Open education - FOS Day 5

So here we are - at the final day of FOS, and the final scenario. This time it's about the concept of open education. The scenario presents an academic who feels uncomfortable about making his material available freely. He has devoted a great deal of time and effort to producing the material for the benefit of his students, and he doesn't feel it is fair that someone else should just be able to come along and use his material 'off the peg'. He feels that they should create their own materials, just as he has done.

Responding
I have encountered this view so often in my academic career, and I have to confess that I have even held similar views myself in the past. I can even recall colleagues speculating that external examiners only took on the role so that they could see how things were done at other institutions and steal all the good ideas!!

Fortunately I realised some time ago that the benefits of being open far outweigh the perceived disadvantages associated with loss of ownership. If you are willing to share your resources then you can benefit from access to other peoples resources. Furthermore, by making your resources openly available, you subject them to scrutiny which can lead to enhancement of those resources. So - the concept of openness is based on mutuality. However, this openness will always be susceptible to abuse. What do we do about that? I think the answer is .... nothing! If some people just take your resources but give nothing in return - so what? Yes - they have gained something, but have you lost anything? In my view you haven't. You still have those resources. Intleectual property issues can be adequately addressed by Creative Commons licenses.

For me, once I had accepted this viewpoint, it changed my outlook with regard to openness.

Reflecting
I have become increasingly interested in open education practices over the past few years. I took part in a JISC-sponsored project a few years ago to produce a set of open education resources (OERs) for the built environment. The project was called ORBEE (Open Resources for Built Environment Education) and I contributed three learning packages in the field of Building Adaptation and Conservation. I've just checked the website, and sadly it no longer appears to be live, so I can't link to it. My involvement with the project really raised my awareness of the whole OER scene, and the use of Creative Commons licenses.

I have also taken part as a learner in two MOOCs. One was an Irish History MOOC run by Trinity College, Dublin under the Future Learn banner, and the other was the Carpe Diem MOOC which Gilly Salmon ran at Swinburne University in Australia. These were very different experiences with quite different levels of engagement, but both were interesting in their own ways.

I would like to explore open education practices in more detail. I'm currently working my way through Martin Weller's book (The Battle for Open) and it is a useful foundation to explore the area.

Making
I'm afraid I don't have time to create anything today, as this is my last day before going on leave and I'm trying to tie up loose ends. However, I will highlight a fantastic open resource which I recently discovered. It brings together a wide range of creative resources. I like to use a lot of images in presentations, and the photography resources available here are absolutely brilliant. It's called Makerbook 

Communities and collaboration - FOS Day 4

Day 4 already, and another scenario. This time it concerns an academic who is designing a postgradute programme with a focus of workplace learning. She is concerned that students won't engage in online communities in the way she is hoping, and won't see the value in participating in online communities.

Responding
She is right to be concerned! It is incredibly difficult in my experience to achieve the level of engagement required for an effective learning community. I have experienced the benefits of such a community as a learner, but have always struggled to get my students to engage as I would like them to. I think the main reason for this (if I'm being brutally honest) is that I have tended to use the concept of a community as an optional extra in my modules rather than fully integrating it. In order to operate effectively I think the idea of the community needs to be reflected in the learning outcomes and embedded in the learning activities and the assessment.

In the scenario presented, I would suggest the following approaches:

1. The learning outcomes could include a reference to working collaboratively in an online environment. 
2. The scheduled learning activities could effectively require participation in, for example, discussion boards or wikis.
3. The assessment criteria could require students to demonstrate how they have drawn on their participation in the community.

Additionally, I would refer again to the importance of learning design (apologies for going on about this all the time). The programme should be designed to build the community, rather than designed around the content with the community added on afterwards. Gilly Salmon promotes an approach to learning design which she calls Carpe Diem, and is based on her 'Five-stage model'. 

Gilly Salmon's Five-stage model. Image source: http://www.gillysalmon.com/five-stage-model.html

Of particular relevance in the context of this scenario is that the first two stages involve 'access and motivation' and 'online socialisation', so the course is designed to ensure a transition into the community,

Reflecting

By coincidence, in my current seconded role, working on a university-wide project related to learning and teaching, I have been developing a framework for 'internal' communities of practice as a means of sharing best practice. This has been challenging to say the least, but I think we are making some progress and we are starting to get some buy-in from colleagues. 

Making

I'm going to cheat a bit here. I'm not going to create a comic, but I am going to include a graphic of the framework which I have developed with colleagues here at Westminster to show how we would like our communities to operate. This hasn't been approved internally yet, so it is still very much a work in progress.

