Learner Bytes

The licence of our current Learning Management System (aka Virtual Learning Environment) runs out at the end of 2010 and we’ve been busy doing a review/evaluation for a new LMS/VLE. It’s been most opportune that there has been a lively debate (across the interwebs) regarding the VLE and whether or not it’s dead, and/or, long live the Personal Learning Environment (PLE). [Recently a new term has been suggested by Mary Bold: Learning Management Platform or LMP (link courtesy of Mark Smithers)]

A number of thoughtful blog posts have addressed the topic and this has led to a useful debate on the difference between the VLE and the PLE. I’ve listed a number of these post below and you might also be interested in viewing the video of the debate at the ALT-C ‘VLE is dead’ symposium.

1. Steve Wheeler: Two fingered salute (a post that helped spark the debate)
2. Donna Hay: Web 2.0 v VLEs (make sure you look for Part 2 as well)
3. James Clay: It’s not dead… yet…
4. Lindsay Jordan: The VLE/PLE debate
5. Dan Stucke: The VLE debate, my thoughts
6. Matt Lingard: VL-istically speaking

I’ve also just come across Mike Bogle’s recent post: Addressing the Big Picture, where he asks questions about the suitability of a LMS for learning. These (management)systems are good for many things but can fall down in providing opportunities & flexibility for learning.

All this is healthy discussion and useful for us all as we wrestle with what learning, teaching, and education might be/come in the future.

Part of our process involved setting a range of evaluation criteria, running some vendor session, having academics staff complete a number of scenarios in each product. All this has happened alongside other evaluations streams such as; total cost of ownership, technical such as technical and streams. It’s good to see that we are investing some resources in trying to do as thorough job as possible in a limited time frame.

One of the most interesting experiences of the process at our institution so far has been to spend most of a day with stakeholders from across the institutions (except for any students) and talking about how a new LMS would impact the core purpose of our work tat the university. What struck me most about all the talking we did, was that we didn’t talk about technology – we spoke about learning and how a new LMS might support that. We also talked about a parallel system that could include an e-portfolio and be the basis of a PLE.

I believe we need to be careful when talking about purpose – what we expect an system or environment to provide or support. Maybe we need to remember to choose the appropriate tool for the job, but that means we need to have a good toolkit. A tradesman will have invested in a range of good tools, fit for purpose & that cover the extent of his ‘discipline’ (although I do know a plumber who uses a hammer almost exclusively). This would mean that an investment needs to made in good tools and some ‘training’ in how to use them. Are our institutions willing to invest in more than just the tools?

My take-home of all this? Maybe it’s no so much about which product we choose (they all seem to have the same range of functionality), it’s more about our understanding of learning in a changing world, what flexible education is, and what the strategic direction the institution is with regard to the type of life-long learner we want our students to develop into. As I heard George Siemens ask in a webinar recently, ‘Is the university there for it’s ability to provide a transformative experience for learners, or does it exist for it’s ability to be a utilitarian agent for pathways into a profession?’ In making the decision to choose a new system are we also taking the opportunity to rigorously examine our position (policy & framework) on (flexible) learning?

I’ve recently returned from this year’s Learning Technologies Conference 2009 held in Mooloolaba, Queensland. An excellent couple of days with a great range of presentations and a wonderful mix of educators from across a number of sectors. It was great to meet up with old friends and also to meet a number of twitter friends, face to face for the first time (& find a few new tweeps to follow).

Keynote speakers at the conference included: Nancy White on Day 1, spoke of the ‘I’ (as individual), ‘We’ (as community), and ‘Us’ (as a network) & reminded us of the power of online communities. On Day 2, Clay Burell told us about his experiences as a teacher searching for the right tools to support student learning and growth. Lots of other great speakers and much of their presented material is available from the links below.

Some of the take homes ideas for me where:

1. That as technology stewards for communities, we should to meet people at their point of need, not talk about technology.
2. That we should encourage the different skills that people have to contribute to our online communities.
3. That content will become more open and through the affordances of social networking tools we are able to making meaning together.
4. That innovation can be dangerous in the short term, but useful in the long run, and that our innovators need our support.
5. As educators we need to read & learn about other opinions & points of view, ask questions, make up our own minds and encourage our students to do the same.
6. That we need to spend time on nothing (to nurture our creativity) and if you’re not upsetting people, you’re not doing your job.
7. That we could encourage students to work/learn on their laptops at home & then come to class to apply their learning (with the help of their students peers & the teacher/coach).

My presentation went well and I had some good feedback when I talked about the six month professional development (PD) activity we ran in an online environment. My questions were centred around the usefulness of this as a model for PD and how we can ‘meet people at their point of need’ (to borrow a phrase from Nancy White).

A lot of what I thought we were talking about was that we need authentic learning activities that encourage questions, thinking, reflection and testing out ideas. Technology can be used in a range of ways to support these activities and we can choose from any number of tools to facilitate good learning.

Checkout the resources available on the conference website which are generously made available to everyone.

1. Papers & presenter information
2. Podcasts .mp3 recordings on most sessions
3. Posterus (for the Pirate shenanigans) the social treasure hunt game…
4. Flickr photos
5. The conference Ning
6. Video & other bits & pieces to come…

There’s more reflection at Alison Bickford’s blog and much more reflection to come from other participants no doubt…

The twitter tag was #lt2009 and you’ll find lots of tweeted insights there. Well done to the conference organisers and hope to see you next year….

I’ve been thinking about eportfolios a lot lately and thought it may be time to write of recent developments that have encouraged me to keep up the momentum in getting them into the mainstream at my institution.

It’s already over a week ago that I was fortunate enough to attend the VET E-portfolio showcase, and as well as catching up with friends from across education sectors, I was able to listen to a number of excellent presentations. Visit the E-portfolios blog to read about updates to the showcase and to find links to the Elluminate recording of five of the sessions that were presented at the VET E-portfolio Showcase.

Amongst other presentations, I was taken by Hazels Owen’s metaphor of eportfolio as ‘performance’, with a backstage (for collecting, development and assembly), a stage (for showcasing or testing work), & an audience (range of presentations or views) that was part of a comprehensive overview of the uses of eportfolios. See her presentation, Web 2.0 ePortfolios that work for both students and educators: Strategies and recommendations on slideshare.

I’ve also noted in a recent blog post on using portfolios for assessment, Limitations of Portfolios that Helen Barrett has added a dimension to her suggestion that an eportfolio can be both a ‘product’ and a ‘process’, she also speaks of portfolio as ‘workspace’ and portfolio as ‘showcase’.

It’s all good grist for the mill that is helping me improve the narrative I tell academic staff at my institution when suggesting they should be using eportfolios to support their students’ learning. Our current review of the university LMS will include a requirement that an eportfolio be part of the package – all good signs for the future. I’ve really come to believe that eportfolios are one of the best tools that we might have to help students engage more with their learning. The challenge for us to make them ubiquitous, persistent, transferable, and life-long, but more on that in a future post.