Pass the SoLT

Last week I met with a representation of the Insight Group to discuss Massey University's participation in the i-graduate Distance Education Barometer project. The DE Barometer was launched in 2010 as a joint sector initiative between i-graduate and The Observatory on Borderless Higher Education as an international benchmarking exercise. The tool covers the following seven key areas of the student experience:

• Decision making
• Application process
• Learning experience
• Technology
• Support and communication
• Recommendation
• Future plans

I was wary of yet another benchmarking instrument as Massey already participates in AUSSE and last year we added a number of institution specific questions about online learning to this survey. We also have our own regular in-house student engagement surveys. Although the findings from AUSSE were very (very) positive for Massey, having lots of data does not solve the problem of how you act on what you discover and this remains a key issue to address. Here at Massey we are working on how we can consolidate various data sources from different instruments in a concise dashboard which can help to lead to more effective, evidence-based decision-making with clear action plans for quality enhanbcement. Ideally this process will be automated but one should not underestimate the scale of the project.

In the meantime, I'm pleased on two counts as it looks like that we have managed to influence the design and depth of questions in the DE Barometer. In particular, there should be, fingers crossed, a new section with a handful of questions on the personal and societal benefits of distance learning to students as there is a lack of solid empirical data on the wider social, cultural, health and especially (in the current climate) economic benefits.

As a quick sidebar, only a couple of days ago I completed an application for an independent international research agency based in the US to begin a study on this very issue. In New Zealand and at Massey we need an economic analysis, with numbers, to go with the personal narratives on the benefits of DE for society at large. We are talking here about calculating the value of human capital and the impact any growth has for families, communities and the nation. Notably, we have also included in scope the benefits of development on a global scale. I'll try to share some of the findings later in the year as we plan to release them at a special high profile event.

The second reason I'm pleased is that last week I managed to work a few late nights to write a paper which consolidates and compares the evidence from six separate student surveys over the last two years on the implementation of Stream (our VLE) in the College of Business. Although the findings are overwhelmingly positive (more so than I expected given the challenging implementation phase), I can't help but think our students are far too kind in giving feedback. However, at least we now have some useful baseline data and it will be interesting to watch how progress tracks in future surveys--both internal questionnaires and external benchmarking instruments.

It's rewarding to see early fruits of our efforts to promote the scholarship of teaching in the area of blended learning. In the last year or so Massey University has invested in a number of central initiatives to support innovation and a stronger community of practice in technology-enhanced learning. Although John Kotter and other change theorists warn of the dangers of celebrating success too early, there is a sense of progress and real momentum throughout the University.

The forthcoming ASCiLiTE Conference in Auckland is evidence of our initial success as Massey staff will have a strong presence. ASCilITE is the major Australasian event on using technology for teaching purposes in tertiary education. On last count approximately 25 staff from across a range of academic disciplines and Colleges along with those in ITS and the Library will attend ASCiLiTE.

Impressively, at least 15 staff will be presenting either a poster, symposium or refereed conference paper on some aspect of their work. The conference provides a valuable opportunity to benchmark Massey's progress and contribution to the field against other university and tertiary-level providers. My prediction is that Massey will have the largest presence of any institution in Australasia, including the host institutions. It's not too late to register if you want to join the large Massey team attending this year's ASCiLiTE conference.

The benefits of attending conferences like ASCiLiTE as a professional learning experience are difficult to quantify. In many respects, the immediate value can be measured by whether participants change some aspect of their course or implement a new idea or innovation into their teaching practice after the event. Of course, we rarely follow up to see whether people make such changes. One thing is for certain, nevertheless, the literature is highly supportive of the type networks and professional conversations which occur before, during and after such events, especially when several colleagues join together from one institution.

The longer-term challenge for the Massey group will be to implement any new ideas gathered at ASCiLITE and other such events in sustainable ways which truly promote benefits for learners.

