Emerging Technologies in South African Higher Education Institutions: towards a teaching and learning framework
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
3 j'aime•1,846 vues
This paper was presented at the 7th International Conference on e-Learning held at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, 21-22 June, 2012
Recommandé
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
En vedette
En vedette (8)
Similaire à Emerging Technologies in South African Higher Education Institutions: towards a teaching and learning framework
Similaire à Emerging Technologies in South African Higher Education Institutions: towards a teaching and learning framework (20)
Plus de Dick Ng'ambi
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Emerging Technologies in South African Higher Education Institutions: towards a teaching and learning framework
- 1. Emerging Technologies in South African Higher Education Institutions: Towards a teaching and learning framework Dick Ng’ambi1, Daniela Gachago2, Eunice Ivala2, Vivienne Bozalek3 and Kathy Watters3 1University of Cape Town, Cape Town South Africa 2Cape Pennisula University of Technology, Cape Town, South Africa 3University of Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa Presented at ICEL 2012, the Chinese University of Hong Kong 21-22 June 2012
- 2. Research team • 8 SA HEIs (SU, UWC, UCT, CPUT, UP, Rhodes, Wits, Fort Hare) • 1 NGO (Open Courseware Consortium) More information at http://emergingicts.blogspot.com/
- 3. Outline • Introduction • Motivation • Conceptual framework • Methodology • Findings • Conclusion • Questions
- 4. Introduction • Use of emerging technologies such as Facebook, Twitter, blogs and many others among students and educators is increasing (Johnston et al. 2011, Johnson and Adams, 2011) • Use of technologies promise to radically transform teaching and learning practice (Johnson et al., 2012)
- 5. Motivation • Despite an increasing use of emerging technologies (ET) in HEI in general and South Africa in particular, teaching and learning (T&L) practices remain untransformed • We sought to uncover how educators were using technologies, and whether it was possible to develop a T&L framework of using ET to transform practice
- 6. Our research question • To what extent does the use of emerging technologies among educators foster emergent and or transformative learning for students?
- 7. Terminologies • Emerging technologies has a contested meaning (see Siemens and Tittenberger, 2009; Veletsianos, 2010) but usually mentioned as if it has a universally accepted meaning • Attempts to define ET include (New Media Consortium’s Horizon Reports, 2011 & 2012; Siemens & Tittenberger’s book, 2009; Veletsianos’ edited collection on ET, 2010) but yet its definition is still in flux
- 8. Rather than define, we opted for characteristics of ET 1. May or may not be new technologies 2. Evolving organism, that exist in the state of coming into being 3. Go through hype cycles 4. They are not yet fully understood 5. They are not yet fully researched 6. They are potentially disruptive, but that potential is mostly unfulfilled Veletsianos, 2010:13-17
- 9. Conceptual framework • Mayes and de Freitas (2004) propose three perspectives that affect choices of teaching strategies: – Associative • Task-focused – Cognitive and • Develop autonomous learners – Situative • Exploit learning relationships
- 10. Types of learning strategies • Prescriptive learning – Pre-determines what learners should learn (Williams, 2011) • Emergent / transformative learning – Learning is through interactions with people, resources and others (Williams, 2011) – Technology is used to increase levels of interactions (Anderson and Garrison, 2003) and lead to deep and meaningful learning (Anderson, 2003)
- 11. Framework Replicative/Prescriptive Emergent / learning Transformative (pre-determined) learning (learning by engagement) Associative Associative Replication / Associative Emergent / (task-focused) Prescriptive (ARP) Transformative (AET) Cognitive Cognitive Replication / Cognitive Emergent / (autonomous Prescriptive (CRP) Transformative (CET) learner) Situative Situative Replication / Situative Emergent / (relationships) Prescriptive (SRP) Transformative (SET)
