Long games and grand strategies

Games playing is not always viewed as a serious pedagogical method. Some teachers dismiss it as time wasting, or as a frivolous activity that is best employed at the end of term, when the serious business of teaching has started to wind down. For those teachers, games fulfil a similar function to 'sticking on a video'. It's a convenient time filler, keeps the kids quiet and isn't too taxing on the mind. And yet many teachers are coming to the realisation that playing games is more than a time filler, and actually has many positive benefits for students. 

Most games playing in schools is confined to a single classroom, and applied to a single subject. But with a little planning and resourcing, we can go a lot farther than this. We could conceivably apply a grand strategy to games that could play out across entire schools. 

I remember an elaborate game we played when I was in school in the 1970s. All of my teachers were involved. The context is important for this story. I was in school on a military base in Holland, and my father was in the armed forces. We were living on a forward base in Western Europe during the height of tensions in the 'Cold War'. At this time, all children and their families lived in a time when nuclear war was a very real possibility. Although the threat hung continually over us and no doubt exercised our parents' minds, most of the time we kids simply got on with our lives. 

The school set up a 'long game' which lasted several days, in which all of our British year group, along with the American, Canadian and German sections of the school, were assigned tables to sit at. Each table had a flag and name representing a country, and those of us on each table had to decide who would act as our head of state, foreign and finance ministers, diplomats, armed forces chiefs and so on. During the long game, scenarios were imposed upon us which we had to negotiate, in order to avert hostilities that might otherwise lead to a worldwide nuclear holocaust. It was engaging, thrilling and compelling, and we learnt a lot not only about politics, but also curriculum subjects such as mathematics (economic decisions), languages (negotiation through translation), communication skills, history and geography. We also practised a lot of transferable skills including leadership and teamwork (collaboration and co-operation), problem solving, critical thinking and decision making. This was learning by stealth, and we had a lot of fun during it. Pedagogically, it was a stroke of genius. Oh, and you'll be pleased to hear that between us, we managed to avoid destroying the world in a nuclear war.

One games theorist, - Bernie DeKoven - has something profound to say about games: "... whatever it is that you're playing, there are two things you have to take seriously: being together, and the sheer fun of it all. No game is more important than the experience of being together, being joined, being equal - governed by the same rules, playing for the same purpose. And no purpose is more uniting and freeing than the purpose of being fun with each other." 

How often do we apply games on such a grand scale in schools? How often do we tap into the incredibly powerful method of engaging learners? Probably not that often, because it takes a lot of work on the part of the teacher(s) to conceive it, design it and then implement it in real learning contexts. And yet the pay off can be immense. And there are plenty of ready made games and gaming strategies already available for free.  I would be interested in hearing from anyone who has done work with games across the curriculum at this level. If you have any games for teachers to use freely, then please share the links in the comments box below.

Photo by Nestor Galina


Rewired, not fade away by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Nothing new under the sun

"What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9
"In a hunting society, children play with bows and arrows. In an information society, children play with information" - Henry Jenkins
"Good artists borrow, great artists steal." - Pablo Picasso

What do these quotes have in common? They all represent what is happening right here, right now, on the web. According to Kirby Ferguson, 'Everything is a Remix', or in other words (see what I did there?) just about everything you encounter online or in popular culture has either been done before, or it's a synthesis (the social media term is 'mashup') of previously available content. The nature of the Social Web is such that tools are available  to repurpose, rip, mash, combine and otherwise manipulate just about any content into any other format you wish. The philosophy and processes behind this movement are compellingly explained and elaborated upon by Ferguson in a series of four short videos, the first of which is embedded below:


Everything is a Remix Part 1 from Kirby Ferguson on Vimeo.

Part 2 looks at remix techniques in movie making
Part 3 explores how innovation happens
Part 4 covers the legal and ethical implications.

View all four videos and then ask yourself some questions - are current copyright laws adequate enough to cope with the new and emerging practices we see every day on the Web? Are we seeing evidence for the end of creativity, or a new kind of artistry? Is there a derivative nature to creativity as Ferguson claims? What does this mean for originality and for the future of self expression? And what are the implications for education?

Photo from Wikimedia Commons


Nothing new under the sun by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Technology won't replace teachers, but...

