Online Feedback

As a final techie flourish, the symposium feedback form is available online at:

http://www.survey.bris.ac.uk/ilrt/crs2004

Record of the event

Someone asked how long the website and the blog will remain after the conference.

The website, including the blog, IRC logs and the Chump, will remain as a permanent record of the symposium. However, we will be switching off the blog login tomorrow so you will lose your ability to post and edit entries although the blog content will remain.

Key themes from the symposium

Grainne Conole had the unenviable task (which she did very ably!) of summarising the key themes from the symposium and linking these to what's going on in current research and policy areas.  She identified six themes:

1. The good and bad of ICT
2. The Speed of Change, the Web in 2010
3. Supporting new collaborations and discourses
4. Harnessing needs, understanding end users
5. Changing practice
6. The wider impact

Delegates were asked to identify things that had particularly struck them about the issues under discussion over the past two days:

• Maybe we've missed the 'survival of the fittest?' element of the title
• Maybe we're missing the point: scale of teaching (student numbers) and assessment so much greater
• Maybe we need to focus more on the skills we're engendering through the curriculum from school through to HE: critical thinking not specific technologies

Grainne didn't have time to talk through the detail of all the themes, but her full slides will be on the Colston2004 Web site.

She concluded by identifying the impact the issues we've been discussing have in current research areas, including e-pedagogy; eSocial Science (ESRC); eScience; HEFCE/DfES eLearning strategies and the many established research centres around the UK.  Also key at international levels.

Final thoughts from the delegates (you can add more here!):

• Narratives very exciting, but need to explain new contexts as well as new resources, new concepts in learning design
• Need to educate people at policy level about this (Diana Laurillard can't do it all on her own!)
• Trying to pull together many different communities: technologists, learning technologists, teachers, learners - haven't had enough research into the learner's experience

Notes from breakout3 groupG

Colston Symposium: Day 2: Breakout group G: facilitator – Ros O’Leary.

  

Oleg’s question:  What do teachers really want?

• As learners, we have access to a lot of information, but it is more important to get in touch with knowledge communities than access information.  Moving into a field, want to get into a located (not necessarily physically) community.  Today, technology is offering information, but this is not what learners want, the need is deeper than that.  Perhaps SW is one approach to this deeper need.
• Another view: What can technology offer me that is radically different / better than face-to-face?  Currently, as a lecturer, I use it as a resource / links base, plus multiple-choice quizzes.  Learners can potentially collapse a 12 week course into a few evenings, but the online component is not designed to substitute for attendence, which is compulsory.  But only 40% students ever log on.  So, I am looking for a benefit to sell to the students, because they don’t believe in elearning at the moment.
• So, a key question is, “how do you get students to learn effectively and take some control over the process?”
• A key role for technology might be in joining remote students, enabling them to learn together (like research practice); students do not see this possibility immediately.  But assessment is individual, so this might put a limit on this role.
• As an ICT champion within an HE department, I get criticised for putting stuff online, maybe putting colleagues out of a job, plus IPR issues.

• Oleg noted that teachers want help with lesson plans, and support for teacher’s expressiveness.  We agree, but VLEs are currently used mainly to substitute for lectures, textbooks, etc.
• We want to be able to support tutorial-type activities online, with 300 students, in groups.

• We want students to gain a certain amount of knowledge, then make links between it, and they then need to practice these skills.  But then assessment kills this process.  Technology is potentially good for this because it motivates students, like a (strategy) game.  But it is difficult to get appropriate software to do this.

Enrico’s question: To what extent to people believe that using the semantic web for learning services is feasible?

• The main issue of internet content is critically reviewing that content, rather than accessing it.  The issue is one of trust.  SW may move in this direction, but not enough (yet).  It may speed up review, but it may not improve the quality of review.
• SW sifts information, but who decides the criteria? (ontology?)
• It is very difficult to express the complex context of a query to a tool – where is the interpretation?

Wendy (Grainne)’s question: How do you predict the unpredictable?  (When we solve today’s problems, tomorrow’s technologies will be very different)

• Not possible to answer this – we have to start from where we are.  Practice in the classroom is very different to the research presented at this event.
• Importance of mobile technologies for learning, and connecting small mobile technologies (eg texting over the phone).  Good for practicing language skills, collaboration, motivation.
• But is this giving us (educationalists) the technology again, and we are again wondering what to do with it.  This is the wrong way round (see Oleg’s question).  Technology doesn’t solve the problems we have now.

Issues raised:

·        Importance of an activity-driven rather than a content-driven approach

·        Importance of student motivation

·        The need is for tools to support joining communities not gaining information

·        Students don’t do what we ask (they do strategic learning) – tools only work if students use them in the way we intend.  We have got to think how students will actually use this tool, and build tools which cope with strategic learning.

Questions

• How can we make use of technology to create a more supportive environment for motivating students?
• How much effort is involved in doing semantic annotation – is this scalable?
• Is SW taking away a level of understanding about the web, disempowering us?

Questions for the final panel

The panel on day 2 didn't get to address all the questions posed.  Use comments to add any thoughts you may have on these.  The questions from the breakout discussions included:

• How does research impact current teaching practice, to generate the time teachers need (this one was addressed by Wendy Hall - the irclogs for 23 March)
• Why aren't learning materials open source? (see the irclogs for Enrico Motta's response)
• How can we encourage communities of practice as Oleg suggested?
• Can learning objects be used to support the dialogue between teachers?
• What is the ultimate objective that will justify or make it practical to build shared resources?
• Who is going to describe all of the dta to make the semantic web possible?
• How can we make use of technology to create a more supportive environment for motivating students?
• How much effort is involved in doing semantic annotation? Is this scaleable?
• Is the semantic web taking away a level of understanding about the web, disempowering us?
• Is technology transforming learning, or is it business-as-usual?
• Is learning fundamentally to do with human interaction?
• How might we bring together the bits of the jigsaw? or 'who do we want at the party?'
• The need for various disciplines, groups, communities to get together ... one huge project or lots of small ones?  how do we get the links and contacts set up?

 

Group H notes

1. How do we predict the unpredictable? how do we take account of the fact that technologies will change?

Given the status quo now - what might not be there in 5 to 10 years?

• the end of the browser?
• what methodology do we use to make sure we are ready for the technology changes that we don't know what will happen?
  

Follow what W3C does - be aware of emerging standards, critical mass, communities of practice

2. What are the possibilities of the semantic web? are they feasible?

Some uncertaintly in the group about what the Semantic Web is.
One answer: objects, their relationship and attributes; connecting your vocabulary and identifiers for people, documents and things, with my vocabulary and identifiers - webbiness.

Also non-text interfaces, and associative memory: "thingy who was in that film with whatsisname, (the one with the beard) and the soundtrack won an oscar..." == RDF

Potential problems/feasibility. web/vs hypertext - the web had broken links but that was fine.

