Looking at Blackboard V 9.0

Several days ago, I attended an IT Services campus presentation on Blackboard 9, as the University will be moving from V 7.3 to V 9.0 later in the summer.

If given a choice, I much prefer to watch an experienced user demonstrate software before I dive in myself. In fact, I’m pretty sure the most useful PC stuff I’ve learned (e.g. alt+Tab in Windows) has been while looking over someone’s shoulder.

This presentation was no different, as Richard – who’s forgotten more about learning technologies than I’ll ever know – took several hundred of us (developers, academics, administrators) on a whistle-stop tour of the main features of 9.0.

V 9.0 does look significantly better. I’ve never seen V 8.0, but our V 7.3 has always seemed a little constricted to me, especially from a designer’s viewpoint, and – to put it bluntly – pretty ugly. (Think of the illegitimate love child of a website circa 1998 and an uninspiring accounting package. It even has the option of chunky menu buttons!)

V 9.0 is far more customisable, has plenty of drag and drop functionality, and, overall, is far better looking; it definitely has a ‘Web 2.0’ thing going on.

More importantly, the addition of blogs and journals allows students to be more than passive recipients of content pushed at them by the tutor. They can now generate content of their own, plus BB9 provides a central area where all this can be accessed by tutors and students alike. ‘Inclusiveness’ seems to have been at the forefront of designing this upgrade. Assessment capabilities and control in BB9 also seem much stronger.

Because he was talking to an experienced Blackboard audience, Richard was able to focus on areas of change that will affect how all of us do certain things on campus, about which he has detailed knowledge. The talk was snappy, clear and directly relevant: it was a great shoulder over which to look.

I’m looking forward to getting my BB9 test account next week.

Simon Kear

Learning Technologist

Credit Crunch increasing Spam consumption?

In recent weeks I have noticed huge quantities of ‘promotional’ spam flooding my inbox from small to medium-sized business enterprises advertising their services and events.

This got me thinking – as marketing budgets are slashed, and in some unfortunate circumstances jobs are lost – are businesses looking to per force reorient and diversify their marketing avenues to include the Internet, email and social networking sites or is it just a coincidence that has nothing to with the credit crunch?

I think there has been an increase in the number incidents where spammers are taking advantage of not only the tried and tested routes but are now systematically targeting social networks – which to be fair are sitting ducks for a decent hacker. This results in a double whammy of frustrations for me:

  1. That I have to delete the emails from my email box… continually
  2. And, I also have to delete the messages once I log into the social network!

Once again spam is making up more than 90% of all email traffic (April 2009) which is a significant increase compared to February 2009, when the spam email level was at 73.3%.

In previous blog posts I have referred to the environmental cost of spam but what could these new and subversive approaches to viral marketing mean for the reputations of these companies, or those that use electronic marketing means legitimately?

Unfortunately I do not have the answer but I can suggest an anecdotal panacea for dealing with spam emails… A few years ago I worked with a Professor, slightly long in the tooth, who refused to check his email; in fact he did not even check his department’s ’pigeon-hole’ or ‘In-tray’! His approach was “if the information was urgent or important someone will come,  knock on my door and tell me to my face” – only then would he react! At that time I did not condone the approach, in fact I still don’t … but with an inbox overflowing with useless spam he might have had a point there!
 
Matthew Wheeler
Keeper of the Media Zoo

How Many Students In University After The Recession?

Almost half of British industries have no intentions of employing any of the hundreds of thousands of new graduates who will flood the job market in the next three months, according to a study by the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development and KPMG, reported in today’s Independent.

Gerwyn Davis, public policy adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development has said:  ”It is going to be a long, hot summer for many of this year’s graduates and school leavers, as they sweat over their chances of finding work. Employers have for a long time had doubts about the employability skills of those leaving education, and this year’s crop face employers in a more choosey mood than ever before. Against this backdrop, graduates and school leavers need to sharpen their case for being picked ahead of their classmates – and fast.”

The question is, what will be the lesson learnt for those who are still in high school, but who observe what is happening to their older peers after graduation. In all likelihood they will take it into account when deciding whether to go into higher education when their time comes.

What will be the outcome for universities in the future, when government targets of getting 50 per cent of young people into higher education are weighed against consideration that the average graduate today, who is likely to be leaving university owing £16,000 for tuition fees, is considered for employment by only 50% of employers? And given that bodies like the very Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, mentioned above, come forward with advice like “Employers have for a long time had doubts about the employability skills of those leaving education… students need to get work experience, demonstrate a broad range of non-study related skills…” A university degree is no longer the surest way to a good job. In fact, the winner of the “Best Job in the World”, (care-taker of a tropical island with a salary of 70 000 UKP) advertised by the Australian Board of Tourism landed the job in tough global competition, after an innovative marketing campaign that highlighted the power of social media, rather than qualifications and diplomas (you can see some of the applications on Youtube here: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=islandreefjob&view=videos&start=40).

The first universities were institutional innovation centres which emerged in the 12th to 14th century Europe as a result of the need to consolidate and expand intellectual resources in response to increasing demands for knowledge and skills in the economy and society. Despite debates whether universities have remained these “medieval organisations,” unchanged over the 700-800 years of their existence or have been transformed by major changes, consensus seems to prevail about intensifying pressures for reform in higher education institutions today. It is important that planning and management are not dominated by short-term thinking about immediate problems and maintaining established practices. Neglect of the long term is increasingly problematic in meeting the challenges of complexity and change in higher education. In order to be able to look beyond the constraints of the present, especially when the investment of significant resources is concerned, higher education institutions need to sharpen their capacity to systematically explore and connect together various driving forces, trends, and conditioning factors so as to envisage alternative futures for themselves and for higher education.

Sandra Romenska

BDRA, 26 May 2009

Shared pedagogic research interests and the sustainability of learning and teaching

Oxford Brookes University has a CETL called the Hospitality, Leisure, Sport and Tourism Network (HLSTN). In 2007 the CETL published a special edition of its LINK newsletter. It was on small projects completed up to 2006 that had received support from the HLSTN’s pedagogic research fund. I worked with the authors to produce 27 edited summaries for the newsletter.

The projects reflect interests of HLST staff across the country: e-learning, employability, sustainability, assessment and feedback, work-based learning, PDP and key skills, interdisciplinarity, student motivation, internationalisation and cultural values, reflective practice, research methods, student retention, problem-based learning, the first-year student experience, foundation degree delivery, learning styles, widening participation, student performance, academic writing and quality assurance.

Although these projects were all embedded in the HLST sector, I could not help noticing when I re-read them recently that the University of Leicester – and Beyond Distance  in particular – share many of these interests. Some of them are national themes.

Sustainability is a concept with many angles, including green ones, but I’ve just read the report published by HEFCE nearly six months ago about the sustainability of learning and teaching in English higher education.* Its message is that this learning and teaching is unsustainable at current funding levels and with current student numbers. Staffing, buildings and equipment are inadequate now and will become more so. Our international standing and competitiveness are at stake. This finding surprised me, because under Labour education has experienced relative plenty.

In a recession, with a huge national debt, how can financial sustainability be attained? In 2007/08, says the report, the higher education sector delivered efficiencies of at least £202m; figures for 2008/09 are not yet available. Further efficiencies will no doubt be demanded. The sector may lose, not gain, government funding.

I don’t know the answer, except that economies of scale must be found, possibly through increased use of e-learning. But to date e-learning has been seen as an add-on cost. A couple of years ago a paper** made the case for distance learning (not e-learning as such) systems offering substantial savings in carbon emissions over campus systems. That’s another kind of sustainability.

David

*JM Consulting (2008) The sustainability of learning and teaching in English higher education. A report prepared for the (HEFCE) Financial Sustainability Strategy Group.