"Technology won't replace teachers, but teachers who use technology will probably replace teachers who don't" 

This was just one of the contentious and thought provoking statements made at Learning Through Technology this week in Glasgow. #LTT2013 was one of two conferences I was invited to speak at this  week. I made my way up to Glasgow after speaking at #LILAC13 in Manchester. The Librarian's Information Literacies Annual Conference was well attended, and just as lively in its dialogue throughout the three days it ran. Both events had several common threads, including the new roles of education professionals, the impact of technology on education and the ways students are appropriating new tools to support their learning.

LILAC was held in the heart of Manchester University, in a well appointed conference centre, where almost 300 library and information professionals gathered for three days to discuss information literacy. As the #lilac13 Twitter stream will reveal, there were lively and protracted debates around the changing nature of library spaces, the nature of knowledge, the future of books and reading, and the impact of digital media. A social event in the spectacular surrounds of the iconic John Rylands Library was a fitting conclusion to Day 1. Day 2 continued with more of the same, and it was refreshing to see so many library and information professionals animatedly discussing their approaches to supporting learning.

LTT2013 took place at the Glasgow Hilton Hotel, and although somewhat smaller, still managed to maintain the relentless pace of dialogue I had already experienced at LILAC. If anything, LTT2013 was even more academic and challenging, thanks largely to the conference chair Mark Stephen, who managed to strike the fine balance between the roles of congenial host and forensic questioner.  Those who presented raised questions around the digital divide, the changing shape of schools, the impact of information and communication technology on learning gain, the ongoing debate about whether schools should filter social media sites, and the use of new and emerging technologies in education. The final session, which culminated in my own keynote, was entitled 'Inspiration and Openness' and featured a live video link to a Scottish school with contributions from the children themselves on science education and technology use. It was truly inspirational to see so many young people engaged and excited with learning science.

One of the main conclusions to emerge from both the Glasgow and Manchester events was that all of us, as learning professionals, need to be able to at least appreciate the potential of technology to transform the learning experience. Most teachers use some technology in the classroom, but how many use it beyond the walls of the classroom? We are not talking about teachers taking technology home for personal use (that should be something most are doing anyway). We are instead alluding to the potential of technology to transcend the boundaries, roles and philosophies of traditional education, and to extend, enrich and enliven learning for all, from the very young, through to lifelong learners.

Another conclusion was that the technology wave is not slowing, and won't go away. Educational institutions need to choose wisely when they are procuring technology, to ensure that they are meeting challenges, not merely buying technology to jump on the bandwagon. One question raised during LTT2013 was whether tablets were going to end up as the latest pile of classroom junk, purchased for the sake of it, without any defined objectives or problems to solve. At the Glasgow event, the Bellshill Academy students did a lot to answer this question, presenting some excellent uses of iPads in their personal and group research. Another question raised at both conferences was around how institutions in all sectors are managing the sudden influx of bring your own technology/device (BYOT or BYOD). If BYOD is implemented, who manages updates, interoperablity and other implementation strategies?

Some very useful examples of technology to solve problems were presented at both conferences, and there were discussions around digital literacy, gamification, mobile learning and digital pedagogical strategies. Much discussion surrounded whether schools should filter content, or make it available for all, with the caveat that teachers and students would have ongoing dialogue about safe and responsible use of the web.

I don't know how many train miles I have travelled this last week, but on reflection, I feel it was worth it.  And as for teachers who don't use technology.... well, you have to ask yourself the question. If you were a headteacher, interviewing new teachers, and there were two candidates of equal standing, but one was digitally literate and the other was not ... who would you appoint?

Image courtesy of Wikimedia Commons (modified)


Technology won't replace teachers, but... by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Rewired, not fade away

A lot of nonsense is still being talked about how technology is damaging our lives, and how the Internet is 'rewiring our brains'. From Nicholas Carr's dystopian scaremongering in The Shallows, to Andrew Keen's bitter rhetoric in Cult of the Amateur, the literature is replete with those who wish to persuade us to repent from our reliance on technology and put on our analogue sackcloth and ashes. There is a never ending supply of doom merchants who are ready to emerge from the shadows into the literary spotlight to peddle their bad news, and once they have done so, exeunt stage left with a nice royalty paycheck.

