New Approaches to Delivering an on-line course

Over the past few months, I’ve had a new Apple server to play with. It came with OS X Server 10.4 on it, but soon after, Apple shipped us a copy of OS X Server 10.5. The differences are significant. With the 10.5 server, once you create a “group” you can also create its website and related web services. So, every group then has a wiki, a blog, webmail, and a group calendar.

The wiki comes with templates and built in headers and banners. The editing bar (very similar to the one I’m using with WordPress.) makes it simple to embed media on a page. It even offers a link to iTunes for podcasts to be distributed.

So this got me thinking that with this kind of website, I could pretty much create a course where the content and resources were delivered through the wiki pages, the interactions could take place through the blog and the webmail, and the calendar could be use to coordinate activities and assignments. Each course could simply be a “group.” If the server got its authentication from the university or college system, then once students were added to the course “group,” they would also be able to log in using their regular id’s and passwords. And the site could be linked to the institution’s iTunesU site.

I think this could trump a lot of CMS’s and I’ll bet somebody is doing this already — somewhere.

More on the future of learning systems

I’m still thinking about the next generation of learning systems.

Lots of bloggers are writing about Personal Learning Environments. (see the Wikipedia article.)  And this seems a useful approach — let’s the learner control their own learning.  It might work very well as a way to document your learning and professional development.

I was thinking more along the lines of the tools.  And I think the browser is the place to start.  Suppose the browser had a set of plug-ins or a configuration set that was geared towards navigating through “learning sites.”  The browser would also have tools for note taking, referencing and citing, and it would compile a history of sites used and the activities the learner engaged in.  The whole thing would be based on XML or the semantic web (whenever that gets here — and it will.)  Then you could have a much more open form of learning.  The learner would use the browser to build a portfolio of their knowledge and learning and then it could be certified or evaluated by some form of accredited institution.  Maybe a university, but not necessarily.

Next Generation eLearning Systems

For awhile now, I’ve been trying to imagine what the next generation of eLearning systems will look like.  The current systems are based on the idea of “computer-based education,” which was first proposed in the 1960’s by the PLATO Project at the Univ. of Illinois.

At Purdue, they have developed Epsilen, which may be the model for this next generation.  An Educause paper describing the ideas behind the Epsilen design can be found here.  (You may have to register to get access.)

I thought the paper was very good — it helped crystallize a lot of my thinking about the design of these systems.  I keep thinking that eLearning needs to be as simple as using a web browser, and just as flexible.  It will be interesting to see how the Epsilen project plays out.  Its important to note that their partner is the New York Times.  I’m sure the Times has noticed how The Washington Post has profited from owning Kaplan.

Blackboard’s patent suit — again

Now the Patent Office has rejected Blackboard’s patent, but the company is not giving up.

When companies start suing over patents, it usually means the innovation is over. I suppose I’m an outsider on this, as many people think innovations are protected by patents. But it has always seemed to me that when companies start putting their effort into defending their turf, then they are giving up innovation and merely fighting to hang on to what they have. It will be gone soon enough.

Technology and Change

When I was working on my dissertation, one of the questions that kept bugging me was about the relationship between new technology and the way we do things.  When a new technology comes along, we tend to see it and use it in familiar ways.  The car was a horseless carriage at first.  But as we become more familiar with the new tech, we begin to see it and use it in different ways.

So, the first use of computers in education was as a platform to deliver what we were already doing — and this still continues today.  At what point does the technology change the way we do things?  What makes that happen?

Seems to me this is a big question with all these Web 2.0 applications.  Will they just be used to deliver the same old classroom stuff, or will they make it possible for us to change the way we do education and the way we think about learning?

New Models for Teaching = New Technology for Teaching

Following up on my last post.Its increasingly clear to me that if we are to get beyond course management systems in education, then we have to have new teaching models and those models need to be driven by a better understanding of how we learn.But where are those models going to come from?In some cases, they will probably come from research labs and universities where the topic is under active investigation. Places like the LIFE Center at the Univ. of Washington, or any of the other Science of Learning Centers being funded by the National Science Foundation.So then, the other source of innovation in teaching would have to be individuals and institutions where innovation was both prized and rewarded.  So … where are those places?  

Seeking Rent Instead of Ideas

Over the last few days I was toying with the idea of writing about the Blackboard patent suit and its impact on educational technology.  I think there’s nothing even remotely original about course management systems — they are simply updates of the old computer-based education systems. PLATO is the best known of those systems.  PLATO IV is probably still more useful and powerful than the most recent CMS available.So I did some research and reading and I came to realize that lots of people know this patent claim is nonsense, but that has little or no effect on rulings about its legal validity.  The law is splendidly isolated from the historical realities of educational technology.  So, for the time being, Blackboard wins their lawsuit and their competitors are threatened with paying money for nothing to their biggest competitor.This is what some economists call rent-seeking.   In this case, Blackboard is looking for revenue, and protection for their market position, by suing their competitors. This is in lieu of technological innovation or improved service.What this tells me is that the interface design we call a “course management system” has reached a dead-end.  Its gone as far as it can go and it can’t go no farther.  Its out of gas. But that figures.  A CMS is a virtual representation (a simulation) of the standard classroom teaching process found in most colleges and universities — lecture, discussion, assignments, quizzes, papers, and exams.  That teaching process is also running out of steam.So, where to next?  I’ve decided that I’ll skip on the history of CMS ideas — they aren’t original and they certainly aren’t innovative.  But educational technology needs to move beyond these systems — or should.  There’s probably a good chance that the system will harden in place and become one more leg of the lecture-text-test process — a delivery mechanism for the same old stuff.  (Herbert Simon once said that we run our universities on the “word-spraying method.”  Now we use a CMS to spray the words farther.)I myself have been teaching a class on Web 2.0 for Education and Training.  I’m noticing that while my students are getting some good ideas about how to use bits and pieces of these applications, they are doing so within the confines of pretty traditional approaches  to teaching and learning.Herbert Simon also wrote that we needed to first consider how we learn, and then try to figure out how to use technology to support learning.  Seems like that’s still the case. 

SITE Conference — day 3

Web 2.0 remains an important topic at the conference, with presenters taking many different approaches to the applications.  One course uses Google Maps in the class as a way to help online students visualize the others in the class.  Wikis are being used in lots of classes as ways to promote collaborative work among the students and to construct knowledge in the content area.  Flickr is being used as a tool for visual learning and to create/sustain communities around specific topics — like fossils.  And yet, a recurrent theme is that many teacher candidates are unwilling to use technology or slow to pick up on its educational uses  And for many k-12 educators, the reality is that many of their students still don’t have access to computers and networks.Blogs as a tool for professional development and as a way for teachers to connect with others and sustain their efforts at professional development. 

SITE Conference

Attending the SITE conference in Las Vegas, NV.Lots of papers that are reports about various courses and teacher training projects.  More concerted efforts to have new teachers learn to use digital media tools and then incorporate them into their classroom practice. WEB 2.0 tools are also a hot topic and those sessions are attracting fair numbers of people.  I’m currently in a session where the presenter is showing videos made by middle school students.  ”The students are much more proficient in using the technology than the adults are.”Interesting comments about audio difficulties in making videos.  He advocates using a text-based narrative as being easier to create and control.  In a similar session yesterday, the speaker advocated using “voice overs” for narration.Many of those who have used Web 2.0 tools talk about the need to structure collaboration for their students since it is not something they automatically know how to do.  I find that a revealing comment.  But it also leads me to think that collaborative work is normal practice in science and engineering, and many other parts of our world.  So then, why should it be so difficult to implement in education?

Marc Prensky on Learning

I was unfamiliar with Marc Prensky until my friend, Dr. Bob, sent me a link to some of his work.There, going through some of his writings, I came across an excellent column on the nature of learning that Prensky wrote in 2002.  You can find it here. One of the things he says is that many of us who work in education or teaching, are strongly influenced by our own experiences as learners.  That got me thinking that it was certainly true for me.  As an adult, I have worked to learn how to play the guitar, ski, and play ice hockey.  In all three cases, I used models, instruction (one-on-one) and lots of practice.  And in all three cases, that process worked well enough for me.  So then, in my own instructional designs, I try to incorporate, models, direct instruction (one-on-one if possible) and lots of practice, with feedback on performance.