1. May 24th 2012Changing technology, pedagogies and organizations in ODLMichael Grahame MooreDistinguished Professor of EducationThe Pennsylvania State UniversityU.S.A.Editor:The American Journal of Distance Educationmgmoore@psu.edu

2. A society which is mobile, which is full of channels for thedistribution of a change occurring anywhere,must see to it that its members are educated topersonal initiative and adaptability.Otherwise, they will be overwhelmed by the changes in whichthey are caught and whose significance or connectionsthey do not perceive.John Dewey (1916)*Acknowledgement to: M. Sharples, J.Taylor, G. Vavoula. (2005) A Theory of Learning for theMobile Age. Sage Publications 3. The Changing learning environment : expansion of DL(USA) % Higher Ed Online% K-12 Online9080807070606050504040303020201010 0 02006201020052010 From 23% to 70% in 4 years From 56% to 80% in 5 yearsBusiness continuing education% Community Colleges 2010 expenditure 201010% 15% BlendedNeither$46 Billion External 75% Online $88 Billion Internal 4. Technologies in higher education:93 % - internet 50 % - podcasts 43 % - videoconferencing36 % - blogs28 % - listservs 2 % - satellite communications 3 % - videogames or simulationsSOURCE:http://www.primaryresearch.com/view_product.php?report_id=113 5. Changing technology: social networkingOpen accessibilitye.g. WikepideaInformation management e.g. del.icio.us 6. Changing technology:m-Learning and cloud-based services2010: 7.5 billion devices2015: 15.0 billion devices(Cisco) 7. Changing PedagogyFrom information age to interactive ageknowledge source: from school to learners learning environments: from predictive to adaptiveTeaching approach: From fail-safe to safe-fail from positive constraints to negative constraints from occasional evaluation to continuous monitoring from robustness to resilience from compliance and predictability to retrospective coherence(Snowden 2010) 8. Changing teachers:From performer to conductor!managing and sifting information, giving structurefacilitating students searching individually and collaboratively linking and weaving ideas and information created bystudents, summarizing, pulling together the threads, relating theparticular experience to general theoryfrom class as unit of instruction to individual!develop students autonomy -- ability to decide what to learn, tochoose among methods, and from array of resources available online 9. CautionWhat adult students tell us:Social interaction is ok, butcourse content is more importantInteraction with other learners is ok, butinteraction with an instructor is more importantInteraction is ok, but having structure is also importantConclusion:both types of learning, predictive and adaptive are of value.Good teaching is good selection and good blending 10. So whats the problem?Educational institutions are still organized for traditionalpedagogiesThe challenge is to change education froma craft to technology based system This requires re-organizing human and capital resources 11. CHANGING POLICIESFrom: past policy To: future policyassumes learning must be on assumes learning takes place in aan institutions campus variety of environmentsResources are to supportResources are to distribute teachingteachers in their classroomsto where the learners areResources are allocated on the Resources are allocated according tobasis of projected enrolments performance expectationsas a percentage change on the that specify outcomes pertinent toprevious years allocations the priorities of stakeholders (based on RSA Telematics initiative) 12. Past PolicyFuture PolicyFaculty and staff Faculty and staff establishments will :establishments are:provide teams that cut across verticalbased on permanentdivisions for specific projects andpositions, vertical divisionsallow for redeployment to reflectand hierarchicalchanging needsrelationships Funds will be allocated:Funds should be allocated: for the heavy front-end investment infor line items in a budget designing technology based learningfixed for specifiedperiods, usually 12 months for amortisation of costs over the lifetimes of programs -- usually more than 12 months 13. Attempts at changing organizational structures Strategic alliances Virtual systems 14. Strategic Alliances in USA states EXAMPLES 15. Strategic Alliances in USA states EXAMPLESConnecticut Distance Learning Consortium American Distance Education Consortium Hispanic Educational Technology Services One MBA 16. Strategic Alliances: International16 17. The AVU collaborating partners include:African Ministries of EducationAfrican UnionAssociation of African UniversitiesUNESCO IIEPUNESCO BREDAUNESCO Teacher Training Program in Sub-Saharan AfricaAssociation of Universities and Colleges ofCanadaOpen University of UK- TESSAUniversit Laval CanadaUniversity of Ottawa CanadaMemorial University of Newfoundland CanadaCurtin University AustraliaIndiana University in Pennsylvania, USAMaestro, Washington DC, USAInternational Development and ResearchCentre, CanadaPartnership for Higher Education in AfricaMIT Open CoursewareMerlot African NetworkStrategic Alliances: African Virtual University South African Institute for Distance LearningCommonwealth of LearningGlobal Text Project 18. COMMONWEALTH OF LEARNING: strategic alliances STAMP 2000: 140 course writers, 8 Southern African countries training school teachers Teacher Education in Sub-Saharan Africa (TESSA) Consortium Commonwealth Computer Navigators Certificate : India, New Zealand, SouthAfrica, West Indies, USA and Canada. Virtual University for Small States of the Commonwealth. 