Their arguments are diverse, but essentially boil down to this: The way technology is currently being used is dangerous because it dumbs down knowledge, trivialises relationships, and ultimately, over a period of time, turns us into its slaves. A recent article in the Telegraph asks 'Is the digital age rewiring us?' The article then goes on to cite a range of scientific studies that support an affirmative answer to the question.  It lists a litany of negative outcomes of our habituated use and reliance on the Web, including a loss of social contact, computer addiction, memory deterioration, loss of empathy, increase in rudeness, loss of privacy, and the introduction of a new word - cyberchondria - which describes a rise in hyperchondriac incidence in GP surgeries, and a supposed link to greater access to information about health issues. There is very little of a positive nature in the article, and with the exception of reports that technology 'can keep us sharper for longer' and that video games can teach us new skills (strange that, when elsewhere it claims that our skills are being blunted), one would come away with the impression that we are all doomed, and that technology is the ultimate nemesis of all humanity.

Let's stop one moment and rationally examine the evidence, and also the premise behind the article. The author makes his first mistake right at the start of the piece when he distinguishes between digital natives and immigrants. This is contentious, not least because there has never been anything other than anecdotal evidence to suggest that older people and younger people perceive, or use technology any differently. Marc Prensky's digital natives theory has been misappropriated anyway. Moreover, there are much more relevant and appropriate theories that describe this generation's use of technology, and even Prensky's revised and updated theory of digital wisdom would be better applied, as would Le Cornu and White's theory around context - digital residents and visitors.

One of the biggest and most persistent claims of the Telegraph article is that technology is rewiring our brains. Several neurological studies are cited (but conveniently with no directly checkable sources) that suggest technology permanently alters the structure of the brain, and in so doing changes our behaviour more or less permanently. All well and good, but there is a fundamental flaw in this argument. Read farther afield than the narrow chain of references in the article and you will discover that just about everything we do - drinking, eating, arguing, reading, sex, playing sport, driving, hobbies, also alters the wiring of the brain. In the world of education we call this 'learning', and it stands to reason that using technology will also rewire the brain. The scientific terms for this is neuroplasticity, meaning the brain is in a constant state of fluid change. It has even been reported to occur after brain damage where the brain then 'heals itself' by rewiring previously damaged areas (See for example this article by Dancause et al, 2005). This is not a new finding, so we must be very careful that we don't fall into the trap of condemning technology as the only culprit, and laying all of the ills of society upon it when in fact life is far more complex than one single causal factor. You can see why I'm very suspicious when pseudo-scientists use very narrow terms of reference to argue their points.  

What about the argument that this generation is 'hooked on the web'? Just like the previous generation was hooked on drugs? Or the generation before that was hooked on Rock and Roll? It is a great error to assume that technology is addictive or has the power to addict. Any addiction, as many psychiatrists will agree, has its explanation more in the personality of the individual than it is to any inherent quality of the substance or item they are interacting with. Read, for example, this piece by Mason (2009) on the addictive personality, and you will see that such seemingly clear cut arguments are in reality far from straightforward. Consider instead that people who are addicted to Facebook might be addicted because they have chosen to use Facebook excessively, not because Facebook is inherently addictive?

Finally, we should all be highly sceptical of any article that generalises to such an extent as the Telegraph article has. Not everyone who answers their mobile whilst in a conversation is 'anti-social', not every young person prefers to txt their friends rather than meet with them personally, and not everyone relies on their mobile phones to recall their telephone numbers for them. And even those who do these things - does this mean they are lesser people as a result? Or are these simply the signs of a new, emerging cultural norm? Did those running the 'cyberchondria' study actually consider that instead of negatively and pejoratively labelling people who are concerned over their health as 'hyperchondriacs', perhaps they should be applauding them for becoming more proactive and aware of health issues in general? That's what tools such as Wikipedia do, you see. They democratise knowledge.

My final thought: An important rule of research is - don't make assumptions, or in other words don't be biased. If you are, you'll become very selective in the data you use, and end up with conclusions that don't bear any resemblance to reality.

As ever, I welcome your comments.

Photo by Tom Swift


Rewired, not fade away by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

False frontiers

Collaboration is where two or more people work together to achieve a common objective. In education, the common objective is usually to learn specific content, skills or competencies within defined areas. Ostensibly, learning is an individual goal, and each student does tend to learn in their own way, using their own favoured approaches and tools. We refer to this as personalised learning (a video explains). However, as we become increasingly connected to each other through technology, and our social ties strengthen, so there is greater scope for students to learn together, sharing their resources and ideas, and approaching their study collaboratively. Collaborative learning does not undermine or contradict personalised learning. It simply amplifies it.