In my previous posting I talked about the value of specific pedagogical interactions in promoting student engagement. On the whole I concluded that the value of interactions for distance learners is not rocket science. I continue with this theme as I share my reflections on another article from my weekly reading pile.

Kirkwood (2009), in a recent paper published in 'Technology, Pedagogy and Education', reinforces the importance of why we need to drill down to specific types of interactions. The paper makes a sweeping claim there is limited evidence that technology-led innovations within Higher Education have achieved the anticipated improvements in learning. While there is an element of truth in this conclusion it contains an important conceptual flaw as technology-enhanced learning is not a single entity.

From a conceptual and methodological point of view, the answer to the question of whether technology has transformed learning requires a much finer grain analysis. It's problematic to make sweeping generalizations about the effects of technology when interventions range from the use of automated multi-choice tests (student-content interaction) to engaging learners in online role-play (student-student interaction).

Again it's not rocket science that some pedagogic uses of technology are likely to lead to better quality interactions and learning outcomes than others. In this respect technology is not neutral as different uses and applications have different pedagogical affordances - although these are strongly mediated by the teacher.

Read more »

In this brief entry, I report two notable developments.

First, last week the title of my position at Massey University officially changed from 'Director of Distance Education' to 'Director, Blended and Distance Education'. The obvious implication of this change is that my role now extends beyond just distance learning to relevant aspects of campus-based teaching.

I have spoken at length in previous postings on the topic of blended learning which can apply to all delivery modes. In the literature, the definition of blended learning remains open to debate, but at Massey we have been trying to more precisely define what this concept means, in our context, as we develop an institutional-wide Teaching and Learning Framework. The current working definition reads:

“Blended learning at Massey University is about purposely integrating different resources, environments and delivery modes to provide an exceptional and distinctive experience for all students.”

Of course, the definition is far less important than how we enact it and work has already begun on an Operational Plan with specific initiatives aligned to the University's Strategic Plan - The Road to 2020. The intention is to launch a draft of the new Teaching and Learning Framework, which contains key initiatives related to Blended and Distance Education, at a university-wide professional development event in early December.

Read more »

A hot topic currently on the agenda at Massey University is how to enhance the student learning experience by taking advantage of new digital learning resources. This opportunity was recently described in the latest Vice-Chancellor's video log on the topic of distance education...

Massey has a long tradition of providing students with high quality print-based study material but we now have new ways of making content available to learners. The challenge is to strike the right mix or balance between digital and conventional learning resources. This challenge brings to the forefront the concept of blended learning, which lies deep in the DNA of Massey University. Although the definition of blended learning is context specific, as different blends will be required in different programmes, Massey aims to provide all students with a rich learning experience using the latest technologies alongside of existing proven delivery systems.

The difficulty is that we need to think about the needs of all learners. While we know from enrolment data that 97% of Massey students have an email address not everyone is able to receive large bytes of rich digital media over the internet. For example, we have many students studying from prison who have limited computer access and the problem of the 'last mile' of internet access remains an issue for many rural New Zealanders. On an enterprise level, the University has to be careful not to exclude some learners in our desire to enhance the learning of the majority through a more vibrant digital experience.

Our intention over the next 12 months or so is to pilot a number of solutions that attempt to exploit the potential of digital media. We hope the lessons learned will help us to better understand our student needs. We already make use of Adobe Presenter as a delivery system for audio enhanced Powerpoint presentations and there is increasing use of MediaSite as a means of capturing lecture content in a digital format. The pilots will expand our efforts to traditional text-based content by using open source authoring software such as ICE in the Stream (Moodle) environment along with hardware solutions such as flash drives, e-book readers, etc.

One of the real challenges is to ensure that new delivery platforms provide a clear advantage over conventional systems and to be careful not to merely pass additional costs on to students. There is little point providing content in a digital format if students then turn around and print all of this material out on their own machines. However, there are clear environmental benefits of saving thousands of pages of paper and our pilot initiatives will aim to advance the University's carbon neutral goal. I will provide further updates on these pilots as results emerge.

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.