32 countries. It is not enough for success to simply link traditional institutions. Amore revolutionary form of organizational structure is called for.Kanwar, Kodhandaraman, and Umar The American Journal of Distance Education (2010) 19. A new (disaggregation) model A system that designs and delivers learning programs bycommissioning the component processes and services from allavailable agencies. The general principle is that a state or nation - can draw on thebest resources wherever they are located to build a network of content experts, instructional designers, the full range of communications technologies, group facilitators and a learner support system and configure whatever mixture is needed for a particular program or project on a flexible, open, "mix and match" basis. 20. Vertical disaggregation (virtual system) modelINTERNALEXTERNALscans DIRECTORATE advisoryenvironment committee course/program planning design unitprojectevaluation unitproposals contentspecialiststechnologyunitSoftwaretraininglearner developmentunitsupportunitLearnersupportRegional STUDYGROUPSCo-ord unitInstructors trainees 21. PROFORMACAOAn example of virtual system:Brazils teacher education program1.The Brazil problem2.The virtual system solution16% of 2.4 million schoolteachers without legally-required years of schoolingin the North, Northeast and Midwest regions (four grades of elementaryeducation) Number of enrollments .......... 11,770,292Teaching Positions ........... 456,095Unqualified Teachers ....... 72,522source : MEC/INEP/SEEC 22. Brazils teacher training networkManagement unitFunderAdvisory cteeCourse design unitUNIVERSITY 1Production & distribution unitUNIVERSITY 2 PlatformUNIVERSITY 3 Video producers 1, 2 etcEtcsoftware 1, 2 etc publisher 1, 2 etcStutors Study centerState coordinatorsTUtutorsStudy center State monitoringand training teamsD State UNIVERSITY 1E tutorsStudy centerState UNIVERSITY 2State UNIVERSITY 3N EtcT tutors Study centerS 23. Conditions for successTECHNOLOGY:APPROPRIATE TO TRAINEES CONDITIONS; HIGH TECH AT CENTRALAND REGIONAL LEVELS, LOW TECH AT VILLAGE LEVELDESIGN:WORLD CLASS CONTENT, SOFTWARE, INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGNSPECIALISTSDELIVERY SYSTEM:WELL INTEGRATED LEARNER SUPPORT, TRAINING AND TUTORIALSYSTEMFINANCIAL :MAJOR INVESTMENT (FUNDING FROM WORLD BANK)POLITICAL : 24. network system in NorwayStudiesenteret.no :43 study centres in 74 municipalities and 7 universitycampuses 25. Norwegian Lifelong Learning NetworkFunder advisory group UNIT coordinatorcourse design &Cproduction specialistsEUniversity 1NUniversity 2TUniversity 3Web producersOnline Retc Video audio producersdelivery Apublishers platform LSTteachers Study centre regionalU monitoring and trainingDteachers Study centreE Local college 1 L teachers ON Study centreLocal college 2CT Local college 3 A teachers Study centreetcS L 26. Concluding thoughts, discussion.Having new technology --Knowing how to use it pedagogically -- Is insufficientwithout changing organizational structuresTechnology: Social networking technologies have added minimally toquality and access to distance education.Pedagogy: Attention to social networking technologies has beencounter-productive by distracting from training in, and studyof, fundamentals of distance teaching, especially systematic coursedesign, including high production-value video presentations.Attention to social networking technologies has been counter-productive by reinforcing traditional classroom methodology andespecially by distracting attention from individualized independentstudy. (See Dewey, above!) 27. Organizational structures: Attention to social networkingtechnologies has been counter-productive by distracting fromevolving new organizational structures.In all cases where advanced virtual systems models have beenattempted, they have beenrestricted or stifled by opposition from established institutionsExamples: Brazil, South Africa, USA (OU MidAmerica, Wisconsin, Florida), Norway (?)To effect super -institutional organization --- with benefits ofspecialization, economies and quality, --- national policies, mostlikely externally imposed are necessaryGovernments and policy makers are intimidated or distracted byinstitutional interests 28. Thank you for your attentionComments?Questions? mgmoore@psu.edu