Feasible:

• who adds the tags?
• trust
• loads of information, all public? everyone can find out anything about you

3. What do teachers really want from learning objects/something else?

TLTP produced CDs, lots of content, only one route around it - cool simulations, buried; could not reuse content. The practitioner needs to be able to cherrypick to fine detail.

Open source learning objectss? - coming - creative commons; however, in some cases universities are cracking down; can't share the materials even if they want to.

Teachers in schools - don't have the skillset, tools or time to create reusable content; need to be given time and training, or a new generation. But would teachers like this? do they want it?

'sage on the stage' vs 'guide on the side'

Question for the panel: why aren't learning materials open source?

Grainne's final keynote

From Libby Miller (mobile)

danbri and ruth

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Group D

 

Enrico’s question: Is the Semantic Web for learners feasible? Is it “superior” to a learning object approach?

Who defines “structure” for Sem Web? How do we deal with multiple vocabularies on Semantic Web. e.g. my “home page” v your “web address”. We still need standards (and/or statements of equivalences?)

Enrico’s linguistic mapping front-end to map “home page” to has-web-address.

c.f. Google as text-based.  Maybe linguistic mapping + Google will be sufficient?

Sem Web places emphasis on collective, distributed responsibility, community involvement. Cf. Laurillard’s bottom-up approach: if it is to work, needs input of teachers.

Oleg’s question: What do teachers really want?

Refine the question: What do teachers want out of technology? What do teachers want and how can technology support?

Challenges not only of teaching and learning but also of control, especially in schools – perhaps more pressing interest in solving control problem!

Teachers have different levels of control of technology. Some teachers don’t know how to use Web. Reality of working across different classroom environments means having to ask others for help! Admitting you don't know does introduce status/authority issues. Compare yesterday’s discussion re live IRC/weblogging, and whether presenter keeps control or not.

Need to separate resources from delivery technology. Teacher wants to use multiple resources flexibility; but in practice need multiple backups of just one resource to cope with potential delivery problems.

Can get caught out by new technology. Never enough time for teacher to exploit properly – end up using lowest common denominator for security! Conversely, some go for new tech for sake of it – appear impressive but content weak. Some good teaching based on (physical!) blackboard.

Technology does support variety of approach.

Question for panel: Is technology transforming learning? Or is it business as usual? Is learning fundamentally to do with human interaction?

Expectations/requirements of assessment. Teachers are judged by results: huge pressures on teacher to deliver results. How to “relax” and allow students to “become researchers” in this context?

Technology is becoming easier to use. Younger generations are familiar with tech, take it for granted.  Cannot be avoided. But teachers need to be able to choose technologies to meet pedagogical requirements. But much valuable work not yet accessible in digital form  e.g. Online journals only available from circa 1980

Children are good at certain ICT tasks (e.g. circumventing filters to play games!) but can’t work Google.

Children can’t put knowledge together. Getting info is easy bit. Separate getting knowledge from creation of meaning – need to discuss what found, teacher provides “scaffold”. Sem Web may assist making connections by meaning rather than simple association.

If technology provides metadata, will children ever learn? Is there a risk of technology doing too much for students? Need to transform pedagogy (e.g. issue of teaching spelling). Skills – research, evaluation, analysis – are needed. Must be taught. Not solved by teaching HTML! Sometimes better not to use computer!

Compare spelling with critical thinking. Yes, some basic level of spelling needed. But can use tech to take care of basic levels, leaving opportunity to concentrate on “higher” level skills

Meaningful connections essential. Example of (MSWord-based) mini-Sem Web of Syllabus – Learning objects relations, as “guidebook to conceptual space”, including links to external resources. Build in terms of answers to questions (Wendy’s unresolved relations).

Mobile technology in schools: dealing with challenges/problems. Can’t ignore very real community concerns re e.g. inappropriate use of mobile photography.

 

Group B

The questions posed by speakers on 23rd March (Wendy Hall, Oleg Liber, Enrico Motta)

------------------

“What do teacher’s really want?”

 “To what extent is it realistic to use semantic content in delivering Learning Objects” or “the feasibility of the semantic vision?”

 “How does one predict the unpredictable?”

------------------------------------

The group thought of other possible questions “What are the connections between these speakers”, “Who would we like them to meet”. We eventually posed:

“How might we bring together the bits of the jigsaw” the various disciplines and groups that need to get together “Who should be at the party”?

How do we close the gulf(s) between, say, AI and Web practitioners and also the Engineering and Social Science communities? An example - researchers unaware of pedagogical developments that have taken place outside her field?  What about the Concept mapping work of Novak in 1980’s? Common Language between disciplines does not exist. “We have a 5,000 piece jig-zaw and most of it is blue.”

The compartmentalisation of research funding in UK is not conducive to finding answers.

Research into Pedagogical Content Knowledge – Learning Objects don’t (can’t?) approach address this.

Reductionism – the danger of LOs. AI to replicate full knowledge of real world. Tensions between AI (reductionism) and how do we enhance our day-to-day practice.

What about a trans-disciplinary research programs with all the Research Councils? Probably not realistic? At least one problem would be there would be no label to apply to the field of research!

What are the conditions in which serendipity might produce an answer? Does it need to be market-driven? Was the Web market-driven, was text –messaging market driven. Will the need to deliver to more and more students provide the market force behind elearning?

Are cultures and organisation in HE too resistant to change? Is HE too rigid? Exeter experience = no inherent resistance from individuals but a major organisational resistance. The benefit unlikely to outweigh the  investment – will this always be so?

Award schemes for teachers in adopting eLearning. How do you provide them with the time and motivations to adopt? (time is the crucial factor)

Are we looking at context rather than objects Are the communities there to share context and practice. Learning Objects  may prove counter-productive?

Group C - Session 3

What do teachers really want? (Oleg Liber)

• Want research and design of courses to be available
• Confirmation of what they are doing and some examples to adapt for themselves
• Already plenty of guidelines and advice but need role models and ways of bringing this to peoples attention
• Familiar, everyday tools to development tools (although often a tension between easy and flexible)
• Transferable skills
• Time and some acknowledgement of the time spent developing materials
• To improve teaching and to adapt to change
• To help support students (especially at school age)

Questions:

How can we encourage the development of CoPs as Oleg suggested we needed?

Can Learning Objects be used as part of the dialogue between teachers?

To what extent is the vision of the semantic web realisable? (Enrico Motta) Often don’t need a 100% hit rate

The dependence of the author to code in the information needed for the Semantic Web is a fundamental flaw, won’t Google get there first?

Questions:

What is the ultimate objective to justify or to make it practical to build shared resources?

Who is going to describe all of the data to make the Semantic Web possible?

How do you predict the unpredictable? (Wendy Hall)

We can learn from the past.

Approach has been to have finer grained descriptions, content and functionality in order to hedge against what might happen but only time will tell whether this is the right approach.

Although you shouldn’t be driven by the technology it often allows you to move into new areas (e.g school children use the Web for research) perhaps as teachers we have to be more open to finding new ways of learning and teaching through using the technology.