- 12. Methodology Qualitative & Survey Quantitative data Aug-Sept 2011: Use of questions survey sent to – pedagogical 22 HEIs uses of ET 30 questions – Descriptive open & closed statistics Interpretive 262 approach for respondents qualitative data Ethical clearance obtained
- 13. Findings Most used Least used technologies technologies Never used OER OER (60%) (39%) Never used eBooks eBooks (67%) (33%) Never used social Social media (69%) medial (31%) Research databases Never used research (75%) databases (24%)
- 14. What most educators use
- 15. What students use, and only a few academics do
- 16. Associative / Replication / Prescription Distributing routine lectures (associative) as podcast/vodcasts Lecturer generated podcasts / vodcasts
- 17. Students work collaboratively (situative) to produce podcasts/vodcasts and distribute via a LMS Situative Emergent / Transformation Student generated podcasts / vodcasts
- 18. Task focused (Associative) and prescriptive yet could be Associative replication / prescriptive transformative if students answered questions Use to answer critical & reflective questions about today’s lecture
- 19. Emergent transformative - example An autonomous learner (cognitive) learning through • …I run an adaptive management course where students were given a fish in a engagement (emergent) tank to take for and to keep a personal blog journal of how often they changed its water, feed the fish, what plants they introduced, what was the quality of water and where they kept the fish… (E5)
- 20. Situative Replication / prescriptive - Learning through relationships (situative) and applying fixed example • …the students would then be knowledge on video story telling paired up with those people in the community who have been trained by our local newspaper in basic print journalism. Students trained them in video storytelling and then had to shoot their own clips… (E4)
- 21. Observations • Most (28%) of educators use of emerging technologies for T&L is self-motivated • It was evident from data that most institutions provided neither incentive nor supportive environment to use ET for teaching (e.g. lack lack of policies)
- 22. Conclusion 1/2 • Technologies emerging amongst HE educators’ in South Africa –Low bandwidth intensive technologies –Prevalence of LMS • Motivating factors guiding educators’ use of ET –Passion and availability of technologies
- 23. Conclusion 2/2 • ET potential to transform teaching and learning practices –Spectrum of uses as per our framework –Though potential to transform T&L practices exist, educators not exploiting the opportunity
- 24. Further research Further research is required to establish whether there is a relationship between awareness of technologies and use for teaching and learning.
- 25. Any questions? See more information on our project on our blog: http://emergingicts.blogspot.com/
- 26. References Anderson, S. 2010. Theories for Learning with Emerging Technologies. In G. Veletsianos (ed.) Emerging Technologies in Distance Education. Theory and Practice. Edmonton: AU Press, pp23-40. Anderson, T., & Elloumi, F. 2004. Theory and practice of online learning. (T. Anderson & F. Elloumi, Eds.)British Journal of Educational Technology (Vol. 36). Athabasca, Canada: Athabasca University. doi:10.1111/j.1467- 8535.2005.00445_1.x Herrington, J., Herrington, A., Mantei, J., Olney, I., & Ferry, B. (2009). Using mobile technologies to develop new ways of teaching and learning. In J. Herrington, A. Herrington, J. Mantei, I. Olney, & B. Ferry (Eds.), New technologies, new pedagogies: Mobile learning in higher education (Vol. 9). Faculty of Education, University of Wollongong. Retrieved from ro.uow.edu.au/newtech Johnson, L. and S. Adams. 2011. Technology Outlook for UK Tertiary Education 2011-2016: An NMC Horizon Report Regional Analysis. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium Maddux, C. D., & Johnson, L. D. 2005. Type II Applications of Technology in Education. Computers in the Schools, 22(1&2), 1-5. Veletsianos, G. 2010. A Definition of Emerging Technologies for Education. . In G. Veletsianos (ed.) Emerging Technologies in Distance Education. Theory and Practice. Edmonton: AU Press, pp1-22 Veletsianos, G. 2011. Designing Opportunities for Transformation with Emerging Technologies. Educational Technology, 51(2), 41-46.
Notes de l'éditeur
- Emerging and new are not necessarilysynonomousWhile for example, Twitter may be an emerging technology, various practices on Twitter platform may already be establishedToday’s ET may become tomorrow’s fad – must remain sceptical about sudden transformation. ETs go through cycles of euphoria, adoption, use, maturity, impact, enthusiasm or even infatuation. Some will remain, others fade into backgroundCan’t yet fully understand the implications and what they offer teaching and learning, what they mean for educators and for institutions. It is not predictable we can’t determine in advance what will happen but only make sense of it after the event (Williams et al. 2011).Initial investigations often evangelical and describe superficial aspects of the technology without understanding the affordances of the technology and how these provide different ways to learn. Newer technologies can also be used in old traditional ways.Lack of research impedes disseminationAccording to Veletsianos (2010:17) emerging technologies are ‘tools, technologies, innovations, and advancements utlized in diverse educational settings to serve varied education-related purposes’. We are still learning and still learners with regard to the affordances of ETs. There is an absence of empirical work or practitioner knowledge base to explore enhancement of practice. Veletsianos (2010:17) personal technologies often sit uneasily with institutions; in some cases they are even banned within the university buildings and networks (Parry, 2005).
- Radical change Is needed in the design and delivery of teaching if HEIs are to be ‘fit for purpose’ for the 21st Century (Bates & Sangra, 2011:4)‘Recognizing the fact that learning is a lifelong process that occurs naturally outside of the classroom, designers are advised to designopportunities for activities that allow learners to engage with course-related topics outside of the classroom. Such activities should occur in open-ended learning environments that allow for learner flexibility, self-direction, and student-centered control of learning (Land & Hannafin,1996), to accommodate learner interests. For instance, introducing learners to communities of practice should be an integral part of higher education curricula’. Veletsianos, 2011)‘transformative learning experiences cannot be “imposed” on learners. Parrish and Wilson (this issue) make a similar argument when they claim that “deeper forms of learning can’t just be made to happen; they are invited, and encouraged, and facilitated. Experience, after all is largely a subjective thing – it’s how real people encounter their worlds, not how they should respond or what the materials are meant to do to them.” This paper is grounded on a similar premise, as technology has been described as an agent of change, as a way to provideopportunities for transformation while sculpting pedagogical practice. Second, since it is not possible to construct transformative experiences but, to provide opportunities for transformation, these learning experiences are bound to encompass unknown outcomes. In other words, the outcomes associated with these opportunities may or may not be transformational. Consequently, the outcomes of opportunities for transformation do not lend themselves well to being evaluated using pre-defined objectives. An added complexity relates to the definition of the term transformation as a personally fulfilling and meaningful outcome. If transformation is a personalized, it is difficult to assess it based on pre-established guidelines. Indeed, individualized assessment may be the only meaningful approach available to evaluate transformative learning.’ (Velestianos,2011)
- Parry, W., “School orders students to remove blogs”. USA Today, 26/10/2005. Downloaded from: http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2005-10-26-school-bans-blogs_x.htmThe over-adoption of tools can lead to what has been termed ‘creepy tree house’ syndrome (Stein 2008) when authority is seen to try and invade a young person's social space. There is strong resistance from students to universities and lecturers making formal use of social networks as this is seen as an invasion of their social space (e.g. Madge 2009). When parents and professors start inhabiting these spaces it creates a role conflict (Selwyn 2009) for students, as they struggle to know which face to present and find their communication stifled. These tools may have significant potential for learning, but students don't want them to become the next LMS: organisationally controlled, bland and singular in focus (i.e. teaching). For the teaching function of scholarship then the question is ‘How can educators utilise the potential of these tools without destroying what makes them valuable to students?’ Weller,2011:
- New references:Herrington, J., Herrington, A., Mantei, J., Olney, I., & Ferry, B. (2009). New technologies, new pedagogies: Mobile learning in higher education. University of Wollongong. Available from http://ro.uow.edu.au/newtech/