Responding to the networked student advance he-conference2018-final
1. RESPONDING TO THE NETWORKED STUDENT –
THEORY AND PRACTICE
Nic Fair: Web Scientist and Digital Educator. nicfair.co.uk /
@nic_fair / N.S.Fair@soton.ac.uk
Lisa Harris: Director of Digital Learning and Digital Educator
/ @lisaharris / L.j.harris@exeter.ac.uk
AdvanceHE Conference, Aston July 2018
2. WHAT OUR TALK WILL COVER…
The Big Picture
Sector priorities
Learners and their expectations
Staff attitudes
Theoretical Framework
Our research
Impact on teaching and learning
Preliminary Research Conclusions
Discussion points
3. SECTOR PRIORITIES….
The TEF, Office for Students and NSS have led to a greater focus on the quality of HE
teaching & learning.
“for the first time, [the TEF will] link the funding of teaching to quality, not simply quantity”
(TEF Factsheet, 2016)
Competition from online-only education/training providers has required a reassessment
of HE business models.
“MOOCs are only the most publicized of an expanding and evolving marketplace of
alternatives to traditional HE” (ECAR Report, 2014)
AI, robotics and automation mean that graduates will need to be equipped with lifelong
learning skills, high-level digital literacies and a well developed Personal Learning
Network.
“Economic security will not come from having a job for life, but from having the
ability to maintain and renew the right skills through lifelong learning”
(Govt Office for Science, Future Skills & Lifelong Learning Report, 2017).
4. LEARNERS & THEIR EXPECTATIONS….
Most HE learners are ‘Networked Individuals (Rainie & Wellman, 2012), living,
learning and working in a Network Society (Castells, 1996, 2011).
Learning, meaning-making, identity and social capital emerge (or don’t) through a
learner’s lifelong interactions with their personal learning network.
Online, mobile and blended learning is “inevitable” (NMC Horizon Report, 2017).
77% of students feel that blended approaches are more effective than face-to-
face-only and online-only teaching (EDUCAUSE report, 2017).
5. STAFF ATTITUDES….
Broadly staff remain unconvinced…..
Only 22% of staff believe that online learning is effective (EDUCAUSE report,
2017).
45% of staff believe online learning is not effective (ibid.).
37% of staff want a “clear indication or evidence that students would benefit”
(ibid.).
34% of staff want time released for course redesign (ibid.)
6. A SOCIO-TECHNICAL APPROACH TO HE
TEACHING & LEARNING
• “knowledge is
distributed across a
network of connections,
and therefore learning
consists of the ability to
construct and traverse
those networks
(Downes, 2007)
Connectivism
• “ICT is used to promote
connections: between one
learner and other learners,
between learners and
tutors; between a learning
community and its learning
resources”. (Goodyear et al,
2001)
Networked Learning • Face-to-face time used
for developing digital
literacies and network
skills.
• MOOCS as a key hub
for autonomous
networked learning
through Personal
Learning Networks.
Flexible, MOOC-
Blended Learning
The learner (and learning) is INSEPARABLE from learning technologies
Socio-technical
Theory as applied
to education
(e.g. Latour, Pinch &
Bijker, Geels)
Supporting learning
theory, pedagogy and
methodology
(e.g. Siemens, Downes,
Goodyear, Illich,
Cummings, deLaat et
al, Goodyear &
Carvalho)
Theory
Pedagogy
Methodology
7. THE INTEGRATION MODELS
Module Location
(cohort size)
Duration Face-to-face
support
Southampton
MOOCs
Integration
model
Living and
Working on
Web
(UOSM2008)
Southampton
Campus
(34)
2nd semester Weekly
voluntary
ins
Learning in the
Network Age
Fully integrated
Online Social
Networks
(UOSM2012)
Southampton
Campus
(47)
2nd semester 4 workshop
sessions
Learning in the
Network Age
AND Power of
Social Media
Revision tool
Living and
Working on
Web
(MANG2049)
Singapore
Campus
(61)
3 weeks None
(Daily Google
Hangouts)
Learning in the
Network Age
Fully integrated
Online Social
Networks
(UOSM2012)
Southampton
Campus
(49)
2nd semester None Learning in the
Network Age
Partially
integrated /
revision tool
8. PRIOR KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERIENCE…
89% of learners had never participated in a MOOC before.
79% of learners had, at best, only a vague idea about what a
MOOC actually was.
61% had never studied in a blended way.
YET, 75% self-identified as residing on the Digital Resident half
of the Resident-Visitor spectrum (White & Le Cornu, 2011).
9. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
UOSM2012, 2016-17,
semester 2,
Interview data
13%
41%
16%
15%
15%
Comments on the value of participating in the MOOC
flexibility and accessibility of online
material
allows deeper understanding
allows deeper exploration of
content
video and audio is a simple way to
help me understand concepts
better
wider range of perspectives
available from global participants
10. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING UOSM2008, 2017-18,
semester 2,
Module reflections
5%
20%
15%
15%
15%
15%
15%
Comments on the value of participating in the MOOC
Flexibility and accessibility of online
material
Allows deeper understanding of content
I learnt from MOOC discussions
Loved the networked learning approach
Wider range of perspectives available
from global participants
Felt part of a learning community
Will use MOOCs again to prepare for
other modules
11. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
56%
34%
10%
91%
9% 0%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
MOOCs are a convenient and easy way for me to learn
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
12. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
23%
61%
16%
57%
29%
14%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
I learn more from MOOCs than from lectures
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
13. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
16%
74%
10%
65%
22%
13%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
MOOCs help me to understand the topic more deeply
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
14. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
49%
39%
12%
76%
14%
10%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
MOOCs are a good way for me to interact with other learners
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
15. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
55%
41%
4%
48% 48%
4%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
MOOCs are most useful when I also have face-to-face
session
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
16. IMPACT ON TEACHING & LEARNING
0%
50% 50%
5%
14%
81%
Strongly / Partially Agree Neutral / No opinion Strongly / Partially Disgree
MOOCs are a waste of my time
Pre-module Post-module
MANG2049, 2017-18,
semester 1, survey data
17. PRELIMINARY RESEARCH CONCLUSIONS
After experiencing the integration of MOOCs into their modules, learners are mainly positive
about the benefits to their learning experience, regardless of the integration model, because:
MOOCs deepen content knowledge and understanding.
MOOCs provide positive interaction opportunities in global networked learning
communities.
They learn more from MOOCs than from lectures (and face-to-face sessions are not always
necessary).
MOOCs are a convenient and flexible way to learn and include helpful multimedia sources.
However, there remains a core of between 5% and 15% of learners who are not positively
inclined towards the integration of MOOCs into their learning experience.
18. DISCUSSION POINTS
By integrating MOOCs (or other similar digital resources) into HE modules, a
number of sector priorities can be simultaneously addressed:
Our research indicates that most learners have an improved learning
experience across a range of positive factors.
Learners develop digital literacies and lifelong learning skills.
MOOCs, more generally, can form part of an HEI’s new product offering
and business model – both for the internal and external markets.
Continue the discussion:
@nic_fair and @lisaharris
Find out more about us :
Innovation In HE blog
Slides available:
https://nicfair.co.uk
19. References
• Department for Education, 2016. Teaching Excellence Framework factsheet.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/teaching-excellence-framework-factsheet
• EDUCAUSE / ECAR Report, 2014. Student and Faculty Technology Research Studies.
https://library.educause.edu/resources/2014/10/2014-student-and-faculty-technology-research-studies
• Government Office for Science, 2017. Future of skills and lifelong learning.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/future-of-skills-and-lifelong-learning
• NMC Horizon Report, 2017. Higher Education Edition. https://www.nmc.org/publication/nmc-horizon-
report-2017-higher-education-edition/
• EDUCAUSE / ECAR Report, 2017. Student and Faculty Technology Research Studies.
https://library.educause.edu/resources/2017/6/2017-student-and-faculty-technology-research-studies
• Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Milton Keynes:
Open University Press.
• Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social - An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford University
Press.
• Pinch, T.J. and Bijker, W.E., 1984. The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of
science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social studies of science, 14(3), pp.399-
441.
• Geels, F.W., 2002. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level
perspective and a case-study. Research policy, 31(8), pp.1257-1274.
CONT…..
20. References Continued…
• Downes, S. (2005, December 22). An introduction to connective knowledge. Stephen’s
Web. http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/page.cgi?post=33034
• Downes, S. (2006). Learning networks and connective knowledge. Collective intelligence and elearning, 20, 1-26.
Chicago
• Siemens, G. (2005a). Connectivism: Learning as network-creation. ASTD Learning News, 10(1). Chicago
• Siemens, G. (2005b). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Chicago
• Goodyear, P., Jones, C., Asensio, M., Hodgson, V. and Steeples, C., 2001. Effective networked learning in higher
education: notes and guidelines
• Goodyear, P., 2002. Psychological foundations for networked learning. In Networked learning: Perspectives and
issues (pp. 49-75). Springer, London.
• Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., & McConnell, D. (Eds.). (2004). Advances in research on networked
learning. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers
• Goodyear, P., 2005. Educational design and networked learning: Patterns, pattern languages and design
practice. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 21(1).
• Carvalho, L. and Goodyear, P., 2014. The architecture of productive learning networks. Routledge.
• Illich, I., 1971. Alternatives to Schooling. Times (London) Educational Supplement, 2945, pp.18-47.