When it comes to learning with others, space is usually required. There is plenty to say about collaborative spaces. I can think of at least three kinds. There are the formal, classroom based collaborative spaces and there are the informal, non classroom spaces where we learn most of what we know in interaction with others. Then there are the virtual, online spaces where many of us are increasingly spending our time collaborating, conversing and sharing with our personal learning networks. I guess I could represent these three kinds of space in a simple Venn diagram below, which would then indicate that there is a lot of crossover, fuzziness, and boundary incursion between the three. You could see where we might place formal learning using a VLE, or where students might meet to chat using Facebook, for example. But it's far from perfect. Ultimately such a diagram serves one purpose - it reveals that where there were once very real boundaries, now they are many false frontiers.

The boundaries are blurring between formal and informal learning. Increasingly, traditional educational spaces are being revised, replacing rigid rows of seats with 'group friendly' clusters or simply enabling all room furniture to be moved and reconfigured in whatever way users see fit. The aim is that reconfigured collaborative spaces allow free flow of all room occupants so that any amount of engagement between individuals is possible during formal learning. Learning can then occur in any part of the space, not just in the area where students are sat. You can read more on collaborative learning space design approaches in this article.

With the increasing popularity of such movements as the Flipped Classroom, and Massive Online Open Courses (MOOCs), other more radical formal learning space configurations are taking place. Students are increasingly learning through formal activities outside the classroom, usually on the move, using their mobile and handheld devices. They are preparing for in-class sessions by watching videos, discussing ideas online, creating their own content such as blogs and podcasts, and learning much of the stuff outside their classrooms that they would traditionally have learnt inside the classroom. This, according the Flipped Classroom theory, frees up a lot more time for discussion, specialist tutor input and collaborative work around the subject being studied. The Flipped approach ensures that the classroom is no longer the only space where formal learning can take place. There are other spaces to use.

MOOCs take learning even farther away from the classroom. Where the Flipped Classroom still maintains some role for the traditional classroom, MOOCs replace them completely. The general premise of the original MOOC programmes was to assume that all participants mediate their learning through technology, and learn in an open, collaborative and personalised manner. In the loosest sense, the MOOC promoted the community more than the curriculum, and privileged context over content. This kind of space has no boundaries, and every frontier then opens up. Learning is learning. It doesn't matter whether it takes place in a pub or a university lecture hall. What matters now is that each learner finds their own space, is comfortable within it, and uses it to its optimum.

Image source


False frontiers by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Things to come...

Yes, things to look forward to.... We are now less than a month away from the start of the 8th Plymouth Enhanced Learning Conference. Those who have previously attended will know that Pelecon is a friendly, stimulating and lively Spring gathering in the beautiful South West of England for those who want to discover and explore more of the world of technology supported learning. This year's line-up of invited speakers will contribute significantly to that. Here below is a sample of some of the keynotes presentations that will be on offer at the event between April 10-12 this year.

Strangely, we'll start at the end. Our closing keynote Donald H. Taylor - chair of the Learning and Performance Institute and a veteran of the fields of skills, productivity and work based learning - will address the title: 'Does Learning and Development have a future?' In his talk, Don will ask: "Learners are doing it for themselves. Both at work and in tertiary education they are increasingly able to find the information they need, the performance support tools and the skills training they need directly. What’s driving these changes and how should learning professionals respond?" Donald will also examine the reasons for these changes, the technologies associated with them, and the likely implications. Whatever else happens, he will argue, standing still is not an option for Learning and Development practitioners. If we continue as we are, we face irrelevance. Join him to explore:

• Change? It’s the economics, stupid - oh, and the technology

• How globalization affects us all

• Does the L&D profession have a future?

• The skills L&D needs to thrive in the 21st Century

• What immediate trends can we expect in the next 12 months?

