Personal Blogs

Activity 19 Report

At the University we already gather information about students personal situation and their engagement with their course through VLE usage, however this data is not currently being used for pedagogic purposes. To implement Learning Analytics (LA) would require a large shift in approach, attitude and awareness to its potential.

One noted problem with our current situation is the lack of awareness for the use of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). This misunderstanding of the area mostly comes from management who do not understand what it is our e-Learning team does in this field and thusly does not support our ideas or initiatives. To make sure that the use of a tool such as LA was implemented correctly we would need to secure buy-in from management who could help cascade change downwards to teaching and support staff.

This would then require teaching staff to have an understanding of LA as it is they who could directly benefit from the information it provides. This then poses the question, who is going to be responsible for interpreting data? If we expect teaching staff to review the data gathered on their students, they would firstly need to be trained in the skills of analytics, which would be costly in both time and money and also lead to stretching the academics time even thinner. We might also consider employing an analyst per school to deal with interpreting and compiling learner data, this would be costly.

Consultation about the process will also be key to successful implementation. Making sure that all stakeholders involved with the LA project will be key to the acceptance of the process. If we openly consult with learners, academics and management staff we can make them aware of what data will be gathered and allow for them to raise any concerns early on in the process.

A further consideration is the infrastructure that would be required to implement LA. It would require servers to cope with the increased CPU load, and server space for the storage of data. This would require resources and staff to maintain.

Conclusion

For us to implement LA across the whole university would be a long term task. This does not mean it would not be possible but it would require management, staff and students to be actively involved in the process of making it a possibility. At the current time, with the financial issues affecting Higher Education I am not sure it would be seen as a priority project for the University.

Activity 1 - Part 1

From looking at early versions of the Learning Analytics (LA) Wiki stub one thing I noticed was the use of the word 'predict' or 'prediction'. Using information or data gained to for see a student's success but in later versions of the page this word is removed and doubts are added raised by Sharkey (2010). He posits that success is a relative term and this is something evident when looking at for example, online learning in the form of MOOCs. MOOCs could have a defined goal; to complete an essay or test, but a student may not want to engage that much with the content (it's open after all and they are free to engage how they wish), their own level of success may be defined by learning about one tiny aspect introduced during the course. I tend to agree with Sharkey's opinion that you cannot determine all learner desires from data.

Another noted change from the history of the Wiki stub is the creation of a separate but interlinked field, Educational Data Mining (EDM). I find this split confusing as both terms seem to deal with the same issues and impact upon the same stakeholders. One given difference is that LA is more student-centric and EDM is more research-centric. The benefits of LA appear to have stayed constant noting the benefits it can have to allow students to self direct learning by having access to information about their own habits and how the data availability on learner habits can help academics design course materials.

Sharkey, M. (2010) Predicting 'success' - Google Groups [Online] Available at: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/learninganalytics/w1eVCqT6GIc/QHLkNbPJiDYJ (Accessed 29 June 2015)

Activity 22 - Suggest a Technology that is important for Open Education

Google Docs

Google Docs is something I have started using during my time on this module (Thanks to Helen!) through the first collaborative activity we had to undertake. I see Google Docs as a kind of slightly different, improved version of a wiki, allowing for multiple users to access one document at the same time, editing and adding information and tracking contributions by users with shared access to the document. This makes it an excellent technology for working together in groups on projects and allows a lecturer (when the document is shared) the ability to drop in on what a group is doing, see who is actively contributing and who is not, highlight areas of good work, point out areas that are weak or give feedback and encouragement in situ.

But I suppose the most important and liberating aspect of the technology for openness in education is that it is free. Not requiring the technology to be purchased or licensed allows for a greater degree of uptake, and can be especially impactful on poorer or developing countries. It also offers a compatible platform for ideas to be discussed and developed, as I could be using a tablet or an iMAC and my friend on a PC in Mexico City could both still be editing the same document as it only requires the internet and a browser.

We are already seeing an uptake of Google Docs and other Google Apps, having recently attended a Google talk at the JISC DigiFest 2015, where a working case study was presented by a College in Worcester, on how they have started using Google Apps as a replacement for a VLE and how Google Docs forms a massive part of the way their students are expected to engage with academic studies.

My thoughts....

Were you convinced by rhizomatic learning as an approach?

Rhizomatic learning seems confusing as a learning approach, and I see it more of an explanation. To me it explains/highlights the fact the learning can be chaotic and random, and that learners can begin learning from any point in a perceived networked learning structure, with or without knowing they are learning or beginning to learn. I do agree with Cormier’s comments about measuring learning, I think this stems from an ideological paradigm which is entrenched within education as a whole, as grades seem to be the most important statistic, not how competent a learner is when its time for them to enter the real world.

Could you imagine implementing rhizomatic learning?

First of all, I think they only way you could implement it is in an imaginary scenario as I think the current educational paradigm would not support it. I don’t think you would get an institution to validate a course that has no material and a loose structure that puts the emphasis on learners creating the curriculum and being the curriculum. Also, the issue mentioned above to do with measuring would be a sticking point, as managerial level people in institutions place more stock in results figures than lecturer judgement.

How might rhizomatic learning differ from current approaches?

From my understanding, rhizomatic learning puts emphasis on learners finding solutions to problems via dialogue and discussion, and that there essentially is no correct answer to a problem. I like this approach as it encourages learners to build confidence in a subject, by removing the teacher-over-learner hierarchy, and lets learners feel like they can actively contribute to the creation of new knowledge.

What issues would arise in implementing rhizomatic learning?

I think the one key issue noted by Cormier is measurement. We measure students to obtain whether or not they know what we have taught them, but as Cormier mentions this learns to ‘cramming’ or temporarily memorising knowledge only to discard it when not required. The reason I see it as an ideological issue, is that Institutions judge themselves against others for the prestige of being the best, and this is done through test scores and graduation rates, they don’t seem to care if a learner knows anything just as long as they look good in a league table, and I think thats completely wrong. If there is no way to measure students knowledge, the statistics institutions use to promote themselves won’t get generated, making it hard for institutions to compete for student enrolment.

Hey everyone, I had some thoughts whilst trying to define what a PLN was and decided to write a bit more about it..........

My definition of a Personal Learning Network (PLN):

To define a PLN in a sentence I would say it is: A Personal Learning Network is a web of connections constructed offline and online by an individual that allows for the sharing and improvement of knowledge.

I did some further thinking on why, and I wrote a bit about it (its also on my blog). Let me know if anyone thinks I am wide of the mark.

Basis for my definition

The thing I struggled with the most about defining a Personal Learning Network is does it require technology in its construction to be considered a PLN. Many blogs and articles I looked at stripped the concept of a PLN right back to being an interaction between people about a shared interest which produced some sort of a newly learned knowledge, for example, one lecturer asking another how they managed to get their students to engage better in a lesson, as they had heard from other colleagues that they had had success with a new technique. This conversation could happen in a University cafeteria or a staff office and new knowledge has been shared between a network of people. That leads me to question whether the knowledge transferred needs to be in a solid form, kind of like an artefact, so the technique would need to be written on a blog site by one of the people involved in the initial discourse, so that it can be subsequently accessible by anyone who searches on the internet for similar knowledge.

Some websites and articles explicitly state that a PLN has to have a technological aspect. In a 2013 post on Edutopia.org, Tom Whitby states that a PLN is “a tool that uses social media and technology to collect, communicate, collaborate and create with connected colleagues anywhere at any time”. I think this statement makes a massive assumption that meaningful knowledge is now only transmitted and discussed on the internet. I agree, a large majority of discussion does happen on the web, as it offers an unparalleled opportunity to connect so many people in different place with different ideas. However, meaningful knowledge is created in smaller, more ‘personal’ networks which may contains under 10 people in a close proximity.

The term Personal Learning Network seems confusing to me, as when something is personal its bespoke to an individual, closed off and precious and what I think would be a better term is an Open Learning Network or a Massive Open Learning Network.

Whitby, T (2013) How do I get a PLN? - Edutopia.org [Accessed at: http://www.edutopia.org/blog/how-do-i-get-a-pln-tom-whitby] [Last Accessed: 12/04/15]