“Learning Identifies in a Digital Age: Rethinking Creativity, Education and Technology” Book Review

How do we think about and make sense of education, technology and creativity? “Learning Identities in a Digital Age,”  Avril Loveless & Ben Williamson

The book “Learning Identifies in a Digital Age: Rethinking Creativity, Education and Technology” is thought provoking and rich with concepts and research about the relationship between education and technology, and its influence on learner identity. Released in February 2013 as part of Routledge publishing’s ‘changing times in education series’, I’ve  been challenged by this book. It brings forth the issues that I don’t always consider, but should when reading and writing about the technological applications and platforms that education institutions are embracing and promoting, i.e. MOOCs, machine grading, social media in education etc.  I am not opposed to progress and innovation by any means, but I am concerned about the long-term implications for learners, and high school and higher education in general. I’ve found this book helpful for guiding my thinking about these issues; it focuses on one important aspect, learning identities. It examines how learners see themselves, and how they are influenced and shaped by factors not within their control.

The authors take a ‘backward gaze’ perspective, where they approach the subject matter “as a historian from the future might, looking back at our present time and seeing vast numbers of unresolved issues, differences of interpretations and general confusions….” (Loveless & Williamson, 2013).  The authors’ approach rests on the idea described by Nigel Thrift in his book Knowing Capitalism (2005). Thrift suggests this method prevents what he calls ‘historical atrophy’, where past events often are packaged up in order to move on and embrace modernity (Thrift, 2005, p 3). This sounds familiar. Though I do find that the book emphasizes more of the ‘now’, and promotes thinking about how policy decisions of governments and curriculum choices made by education institutions impact our students. Rather than provide answers, Loveless and Willamson aim to stimulate deep thought by treating education, technology and creativity as objects of thought, which I believe they do quite successfully.

Digital Identity vs. Learning Identity
I’m familiar with the term digital identity, yet learning identity, I discovered is more complex. Digital identify can be described as one’s persona that is displayed and shared online through social media sites and other platforms. Learner identity in the context of youth and young adult learners encompasses their online persona and another dimension—identity that is created through academic learning and pedagogy. For the most part, these latter factors are not within the learners control but are shaped by programs and methods driven by policy, an institutions curriculum, educators and even society’s use of, and attitudes towards technology.  For readers interested in learning more about digital identity for students, I’ve included links to resources at the end of the post from Catherine Cronin, an educator with considerable experience in teaching digital citizenship.

Big Picture Overview
An interesting fact about the authors, is that they are two decades apart in age, which according the preface, promoted differing viewpoints that led to different types of questions and arguments within the book.

The scope of the book is guided by these three questions:

1. How is the future of education being through and re-thought in relation to new technology and media?
2. What kind of learning identities are presupposed and promoted by the merger of new technologies and media with education?
3. How are those learning identities to be organized in emerging models of learning, curriculum and pedagogy?

Content is divided into two sections, Part I, Reconfiguring education and technology, and Part II, Thinking, curriculum and pedagogy. You can review the specifics of each of the eight chapters by visiting Routledge’s website here.

Conclusion
I highly recommend this book for educators that work within K-12 and higher education settings, and I’ll go so far as to suggest it is a must-read for individuals in either of those groups that teach or support online education in any capacity. Decision makers in education public and/or institutional policy would also benefit from the book’s topics and arguments—it could provide a basis for promoting constructive dialogue among stakeholders about learner identities. The book is dense with ideas, addressing through the topic of learner identity how technology is interwoven with education and its effect on education and students.  I do hope that this book makes its way into the hands of educators and decision makers sooner rather than later.

Resources on Digital Citizenship:

• Enacting Digital Identity, (2012), Catherine Cronin
• Catherine Cronins’ Slideshares
• Digital Citizenship, ISTE Wikispaces
• Digital Identities: Who are you when you are online? (2013), Danya Braunstein, Huff Post

Need-to-Watch-Videos: Three Clips that Promote Thinking Outside-of-the-Box

I interrupt this regularly featured ‘Need-to-Know’ blog post series to bring you three media clips that may promote thinking-outside-of-the-box—a different way to look at three much discussed and researched issues in education. I engaged with three media clips this week that were not targeted to educators specifically, but provided deep insights; each clip presents a unique perspective on a provocative topic in education.

