To add to our technology for technology's sake discussion that has been ongoing for several posts, I am going to take issue with the current state of m-Learning or training by means of mobile devices such as phones, PDAs etc...

I received a post today from one of the many listServs to which I am a member asking how the members of the listServ were delivering learning to cell phones. Multiple responses documented provided recorded lectures and making them available to phones as an “exciting” use of this "innovative technology." Here is my response to the listserv on delivering learning to cell phones:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I must respectfully take issue with the use of cell phone as an extension of the lecture space. I think the worst possible scenario for cell phone usage in education is to move lectures from the physical space to the cell phone space but am consistently seeing it as a first jump into the medium.

The phone provides a unique opportunity for delivering content anytime/anyplace that doesn’t need to adhere to the traditional metaphor of the "sage on the stage." In a project based approach to learning for example, small chunks of video or audio content that play in the context of the larger project can be delivered. These pieces could be short, engaging, acted out scenarios that stimulate discussion within the project context. They could be pre-made or custom produced pieces of support information on a current and relevant topic within the context of the project. They could be a collage of student reflections on what they have learned in a particular aspect of a project. What they should not be is a 40 minute shot of a talking head. They sleep through it in class. On a phone, they will simply shut it off.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even more frustrating is looking at the Wikipedia treatment of m-Learning. Only 5% of the entry on m-learning has anything to do with content or structure of the content. The entire entry is technology focused as opposed to learning focused. The word "learning" is 8/10ths of the characters in the term "m-learning." Learning should also represent as much if not more of our focus when delivering via mobile technologies.

Posted by Christopher Keesey at 4:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

I love podcasts. I love iTunes U. I love the potential of this technology for enhancing learning. But lord save me from the way most faculty use the technology. There is nothing more boring that listening to a 90 minute audio of a class session. It is even worse than sitting there listening to a faculty member talk to the white board as she/he writes on it. At least in person, you can be entertained by the non-verbals of others sitting through the same experience (torture?).

Podcasts offer exciting possibilities. At the least, they offer a different way for learners to access content. At the best, they offer a way for learners to access and interact with engaging learning experiences in a more mobile environment. I would hope we focus more of our develop efforts on the latter rather than the former. To restate an opinion from a previous post, we should design the learning first, and then utilize the technology to enhance the learning.

John Stinson

Posted by John Stinson at 4:56 PM | Permalink

I always leave conferences with one session in my head that stands out above the rest. I just returned from the Sloan C International Conference on Asynchronous Learning Networks and would cite a session on “Using Intelligent Agents” as that one session. In case you are unfamiliar with the term here is a link to the Wikipedia definition for intelligent agents.

Steve Knode of the University of Maryland University College was the presenter. His overlying premise was that vast quantities of information are easily findable now but the ability to effectively filter and fuse the information for specific users and circumstances makes for shallow knowledge and analysis. As intelligent agents, now in first generation, continue to develop, information will continue to increase in relevance and depth. The agents themselves will better learn and adapt to users and circumstances.

How will this further learning? I was running various scenarios in my head throughout the presentation as to how really effective bot development could change the learning landscape. The one futuristic scenario I keep seeing is that scores of highly intelligent and adaptive agents could be developed, each for specific content areas. Likewise, these bots could be mixed and match for hybrid topics or creating new topics. As long as there was a standard for interoperability, it would be easy for learning architects to add bots to specific challenges in learning modules, simulations or games as learning support. When a learner needed just-in-time information, it would be instantly available locally in the sim or module and completely “fused and filtered” per the users questions and circumstances. Best yet, the bot would itself be learning from the learners themselves and readjusting how it delivered its results.

Posted by Christopher Keesey at 7:04 PM | Permalink

Technology is neat. Technology is fun. Technology is engaging. Technology is seductive. Technology is…! You get the idea. But, for those of us in the learning business, technology is not the end. Learning is the end… and the beginning.

When we at OUWB start to architect a new learning experience design, we exercise a strict discipline. We start by consciously defining the targeted learning outcomes. Then we apply a well-defined learning philosophy (which we are willing to share with any of you who might have an interest) as we design the experience.

We then turn to technology. How can we use technology to increase access – overcome the boundaries of time and space? How can we use technology to scale the experience - make it available to more people more efficiently at a lower cost? How can we use technology to more effectively engage the learner in the experience? Most importantly, how can we use technology to enrich the learning experience, to enable experiences not possible in a traditional face-to-face learning environment?

I don’t mean to minimize the importance of continuously exploring new technologies. We constantly troll for them, fantasize about them, imagineer how they might be used to make learning more effective, experiment with them in potential new architectures. But we do not jump into a new technology just because it’s new. And we don’t make the mistake replicating the same tired old learning philosophies in new technological environments (no matter how many faculty want us to podcast their lectures!).

We are not in the technology business, we are in the learning business. And while technology is central to all that we do, technology is not the most important feature. For us, to paraphrase James Carvel, “It’s the LEARNING stupid!”

While we are unbounded, we start by being grounded,
John Stinson

Posted by John Stinson at 2:32 PM | Permalink