Harnessing Technologies for Learning: Part One

1. Harnessing Technologies for Learning: Part One Academy of Distinguished Teachers Fall Retreat 2007 Billie Wahlstrom, Vice Provost

2. What’s Going On in Technology? Key Technology Trends • Smaller • Faster • Cheaper • More mobile • Changing often • Converging • Ubiquitous

3. What’s Going On in Education? Key Educational Trends • Increased demand for information • Proliferation of networked scholarly information • Online education • Course management systems • Importance of the curriculum & training • Improved usability of technologies & their impact on learning Source: Adapted from Robert Kvavik, “Technology in Support of Learning”

4. Top-Ten Teaching and Learning Issues, 2007 • Establishing & supporting a culture of evidence • Demonstrating improvement of learning • Translating learning research into practice • Selecting appropriate models & strategies for e-learning • Providing tools to meet growing student expectations

5. Top-Ten Teaching and Learning Issues, 2007 • Providing professional development & support to new audiences • Sharing content, applications, & application development • Protecting institutional data • Addressing emerging ethical challenges • Understanding the evolving role of academic technologists. Source: Educause Quarterly, Number 3 2007, pp. 15-21.

6. Selecting the Right Models • No single model or strategy exists, but many successful models exist to emulate. • Best choices are built on • Learner characteristics • Level of preparation • Preferred delivery modes • Technologies, support, & services available • Faculty characteristics • Institutional goals

7. Star Tribune E5 Friday, January 19, 2007

8. Learner Characteristics

9. Models for the University of Minnesota • Improve the student experience • Convenience is valued • Communication & socialization is very important to undergraduates • Academic technologies in courses are very important & students suggest improvements • Students want control of their course experience & want materials organized.

12. Models for the University of Minnesota • Improve Academic Technology Literacy • Articulate faculty and student skill & knowledge levels • Provide sufficient support and training to achieve necessary skills & knowledge base • Integrate technologies into the curriculum (e.g., ECAR studies in 2004 & 2005) • Define skills needed for e-learning, within each unit • Benchmark

13. Faculty Development Is Key • Faculty are in a difficult place & faculty development is the key to change • Need to engage students • Need to maintain & develop their skills • Need to move outside the learning environment in which they started and were successful

14. Developing Faculty to Use Technology with Success • Pedagogy first, built on the science of learning. • Resistance is futile; no more “stuff and dump” passive learners. • Create active learning environments that invite understanding, and may include interactive face-to-face lecturing. • Transformative faculty development is essential—opportunities to apply technology-enhanced learning practices to faculty’s own courses within their disciplines. • Good reasons for changing are critical. Adapted from Educause Review, “Active Learning and Technology”

15. For You at the U. • Technologies for Teaching and Learning • MyU Portal

16. Not Your Father’s Buick • Foster collaboration & interaction • Learn best practices & find resources • Encourage critical thinking & reflection • Empower student voices • Enrich the learning environment • Support diverse learning styles • Improve students’ communication skills • Measure learning outcomes

17. Easy First Steps • Interaction: Instant Messaging <chat.umn.edu> • Best Practices: TEL Seminar Series <dmc.umn.edu/issues.shtml#1> • Critical Thinking: Portfolio <portfolio.umn.edu> • Student Voices: Blogs <blog.lib.umn.edu/> • Rich Learning Environment: • <umconnect-support.umn.edu/get/> • Support Diverse Learning Styles: <TEL@umn.edu> • Improve Communication Skills: Wikis <wiki.umn.edu> • Learning Outcomes: Customizable Evaluation <eval.umn.edu>

18. U of M’s MyU Portal Strategic Positioning Goals Excellent Faculty Excellent Students Innovative Organization Statewide Needs Changing Students Changing Educational Paradigm in Health Sciences Leads the Way

19. Why Create a Portal? Many high-quality internet-based tools to support instruction, but most are not integrated. Number of choices is confusing. Most technologies are not personalized or customizable to the learner. The result: a lower quality academic experience

20. Choosing Between a Doorway & a Maze

21. The MyU Portal as Model The Portal is the U’s strategy to integrate many different independent applications into a unified system to support learning.

22. How Does the Model Work? Academic technologies are integrated into one system, the primary access point of which is the MyU portal, which was launched with the Class of 2008 portal.

23. Can the Portal Help Us Manage Technological Change? As the University acquires new software and technology, the platform evolves, and all who use it have a scaffolding that is continuously enhanced.

24. Role of Faculty in Learning Environments: A New Model The presence of varied technologies and a University-wide strategy for making them accessible means faculty often have to rethink courses, programs, and roles.

25. The Learner Is the Center

26. Learning Principles Learning is facilitated by. . . • Actively contributing to the learning process and solving real-world problems • Opportunities for self-direction in learning • Using existing knowledge as the basis of new learning (Given-New model) • Demonstrating new knowledge to the learner • Applying/practicing new knowledge • Integrating new knowledge into learners’ real worlds • Reflection and self-assessment • Interacting with role models and mentors

27. Faculty Using Technologies: Start at the End. . . What will students be able to do at the conclusion of the course that they likely can’t do at the beginning? And, how will they demonstrate the resulting competencies and capabilities?

28. The Instructional Design Process Changes Faculty remain at the center of the educational experience as content experts and as learning outcomes. They have help in developing courses.

29. The Instructional Design Team Faculty Member/ Content Expert Course Coordinator Instructional Designer The Learner Graphic Artist Videographer Web Developer

30. Instructional Design for the Learning Platform: The OT Example • Students in Rochester and the Twin Cities • Students new to the University and some new to hybrid curricula • First year fundamentals within the curriculum • Blended online and F2F learning • New and changing faculty group requiring a ‘persistent’ curriculum

31. An OT Student Perspective Begins with: www.myu.umn.edu

32. An OT Student Perspective

33. An OT Student Perspective

35. An OT Student Perspective

36. An OT Student Perspective

37. Acknowledgements Janet Shanedling, Ph.D., Director, AHC Learning Commons, AHC Office of Education, provided her slides from the 2007 CAHP briefing on the Learning Platform and the OT student perspective.

38. Works Cited • 2006-2016 Map of Future Forces Affecting Education, prepared for KnowledgeWorks Foundation by the Institute for the Future. • “Active Learning and Technology: Designing for Faculty, Students, and Institutions.” Anne Moore, Shelli Fowler, and C. Edward Watson, Educause Review, September/October 2007. pp. 43-76. • ECAR studies for 2004 and 2005. EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research <http://www.educause.edu/AboutECAR/94> • “Faculty 2.0.” Joel Hartman, Charles Dziuban, and James Brophy-Ellison.” Educause Review, September/October 2007. pp. 62-76. • “Technology in Support of Learning on the Twin Cities Campus,” Robert B. Kvavik. Prepared for the Academic Health Center. • “Top-Ten Teaching and Learning Issues, 2007.” Educause Quarterly, Number 3 2007. pp. 15-21.