1) What predicts Student Success?
Angela Lee Duckworth: The key to success? Grit

Much researched, pondered and discussed—what predicts a student’s success? This Ted Talk features Angela Duckworth, an educational psychologist who left teaching seventh graders to search for that elusive factor that predicts student success in school. She conducted extensive research to find out. Her research revealed that it’s not IQ, family income, precociousness, or talent, but it’s grit. Grit is defined as passion, perseverance, and relentless drive. Students and adults with grit are in it for the long-haul, they don’t give up when faced with obstacles, but continue moving towards a goal they have set out to achieve.

How Children Succeed: Grit, Curiosity, and the Hidden Power of Character, the book by Paul Tough discusses Duckworth’s work and writes about schools and programs that aim to teach grit through character building education. I read this book recently, and would recommend it to parents and educators interested in learning what contributes to the grit factor [though it's still inconclusive].

• How gritty are you? Click here to take the test. University of Pennsylvania
• Angela Duckworth and the Research on ‘Grit’. Emily Hanford, American Radio Works

2) Educators and Artificial Intelligence
Interview: Charting technology’s new directions: A conversation with MIT’s Erik Brynjolfsson.

This clip featuring MIT’s professor Erik Brynjolfsson shifted my [resolute] viewpoint on the role of machines in teaching and student learning. Brynjolfsson discusses recent innovations in artificial intelligence and how it will impact society significantly over the next five years. Though Brynjolfsson didn’t mention education specifically, his talk motivated me to think about the relationship between man and technology quite differently.

I posted several comments this week in response to a blog post about this topic on e-literate, Getting students useful feedback from machine learning. This is the second post on e-literate about machine learning, and both have generated much discussion. My position has been one in opposition to machine assistance, regardless of how it is used. This specific post describes a conversational agent that supports student dialogue in small group discussions by a technique called accountable talk.  When I watched this interview clip something clicked. As I listened to Brynjolfsson speaking of how machines, artificial intelligence can be used in conjunction with humans to create better conditions, I thought of the potential that machines might be able to create with teachers to create better learning conditions.  I haven’t changed my mind completely, but I am looking at this topic from a different point of view.

“… humans and machines are complementary. Machines aren’t perfect or even very good substitutes for humans in some areas. But by working together, by racing with machines, we can do more than the machines by themselves or humans by themselves could do.”

• Getting students useful feedback from machine learning, Elijah Mayfield, e-Literate
• Six ways the edX announcement gets machine grading wrong, Elijah Mayfield, e-Literate

3. How an education icon adapted to the Internet
An interview with Jorge Cauz, president of Encyclopedia Britannica

The Internet is disrupting traditional models, ways of doing business in all sectors including education. This interview highlights the issue of adaptation and a change of thinking in response to technology.  Many organizations have adapted quite successfully, some have failed and others continue to struggle.  Which is why I found the interview with the president of Encyclopedia Britannica most intriguing. One would think this iconic company, relied upon for over two hundred years as a primary source of information would be doomed in the age of the Internet. Yet it is not so. Encyclopedia Britannica is flourishing and successful  even though it ceased to print its famous set of reference books last year after 244 years. The company has shifted its model by responding to the societal shifts resulting from technological advancements. In the interview, the president speaks of the natural evolution of the product.

We had known for some time that this day was coming. Given how little revenue the print set generated, and given that we had long ago shifted to a digital-first editorial process, the bound volumes had become a distraction and a chore to put together. They could no longer hold the vast amount of information our customers demanded or be kept as up-to-date as today’s users expect.

The way the company adapted to the digital age is most remarkable. It made me think about how Encyclopedia Britannica was able to respond to the digital age where others have failed. Are there any parallels between Encyclopedia Britannica and education institutions? Some would say absolutely not—Encyclopedia Britannica is a business. I see it differently, what about you?

• Encyclopedia Britannica’s President on Killing Off a 244-Year-Old Product, Jorge Cauz, Harvard Business Review
• Encyclopedia Britannica, britannica.com

Click this image which links to HBR’s webpage featuring the recorded interview and its transcript.

I hope you enjoyed these videos and were inspired in one way or another.

How Course Design Puts the Focus on Learning Not Teaching

This is the second post in a series of four on instructional design for online courses. The goal of this series is to introduce a fresh, innovative approach to course design.

Instructional design, also known as learning design, appears to be making a comeback, which is most fortunate given that I am writing a series on this very topic. Massive open online courses [MOOCs] that mimic the classroom model where the learner is passive and the instructor is not, highlights the need for fresh, new approach to course design. And it’s not just MOOCs that need help, but numerous courses currently offered online; many are in need an overhaul to create an environment focused on learning, rather than one that focuses on instruction. My aim here is to provide readers with a course design framework, information and tools for designing online courses. These tools and skills appear to be in demand by educators that are trying to adapt their courses and teaching methods to an online or blended format.  Some educators also find when entering into the MOOC world of instruction, they are in need of a different skill set from what is required for face-to-face teaching.

In the first post of this series, Why Online Courses [Really] Need Instructional Design I wrote about the dire need for instructional design: how it is needed to guide the process of learning for students, and guide the teaching of the course as well. A courses’ structure is a reflection of the design teams’ [or designer] belief in how people learn. The teams’ learning perspective translates into the choices made for instructional tools, the delivery methods, application activities and assessment methods for the course. We can see this in traditional higher education, which for the most part ascribes to the cognitive theory of learning, a theory that rests on the assumptions that learning is an internal process; a function of the learners memory. It’s an instructor-focused paradigm, where the teacher describes concepts for the learner via instruction, and in some cases relies upon visual representations for reinforcement. (Roblyer & Doering, 2010). This model still is the primary model in colleges and universities—professors lecturing to a class of [passive] students. Even though considerable research proves that students learn better when active in the learning process [in keeping with the constructivist theory], the cognitive theory prevails. George Siemens, co-founder of the first MOOC noted in a recent blog post:

The current MOOC providers have adopted a regressive pedagogy: small-scale learning chunks reminiscent of the heady days of cognitivism and military training. Ah, the 1960′s. What a great time to be a learner.” gsiemens, March 10, 2013

Before I move on and provide further examples, I’ll review four learning orientations—beliefs in how people learn. I wrote about each theory in-depth in a previous post, A Tale of Two MOOCs: Divided by Pedagogy, though here I’ve put together an image that summarizes the core principles of each.

When examining the image [above], one can see how learning theories influence the methods of instruction for a course. This diagram is not meant to be an implementation tool for course design, but an information source. In subsequent posts of the series I’ll review how learning theory is incorporated into the design of a course during the initial phase, the analysis phase [following the analysis is the development phase and then implementation].

Image shows four perspectives on learning based upon theoretical principles. Instructional methods associated with each, adjacent to respective quadrant. Orange quadrants represent a student focused learning model, blue instructor focused.

In another article published recently, The Pedagogy of MOOCs, the author suggests that xMOOCs offered through platforms such as Udacity, are a step backward for education. Rather than leveraging the technology and the thousands of students to advance learning, where students become contributors to the course, the MOOC applies instructor-centered teaching and assumes the learner is passive – an empty vessel.

Closing Thoughts
The crux of my post, the point I would like to leave with readers, is that a fresh, new perspective is needed for teaching and course design—course design is about creating environments to help students learn. As new courses are developed or transformed from face-to-face to an online format, the focus should not be on the technology, the platform, the video lectures, the forums, the instructor, but on the students —what methods will facilitate their learning? How will they learn? Stay tuned for my next post in this series.

Resources:

• The Pedagogy of MOOCs, Paul Stacy
• How would MOOCs should be designed and structured differently? Learner Weblog
• Opinion: The Case for Learning Designers, by Peps McCrea
• Group work advice for MOOC providers, George Siemens
• Salomon, G. (1991). From theory to practice: the international science classroom — a technology-intensive, exploratory, team-based and interdisciplinary high school project. Educational Technology, 31 (3), 41-44.

Need-to-Know News: iVersity’s Contest, Students not-so College Ready & PD for Educators

In this ‘Need-to-Know’ blog post series I aim to share noteworthy stories that speak of need-to-know developments within higher education and K-12 that have the potential to influence, challenge and/or transform the traditional model of education.

Several significant developments transpired this week in the education arena. I’ll highlight the key need-to-know stories here—events that will likely spark discussion and perhaps even debate among educators. iVersity’s MOOC contest has over 250 applications. Each applicant is vying to have his or her course featured on iVersity’s platform in Fall 2013—voting is open! Also, the National Center for Education and the Economy [NCEE] released a report on college readiness for high school students—results are distressing, and is more fodder for the discussion about education reform. And educators have new options for professional development online, courtesy of MOOC provider Coursera.

