A New Year's Day educational message from Seth Godin

I've had an enjoyable break from Twitter over the Christmas break. But having switched on the computer on New Year's Day I came across this thought-provoking video from Seth Godin in which he outlines the reforms he believes are needed for compulsory and post-compulsory education. In questioning the fundamental philosophy which informs current approaches to pedagogy, Godin's observations echo those of Sir Ken Robinson in highlighting the need for a fundamental reevaluation of the educational system.

Why aren't more governments and educational policy makers listening to people like Seth Godin and Sir Ken Robinson? History shows that resistance to change never succeeds in preventing change from occurring. It seems evident that the sooner governments, universities and schools embrace 21st century educational thinking the more likely they are to ride (and potentially profit from) the wave of change. And yet report after report is written highlighting the problem of entrenched views hampering the uptake of new pedagogical approaches (see, for example An Avalanche is Coming, Innovating Pedagogy 2013).

Why is there so much fear of change, particularly in the Higher Education sector which for centuries has been at the forefront of intellectual thought and new knowledge?

We are already entering a post-digital world where ubiquitous access to information should inform a fundamental reevaluation of 19th and 20th century working and pedagogic practices. MOOCs represent the tip of the iceberg in terms of a new view of education, and Thomas Friedman has issued a stark warning to universities that they should strongly consider moving away from a model of 'time served' and towards one of 'stuff learned'. Friedman believes that "increasingly the world does not care what you know. Everything is on Google. The world only cares, and will only pay for,  what you can do with what you know". Those institutions that are able to adapt their provision successfully will most likely lead educational innovation well into the the next decade and beyond.

Seth Godin, Sir Ken Robinson and all those offering an alternative view of education for the 21st century should be congratulated for continuing the march on the ivory towers of educational practice.

Summary of NADP conference, 28th Nov 2013

National Association of Disability Practitioners

Yesterday I had the opportunity to attend an event put on by the National Association of Disability Practitioners in Birmingham. The focus of the event was the use of social media in the context of disability support services and we were fortunate enough to have two excellent speakers, Matt East from Anglia Ruskin University and Terry McAndrew from JISC TechDis. This blog post begins with five things I learned during the day, then goes on to provide a summary of the key points from both sessions and links to some of the online resources highlighted during the sessions.

Five things I learned at the NADP conference

1. Students increasingly expect to access resources via social media
 

This implies that support departments may need to communicate via an appropriate social media platform in order to maximise their reach and impact. However, choosing an appropriate platform is key in order to avoid issues of involuntary disclosure of a disability.

2. The growing ‘App Mentality’ has significant implications for student learning
 
This mentality is potentially causing students to be more critical and demanding of available services. Some of the quotes included “I want everything I need in one place”, “if I download an app and it doesn’t work first time, I delete it”, and, “I want information personalised to me”.

3. The preferred search engine for 16-24 year olds is YouTube
 
This statistic shows that students are very comfortable with consuming information in video format. Support departments could harness this by creating short videos about their services, and potentially turn these into a YouTube ‘channel’ to make it easier for students to find and understand them.

4. Transmissive teaching is not accessible
 
Wherever possible we need to encourage approaches to teaching which encourage participation. This has benefits for all students, not just those with disabilities.

5. Age and disability are not significant factors in determining whether someone becomes a ‘resident’ in a network
 
Research by Le Cornu and White (2011) indicated that social, participatory learning spaces provide a means for students to create a different identity. These spaces can empower non-traditional learners and those with disabilities as they prevent others from judging them on their appearance.

Summary of presentations

 

Matt East – Anglia Ruskin University

Matt argued that social media is a key factor in our successful engagement with students as it enables them to access support services in a way with which they are familiar and comfortable. The above Prezi contains some informative videos which provide a useful insight into the world of social media.

Matt shared a quote from a student who had revealed that, “using Twitter has become my first port of call rather than using the Library in many cases”. Typing a search term into Twitter will almost always bring up a list of useful resources ranging from social (blog posts and videos) to academic (journals and e-Books). This suggests that support departments who are seeking to raise awareness of their services would do well to ensuring that they were discoverable on social media platforms. An example might be regular tweets containing links back to departmental web pages, blogs and online resources.

