This is significant. Phil Hill described D2L's new technology deployments in contrast with Blackboard and (to a lesser extent) Canvas. As part of this he notes how the way institutions deoply LMSs has changed. "According to David Koehn, VP of Product Management at D2L:
What this means is that universities won't be running their own servers any more. But more to the point, it means that the back end can scale (or shrink) as needed, can link to sevrices as needed, and take advantage of other aspects of the AWS cloud environment.
There is no such potential, writes Eric Hellman. " All the good attributes ascribed to magical 'blockchain technology' are available in 'git', a program used by software developers for distributed version control," he explains. "The folks at GitHub realized that many problems would benefit from some workflow tools layered on top of the git, and they're now being acquired for several billion dollars by Microsoft, which is run by folks who know a lot about that digital crypto stuff." The details are complex, but yes, he's right, to a point: "if you have a problem where you need to reach consensus (or disagreement) about information by the usual (imperfect) ways of humans, git repos are possibly the Merkle trees you need."
I have in the past challenged the presumption that certain topics are instances of 'foundational' learning but suggesting that concepts like succession and substitution might be more basic in math than addition and multiplication. This article (12 page PDF) makes that case in a much more convincing form. It attacks "a false assumption: that mathematics is a fixed, linear sequence of skills that must be acquired ... building block by building block." And it argues against the idea "that topics are unitary things." And here's the point: "assumptions about pedagogical priority based on the structure of mathematics can create barriers to children’s learning, as can using statistical prevalence to make claims about cognitive necessity." What we call 'foundational' might be statistical or conventional, but it is not indispensable. Related: Jeannine Diddle Uzzi, We should teach math like it's a language.
Donald Taylor's report (27 page PDF) asks "What do you think will be hot in L&D in 2018?" The top three responses were personalization/adaptive delivery (11.9%), collaborative/social learning (10.1%), and artificial intelligence (9.0%). I guess a lot of what constitutes 'hot' depends on your perspective, because these three barely move the needle for me. Even Taylor writes, "personalization/adaptive delivery remains top of the table – but for how long?" He devotes a page to 'microlearning', which has become more popular since 2015. And the wordle features 'xAPI' and 'data' over other options. Ultimately, though, he suggests that 2018 might be the year of AI.
This paper (10 page PDF) offers a brief history of the use of simulation in education and then looks at its use specifically in health professional education. Simulation Based Education (SBE) is then discussed in the light of Engeström's theory of Expansive Learning, which the authors argue "can be utilised to theoretically and philosophically underpin the integration of SL into curricula, and ultimately into practice, therefore creating a process which breaks down the traditional boundaries between classroom learning and the reality of practical experiences within actual clinical environments." Note that this paper is from the first issue (Volume 1, Number 1) of the Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching (JALT).
Technology engagement for academics in third level: Utilising the technological, pedagogical and content knowledge framework (TPACK)
Orna O'Brien, Matt Glowatz, Journal of Applied Learning & Teaching, 2018/06/08
This article (12 page PDF) evaluates the use of the technological, pedagogical and content knowledge framework (TPACK) in academic learning contexts. The framework suggests that all three types of knowledge (ie., technological, pedagogical or content knowledge) may be needed in a given learning environment, and it is the role of the instructor to select and balance those. The authors suggest that "the current framework does not sufficiently account for the lecturer knowledge of students’ cultural backgrounds, their knowledge of student profiles and demographics of different student cohorts. This knowledge, depicted by the authors as 'craft knowledge' appears to mitigate against, say, a lack of technological knowledge.
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter? Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2018 Stephen Downes Contact: firstname.lastname@example.orgThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.