Breakout Group3 A

1. Question: What do teachers really want?  (How do we find out).

 School Teachers don't have time, yet materials exist on the net. Therefore they want someone to find information relating to corriculum, put into an easy to use format, safe (controlled) to involve no marking.  In time, they would love to be able to modify it. 

In HE they want the time.  They want to be free from constraints of copyright and IPR issues.  As soon as material goes on the web, there are extra issues, e.g. actors in videos charge more as soon as material goes on the web.

There is a move towards open  source for copyright in the states.  The owner of the materials grants permission which is embedded in the material.  This has the potential to help overcome this problem.  There are however differences in subjects (science easier than Arts for example.

Don't want pre-packaged materials (want pictures, videos and articles). 

In both schools and HE, they want some way of relieving administrative burden.  It is easier for schools with the curriculum than in HE where only some have set objectives.

In schools DFES provide lesson plans and recommended resources but don't insert media into the lessons. 

Conclusion: Need ability to find resources and copyright and IPR needs streamlining. Still not sure about learning objects.

 

2. Question: What are the possibilities for the semantic web?

Has the potential to help with problems above.  Question, how do we make sure the cataloguing is done properly.  This is then met tag problem over again.  Frameworks, templates are needed (VLEs or Macromedia contribute).   Could services be the answer in the wider context?  Could 'somatic librarians' add value, just as librarians do in physical librarians?  Probably not.   The authors need to do it, but it needs to be extremely easy to do or largely automated (semantic passport).  It is the extra really useful description that it will be hard for people to do.

Do we need the semantic web when google works as a search engine?  It may offer more efficient retrieval.  Partly depends on whether freely accessible Internet material will grow or be locked behind passwords.  Can we really get what we need instantly from goggle?  Do we need to know how to search goggle and will semantics make it harder.

Semantic web used as a research tool to find links and patterns, but is this relevant to 8 year olds.  Do they need a lot of knowledge and direction from the teacher before children can benefit from the semantic web?  Conclusion: depends on your pedagogical beliefs.

Will semantic web help to create networks of information?  Can we do this without semantic tagging? 

 

3. Can we predict the unpredictable?  We can't predict where technology will go so how do we plan ahead.

Are we at a stage where we believe technology can do almost anything? Should we not just be able to say what we want and assume that the trench will soon be able to do it?

Examples: Use of technology to record what people do and where we are?  Voice control would be useful. Computer understanding what we are saying and putting into the context of where we are (nearest place to find a good or information about a service). What we want is 'more time, more sleep, more sex' but technology is doing the opposite.  In reality, can we shape the future to give us what we want?  Possibly not.  The leisure industry will invent what they can sell, and we may have to work with what they invent.  Maybe we need to try to predict the leisure industry

 

Question for panel? 

How can the research into learning technology impact on teaching practice to create more time for teachers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notes from Group F session 3

Chaired by Simon Price

How do we predict the Unpredictable?

• Ask teachers what they want – might help predict 

New learning possibilities for the Semantic Web? What is possible and practical?

• Idea of Agent is attractive? But ontologies are not value free...
• Can it help with re-use? Perhaps support re-use by teachers, economy of effort
• ... lots of discussion about Learning Objects... How much of LO’s are driven by economic and political factors – should start with hard teaching problems we need solving are problems in teaching from DLs talk yesterday.
• ... ILS based systems -> centralised view...
• Can Sem Web help make this more flexible?
• Can be used badly too...
• Example that AI logic/rules etc... didn’t work with intelligent tutoring...
• DanBri – noted that Sem Web is not focused on AI... more like Enrico’s example of doc annotation...
• Difference between Sem Web – Learning Objects... Sem Web allows choice of ontologies/vocabs... allows mappings between – Not a unified worldview.
• Possibilities ... examples of mapping field of research – groups/people/views/approaches... automatically.
• There are huge swaves of human life that can’t be formalised...
• Can it do more theoretical relationships more than

What to teachers really what?

• What do Learners really what?
• Do teachers really know what they want?
• Might want what they used to be.
• Need a dialogue between the teachers and technologists...
• Technologists working with teachers ... e.g. project interviewing teachers... new technologies arrive all the time. But some are more useful than others. Consultation to get more meaningful and useful...
• What do we do first? E.g. of company with teacher as developer...Learning Objects developers used differently
• Is it about evolution? Start anywhere and many flowers bloom... fittest survive
• Need many support systems some technological and some not. 

Questions for the Panel

Oleg. What are the first step that Oleg wants Learning Objects to deliver to do what teachers want?

Does the panel think that the Sem Web can answer more complex questions e.g. organising theoretical relationships more than factual relationships?

Does the panel think that asking teachers what they really want the wrong question?

Group E

What do teachers really want?

We found the question overboard but considered various aspects of how to answer it. At what level is this considered? It is very different for schools in comparison to HE/FE. Teachers want a large range of materials for supporting their teaching methods. In particular, they want to work in their way, and would appreciate support for being worked with. However there is a range of responses - some want to do what they have always done, some want to do what they have always done, and some don't want to be dictated to.

Ownership of the process of creation of this content, and ownership of the content itself has to be clear and agreed with the participants. Only then can a proper community be generated. There are also issues with the HE/FE reward structure with respect to such teaching development.

Is my vision feasible? Enrico Motta

It is feasible if the trust and authenticaion issues are sorted out. It is important that if the machine technology is making content, gathering and aggregating adaptive content that the provenance and quality is assured, given that there is no human involvement.

How does one work around one's routed-ness in today's techology? Wendy Hall

Predicting the unpredicatable - tricky! Do take account of things that seem fanciful, such as science fiction. People are put off by long term horizons, wheras looking 3-4 years ahead is a lot more feasible.

Tracey and Lesly

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Requirements for a sustainable Learning object environment, Professor Oleg Liber

There is no question that one of the major opportunities offered by the Web is vastly increased access to content. However this has brought with it a number of problems. Whereas paper based publication has evolved a range of effective mechanisms and standards over time – the structure of text books, mechanisms for review and publication, delivery methods – online publication is struggling to develop its own mechanisms, that do not restrict the benefits of access, but do provide confidence in its validity. In particular, traditional educational structures, processes and roles are well harmonised with the technology of printed materials – teachers and learners know how to work with books and libraries, and how to use them to support their purposes; institutions know how to acquire and pay for them.

More...

Enrico and danbri

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Semantic Webs for Learning, Professor Enrico Motta

Augmenting web pages with semantic contents, i.e., building a ‘Semantic Web’, promises a number of benefits for web users in general and learners in particular. Semantic technologies will make it possible to reason about the Web as if it was one extended knowledge base, thus offering increased precision when accessing information and the ability to locate information distributed across different web pages. Moreover, it will become possible to develop a range of additional educational semantic web services, such as interpretation or sense-making, structure-visualization, support for argumentation, novel forms of content customization, novel mechanisms for aggregating learning material, etc.

More...