**Roy, Robin, Potter, Stephen and Yarrow, Karen (2007) ‘Designing low carbon higher education systems: environmental impacts of campus and distance learning systems’. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 9, 2, 116-129.

Learning through off-the-wall conversations

The Open University hosted a ’CAMEL’ workshop last week for a cluster of participants in JISC-funded projects. (CAMEL is a great community of practice model for e-learning management. See Theo’s blog for a nice succinct description or the CAMEL website for more info on this.) Ming and I attended from Beyond Distance in our capacity as researchers on the Beyond Distance DUCKLING project.

It was a hugely inspiring day for me – there was a kind of energy and warmth in this group of people who had been thrown together for the day that is usually only found amongst friends who have known each other for years. Full marks to Peter Chatterton and Steve Garner for setting up this wonderfully nourishing event. (And the Chinese dinner afterwards played no small part in the day’s success!)

Andy Bardill and Bob Fields from Middlesex University set the scene for the day by telling us about a fascinating project they are doing with their Interaction Design students. Imagine a design studio in a well-equipped university, with a lecturer and six to eight students sitting around a large table, and one student showing his or her photos or drawings to the group for critique. The conventional way to do this is to have each student projecting his or her work onto the wall using a data projector, while the rest of the students comment and take notes.

Andy and Bob are not conventional teachers, though, and they felt frustrated at the limited interaction, as most of the students sat with their heads bowed taking notes on their laptops. Their solution was to ban laptops from the classroom (an initially unpopular decision), and to project each student’s work from a ceiling-mounted projector onto the table (an accidental, but very exciting discovery, as it happened) instead of the wall… They covered the table with flipchart paper to provide a sort of screen for the projected image.

The side-effect (literally!) was that students started writing their notes on the table around the edges of the projected image, instead of typing on their disallowed laptops. This immediately had the effect of making previously private notes public, and catapulted the group into deeper conversation. At the end of each session, students started spontaneously taking photos of the conversation on the table as a record of their ‘notes’. You can see some of these intriguing photos on Andy Bardill’s Flickr page.
(http://www.flickr.com/photos/mdxinteractiondesign/)

The next development was to video the unfolding conversation on the table with a ceiling-mounted video camera, in order to have a record for later analysis of the learning process. No doubt we’ll hear more from Andy and Bob about what they’ve learnt from this as the project progresses.

In the meantime, it is worth noting that the simple act of moving the focus from the wall (‘out there/ away from us’) to the table (‘in here/ amongst us’) resulted in a change of perspective for the whole group. It enabled people to physically move around the image. Their interactions became focused on the centre of the table, as they gestured towards the central image while discussing it. A bit like the hub of a wheel that keeps the spokes together, this central point kept the participants connected in a way that a projected image on a wall cannot easily do. The popular literature from neurolinguistic programming also tells us that when we look down, we are drawing more on the emotional part of our brain. Perhaps there’s something in that too.

Thanks, Bob and Andy, for reminding us that technology on the sidelines (and on the ceiling) can sometimes be much more effective than technology on our laps or in-our-faces. We’ll be watching this space for more off-the-wall inspiration. (Just let us know which space, so we don’t get left behind staring at the table while you’ve moved onto the floor… or underground…)

Gabi Witthaus

What can Second Life offer to Art and Design subjects?

Recently I went to a couple of meetings where I got to know more about interesting approaches to use Second Life.  The first was a seminar organized by School of Education at the University of Leicester.  Mark Childs was the speaker who works as a Teaching Development Fellow at Coventry University. The title of Mark’s presentation was “Virtual food for real thought”. Then I attended the JISC CAMEL meeting recently. The CAMEL meeting was a cluster meeting that aimed to bring together the projects funded by JISC under the Curriculum Delivery strand and to share experiences. At the meeting, the ATELIER project by the Open University drew my attention. They used SL for creating collaborative working opportunities.

Mark’s presentation was really interesting. At the beginning of his talk, he summarised why use SL for teaching and learning. SL offers lots of potentials for subjects such as Art, Fashion and Design that involve design, development or creation. Mark introduced a case study designed by Nottingham Trent University, and conducted as part of the Theatre Design and New Media course at University of Warwick. In this study, students were taken through a series of Theatron and other theatres and asked to reflect on their experiences.

 The approach that the ATELIER project at OU used for their Design students belongs to this category. They designed activities in which students were instructed to design a chair individually, and then design another chair collaboratively. We also trialled a similar approach as part of our JISC funded MOOSE project. In MOOSE, we worked with a group of Digital Photography students at the London South Bank University. In this study, we adopted Virtual Story Cubes approach. Students were shown how to use snapshot and a variety of other tools to take stunning pictures in SL. They were shown how to create a cube, change the size of it, move it around and put the pictures that they had taken on each side of the cube. They then were asked to put their cubes together, negotiated the shape, order, which sides to show, and which sides to hide and tell a story of all their cubes.

Interestingly, I had a talk with my colleague Sandra Romenska (at BDRA) over lunch yesterday. Sandra is our research associate on CALF project. Sandra said that the students studying Dance at Falmouth were very interested in how they can make dancing movement in SL and how to use SL to advertise themselves as artists. This is a very interesting view and a very similar view to another group of student artists that I worked with. The Digital Photography students at the London South Bank perceived that one of the potentials SL can do for them is the possibility of running a virtual exhibition or gallery, the potential of attracting viewers from all parts of the world, and the possibility of gaining publicity, networking, advertising themselves as artists at a low cost.

In Mark’s presentation, he discussed other aspects that SL can really added value to teaching and learning, for example, to explore  and inhabit  spaces and resources, to bring people together for discussion, performance and language learning, to role play for being others and identity tourism for exploring self. Each of the area is very interesting by itself. I will reflect on the other areas in my following blogs.

Ming    22 May 2009

UNIQUe: University of Leicester wins accreditation for e-learning quality

‘Good things come to those who wait’ was the strap-line from the series of TV ads for Guinness. Among others, it featured the Swimmer, the Surfer, the Tipping Point and the march of noitulovE (that’s ‘evolution’ spelt backwards).  Though Irish stout is not my preferred beverage, my thoughts did turn to this old adage several times while waiting for the ‘official’ communiqué confirming the University of Leicester’s UNIQUe accreditation to arrive.

It started in October 2007 and finally, in May 2009, the University has been awarded the UNIQUe ‘e-Learning quality label’ for 2009-2012 by the European Foundation for Quality in E-Learning (EFQUEL). It is the first, and to date only, university in the UK to receive the award; other European institutions awarded the accreditation include the Università di Macerata (Italy), the Universidad de Granada (Spain) and the TKK Dipoli Institute at the Helsinki University of Technology (Finland).

According to the letter received from EFQUEL, the assessment board of the awarding body was ‘unanimous in its decision to grant a full three year certification to the University of Leicester’. The letter adds that, having obtained the UNIQUe certification, Leicester now belongs to a select group of ‘leading institutions in the field of Higher Education e-learning in Europe’.

UNIQUe stands for ‘European University Quality in eLearning’. It is the first European institutional accreditation for universities’ activities in the field of e-learning and ICT usage for teaching and learning, and aimed at enhancing the reform process of European HEIs by creating, testing and launching an eLearning quality label for ICT use in higher education. The project was executed by EFMD , the MENON Network, EFQUEL and EuroPACE with sponsorship from the EU’s Socrates (presently, ‘Lifelong Learning’) Programme. 

UNIQUe focuses on enabling higher education institutions to measure how successful they are in technology-enhanced learning, and allows for continuous improvement though peer collaboration and ‘benchlearning’. It also aims to facilitate the improvement of higher education e-learning-related processes and management.

The University of Leicester’s participation in the UNIQUe accreditation project was led by Christine Fyfe (PVC, Students) and Prof Gilly Salmon (Beyond Distance Research Alliance). Grateful thanks are due to the several colleagues from across the University for their editorial inputs and their time.