Two days earlier, one of the country's leading head teachers - Karine George - will give the opening keynote when she tackles the subject of 'Off the beaten track: teaching for the Third Millennium. Karine's school is one of those schools that is held in high esteem as a place where learning is in the hands of the children. One of the projects her school is acclaimed for is the S'cool Radio project, where children take it in turns each day to take the roles of interviewers, journalists and news reporters, bringing their classmates the news and views of the day.  Hampshire's Westfield Junior School is well and truly on the map, continues to receive plaudits from many, and was awarded an Outstanding rating from a recent Ofsted visit. We look forwarded to hearing Karine's unique perspectives on what it takes to create an outstanding school where technology is fully embedded into daily activities.

One of the brightest, rising stars of the e-Learning world, Dr Doug Belshaw, will give a keynote on Day 2 of Pelecon. Formerly at JISC, and now working for the Mozilla Foundation, Doug's title 'The history of Open Badges through the medium of animated GIFs' is intriguing. Doug says: "Last month the non-profit Mozilla Foundation launched v1.0 of the Open Badges Infrastructure (OBI). In this presentation we will look at Mozilla's motivation in developing the OBI, the ways individuals and organisations can use Open Badges, and how Mozilla plans to use them in relation to a new, open learning standard for Web Literacy". Doug will address this topic in his own inimitable way, whilst no doubt reflecting on his recent successfully completed doctoral studies into digital literacies. 

Another of our invited speakers, Derek Robertson, is known by many for his crusading into how video games can be used in education. Derek is National advisor for Emerging Technologies and Learning for the Scottish Government, and anyone who has heard him speak will agree that he is entertaining and challenging in equal measures. Much of the recent past of Derek Robertson's career has been involved in exploring, researching and sharing the benefits to learning of game based learning. He was an instrumental figure in the creation of Education Scotland's Consolarium initiative and it may be argued that his research and the many partnerships with educators who joined him in exploring the  grounded application of COTS games to support learning and teaching has helped to change the discourse around the use of games for learning. In this talk Derek will share examples and insights from his work in this field and with a focus on recent research into Signature Pedagogies with Nintendogs in the Early Years he will argue that the deep learning that we are seeing and, the effective methodologies employed by teachers to enable this, should make us give serious thought to ditching the title game based learning because what we are seeing is so much more than game based learning.

The other speakers in our exciting keynote line-up are Professor Grainne Conole, Professor Steven Warburton, Learning without Frontiers founder Graham Brown-Martin, and all the way from down-under, Joyce Seitzinger.

It's going to be a great event, in a long line of great events. We don't want you to miss out on the fun. So book your tickets now while they are still ... yes still... at the early bird rate. Here's the conference website. This offer will finish on 29th March. See you at Pelecon!

Images from various sources, used with permission


Things to come... by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Minimally invasive education

The following is an exclusive interview that was organised by EDEN and is mirrored from the EDEN homepage. It was conducted in the run up to the EDEN Annual Conference which will take place in Oslo, Norway on 12-15 June, 2013.

The media and education worlds have been buzzing for the last few weeks over the ground breaking work of a quiet, unassuming Indian-born professor. Born in Calcutta in 1952, Sugata Mitra started his academic career in computational and molecular science. His later research also encompassed biological science and energy storage systems. Mitra has also researched diversely into areas such as medicine (Alzheimer’s disease and memory research) and psychology (perception in hypermedia environments) and he received a PhD in Physics for his studies into organic semi-conductors. It is not hard to see why some have hailed him as a polymath and even ‘something of a genius’. Most recently, Professor Mitra won the prestigious TED prize of US$ 1 million in acknowledgement of his work setting up computer kiosks in developing rural areas, and for his studies into ‘minimally invasive education’. He has pledged to use the money to fund his 'School in the Cloud' project in India. He is now Professor of Educational Technology at Newcastle University, in the North East of England. I managed to catch up with him to interrupt his busy schedule for a brief interview ahead of his keynote at the EDEN 2013 Oslo Conference.

Steve: Sugata, thank you for taking some time out from your busy schedule to speak to me, and congratulations on your recent TED prize. You have been an inspiration to many through your research, but what is it that inspires you the most in your work?

Sugata: When the numbers from measurements come together I look for strong correlations - black and white with zero probability of error. Like in a Physics experiment. Sometimes I get results like that and I think, 'I guessed that one right'.

Steve: A lot of your recent work has been around the use of technology in education. What benefits do you believe technology is offering to learners, and what evidence is there that it is making a difference?

