand from staff for using Mediasite has continued to grow but this has not been matched by increased resourcing for this service. Moreover, there has never been a formal evaluation of the pilot or full analysis of the University's business requirements in the area.

This strategic gap is something we are wanting to address by more tightly aligning our investment in technology-enhanced learning with the goals the University has for teaching and learning. Massey University has a commitment to providing an exceptional and distinctive learning experience for all students and generally speaking recording unedited internal lectures for off-campus students is not seen as a particularly effective or engaging form of distance education.

Of course, the value of any technology depends on how it is used and sweeping generalizations are unhelpful. For example, we know from previous Massey surveys and feedback that some distance learners want more of the internal lectures to be available to them on video. The tricky issue in the University responding to this demand is the implicit assumption that lecturing is the best form of teaching for the discipline in question. In addition, there is a danger that without substituting other learning resources we may inadvertently add to student workload, which is an important factor in retention. Asking students to passively watch a bank of videos without making any other changes to curriculum design or delivery is a recipe for further problems.

The key point is that decisions about the use of lecture capture technology should be driven by what the University wants to deliver in terms of the student learning experience, rather deploying Medisite in a manner that reinforces traditional forms of instruction. With this point in mind, a recent article by Gosper el. al., (2010) in the journal 'Research in Learning Technology' makes valuable reading. The Abstract reads...

The uptake of web-based lecture technologies for recording and delivering live lectures has increased markedly in recent years. Students have responded positively, and for many their use has transformed learning – freeing them up from rigid timetables by providing choice in lecture attendance and supporting learning by extending the lecture experience and enabling them to revisit key concepts and ideas in their own time. Less transformational has been the impact on teaching. Although changing attendance patterns and disquiet about the quality of learning are of concern to many, lecturers have largely responded by simply modifying lectures. For most, the challenges of catering for the learning needs of a cohort with variable lecture attendance have not been addressed at a whole of the curriculum level. The technologies have been added on, rather than integrated into the curriculum. This paper will review the changes taking place in learning and teaching, explore the reluctance to embrace more wholesale change to the curriculum, and discuss the implications for institutions in the face of ongoing change.

First the good news:

• 76.3% of student respondents reported a positive experience
• 79.9% of students agreed that it had, in either a significant or moderate way, helped to make learning easier
• 66.7% of 813 agreed that it had, in either a significant or a moderate way, helped them achieve better results

The paper goes on to report that 'Some lecturers have taken the opportunity to reflect on the relationship of lectures within the whole curriculum and have made various adaptations. The changes encompassed integrating other activities by utilising online forums to gather feedback and to discuss issues and themes emerging from the lecture, using formative assessment approaches to promote engagement, and staging tasks to encourage students to keep a steady pace of study' (p. 258).

However, the news is not all good as only 3.2% of teachers used lecture capture technology because they felt students could learn as well from the recording. Moreover, most teachers (75%) report they had not changed the structure of their course as a result of using the technology. In other words, they had merely added the use of lecture capture technology onto existing practice, rather than thinking through the implications at a whole of curriculum level. The authors then cite Ellis and Goodyear (2009) who rightly warn against using e-learning as a way of delivering information by bolting it on to course design in an unreflective way.

In contrast to teachers, a sizable number of students felt they could learn just as well from the technology. This raises a provocative question: If lectures are delivered with little to no audience participation, then why not replace them with lecture technology and use the face-to-face time in more interactive, student-focused ways?

This question strikes at the heart of the pedagogical use of new digital technology for disruptive and transformative forms of learning. Without expanding on these concepts the obvious implication is that the effective use lecture capture technology strongly depends on appropriate professional development. As Gosper el. al., (2010) conclude:

'Professional development programmes are an essential ongoing requirement to enable staff to develop new pedagogical models that balance the needs and expectations of students with the culture and requirements of the discipline. Programmes need to go beyond the provision of technical information and training to encompass the development of a deeper understanding of the capability of learning technologies based on sound teaching and learning principles' (p.261).

Reference

Gospera, M., McNeilla, M., Phillips R., Prestonc, G., Wooa, K., & Green, D. (2010). Web-based lecture technologies and learning and teaching: a study of change in four Australian universities. Research in Learning Technology, 18 (3), 251–263.

[Available to Massey staff/students through the University Library]

It seems hardly a day goes by without hearing something about the growth of ebooks and ebook readers in higher education. Importantly, these developments are not same despite often being confused in the popular literature. In the latest issue of Inside Higher Ed the question is asked whether this is finally the year of ebooks. The article reports that CourseSmart, the e-textbook consortium comprising five major publishers, claims to have sold four times more e-textbooks in 2009-10 than it did the previous year. The article goes on to say that:

"It has been a truism for years that e-books are massing at the gates. For the most part, officials are no longer arguing if the college library will transform from a warehouse of bound volumes to a nexus for accessing various digital resources, but when."

However, a more skeptical view is also reported as the expected boom of ebooks has been stalled for many years. According to market research, e-books accounted for only 2 percent of textbook sales last year. That said, the arrival of the iPad is seen as a potential game breaker. Also potential textbook rental services provide a new business model which may substantially reduce of cost of electronic textbooks to students.

Although the ebook landscape remains fluid, the above developments underscore the importance of current pilot initiatives underway at Massey University. My previous weekend was spent refining the student survey for Phase 2 of our digital learning resources initiative and I hope to report some of the findings in the next few months.

For several years now the annual ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology has shed light on how information technology affects students and their university experience. The survey asks US students about the technology they own and how they use it in and out of their academic study. It gathers data on how skilled students believe they are with technologies; how they perceive technology is affecting their learning experience; and their preferences for technology use in their course.

The latest ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology is based on data from a 2009 survey of 30,000 university students at 103 four-year institutions and students at 12 two-year institutions. It also includes data from student focus groups from 62 students at 4 institutions. In addition to studying student ownership, experience, behaviors, preferences, and skills with respect to information technologies, the 2009 study also includes a special focus on student ownership and use of Internet-capable handheld devices.

Key findings include:

• High level computer access and ownership with a shift from desktop to laptop and other mobile devices.

• Growing use by students of the library and learning management systems.

• About 50% of students self-report they are early adopters of technology but with a there gender gap.

• Eight out of 10 students said they are very confident at searching the Internet for information.

• In general, students are lukewarm about teachers use of technology with less than half reporting they use it effectively in courses.

• Convenience is the major value students perceive of technology in courses.

• Relatively few students make use of technology so they can skip classes and face-to-face teaching is still valued.

• Students do not want their learning dominated by technology but there are discipline differences.

• There is a mobile revolution underway on university campuses.

This survey provides a useful benchmark for institution specific research and the type of initiatives planned and currently underway at Massey University. There is certainly no driver on the basis of this research to replace face-to-face teaching with technology - although students are clear that they want the convenience new digital technology provides to their learning integrated throughout course work and their campus experience.

Reference:
Smith, S, Salaway, G., & Caruso, J., with an Introduction by Richard N. Katz. (2009). The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2009. Research Study, Vol. 6. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research. Available from http://www.educause.edu/ecar.