A hugely powerful vision: A potent addition to our learning ecosystems of the future

 

Daniel Christian:
A Vision of Our Future Learning Ecosystems


In the near future, as the computer, the television, the telephone (and more) continues to converge, we will most likely enjoy even more powerful capabilities to conveniently create and share our content as well as participate in a global learning ecosystem — whether that be from within our homes and/or from within our schools, colleges, universities and businesses throughout the world.

We will be teachers and students at the same time — even within the same hour — with online-based learning exchanges taking place all over the virtual and physical world.  Subject Matter Experts (SME’s) — in the form of online-based tutors, instructors, teachers, and professors — will be available on demand. Even more powerful/accurate/helpful learning engines will be involved behind the scenes in delivering up personalized, customized learning — available 24x7x365.  Cloud-based learner profiles may enter the equation as well.

The chances for creativity,  innovation, and entrepreneurship that are coming will be mind-blowing! What employers will be looking for — and where they can look for it — may change as well.

What we know today as the “television” will most likely play a significant role in this learning ecosystem of the future. But it won’t be like the TV we’ve come to know. It will be much more interactive and will be aware of who is using it — and what that person is interested in learning about. Technologies/applications like Apple’s AirPlay will become more standard, allowing a person to move from device to device without missing a  beat. Transmedia storytellers will thrive in this environment!

Much of the professionally done content will be created by teams of specialists, including the publishers of educational content, and the in-house teams of specialists within colleges, universities, and corporations around the globe. Perhaps consortiums of colleges/universities will each contribute some of the content — more readily accepting previous coursework that was delivered via their consortium’s membership.

An additional thought regarding higher education and K-12 and their Smart Classrooms/Spaces:
For input devices…
The “chalkboards” of the future may be transparent, or they may be on top of a drawing board-sized table or they may be tablet-based. But whatever form they take and whatever is displayed upon them, the ability to annotate will be there; with the resulting graphics saved and instantly distributed. (Eventually, we may get to voice-controlled Smart Classrooms, but we have a ways to go in that area…)

Below are some of the graphics that capture a bit of what I’m seeing in my mind…and in our futures.

Alternatively available as a PowerPoint Presentation (audio forthcoming in a future version)

 



 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

— from Daniel S. Christian | April 2011

See also:

Addendum on 4-14-11:

 

Tagged with:  
Tagged with:  

Faculty “buy-in”– to what? — from CampusTechnology.com by Trent Batson

Excerpts:

We can continue incrementally to find our generalized theory as a national and international enterprise if we are willing to wait decades and waste enormous energy and time on failed experiments. Or, we can make efforts to bring together the learning theorists and researchers with those who understand the capabilities of the technology.

At conferences of learning theorists and researchers, we hear about useful new ideas, research results, hopeful new ways of framing what we have gleaned from a century of careful thought and work about how humans learn. But, we don’t find that these learning theorists understand the dynamics of the new technologies sufficiently to recommend a path toward implementation of the theories.

At conferences of technologists, we hear of successful work in innumerable contexts across the country. But the technologists are not aware of learning theory in most cases, or they do know about learning theory but are not active in a learning theory research field. The innumerable technology implementation contexts, then, remain just anecdotal as they are not tied to a developing new theoretical construct.

The challenge is to build a cultural theory that guides academia to re-imagine itself in every tiny bit of being. Who is taking up this challenge? Where is our theory? Where are our theorists?

I hope our community will move away from the simplistic notion that somehow information technology can be “bolted on and not built in” to quote a colleague from last November’s ePortfolios Australia Conference in Melbourne.

Academic transformation is under way. Don’t put the technology first; put understanding of the technology implications first–the unifying learning theory. Second, start the changes on campus that will provide the road system for academics to use in our new landscape.

 

From DSC:
Having just completed a course re: learning theories, I greatly appreciated Trent’s article here. In that class, I was constantly looking for the applications of the learning theories. While learning to give up on the idea of a silver bullet, I was still in search of answers to questions like:

  • What does all this mean?
  • What’s the bottom line for such and such a learning theory?
  • How does this learning theory impact someone’s teaching and learning strategies (pedagogy and/or andragogy)?