Supporting learning - FOS Day 3

Today's scenario centres on a student who is unsure of the value of maintaining a blog in connection with her course. She writes her reflections but is never really sure whether anyone looks at them and she therefore wonders whether it is worth actually publishing them to a blog as opposed to just writing up notes in a Word document.

Responding
As on the previous two days, I have some sympathy with the views of the student. It is hard to maintain the motivation for writing blog entries when you don't think anyone is actually reading your posts. It can seem like simply writing for ourselves rather than a wider audience. In response to this, I think I would make two points:

1. Firstly, the act of writing is itself valuable in forcing us to reflect on our experiences and synthesise ideas from various different sources. This aids our learning significantly.
2. Secondly, whether we realise it or not, we do generally write in a different style when we know it is going to be published to a wider audience, whether this is public or just, for example. the other students in a tutor group. We thus tend to articulate our views more clearly, and the process of distilling complex ideas into words which can be read by others (as opposed to just ourselves) can be quite productive in terms of our own understanding.

So - I would encourage the student to persevere. How about looking at other students' blogs and commenting on them, and using the opportunity to invite them to comment on yours? Get the dialogue going yourself.

(Confession: I don't necessarily practice what I preach!)

Reflecting

I know from bitter personal experience how difficult it is to get students to engage effectively online. I have used discussion boards, blogs and wikis, all with limited success. I refer again to comments I made in response to yesterday's activities: learning design is critical. The online learning activities have to be designed as an integral part of the curriculum rather than an optional add-on. When I  did my course with the OU the most effective online discussions were typically linked to an assessment. For example, the assessed work was required to draw on (and specifically cite) discussion board entries. 

Making

Some people think that John Biggs' concept of constructive alignment is a bit 'old hat' now, but I firmly believe that it holds true whether we are designing for face-to-face or online. Essentially, the learning outcomes, the learning activities and the assessment & feedback all need to be aligned. Far too often students are presented with learning outcomes at the start of a course or a module, but are given no guidance as to how those learning outcomes are to be achieved.

When a 'constructive alignment' approach is adopted, the learning activities and the assessment and feedback provide the scaffolding which enables students to reach the learning outcomes.

Images source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/gavatron/10037420373/  

Flexible pedagogies - FOS Day 2

The scenario provided today is based around a student who has signed up for an online course because there was no equivalent face-to-face course available locally. The student finds the course very challenging because of the lack of interaction, particularly with a tutor. He feels so isolated that he is considering giving up the course.

Responding
I sympathise with his point of view, and can understand how online students can feel without a clear sense of direction. The lack of engagement (both student/student and student/tutor) inevitably leads to feelings of isolation and this becomes particularly acute when students are facing challenging aspects of the course. There may be no sense of a shared experience and no mutual support network. In my view this is largely due to a poorly designed and/or poorly delivered course. Technology, when used effectively, has the potential to create fantastic learning experiences, even when the course is delivered entirely remotely. In this case it would appear that the course design is not making effective use of the technology.

I did a PGDip in Online and Distance Education with the OU, and in three years I didn't have any F2F contact with either tutors or students, and yet it was one of the most engaging learning experiences I have ever had. That's because it was properly designed.

Reflecting
Promotion of flexible pedagogies has been one of the main challenges I have faced over the past couple of years. I have been trying to encourage greater use of blended learning approaches amongst colleagues, and trying to enthuse students about it. I have had limited success. I think this is due to a certain amount of fear of technology, but more importantly I think there is a real lack of understanding about what BL really is. Many staff think if that put their Powerpoint slides on the VLE then that's BL. When staff do attempt to use BL more effectively, they often simply overlay online activities on top of existing traditional learning activities. The result is that students get overwhelmed, and if they have the choice they will simply avoid the online stuff.

Making
If I could come up with a plan I think I would solve my problems! I think there has to be serious commitment from senior management (as opposed to just lip service) and a real focus on learning design.

Digital literacy and identity - FOS Day 1

OK, so here I am back on my blog and feeling rather guilty. I haven’t posted to my blog for over a year, and it has taken a little nudge to get me back on here. That nudge has come in the form of my involvement with an online course called FOS – Flexible, Open and Social Learning. 

The course is being run over five days from 13^th to 17^th July. The activities for Day 1 are based around the theme of ‘digital literacy and identity’. We are to respond to a scenario in which someone has been asked to create a digital portfolio, but is not convinced of the value of such things, and seems to be very sceptical about the whole notion of a digital identity.

Responding

I can empathise with the view expressed in the scenario. My lack of commitment to my blog is evidence of my own doubts about the value of an online presence. I have tended to blog only when it accompanies a specific activity, and yet I enjoy reading other people’s blogs and I think I often get a lot out of it. I suspect that the root of the issue is a lack of confidence in my own views. If I’m not convinced that what I’ve got to say is of any interest to anyone else I tend to shy away from blogging. I have felt similarly about Twitter. I use Twitter a lot, but predominantly as a consumer rather than a contributor. Again – I think this comes down to confidence in what I’ve got to say.