Sugata: At this link you will find several examples, including children teaching themselves to use the Internet on street side computers, and doing it well enough to pass a government examination on computers. Children in Kuppam teaching themselves biotechnology 10 years ahead of their time and children in Uruguay whose reading comprehension in Spanish has jumped several levels because of their access to computers.

There are many other published results. Anecdotally, a student from a village in Maharashtra, India, is doing a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology with a scholarship to Yale. He says he got there because he used to read New Scientist from a hole in the wall computer in his village. A child from a slum in Hyderabad, India, is studying medicine with a scholarship in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. He got there with encouragement, advice and support from a 'Skype Granny' from England. 

Steve: These are certainly remarkable results, leading me to think that education is in need of change. What do you think are the main constraints preventing any significant reforms of education? And what might be done to overcome them?

Sugata: There is a powerful belief that schooling should be done the way it is. All we need to do is improve classrooms, make teachers better and review the curriculum every five years. This is thinking from another century, so powerfully reinforced that we find it impossible to think any other way. Schooling does not need improvement, it needs to be reinvented. Every aspect of it - curriculum, pedagogy, assessment and certification. Some brave Government, somewhere, will have to take a plunge....

Let me give you an example. Here is one of today’s examination questions: How long will it take a 5 Kg mass to fall to the ground if dropped from a height of 20 metres? (Do not use computers, calculators or any other aids. Do not talk)

This could easily be changed to: Use the Internet to find out how long it will  take a 5 Kg mass to fall to the ground if dropped from a height of 20 metres. Discuss the answer with your colleagues and report the results of the discussion. Justify why you think the answer is right. 

Steve: That would certainly bring more relevance to learning, especially for children who have grown up with technology all around them. Let’s talk about your recent work. You are known worldwide for your groundbreaking work in minimally invasive education. Can you explain what this is and why you think it is so important?

Sugata: There are places on the planet where good teachers cannot or do not go. We have tried to level the playing field for a thousand years, unsuccessfully. We need an alternative. Children, given technology and left alone, seem to be able to level the playing field by themselves, probably because Computers and the Internet work the same way in the swamps of the Sunderbans as in Washington DC. Teachers don't work the same way, neither do parents. So, if there was a way of learning that had minimum dependence on parents and teachers, children everywhere would have a better chance. This is Minimally Invasive Education. 

Steve: You seem to have attracted the nickname of the 'Slumdog Professor' in regards to the influence your research had on the making of the Slum Dog Millionaire movie. Is this something you are happy with?

Sugata: I am happy that Vikas Swarup was inspired by my early work. I am not happy that self taught children should aspire to win game shows. They should do a Ph.D. instead, as, at least, one child from a hole in the wall computer has done. I love the name though!

Steve: You tell stories about your contact with learners in remote or under privileged areas of society, many of which are inspirational. Which story (or stories) inspires you the most from your many travels?

Sugata: There are far too many stories to tell, all of them incredibly inspiring. One incident came to my mind as I said the last sentence:

'You Sir, have crossed all limits of human decency!' said a child to another in a self organised learning session without teachers. The teacher and I giggled from the corridor for a long time. I don't know why I find this inspiring, but I like laughing. 

Steve: Following on from your hole in the wall projects in their various contexts, you developed the idea of remote mentors, popularly called the 'Granny Cloud'. Can you explain how this works and why it is important?

Sugata: As I previously said, there are places on the planet where good teachers cannot or do not go. But they can, using Skype. There are retired teachers who miss children. Grannies can accelerate self organised learning. Put it all together and you get the Granny Cloud. You can get further details about this idea from this link. 

Steve: Can you talk a little about your latest research interests?

Sugata: There are several research questions I’m currently pursuing. For example, can a facility for children be operated remotely over the Internet? What will it take to build one? How can we get Key Stage 4 (14-16 year old) reading comprehension in children of age six? Is there a math (formula) that will explain how learning works?

Steve: Those are quite ambitious research questions, and we will be very interested to hear of your results. I had dinner with Nicholas Negroponte recently and your name came up. He told me you have been involved with MIT, working with him and his colleagues such as Vijay Kumar in the Media Lab. Could you talk a little about your involvement there? Did your work there for example relate to Negroponte's one laptop per child movement?

Sugata: I was there as a visiting professor for a year. I am not now. My work with Nicholas was on whether children can learn to read by themselves. We don't quite know yet. Nicholas framed a question for me, 'is knowing obsolete?' It is my biggest take away from the Media Lab. 

Steve: What is your vision for education in the next 10 years? What do you think needs to be done next?

Sugata: We need to rethink the curriculum, rethink assessment and rethink certification in an age where 'knowing' may be obsolete. Homo Sapiens will transition to Homo Deus in the next 50 years. Our preoccupation will be with meaning and creation. Knowing will not be our main interest - creating will. In order to create we will need to know things. 

When we need to know something we will have the means and the capacity to do so in minutes. A page of erudite text may take an educated person an hour to understand. A century ago it would have taken a month. A thousand years ago, a year or more. We could extrapolate to a time when it will take us a minute to understand. A generation or two later, one second. 

The human brain is evolving faster than anything has, ever before. 

Steve: Sugata, thank you for sharing your thoughts.

Photo by UOC

Minimally invasive education by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Who's afraid of the big bad MOOC?

After apparently stalling for a short time, MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) seem to be gaining ground again. First there were the cMOOCs, free and open online courses that focused more on learning than they did on accreditation. Learning was fun and informal, and learning was often self or peer assessed. With the potential for thousands of students to enrol together on MOOCs, learning through connection to this large network of learners became the foundation and the cornerstone. Next came the institutional versions, the xMOOCs, which borrowed the 'free at the point of delivery' open and online model but emphasised formal assessment and accreditation (which is clearly where the money is).  Quasi versions of open online learning already existed, such as the incredibly popular video based Khan Academy content.

Inevitably, some surveyed the huge scalability and openness of massive open courses and saw they were ripe for exploitation. Up popped a number of edu-businesses such as Coursera, Udacity and EdX, all of which promised dynamic and scalable platforms from which any university could launch its MOOC, and gain huge numbers of students overnight. xMOOCs have been around for only a short while in their current form, but have already attracted criticism and received some bad press.  Coursera for example came under fire for its problematic approach to peer assessment, whilst others were criticised for dumbing down learning through for example their use of automated assessment and delivery of homogenised content. Regardless of these detractions, several universities have bought into the vision and have launched their own versions. Yet many universities remain sceptical about the sustainability and relevancy of MOOCs. Others are standing on the sidelines watching to see what will happen next.

Writing in the Thursday March 7 edition of the International Herald Tribune, Thomas Friedman issues a stark warning to all traditional universities about MOOCs, focused on improving pedagogy. Universities must change, he says, from a 'time served' model to a 'stuff learned' model. He reasons that 'increasingly the world does not care what you know. Everything is on Google. The world only cares, and will only pay for,  what you can do with what you know'. Friedman points out, quite rightly, that the world of work is now competency based, and respects less and less the academic qualifications job candidates place on their CVs. He pours further fuel on the fire by pointing out that the world of MOOCs is 'creating a competition that will force every professor to improve his or her pedagogy or face an online competitor.' Whilst this would be a good thing for universities (why would anyone not want to improve their professional practice?) many are less convinced that MOOCs will provoke such a dichotomy of educational choice. Clearly Friedman has a point, but many remain sceptical, asking questions such as: How many courses can actually be fully and convincingly delivered in MOOC format, with no denigration of quality of learning experience? How in the long term can quality be assured in the delivery of MOOCs? What about authenticity (are the learners who they say they are?) and what about assessment of such a large number of students - how can this be achieved reliably (remember the Coursera fiasco). And how many universities are actually threatened by MOOCs anyway?  

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Who's afraid of the big bad MOOC? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Learner power

Students' minds are occupied by many challenges, such as how they are going to be able to afford their tuition fees or how they will achieve the highest grades. The first concern is beyond the influence and reach of most students, whilst the second is usually down to good, hard work. Perhaps a little farther down their agendas students are concerned about finding good learning spaces, concerns over the environment, and keeping themselves fit and healthy. Wouldn't it be great if all of these concerns could be met at the same time? Well, they have been, at one Belgian university, but more of that in a moment.

I visited the University of Hasselt this week and was shown around some of its learning spaces. 70 kilometres east of Brussels, Hasselt is a small university, but it has some big ideas. Universiteit Hasselt takes some innovative approaches to education including its refurbishment of an old prison to create a bright and airy new learning space for its law faculty students. The old cells are now 'study cells', where students can find space to focus on their projects.

