Web2.0 hea ics-demontfortnov2009finalfinal

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Share Collaborate and Exchange, reshaping education through technology: the EdShare experience

presentation to HEA-ICS Autumn 2009

Su White, Hugh Davis, Thanassis Tiropanis, Les Carr, Dave Millard

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The shape of this talk

1 – context and current practice

2 – room for change

3 – some (affordance led) change

4 –future and conclusions?

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

AND CURRENT PRACTICEContext

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Edshare – a preview

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Universities and knowledge

The Humboldtian Ideal

In universities, learning should not be [defined] in terms of the passing on of well established knowledge, but always in terms of not yet completely solved problems.”

Humboldt, 1807Thanks to Lewis Elton

Autumn 2009

Web 2.0

affordances

?

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Welcome to my world…

This course aims to develop critical thinking, effective working within teams, peer-learning and discussion, and individual responsibility as these are transferable skills that are essential within a highly competent technologist, computer scientist, software engineer or researcher”

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The home front

Early adopters

Vanilla web Information publishing Online Discussion Social networks YABB Network News

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Circa 1994-1996

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Actually…. Way back…

The cloud was Vicky – the department’s platform

Vincent was the fridge who emailed observations on

departmental politics

YABB and Network News Social networks were

technologically augmentedand

Technology Networks were socially augmented

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

1994 – TQA and social web

Autumn 2009

The TQA visit in 1994 used what Shirky in his much quoted post which describes as social software

After each observation, colleagues would leg it back to their computer and email colleagues explaining the way the review was going, what the reviewers were asking etc…

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The world has changed

True But… Digital immigrants vs digital natives is a naiive concept

Note - Universities continue flourish despite the long time existence of libraries

The academy exists/has existed in many different cultural contexts and traditions

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The world is changing 2

True But…

We need to beware of

being obsessed with the the leisure habits of young people

generalising the working habits of early adopters/evangelists

Attributing OU behaviours to the whole student population

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Our University has changed…

Local Early adopters Vanilla web Admin and info Wiki, Media Wiki Knowledge base FAQ …under development

EdShare Dynamic transcripts

with real time/collaborative editing

Institutional Portal ‘info’ blogs Gimmicky Web 2.0 VLE (Blackboard) Web 2.0 ‘Pod Casting’ Second Life

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The home front

Educational innovation (1990s->)Microcosm, notes

Authentic assessment Online open web exams Zappers - the teachers learn

Admin and Education (1998->) Skywriting Wiki for advice Wiki for knowledge capture and sharing Wiki for assessment (them and us)

Latterly

Mixed Mode, mixed purpose ECS-TV, Student Blog Self study groups - mixed environments

Student practice (2007, 2008, 2009) Facebook, facebook, facebook Wikipedia Portal confusion/Portal distaste Del.icio.us, digg, cite-u-like etc

- small

It’s a learning journey Different times Different people Socially augmented communication

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

FOR CHANGERoom

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

From the well to Web2.0

“Web 2.0 is the network as platform, spanning all connected devices; Web 2.0 applications are those that make the most of the intrinsic advantages of that platform: delivering software as a continually-updated service that gets better the more people use it, consuming and remixing data from multiple sources, including individual users, while providing their own data and services in a form that allows remixing by others, creating network effects through an "architecture of participation," and going beyond the page metaphor of Web 1.0 to deliver rich user experiences.”

- Tim O'Reilly October 01, 2005

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The world is changing 3

We need to Remember all we have

learned about how people learn

Stay true to our beliefs about how people can learn

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

The world is changing 4

True But acknowledge…

The half life of information is diminishing Working practices are changing We can harness technology in disruptive ways Affordances emerge!

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Life at the chalk face?

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Student/learner

Individuallecturer

Curriculum designer(s)

Classroom practice

VariousStakeholders

Accreditation

UK HE/PLC

Future Employers

Informal

learning

Formallearnin

g

Multiple perspectives

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Consider disciplinary differences

Survey(s) of students attitudes their experience and

perceptions of TEL

Identify user needs

Compare experience with theory

Because

Disciplinary differences literature

Ad hoc development of e-learning resources

Opinions on Web2.0 Cost of developing

TEL resources Sometimes structural

barriers to change

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Indicative Areas

Hard Soft

Pure

Applied

C. Scienceand Maths

S Sciences andHumanities

Nursing orEducation

Computingand Engineering

Biglan, 1973

Curriculum/content -> curriculum purpose -> assessment

Reflecting on Biglan “a sound understanding

of key aspects of teaching and learning must

depend on the recognition of the distinctive

features of different knowledge domains and

their social mileiux” (Neumann, Parry and

Beecher 2002)

Beware of generalising about 2.0

learningThink about your educational

objectivesHarness the technology affordances

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Curriculum/Content Assessment Cognitive Purpose

• Concepts and principles closely connected.

• Content typically fixed and cumulative. Quantitative.

• Teaching and learning activities are focused and instructive.

• Specific and focused exam questions.

• Objective tests relying on quantitative nature of knowledge

• Logical reasoning. • Testing of ideas in

linear form of argumentation.

• Reliance on facts, principles, and concepts.

• Concerned with the mastery of the physical environment.

• Focus is on products and techniques.

• Knowledge is atomistic and cumulative.

• Emphasises factual understanding

• Preference for exam questions, especially problem-solving

• Problem-solving and practical skills

• Emphasis on integration and application of existing knowledge

Hard Pure

Hard Appliede.g.Engineering

Hard Subjects…

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Disciplinary Differences Survey

Students in Hard areas valued online tutorials reference materials objective tests (also VLEs)

Support the mastery of facts, principles and concepts.

Quantitative, Closed

Students in Soft areas valued synchronous discussions role play and games access to open web Access to online journals

Support the development of argumentation skills and critical thinking

Qualitative Open

The responses were broadly consistent with knowledge framework.

Web 1.0 vs Web 2.0?and

Space for Web 3.0

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Our typical education mix…

students In Hard fields of study experience a heavy workload, so technology which offers affordance which save or optimise the use of time will be powerful

However from the point of view of the academic there is also a “high incidence of face to face teaching and concern for substantial coverage

Neumann Parry and Becher

Academics may be disinclined to invest

large amounts of additional time

preparing e-learning materials

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

TEL/Web2/Linked Data?

Blended/Web 2.0/Linked Data approaches…

allow systematic/automated selection of activities to best meet range of requirements

supporting student learning

making good use of faculty time

streamline administrative tasks

(monitoring and recording student progression and achievement)

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Our recent survey

Across Soton90% facebook, once a

week or more - check98% students use

textsConscious act not to

use them – not digital divide

In ECSMajority have laptops

– 2009: the year of the laptop

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

AFFORDANCE LED CHANGE

some

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

We use RDF – it saves time!

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

2009

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Add some student generated content

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Tie in with the wild web…

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Add some structure

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Edshare web science

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

CONCLUSIONSThe future and …

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Where the future lies…

Soft semantics Meaning in formats that

humans can process

Lightweight knowledge modeling in Web2.0

Hard Semantics Meaning in formats that

machines can process

Processing independent of specific knowledge models

Semantic Technologies for Teaching and Learning

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Learning and teaching opportunities

Transparent Data can assist Retention by monitoring

progress and empowering students

Visibility of programmes and research output, attracting funding

Workflows and collaboration across departments and institutions

Student recruitment Integration of knowledge capital,

cross curricular initiatives

Classroom contexts Assisting course creation and

deliver workflow Recommend relevant resources

and workflow Efficient accreditation processes

Critical thinking and argumentation support

Efficient personal and group knowledge construct

Group formation Assessment, certification,

countering/detecting plagiarism

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Thank You

Acknowledge:

Contributions of colleagues at our respective institutions

Questions?

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Thank You

Dr Su White

Learning Societies Lab

University of Southampton

[email protected]

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Major reference

Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report

Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching (SemTech) - JISC Report.

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

References

Boyer E. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate 1990.Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A

Blueprint for America's Research Universities. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 1998.Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University. Reinventing Undergraduate Education, Three

Years After the Boyer Report. New York: Stony Brook: State University of New York at Stony Brook; 2002.Brew A, Boud D. Teaching and research: establishing the vital link with learning. Higher Education. 1995;29(3):261-73.Carter J, Jenkins T. Gender and programming: what's going on? ACM ITiCSE. Leeds: ACM Press New York, NY, USA 1999:1-4.Committee on Higher Education. Higher Education: Report of the Committee Appointed by the Prime Minister Under the

Chairmanship of Lord Robbins, 1961-63. London: HMSO; 1963.Davis HC, White S. A research-led curriculum in multimedia: learning about convergence. 10th annual SIGCSE conference on

Innovation and technology in computer science education 2005; Lisbon, Portugal; 2005. p. 29 - 33.Davy J, Jenkins T. Research-led innovation in teaching and learning programming. ACM ITiCSE. Leeds, UK: ACM Press New

York, NY, USA 1999:5-8.Dempster JA. Developing and Supporting Research-Based Learning and Teaching Through Technology. In: Ghaou C, ed.

Usability Evaluation Of Online Learning Programs. USA.: Information Science Publishing, Idea Group Inc 2003:128-58.Elton L. Research and teaching: symbiosis or conflict? Higher Education. 1986;15:299 - 304.Fasli M. On the Research Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor. 8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information

and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 77-81.

Gibbs G. Institutional strategies for linking research and teaching. Exchange. 2002;3.Hatch A, Burd L, Ashurst C, Jessop A. Project Management Patterns and the Research-Teaching Nexus. In: HEA-ICS, editor.

8th Annual Conference of the Subject Centre for Information and Computer Science; 2007 28th – 30th August 2007; University of Southampton: HEA-ICS, University of Ulster; 2007. p. 68-71.

Hattie J, Marsh HW. One journey to unravel the relationship between research and teaching. Research and teaching: Closing the divide? An International Colloquium; 2004 March 18-19, 2004; Winchester; 2004.

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Hattie J, Marsh HW. The Relationship between Research and Teaching: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research. 1996;66(4):507-42.

Healey M. Linking research and teaching: exploring disciplinary spaces and the role of inquiry-based learning; 2005.Hoare T, Milner R, eds. Grand Challenges in Computing: British Computer Society 2004.Jenkins A, Healey M, Zetter R. Linking of staff disciplinary research and student learning. York: Higher Education Academy; 2007.Jenkins A, Healey M. Institutional Strategies to link teaching and research. York: Higher Education Academy; 2005.McGettrick A, Boyle R, Ibbett R, Lloyd J, Lovegrove G, Mander K. Grand challenges in computing education: British Computer

Society; 2004.Neumann R. Perceptions of the Teaching-Research Nexus: A Framework for Analysis. Higher Education. 1992;23(2):159-71.Neumann R. The Teaching-Research Nexus: Applying a Framework to University Students' Learning Experiences. European

Journal Of Higher Education. 1994;29(3):323-38.Ramsden P, Moses I. Associations Between Research and Teaching in Australian Higher Education. Higher Education. 1992 April

1992;23(3):273-95.Roach M, Blackmore P, Dempster JA. Supporting High-Level Learning through Research-Based Methods: A Framework for

Course Development. Innovations in Education and Teaching International. 2001;38(4):369-82.Strazdins P. Research based education in computer science teaching. Canberra: Australian National University; 2007.Thomas RC, Mancy R. Use of Large Databases for Group Projects at the Nexus of Teaching and Research. ACM SIGCSE

2004; Portland: ACM; 2004. p. 161-5 Tiropanis, T., Davis, H., Millard, D., Weal, M., White, S. and Wills, G. (2009) Semantic Technologies in Learning and Teaching

(SemTech) - JISC Report.Wirth A, Bertolacci M. New algorithms research for first year students. Proceedings of the 11th annual SIGCSE conference on

Innovation and technology in computer science education; 2006; Bologna, Italy: ACM Press New York, NY, USA; 2006. p. 128-32.

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of SouthamptonAutumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

NOT USED, BUT REFERRED

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Putative table

Collabroative authoring and annotation

Searching and matching

Repositories, vles and authoring tools

Infrastructural technologies for linked data and semantic enrichment

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

From semtech report

The initial value of semantic technology will be in scale first before reasoning

The emergence of linked data fields across related repositories could enable applications and value for the identified HE challenges

Semantic lools and services that map linked data to application specific ontologies will increase linked data value and impact

Encouragemen of community afreed ontologies to empower semantic applicationsalongside application specific ontologies

Empressive semantics to enable pedagogoy aware applicationsAutumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Challenges

Barriers to exposing institutional data in RDF

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Most of fhe identifired he challenges can be addressed by querying across institutional repositories (databases, web pages, VLSs)

Significant learning and teaching challenges can be addressed by accesing resources across departments, schools, institutions

Argumentation and critical thinking could benefit from advance reasoning over large scale of resources

Could we adopt a bottom up approach starting from linked data which can be related to (layers of) ontologies larer in the context of specific applications.

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Looking at our data

Autumn 2009

Learning Societies Lab, University of Southampton

Further Questions

How can insight into disciplinary differences assist the selection of effective TEL (and therefore Web1.0->3.0) approaches?

How can understanding disciplinary preferences help identify ways of working with faculty to successfully embed TEL and develop blended approaches?

What are the technology affordances of e-learning which might best be used in computing, engineering and our cognate areas?

http://fie.engrng.pitt.edu/fie2006/papers/1784.pdf

Autumn 2009