discovering a multi-access learning environment in action
DESCRIPTION
2010 ETUG Spring Workshop: (see session descriptions http://etug.ca/?page_id=835) Session: Discovering a Multi-Access Learning Environment in Action Presenter: Valerie Irvine, TIE Research Lab, Faculty of Education, University of VictoriaTRANSCRIPT
Discovering a Multi-Access Learning Environment in Action
Dr. Valerie IrvineTIE Research Lab, Faculty of Education
University of [email protected]
About Valerie
Dr. Valerie Irvine
Assistant Professor, Educational TechnologyCo-Director, Technology Integration and Evaluation
(TIE) Research LabUniversity of Victoria
2 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
“Technology Integration and Evaluation” Research Labhttp://tie.uvic.ca (with Co-Director, Dr. Allyson Hadwin
Approximately $800,000 in funding provided by:• Canada Foundation for Innovation• British Columbia Knowledge Development Funds• Knowledge North (Canarie)• The University of Victoria (various sources)• Telus• Polycom• Dell• SMART Technologies• Epson, etc.
33 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVicRESEARCHING
• Technologies for improving learning strategies• Learner and teacher technology acceptance• Regulating solo and collaborative learning• Evaluating video-conferencing technologies for
learning and collaborating
4 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
INFRASTRUCTURE• State-of-the-art video conferencing facility• Research workstations• Digital video & recording devices• 3 portable laptop laboratories• Video capture and streaming server (about to be
enhanced)• SMART technologies
5 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
6 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
7 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
8 of 39
• Influx of new technologies supported the exploration of ways to support networked learning
So what does this mean for learning environments?
9 of 39
• Registration options: • Building, Room, Day, Time• “ONL” = online…
• Guest speaker from Stanford and the logistics of student involvement when no schedule was committed
• Video conference vs. Elluminate
Reflections on online course experiences
10 of 39
• Mix of off-campus & on-campus students enrolled• On-campus students create F2F meetings• Distance students create F2F meetings when in
the same city• Perception of responsibility to meet needs of
on-campus students• Rural school district superintendent with VC-enabled
room expresses interest in teacher PD via VC
Reflections on online course experiences
11 of 39
• Examination of registration system• “building, room, day, time” course category• “online” course category
• An environment or way to connect is chosen • Student participation in a course
• determined by ability to access a course within those constraints
Current Processes in Higher Education
12 of 39
• NO option for students to *make a choice* about *how they are able* to access a course
• Locus of control of course access is at the instructor or institutional level
Current processes in higher education
13 of 39
• Recent research showing higher exam results with podcast learning
(McKinney, Dyck, & Luber, 2009)
• How do we communicate choice of access to learners?
Factors for Change
14 of 39
• Declining student population in some cases• echo generation moving on, increase of post-
secondary institutions, decrease in funding, etc.
• Need to merge the three types of learners and find ways to deliver learning that can be accessed…
• Anytime, anywhere, and any way
Factors for Change
15 of 39
• How does this fit with current delivery modes?• How can this be communicated via traditional
university time table systems?• What type of label is appropriate for this
environment?• How can this be supported?• Do we worry about media release of students?
Questions raised
16 of 39
Learning Delivery Modes
• Face-to-Face Education
• Blended Learning
• Online Learning (asynchronous typically)
• Blended Online Learning (asynchronous & synchronous)
• Video Conferencing Learning
:
• Multi-Access Learning17 of 39
Learning Delivery Considerations
• Additional Considerations
• Open Online Communities
• Open Courses
• See examples by George Siemens (Athabasca University) or Alec Couros (University of Regina)
18 of 39
allows the following:• School district, health unit, business could register a
number of students and the spot for one IP connection to a vc-enabled classroom
• Individual enrolment by desktop distance learner to watch recorded lectures and participate online
• On-campus learners can register a bum-in-seat spot in the VC-enabled classroom
• Potentially, desktop connection to VC unit if hardware bridge is employed
Multi-Access Learning (Irvine, 2009)
19 of 39
Multi-Access Learning (Irvine, 2009)
20 of 39
21 of 39
Three Types of Learner Access
1. Distributed (online)• Off campus typically• On campus learners (can be unhappy with an
online option)• Individual access (not likely pods of F2F learners)
22 of 39
Three Types of Learner Access
2. IP Video Conferencing• Off-campus learners (e.g., health units, business,
K-12, etc.)• With so many codecs around, why do we not
support their access to higher education for professional development?
23 of 39
Three Types of Learner Access
3. Face-to-Face• Still “the” mode for most universities• Might be easier to push traditional faculty
members to move to video conference than to teaching online?
• Course casting is typically seen as a supplemental resource for on-campus students
• And perhaps loss-leader marketing tactic…
24 of 39
Considerations for Implementation
• Cost and Portability• Offset to cost may
be increasedenrollment
25 of 39
Considerations for Implementation
• Instructional design – need for research/pilots • Instructor Preparation
26 of 39
Considerations for Implementation
• Recording and Privacy• Media Release?• Course outline as contract and stated • Alternative exists (online access)
• Integration of other technologies to access community groups (SMART Bridgit conferencing)
27 of 39
Considerations for Implementation
• Registration Systems• Biggest barrier• No option for learners to *make a
choice* about how they wish or *are able* to access learning
• We have offered anytime and anywhere, but not any way
28 of 39
Considerations for Implementation
• Registration Systems“Multi-access course”
1. Online (asynchronous)2. Video Conference at stated day/time
User to submit IP, register one-way of the multi-point unit, register students at site
3. Face-to-face at day/time/room29 of 39
OVERVIEW OF FIELD INITIATIVES
• Video conferencing
• Role of Social Media
• Role of Recording/Streaming & Mobile Learning
30 of 39
VIDEO CONFERENCING
• Bandwidth
• Knowledgeable educators & staff
• See B.C. Premier’s Technology Council’s Report # 12
31 of 39
VIDEO CONFERENCING• Community support
• http://2learn.ca equivalent is required
• And where exactly is the VC community???• Some school districts listed on Canarie site:
http://www.canarie.ca/canet4/connected/map.html• Some school districts listed on VcAlberta.ca
site: http://vcalberta.ca/directory/directory.cfm
• More to come on VcCanada.ca when it gets more support…
32 of 39
The Elevate Conference (K-12)
• Approximately 500 K-12 Educators in Alberta• willing to come to a conference in August
33 of 39
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
34
TIE Research Lab @ UVic
35
Social Media• Could provide ability to provide another way for
learners viewing live stream to participate or for connecting for open education
• Tagging options within streaming solutions
36 of 39
Recording/Streaming & Mobile Learning• Live Stream or Video-on-Demand of Multi-access
course• See presentation later today• Ability to support mobile learning with this multi-
access route
37 of 39
Dream? Or Plausible?
• Invited to present to Internet2’s advisory group in Washington DC…
38 of 39
to check out
• http://cilc.org• http://vcalberta.ca• PTC report• VROC• Content providers/BCTF• http://bc.net presentation• http://tie.uvic.ca• GYRD
39 of 39