I suppose that one way of looking at blogging is that the value lies as much in the process of self-reflection, as in sharing your views with other people. I’ve often likened blogging to shouting into a darkened room. You don’t know who is there listening and, unless you get responses, you don’t know whether anyone is actually interested.

Reflecting

I would like to think that my own digital literacies are reasonably well developed. I make use of a wide range of digital resources and have quite well-established strategies for managing them. Having said that, I am sure I can learn a lot from others, and I think I am always open to alternative approaches.

I try to encourage the development of digital literacies in my students, and I promote the use of various technologies to support students. I have provided detailed guidance to students on the use of some of these technologies.

I have recently been involved in an initiative at Westminster to develop university-wide elective modules. I wasn’t actually part of any module team but was helping the teams to think about alternative approaches to module design. I was struck by the fact that none of the teams really considered using online approaches in their module delivery. This gave me an idea to develop an elective module around the theme of digital capabilities and to deliver it almost entirely online. I haven’t yet done anything further with this, but maybe this course will give me some ideas to take forward.

Making

I think I need a bit more time to create my map of digital me, but I would like to have a go. Watch this space.

My first MOOC experience

My experience of the Carpe Diem MOOC

I've been getting my first experience of MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) over the past few weeks. Since MOOCs went mainstream around 2011 there has been a somewhat hysterical reaction in the media, with many commentators suggesting that MOOCs signaled the end of higher education as we know it.

MOOC Hysteria by CogDogBlog  Licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

I must confess that I initially viewed MOOCs with a degree of scepticism, both in terms of their educational value and on purely commercial grounds. However, earlier this year I became aware of the Carpe Dime MOOC which was being offered by Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia which sounded interesting. It was based on the Carpe Diem learning design process devised by Professor Gilly Salmon. It provided me with a great opportunity to learn more about something I was interested in, whilst also gaining experience of participating in a MOOC.

The MOOC took place over a six week period in March and April and typically required a commitment of around three hours per week. Over 1200 people around the world registered for the MOOC, and everyone was allocated to a group of between 25 and 30 participants. The delivery platform was a Blackboard open platform called CourseSites, and since I am used to working with Blackboard in my own institution I found the look and feel of the site very familiar.

The course was concerned primarily with the Carpe Diem Learning Design process, so the actual content of the course was kept to a minimum and the focus was on working collaboratively with other participants to go through the process.

Positive things I took from the experience

• I learnt about Carpe Diem learning design and I think I will be able to apply aspects of this in my own practice. 
• I was introduced to several different perspectives on learning design issues, as contributed by various other participants.
• I gained additional experience of collaborating online, which highlighted several factors, both positive and negative
• I made contact with several people from around the world who, i would like to think, I could contact again in the future.
• I experienced at first hand what it was like to participate in a MOOC. This provided me with several ideas about how we could run such an initiative at my own institution.

Negative aspects

• There seemed to be a very high drop-out or non-participation rate. I understand that this is fairly normal for MOOCs, but I would say that in my group of around 28 registered participants there were only around five or six who were active.
• The low participation rate made it very difficult to establish working collaborations. This in turn had an impact on momentum in the group exercises. If you happened to find yourself allocated to a group where participation was very low, I suspect your experience of the MOOC would be far less positive than that of someone in a successful group. I wonder whether more thought needs to go into the arrangements for establishing groups at the start of the MOOC. 

Overall verdict 

My overall experience was undoubtedly positive. Badges were awarded for completion of the weekly activities, and a certificate of completion was issued to all participants who successfully completed all activities. 

The experience obviously didn't put me off MOOCs because I subsequently registered for the Open Course in Technology Enhanced Learning (ocTEL) which has just begun this week, and I will write more about that in due course.

 

Pipes, platforms, public performances and backstage activity: a Change Masterclass

How a 'Change Masterclass' helped me to put things in perspective

On Tuesday 25th March I attended a Change Masterclass in Manchester concerned with implementing change. It was run by the Higher Education Academy (HEA) and was very effectively facilitated by Helen May and Andrew Fleming. The fact that there was a fairly small group of delegates meant that there was plenty of useful discussion.

My particular interest in the event was as a result of my ongoing involvement with the Learning Futures Programme at the University of Westminster. I have recently been asked to take the lead on one of the projects in the Learning Futures Programme -  Transforming Learning and Teaching - which seeks to bring about genuine change within the university, with a focus on enhancing the learning and teaching experience for both students and staff. Originally, it was proposed that a Project Manager would lead the project but it has been decided that the Transforming Learning and Teaching Project should be led by an academic, and I am therefore going to be seconded to the project for 80% of my time. 

Whilst I am excited about taking on a new role I also feel a certain sense of trepidation at leading a project which will involve quite significant changes. The Change Masterclass helped me to put things in perspective and enabled me to view the role in a different light. 

Having reflected on the experience over the past week, here are the main points which I think were relevant for me:

Public performance and backstage activity

I had been thinking about my new role very much in project management terms, as that is how the job was originally envisaged. I was therefore expecting the role to be all about deliverables and Gantt charts and budgets and risks and so on. What I've realised is that programmes which seek to bring about genuine cultural change within an organisation cannot rely solely on project management approaches if they are to be successful. What really matters is change leadership. Buchanan and Boddy (1992) refer to the idea of 'public performance and backstage activity'. The 'public performance' of those responsible for bringing about change (change agents) may have to be one which follows the traditional project management approach, in which everything is presented rationally and logically. However, behind this public performance there is a lot of 'backstage activity' through which support is gained and resistance is dealt with. This backstage activity will typically involve a lot of listening, negotiating, selling ideas, and building relationships.  Being a change agent therefore involves following the script and presenting the traditional role of project manager to those who require evidence of formal progress within the system, but actually doing a lot of the 'political' work behind the scenes, backstage. 

Being positive

It is vitally important to focus on the positive. Change is too often presented as a solution to a problem rather than an opportunity. Of course there will be resistance to change, but rather than fearing this resistance we should embrace it as evidence of engagement.

Pipes and platforms

Good communication is critical but we need to think about how we communicate. The analogy of 'pipes and platforms' was used. In 'pipes' there is a linear flow: information is produced at one end and pushed out to be consumed at the other. With 'platforms' the information isn't just pushed out, but rather it is placed on a platform where users can engage with it and contribute to it. The best example to distinguish between pipes and platforms is to consider traditional TV channels as being 'pipes' whilst YouTube is a 'platform'. The internet has facilitated a shift towards the 'platform' model in many areas of our lives and enabled us to engage in more meaningful communication.

Goals and unintended consequences

We obviously have to be clear about our goal, even though we may not know exactly what the goal will look like, nor how we will actually get there. Nevertheless, we should at least be clear about why we are heading there. Having said that, the final outcomes of any change programme can be completely different to those envisaged, and may even be counter-intuitive, so it is unwise to plan everything in minute detail. We need to be flexible and agile, and capable of responding to emerging ideas and other factors as they arise.  We can never be absolutely certain about the impact which changes will have on an organisation, and it is not uncommon for unanticipated side-effects to emerge. These side-effects can be both positive and negative.

Reference:

Buchanan, D., and Boddy D. (1992) The Expertise of the Change Agent: Public Performance and Backstage Activity. New York: Prentice Hall

Implementing a university-wide change programme to promote blended learning: Where do we start?

Change is rarely easy, and universities are notoriously conservative institutions which are inherently cautious. The implementation of a change programme involving technology requires a delicate balance in order to bring about genuinely new ways of working whilst endeavouring to address the understandable concerns of staff. What approaches actually work?

At the University of Westminster we are embarking on a wide-ranging programme known as ‘Learning Futures’ which aims to transform the student and staff experience by creating a streamlined, forward-looking and engaging curriculum. The programme comprises a range of parallel projects which address themes such as curriculum and assessment, learning and teaching, academic support, employability, internationalisation, and sustainability. I’ve been involved in the learning and teaching strand of the Learning Futures programme since the start, specifically in relation to the promotion of technology-enhanced learning and blended learning approaches.

The proposed changes have all emerged from staff themselves in a ‘bottom-up’ approach, albeit with the full support of the senior management of the university. The enthusiasm of staff in generating new ideas and their continued commitment in developing the projects has been a revelation. However, up to now it has largely been driven by a relatively small proportion of staff – the so-called ‘early adopters’– the committed minority who are willing to experiment and keen to innovate. As we move towards the implementation phase of the programme it will be critical to maintain momentum in the face of the resistance to change which is bound to emerge.

What resistance?

It is inevitable that there will be resistance to change, particularly change which involves the introduction of new technologies. As Wheeler (2014a) points out, there is a perception amongst some academic staff that technology will undermine their role and require the investment of a lot of time learning new skills. If there is resentment or distrust, this can be transmitted to students. 

Marshall (2010) suggests that the resistance to change may be borne out of a perceived lack of convincing evidence that technology actually benefits the students’ learning, despite the fact that, as Garrison and Vaughan (2013) point out, “this is not a defensible position”. Nevertheless, such resistance patently exists, and this invariably makes it difficult to get buy-in from the remainder of the staff.