However, use of certain platforms such as Facebook did raise issues of disclosure, particularly for students with disabilities. For instance, a significant attraction of social media is that it enables people to assume an online identity that is different from their physical identity. Consequently, a Disability support department might reasonably aim to push out their service on Facebook because they know a large percentage of students will see it. But if a student were to ‘like’ this page this could suggest to others - rightly or wrongly - that they have a disability, as their friends would see that they had liked this particular page. This highlights the importance of choosing a social media platform that is appropriate both to your needs and to those of your intended audience. For this example, Twitter was cited as a potential alternative as it is less ‘personal’ than Facebook – in other words, there is potentially a smaller reputational risk for a student who follows a Disability services Twitter feed.

Matt also drew attention to the excellent AMMOSSHE Social Media Toolkit. This provides helpful advice and guidance for anyone considering greater usage of social media. The toolkit contains both strategic advice for managers and departments as well as more practical tips for staff.

Terry McAndrew - TechDis

This presentation highlighted both the high-level, strategic aspects of social media use for institutions as well as providing links to a range of useful TechDis resources on accessibility. Terry reinforced the point that, when using social media, students with a disability often don’t want to let on that they have a disability. Highlighting the research by Vaughn and White?? around Digital Residents and Digital Visitors which revealed that neither age nor disability are significant factors in determining whether someone becomes a ‘resident’ in a network – i.e. becomes a regular contributor. This suggests that using social media provides an opportunity to widen participation, communication and learning experiences, and it is therefore important that universities maximise their usage of social networks.

Below are some of the key resources that Terry highlighted:
 

• Concept Linkage - this tool enables students to enter two different search terms. The tool then creates a visual map of all the potential linkages between the two terms, and could be useful in helping all students find out ‘what they don’t know’ about a topic.

• TechDis accessibility resources - the TechDis website has some fantastic resources, particularly on accessibility, inclusion and assistive technologies.

• Web2Access - great resource by Southampton University which evaluates a range of freely available Web 2.0 tools. The Disabilities page also contains a wealth of diagnostic tests to help you match an appropriate learning tool to a disability.

• Access For All - enables you to download a PDF Accessibility Checker, making it easier for you to check the accessibility of PDF documents.  

• Flexible Pedagogies: new pedagogical ideas - a report by the Higher Education academy into new pedagogical ideas, including social learning, learner empowerment, crossing boundaries and decolonising education.

Me – Digital Curation: how to make social media work for you

Due to a gap in the programme I also jumped in during the afternoon slot and provided a short workshop on Digital Curation. The aim of the session was to introduce participants to some practical social media tools that they begin using in their professional activities. The session introduced a simple three-stage framework to inform usage of social media - Discover, Curate, Share – with a view to providing a reason for participants to engage with social media. My main aim was to encourage people not to fear social media but rather to get involved and have a go. Only by doing so do the benefits become more evident.

The resources for my session can be found on the Digital Curation page of this blog, and I must thank Sue Waters for sharing her excellent blog post with me on which my page is based.

Thank you also to the NADP for organising a thoroughly informative and enjoyable day.

October edition of Inside Learning Technologies

 
 

There are some good articles in this magazine, including the following:

• Making the case for blended solutions – Clive Shepherd

• Is learner motivation our responsibility? – Julie Dirksen 

• The rise of video for digital learning – Kath Fleet 

Read the full magazine here.

We hear you Russell, but what's the alternative?

 
 
Jeremy Paxman's recent Newsnight interview of Russell Brand provided a platform for the comedian to wax lyrical about the woes of the current political system. The second half of the interview highlighted Brand's ability to be a convincing public speaker. After all, it takes an agile mind and flawless delivery to render Paxman at a loss for words. 

But what was worrying was Brand's call for revolution without presenting any suggestion of an alternative system of government. There have been many figures in history capable of stirring an otherwise passive public to rise up against the status quo, but these speeches usually include a proposition for an alternative system of government. To me it feels irresponsible for Brand to call for a revolution without offering a corresponding vision for how things might be different.

What struck me most about the interview, however, were the parallels between Brand's portrayal of dissatisfaction with democracy and the current debates around the future of higher education. In recent months a significant amount has been written about the viability of the current university model. Topics of concern range from the sustainability of rising fees to the impact of MOOCs and new technologies on student expectations. Anyone new to the higher education sector reading these articles could easily believe that the entire system was on the brink of a revolution.

But what is lacking, in the same way as in Brand's interview, is a convincing view of an alternative vision of higher education. While few would argue that there is no shortage of innovative ideas, pedagogic models or technologies, there is a surprising lack of debate around what an alternative system of higher education might look like. In much the same way as western democracy, western higher education has been exported across the globe. Despite its flaws, many countries strive to replicate the western university model.