Graphically speaking, I came up with these thoughts:
(Depending upon how you are viewing them, you may need to right click on these graphics and save them down to your desktop; them up them up in a new window/application)

 

 

 

 

 

And my thanks to Capella University for the underlying graphics/information here:

 

 

 

 

From DSC:
Not that I’m on board with everything here…but the following excerpt from Rethinking colleges from the ground up — from the World Future Society by Thomas Frey — is worth reflecting upon; and so are some of the questions listed at the bottom of this posting. 

(NOTE: You may need to be a member to access this article in its entirety; emphasis DSC)

 

So What’s Changed
The obvious question to start with is simply, “What’s changed?”

Why is it that an education system that has produced some of the world’s top scientists, engineers, and business executive is no longer good enough to serve today’s young people?

The answers can be found in the following five areas:

  1. From information poor to information rich
  2. Fierce competition
  3. The cost to benefit ratio is changing
  4. New times require new intelligence
  5. Shift from individual intelligence to group intelligence

The following are but a few of the reasons why changing times demand different solutions…

Colleges are being pushed in a number of directions but the big dividing points will be oriented around in-person vs. online, and for the in-person side of the equation, doing the things in-person that cannot be done through online education.

 


Also see:

What does the “new normal” of shrunken classroom budgets, greater reliance on information technology and the ongoing science and math skills shortage mean for the future of education? Join fellow futurists this summer in Vancouver to solve these and other questions during our two-day WFS-exclusive Education Summit. This year’s speakers include FUTURIST magazine authors Maria H. Andersen, David Pearce Snyder, and Tom Lombardo among many others.

Sessions include:

  • Defining the “New Normal” for Education
  • Education as a Service
  • Where’s the “Learn This” Button?
  • Learning in Depth: A Simple Innovation That Can Transform Schooling
  • A New Education Vision: Reinventing School-to-Employment Systems for Knowledge-Based Global Economies
  • The New Tech Network
  • Jump-Start Your Career as a Foresight Educator
  • Reinventing Educational Activism by Creating Linkages: Technology, Content-Driven Collaboration, and Financial Literacy
  • A New Century: A New Instructional Paradigm
  • Educating the Wise Cyborg of the Future
  • Deconstructing the Education Monopoly in the United States
  • Futurists and the Future of Education

WorldFuture 2011 Education Summit: $295 for WFS members/$345 for nonmembers. Learn more and register here.

 

Campus ed tech ‘must haves’ by 2014 — from InsideHigherEd.com by Joshua Kim

 

The newsonomics of oblivion — from the Nieman Journalism Lab by Ken Doctor
Excerpt:

The threat of oblivion should be a powerful motivator, and we now see — finally — after a decade of decline, its specter moving us away from incremental, “experimental” tests to a fundamental restructuring of the business of news.

From DSC:
(I don’t mean to be full of doom and gloom here. However, a healthy respect of the disruption being caused by technology is warranted here I believe.)

I couldn’t help but think of higher education as an industry when I reviewed this particular blog posting.  Those of us working within higher education need to be highly aware of how other industries are dealing with the disruptions being caused by the Internet and other technologies. Why? Because the disruption has already begun within higher education.

From DSC:
The first article/item I want to comment on is:

A Potential Market for Courseware Developers — from Brandon-Hall.com by Richard Nantel

First of all, thanks Richard for tackling this subject and for putting a posting out there regarding it. For years, I’ve wondered what the best way(s) is(are) to pursue the creation of professionally-done, interactive, personalized/customized, multimedia-based, engaging content. It is expensive to create well-done materials and/or the learning engines behind these materials. Also, as at the faith-based college where I work, some colleges would want a very specific kind of content or take a different slant on presenting the content.  So the content would have to be modified — which would have an associated cost to it.