Implementation

We have a clear vision about where we want to be. We are obviously not starting from scratch, since technology is already used widely throughout the university and there are many examples of highly innovative practice. What we are seeking to achieve is a much more integrated approach to technology-enhanced learning where the technology is seamlessly embedded in our courses and both staff and students are comfortable with technology.

So, we’ve generated the ideas, we have the approval of senior management to proceed, and we have project structures in place. But now we actually have to move from the strategy to the tactics. Where do we start?

I’ve been doing quite a lot of research around this, and there are obviously loads of issues to consider, but three immediate questions emerge:

1.       Should we assess the extent to which the institution is ready for change?

I have mixed views on this issue. I can see that there would be some value in assessing institutional readiness, but given that the decision has been taken to go ahead with the change programme are we just wasting valuable time? There is obviously a certain appetite for change, as demonstrated by the ideas and proposals already generated in the early stages of the programme. We could carry out an audit of existing practice, but this will probably take a long time and all it is likely to tell us is what we already know: that there are pockets of innovative practice involving technology but the majority of courses are delivered primarily through traditional means. What else could we do to assess our readiness?

There are tools available which are specifically designed for this very purpose. For example:

• ELTI (Embedding Learning Technologies Institutionally) A JISC audit tool which is “designed to inform the process of embedding learning technologies, assist in developing institutional structures, culture and expertise and to encourage cross boundary collaboration and groupings”.
• The eMM Framework (E-Learning Maturity Model) which is designed to measure “the capability of institutions to sustainably engage in technology-supported learning and teaching”.

Has anyone got experience of using these tools and if so, were they useful?

2.       How do we ensure that staff have the skills and confidence necessary to adopt technologies more widely?

It is highly likely that only those ‘early adopters’ will feel comfortable working extensively with new technologies. Wheeler (2014b) highlights the importance of universities providing high quality, sustainable support to academics to ensure that they see the relevance of new technologies and gain confidence in using them. The recently published NMC Horizon Report2014 identifies the challenge of ‘low digital fluency of faculty’ and proposes professional development for academic staff, not just in digital media skills, but also in the underlying concepts of digital literacy (Johnson et al., 2014).

Garrison & Vaughan (2008) indicate that the most common form of professional development involves skills-based training in specific techniques or software. However, they suggest that such an approach rarely has sufficient follow-up and ongoing support for academic staff, and thus the impact is minimal. They propose an alternative approach based around the idea of a “Community of Inquiry” in which local faculty groupings of eight to twelve staff engage in a continuous process of reflection and discourse about teaching problems where there is a focus on getting things done. The communities adopt a blended learning approach which combines face-to-face and online activities.

What approaches have been used at other institutions?

3.       What are the mechanisms needed to actually implement change?

What structures need to be in place to promote the widespread adoption of technology in learning and teaching? What does the change programme actually involve? Are there tools and techniques we can adopt as a vehicle for change. For example:

• Peter Reed (University of Liverpool) suggests a ‘spine’ of core technologies used across the institution with, for example, baseline standards for the use of the VLE together with online assessment, lecture capture and ePortfolios

•  Keith Smyth and colleagues at Edinburgh Napier University have developed the 3E Framework to support the meaningful incorporation of technology into learning, teaching and assessment

• York St John University has published a Technology-Enhanced Learning Quality Framework (which incidentally is based on Edinburgh Napier’s 3E Framework) which sets out ‘minimum expectations’ in a university policy document which all members of staff are expected to adhere to.

What other mechanisms have been used, and how effective have they been?

Your views?

I would be really interested in hearing from colleagues at other institutions who have been through similar change programmes and have experience of implementing change. Please feel free to add your comments or contact me directly.

Author’s note: I should stress that I am just a member of the Learning Futures team at the University of Westminster – I am not leading the programme. I should also add that the views expressed above are my personal reflections, and do not necessarily reflect the policy of the University of Westminster.

References

• Garrison, D. and Vaughan N. (2008) Blended Learning in Higher Education: Framework, Principles, and Guidelines. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
• Garrison, D. & Vaughan, N., (2013) “Institutional change and leadership associated with blended learning innovation: Two case studies”, in Internet and Higher Education Vol. 18, July 2013
• Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2014). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition [Online] Available from http://www.nmc.org/publications/2014-horizon-report-higher-ed
• Marshall, S(2010) 'Change, technology and higher education: are universities capable of organisational change?', Research in Learning Technology, 18: 3, 179 — 192
• Wheeler, S. (2014a) The Survival of Higher Education (5): Recommendations  http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-survival-of-higher-education-5.html
• Wheeler, S. (2014b) The Survival of Higher Education (4) 5 Key Objectives  http://steve-wheeler.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/the-survival-of-higher-education-4-5.html   

My new toy: the Samsung Galaxy Note 8

I got a new gadget for Christmas. I'd wanted a mini-tablet for a while and I read a lot of the reviews about the 7 inch and 8 inch tablets available. Invariably the iPad Mini always comes out on top, but I'm afraid I just don't buy into the whole Apple thing, and I've been an Android user for the past couple of years. Most of the reviews of Android tablets rated the new Nexus 7 as the best on the market and there's no doubt that it's a lovely piece of kit. However, I'd read a few very positive reviews of the Samsung Galaxy Note 8, and I was attracted to the potential additional functionality offered by its in-built stylus - the S-Pen. All the reviews acknowledged that the Note was an excellent tablet but indicated that it wasn't worth paying around a £100 more than the Nexus just to get the S-Pen.

I wasn't convinced. When I held the two tablets in a store, the Note just felt nicer in the hand than the Nexus. And I was really taken with the idea of the stylus. Then, just before Christmas I saw the Note on offer at PC World for the same price as the Nexus and I didn't hesitate.

I've been using it for about three weeks now, and the verdict is – I absolutely love it. It’s a lovely size, I think the screen is great and it is just so useful. And as for the stylus – I think it’s brilliant. It can be used in place of the virtual keyboard for any application that requires text input – whether it is word processing, emailing, note taking or web browsing. You simply write on the note pad at the bottom of the screen and it recognises the text. The example below shows me using it with the Evernote note-taking app. 

It's particularly useful with an app like Evernote, because once the text has been input you can then access that note from any device. I've already used it to make notes at meetings and to jot down thoughts and ideas, and it just works. 

The next thing I want to experiment with is marking up PDF documents. I think this might have real potential for assessing students' coursework which has been electronically submitted. I also want to try out an app called Lecture Notes which enables you save handwritten notes.

The only problem I've had with the Note is the stick I've been getting from the family because the thing is rarely out of my hand.

Disillusioned with politics and politicians

It's never been my intention to use this blog to post political views but I've just been watching the 10 o'clock news on TV and seen an exchange between David Cameron and Ed Milliband at Prime Minister's Questions in the Commons. It was yet another example of 'yah-boo' politics with no meaningful debate and no real outcome. It's not really any wonder that ordinary people are becoming increasingly disillusioned with politics as we watch our political leaders play to the cameras and bend and sway to the whims of the media and  corporations.

I've recently finished reading Damian McBride's book, "Power Trip: A decade of policy, plots and spin". McBride was Gordon Brown's press officer. In other words a spin doctor. Regardless of your political views it is a fascinating insight into the world of policy, and government decision making.

In the final chapter McBride, who was forced to resign in 2009 following revelations about his rather questionable practices, reflects on the current state of British politics. Setting aside any views of him personally,  I think he summarises the situation perfectly:

"Our political system is set up to expose human frailties.....  It's the cut-throat competition to be selected, elected and promoted, and the macho bear-pit of parliamentary debate; it's the booze-fuelled largesse and the late nights of Westminster, and the ever growing distance from the people that put you there; it's the worship of money, praise and favour, and the desperate kowtowing to those - including the media - who dispense them; it's the short-term motives behind most decision making, and the partisan impulse to disagree for disagreement's sake".

What a damning indictment of modern politics that is.

Using Google Docs in the classroom

I've been aware of the potential of Google Docs for collaboration for quite a while but I had never really considered the use of Google Docs for classroom activities.  That is, until a few weeks ago...

I run a final-year undergraduate module called Building Adaptation and Conservation, in which students are required to consider the adaptive reuse of historic buildings.  The students are generally well engaged and fairly opinionated, which makes the module enjoyable because the subject lends itself to a lot of discussion.

I wanted to run a class exercise in which students work in groups to discuss the preparation of a conservation plan.  I gave a lecture in which I explained the purpose of conservation plans and identified the key components of such a plan. In previous years when I have run a similar exercise, students formed themselves into groups, discussed the topic, made notes within their group and then fed back to a plenary session. There was no formal capture of the outcomes of these discussions.

It occurred to me that Google Docs could provide a means of addressing this problem. I knew there would be a maximum of fifteen groups in the session, so beforehand I created fifteen documents in Google Docs which were identical apart from the document heading, which simply indicated a group number. I then created a separate link to each Google Doc from within Blackboard (our virtual learning environment) and made these links available to all students on the module. I also made some example conservation plans available to the students via Blackboard. I asked students in advance to bring devices with them to the session from which they could access the internet. 

