Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Thailand 2013 keynote

Keynote to AAROC conference in Bangkok

  • Be the first to comment

Thailand 2013 keynote

  1. 1. How is your institution dealingwith disruptive technologies? Terry Anderson, PhD Professor, Athabasca University
  2. 2. Athabasca University, Alberta, Canada 34,000 students, 700 courses 100% distance education Graduate and Undergraduate programs Master & Doctorate * Athabasca University Distance Education*Athabasca Only USA Accredited University University in Canada
  3. 3. * Athabasca University Alberta average low temperature in January -19 C.Population density Canada - 3.36 people per sq km (35 million) Thailand - 118.43 people per sq km (66 million)
  4. 4. • “Canada is a great country, much too cold for common sense, inhabited by compassionate and intelligent people with bad haircuts”. – Yann Martel, Life of Pi, 2002.
  5. 5. Our Values• We can (and must) continuously improve the quality, effectiveness, appeal, cost and time efficiency of the learning experience.• Student control and freedom is integral to 21st Century life-long education and learning.• Current educational models do not scale for lifelong learning for all residents of our planet.
  6. 6. Our Values• We can (and must) continuously improve the quality, effectiveness, appeal, cost and time efficiency of the learning experience.• Student control and freedom is integral to 21st Century life-long education and learning.• Current educational models do not scale for lifelong learning for all residents of our planet.
  7. 7. Three Educ. Technology Disruptions:1. Content Crash2. MOOCs and OERs3. Connectivist learning – Network effects, Persistence and participation beyond the course Dealing with disruption
  8. 8. Content Crash
  9. 9. Posted on October 30, 2011 by G.E. Ross
  10. 10. Content:A bargain even at 80% off?? Most of us like Free!
  11. 11. Cost of Content
  12. 12. • Cost to produce educational video – 1995 - $1,000-$3,000 per minute – 2012 – approaching zero
  13. 13. User Generated Content
  14. 14. Education was Based on Old Models of Scarcity P. Banbury 2009
  15. 15. Now: Anyone, Teaching Anything, to
  16. 16. Educational Response• Open Educational Resources – Textbooks – Learning objects – Open Scholarship
  17. 17. South African open Text project “innovative education project has enabled the government to print more than 2.4 -million free maths and science textbooks for a nominal cost.” SA Times, Mar. 2012 Siyavula | Technology-powered Learning"we are opening" in Nguni.
  18. 18. Are Open Texts Associated with Higher Marks?“students in courses that used FWK textbookstended to have significantly higher grades andlower failing and withdrawal rates than those incourses that did not use FWK texts.”Feldstein, et al.(2012). Open textbooks and increasedstudent access and outcomes. EURODL, 3. Retrieved from
  19. 19. We need more than objects, We need an OER culture
  20. 20. Canada’s first Open Access press!!
  21. 21. But What about MOOCs??
  22. 22. • MOOC History by Alys From history/ a MOOC History by Alyssa Martin
  23. 23. MOOC Completion Rates??• Coursera Course Computational Investing, January 6, 2013 by Tucker Balch ,• 53,265 enrolled• Completed the course: – 4.8% of those who enrolled – 18% of those who took a quiz. – 39% of those who submitted the first project.
  24. 24. Familiar Access rationale• "If we continue to keep the barrier to entry low, we’ll enable students to taste many many courses, and that may be a good thing for education.” Tucker Balch
  25. 25. MOOCs• Free Access• Who benefits from their attention?• Is partial knowledge/learning bad?• The bar has been raised, we have to add value beyond content or “subject matter content”
  26. 26. MOOCsd Through the Lens of Online Learning Pedagogy 1. Behaviourist/Cognitive – Self Paced, Individual study 2. Social Constructivist – Groups, LMS 3. Connectivist – Networks and CollectivesAnderson, T., &Dron, J. (2011). Three generations ofdistance education pedagogy.IRRODL, 12(3), 80-97
  27. 27. xMOOCPedagogy Gen. 1 - Cognitive Behaviourist• Medium to high quality content – Screen captures, video lectures, page turners• Machine scoring of quizzes and assignments• Optional testing (for fees) and emergent accreditation – Badges, challenge exams for credit
  28. 28. MOOC Challenges to Traditional Schools• Are our course really better than those from MIT?• How interactive are our instructors?• Do we accredit seat time, courses or learning?• Will our students choose our fees over free?• Is American learning (knowledge) the same as Thai learning?• Can we develop a business model from free MOOCs?
  29. 29. 2nd Generation - Constructivist• Online Learning Current model – continued strong growth in US and globally 32% of higher education students now take at least one course online.
  30. 30. Constructivist Learning in Groups• Long history of research and study• Established sets of tools – Classrooms – Learning Management Systems – Synchronous (video & net conferencing) – Email• Need to develop face to face, mediated and blended group learning skills Garrison, R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (2000). Critical thinking in text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87-105.