Initial feedback from the Peer Review Team’s visit in July 2008 – as part of which they met the University’s senior management, academics, IT support services staff and students – was highly positive. It highlighted that: ‘the University of Leicester has great strengths in all areas: there is a well-developed process for strategy formulation regarding e-learning, which is regularly reviewed. The strategy includes attracting staff to the use of technology-enhanced learning through the development of research projects undertaken by the BDRA in particular, with the strong support of the governing bodies, senior management and other departments.’

All colleagues involved in e-learning and learning technology research, development and innovation throughout the university can be delighted that their efforts have been recognised, not only across our university and by their students, but also in the demanding and competitive, external HE world. The implications of receiving the award are the underpinning of the new Learning Innovation strategy for the University (now in its final stages), a higher profile throughout the HE sector in the EU, the enhancement of the University’s ability to apply for EU funding and the attraction of EU students.

All ‘good things’ indeed, but, to paraphrase a football manager facing relegation, achieving these ‘is in our own hands’. And instead of waiting, we need to start taking steps to ensure these ‘good things’ really happen.

Jai Mukherjee / 20 May 2009

Promises, promises… (Or: The best time management trick I ever learnt)

Today a colleague and I were lamenting the fact that neither of us had actually ‘finished’ anything in weeks. Or was it months? I am one of those people who is prone to distraction, whereas Madelaine has a more legitimate excuse – her job requires her to respond immediately whenever something comes up (which is more or less every five minutes). We both need a mechanism to keep track of where we were before we were so rudely (or politely, as happens on occasion) interrupted. In Madelaine’s case, I think her brain does it for her, but I need a little help…

If the distraction occurs when I happen to be trying to prune the thicket of e-mails that seems to grow like topsy in my inbox without the slightest provocation or encouragement, I can relax. I know my ‘system’ will help  me to keep track of the important things in that endless information flow. The system is based on a little trick that I learnt from productivity guru David Allen (whose book, Getting Things Done, I mentioned in an earlier posting).

It involved creating two folders in my inbox: one called ‘-Action’ and one called ‘-Waiting for’. (The dash at the beginning is to make sure they stay at the top of your list of folders. It works in Outlook. In other systems you might need to use the @ symbol instead.)

Then, every time I send an e-mail to someone that I need a response from, I simultaneously save it to my ‘-Waiting for’ folder. (You can do this in Outlook by clicking on ‘Options’, ‘Save sent item’ before hitting ‘Send’.)

And if I write an e-mail promising to do something, I immediately save that to my ‘-Actions’ folder. This also works for e-mails I receive that I can’t act on immediately but I know I need to ‘do’ something with.

Using this system, ideally your inbox is always empty – except when new items come in that you haven’t yet looked at. As soon as you’ve looked at an item and either replied or decided not to reply yet, the e-mail gets moved into the relevant folder.

This can be very cathartic, especially in those rare moments when you look at your inbox and it is… actually… empty! A bit like looking at your desk after you’re cleared everything off the surface and hidden it away in the drawers…

And therein, of course, lies the rub. The system only works if you check your ‘-Waiting for’ and ‘-Action’ folders regularly. But if you do somehow manage to find the time to do that, you will find yourself ruthlessly following up on all the promises that other people have made – and wishing you hadn’t made so many yourself.

Gabi Witthaus

Implementing change: Knowing what to do and making it happen

I recently attended the JISC Conference entitled ‘Transformation: Managing and Measuring Change.’  The Conference focused on best practice in change management, and discussed strategies for implementing change.

One presentation that inspired me to think about my work within the DUCKLING project was a talk by Clive Anderson. The talk considered the ‘knowing-doing gap’. This idea was inspired by the thoughts of Pfeffer and Sutton (1999), based around the principle that moving from ignorance to knowledge is not a difficult transition: the real challenge is taking the step from knowledge to implementation, i.e. making sure that change actually happens.