The world needs people like Russell Brand and the thousands of commentators who are able to articulate the faults with our current systems of government and education. But the debate would also benefit from the voice those who are able to present a convincing alternative.

Knowledge + knowing = innovation

I've just finished reading a dense yet highly insightful article by Cook and Brown (1999) about the nature of knowledge and its relationship to organisational innovation. Although the article was written in a pre-social media age (hard to imagine now), like any great research it contains powerful insights that are highly relevant in today's world where use of social tools by businesses is growing exponentially. This post is an attempt to interpret aspects of their article and apply it to social business, but I would highly recommend reading the original research (reference at the end of the post).

Cook and Brown argue that there are four different types of knowledge: explicit, tacit, individual and group. Each type of knowledge is distinctly different and each fulfills a function that the others cannot.

• Explicit knowledge can be understood as "knowledge that can be spelled out or formalised"
• Tacit knowledge is associated with skills or know-how
• Individual knowledge is that stored in the minds of individuals
• Group knowledge constitutes the 'body of knowledge' possessed by a specialist group or community of practice

 
'Knowledge' and 'Knowing' are also understood as two separate concepts, with each enabling the other. Knowledge can be viewed as something that individuals or groups possess, and Knowing constitutes the application of this knowledge in a form of action by groups and individuals interacting with each other and the physical world. In this sense, Knowledge is positioned as a tool of Knowing with each enabling the other.

The key aspect of this interpretation is Cook and Brown's belief that the interaction between knowledge and knowing constitutes a powerful driver of innovation in organisations. Of particular significance is their argument that "harnessing this innovation calls for organisational and technological infrastructures that support the interplay of knowledge and knowing" (1999: 381).

Why is this relevant in the age of social media?

The use of social media tools in organizations can be seen as constituting precisely this sort of infrastructure, as these tools enable employees and managers to access, manage and make use of the "intellectual capital" of the organisation. Implementing a means to access the tacit and explicit knowledge that resides in both individuals and groups enables managers to tap into the creative potential of the workforce. This rich knowledge can then be applied to help the organization generate innovative ideas, products or solutions. The ease with which organisations are able to tap into this creative potential is likely to increase their competitive advantage and ultimately render them more innovative.

The recent report by the Altimeter Group about the Evolution of Social Business suggests that there is a distinct gap between businesses that are implementing a social media strategy and those that are 'deeply integrating social media and social methodologies throughout the company to drive real business impact' (full report below). The research indicated a truly social business has an approach to social which:

1. is clearly aligned with strategic business goals of an ogranisation
2. has organisational alignment and support that enables the execution of that strategy.

After surveying nearly 700 social media professionals and executives the research also found that only 34% of businesses believed that their approach to social media was connected to the goals and objectives of the business. And more worryingly, the report uncovered that 'half of all executives are not informed, engaged or aligned with their company's social media strategies in any capacity'.

There is a clear need for senior executives in businesses and organisations to understand the competitive advantage that social tools can leverage. The alignment of social tools with strategic objectives can significantly increase the potential for an organisation to harness the rich creative potential of its workforce. Using social tools, organisations can access the 'knowledge' residing in individuals and groups and turn it into the 'knowing' that can bring real innovation.


References

Cook, S. D. N. and Brown, J.S. (1999) Bridging Epistemologies: The Generative Dance Between Organizational Knowledge and Organizational Knowing. Organisation Science, Jul/Aug 1999, Vol. 10, No. 4. pp.381-400.

Li, C. and Solis, B. (2013) The Evolution of Social Business; Six Stages of Social Business Transformation. Altimeter Group 

The Evolution of Social Business: Six Stages of Social Media Transformation, by Charlene Li and Brian Solis from Altimeter Group Network on SlideShare

Higher Education, MOOCs and global fluency

What is the purpose of Higher Education? I don't pretend to have the answer - after all, it isn't a simple question. But having read George Siemens' recent assessment of the debate around MOOCs it strikes me that the unwillingness of Higher Education to respond to the networked environment is at the heart of its existential crisis:
 

University of Wisconsin-Madison from gsiemens

Today's students are in some way connected almost every hour that they are awake. But while they (and we) are using 21st century technologies to access knowledge the majority are being forced to learn according to 20th century delivery models.

According to Siemens (2013)...                  ...but from what I'm reading...

That's not to say there aren't some interesting innovations. The adoption of competency-based learning frameworks at several US universities is just one example of an innovative response to the challenges of higher fees. But these are tempered by worrying stories of entrenchment, such as the recent news from Duke University that Faculty have rejected a plan to enable graduates to gain credits for online courses. Then again, if it is true that "digital literacies are still too chaotic and random a concept... to deal with at a senior level" then it is unsurprising that the paradigm shift represented by MOOCs is a conceptual leap too far for many universities at present.

But in business, if your customers get networked, social, self-organised, adaptive and global, and you don't, you days are numbered.

Remaining relevant

If Higher Education is to remain relevant to the future needs of its students it will have to accept the fact that a new delivery model is needed, perhaps even several. Bonnie Stewart observes that MOOCs are a symptom of the change currently taking place in HE rather than the source, and makes a strong argument that universities should be seeking to adapt in response to the new ways of knowing and learning that the networked era has created. We've already been warned that an avalanche is coming, and MOOCs currently represent the first flurry of snow. But whether the snow settles or not, MOOCs will be followed by innovation after innovation, each potentially more disruptive than the last, until traditional models of Higher Education disappear under a glacier. Grainne Conole's paper calling for a new classification of MOOCs is a positive step towards convincing university decision makers of their value in terms of pedagogy and social inclusion.

50 years ago the top 5% of school leavers went to university to become professors and push the boundaries of knowledge. In today's society the top 50% of school leavers go to university to avoid being in the bottom 50% of wage-earners. But despite this, many Higher Education Institutions are clinging to an operational model that belongs in the previous century and are unwilling to accept the changes that digital technology has forced upon the music and publishing industries. And look what happened to them.

The purpose of Higher Education

It is clear that universities fulfil a complex function in today's society. Although it can be argued that the traditional view of Higher Education as a public good unto itself is largely outdated, nobody is advocating that universities' sole focus should be on employability. But it is important to realise that the overwhelming majority of students go to university in order to access more highly paid jobs than would otherwise be possible.

Higher Education should therefore aim to prepare Bachelors students for the changing world of work, while at the same time providing postgraduate students with an environment in which they can develop the base knowledge of their disciplinary area. Graduates should leave feeling confident that their investment has prepared them for a wide range of jobs, rather than fearing their degree was a waste of time. Business should be able to have confidence that the majority of applications they receive will come from candidates who are literate, capable and appropriately skilled.

Universities could be better at aligning some aspects of their provision more directly with the needs of the global economy. The Higher Education Academy highlights the value of skills such as creativity to employers, but at the same time states that universities need to articulate more explicitly the 21st century skills that students are learning during their course.Students considering a Bachelors degree should have a clear understanding of how the course will equip them with the skills and abilities to obtain a good job. Graduates at Bachelors level should then be able to demonstrate the skills and literacies they need in order to be globally fluent and able to succeed in the global economy, incorporating:

• creative & critical thinking
• collaboration
• network and social media literacy
• information literacy
• knowledge management
• connected leadership

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Could Competency Based Learning give MOOCs longevity?

Just came across an interesting post on Edudemic explaining how competency based learning (CBL) works. Essentially, a CBL-based curriculum requires students to demonstrate competency in the required areas of learning regardless of the amount of time spent on a given task. This means that students can determine their own rate of progress, moving rapidly through certain areas of the curriculum if they can demonstrate their mastery of the required content.

This seems to me to be an ideal academic framework for MOOCs to thrive. A curriculum designer would create the learning tasks that students have to master, and then it would be up to the student to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to demonstrate their competence in the specified areas. As the Edudemic posts suggests, the role of the tutor then becomes that of a facilitator, providing 'office hours' for students in which they can discuss their progress.

The spiralling cost of Higher Ed in the West is causing many students to question the value of a university education unless they leave with the 21st century skills necessary to make them employable. MOOCs have already demonstrated the potential to offer a low-cost alternative to the spiralling cost of Higher Ed, and even if MOOC providers were to introduce a nominal fee it would be much less than the cost that students currently face. A CBL curriculum would enable students to use MOOCs to gain the knowledge they require to learn the competencies they need, and provide a reason for Higher Ed institutions to keep providing them. A university would then split its core function of teaching and assessment: it might not accredit the students who participate in its MOOCs, but could provide accreditation to students who have participated in the MOOCs of another university.

I'm thinking off the top of my head here, so feel free to add your thoughts and comments...