I'd say, it depends on the institution and its policy. There are at least 6 factors: institutional, technical, pedagogical, instructional design, faculty, and student factors. I recently published "Pedagogical uptake of technology ...".
At my Uni., while institutionally technology adoption is underway, the academics are slow to change teaching practices to suit the institutional requirements. Despite institutional support, part of the problem is with policy makers. They often do not recognize the unique difficulties of teaching online. Thus, under the assumption that online learning can be offered with about the same effort as classroom instruction, academics are pushed into an ‘online classroom’. The bravest have already had some experience using the web to support existing teaching. However, no one has given them the kind of support needed to create and deploy quality online learning. They are pushed into the shoes of web developers, courseware designers, and e-learning content writers, this consequently creating resistance to the change and resulting in slow adoption of the innovation. E-learning support is left in the hands of a few enthusiasts creating peer-pressure (in the form of training workshops for colleagues and publications). As a result the poor quality of e-learning fires back at both the faculty and the institution and the students.
The Uni. has been offering institutional support through regular and on-demand training for academics wishing to learn the technology. There is enough technology; hardware, software and bandwidth are not deterrents; there's enough technical support too. However, the availability of technology does not necessarily motivate change. Availability of technology does not motivate the students to make use of it for purposeful and meaningful study; nor does it motivate teachers to make the best use of this technology to support learning. The availability of technology does not automatically imply its pedagogically effective use to support learning, In that respect, digitizing material is not a digital innovation!
In my inquiry, I simply counted the number of instances of a resource (resources varied from 1 page to 200 in some groups) in 166 groups (studying English language) in our Moodle and found that 50% to 80% of the resources were digitized printouts! A video broadcast of a lecture is still a lecture. But if this same lecture were a video-conferencing one with the possibility for students to interact with the lecturer and peers and engage in discussion etc., it may become a little more of a digital innovation, and not yet there.
If faculty is not given enough instructional support, there will be no digital innovation - traditional classroom practices will be blindly transferred to the digital world with little educational efficiency and effectiveness. If they were smarter in management, they would have though about pedagogical, instructional support.
Finally, if the institution favours and rewards digital innovators, things may become really messy. So no peace possible in such situations, which I find are dominating when talking to colleagues in different educational settings around the world.
No. The evangelizing of the traditional academic lecturers by the digital innovators creates tensions. The digital innovators look down on their tradition-bound colleagues, who are quite happy carrying on as they always have. The universities need to support and advance the digital innovators, and have progression plans which help this. To help the traditional academic lecturers convert, the universities need to provide labour to do the digitization of their material.
Are you asking the right question? The framing of your question to me, sounds like one of ideology, which by it's nature tends to polarize into self-interested groups. The mix of pedagogical approaches should be based on desired student outcomes, which is in turn influenced by demographic and psychometric factors. These decisions should not be made by faculty on a class-by-class basis - the institution needs to lead, coach and support the transition and develop and validate best practices against measured outcomes.
Digitization of existing pedagogy and materials doesn't work - courses have to be redesigned. Providing "labour" for this approach won't help, because the approach is wrong in the first place. Secondly, it removes accountability from the faculty member for results, allowing them to defend their position against instructional innovation when it inevitably fails.
http://onlinelearninginsights.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/is-blended-learning-the-best-of-both-worlds/
http://www.kineo.com/documents/Free_Guides/Blended_Learning_Report_%202013.pdf
http://www.umuc.edu/ctl/upload/bestpractices.pdf
I'd say, it depends on the institution and its policy. There are at least 6 factors: institutional, technical, pedagogical, instructional design, faculty, and student factors. I recently published "Pedagogical uptake of technology ...".
At my Uni., while institutionally technology adoption is underway, the academics are slow to change teaching practices to suit the institutional requirements. Despite institutional support, part of the problem is with policy makers. They often do not recognize the unique difficulties of teaching online. Thus, under the assumption that online learning can be offered with about the same effort as classroom instruction, academics are pushed into an ‘online classroom’. The bravest have already had some experience using the web to support existing teaching. However, no one has given them the kind of support needed to create and deploy quality online learning. They are pushed into the shoes of web developers, courseware designers, and e-learning content writers, this consequently creating resistance to the change and resulting in slow adoption of the innovation. E-learning support is left in the hands of a few enthusiasts creating peer-pressure (in the form of training workshops for colleagues and publications). As a result the poor quality of e-learning fires back at both the faculty and the institution and the students.
The Uni. has been offering institutional support through regular and on-demand training for academics wishing to learn the technology. There is enough technology; hardware, software and bandwidth are not deterrents; there's enough technical support too. However, the availability of technology does not necessarily motivate change. Availability of technology does not motivate the students to make use of it for purposeful and meaningful study; nor does it motivate teachers to make the best use of this technology to support learning. The availability of technology does not automatically imply its pedagogically effective use to support learning, In that respect, digitizing material is not a digital innovation!
In my inquiry, I simply counted the number of instances of a resource (resources varied from 1 page to 200 in some groups) in 166 groups (studying English language) in our Moodle and found that 50% to 80% of the resources were digitized printouts! A video broadcast of a lecture is still a lecture. But if this same lecture were a video-conferencing one with the possibility for students to interact with the lecturer and peers and engage in discussion etc., it may become a little more of a digital innovation, and not yet there.
If faculty is not given enough instructional support, there will be no digital innovation - traditional classroom practices will be blindly transferred to the digital world with little educational efficiency and effectiveness. If they were smarter in management, they would have though about pedagogical, instructional support.
Finally, if the institution favours and rewards digital innovators, things may become really messy. So no peace possible in such situations, which I find are dominating when talking to colleagues in different educational settings around the world.
I'm with Derrick on this.
You ask if peace is possible. Is there war?
-Derek
@Jane. The terms "digital native" and "digital immigrant" have now been largely discredited as a generational based construct. See for instance http://comminfo.rutgers.edu/~tefko/Courses/e553/Readings/Selwyn%20dig%20natives,%20Aslib%20Proceedings%202009.pdf
I really like your "digital Explorer" concept. My mother is 86 and fits this. I've been thinking about the term academic lecturer. It's a poorly framed question here, and could benefit from some clarity. I'm assuming this is someone who just talks during a lecture, and maybe uses chalk or whiteboard or OHP.
As an aside, I was teaching in an institution recently. Doing staff development. One room had just a chalkboard. BUT moveable chairs. I saw videos and pictures of a superb lesson with a mix of lecture, group work, pair work, good feedback. Digital or not does not determine if learning is active. Academic lectures with interaction can be great. Digital stuff with powerpoint can be crap. Ali must have more to his question. I'm going to wait now in case he remembers he has posted and that we exist.
-Derek
As has been indicated earlier - I suggest you are framing the issue as a dichotomy rather than as a continuum or even perhaps a matrix where there are four possibilities - non proficent academic and non proficient digital innovator .... through to proficient academic and proficient digital innovator. So rather than couching it as an either/or perhaps look to moving the discussion to how academics can utilise technology as an additional tool in their repetoire of teaching. Sometimes the best practice is not an innovation, at other times the affordances of technology can enhance student learning.
I'd simply have to say that such a peace is inevitable, and rightfully so. We are preparing students to function in a digitally saturated environment, and its our duty to our students to be "digitally innovative." I have been teaching mathematics and statistics for over 15 years and I have always tried to stay ahead of the classroom technology trends. Just as my students look to me for guidance in theory and practice of the subject matter, they also rely on my assistance with digital tools. I have seen my colleagues eventually having to play "catch-up" (I gladly assisted). Now I notice that some of the most "traditional" (and stubborn) colleagues are not only making peace with digital resources but are experimenting with new tools on their own.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Education
- Higher Education
- Academic Writing