  31. 31. Problems with Groups• Restrictions in time, space, pace, & relationship - NOT OPEN• Often overly confined by leader expectation and institutional curriculum control• Usually Isolated from the authentic world of practice• “low tolerance of internal difference, sexist and ethicized regulation, high demand for obedience to its norms and exclusionary practices.” Cousin & Deepwell 2005• “Pathological politeness” and fear of debate Relationships• Group think (Baron, 2005)• Poor preparation for Lifelong Learning beyond the course Paulsen (1993) Law of Cooperative Freedom NOT Scaleable
  32. 32. 3rd Generation: ConnectivistLearning
  33. 33. Connectivism• Building knowledge networks with resources and people.
  34. 34. Connectivist Learning Network Persistence Effects Accessibility
  35. 35. NOT Learning in a Bubble
  36. 36. PersistenceRosetta Stone
  37. 37. Networks add diversity to learning“People who live in the intersection of social worlds are at higher risk of having good ideas” Burt, 2005, p. 90
  38. 38. If you want to learn how to fix a pipe, solve a partial differential equation, write software, you are seconds away from know-how via YouTube, Wikipedia and search engines. Access to technology and access to knowledge, however, isn’t enough. Learning is a social, active, and ongoing process. What does a motivated group of self-learnersneed to know to agree on a subject or skill, findand qualify the best learning resources about thattopic, select and use appropriate communicationmedia to co-learn it?
  39. 39. Connectivist Learning
  40. 40. Walled Gardens (with windows)• Connectivist learning thrives in safe learning spaces with windows allowing randomness, external participation and public presentation
  41. 41. Soft-to-hardInto action… Generations 1-3 Sets, nets and groups
  42. 42. The Landing Platform1,686 plugins available, our installation using about 90Fairly strong development team, plotted roadmap44
  43. 43. What is the Landing?• Walled Garden with Windows• A Private space for Athabasca University – students, staff, alumni• A public Place• A user controlled creative space• Boutique social network• Networking, blogging, photos, microblogging, polls, calendars, groups and more• A campus for Athabasca
  44. 44. group net set Where to look first
  45. 45. Multiple rationales for This Connectivist Space collectiveSustaining ties CooperationMaking ties SharingAd hoc networks SerendipityKnowledge diffusion net set Interest -orientationSocial capital Sense-makingSocial presence Collective intelligence Intentional discovery group Courses Committees Research groups Study groups 48 Centres and departments 48
  46. 46. • Bottom up control and Innovation LMSAndersen, Henriksen,Secher&Medaglia, (2007) "Costs of e-participation: the management challenges", ELGGTransforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 1(1)29 - 43
  47. 47. Is Your Institution ready toExploit these opportunities??
  48. 48.
  49. 49. • How can your university exploit and benefit from these four disruptions?
  50. 50. Theories of Disruptive Technologies• Disruptive technologies: – Lead to profound change in the business model, customer base or functionality of an existing organization• Sustaining technology – Increases efficiency or effectiveness of current product or process
  51. 51. Disruptive technologies• “are typically: – cheaper, – simpler, – smaller, – more convenient to use" Clay Christensen (1997) – access to new users (social justice?) • Classic examples are the micro computer, digital cameras or the innovations of the industrial model of distance education.
  52. 52. Impact of Disruptive Technologies• Student’s access to content and learning activities no longer directly controlled by institution• Very significant reductions in costs of some models of education• Teacher role may be threatened• Opportunities for “de-skilling” and further industrialization of academic role
  53. 53. Excerpts from The Innovator’s Solution – page 183-4 -- PROCESSES:”“… Innovating managers often try to start new-growth businesses using processes that were designed to make the mainstreambusiness run effectively..the new game begins before the old game ends.Disruptive innovations typically take root at the low end of markets or in new planes of competition at a time when the corebusiness still is performing at its peak -- when it would be crazy to revolutionize everything. It seems simpler to have onesize-fits-all processes.
  54. 54. Christensen, C., &Raynor, M. (2003). Innovators Solution. Cambridge: HarvardBusiness School.
  55. 55. A context for successful disruption• An enduring Culture of Innovation• Learning communities of practice within the institution• New partnerships, exploiting net tools• Extensive use of OERs and cloud computing• Constant work on testing and accreditation• Are you building learning networks???
  56. 56. E-learning Readiness of Thailand’s Universities (2011)• A list of many “top down” recommendations!• “Faculty support is essential, especially in nurturinggrassroots ideas from the faculty rather than imposing a top-down pedagogical approach. Institutions must offer instructional technology support to help faculty so that theycan focus on the instruction rather than the technology.” p. 130 E-learning Readiness of Thailand’s Universities. Comparing to the USA’s Cases ApitepSaekow and Dolly Samson International Journal of e-Education, e-Business, e-Management and e-Learning, 1(2), June, 2011
  57. 57. Learning as Dance (Anderson, 2008) • Technology sets the beat and the timing. • Pedagogy defines the moves.
  58. 58. • More flexible To control your networked destiny you must be more flexible than your environment. The Law of Requisite Variety Ross Ashby (1956)
  59. 59. or Your comments and questions most welcomed! Terry Anderson Blog: