Skip to main content

New Edition of the APA Publication Manual

At least in North America, and in education domains, in which I am involved, The American Psychological Association calls the shots in terms of formatting and style for most education publications, student papers and thesis work. In addition it is the normal format required for many (most?) educational Journals including the one I edit IRRODL.

Thus, I pay attention when a new edition comes out. Generally the edits and enhancements made to each addition are useful and helpful in reducing complexity and increasing intuitiveness. In particular as an online journal we are concerned with the ways that electronic resources are cited, quoted and included in formal academic discourse.  The 6th edition continues this positive trend. The changes are covered in both podcast and text format at the APA’s site. They also offer an online course Mastering the 6th Edition for $40.

Things I like about the 6th edition include:Read More

ALT-C – Great conference in Manchester

ALT-C – Great conference in Manchester

alt-logo_0_0

I was very fortunate to be able to attend what I consider to be one of the best higher education, ed tech conferences in the world, last week in Manchester, UK. I was even more fortunate to be asked to do the closing keynote. The annual Association for Learning Technologies sponsors the Conference (the C) and a Journal Alt-J. This year, was a sold out event and lots of great presentations, conversations and networking. Alt-C is probably the best kept UK secret, as it is a world class event, but the attendees are at least 90% UK ed tech innovators. The conference features the usual keynotes, panels, tradeshow, concurrent sessions, posters, food and drink. Unlike some others I’ve attended, this one was very well organized, few presenters missing and tight adherence to time lines leaving a fair chunk of time for discussion after each presenter.Read More

Royalties from Open Access

I was very pleasantly surprised to receive this week the download stats and a check from Athabasca University Press. I edited the second edition of the Theory and Practice of Online learning and it was copy edited and now promoted, sold and distributed by Athabasca University Press. I documented the reason for releasing the book under a Creative Commons license as one of Alan Levine’s Amazing Stories of Openness see Terry’s Amazing Story of Openness

During the first year of distribution 404 copies were sold and at 5% of net sales, my royalty check was for $636. During that year 26,497 chapters or copies of the whole book were downloaded at no charge. This means  1.5% of readers choose the paid route- This may be underestimated  as some readers probably downloaded more than one chapter, or more than once. In any case, this $600 is about the same range of funding I have come to expect from the other 5 academic type books I have authored or co-authored. But of course, the fame and glory from 26,000 PLUS readers is unmeasurable!

The download links for the full book and each chapter are accessible here Read More

The disruptive effects of ‘free’ education

The disruptive effects of ‘free’ education

u-of-people-logo

After reading Wired Chris Anderson’s (2009). Free: The Future of a Radical Price (available but ironically only for free to residents from the world’s richest country, the US, from SCRIBD), I spent some time reflecting on the disruptive effects of ‘free’ on higher education provision and opportunity.

Free has not only effected media consumption, publishing, and software production but also has capacity to create very disruptive, low end challenges to higher education. A low end disruption offers a service to a large new market by providing satisfactory (but not necessarily equivalent, at least at the beginning) services to large new groups of consumers. The most publicized example in higher education is the University of the People, founded by Israeli entrepreneur Shai Reshef. UoPeople is headquartered in California and is now registering students for its first courses to begin in September 2009. Mr Reschef provides a good overview of his vision and the logistics of operating a very low cost institution in a recent Higher Ed podcast.Read More

Past the "No Significant Difference"

The release last month by the US Dept of Education’s  Evaluation of Evidence-Based Practices in Online Learning: A Meta-Analysis and Review of Online Learning Studies provides another salvo in the simplistic showdown between online and face to face learning. As expected online learning (both at a distance and a classroom continues to out perform unmediated education.

First, let me repeat the standard whine accompanying every educational meta analysis – there are far too few studies, many of the conditions between control and experimental group are not held (and perhaps cannot be held) constant and as always when one says ‘online learning’ the term includes a very wide range of learning activities, modes of learning, types of teacher intervention and divergent focus on collaborative, cooperative or individual work – and many other variables that have long been associated with changes in learning outcomes. So when “online’ learning is conceived of as the independent variable- it really means this is the variable we are going to focus on, make a vague attempt to control those we can and ignore the rest!  This occurs even though we know there there are a lot of potentially confounding variables in play. However this variability applies to the complex face to face (F2F) classroom environment as well as online. To be fair to the researchers on this study, attempt were made to tag studies for differences in ‘practice variables’- those under control of the teacher/designer and ‘conditions’, rather unchanging environmental differences  between experimental and control groups. However, again messiness intrudes – as noted by he the authors “Many of the reviewed studies, for example, did not indicate (a) whether or not the online instructor had received training in the method of instruction, (b) rates of attrition from the contrasting conditions and (c) contamination between conditions.” Retention and completion rates are a concern in all types of distance education, so not documenting the independent variables’ association with successful completion mares many studies.

As an example of the confusion of terms, methods and technologies, the study has a brief anecdotal section on “individualized instruction”. I went right to that section hoping it talked about changing condition of online study from the usual cohort, to the older self-paced, independent study mode. Unfortunately, what the authors meant by the title was interventions involving more machine interactive learning – tailored responses with additional help for incorrect answers (positive effect) and individualized adaptation presenting different environments to different students (positive effect again).Read More

23rd ICDE World Congress

I was very pleased to be invited to do a keynote at International Council for Distance Education (ICDE) in Maastricht Holland this month. ICDE  is the largest coordinating and professional development organization for distance education and open learning institutions and communities around the globe. It attracts delegates from the large mega universities as well as a smattering of dual mode colleges and universities. My keynote on Open Educational resources, was OK, except the time was limited to 20 minutes and my iphone count down timer failed to bark at me, so the moderator practically had to get the hook out to get me to finish – quite embarrassing! The slides from my talk are here and the slides from the other speakers on the OER panel Peter Sloep and  Andy Lane are as well.

The keynotes were videotaped and there was a promise of streaming, but I can’t seem to locate the links from the conference web page at www.ou.nl/icde2009. I was especially pleased to have the opportunity to hear the legendary network theorist Manual Castells author of the trilogy “The Information Age: Economy, Society, and Culture”, 1996-2003, translated in 23 languages. For some reason he did not allow a video recording of his talk.

The congress featured the usual scrumptious buffet of concurrent sessions, most of which I quite enjoyed. The concurrent sessions were organized under the themes of cultural diversity, learning technology, removing institutional constraints, quality assurance, student support and a number of other special sub-themes.  Unlike most DE conferences, presenters were compelled to submit full papers, and most of these have been linked from the listings of the schedule at the web site. Unfortunately, the paper from my own session THE DANCE OF TECHNOLOGY AND PEDAGOGY IN SELF-PACED DISTANCE EDUCATION isn’t linked, so I have posted it here

The conference was also the annual conference of the European Assoc. of Distance Teaching Universities, so there was lots of European representation. As always, I was impressed by the amount of money provided for educational technology related research and development in Europe. I attended a presentation from the e-jump 2.0 group whose 2 year project from the EU Lifelong learning program was “Implementing e-Learning 2.0 in everyday learning processes in higher and vocational education”  A great idea, but some of the problems encountered creating ‘courses’ for teachers on web 2.0 tools (why create courses???), were very predictable. More encouraging was the work of the Re-vica Project which “aims to make an inventory and to carry out a systematic review of cross-institutional Virtual Campus initiatives of the past decade within higher education at European, national and regional levels”.  I would love to undertake a similar rear view look at Canadian initiatives during the past decade, but alas, no EU pot of money to make it happen.

All in all, I was pleased with the ICDE Congress, and glad to see that ICDE (under new management) seems to have recreated itself and back to doing important networking and knowledge development in this sector. Congrats as well to the host Open University of the Netherlands, for a well organized conference

Final Report: Shaping Our Future: Toward a Pan-Canadian E-leaning Research Agenda.

A year ago George Siemens, Sylvia Currie, Paul Stacey and I organized a two week online conference titled Shaping Our Future: Toward a Pan-Canadian E-leaning Research Agenda. The release of the CCL report last week, reminded me that we had never properly promoted the final report of this conference. Joanne Nielsen produced a report that documents the activities and results of the conference and it is available here

The online conference  was fairly well attended, and we heard some great Elluminate talks by Canadian and other experts and had some lively threaded discussions. We attempted to create a draft of a research agenda using the Moodle wiki, with limited success. I believe that the real value of the event was in informing each other of the complex issues related to research in this strategically important area of e-learningl  In addition those interested in this mixed synchronous/asynchronous model of online conference deliberation and production, will find the report of value.

Thanks to BCCampus for hosting the Moodle infrastructure and for all those who organized, animated, promoted, contributed and presented at the conference.

Canada's Lost e-learning Decade

The title of this posting  may be a bit melodramatic, but it accurately reflects the lost of international e-learning leadership by Canada as documented in the release of State of E-learning in Canada 2009 by Canada Council on Learning. I could find nothing I totally disagreed with in this 145 page report and much that I found myself agreeing with. But the report saddens me, I’ll review the main sections in the following and return to the angst in the conclusion.