1) iVersity’s MOOC Fellowship Contest
The MOOC Production Fellowship Contest to date has over 250 MOOC applications from scholars around the world are in for review. The selection committee [called the jury by the fellowship], will choose ten courses, and each winner will receive 250,000 euros to develop and launch his or her course on iVersity’s platform for Fall 2013. Consideration is also given to votes from the Web public. One vote per person, and one must register on the platform to vote. Click here to view the submissions and cast your vote for the course you feel is worthy of winning.

What is the criteria? According to the website, the fellowship is looking for “creative, innovative and sustainable MOOCs”, though it’s not clear what the definition of sustainable is. The contest sponsors, Stifterverband and iVersity hope to “raise awareness for the potential of digital technology in education and seek to activate a process of creative adaptation within the academic community”.

Screen Shot of one of courses submitted to the MOOC Contest

The MOOC Applicants
The courses submitted to date are impressive. Each submission includes a brief video introducing the course (some are very clever), a course description, objectives and references. I perused the site and reviewed only a handful, and included three of my favorites below. The video clips that accompany each submission give an excellent two-minute [or less] synopsis of the [proposed] course.

• Design 101 (Or Design Basics), Mr Stefano Mirti and Prof. Vanni Pasc
• Foundations of Educational Technology, Dr. George Veletsianos and Audrey Watters
• Gutenberg to Google: The social construction of the communications revolution, Prof. William Kovarik

2) Community College Faculty Set Bar Low for Students
The National Center for Education and the Economy [NCEE] released a [discouraging] report “What Does It Really Mean to Be College and Work Ready?”

NCEE has just released What Does It Really Mean to Be College and Work Ready?, a study of the English Literacy and Mathematics required for success in the first year of community college. On May 7th, during a day-long meeting, key education and policy leaders joined NCEE to discuss the results of the study and its implications for community college reform, school reform, teacher education, the common core state standards, and vocational education and the workplace.

Though the skills gap is nothing new, what is new is the research that shows how little community college educators expect from students—the bar is set low, way low. The study also found that assessments used in college classes were lacking, most consisted of multiple-choice questions that demand very little in the way of complex reading skills and no writing.

• Low Bar, High Failure, by Paul Fain, Inside Higher Ed
• Skills From High School Don’t Match College Demands, by Caralee Adams, Education Week
• A serious disconnect in college education, by Matthew Dembicki, Community College Times

3) Professional Development for Educators
MOOCs may have found a niche, professional development for educators. Educators can collaborate and develop a network with other educators, which is what many cMOOCs have been doing for quite some time now. Coursera has taken a step in this direction.

Today we are extremely pleased to announce the launch of a teacher professional development category on Coursera. We believe that helping teachers improve their skills is an important contribution that we can make to the education of students everywhere. We are truly excited about the possibilities that having these courses available for free online, to be used independently or in a blended learning capacity, will open up for teachers, schools, and districts. [blog.coursera.org]

Titles include Foundations of Virtual Instruction, Surviving Your Rookie Year of Teaching, and The Dynamic Earth: A Course for Educators. Click here for full list.

4) Saylor’s Updated Platform and New Courses
Saylors’ updates include dividing courses into three sections, 1) Saylor University, the core courses, 2) Saylor K-12, newly unveiled, pre-college courses, and 3) Saylor Professional Development. Visit saylor.org.

Have a good weekend. I will continue with my instructional design blog series on May 13.

Why Online Courses [Really] Need an Instructional Design Strategy

In this post I examine and define instructional design, and share why it’s essential to the development of online courses.

“Design brings forth what would not come naturally“  Klaus Krippendorff

Developing an online course that is engaging, promotes interaction, motivates learners, and above all facilitates learning is easier said than done.  It’s even more challenging when trying to modify a face-to-face course for the online format. I know because I worked at a four-year college as lead curriculum designer. My job was to collaborate with faculty to transition their face-to-face courses to a 100% online course which was delivered via the schools’ learning management platform, Moodle. During the process of converting more than fifteen courses to 100% online courses, I was able to recognize and appreciate fully the principles and process of instructional design.

The Design Process for Online Courses, by Giulia Forsythe (Flickr)

I have over ten years experience as an instructional designer, which includes creating management development courses and employee training programs. I’ve also developed courses for K-12, including math enrichment curriculum and education programs for parents. I almost always adhere to instructional design principles and a framework for all course design projects, though I’ve found online courses to be the most dependent on sound design principles. In 100% online classes, not only is one building a course, but also a virtual classroom and community.

In this first post of a four-part series on instructional design, my aim is to provide an overview of what instructional design is, and why it’s absolutely essential to online course development. In subsequent posts I’ll cover learning theories and their role in course design, models of instructional design, and I’ll present a framework for online course design that I’m currently working on.

What is Instructional Design?
Though I’m an instructional designer and call myself such, I realize the term is vague. My definition in one sentence— “Instructional design is creating an environment for learning by structuring content and creating activities that engage students and facilitate meaningful learning”.  Also, critical to the concept of instructional design is knowing that it supports the process of learning rather than the process of teaching. Skilled instructional designers are not the subject matter experts, but collaborate with the experts to create environments where students can participate in rich, meaningful learning experiences. Of the many formal definitions of instructional design, I find the following the most accurate:

Instructional Design is defined as “a systematic process that is employed to develop education and training programs in a consistent and reliable fashion” (Reiser & Dempsey, 2007). In addition, Instructional Design models or theories may be thought of as frameworks for developing modules or lessons that 1) increase and/or enhance the possibility of learning and 2) encourage the engagement of learners so that they learn faster and gain deeper levels of understanding (www.nwlink.com).

Why Instructional Design?
Some critics of instructional design suggest that with abundance information available on the web, anyone can learn just about anything on their own terms and customize learning to their own needs. Instructional design is not at all relevant many argue, the models are inflexible and outdated. Yet I disagree. Even though we have access to unlimited content and can learn just about anything on the web, I suggest that this is all the more reason that structure is needed to guide the learner, frame the experience, even for students seeking a self-directed learning program.

Principles of Instructional Design
In subsequent posts I’ll be writing in detail how readers can apply instructional design principles when developing their own online courses. Below I provide an overview of the  principles that establish a foundation for course development. I’ve summarized the principles into three phases:

I. Analyze: Integral to the design process is analyzing the learners, learning contexts and the purpose for the instruction. Though this step is often overlooked, this phase shapes the course. Included in the learner analysis is examining students’ skill level [technical and education], cultural background, attitudes and motivations for learning, etc.  Another consideration—how will students access content and instruction, i.e. what platform will be used [learning context]. Finally instructional analysis includes identifying the learning objectives [institution established or student created] and the purpose of the instruction i.e. credit, certificate or personal interest, etc.

II. Develop/Select: This phase is time intensive and where most of the work is done. Goals for the course are identified and articulated, which may be specific or general depending upon results from the analysis. This phase includes identifying and selecting content sources on the web and/or developing new content, as well as developing an instructional strategy. The instructional strategy includes selecting the delivery methods or sources for instruction, developing/selecting instructional materials, selecting the applications and methods to support group interaction and tools. Selecting or developing tools or methods for student assessment (as applicable) and course evaluation.

Critical in this phase is developing thorough and detailed instructions for students, and ensuring a user-friendly interface with the delivery platform.

III. Implement: This phase is about putting course into practice with students. Garnering feedback from students is critical to revising and updating the initial design of the course. Conducting formative and summative evaluation is necessary to modify the course interface, materials, content and/or instruction, to better meet the needs of learners. Though revisions and updating to online courses is an ongoing process, as learning and teaching are dynamic, always changing and evolving.

Closing Thoughts
In higher education [and K-12] the design principles for instruction and learning in a traditional face-to-face setting are specific to the four walls of a classroom. But online education has no walls, and uses a delivery method that shifts the model of course development entirely. Instructional design principles and models are essential to deal with the complexities that are inherent with the Web as a delivery method. Instructional design methods are essential to online course development so that the focus is on student learning, not on the technology or the platform. In my next post I’ll review instructional design models, and examine the merits of each in the context of online course development.  Update: Post two in this series, How Course Design Puts the Focus on Learning Not Teaching.

Resources

• Instructional Design, Big Dog & Little Dog’s Performance Juxtaposition
• Instructional Design in e-Learning, elearnspace
• Dick, W., and Carey, L. & Carey, J. (2004). The Systematic Design of Instruction. Allyn & Bacon; (6th ed.)
• Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J. V. (2007). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
• Krippendorff, K. (2006). The Semantic Turn: A New Foundation for Design. Taylor & Francis Group

Why MOOCs Are Hindering and Not Helping Higher Ed

The Chronicles’ web-diagram Major players in the MOOC Universe published this week, though beautiful to look at, adds to the confusion about what MOOCs are and are not. This confusion is no doubt a significant hindrance to constructive dialogue that educators are having about online learning; including how to leverage technology to improve access, quality and lower costs. The Chronicle is not alone in [unknowingly] promoting myths about MOOCs, which is not helping to move the discussions forward.

Several institutions and platforms associated with MOOCs quite often have little to do with MOOCs.  Khan Academy for instance, and even San Jose University’s pilot project San Jose State Plus are two programs that don’t follow the MOOC model. These misconceptions among others, divert attention away from the instructional and pedagogical models that can provide solutions. Online learning in small classes for example. Small online classes do not resemble MOOCs at all. The closed, online class, with a sound instructional plan, allows faculty to provide feedback and support to students, as well as provide opportunities for small group collaboration guided by the instructor. Another format, the blended model, combines face-to-face class time with web-based instruction. The blended model has proven to be effective in reducing costs and maintaining, and in some cases improving learning outcomes over traditional instructional methods. For further reading on blended learning click here.

San Jose Pilot Program: Not a MOOC
One significant error in recent articles, the Chronicles’ diagram included, is identifying San Jose State University as a MOOC player. There is a partnership between San Jose and Udacity as the link in the image shows, though the connection involves a pilot project with three math courses co-created between the two. Yet the courses are not MOOCs; they  don’t adhere to the MOOC model whatsoever. The classes in San Jose’s pilot were not massive—each had less than 100 students. Classes were closed—open only to high school students, community college students and members of the armed forces. Enrolled students participated within the schools’ learning platform where they could engage in discussion forums with the professor and peers. Yet the key differential was the academic support available to students. Students had access to a help line, instructor-facilitated peer meetings and even outreach counselors for those struggling with the content. Far from a MOOC, this model does provide the instructional support and feedback necessary for a successful college-level learning experience. Furthermore, San Jose’s pilot is an excellent example of a model for online learning that can be effective, though many outsiders are unaware of its instructional strategy.

Khan Academy: Also not a MOOC
Though Khan Academy is often described as a MOOC, it’s not even close. It’s not the first time that Khan Academy has been classified as a MOOC. Khan Academy is a robust library of open education resources that can be accessed by students, institutions, or anyone—for free. That’s it. It’s not a course with a start date and end date. Though it does include resources for teachers to build an instructional strategy of their own, the platform primarily is a repository for a collection of short videos that focus on a specific topic. No MOOCs here. Even Sal Khan emphasizes that his platform is not MOOC, but is what he calls a “transplantation” of a traditional course.

MOOC Players that Aren’t
Cathy Davidson, professor at Duke and founder of Hastac appears to be associated with the MOOC players as per The Chronicles’ diagram. Yet Dr. Davidson has little if anything to do with the MOOC movement. She was part of a small group that crafted a controversial Bill of Rights for online students, yet her involvement ends there. Davidson was quite surprised to find herself featured in the lineup of individuals associated with MOOCs in the web-diagram, describing it as “comical” in a blog post on Hastacs’ site—and even admits to feeling ambivalent towards MOOCs, with “more than a healthy degree of skepticism”.

Technology is a Tool
My point here is not to highlight all that is wrong with the web-diagram in question, or the reporting of the issues elsewhere, but to emphasize that misconceptions about online learning, MOOCS included, that are likely impeding constructive conversations within education circles. The Chronicle and other news organizations are not intentionally writing to deceive, but are caught up in MOOC mania as we all are. MOOCs will not solve the challenges of access, cost control and quality that institutions are struggling with, yet we need to be well informed about the technology, and what it can deliver.  It’s also helpful to remember that technological applications are tools to solve problems. The first step is identifying and analyzing what the problem is, determining the needs, then analyzing potential solutions thoroughly before jumping to a solution. Starting with the solution, and working backwards rarely works.

Need-to-Know News: Globalization of MOOCs, $500,000 Prize for Faculty & Ed Tech Tools

In this ‘Need-to-Know’ blog post series I share noteworthy stories that speak of need-to-know developments within higher education and K-12 that have the potential to influence, challenge and/or transform the traditional model of education.