Before we take action to implement any kind of change, we need to think carefully about what we are going to do and why we are going to do it.

As academics, we often (quite rightly) want to take this knowledge-gathering process as far as we can. We often strive to be experts in our field. We want to know as much as possible about what we do, drawing on existing knowledge and conducting research to gather new information. When implementing changes to our existing courses, we will naturally want to apply this same approach: we want to know details about what we are changing, why we are changing it, how these changes will take place and what they will involve.

The question is: at what point do we make that transition and move from ‘knowing’ to ‘doing’?

DUCKLING is a 2 year project in which we aim to incorporate new technologies into the delivery of our course materials. Our course team have the advantage of working with experts in the BDRA, so our interventions are informed by the extensive knowledge of the team members. This allows us to have confidence in the theoretical and empirical basis of the strategies we will implement.

Despite this, it is still easy to spend a lot of time standing on the edge of the ‘knowing-doing’ divide. However much we know, we could always know a bit more. However much we prepare ourselves for implementing changes, there will always be more preparation we could undertake; other issues we could consider.

It is also worth noting that some changes seem easier to implement than others: the course team were fairly quick to produce podcasts and to make them available to our students. We seem equally keen to distribute ebook readers for students to use within their studies. Yet with Second Life technologies, we seem less certain, perhaps because this is such  new territory, and will involve taking a step slightly further outside our ‘comfort zone’?

We have many ideas about how Second Life can be used (through various SL-tivities). A couple more weeks of planning ought to be enough time for us to begin implementing some of these ideas. Yet there is some apprehensiveness in terms of actually ‘doing’ this: in breaking that knowing-doing barrier. There are some genuine concerns over what will happen when we find our (avatar) selves in this virtual reality, with student avatars expectantly waiting for us to deliver. Perhaps these fears are preventing us from taking the steps necessary to take forward our ideas and put them into action?

I am writing this blog as much to motivate myself as to motivate others. The message I am trying to convey is that, as change agents committed to enhancing the learning experiences of our students, we need to take the leap; give it a try; make it happen. If things go wrong, we can learn from this. But if we’re not prepared to put our knowledge into action, then how can we expect anything to change for the better?

Kelly Barklamb, 19th May 2009

Knowledge sharing

Some time ago David Hawkridge wisely suggested a centrally held, easily accessible resource for BDRA, containing a well-indexed set of academic references that colleagues can use in their writing. Today we have a growing RefWorks database covering many of the areas that are central to our research.

As has been reported in this blog before, the Friday morning Writing Group provides a forum for BDRA colleagues to run their drafts past their peers in a safe, informal and constructively critical environment. Last week, however, we altered the usual Writing Group session and conducted a structured three-hour knowledge-sharing seminar instead. Its aim was to to share the key lessons that individuals or groups of colleagues have learnt from recent conferences and other activities, enabling the rest of the team to benefit from them. It was a very good opportunity to revisit and debate the main ideas and concepts.

Topics included:

  • BDRA’s collaboration with the RAF
  • ‘Shock of the Old’ conference, Oxford
  • Occupational Psychology Course Conference at Leicester (DUCKLING project)
  • JISC Curriculum Delivery meeting, Birmingham (DUCKLING project)
  • Considerations from 2 timely reports: ‘The sustainability of learning and teaching in English higher education’ and ‘Thematic enquiries into concerns about academic quality and standards in higher education in England’.
  • Work-based curriculum delivery and assessment
  • CABLE (from the HE Academy CABLE-Carpe Diem event held on 5 May)
  • A range of salient issues from many other recent national and international conferences

The session, which was attended by all BDRA staff, was very informative, interactive and enjoyable. We are now considering ways to maximise the impact of our lessons learned on the team, beyond the occasional F2F knowledge-sharing sessions that we will continue to organise. Not surprisingly, we are discussing ways in which technology can help.

Alejandro Armellini
17 May 2009

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 503 other followers

%d bloggers like this: