Tuesday, 21 February 2017

2 Free & useful #TELearning in Higher Ed reports #elearning #education

These two reports give a status of TELearning in 2016: one analysing the Technology Enhanced Learning for Higher Education in the UK (233 pages, with appendixes starting at page 78) and case studies of Technology Enhanced Learning (48 pages, with nice examples). I give a brief summary below.

The reports were produced by UCISA (Oxford univesity based network) representing many major UK universities and higher education colleges and it states to have a growing membership among further education colleges, other educational institutions and commercial organisations interested in information systems and technology in UK education.

The used definition of TELearning is: "Any online facility or system that directly supports learning and teaching. This may include a formal VLE (virtual learning environment), e-assessment or e-portfolio software, or lecture capture system, mobile app or collaborative tool that supports student learning. This includes any system that has been developed in-house, as well as commercial or open source tools."

Both reports provide an interesting (though UK-oriented) read. Here is a short overview of what you can find in them:

The report focusing on the TELearning for HE in UK (based on the TELearning survey), I have put the main conclusions next to the main chapters:

Top 5 challenges facing institutions: Staff Development is the most commonly cited challenge, Electronic Management of Assessment, lecture capture/recording continues to move up, technical infrastructure, legal/policy issues.

Factors encouraging the development of TELearning: Enhancing the quality of learning and teaching, meeting student expectations, improving student satisfaction are most common driver for institutional TEL provision. Availability of TEL support staff, encourages the development of TEL, feedback from students, availability and access to tools, school/departmental senior management support. In terms of barriers for TELearning: lack of time, development & consolidating, culture continues to be a key barrier, with Departmental\school culture, and Institutional culture, internal funding, and lack of internal sources of funding to support development.

Strategic questions to ask when considering or implementing TELearning: with Teaching, Learning and Assessment consolidating, the rise of the Student learning experience/student engagement strategy, corporate strategy and library and Learning Resources.

TELearning currently in use: main institutional VLE remains Blackboard and Moodle.
Moodle remains the most commonly used platform across the sector, but rising alternative systems such as Canvas by Instructure, and new platforms eg. Joule by Moodlerooms. SharePoint has rapidly declined. An increase in the number of institutions using open learning platforms such as FutureLearn and Blackboard’s Open Education system. Evaluation activity in reviewing VLE provision: conducting reviews over the last two years. TEL services such as lecture capture is the second most commonly reviewed service by all over the last two years.

Support for TELearning tools: e-submission tools are the most common centrally supported
software, ahead of text matching tools such as Turnitin, SafeAssign and Urkund. Formative and summative e-assessment tools both feature in the Top 5, along with asynchronous communication
tools. Adoption of document sharing tools across the sector and the steady rise in the use of lecture
capture tools. Podcasting tools continue to decline in popularity and the new response items electronic exams and learning analytics appear not to be well established at all as institutional services, with only a handful of institutions currently supporting services in these areas.
Social networking, document sharing and blog tools are the common non-centrally supported tools. TEL tools are being used to support module delivery. Blended learning delivery based on the provision of supplementary learning resources remains the most common use of TEL. Only a small number of institutions actually require students to engage in active learning online across all of their programmes of study. Increasing institutional engagement in the delivery of fully online courses, with over half of 2016 respondents now involved. Growing adoption of MOOC platforms by institutions, but less than half of respondents are pursuing open course delivery.
Little change in the range of online services that higher education institutions are optimising for access by mobile devices. Access to course announcements, email services and course materials and learning resources remain the three leading services optimised for mobile devices. Library services, are being optimised. Optimising lecture recordings at the same level as 2014. The most common ways in which institutions are promoting the use of mobile devices are through the establishment of a bring your own device (BYOD) policy and by loaning out devices to staff and students. Funding for mobile learning projects has reduced in scale.
Outsourcing of institutional services grows: student email, e-Portfolio systems, VLEs and staff email. The type of outsourcing model is dependent on the platform being outsourced: Software as a Service (SaaS) cloud-based model for email services, and to use an institutionally managed, externally hosted model for TEL related tools, such as e-Portfolios and the VLE for blended and fully online courses.
National conferences/seminars and internal staff development all remain as key development activities. Increase in the promotion of accreditation activities, in particular for HEA and CMALT
accreditation.
Electronic Management of Assessment (EMA) making the most demand on TEL support teams. Lecture capture and Mobile technologies as well. The demand from Learning Analytics and from distance learning/fully online courses continues to increase. A new entry which might be expected to make more demands in the future is Accessibility; in particular, demands made by changes to the Disabled Students’ Allowance in the English higher education sector.

A number of appendixes: full data, a longitudinal analysis of TELearning over the past years (going back to 2001), questions that were used for the longitudinal analysis.

The report focusing on the case studies from TELearning:
These case studies are a companion to the earlier report mentioned above. The idea is that the case studies enable to probe themes in the data and shed light on TEL trends through the eyes of representative institutions, offering context to the findings of the overall report.
In each of the case studies, the institutions provide answers to the following TELearning sections: used TELearning strategy, TEL drivers, TEL provision, TEL governance and structures, TEL-specific policies, Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) strategy, Teaching Excellence Framework, Distance Learning and Open Learning, and Future challenges. The diversity of institutes interviewed give a good perspective of the TEL landscape within Higher Education in the UK. 

Friday, 17 February 2017

Recognising Fake news, the need for media literacy #digitalliteracy #literacy #education

I was working on a blogpost on books focusing on EdTech people (the woman, the tasks…), but then I opened up YouTube and I saw that president Trump had his first solo press conference.

I guess we can all benefit from Mike Caulfield's ebook (127 page) on web literacy for students (online version) or here for other versions including pdf), a fabulous book with lots of links and useful actions to become (more) web literate (thank you Stephen Downes for bringing it to my attention). 

After watching it, I thought there was a clear need (for me as an avid supporter of education) to refer to initiatives on the topic of real and fake news, because honestly I do not mind if someone calls something fake or real, as long is that statement is followed by clear arguments describing what you think is fake about it, and why. Before doing that, I want to share the reason for this shift in attention.

I love Amerika, for several reasons: where Europe stays divided, the United States have managed to get its nations to work together, while leaving enough federal freedom to adapt specific topics according to individual nation’s believes; I have worked and honestly like to work with Americans (of all backgrounds) and American organisations, truly I am in complete awe of the Bill of Rights, and the way the constitution is securing freedom for all. I know that a goal as ‘freedom for all’ is difficult to attain, but at least it is an openly set vision, put on paper. I mean, I truly respect such strong incentive to promote freedom for all citizens within a legal framework and the will to achieve that freedom. And due to this love for the United States, I felt that Trump is okay. In democratic freedom, the outcome might not be of anyone’s liking, but … history has shown that democratic freedom can swing in a lot of ways and that it this diversity nurtures new ideas and insights along the way.

However, while watching the press conference I got more and more surprised by what was said and how: there were clear discriminatory references, which I do not think befit a President of all the American people. But okay, to each his own and rhetorical styles can differ (wow, can they differ), but the ongoing remark and reference on Fake News that kept coming up as an excuse and used as a non-sequitur at any point during the press conference just got to me. Manipulation has many faces, and only education can help built critical minds that will be able to judge for themselves, and as such be able to distinguish real from fake news. To me, even if you refer to ‘this is fake news’, I want to hear just exactly what you mean: which part of what news is fake and why. Enlighten me would be the general idea.  

Fake news and believing it: status
A Stanford study released in November 2016, concluded that 82% of middle-schoolers couldn’t distinguish between an ad labeled “sponsored content” and a real news story on a website. Which seems to indicate that somewhere we are not addressing media or digital literacy very well. On the reasons why this lack of media literacy is occuring, I like the viewpoint of Crystle Martin who looks at misinformation and warcraft in this article; saying:
Teaching information literacy, the process of determining the quality and source of information, has been an emphasis of the American Association of School Librarians for decades. However, teaching of information literacy in school has declined as the number of librarians in schools has declined.
Luckily, there are some opinions and initiatives on distinguishing between fake and real news. Danah Boyd had another look at the history of media literacy, focusing on the cultural context of information consumption that were created over the last 30 years. Danah shared her conclusions in a blogpost on 17 January 2017, entitled 'Did media literacy backfire?' She concluded that media literacy had backfired, in part as it was built upon assumptions (e.g. only media X, Y and Z deliver real news) which often does not relate to the thinking of groups of people that prefer other news sites A, B and C.  

Danah describes it very well:
Think about how this might play out in communities where the “liberal media” is viewed with disdain as an untrustworthy source of information…or in those where science is seen as contradicting the knowledge of religious people…or where degrees are viewed as a weapon of the elite to justify oppression of working people. Needless to say, not everyone agrees on what makes a trusted source.
The cultural and ethical logic each of us has, is instilled in us from a very early age. This also means we look upon specific thinking as being ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. And to be honest, I do not feel this cultural/ethical mind set will deter all of us from being able to become truly media literate. As long as we talk to people across the board. As long as colliding thoughts fuel a dialogue, we will learn from each other and be able to understand each other in better ways (yes, I am one of those people that think that dialogue helps learning, and results in increased understanding, thank you Socrates).
If this is the case, than we need to do a better job of improving media literacy, including listening to people with other opinions and how they see it. It is a bit like the old days, where the people from the neighborhood go to the pub, the barbershop, or any get together were people with different opinions meet, yet feel appreciated even during heated debates.  

Maha Bali, in her blogpost “Fake news, not your main problem” touches on the difficulty of understanding all levels of the reports provided in the news and other media. Sometimes it does demand intellectual background (take the Guardian, I often have to look up definitions, historical fragments etc. to understand a full article, it is tough on time and tough to get through, but … sometimes I think it is worth the effort). Maha Bali is a prolific, and very knowledgeable researcher/educator. She touches on the philosophical implication of ‘post-truth’ and if you are interested, her thesis subject on critical thinking (which she refers to in her blogpost) will probably be a wonderful read (too difficult for me). So, both Maha and Danah refer to the personal being not only political, but also coloring each of our personal critical media literacies. 

If media literacy depends on personally developing skills to distinguish fake (with some truth in it) from real (with some lies in it), I gladly refer to some guidelines provided by Stephen Downes, as they are personal. One of the statements I would think is pivotal to distinguish between fake and real news, is understanding that truth is not limited to one or more media papers/sites/organisations, it is about analysing one bit of news at a time. It is not the organisation that is authoritative at all times, it is the single news item that is true or at least as real as it can get. So, here is a list of actions put forward by Stephen Downes on detecting fake news : Trust no one, look for the direct evidence (verification, confirmation, replication, falsification), avoid error (with major sources of error being: prediction, relevance, precision, perspective), take names (based on trust, evidence and errors), and as a final rule he suggests to diversify in sources (which I really believe in, the pub analogy). 

Another personal take on detecting fake news comes from Tim O'Reilly who describes a personal story, and while doing so he sheds some light on how an algorithm might be involved. 

Thinking about algorithms, you can also turn to some fake news detectors:

The BS detector: a fabulous extension to the Mozilla browser. Looks at extreme bias, conspiracy theory, junk science, hate group, clickbait, rumor mill… http://bsdetector.tech/

Snopes: started out as a website focused on detecting urban legends, and turned into an amazing fact checking website (amazing as you can follow the process of how they look at a specific item and then decide whether it is fake).  ( http://www.snopes.com/

And finally, for those who like to become practical asap: a lesson plan on fake news provided by KQED http://ww2.kqed.org/lowdown/wp-content/uploads/sites/26/2016/12/Fake-news-lesson-plan.pdf

In my view, the increase in accepting the idea of fake news is related to the increased divide within society. So, in a way I agree with Danah Boyd: we read and agree with specific people and news sources, and so we filter our sources to those people and media. Seldom do we read up on sources from media we do not agree with, or people we disagree with. It used to be different, as discussions around specific topics were discussed in our community, with a mix of ideas and preferences.
So maybe media literacy could be done on a community level, where everyone gets together and shares their opinion on certain topics. We recreate the local pub or café, where everyone meets and gets into arguments on what they believe (or not). Media literacy – to me – is about embracing diversity of opinion, listening, seeing the arguments from the other side and … making up your own mind again.

So, coming back to president Trumps referencing to fake news. In terms of increasing media literacy, I do not have a problem with referencing to something that is seen as fake news, I do have a problem with that fact not being explained: what is fake about it? Why? And again, with saying that, I mean a real explanation, not simply repeating ‘this is fake news. It is. I tell you it is’ (feel free to imagine the tone of voice that such a sentence might be delivered in), now give me the facts, because I do want to know why you or anyone else is labeling something as true or false.

Wednesday, 15 February 2017

How do Instructional Designers support and add to teacher knowledge

As online learning becomes more known, the quality of the delivered online materials become more essential, as learners can (partly) decide which courses they will follow based on the quality of the course material. One of the challenges is to give teachers and trainers an idea of how instructional designers can help (IDs are schooled in online learning options) and what instructional designers can bring to the interdisciplinary learning/teaching team (a broader online and blended learning knowledge, specifically aimed at online or blended interactions, this relies on specific theoretical frameworks that facilitate practical implementations). So, being asked by EIT InnoEnergy to provide an overview of why Instructional Designers are an important Human Resource profile to ensure high quality online or digital learning material, I put together this brief presentation. The slides are text rich so course partners (SELECT) can have another look after the presentation and an ongoing conversation with local Instructional Designers might be started.

In the meantime I am continuing the inspiring work on the Instructional Design Variation Matrix (a practical guide for Instructional Designers, a bit of an extended job aid).

(picture: deeply thinking teachers from KTH Sweden, Polito Italy, UPC Spain, IST Portugal, Aalto Uni Finland listening to online learning experiences at InnoEnergy SELECT kick-off meeting)



Friday, 20 January 2017

Tips for a PhD defense or viva #phd

It is with quite some pleasure that I was awarded the PhD in Educational Technologies last week.

The UK version of a PhD defense is called a Viva, which resembles a closed oral examination (open book) with one external examiner (connected to another University than the one you are at) and an internal examiner (affiliated to your own University, but with whom nor yourself, nor your supervisors have co-authored a paper – so not closely professionally related). In addition to that, you have one observer (normally that is one of your supervisors, she or he will take notes on what is said, and possible recommendations) and a chair (Doug Clow, who explains all the details of the viva and who sees to it that everyone stays hydrated and in an objective state of mind). In my case the external examiner was Neil Morris (Leeds University), the internal examiner was Allison Littlejohn (The Open University, UK). The external examiner usually leads the questioning, which was also the case in my viva. Btw the central question to my PhD thesis was 'what characterizes the informal, self-directed learning of experienced adult, online learners engaged in individual or social learning using any device to follow a FutureLearn MOOC'. It resulted in a conceptual framework for informal self-directed learning, using a method that provided the voices (experiences) of the learners to come through, as such providing a theory from the ground up (in most cases a framework starts from theory, providing a top down dynamic to come to the conclusions). A draft version of the thesis can be read here. The picture shows my two supervisors (Mike Sharples and Agnes Kukulska-Hulme) and Rebecca Ferguson (who was kind enough to be my main examiner during the mock viva) and my wonderful colleagues Janesh Sanzgiri, Jenna Mittelmeier and Garron Hilaire.

The questions started off mildly (with a fair question, which aims at making you feel comfortable, so along the lines of: briefly describe your research, why were you interested in the topic you investigated). From there the questions tend to become more complex and they tend to demand a more in-depth answer. Normally the questions will start at the beginning of your thesis, and consist of overall (e.g. how did you select your literature) as well as very detailed questions (why did you select only that fragment here) which the examiner found either of interest, confusing, or lacking. This means you really need to understand why you did what you did, throughout your thesis.
These are some of the questions I got, with some additional information:  
  • How do your research questions follow from your literature review? During preparation I linked all of my research questions to the most influential paper I mentioned in my literature review. This is also handy for other literature related questions, as you memorise core papers and their subsequent authors.
  • Which element of your findings gave rise to the most poignant discussion; and can you list the main authors for that discussion reflecting on that part of your findings? Why did you limit yourself to these authors for the discussion on that part of X findings? I can tell you, this was a tough question. It means you relate the literature of your literature review and use some of those papers to fuel the scientific discussions on your findings taking into account what the literature already pointed to, as opposed to what your findings show to be different (or similar, as you will most likely find that your findings have commonalities as well as differences with prior research).   
  • What is the relation between the research of your pilot study and the main study? In my case the pilot study had different research questions (and sub-questions) than the main study, this had to be explained, and this had an effect on the findings. This change resulted from the qualitative, exploratory starting point of my study, and the resulting findings from the pilot which urged me to rephrase the research questions of my main study a bit.
  • Is there a theory runs through your investigation, and has an effect on the literature you choose to focus on, the methodology, and research instruments? In my case that was socio-constructivism, briefly: one of the theories I used (connected to the pedagogical design of FutureLearn) is Laurillards conversational framework, specifically the informal conversational framework, which is related to the socio-constructivist view of the world. Additionally, I choose to use Charmaz’s constructing Grounded Theory approach, which also is deeply embedded in the socio-constructivist heritage, and I used multiple learner voices to look at emerging codes, categories and concepts coming from multiple viewpoints (as I used multiple data sources provided to me over time by the participants in my study – participants were asked to self-report their learning through learning logs, sent at different moments throughout their learning experience with FutureLearn MOOCs.
  • Questions could also be limited in scope, for instance: what is your definition of socio-constructivism? Prepare core definitions that are key to your thesis.
  • How did your research questions guide your coding? Tough one, as there is a tension between qualitative research which starts from the concept of no-assumption, to research questions inevitably guiding codes (e.g. codes related to the sub-question of technology for learning).
  • Or considering one area of my findings: what type of definition are you using for social learning? And how does it differ from other social learning definitions? In my case, I used social learning as it is defined by Laurillard, which fits FutureLearn, and is based on the notion of Socratic dialogue, which means it involves at least two active people. This stands in contrast with for instance Bandura (who goes back to a behaviorist view as well, as Bandura’s definition of social learning can be traced back to Pavlov), where Bandura also sees passive learning (e.g. lurking) also as a form of social learning, as it is still embedded in a the whole of society as the learning environment and is part of observing.
  • Two difficult questions were raised during my mock viva. A mock viva is a sort of general rehearsal for your viva. It usually involves your supervisors, as well as a colleague who wishes you well and wants to strengthen your viva skills. In my case, I head the pleasure of having Rebecca Ferguson as my mock viva examiner and she is fabulous! I also used some of her tips in preparation for the mock viva, have a look at the top 40 viva questions she listed as important here. One of the questions she asked me was: what is the difference between MOOC learning and other online learning? E.g. active presence of a facilitator, scale, length of course versus length of curriculum, prerequisites, compulsory or not. Another difficult question was: why did not you taken into account the MOOC educators? Where the better answer would have been: I did take them into account educators, but only in the roles in which they were seen by the learners, not in their classical roles as defined by educational institutes.

Some general remarks:
Make sure you know your thesis, and use parts of it when looking for answers to the questions you are getting. I mean, physically point to your thesis, this will buy you some time to find the right answer, and will give you some additional content support.

Look confident and be succinct. This gives the idea of professionalism to your person, a research professionalism. It does not matter if you belief it, just know that you are indeed the expert on that topic, so you can and must be confident.

The questions you get can come from a variety of thoughts: interest in the approach, doubt on what you wrote, or simple trickery to see whether you do really understand what you are doing. This means that at times you might here a question, which prompts an internal voice to say “Hey! But I did do that, or I do have an argument for doing it that way!”, in that case voice your answer and do not be afraid to stick with your thesis, or correct the examiners. Of course, it is essential to always stay polite, also when you are entering a discussion. But really, the examiners are there to strengthen your thesis, so they are in a way trying to let you grasp how you can make your thesis even stronger, and you are the one who is the real expert in what you have investigated, you know the processes you used to get to your main conclusions.


Wednesday, 28 December 2016

Academic job applications lessons learned... so far #phd #job

Once a PhD is almost finalized (I am having my PhD defense on Thursday 12 January 2017), the next challenge is finding a new job. Finding a new profession is always a challenge, but... it turns out that I was not that well prepared and I did not know some of the basic steps towards becoming a serious researcher. So, I thought that I would add to the previous PhD posts and accompanying slides (on Life as a PhD student and Is there life post PhD?).

Some elements are easily adaptable for future job applications, and other actions should have been undertaken early in the PhD journey. I learned to mention my experiences explicitly, to read the job applications 10 times over (as well as the information page of the related departments), to illustrate funding explicitly, and highlight teaching experiences. I did ask a Human Resource expert to have a look at my academic resume/CV from the HR point of view, and that improved the overall look of it. But admittedly, no one else but me knows what I actually did, so I had to learn to make my academic leadership/research/philosophy explicit, while staying true to myself (this last element can have a huge effect by the way).
On the other hand, there are some facts that are unavoidably part of the process of becoming a serious researcher, and it seems that I have to find and accept those rules. Here is what I learned so far, all mixed with some personal reflections on each step (reflections of someone who still has to learn the ropes despite (or because of) her age. If you know other points of attention, feel free to share, I still have a lot to learn, I am sure.

What accounts as scientific output: choose high impact journals to publish your research
However much you might be critical of the self-sustaining closed research publishing cycle... it has no use to solely publish in open access journals if you want to be seen as a high class researcher. Publishing in what is called A1 (or high impact) journals is inevitable if you want to be seen as a strong researcher. Even if you have a high h-index and accompanying citations, it just is not valued as strongly as the sometimes less-cited A1 journals.
There is a good, longstanding article on the debate of 'Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research' comes from Per O Seglen which goes back to 1997, a more recent article published in Nature written by Ewen Callaway on some of the publishing elite turning its back on the impact factor. And there is of course the risk of being trapped by predatory open access publishers, which needs to be avoided by all of us.

Research versus practice oriented work
Another distinction is made between research articles and practice work and articles. To me writing practice oriented articles increases the public awareness of evidence-based research implementation. I also really like to put theory to practice (what works on paper and in life... is real evidence-based, right?). But, it can be used against you when your profile is compared to others who publish research articles solely, or only work on theoretical research. So, if you want to be considered as a serious researcher, collaborate with other high impact researchers and institutes to built your strong research profile.
This also means to use highly visible (and generally accepted) theoretical frameworks or theoretical grounding for any application which involves research. Share ready-to-be-used research instruments, based on theoretical sound frameworks. This is part of making your assumptions and expertise visible, if you have theoretical knowledge and you are planning to use it, than make those theoretical groundings shine like really bright stars in order to look as serious as the serious investigator you are.
On the other hand, look for practice oriented postdocs if you like putting theory to practice .

Making research assumptions visible
To me, it is very logical what I did professionally, but that is not the case with others reading my resume/CV. This is true from a theoretical research perspective, and from a practical perspective. A sentence like "I developed and rolled out multiple elearning solutions" covers what I did in terms of developing Technology Enhanced Learning tools and instruments. It turned out that such sentences simply get blurred if they are in the middle of a cv. Those types of sentences do not ring any bells, so they do not trigger the brain of whomever is reading the resume. I found that out the hard way, from feedback indicating that the person who was accepted had more experience with authoring tools and virtual learning environments ... I have used multiple authoring tools, each to build online learning that was meaningful for its context, delivery and target population, ... so that made me think about what I had mentioned in my resume, and what was actually understood by it. So, now I adapted my resume, and added a brief list of examples after the sentence: built content using authoring tools, increased social learning experiences by implementing a diverse social learning palet (cohort learning, jigsaw approach), linked indicators to meaningful learning analytics, engaged in expert recording, editing and using mixed media (audio, video, computer assisted animation tools), wrote html5 applications to be used in mobile learning, installed, supported and adapted Moodle for LMS (including basic learning analytics). But these are all very practice oriented deliverable's.

Now, I also understand that if I want to focus on my scientific work, I will have to briefly describe and than possibly offer more detailed accounts of my research work: instruments used, frameworks used, theoretical grounding I am familiar with... Looking as a serious researcher opens the door to becoming (an even more serious) one. Classes I have given (for which levels or groups).
From a personality perspective, listing these accomplishments felt difficult. It felt like bragging (a thing not to be done in my upbringing, but ... very necessary when applying for jobs in competitive fields).

Promote and support your independent research 
From a research perspective, there is a recurring question probing for any independent scientific work you have performed. Again, this is where I used the wrong sort of phrasing: I mentioned my independent scientific work, but I did not specify that it was independent (I set it up, coordinated it, built the instruments and found funding), which made it look like just something I was involved in due to being asked. Okay, I am changing the phrasing on those options as well.
But there is more, if you are writing a research or teaching proposal, make sure you use strong, supported theoretical frameworks for those proposals. Again, show that you know your field-specific research, and that you can use accepted theoretical frameworks as a means for your proposal.
Get affiliated with a major research institute. Not being affiliated with an well-established, recognised research institute might also keep doors closed. So even if you are an independent researcher, try to get a (free, but affiliated) title with one of the major universities. This will help you grow personally, professionally, and will help to open doors in the future.

Built and nurture your professional research network
Even if you cannot sell yourself that well to others you do not know, those researchers who do know you will understand your strengths more easily. This enhances your options of getting a job at their institutions, or

Ask more senior researchers to revue your proposal
Well, this is of course only possible if you write your proposal well in advance, as senior researchers have little spare time. I neglected this option with one of my research proposals, and the feedback made me realize that it could have been stronger, if I had only showed the proposal to more experienced academics in my network and gotten their feedback.

Understanding academic leadership, and making it explicit
Providing a good overview of your academic leadership is very useful. This means that you need to put yourself out there, ready to collaborate with others. Say yes to any research, supervision, funding, teaching opportunities you might be offered or you can attract yourself. This is VERY important. If you support anyone's (research) thesis, whether in a master/PhD track, make note and list it in your resume (preferably with a link to title and person of course).

Language is also a determining factor, being able to communicate in English is quite important in the Northern hemisphere. And although the academic world is seen as being international, you will have to make sure you learn your field-specific jargon and regional focus points (some countries look for international academics, others are more national in their search). And it seems to me that it is better to stay and get a post-doc where you got your PhD, than to immediately go out and move country immediately after having finished your PhD. So, first build up some extra seniority as a researcher.

Personal challenges
Everyone looking for a job has additional personal challenges: for me - or at least how I perceive it - there is my age (admitting that I do have a lot of pre-academic professional experiences). The fact that I come from a background without prior academics (so no common or informal knowledge was passed on). The fact that I belief everyone should be able to have access to any research output (which inevitably brought me to the idea that open journals are always the best choice, which ... they are not if you want to be seen as a serious researcher. My family combination (same sex couple with young child) omits me from some working environments, and omits some professional options.

Of course, these are only small challenges when compared to others in more pressing circumstances, e.g. what to do if you were educated in another country or having had to move from a forced displacement, and your at least one of your degrees is not acknowledged? But for me, it already feels like an uphill battle and sometimes one I had not seen coming.

I will become 50 years old in the year to come, and I must admit I feel a bit beaten by the norm once again. At this point in time it feels like I found my calling too late, or that I am not fully equipped for it, and that the choices made early in life keep weighing on the future steps you take.  

Monday, 19 December 2016

Call for papers: MOOC, artificial intelligence, immersive research... disseminate your knowledge!

eMOOCs2017:
conference dates: 22nd to 26th May 2017
Location: Madrid, Spain
Website: http://emoocs.eu/emoocs-2017-conference/

EMOOCs 2017, the 5th European MOOCs Stakeholders Summit, will take place from 22nd to 26th May at the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (Spain). In addition and during the same week on 24th and 25th May, Open edX will hold its first European conference in the same location.

Do not miss this great opportunity to learn first-hand about the best examples of MOOCs in the world. Organised by Universidad Carlos III de Madrid with the collaboration of P.A.U. Education, EMOOCs 2017 will bring together leading European actors in Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), which will range from policy makers to practitioners to researchers.

The event will be organised in five tracks:
• Experience Track, based on new learning and teaching models; • Research Track, to focus on research-based online methodologies;
• Policy Track, a session that will assess the current potential and future challenges of MOOCs in European education institutions; 
• Business Track
, that will look in depth at how businesses are taking advantage of new educational technology;
• Spanish Track, a session dedicated to analysing the use of MOOCs in Spain and Latin America.
Are you interested in submitting a paper? Your submissions are most welcome. The closing date for submissions for the Research and Experience Tracks and proposals for Workshops and Working groups is 16th January 2017. Paper submissions for the Spanish Track, Policy Track, Business Track and submissions for Work-in progress short papers must be received by 9 March 2017.
Check submission procedures and important dates at http://emoocs.eu/important-dates/ For any additional information, please contact registration@emoocs.eu 

Dates:
16 Jan 2017: Submissions deadline for Research and Experience Tracks. Proposals for Workshops
24 Feb 2017: Notification of acceptance/rejection (Research and Experience Tracks, Workshops)
20 Mar 2017: Camera-ready versions for Springer LNCS Proceedings (Research and Experience Tracks)


ECSM 4th European Conference on Social Media 2017
Hosted by Business and Media School of the Mykolas Romeris University (MRU), Vilnius, Lithuania Conference dates: 3-4 July 2017.
Extended deadline: 9th January 2017.
The European Conference on Social Media (ECSM) focuses on academic research and practical applications of Social Media in many areas. This includes topics within Business, Education and the analysis of society such as, Enterprise social network; Technology enhanced learning and social spaces– to mention only a few topics. The conference attracts a varied group of people with different perspectives on e-Learning and brings top research and proven best practices together into one location, for the purposes of finding ways to use Social Media.

For more information and to submit papers, please go to: http://www.academic-conferences.org/conferences/ecsm/ecsm-call-for-papers/
ECSM 2017 will also be hosting the final round of the Social Media in Practice Excellence Awards. We aim to showcase innovative social media applications in business and the public sector. We are keen to see how academe and business have worked together to identify, develop and implement innovative social media applications and to this end we encourage joint submissions with both academic and practitioner contributors. More details about the competition at: http://www.academic-conferences.org/conferences/ecsm/ecsm-excellence-awards/

Papers presented at the conference will be published in the conference proceedings which have an ISSN and an ISBN subject to author registration and payment and will be considered for further development and publication in a number of journals.

AIED 2017 CALL FOR PAPERS
Cebu, The Philippines - 
Conference dates: 26-30 June 2017
website: http://aied2017.ateneo.edu/

The 18th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (AIED 2017) is the next in a longstanding series of biennial international conferences for high quality research in intelligent systems and cognitive science for educational computing applications.

SUBMISSION CATEGORIES
- Full papers (10-12 pages) - submission:
https://easychair.org/conferences/?conf=aied2017

- Posters (4 pages) - submission:
- Industry Papers (up to 6 pages) - submission:
- Workshop proposals (2-4 pages)
- Tutorial proposals (2-4 pages)
- Doctoral consortium (4 pages)
- Interactive Events (2 pages)

SUBMISSION DATES
- Abstract for Full Papers Jan 17, 2017, 11:59pm HST
- Full Papers & Posters: Jan 24, 2017, 11:59pm HST
- Industry Papers: Jan 24, 2017, 11:59pm HST
- Workshop & Tutorial Proposals: Jan 13, 2017, 11:59pm HST
- Doctoral Consortium papers: Feb 26, 2017, 11:59pm HST
- Interactive Events: April 7, 2017, 11:59pm HST

For more information, visit the conference web page:
http://aied2017.ateneo.edu/

General Chair:
Benedict du Boulay, University of Sussex
Program Committee Chairs:
Ryan Baker, University of Pennsylvania
Elisabeth Andre, Augsburg University
Local Arrangements Chair:
Ma. Mercedes T. Rodrigo, Ateneo de Manila University
Jessica O. Sugay, Ateneo de Manila University

iLRN2017 3rd Immersive Learning Research Network Conference
conference dates: 26-29 June 2017
Location: Coimbra, Portugal, European Union

Special Track on Immersive and Engaging Educational Experiences

Overview
------------------------
Immersive and engaging experiences are powerful teaching tools and allow innovative forms of entertainment, learning, training, and other experiences. More and more virtual reality platforms, virtual world environments, augmented/alternate reality applications and game -based experiences, and various forms of interactive media are designed to create engaging and immersive experiences in an educational setting. This can be a traditional classroom, a virtual and remote classroom setting or activities that further the educational agenda.
In this track, various forms of interactive media and “entertainment with purpose” are
discussed to create different forms of engagement. In this special track we discuss how
we can design, develop, and analyze educational environments to be both, immersive
and engaging. The track does not only cover research on design, development, and
analysis of such environments, we also invite submission describing non traditional and traditional design practice and development approaches to create different engaging experiences.

Topics
------------------------
The topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

- Learning: learning in immersive environments, augmented realities, virtual realities, virtual worlds, and games
- Design: design techniques, practices, methods
- Analysis: frameworks, exploration studies, user studies
- Technology: platforms, devices, engines, environments, graphics, navigation, interactions, user analysis, data analysis, procedural content generation, artificial intelligence
- Non- traditional, non -classroom and non- curricular learning environments
- Development approaches to create different engaging experiences

Author Info
------------------------
All papers (including papers selected for Springer publication, Online Proceedings and poster submissions) must follow Springer’s style guidelines.
Contributions are welcome as work-in-progress, research results, technical development, and best practices. Research, development, and best practices contributions will be accepted according to their quality and relevance either as full or short papers. Selected papers from the main conference and special tracks will be published in the Springer Proceedings, and the rest of the accepted papers will be published in the online proceedings with a confirmed ISBN number/reference. Work-in-progress will only be accepted as short papers.

Full papers accepted for Springer publication must not exceed of 14 pages.
Long papers accepted for publication at Online Proceedings must not exceed of 10-12
pages.
Short papers accepted for publication at Online Proceedings must not exceed of 6 – 8 pages.
Submitted papers must follow the same guidelines as the main conference submissions. Please visit https://immersivelrn.org/ilrn2017/author_info/ for guidelines and templates.
For submitting a paper to this special track, please use the submission system
https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=ilrn2017 , log in with an account or register, and select the track “Special Track 5: Immersive and Engaging Educational Experiences” to add your submission

Special Track Chairs
------------------------
- Johanna Pirker, Graz University of Technology, Austria
- Foaad Khosmood, California Polytechnic State University, USA

Program Committee (to be confirmed and extended)
------------------------
Allan Fowler, Kennesaw State University
Brian Mcdonald, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK
Dominic Kao, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA
Kai Erenli, UAS bfi Vienna, Austria
Ryan Locke, Abertay University, UK
Volker Settgast, Fraunhofer Austria, Austria
Kai Erenli, University of Applied Sciences BFI Vienna, Austria
Zoë J. Wood, California Polytechnic State University, USA
Britte H. Cheng, SRI International, USA
Helen Wauck, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, USA
Guenter Wallner, University of Applied Arts Vienna, Austria

Contact
------------------------
For more information, please contact Johanna Pirker (jpirker@iicm.edu).

Tuesday, 13 December 2016

Free report & toolkit on MOOCs for development #MOOCs4dev #itcilo @alessiames

The International Training Centre for International Labour Organisation (ITCILO) has always been a forerunner in innovation for development purposes. When I met Alessia Messuti two weeks ago, she mentioned that ITCILO just published a free report and toolkit on MOOCs for development. The report is 29 pages and gives a brief, yet well-founded description of the past 5 MOOCs which were implemented since 2015 in which the ITC was involved with (including a MOOC on 'Crowdsourcing for Development'), and the report also highlights the challenges (business model, quality assurance, access barriers, and facilitation & teaching support quality). The pedagogical MOOC design they used is also mentioned and what I really liked was their non-video approach, as this enabled much more learners in developing settings to engage with the MOOC material.

If you read the report and are interested in more information, Alessia also made a toolkit available for those who want to learn more than just the basics mentioned in the report. You can ask for a copy of the more expanded MOOCs4Dev toolkit by emailing delta@itcilo.org .

It is a good read for all those in valuing the concept of education for all and what that means for MOOCs. 

Friday, 9 December 2016

Commenting & sharing free 5th innovating pedagogy report #pedagogy #EdTech #OU

While I was reading the latest innovative pedagogies report, some comments came to mind, which I will gladly share a bit further down this blogpost after a quick description of the report itself. Researchers from the Instituteof Educational Technology located at The Open University (UK) together with academics from the Learning Sciences Lab at the National Institute of Education in Singapore recently published the fifth Innovative pedagogy report. A full-text PDF version of this 47 page report is available to download from www.open.ac.uk/innovating. In the report they provide an overview of emerging innovative pedagogies. This report covers: learning through social media, the concept of productive failure as a pedagogical option, teachback, design thinking, learning from the crowd, learning through video games, formative analytics, learning for the future, translanguaging, and the blockchain for learning. The aim of the report is to explore new forms of teaching, learning and assessment for an interactive world, to guide teachers and policy makers in productive innovation. This fifth report proposes ten innovations that are already in currency but have not yet had a profound influence on education.

This is definitely an interesting report, as it offers a quick overview of emerging pedagogies. There have been prior reports that I found inspiring as well (previous reports can be found here). The introduction situates the current learning science and puts it within the increasingly interdisciplinary realm of learning and teaching, both formal and informal. While most introductions are merely synthesis of what can be expected, the introduction of this report offers a truly rich – yet brief – background to the report, adding what went before it and providing a state of the art overview of EdTech.

As an educational technologist, some of the innovative pedagogies seem familiar, e.g. learning through social media is a topic most of us are familiar with, but indeed, it is not always implemented as a recognised pedagogical policy. The report also emphasizes the need for educators/facilitators to be part of the learning process to allow truthful curation of content. The examples given of crowdsourced and facilitator driven social media accounts are really inspiring (@realtimeWOII and pepysdiary.com both using direct quotes from the past to bring it back to life).

The productive failure option fits with the flipped classroom/lecture approach, as it allows learners to first try out finding a solution on their own, possible failing at it, after which a teacher/instructor steps in. Giving the students room to creatively work around a problem they cannot solve at first, and discussing it. I like this approach. I would also like to see deliberate flawed research presentations, I mean giving faulty presentations first, asking the audience to indicate where they thought a faulty research method/deduction… had taken place and then rectify it as a presenter. I guess that would make a conference audience more attentive and make the whole process more inspiring. … Yes, I will use this in an upcoming presentation. Maybe even a classroom or lecture option.

The teachback approach is slightly related to the productive failure, in that it tries to limit failure in communicating. This approach comes from the medical world, and I remember doctors in training having to learn to listen to patients in order to really grasp the medical condition as it is portrayed by the patient. Teachback asks one person (usually an expert or teacher) to explain something they know about a topic to another person (usually someone new to the topic). Then the novice tries to teach their new understanding back to the expert. If the learner gives a good response, the expert goes on to explain some more about the topic.

Massive peer learning, or learning from the crowd fits the next level of networked learning, in its nicest form is the citizen learning, where people share what they learn in their contexts/locations with others. This is used in http://www.NQuire-it.org

Formative analytics, based on learning analytics but giving the learners tools to visualize their learning and possibly adjust their learning is an upcoming trend. But then again, I do wonder what are the chosen indicators for visualizing learning (is it the learner who decides or others that decides what matters in terms of learning?).

The translanguaging is something that is in need for accepting. Most of us global citizens speak at least two languages. Mixing languages to deepen understanding is something most of us have been doing, but is now growing interest in formalized learning and I am truly happy to see that, ik ben er echt blij om, vraiment ça me donne de l’énergie! Or to use my native dialect: doar zenn’k na ne kier echt blaai oem! 

Blockchain learning becomes interesting (a blockchain stores digital events securely on every user’s computer rather than in a central database). It is of interest, especially when we will be able to keep our learning trajectories openly accessible for personal use. Creating our own learning across formal and informal learning environments.

Anyhow the report provides new ideas, and new ways of creating learning opportunities. But … pedagogy is only one part of the learning equation and recently, I wonder whether we as educational technologists are not loosing serious learning/teaching ground. Education for all is slipping through our fingers as we dig deeper into pedagogies, yet deny current filter bubbles as results of algorithms. For people do indeed learn from social media, but this learning increasingly happens in isolated information islands… only rehashing what you like. This means that what I get to see through social media is increasingly what fits my views… this means the learning is decreasingly Socratic, for I am not provided with discussion food the way I (or dare I include we) I used to.

If we learn increasingly with the use of social media, we are increasingly learning from results that are filtered by non-transparent algorithms. Numerous algorithms that we are unaware off. Are we slowly being brainwashed, now more than ever before?

Wednesday, 7 December 2016

How can we be safe in an online environment? #oeb16 workshop

Workshops tend to take at least half a day to come to a result. But at OnlineEduca I had the pleasure of meeting Christian Friedrich and it is amazing what this man can inspire people to do in just 60 minutes time!

To tackle the subject of 'how can we be safe in an online environment' and let people come up with ideas they did not know they had before in such a small period of time... is amazing. Admittedly, his material would enable a flipped workshop approach. Where - as an ideal participant - you would read up on all the material before coming to the workshop, but in this case, the participants simply did not have the time. OnlineEduca was packed with sessions, and this workshop was organised at the end of day 1, meaning that most of the participants were already slightly tired.
But somehow this did not affect Christian, for he got us to come up with a short statement on how we could safeguard our own ideas and writings while sharing ideas online.

If you can get Christian in your conference, I am sure that the resulting workshop will give the attending participants ideas, let them think about privacy, security, identity and contemporary digital traces.

For this workshop, the participants need to identify with a specific target group, then think about potential online risks they might face, and how to counter these risks. So, in a way it was all about openness versus privacy & security. Some interesting links provided by Christian: the ethics of big data in higher education, an introduction to online privacy, and Lawrie Phipps with a great analysis on the effect of algorithms, and an audio recording with Audrey Waters and Kin Lane on Online Ownership.

This was the result from the team effort of Jeanine Reuteman, Luca Morini, Christian Glahn and Marit from Denmark (sorry, I did not remember the full name) and myself.

Tuesday, 6 December 2016

Hybrid presence an emerging format #OEB16

Last week I had the pleasure of being part of a virtual connecting meeting at OnlineEducaBerlin. The initiative came from the VConnecting group. For this session, onsite buddies Christian Friedrich, Hoda Mostafa, and I spoke with guests Jeanine Reutemann (Jeanine researches the affordances of video and has great insights on it!). Ilona Buchem (Ilona has a long standing tech record, her latest research looks at open badges) and Aziza Ellozy (Aziza is a leader in faculty development, and making learning visible). The recording can be seen below (it was a hangout).

For those who are not familiar with the concept of Virtually Connecting through online buddies, have a look at the website. During Online Educa Berlin 2016 there were four virtual connecting meetings (I only could attend one, as I was chairing or speaking at the other moments), and it really provides an additional layer of interest to conferences. I had a previous experience with Whitney Kilgore at eMOOCs2015 which I blogged about here, and which worked inspiring as well.

The format has a basic idea behind it: connecting people with similar interests across conference boundaries (so those who can attend a conference, share knowledge that is provided within the conference to others who are unable to attend the venue).

Although the idea is simple enough, what is interesting is the emerging layer of knowledge that is transmitted. In some way those who attend get a meta layer going. Or at least that was what I felt when joining one of the virtual connecting sessions. When reflecting on why this extra - and to me meaningful layer of learning emerges - I had the idea that it might come from the available expertise in all who entered the conversation. The shared yet complementary expertise gave spice to the conversation, sparking new ideas and links to previous experiences on topic. And I think it was also related to similar interests that come together at that point, and drive the conversation forward. 

In the session that I was in, the conversation covered the plenary keynotes, some ideas coming from the keynote speakers and how we (participants in the virtual meeting) agreed or disagreed, the overall feeling of the conference, the formats and the consequent results of the sessions...