Yes, this is happening. There are many more (and more accessible) resources available – so many it can be hard to know where to start (and when to stop) looking. But are they better? Yes and no. It may be difficult for learners to assess the quality of resources. What criteria can be apply? Are all resources fit for their current purposes, or are they beta versions, are they detached from the broad curricula context for which they were conceived originally. Are they presented in a form that is true to the medium, or are they print materials converted hastily for web delivery, with consequent sacrifices in quality, completeness and/or accessibility?
>Greater flexibility?
Undoubtedly, but as H800 itself shows, not all the resources fit always with all our preferences and preferred tools, hence growing baggage of laptop, folders of printed stuff, notebooks, iPhone, etc.
>More collaborative?
More, or just different kinds of collaboration in a different context?
>New/better learning with Web 2.0 tools?
Yes, yes, yes! But what if you don't know how to use these tools? Is support available, and is the use of these tools embedded into study practices?
>Better/more tutoring?
Again, better or different?
>Better assessment?
I think that the potential for assessment of collaborative work is one of the big promises of technology enhanced learning. ICTs already enable and support all manner of collaborative work in the workplace, and increasingly employers seem to require evidence of assessed collaborative work. Particularly in areas of health and social care, IT, etc. I don't know if this is being realised just yet, at least in my context, but it looks like being one of the big stories of technology enhanced learning in the near future.
H800 Week 11, Activity A3b
Other benefits of ICT
>Access to more/better resources?
Yes, this is happening. There are many more (and more accessible) resources available – so many it can be hard to know where to start (and when to stop) looking. But are they better? Yes and no. It may be difficult for learners to assess the quality of resources. What criteria can be apply? Are all resources fit for their current purposes, or are they beta versions, are they detached from the broad curricula context for which they were conceived originally. Are they presented in a form that is true to the medium, or are they print materials converted hastily for web delivery, with consequent sacrifices in quality, completeness and/or accessibility?
>Greater flexibility?
Undoubtedly, but as H800 itself shows, not all the resources fit always with all our preferences and preferred tools, hence growing baggage of laptop, folders of printed stuff, notebooks, iPhone, etc.
>More collaborative?
More, or just different kinds of collaboration in a different context?
>New/better learning with Web 2.0 tools?
Yes, yes, yes! But what if you don't know how to use these tools? Is support available, and is the use of these tools embedded into study practices?
>Better/more tutoring?
Again, better or different?
>Better assessment?
I think that the potential for assessment of collaborative work is one of the big promises of technology enhanced learning. ICTs already enable and support all manner of collaborative work in the workplace, and increasingly employers seem to require evidence of assessed collaborative work. Particularly in areas of health and social care, IT, etc. I don't know if this is being realised just yet, at least in my context, but it looks like being one of the big stories of technology enhanced learning in the near future.