• Cummings, T.G., 1978. Self-regulating work groups: A socio-technical synthesis. Academy of management
Review, 3(3), pp.625-634.
• De Laat, M., & Lally, V. (2003). Complexity, theory and praxis: Researching collaborative learning and tutoring
processes in a networked learning community. Instructional science, 31(1-2), 7-39.
• De Laat, M., Lally, V., Simons, R.J. and Wenger, E., 2006. A selective analysis of empirical findings in networked
learning research in higher education: Questing for coherence. Educational Research Review, 1(2)
Editor's Notes
No longer is ‘quantity’ of teaching sufficient, ‘quality’ is also crucial – and failure to provide teaching and learning which meets learner’s expectations can have real-world consequences (e.g. TEF award)
Accredited online courses, which can be shorter, cheaper and more focussed than on-campus HE options are challenging the sector to adapt its business models
Lifelong learning will be essential in enabling individuals to adapt to a rapidly changing future of work.
It is vital for HEIs to respond to these sector drivers effectively.
Most, but not all, HE learners today are……
Surveying over fifty-seven thousand staff and students at over a hundred institutions in ten countries, the EDUCAUSE report finds that both students and staff overwhelmingly believe that blended approaches are preferable to either online-only or face-to-face only modules,
BUT - there is a significant difference in student and staff attitudes to the effectiveness of blended approaches.
Forty-five percent of staff think that online learning is not effective and thirty-seven percent want “clear indication or evidence that students would benefit” before being motivated to integrate technology more effectively into their teaching.
This research attempts to add to a growing body of evidence in this regard and address staff concerns through the underpinning theory and evidence of practice.
This framework formalises some of the concepts we have mentioned above and provides underpinning support for why blended learning approaches should be effective.
However, as the EDUCAUSE report suggests, theory is not enough for many university staff.
Therefore, we have been investigating the impact of integrating MOOCs into university modules on teaching & learning.
[HANDOVER TO LISA]
We have explored MOOC integration in a number of different modules in a number of different ways, which are outlined here. We used pre- and post-module surveys, post-module interviews, and post-module reflective writings to explore learner’s attitudes towards the integration of MOOCs for teaching and learning.
So what did the learners think about the integration of the MOOc(s)….?
Using post-module interview data from UOUSM2012 2016-17, an on-campus, lecture-driven module…..[focus on deeper learning and global perspectives]
Using learner’s module reflections from UOUSM2008 2017-18, an online, innovation module…..[focus on deeper learning, learning communities and global perspectives]…[reduced emphasis on flexibility as the entire module is online]
Using pre- and post-module formal surveys for MANG2049, a module for students at Soton’s Singapore Campus…
Before the module 56% agreed in some form, but after the module this increased significantly to 91%.
Before the module only 23% agreed in some form, but after the module this increased to 57% - with a big shift from neutral to positive – meaning that over half the learners preferred doing the MOOC to going to lectures (from a learning perspective).
Before the module only 16% agreed in some form, but after the module this increased to 65% - again, with a big shift from neutral to positive – confirming results from the analyses of the other modules already presented – namely that after experiencing the MOOC learners understanding of the module content was improved.
Before the module 49% agreed in some form, but after the module this increased to 76% - again, with a big shift from neutral to positive. This also confirms previous findings about the value of networked learning and access to global perspectives.
Before the module 55% agreed in some form, but after the module this fell to 48% - which is interesting because it means that just over half the students did not feel the need for any face-to-face time to support their MOOC learning activities. This raises interesting questions about the findings of the EDUCAUSE report about blended learning [the 77% of students who prefer it] = after experiencing online learning through MOOCs, face-2-face time became (slightly) less important to learners.
Before the module 50% disagreed in some form, but after the module this rose to 81% - again, with a big shift from neutral to positive – although one learner, after participating in the MOOC, felt it WAS a waste of their time….
Having studied on a module featuring the integrated use of MOOCs, students report their attitudes as shifting from neutral/no opinion to a viewing them as mainly positive for their learning experience.
However, there remains a core of between 5 and 15% who are not positively inclined towards the integration of MOOCs into their learning experience.
[HAND BACK TO NIC]
Positive factors range from being able to learn ‘in bed’, to interacting with peers and global others, to gaining a deeper understanding of course content. This is crucial for TEF and NSS scores, because, as Coates said in2005, “positive engagement by students is acknowledged to be an important indicator of quality”.
Learners become more equipped for the changeable nature of future work.
Monetising MOOCs through developing proper accreditation (such as Uni of Coventry is doing with FutureLearn and their 50 MOOC-based degree programmes by 2023), while simultaneously making them suitable for on-campus integration, has real value to an HEI’s business activities.