The first section of the report documents the undeniable impact of ICT on all aspects of Canadian Life. It further notes Canada’s R&D accomplishments in a number of areas – notably “wireless technology, biometrics, security technology, software, and multimedia and digital entertainment.” The report then documents the now well known list of affordance of e-learning, including capacity to span geographic and temporal distance, support rich interaction, support low cost access to multimedia resources etc. Data is presented showing Canadians are using the Net and e-learnings one of the applications (50% of adults use it for education, training or school work). The report then spends 30 pages or so defining, describing and detailing major stakeholders in e-learning- nice stuff, maybe useful as a primer, but hardly the stuff of a national policy report. The report then talks about applications and the key leaders in schools, universities, industry and lifelong learning. The report then details the programs, and stimulation and elearning support initiatives of countries like Korea, Australia, UK, France, US and EU. But then comes the long list of challenges docuemented in earlier studies:

•” Canada’s efforts in e-learning are trailing behind those of other countries.
• Low levels of collaboration across and among jurisdictions are resulting in the
duplication of efforts and in unnecessary costs.
• There is a lack of Canadian data related to e-learning—in particular, relevant
empirical and longitudinal research on e-learning that details the effectiveness
of current Canadian e-learning initiatives.
• Key barriers remain at the university level, including infrastructure, funding and
staffing issues, and resistance by faculty (e.g., because of added workload,
intellectual property issues).
• Although lifelong learning is at the forefront of policy discussions, and
technology is transforming education in most instances, there is little planning
for, or vision of, e-learning for the future.
• Research findings reflect a variety of opinions and conclusions. Some research
demonstrates the positive impact of technology on student learning. However,
other research strongly suggests that there is little evidence, if any, to support
the claim that the use of technology in learning justifies the resources it
requires.
• As Abrami et al. (2006) note, post-secondary education in particular would
benefit from a national plan to assess the impact of e-learning initiatives.
• To date, there appears to be no comprehensive or coherent approach in Canada
to align e-learning’s vast potential as a learning tool with a clearly articulated and
informed understanding of what it could or should accomplish.” p. 14

Finally we get to the section where the report outlines a plan to reverse our slide to mediocrity – Wrong!. Where one would normally get recommendations we get a rehash of the action plan from the Advisory Committee on Online Learning, 2001. The recommendations from that action plan, reiterated as 4 key areas needing attention are:

  1. Generating momentum: stakeholder collaboration and sharing
    of resources
  2. A shared vision of e-learning
  3. Harnessing the potential of technology to facilitate the needs of learners
  4. Filling the gaps in research

Now again, I agree with the need for action in all of these ‘attention areas’. But what is the point of reiterating ideas from a 2001 report (likely gathered from issues of a decade ago), without looking deeply at why the action plan was never implemented. Will calling for action on the same issues change anything? I realize that the government changed after the 2001 report, but why is it that e-learning has failed to make the national or provincial agenda amongst conservative governments in Canada, while much has been done by similar governments in Australia, New Zealand, and the US. Canadian spending per capita on formal grade school education is higher than OECD average and one of the 3 highest in the world at tertiary level (OECD 2006), yet our spending on research and development to insure we getting value for that expenditure is minuscule. Have education and lifelong learning researchers and policy makers failed to mobilize interest? Will e-learning excellence and the benefits of accessible life long learning simply fall to Canadians without us doing anything to make it happen?

This report is informative, generally accurate (even though much data is not available or out of date – no funding for research!), and demonstrates that Canadian’s have a capacity to write with scholarly aplomb about important issues (note the 34 pages of endnotes and bibliography!!) The report quite correctly notes that the 2001 action plan has demonstrated only inaction. The report calls (in a muted way) for the type of momentum, vision, research and effort needed by Canadian’s their governments, businesses and educational institutions. These four – vision, momentum, research and effort are key to gaining the strategic advantage that a well equipped and motivated learning culture supplies to its citizens. I hope we don’t let another decade slide by.

From Teaching or Tutoring to Mentoring

From Teaching or Tutoring to Mentoring

A couple of months ago I was honored to be asked to give the annual  Ernest Boyer lecture at an all -college gathering of Empire State CollegeState University of New York. I had heard about Empire State for some years, as it was founded in 1971 – about the same time as the Open University UK and my own Athabasca University. Each of these were new initiatives devised new institutional delivery models to increase access to University programming for adults. The OUUK and many of the institutes that were spawned after it (like Athabasca) choose an industrial model of distance education to increase affordability and the access to programming. This meant that specialty course development teams created extensive and often multi-media course packages that were delivered by mostly part time tutors to students at a distance. This model created economy of scale through mass production and division of specialized labour. I had assumed that Empire State operated under a similar model, as it too emphasizes distance education programming, adult learners, flexibility and access.

I was quite wrong!Read More