FLANZ - Day 1 afternoon

 

After lunch, the FLANZ awards are announced.

The second keynote is with Derek Wenmoth who presents on the topic ‘future focused flexible education’.

Started with a review of how flexible learning has evolved. To begin, f2f and correspondence education were quite separate. However, equity requires a sharp relook to allow for access to all. Teaching and instruction for both f2f and correspondence delivery based on teaching and delivery. Disruptions began occurring in the 1990s as the www emerged. LMS started to be developed. Online and elearning began in the mid-90s. Told the story of how, in the mid-90s, country secondary schools could network to offer shared teaching for subjects with small number of students. This reversed students going to boarding school and the effects on the town which was able to retain its secondary school. The next disruption was the increase in ownership of mobile devices. Mlearning allowed for home/school/www to merge and the increase of blended learning through flipped classroom and virtual online schools. What then happens now? There is shift of the ownership of learner – eventuating in personalised/adaptive learning which is about knowledge building communities and boundary-less organisations – allowing networked/connected learning. Proposed ubiquity, connectedness and agency as the main themes. Ubiquity relates to anytime, anyplace, anywhere with the shift to cloud access through wifi and on mobile devices. There is now a merging between the formal/informal and the physical/virtual. Connectedness refers to having a sense of being a part of something that is bigger than ones self; the capacity to benefit from connectivity for personal, social, work etc. the importance of social networks, learning how to communicate across many medii, connectivisism etc. Agency is having choices and the ability to act; informed enabled empowered learners; and shifting ownership of learning. See Washor, E;, & Mosakowski, C. (2013).

Check Hanna (2002) – evolution of programme design – product orientation and standardisation to customisation and student need orientation.

Challenged the audience to see beyond the future developments (AI, chat bots, neural transfers, adaptive learning, mobile learning, AR/VR, ) and to see how these must be deployed to try to meet the real challenges of the future (over population, food/water supply, global emissions, climate change, religious intolerance, cultural assimilation, unemployment, nano-technology etc.)

Then a series of presentations.

Firstly, Dr. Gloria Gomez with ‘OB3 media-rich documents with embedded discussions: lifting learning performance and engagement through interactive design.’ Ara has several programmes using OB3 and has found it especially appropriate for co- and social-constructivist pedagogy. Shared a study using interaction design study to gain entry into the study of novel educational practice. Summarised the 6 principles of the bridging design prototype approach and the concepts used in understanding the data gathered. Rationalised the need for OB3. Then provided an overview of how OB3 works. OB3 interface allows for - no need for technologist in preparation of OB docx, students engage in synchronise discussions with teacher within the document and students engage in authoring curriculum.  User interface is familiar with cut/paste and drag/drop. Discussions can inserted anywhere into the document in the form of text, images, videos, audio recordings. Used case study from 10 years of use by Otago/Sydney Master of Ophthalmic basic science course. Video of how OB3 works provided background. When compared to Creative Classroom Framework (CCR) and the NMC Horizon report – OB3 helps students move towards become co-constructers of learning and leads to deeper learning and critical reflection.

Then Andi Sudjana Putra and Alan Soong from National University of Singapore with ‘operationalising an online ‘design your own module’ using the community of inquiry framework. Introduced the programme Design your own module (DYOM) with students as partners (SaP) and Community of Inquiry (COI). DYOM allows student to explore learning beyond their own discipline, using self-directed approaches through MOOCs or to engage with NUS teachers/admin staff or industry leaders. Objects of DYOM to provide flexibility in planning their studies without disrupting their normal structured disciplinary studies. Also to encourage students to broaden their knowledge and encourage lifelong learning. Provided examples of a wide range of topics. Summarised the study on better understanding and evaluation of DYOM. SaP framework includes aspects of co-learning, co-design and co-developing anchored by 5 principles – foster inclusive partnership, nurture power-sharing, accept partnership as a process of uncertain outcomes, engage in ethical partnerships and cooperation. CoI includes social, cognitive and teaching presence but also by supporting discourse, setting climate and supporting collaboration. Provided details of the context of the DYOM. Use https://padlet.com/andisputra/3a659ijac65xsytr to see example.

Alan shared the findings from students survey post-DYOM. There was increased student engagement and motivation; increased understanding of the experiences of others; and enhanced student-student partnership. Students attain ownership of their learning.

After afternoon tea I attend sessions by Professor Cheryl Brown from University of Canterbury on ’Open textbooks: What’s stopping us and why we need them’ with work by Zhanni Luo and Maansa Bajaj Prakash. Defined text books as a manual of instruction in any science or branch of study. OER covers any type of educational material. Open textbooks can therefore be defined more widely. Cost of text books have increased and students are likely to seek alternative resources to access textbooks when cost is a factor. Adapted a survey used at Otago University – Stein, S., Hart, S., et al (2017). Student views on the cost of textbooks. Used a snowball crowdsourcing approach and gathered over a 1000 participants. Over 80% were required to purchase a physical textbook, with 18% required digital materials. More costs for science and engineering students. The majority did not buy the textbooks! So what are they using? 56% did not use textbooks and relied on resources provided by lecturers. Very few actually used filesharing, borrowed from friends etc. Many did not use the library either!! Reasons were inconvenient time, inability to highlight/annotate, limited loan time, unawareness of library services and unavailability due to limited number of copies. 70% did not know about OER. Without textbooks, students were worried they may be missing out and some had to make substantial sacrifices to be able to purchase. Those with textbooks were frustrated when the textbook as not used or were not relevant. Some solutions – cut cost by using OER and not prescribing, capture alternative sources, clearly communicate what content is relevant in textbook, reflect on why, share resources in class, use OTs and adapt for context, don’t directly link textbook to assessments, get students to generate quiz Q & As. Recommend range of textbooks, peer rate resources, and start small to build content, collaborate with colleagues and invite students to contribute.

And Dr. Lynnette. Brice from the Open Polytechnic with ‘closing the distance with an open smile’. – the impact of emotion in ODFL experience. ODFL is largely mediated through technology but emotion is a human response. Defined ODFL in the context of emotional associations. Therefore, open and flexible = remove barriers but distance = the opposite. Shares case studies from ODFL learners and how their emotional state/s affect their learning. Summarised some understandings of the power of emotions in learning. Then summarised Maori knowledge of emotions in an educational setting – summarised as he kare a roto – the ripples within. Emphasised the need for the ‘smile’ in all of the strategies and processes the institution, support and teachers project to learners.