Some options that I’ve thought of:

  • Outsource the content creation to a team of specialists — at educationally-focused publishing companies out there
  • Outsource the content creation to a team of specialists — at other solution providers focused on education
  • Develop the content in-house with a team of specialists
  • Don’t create content at all, but rather steer people to the streams of content that are already flowing out there. Some content may be changing so fast that it may not be worth the expense to create it.
  • Have students create the content — that’s what school becomes. Learning enough to create/teach the content to others. (This would require a great deal of cross-disciplinary collaboration and cooperation amongst faculty members.)

As a relevant aside, I have held that if an organization could raise the capital and the teams to develop this type of engaging, professionally-done content — and scale the solution — they could become the Forthcoming Walmart of Education. The attractive piece of this for families/students out there would be that this type of education will come at a 50%+ discount.


The second article/item that caused some additional reflection here was the article at The Chronicle of Higher Education by Marc Parry entitled, Think You’ll Make Big Bucks in Online Ed? Not So Fast, Experts Say

What if the United States could reallocate even the cost of 1-2 high-end planes in the United States Air Force? Our nation could create stunning, engaging content that could reach millions of people on any given subject — as online learning has the potential to be highly scalable (though I realize that much of this depends upon how much involvement an organization wants to integrate into the delivery/teaching of this content in terms of their instructors’/professors’ time).

Anyway, Marc highlights some important points — that creating content, marketing that content, etc. can be expensive.

But I have it that if you don’t get into this online learning game, you won’t be relevant in the years to come. People want convenience and students’ expectations will continue to rise — wanting to learn on their own pace, per their own schedule, from any place and on any device; finally, they will want to have more opportunities to participate/collaborate/control their own learning experiences. (And this doesn’t even touch upon whether it will become even more difficult to get through “the gate”  — that is, getting the student’s attention in order to make it into their short-term memory, in hopes of then moving the lesson/information into long-term memory.)


Does online education put traditional universities at a ‘grave risk’? — from eCampusNews.com by Denny
An expert on ‘disruptive innovation’ says ed tech could change the way powerhouse universities operate

Excerpt from article:

Christensen, a Harvard Business School professor and author of The Innovator’s Dilemma and The Innovator’s Prescription, delivered the keynote address to an audience of higher-education officials March 7 at the American Council on Education’s Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C.

Christensen outlined the ways upstart, innovative businesses have toppled the giants of industry—such as Toyota’s rise coinciding with American automakers’ downfall—and how that model might translate to colleges and universities.

While online college classes have grown more available and affordable over the past decade, Christensen said a major shift had not yet occurred in higher education. Not until online learning grew in popularity was higher education even “amenable” to a major “disruption,” he said.

“When technology gets good enough, it sucks customers out of the old into the new,” he said, referring to institutions that have specialized in online learning, rather than traditional schools that have slowly adopted online college classes. “It doesn’t work the other way around.”

That move away from traditional powerhouses of education, he said, likely would happen in the next 20 years, and elite schools should be prepared.

National data support Christensen’s warning to traditional universities. Online student enrollment increased by 21 percent in 2010, according to the annual Sloan Survey of Online Learning. Overall, higher-education enrollment grew by 2 percent.

The survey of more than 2,500 colleges and universities showed online college classes gained 1 million students from 2009. More than 5.6 million students were enrolled in at least one web-based class in the fall 2009 semester.

Some example items from Christensen’s and Cizik’s keynote presentation:
The Innovative University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education From the Inside Out

 

 


Also relevant/see:

From DSC:
In my mind, this area of intelligent systems and agents is one of the most important areas to watch in the years ahead.  Such efforts should help us develop sophisticated systems that can help deliver personalized, customized education at the K-12 and higher ed levels…and perhaps will be relevant in the L&D space as well.

The innovations that come from this area may make hybrid-based — as well as  100% online-based learning — incredibly powerful!

If someone can develop such systems and make them available at far cheaper prices than exist today, a quality “Walmart of Education” will truly have been built.