I presented a case study based on a real Georgian building in central London. I outlined some of the key features of the building and showed the students a series of photographs. Once they had formed their groups I allocated a number to each group by simply giving the group a slip of paper with a number on it. Each group then had to access a specific Google Doc on Blackboard and add information to the document. 

Specifically, I asked each group to consider:

• How would you go about preparing the conservation plan?
• What information would go in to the conservation plan?
• What format would the conservation plan be in?
• How could you present information in a way which can be understood?

Screenshot from Blackboard showing access to Google Docs

The students appeared to engage quite well with the exercise. They were able to access Google Docs on a variety of devices including laptops, tablets and smart phones. Once the exercise was complete I was able to open individual group documents on the screen at the front and talk through some of the issues identified. 

The advantages of using Google Docs were as follows:

• Groups had a ready-made template in which to enter the outcomes of their discussion immediately.
• Individual members of each group could all add information to the document simultaneously as long as they had a suitable device with them.
• Once the exercise was complete all members of the group had equal access to the document they had prepared.
• All students had access to the documents produced by other groups, thus enabling them to benefit from the input of the entire class.

I think this worked rather well as a means of capturing the discussions, and was much better than students simply writing their ideas down on a piece of paper and not really sharing that with anyone else. 

I'll be using this approach again.

Are our undergraduate construction students really ‘digital natives’?

In the higher education world we often hear that nowadays the students joining our courses have grown up immersed in digital technologies and are already highly proficient in using these technologies. They are the so-called ‘digital natives’ whilst the older generation are the ‘digital immigrants’. I realise that these ideas have been challenged but in my experience it is a widely held view that young people entering higher education are very ‘tech-savvy’ and don’t need any advice from us about the use of technology.

I wanted to get the students’ own views on this issue in order that we can adapt our provision to cater for students’ needs. At the start of the academic year last month I conducted a survey of all new students joining the Construction Studies Undergraduate Programme to identify the level of access they had to computing and how familiar they were with various technologies. The programme comprises five honours degree courses in construction-related disciplines, namely Architectural Technology, Building Engineering, Building Surveying, Construction Management, and Quantity Surveying & Commercial Management.

The survey yielded a total of 99 responses out of a total intake of 129 students so it is obviously just a small snapshot from one programme in one university. Nevertheless, it does produce some interesting results. Here are just a few of the key findings:

• The vast majority of students (93%) have access to their own laptop. The majority of these devices run the Windows operating system.


• Only around half the students currently have access to a tablet device.


• The overwhelming majority of students (95%) have a smart phone. Around a half of these are iPhones.


• Use of social media is nowhere near as widespread as we might expect. Whilst most students have a Facebook account, around two thirds of them post to Facebook rarely or never. Around 40% of students do not have a Twitter account and of those students who do, most of them rarely ‘tweet’. Google+ is only used frequently by around 20% of students.


• 95% of students have never maintained their own blog. Similarly, around 95% have limited or no experience of using wikis, and almost 90% have limited or no experience of using discussion boards.


• 95% of students have limited or no experience of using social bookmarking (such as Diigo or Delicious) and almost 80% of students have limited or no experience of using image hosting services (such as Flickr).


• Around half the students do not use any form of cloud storage.


• There is very limited use of ‘productivity’ web apps such as notetaking apps (e.g Evernote) or ‘to-do’ list apps (e.g. Wunderlist).

What does this tell us?
In my view this suggests that we cannot simply assume that our students are highly proficient in the use of digital technologies. I think our courses have to incorporate guidance on digital literacies and the effective use of digital technologies so that students can get the most from their studies and be better prepared for the professional world.

Further information
A document summarising the responses to the survey is available in PDF format here.

A good read...

I’ve just finished reading Alan Johnson’s book about his childhood up to the age of eighteen. Alan Johnson is a Labour MP who held senior cabinet positions in the last government, including Home Secretary. He was born and brought up in Notting Hill in West London in the 1950s.

Nowadays Notting Hill is home to several senior politicians, and indeed David Cameron had a house there prior to becoming prime minister. An average family home there would probably set you back around £5 million so people understandably think of Notting Hill as a very well-to-do area. What many people won’t realise is that 60 years ago the area was a slum. Johnson lived in abject poverty with very little support from a feckless father who abandoned the family. Living conditions were apalling by modern standards, with damp rooms, no heating, no proper sanitation and shared cooking facilities. His mother, who battled constantly against ill-health, worked at several jobs to scrape together enough to feed him and his older sister.

Despite the sadness, the story is ultimately about love and perseverance in the face of adversity.

Given the choice between a prime minister who lived in Notting Hill in the 1950s and one who lived there in 2010 I know which one I’d choose.

