This document discusses how technological developments may impact education over the next 20 years. It outlines plans for a new School of Education Plaza that will facilitate collaboration between educators. It then describes 5 emerging technology trends and how they could influence 21st century skills. Key elements of education that may be affected are student autonomy, transactional distance between instructors and learners, and learning environments. Three scenarios are presented varying these elements from low to high levels. The document concludes with a workshop on using scenarios as diagnostic and visioning tools to explore relationships between technology and education.

1. Technological development
&
the future of education:
The next 20 years…
OEB Midsummit
Reykjavík, Iceland
June 2017

2. School of Education’s
Education Plaza
• Shared spaces for communities of practice involving
multiple stakeholders:
– Educators & administrators
– Future educators
– Policymakers
• Goals:
– Facilitate educators’ continuous professional development
– Strengthen ties between academia and educators
– Encourage innovative practices
– Inform about new knowledge, tools, etc.
– Promote forward looking thinking about education

3. The Icelandic Center for Future studies

4. Technology and education
5 convergence technology trends
• Focus on impact not jargony labels:
– Massively granular data analytics (Big data)
– Blurred distinction between the real and the digital
(Augmented reality)
– Digitize everything (Dematerialization)
– Critically thinking machines (Artificial intelligence)
– Ubiquitously integrated technology (Wearables/implants)
21st century skills will be derived from these
technological developments!

5. The education side…
• Key elements of education that are affected by
technological development:
– Student autonomy
• Learners want to be (or at least feel they are) in charge of
their own learning.
– Transactional distance
• Effective instructors minimize the physical, conceptual and
social separation between themselves and their learners.
– Learning environment
• Learning happens somewhere and there is a perception that
some places are more suited to learning than others.

6. Student autonomy
• Learners take charge of their own learning
– Pros
• Learners choose methods and strategies that work for
them.
• Learners aware of their own learning.
– Cons
• Learners avoid what is perceived as unnecessary.
• Instructors’ role is ambiguous.

7. Transactional distance
• The cognitive & conceptual distance between
instructors and learners: “a psychological and
communications space…” (Moore, 1993)
– Pros
• Instructors and learners relate to each other.
• Instructor is aware of learners’ progress.
– Cons
• May be perceived as hindering student autonomy.
• Can create gaps between learning environment and the real
world.

8. Learning environment
• Physical, social, contextual, cultural settings in
which learning occurs.
– Pros
• Situating learning in relevant contexts.
• Direct learners to appropriate learning tools and resources.
– Cons
• Potential disconnect between “real-world” and “educational-
world”.
• Limited access to useful tools and resources.

9. Application of scenarios
Do risk analysis regarding the decisions
which need to be taken in the
development process
Be prepared to meet the uncertainty of
the future - „prepared minds“
Develop new strategy and test it against
different scenarios
Bridge the gap between different
options and create understanding for
new solutions and process

10. The Future – Assumptions
 You cannot know the future, but a range of possible futures can be known;
 The likelihood of a future event or condition can be changed by policy, and
policy consequences can be forecasted;
 Gradations of foreknowledge and probabilities can be made; we can be
more certain about the sunrise than about the rise of the stock market;
 No single method should be trusted; hence, cross referencing methods
improve foresight; and
 Humans will have more influence on the future than they have had in the
past.
Glenn & Gordon (2003)

11. Scenario modeling: 3D matrix
X
Y
Z
X = Student Autonomy (low <--> high)
Y = Transactional Distance (high <--> low)
Z = Learning environment (low definition <--> high definition)

12. Scenario 1.
We’re doing great!
• X: High student autonomy
– Learners construct their own learning
experience according to learning goals.
– Collaborative problem-based learning.
– Technology integration is shared
responsibility.
• Y: Low transactional distance
– Learners consult with instructors or
virtual & real aides as and when needed.
• Z: High definition learning environment
– Learning is situated in authentic contexts
in real-world situations & simulations.

13. Scenario 2.
We’re getting there, but…
• X: Medium student autonomy
– Learners have some opportunities to shape own
learning experience but ultimate decisions are
instructors’.
– Personalized learning occurs when instructors aren’t
under pressure to address externally mandated goals.
– Instructor creates opportunities for learners to decide
on technology.
• Y: Medium transactional distance
– Learners can transmit communications to instructor
as needed but instructor decides when & how to
respond/react.
• Z: Medium definition learning environment
– Learning is mostly group- & classroom-based.
– Opportunities for collaborative & project-based
learning in classroom are common.

14. Scenario 3.
Help!
• X: Low student autonomy
– Education is governed by prescriptive policy and
regulations that emphasize process over
outcomes.
– Learning activities are decided by instructors
target the group over the individual (one-to-many
teaching).
– Technology has predefined place and purpose in
learning activities.
• Y: High transactional distance
– Learners are expected to communicate directly
with instructors only according to a
predetermined schedule.
• Z: Low definition learning environment
– Learning is classroom-based.
– Opportunities for collaborative & project-based
learning in classroom are few, if any.

15. Workshop
Using scenarios
Loosely based on Inayatullah’s (2004) Causal Layered Analysis:
Litany
“The official unquestioned
view of reality.”
Everyone knows what a
“traditional” classroom is…
Social causation
The social system that
supports and helps to
maintain the litany.
The purpose of the
classroom is to…
Worldview
Deeper ideological and
philosophical assumptions.
What happens in the
classroom is transferable to
the real world.
Myth & metaphor
Unconscious emotive
dimensions.
“Classroom” refers to a set
of practices and values.

16. Workshop
Part 1.
• Scenarios as a diagnostic tool:
– What is the relation between technological
development and the educational environment
portrayed in the scenario?
– Describe how technological integration/avoidance
shapes the educational environment portrayed in
the scenario.
– How would you justify maintaining the status quo
as described in the scenario?

17. Workshop
Part 2.
• Using scenarios to make the future better:
– How can the technological developments be used to
strengthen/advance the educational environment
portrayed in the scenario?
– What is the role of policymakers, administrators,
instructors and technology developers in achieving
your vision?
– What is the role of learners in achieving your vision?
– What would you propose as a next move?

18. Thank You!
Tryggvi Thayer
University of Iceland, School of Education
tbt@hi.is - http://www.education4site.org - @tryggvithayer
Karl Friðriksson
Innovation Centre Iceland/Icelandic Centre for Future Studies
karlf@nmi.is