 IADIS International Conference: Intelligent Systems and Agents - in Rome, July 24-26, 2011

 

Per the Call for Papers section, the topics for this conference include, but are not limited to:

 

Area 1 – Intelligent Systems  

– Algorithms

– Artificial Intelligence

– Automation Systems and Control

– Bioinformatics

– Computational Intelligence

– Expert Systems

– Fuzzy Technologies and Systems

– Game and Decision Theories

– Intelligent Control Systems

– Intelligent Internet Systems

– Intelligent Software Systems

– Intelligent Systems

– Machine Learning

– Neural Networks

– Neurocomputers

– Optimization

– Parallel Computation

– Pattern Recognition

– Robotics and Autonomous Robots

– Signal Processing

– Systems Modelling

– Web Mining

 

 

 

 

Area 2 – Agents  

– Adaptive Agent Systems

– Agent Applications

– Agent Communication

– Agent Development

– Agent middleware

– Agent Models and Architectures

– Agent Ontologies

– Agent Oriented Systems and Engineering

– Agent Programming, Languages and Environments

– Agent Systems

– Agent Technologies

– Agent Theories

– Agent Trends

– Agents Analysis and Design

– Agents and Learning

– Agents and Ubiquitous Computing

– Agents in Networks

– Agents Protocols and Standards

– Artificial Systems

– Computational Complexity

– eCommerce and Agents

– Embodied Agents

– Mobile Agents

– Multi-Agent Systems

– Negotiation Strategies

– Performance Issues

– Security, Privacy and Trust

– Semantic Grids

– Simulation

– Web Agents

 

 

Blockbuster’s largest shareholder calls Blockbuster worst investment ever made — from FastCompany.com by Austin Carr

.

After years as Blockbuster’s largest shareholder, Carl Icahn, who at one point amassed some 17 million shares of the now-bankrupt company, has called Blockbuster “the worst investment I ever made.”

In a candid piece written for the Harvard Business Review, Icahn opens up about the rental giant’s struggles and failures in an ever-changing industry.

“[Blockbuster] failed because of too much debt and changes in the industry. It had too many stores, Netflix created a better business model, and then Redbox kiosks and the whole digital phenomenon eliminated the need for consumers to go to a separate DVD store,” Icahn wrote. “Maybe the board did make a mistake in picking Jim Keyes as [John] Antioco’s successor—Keyes knows retailing and did an excellent job with the stores, but he isn’t a digital guy.”

From DSC:
I write about Blockbuster — and I emphasize the items above — because Blockbuster did not respond to the changes that were occurring around them.

.

What about those of us in higher education?
How’s our response(s) coming along?

.

The pace has changed -- don't come onto the track in a Model T

.

Staying Relevant

 

5/2/11 addendum:

4/7/11 addendum:


Christensen on disruptive innovation in higher education — from Lloyd Armstrong, University Professor and Provost Emeritus at the University of Southern California

Although the absence of an upwardly scalable technology driver has rendered higher education impossible to disrupt in its past, we believe that online learning constitutes such a technology driver and will indeed be capable of disruptively carrying the business model of low-cost universities up-market.

Is the Four-Year, Liberal-Arts Education Model Dead?

.IMPORTANT NOTES FROM DSC:

I went through a liberal arts degree in college (Economics) and I work for a Christian liberal arts college. As such, one can tell that I greatly endorse and believe in the benefits of a liberal arts education; such an education is extremely valuable and helpful, no matter which career path(s) a student may choose to pursue after college.

However, it has become clear that the costs of education are getting out of hand — and out of the reach of a growing number of people. Now with the Internet and alternative methods of delivery in the mix — and the current model continuing to show itself as being vulnerable and unsustainable for a growing number of people —  there is a potent equation for change in the air.

So…if you don’t believe we are in a game-changing environment, how do you explain this (increasingly-prevalent) line of questioning? (Though most of the articles I’ve seen do not use the word “dead”, the flavor/meaning of such articles and postings is much the same.)

 

 

India -- The next university superpower? -- from BBC News in March 2011

The Connected Life at Home — from Cisco

The connected life at home -- from Cisco

.

.

From DSC:

How will these types of technologies affect what we can do with K-12 education/higher education/workplace training and development? I’d say they will open up a world of new applications and opportunities for those who are ready to innovate; and these types of technologies will move the “Forthcoming Walmart of Education” along.

Above item from:

Tagged with:  
© 2024 | Daniel Christian