This week MOOCs go global with the launch of OpenupEd the newest MOOC platform supported by the European Commission, and at the same time several discussions on the blogosphere about the cultural implications of American MOOCs.  Minerva, the yet-to-be launched elite online school announced a hefty prize for an ‘extraordinary professor’ akin to the Nobel Prize according to Minerva’s founder, and two slick new tools for creating online transcripts and portfolios.

The Globalization of MOOCs
The MOOC platform OpenupEd that launched this week has a different approach than its counterparts in the United States. One distinction between OpenedEd and US MOOC platforms is the course delivery method. Rather than a common platform for courses, as Coursera and edX provide for example, each institution uses its own learning management platform. OpenedEd acts like a portal, or gateway to course providers own sites.  The selection of courses is impressive [40 courses currently], and can reach a broader audience given the range of languages available, of which there are twelve represented.

With the different platforms for each course, I see some potential barriers to learning based on my brief review. I found several courses available in English that piqued my interest. Yet one, Brain, Lifestyle and Learning appears to be a version of a previously run course with recorded lectures. It ended on April 13, 2013, and has a fee of 100€ associated with it.  Another, Psychotechnology and learning processes, sounds excellent, though I couldn’t register for it , but there was an email address provided for those seeking information. Disappointing. This doesn’t seem to fit the open criteria.

Likely it will take some time for each university to work out the details, and streamline the open process. Overall, this initiative is a positive development – opening up education to thousands of individuals with courses that cater to regional differences by language and topic.

Cultural Implications of Global MOOCs
MOOCs with their global audiences highlight cultural differences – and not just language but value systems.  An article published this week The World is Not Flat (Rivard) discusses the challenges of implementing American MOOCs in other cultures. American educational values are not universal, and certain course content and methods may not be well received by some students of other cultures. Quite telling was a comment quoted in the article from Stephen Carson, spokesperson for the MIT Open Courseware Project:

“Educational materials are not universal, but they are very, very informative for other universities to see the context in which other universities are working.”

Apparently the idea for MIT’s Open Courseware was not to create content applicable to a universal audience but to share with others for adaptation purposes. Perhaps this is why many MOOCs attract participants with advanced degrees from other countries—those with an interest in examining education principles and curriculum from American universities.

• The World is Flat, by Ry Rivard, Inside Higher Ed
• Vassiliou welcomes launch of first pan-European university MOOCs, Europa Press Release
• Cultural Awareness and Differences in MOOCs, Learner Weblog
• On the Expanding Global Landscape of MOOC Platforms, Globalhighered

$500,000 Prize from the [New] Minerva Academy
“Effectively it is a Nobel Prize for teaching,” said Ben Nelson, founder and chief executive of the Minerva Project, a for-profit online school yet to open its doors [launch date is 2015]. The prize is open to faculty from any institution with a track record that “stimulates innovation in higher education” [Anderson, 2013].

The winner will be chosen by a newly created non-for-profit Minerva Academy, led by Stanford professor and Nobel winner Roger D. Kornberg.  The Academy is now accepting nominations. There are three broad areas upon which a nominee’s work is considered and evaluated—Innovation, Impact and Inspiration, as well as a list of five criteria—all seem reasonable except for point #2:

“Nominees must have a substantial number of highly cited publications that demonstrate the impact the innovation has had on teaching.” Minerva Project

In my opinion this criteria contradicts the idea of innovation in education—the requirement that faculty applicants have numerous publications in peer-reviewed journals and rankings as per the impact factor, is grounded in the traditional model of higher education, exactly what innovation in education is trying to transform.

• Yearly Prize of $500,000 is Created for Faculty, by Tamar Lewin, New York Times
• New $500,000 prize planned for teaching, by Nick Anderson, Washington Post
• The Minerva Project, The Academy
• The Thomson Reuters Impact Factor, Thomas Reuters, Science

New Ed Tech Tools

• Accredible launched this week, appears to be an online resume and record of accomplishments and education from unaccredited sources. It seems similar to Degreed.com, which I mentioned a few weeks ago, but this platform seems to be more of a resume than transcript.
• Seelio, the portfolio for network for students and doers.  Details on this new start-up covered in-depth in the TechCrunch article.

Have a great week!