Wendy Hall's keynote

Good morning, Wendy

Web technologies in evolution – a context for learning cultures, Professor Wendy Hall

Long before the Web existed hypertext visionaries and researchers foresaw a richly inter-linked world that allowed authors and readers alike to move easily between related items of information in a global network: many were excited by the idea that such environments could be used to support learning. The Web provided the infrastructure to enable those ideas to become reality but in some ways is far more limited than many of its antecedents. Links, the fundamental building blocks of any hypertext system, are still difficult to author and maintain. Associative, personalised links, which formed the basis of Vannevar Bush's off-cited article "As We May Think", are largely missing from both the theory and the practice of building Web sites, and it is left to search engines to fill the gaps. However, the development of the Semantic Web promises to provide a much richer environment for exploring these ideas, and in particular how they might provide a context for learning. This talk will consider how the Web is used today to support learning, and will look forward to the potential for more sophisticated Web-based learning environments in the future as the Semantic Web evolves.

Dinner in the Wills building

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Jonathan Drori's public lecture

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Sex, Drugs and New Interactive Services - Creating New Services for a Networked World, Jonathan Drori

Suddenly the word 'interactive' is everywhere. Why should people [educators,broadcasters and advertisers] be so interested in interactivity? What are the opportunities and pitfalls in developing new interactive services? What can we learn from the gamut of compelling human experiences that we can apply to new services that we want people to engage with, enjoy and encourage their friends to use? Jonathan Drori, Director of the government's new Culture Online project will give his personal (and possibly controversial) views of what's good and what's hopeless with plenty of practical tips to make and manage a new service or business that is exciting and desirable rather than earnest and dull. This will be an interactive session, with the possibility to win chocolate. Public humiliation will not figure.

Wills building

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Group C

We ended up with discussion about summative assessment, less about formative (and heard more examples of auto marking, partially-auto).  Could you use IRC as part of formative assessment, getting them to chat?

The IRC experience in Colston: it's difficult to keep an eye on the IRC and blog. Having a monitor at the front might be helpful.  Maybe we don't have the model right, it's subversive, no formal checkpoint, no formal consideration.  It should be better integrated into the session - especially true for undergraduate lectures! - and have pauses, series of checkpoints, time for reflection and discussion face-to-face and then carry on.

We then had a discussion about whether using technology is the only way to be interactive in a lecture?  Q&A.  Example stats course, 80 students, can see on their faces whether they're getting it.  Requires significant level of input from the lecturer.

But as far as today's sessions have gone, we had various accounts of positive experiences of using the IRC, the weblog and particularly using the wireless network - downloading pdf, downloading presentations, shared with other people (though not via IRC), sharing the learning. 

Notes group B

How do we cope with all the extra tech?

Do you have to apply the tech? student expectations? fact to face teaching

prior/post class rather than synchonously?

have to use the tech with care, don't just plonk it down

what do I change from my currect practice and what routes are there to change?  more variety? or just more...?

skills needed many and changing

- is it worth it?
- does the institution have the correct mix of labour? experts lecturing vs other means

tempting to just use it because it's there; but can't ignore the changes happening outside

now: don't need people to tell you facts - the information is all out there.

social and logistical concerns?

schools have changed, universities less so.

Group C

Discussion ranged around, but not directed towards, any particular question to start with.  We considered Gilly's model and the issue of cost: the feeling is that cost differentials are at least the same (as developing old technologies) but probably considerably more.  This isn't a cheap option.  Actually costs are probably higher - because not looking at replacing, looking at augmenting.

Thinking about what was on / in the tin, it seems we're still asking the same question: what's most appropriate [technology] for what?

Students are time-pressured (not just location-pressured in distance learning context).  Blended learning gives choice, flexibility for students
Similarly useful for activity they can't do, don't have the resource to do any other way.  eg genetics wetlab; geography virtual field trips; classics virtual fieldtrips.

Takes us back to an earlier discussion (this morning) and the need to redefine what the lecturer/lecture is for.  Example from comp sci, programming.  Notes are online.  Why come to lecture?  Free up programming time.  Lectures can offer a rhythm / milestones effect. Lectures more and more are about motivation, enthusiasm, what David May in the panel session calls 'performance'.

eLearning used as a backdoor method to offering training to academics in pedagogy ... back to appropriateness - get the ed. objectives/learning experience first, then think IF need any technology

Group C

Vinnie joined our group, so we had a direct route into this question, although the discussion involved various group members.

Vinnie's question was "What might be the most useful axes of adaptivity for courses with which you are involved?"

that is, what elements of subject content can be adapted?

Some testing of students' prior knowledge (pre-test) of course content is just one element and might not / should not be the only or most dominant element.

Perhaps it's more to do with students' confidence than competence in an area?
Some self-rating of competence can be helpful.

One of the important axes is mode of communication: to have sufficient flexibility in the system to deliver in different ways, different modes of communication (query: students' learning styles - do we 'believe' in the theory of learning styles | in practice)?

The successful outcomes of the course and satisfaction levels may be as much derived from students' ownership/responsibility for the course and having choices within parameters - maybe this contributes more to success of the course than having material that suits a student's particular learning style?

We were reminded that the tutor's role is still important: there's a need to design the programme, not just do some kind of automated adaptive content retrieval

Appropriateness in this is combination of content/delivery package (my notes tail off at this point ... maybe someone else in the group can comment).

Group 2F

We discussed three rough areas

Technology

It would be good if there was better and more well-fitted technology suitable for the purpose for use. The current process for communicating requirements for educational software developers is very bad; resulting in tools that are inappropriate for teaching practice and difficult to connect together - some support is completely missing. We do however expect the tools to improve in the future as technology develops. This will require a better negotatied process of requirements gathering rather than just delivering what one party asks with "I want".

Changing Roles

There was a realisation of an expectation gap in what students expect, or what they were promised and what the teaching they received. This is usually due to uneven application of the technology, or failure of some educators to apply it at all. There is seems to be a role gap - it is not clear where the responsible parties are for some of this support - it tends to fall between libraries, support services, technology services and department staff.

Adaptive course design

This group was rather skeptical about the application here - thinking it might be expensive in time and bandwidth. It seems to be more appropriate for factual based materials than other subjects. It was not compelling that there was a strong need for this.

final panel day 1

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Group 2H

 Adaptive Learning

Adaptivity should not affect assessment. Learning objectives should be the same. In the real world there’s less chance for adaptive assessment.

Should this depend on the type of content? Our culture of education is assessment driven. It is an area we need to look at. Adaptivity is viewed as something essential. Students are exam-centred. The end point (of learning) is not necessarily the same for each student. Adaptive learning could be more motivating.

What about course development?

You should consider the different type of learners you have, whereas in the traditional you don’t think about that. Teacher adapt all the time. There is not just ONE approach. There are differences in an e-learning vs. a classroom context. Traditionally you use off the shelf materials. There is a pre-determined sequence. There are some products that allow different paths of learning but it is not genuinely adaptive.

In a particular blended approach, there is content delivery and there are discussion threads. In that case, we analyse students learning styles, as an exercise. It is not incorporated to our methodology fully (Masters degree). In another approach, we direct student in a more open fashion. The main aim is to develop collaboration. It’s personal at the group level. Groups will make recommendations at the end. It’s about bringing knowledge into practice.

This might be a rewarding approach. There are scalability issues though. In the school context you don’t have the option to move into a totally online fashion. In higher education there is. Adaptive would work ideally in a 1 to 1 fashion. The real world is 30 to 1.

Group A

Adaptive learning

Adaptive learning of connect is relatively straightforward, but adaptive learning styles then much more difficult. Students may adapt to the lowest denominator, stay on what they are most comfortable with, unless driven by assessment..

Points discussed

Many different types of adaptive learning. How can you link in to assessment?

How does it transfer to different age groups, with different histories. What’s it application to primary school (5-11 age group), secondary, or HE? Especially, given the assessment driven approach to education.

The group wondered about Diana’s presentation – the role of the conversational model to a system that has developed to focus on the delivery of set targets.

Key for scaleability – adaption needs scale, can the technology deliver in a manageable workload for the teacher.

The success of adaptive learning is the same as e-learning, it’s pedagogical design and appropriate screen design for the audience/task.

Question from group ?

How does adapative learning account for learning styles, and how can it be delivered in 4 days

Will adaptive learning provide a rich learning environment or does it increase isolation as you work on your own? What is the role of the tutor and peers, and how can technology deliver this tutor/peer needs.

How does adapative learning and learning to learn fir in with the assignment driven UK education system?

Group G

Stand-in note taker: Claire Furlonger. Factilitator: Simon Price.

Evaluation of the LRC onscreen during the afternoon sessions?

How did people feel having it there?

Initially humorous comments – did develop a more structured approach towards the end. Not actually obvious how it should be used and not intuitive.

Some of group felt it was a waste of time and certainly not of value for undergraduates.

Summarising the talk – who was this for? Some wondered if there were people outside who were reading it. This was the case at the Web conference – but there it was to inform an external audience.

Some web addresses marked up – but could have been done by speaker.

Discussion relating to Gilly Salmon’s presentation. The analogies were not completely understood. Some felt that she thought we had more understanding than we did!

Are we using the right technologies for the right purposes?

We need to bring our own understandings and knowledge to make full use of them.

Questions were found a bit off the wall!!

Vince’s questions

Felt to be very useful to have ability to adapt to students with differing needs and differing previous knowledge and learning histories.

Intelligent tutoring systems from past years which try to establish how people are different and respond to meet individual needs.

Challenges in assessing outcomes of adaptive courses.

Example given of bank of questions. Students are given a random sample of questions for assessment  purposes. Found that it needed to be personalised for courses as well as students.

Example given of  OU software in which test results determined the additional content that would be offered to individual students. Those who didn’t do as well got the full additional content and had loads more work presented to them. Some of those who got more questions right found they had no opportunity to go further in areas in which they were not confident (even if they had got the question correct). They found students preferred to choose their own pathways and areas for further study.

Felt that Vince’s students were re-personalising time after time not for formal learning reasons but possibly because they wanted to find out how the software worked – problem solving!!

If the process is automated where is the role for the teacher? Isn’t that what teachers are so good at – negotiating pathways with students?

Are those who are not as familiar with new technology being disadvantaged? Felt that if the software was well designed and constructed this could be overcome.

Reading onscreen – everyone prints out. Evidence that we engage more with text on paper as we can mark it etc. Speed of reading slows down when reading onscreen and we find it difficult to focus as due to refresh our eyes constantly flick around the page.

The questions are found to be too general – different contexts require very different solutions. Most of the information is so general – a lot more needs to be done to relate it to many different individual contexts.

Question for panel

We have bought the tin – how do we use it and adapt it for our individual needs? How do we enable academics/teachers to use the technology in different contexts eg: undergraduates as opposed to postgraduates; large teaching groups as opposed to small teaching groups; different subject disciplines?

Session 2 - Group D

Questions for the Panel Session – Group 2D: (Facilitator Neil Jacobs)

If the twin goals are to improve student learning and to revalorise (restore value to) teaching, by making both more like research – what practical steps can be taken to achieve either or both of those goals?

What is e-Learning and what mix of technologies and in what contexts (audience, course, etc.) should they be used? And what skills sets do you need to implement them?

What if the tools aren’t there to do what you want to do? The market (products available) haven’t caught up how is this identified

How do you use the transformational qualities of the technologies, when the every day experience of the teacher is in managing large throughput of learners?

Group E: 16:10

• Student expect more from BB and other VLEs. Tutors perhaps have lower expectations e.g. Discussion boards are required by students but tutors don’t know how best to use them. Motivation to use Discussion boards – there needs to be a reason for these to be used.
• In introducing VLE/eLearning - need a professional development programme for teaching staff and time to deliver the curriculum that the institute wants to put in place in 5 years?
• One idea - small centres of best practice in early adoption and use of VLE.  Mechanisms of feedback to pass on success and failures.
• Did you buy the right tin – will your VLE fit with your existing systems and/or technical policies?
• Would all like the means to more easily swap out a poor system or have an adaptive system that responds to customer demands - Open source/open architecture may be one way forward.
• Bad workman blaming their tools – feeling threatened, things are going wrong then you will blame the software. You need a collaborative planned approach to the introduction of a VLE.
• Course development will change if adaptive technologies are introduced, as tutor might have to surrender ownership of the courses.
• Adaptive technologies - There will be the opportunity to lesson to what students will be saying, to “eaves drop on coffee-bar conversations”.

Vincent Wade and Sue Timmis

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Gilly Salmon and washing machine

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Can technology learn from the learners themselves?, Vincent Wade

The idea that technology can learn from and adapt to the learners themselves, is increasingly being proposed in various forms: Personalised eLearning, Contextualised eLearning, eLearning 'just for you'. ELearning technology is emerging which claims to be capable of customising educational strategy, dynamically composing educational resource/content, reshaping presentations and user interfaces, and adapting communication & collaboration tools, to suit the individual learner or groups of learners. A typical problem addressed by such systems has been the 'one size fits all’ delivery of elearning content, which can lead to various problems including lack of relevance, motivation (intrinsic), inflexibility, lack of choice of learning strategy etc. In Personalised eLearning the learning experience can be adapted to several aspects of the learning e.g. current goals, expertise, learning history, learning style or physical context (access device availabilities and capabilities, connection quality, mobility etc).

More...

Does it do what it says on the tin?, Gilly Salmon

Gilly Salmon invites you to take a fresh look at 4 technologies available to us to support and develop educational objectives, considerwhat might underlie their purposes and explore their fitness in the service of teaching and learning in the first part of the 21st Century.
Questions to explore:

• Can we call a spade a spade?
• Are bad workman blaming their tools?
• Have you a key to a new box for me?

Grainne Conole and Diana Laurillard

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Blogging in a Presentation

Paul Shabbajee asked is it rude to use technology to gain further info during or reflect on a presentation whilst in progress. As I am writing this Diana Laurillard is speaking and I feel desperately uncomfortable. Also I keep losing track of what she is saying - what skills or social mores do I need to acquire to make a success of this?

E-learning in the Knowledge Economy: the right context for innovation, Professor Diana Laurillard

Teachers and lecturers need support for the range and depth of innovation we need if we are to transform education through e-learning. The paper will discuss the extent to which we have a genuine knowledge economy within the education system, and what kinds of structures and technologies would provide better support to the continual innovation in teaching practitioner knowledge we now need.

Group H

Main question addressed: Does education have to change because of technology push?

Example where new technology fails: SAT tests

Technology requires new skills, e.g. touchtyping

Also offers new challenges for education: how can it be effectively embedded and managed.

Need to take account of resistance to new technology.

People lose skills because of new technology (e.g. spelling) but also learn new skills.

Face-to-face lecturing will always remain important, but to be effective it will have to account for new technology.

With regard to new technology we are currently in a transitionary phase: current pupils/students are much more familiar with it.

Questions for panel:

Don't we need to rethink education as a whole? Before that we can't really decide how technology is best going to support it.

Does the role of the academic change? E.g. authoring content. Need to train academic in this.

Group E

Questions for the Plenary Session:

1. How does education prepare for the information society?

2. Online technologies provide ‘live’ interaction, the need for moderation appears. How do we accommodate for different styles of learning?

3. Awareness of the potential and dangers of abundance of information. How do we teach that to children? How do we empower them to participate in Democracy?

Some other issues discussed: Teaching and avoiding plagiarism. Developing critical thinking. Interdisciplinary character of design. Rating online materials and resources.

Notes group B

How do we cope with all the extra tech?

Do you have to apply the tech? student expectations? fact to face teaching

prior/post class rather than synchonously?

have to use the tech with care, don't just plonk it down

what do I change from my currect practice and what routes are there to change?  more variety? or just more...?

skills needed many and changing

- is it worth it?
- does the institution have the correct mix of labour? experts lecturing vs other means

tempting to just use it because it's there; but can't ignore the changes happening outside

now: don't need people to tell you facts - the information is all out there.

social and logistical concerns?

schools have changed, universities less so.

Group C

1. Is there an inverse relationship between learning & the extent of  teacher and knowledge control ?

2. How does technology change this relationship?

How to control…how to engage

Loss of control…versus ‘safety’

Personal autonomy..versus authenticity of knowledge

Paradox of managed discussions – we want to capture the informal spontaneous discussions that emerge. But what is happening in informal situations…? Not enough research. Few people capturing that. (Patrick)  

‘Our’ view…context & time dependent…that things should be orderly. No longer appropriate. Can we tolerate multitasking by students & continuous feedback into teaching. Is it rude to be doing things during a lecture? …the problem is the opposite..getting them to engage (if you can keep under control)

The technologies have the potential to ‘destabilize’ traditional ways. “Don’t have a problem with technology...but do have a problem with what we DO with it’ (Ian). Answers country/culturally dependent

However the technologies can help us adapt our teaching e.g. Work out from bulletin board discussions in order to explore what they’ve failed to grasp. Demonstrate active and problem based learning. What they get out of this varies.

Example of students continuing to type against guest lecturer (when he’s already said that ppt slides were on a web site). (Colin)  Students critiqued ..lecturer was shocked.

Ann asked why didn’t the lecturer ask what they were doing…he was a guest?

Another question:

What should children know?  Do and don’ts of online relationships (Ann)...and personal safety.  Also criticality & intelligent thinking (example given of Holocaust denial) (loss of control again!). Access to information in families & in society- very serious issues. Freedom to search provides very high price. Fast typing.

Comment on the technology itself

The ways tools e.g. bulletin board are presented, impacts on the ease of use and interaction. Whether to buy in or write tools (e.g. assessment) - ‘tone’ has to be right

Can we have a url for these?

1. Roger Shank positioning is that teacher/lecturer will disappear completely. I’m not very afraid…’(schools in Chile, Gerardo). The problem is how to introduce to regular classes. ..what are the best strategies or how to integrate the technologies. Mix of some virtual experiences...exciting activity. How to involve students in great experience..not how to control

2.  IMPACT study

Massive distance still to go in school & lesson time. At home much higher. But the students are doing it (less so teacher).

What skills do we need?

This picked up David May's question around what skills we will all need (and should therefore be teaching now) to handle all the technologies we're likely to encounter in the Web of 2010. 

There is a paradox in that with the current National curriculum: we encourage critical thinking, self expression etc in children til they're 8, then again when postgrads, but in between the educational system explicitly rejects this in some cases (regurgitating material for assessment rather than thinking for themselves). 
Maybe it is wrong to talk about is this technology useful or not?  More about how you learn to use it and about learning to use the appropriate medium for the type of communication (this being a recurring theme to our discussion).

It's noted that online workloads for students and tutors is growing.

There are, and need to be, different motivations for people to participate in online interactions.

We are seeing something of a changing nature of the educational experience - online notes available beforehand, but the discussion in the classroom is different.  irc/blogging has to be used very thoughtfully.

Many of the e-skills are transient and easy to acquire, what we need to do is focus more on teaching children how to think, and how to acquire these skills rather than training them in any specific technology.  There seems to be a growing need to teach logic, critical thinking, evaluative processes and the broader view of communicating information, what's the appropriate way of communicating?

 

Group 1D

From Paul’s session:

1.      Is it rude to engage with available technologies during ‘traditional forms’ of teaching and learning activity?

Possibility of missed opportunities if not paying attention.  However, chance of accessing that information at any time (i.e. later).  Difference between education and information retrieval though.  Important to think about that information and take opportunities to question it.  Students like the security of having something being presented. 

Important to ask questions about purpose of activity.  Accessing and retrieving information and using the technologies is an essential part of learning process but is more complementary to the traditional forms rather than an integral part of it.  (Good) lectures can  become performances rather like an opera and you don’t let someone use a mobile phone while the fat lady sings.

Technology can help towards offering options with assessment.

Blogs can be helpful in creating a space for thinking and understanding but how do you effectively close the loop back to the teacher/educator?  Especially where you have large classes?  Need tools to navigate student blogs to make sense of them, find themes and patterns, separate wheat from chaff.  Blogs are probably more useful in building social processes rather than generating important and relevant information that can be easily assessed.

 2.      What are implications of an ‘always on’ environment?

Didn’t get this far.  Which is a shame.

Question for panel?

Vision of the web in 2010 implies that info will be paid for on access of it rather than up front as is currently case with say payment for a broadband connection.  Who pays and how? 

Is it rude ...?!

Group G: Facilitator Paul Bason, Notes Lesly Huxley

We started with the question Paul Shabajee raised: is it rude and detrimental to learning to be discussing a tutor'\s presentation wirelessly with ones' peers live during the lecture or lesson?

In some ways we've always been in a state of 'partial concentration' - how many of us remember being students and doodling or reading surreptitiously during lectures?
Technology offers more ways for people to be elsewhere, but might also bring people back into the fold if used appropriately.

=key is how integrated it is to the session / lesson taking place?

=if this is happening in an unrelated way, in parallel tracks, you might end up with "subversive conversations in the bushes", but if facilitated/mediated, interactive participation can be very valuable.

=does this need a redefinition of what someone standing up in front of a class/conference is actually there for?

This was our longest discussion, and it ended with turning the question back on itself:

Is it rude for the lecturer/speaker to expect students/delegates to make notes on his/her lecture?!

 

Group A

Is it rude and detrimental to be discussing/looking things up during lectures?

It is evolving e.g. mobile phones turned off during lectures

Social and cultural norms will develop and depend on nature of conference

Roles will evolve – e.g. lecturers

Reflecting and evaluating while in the process of doing it very difficult

You are reacting – giving speaker richer feedback

Need to manage people’s attention when teaching

At conference trading in people’s attentions

2 issues:

• Technology that supports speakers
• Technology that interferes

If it is going to work the lecturer would  need to have control of how people use it (constructively)

Role of education?

2  issues – how knowledge and knowledge development is changing

-ubiquity of technologies

increasing network enables education to change role --- more participative role, less transmissional; knowledge widely distributed, co-creation

Technology aids and abets

If completely networked world – these networks are owned – educationalist not involved in the development of standards etc Need to be involved.

Educationalists are involved – students bring the technologies brought in – so educationalists are being led.

Young people exploit comm. Channels – social support – as opposed to the content/knowledge – go to social network.

Technolgy offering opportunities to structure events in different ways e.g. choosing text over phone.

Blogging – can it be imported into classroom?

Controlling space to define identity – personal freedoms.

Can you design events?

Things we mistake we can design are things that evolve.

Reflective logs – needs to suit the way people want to do it.

Do they need to post to a blog, discussion board to learn?

Medium for expression or a medium for communication?

If a feedback channel needed– would manage this in a different way.

Audience important.

What is the imagined audience – what is the real audience?

Implication for school age classrooms?

This would trickle down.

Very motivating to children to publish on web.

How will we learn?

It will evolve.

Do we educate students to be users of technologies or designers, creators of these technologies? (critical co-creator people)

Should children learn to programme? Can teach everyone everything or  teach programmers how to think like layperson.

If you don’t have a sense of programming…..can’t create…another tool for creativity.

Can education take back Intellectual ownership from commercial ownership of information? Infrastructure owners own information (e.g satellite tv) What we teach is controlled by what people are prepared to transmit.

What are the implications for the schoolage classroom/curriculum?

Group G: Facilitator Paul Bason. Notes Lesly Huxley.

There are some big issues for in-service training; barrier may be with the teachers and the support and training they have (or have not)

Need to have service providers that focus on infrastructure, dba, etc., so that teachers can focus on teaching. So often the resource and culture aren't there to allow specialists to focus on what they're good at (service provision, network etc management; teaching)

Support for teachers need to be there, and they also and need motivation for them to learn to use some of these technologies in a really meaningful way in the classroom - again, goes back to educational objectives and appropriate media.

But there are examples of using technology to support peer-to-peer assessment where students can comment on each others' work, participate, assess each other.

What are the implications for educational assessment ?

Group G: Facilitator Paul Bason. Notes Lesly Huxley.

We ranged widely around the role of technology in the classroom and not so much about assessment, but the main thrust of the discussion was the need always to return to the educational objective.  What are we trying to assess? What's the most appropriate medium for that?  And not to forget that, it may not be the use of the technhology nor the subject matter that's important, but skills such as team-work or critical thinking that are being demostrated through use of the technology.

Session one, breakout group F

Notes as taken, presented unedited. Perhaps the participants might like to follow-up with an explanation?

PaulShab's questiounbs: what is going to be different with always-on networks?
 Noise / Taking it all in

Implications for education, distraction, what about school-age curriculum

How do the roles of your peers change?

Is it rude/detrimental to learning to have multiple activities going on?

 

And the group said:

(After an introduction, thatwe wouldn't have to remember everyone else's names?)

It's an attention thing. You're training people to pay attention for a small space of time.
It's short and quick.

Is it helping education? Not necessarily rude.

There's always something better waiting for you (eg, call waiting).

Society could benefit, increasingly people will choose private space. People will have
to learn when to switch off. Teaching people to take responsibility.

Response to being unavailable with mobile can be positive.

Social inclusion aspect: implies a world where kids have technology available to them.

"The digital divide". One argument was that it'll get cheaper.
Cheaper doesn't mean more equitable.
Children will still have access to mobiles, TV, playstation, etc. But may not use it for
an educational perspective.

In the past you had a limited set of tools to teach people, with a range of digital devices
then there's evidence a wider range of kids can respond positively, compared to books.
A personalised learning agenda.

Many teenagers can do three things happily at once. Is that to the detriment of other
styles that are less superficial? Eg: detailed discussion. Loss of reflection.
Loss of coordination with mobile phones whilst walking as an example for cognitive overload.

How does blogging etc differ from older forms of note-taking? etc.
You're more likely to be distracted because you have greater opportunity to shift attention outside the immediate environment.
Are multitasking critical skills accellerating at the same rate? If their skills are keeping
pace then there's proortionately no loss.
(Psychological: there's a limit to the number of tasks that the "central executive" can
manage at once. But who knows? Maybe there's accelerated evolutionary development here)

You always have to fight for attention in a teaching environment. I could live with
a little note-passing. But that they might be alking about what I'm saying, I'd feel
very exposed. Eg: IRC challenge to speaker at a conference.

... but that's great as a student.

Why would you lecture if it's a condoned practice that people will be commenting on what you're saying ("more likely what you're wearing") as you lecture.

Teaching has to change. ("I'm not people should just stand up and talk")

How can you monitor other's disattention?

... I like the voting idea. This could be subverted by "gaming" a voting opinion.

A teacher uses the group to decide how they're doing, if material needs going over.
It's building in disengagement between a teacher and a group.

Industrially group work is more and more important. Is this training you to work as
an individual?...
... not sure. If you're communicating with the rest of the group collectively then
you _are_ being taught in a group environment. The lecturer takes on more of a facilitator role.

Teachers need a new set of skills for this. Also, you could modify style. "There are times when I will need your attention."

How are primary school children going to gain these skills?

And how are they going to employ them even when they have them?
(On history for conference) We debated putting all content available beforehand.
But how do you deal with the situation where everyone turns up without doing the prep?

I've experienced the situation where a class was well-prepared, and we immediately went deeper - it was no longer about transmission.

Anecdote: Looking at a primary school making presentations, ppts, etc about Shrewsbury.
Searching the web for bits and pieces. Half the kids had a New Hampshire one.

...but you can learn more by mistakes...

Blogging: there's been a lot of discussion about computer-mediated discussion,
VLEs. Many have small-community appeal. I was interested in the fact that the reason people were writing was emotional. Could you tap that emotional power, use it, apply it?

...Maybe you can encourage people by allowing them to add comments during lectures?
It would be handy not just for future lectures but also for the students.

Related anecdote: I've been working on software for "e-learning" recently. How do you engage gifted kids? We might encourage kids to use blogs. The gifted kid is encouraged to share his knowledge, he becomes a publisher. Then next year, a year seven student has _two_ views. The material is added to the reference.
...but how far can you get through reading other people's versions of stuff?
Plagarism: you develop an academic rigor for referencing. In this more fluid environment, where does the line of what is your work end? Some universities don't like online discussion for assessed material because of plagarism issues(!)

Some of educational oucome is simply: knowing stuff, knowing who to ask.

...but the educational system [currently in the UK] is individual assessment and exams.
There is a system of immediate and pressing deadlines: the next exam.

If people _want_ that information they'll find it. The school problem is getting kids to want it.

Distractions include: other folk being distracted near you.

Examples already:
CNN's out-of-band ticker tape. I read the tape when the item is less interesting.
Or kid's programs with SMS->ticker.

On another topic:

The thought of a shop shouting at me as I pass is horrendous. Unless I can opt out.
Eg: my parent's generation - cannot stand music playing when they go into a shop. I don't notice.

 

Question for the panel

What do people think about the role of learning technologists? How do teachers use
this technology to engage directly with the students? What about if specialists
performed that facilitation role to enable teachers to teach, students to study.

What's the role of face-to-face interactions going to be?

Is the electronic distraction mode so very different from whispering, passing notes,
and the traditional distractions? Is it a difference of scale or some other difference?

 

David May and Peter Flach

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Insights into evolution - community learning and information sharing, David May

The technology underpinning the Internet and the Web will continue to evolve rapidly. An ever increasing range and quantity of mobile devices will be connected to each other and to an expanding infrastructure. This will lead to a more nomadic style of living and working and a very diverse range of digital content. We will become both authors and readers of multimedia - from images to movies to soundscapes - and participants in experiences which combine the physical and virtual worlds. The construction of the devices and their supporting infrastructure poses new challenges in technology and interface design - and in the organisation, management and use of huge quantities of information flowing between billions of devices. But the greatest challenges are in education and learning: how can we enable people to discover and exploit the full potential of these new technologies?

Insights into evolution - community learning and information sharing, Paul Shabajee

Ubiquitous wireless networked computing and 'convergence', are not only buzzwords, but are already dramatically redefining social and educational relationships in a deeply 'disruptive' manner. They are redefining our traditional educational processes, norms and roles. For example, is it rude and detrimental to learning, not to listen to a tutor when they are presenting, or to be checking what they are saying is 'true' on the Internet as they are speaking, or to be discussing it wirelessly with your peers live during the lecture or lesson? At a strikingly practical level these technologies are also challenging our traditional concepts of space and time and indeed our self image(s), and those we have of our social, educational and working communities.

More...

Dr Bonnie Nardi at Colston symposium

From Libby Miller (mobile)

Bonnie Nardi

Bonnie Nardi spoke on the her work on looking at blogging for the education environment and how a small group of people have been using it in different ways. The blogging survey was interviews of bloggers followed by contacting with email, phone and IM afterwards and identified several types of blogs.

Blogging was seen as a social activity, but more in a broadcasting style, with the listeners as second class citizens that may only have limited feedback. The motivations are varied but included giving advice or information, updating people on activity emotional release and thinking by writing. The latter might be the most relevant to education.

Blogging for education makes sense as a grass root technology that can be useful if you are encouraging people to write; a public forum would be better than just for the professor. There are several challenges using these for education such as getting the motivation going and encouraging critical thinking of making entries as well as commenting on them - there needs to be a hook to get students involved.

However, she did show that the bloggers were careful to attend to their readers, and in particular were motivated to continue beyond their own interest, as well as receive feedback, mostly by other channels. Self-censorship was seen because of the known readership such as not wanting parents to see them, or offend the community leading to possible exclusion. This can mean the use of private entries.

Bloggers like the controlled or limited interactivity of blogs that is entirely different from email or IM, how readers can choose to read or not at their preference - not delivered, interactive content that must be read NOW. Email lists can also get rather emotional as it deals directly with people, whereas blogging is to an anonymous audience and not so personal. Most individual blogs have no comments and get their responses by email or other methods.

There was an interesting comment from Ian Holyer, Bristol CS that when they asked students, half wanted course feedback by email and half via blogs which meant a need for

One thing I noted was she didn't reference on why people might stop blogging - see Why do people give up weblogs? by Giles Turnbull. Giles also had a story on his own blog: how to catch mice where the comments took on a life of their own. It's still the #1 answer on google for: how to catch mice.

Learning and Web Technologies in Evolution: Creativity and Catharsis in Blogging, Dr Bonnie Nardi

Weblogs, or "blogs" are online journals, usually characterized by short posts in reverse chronological order. In ongoing research on blogging, I have noticed a connection between creativity and catharsis. In several very different blogs investigated in the research, including a poetry community blog, an American presidential primary campaign blog, a legal blog, and a student teacher blog, creative output seems related to emotional release. In this talk I discuss various forms of creativity for which blogs provide a "habitation", including poems, new forms of political organizing, and legal reasoning. I attempt to analyze why blogs provide a dwelling for such creativity, examining the technical affordances of blogging software, the blog as a particular kind of literary genre, and the social expectations of blog audiences. If blogs promote creativity, as I believe they do, can such creativity can be brought more fully into mainstream educational practice? If so, would this be a good thing? I discuss the scientific problems of engaging concepts such as "catharsis", and the problems of avoiding such concepts, without which analysis may be sterile.

About this Weblog

Welcome to the Colston Research Symposium 2004 Weblog. This site is a forum for discussion and information sharing as well as a permanent record of the event.

Symposium delegates have each been allocated a user name and password that will allow them to login via the link on the left and post messages to this blog. Non-delegates are also invited to participate by commenting on blog entries or by joining the symposium's IRC chat channel. Please see the notes on electronic participation for quick-start details on how to use this weblog and the symposium's IRC chat and chump facilities. Above all, share information, share ideas, share opinion and be imaginative about how you make use of the communication channels on offer.

We've enhanced the Movable Type blog software to allow rich text editing for recent versions of Internet Explorer (PC), Netscape (PC/Mac) or Mozilla (PC/Mac). We've also installed "moblogging" support to allow posting from email capable mobile phones or PDAs directly to the blog. Emails can include images - so watch out what you get up to at the dinner! To moblog, your mobile phone number needs to be registered with the system. Please leave your number at the help desk if you'd like to try this feature out.

Simon Price and Paul Shabajee, ILRT