Alan Johnson - perhaps the best prime minister we never had.

Five things I've learnt on my Revit training course

This week, along with several colleagues from the Dept. of Property & Construction at the University of Westminster I’ve had three days of training in Revit, an architectural 3D modelling package. The training has been provided by Cadassist, and our trainer, Aaron has been superb - he is clearly extremely knowledgeable and experienced, not just in this software package, but also in many other relevant packages which often run alongside Revit. He presents the course in a very clear manner and is very patient with those of us who don’t quite grasp the concepts immediately.

The course has been a real eye-opener for me. I was aware that Revit (and similar packages) offered a whole new approach to the design process and the management of the information associated with a building, but this week I’ve had a glimpse of the real potential of this technology.

So here’s the top five things I’ve taken from the course:

1. This technology has the potential to genuinely change the way the industry operates. When used effectively it will not only change the design process but will also integrate production, cost control and built asset management and will facilitate real collaboration between all the parties involved.


2. Our students have to become proficient in this technology. It is them who will have the power to change the industry.


3. All construction professionals should develop a good working knowledge of this technology, not just those involved in design.


4. The technology has massive potential to change the teaching of built environment disciplines. For example, I teach construction technology and I can see fantastic possibilities for making the subject easier to understand for students.


5. Regular use of the technology will be essential to retain and develop proficiency. I am going to have to keep working with Revit otherwise I will simply forget it.

Looking at the screenshot below, it will be apparent that I still have a great deal to learn!!

30 things that make you second-generation Irish - The Irish Post

Link: 30 things that make you second-generation Irish - The Irish Post

This might be a lighthearted piece by @RobBrennan82 in the Irish Post but it’s amazing how many of these resonate with me. What I find particularly funny is that most people who aren’t 2GI (second generation Irish) probably won’t understand them at all!

Orla’s first visit to Loftus Road

John and I made our usual trip to QPR yesterday but we were accompanied by some friends, including my Goddaughter, Orla who was attending a match for the first time, despite having broken her wrist last week. She really enjoyed it and she brought us some luck as we beat Birmingham City 1-0.

Interesting perspective on LinkedIn

Came across this (very lengthy) article about LinkedIn via a tweet from @jjn1

It’s adopts quite  a cynical tone about LinkedIn and I must confess that, to some extent, this chimes with my own view. I’ve always been sceptical about the value of LinkedIn for those seeking to boost their career prospects. I particularly dislike the recent trend of ‘endorsing’ people for particular skills or talents. I have a whole stream of notifications in my LinkedIn inbox informing me that someone has endorsed me for this or that.

The one valuable thing I use LinkedIn for is staying in touch with our graduates and keeping up to date with the progress of their careers.

Learning with 'e's: New wine, new wineskins

Link: Learning with 'e's: New wine, new wineskins

A timely blog post from Steve Wheeler @timbuckteeth in which he uses the biblical metaphor of new wine in old wineskins to highlight the problem of trying to provide an education for students who learn in new ways and with with new technologies, whilst still clinging to traditional pedagogies and practices.

Why We Need Digital Wisdom

Link: Why We Need Digital Wisdom

I picked up on this article via Nik Peachy’s Tumblr Blog. The article is written by Marc Prensky in November 2012. Incidentally, it was Prensky who originally developed the metaphors of ‘digital native’ and ‘digital immigrant’ back in 2001 - a concept which has since been challenged. 

Anyway - this is an interesting piece. I find it quite useful to think of technology in terms of how we delegate portions of our mind, whether that be our memory to external devices, or our navigation skills to GPS devices.

I like the final paragraphs, which summarise the challenges for education:

For our students to get the maximum advantage from technology, we must view such enhancements not only as positive, but as essential. We need to reevaluate what “the basics” are for students’ technology-enhanced minds, and we need to revisit all our former notions of “age-appropriate.”

Some things—human passion, empathy, or yearning—may never be outsourced to technology. But we need to learn to combine these human traits with technology in order to make the wisest decisions in our 21stcentury context. For skills we choose to retain in our heads—such as logical and critical thinking—we need to turn to technology-enhanced ways of learning them, such as programming and online communities.

To do this, we need digital wisdom. The unenhanced human is no longer the smartest thing on the planet.

Last orders for the British boozer | Neil Davenport | spiked

Link: Last orders for the British boozer | Neil Davenport | spiked

I think this article has got it right, both on pubs and on the attitude of young people. I know from my own (often mis-spent) youth that pubs provided an enculturation into adult communities. I know from my own kids that there there doesn’t seem to be any real inclination on the part of young people to go to pubs nowadays. I think that’s a shame. As the author points out, pubs provide a great place for young people to interact with adults and to develop their social skills.