But back to the question about student concerns. One particular innovation really grabbed my attention. In one of the common areas, I saw this study plinth and simply had to capture this image to share it.  It's such a simple, yet elegantly useful idea. Students sit at the plinth, plug in their laptops or tablets, and then generate electrical power by turning the pedals underneath. While they are generating the power, they are simultaneously improving their fitness levels. Pedal power - saving the university money and providing students opportunities to keep fit while they are learning. Like it? Do you have any other useful ideas that could transform the learning spaces at your institute?

Photo by Steve Wheeler


Learner power by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Gold mines

One of the most persuasive affordances of social media is that it encourages users to generate their own content. Potentially, this is a pedagogical gold mine for teachers if they choose to dig a little deeper. Teachers know that active forms of learning are better than passive forms. One result is deeper learning. Active learning is encouraged when students need to do something, solve a problem or produce something related to the content they are studying. Teachers who recognise this and see the potential of social media to promote active learning are in for an exciting time. Learning through digital media, says US educator Douglas Thomas, means that children are not only critical consumers of knowledge, but also producers of new knowledge. For too long, schools have been promoting the exclusive consumption of knowledge, some of which goes out of date very quickly. Schools (along with other educational institutions) should also be knowledge production centres. Our society needs new knowledge to supplement the established knowledge that already exists. Why leave it until university before students get to do research? Why not start them off on a lifelong journey of inquiry while they are still young?

Several recent schools based projects have shown the value of active learning, through knowledge production using digital media. The Quadblogging project which first began life in a small school in Bolton, North West England, is now a global phenomenon, with children in many countries blogging their stories, conversing across continents and sharing their imagination. A similar effect is seen in the 100 Word Challenge, and in other similar school related blog projects. Some schools are also promoting the idea of radio stations, which provide children with a chance to be a newsreader, DJ or station presenter. Children really learn a lot from presenting live on air - you really have to do your homework if you are summarising today's news, or interviewing a local politician.

Designer Micky McManus points out that the volume of knowledge production is unprecedented, and thanks to the Internet, anyone can publish content or perform their ideas to a potentially worldwide audience. This is exactly what the Quadblogging kids are doing. They are gaining an audience for their ideas, and in so doing, are cultivating a love of the written word. Blogging is just one of the many social media tools teachers have available to promote user generated content. There are many others, all of which have their own affordances. Before any of these tools can be used effectively however, two things need to happen. Firstly, teachers need to accept that active learning can be supported through the use of social media. And secondly, schools need to stop blocking these services so teachers can use them effectively. The gold mine is there for the taking.

Photo by Kris Olin


Gold mines by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Skills or literacies?

What does it mean to be digitally ready? How can we ascertain what is necessary for someone to be digitally literate? The answer may be changing just about every other month, as new devices, tools and services appear and are rapidly assimilated into the repertoire of individuals everywhere. We know there are digital divides between those who have and don't have. Some of these divides are socio-economic, others are technical based on geographical location, still others are about willingness to engage, or the skill to be able to use tools effectively. I prefer to use 'literacies' to indicate the ability to be digitally ready. Literacies reach beyond skills. I wrote a series not so long back on this blog about some of the digital literacies I considered to be vital if any individual was to effectively harness the potential of digital media and technology. I also mapped out some of the skills for Learning 2.0, based on the work of Mark Federman.

Skills and literacies are often used interchangeably, and this is not reprehensible. However, I think a clear distinction should be made between them if we are to fully apprehend many of the nuances and emerging aspects of learning through digital media. We are digitally ready when we are able to utilise our tools effectively, and we are digitally literate when we are able to act appropriately and make reasoned decisions in the face of the relatively unfamiliar culture of the digital ecosystem. Let me give you some examples of literacies that derive from immersion in a culture.

I spent two years living in Holland, where I attended an international school. Although most of our lessons were in English, some were in German, and I also picked up a fair understanding of Dutch too. We had to learn the subtle nuances and some of the intricacies of these languages to fully participate within the culture we found ourselves. Basic conversational language was usually enough, but to appreciate the finer aspects of life in Holland and Germany, we had to learn a few of the idioms and some slang too.

When visiting Islamic cultures, or meeting Muslims, it is not acceptable for a man to touch a woman. Several times I have seen colleagues embarrass themselves when they try to shake a Moslem woman's hand. In some cultures it is offensive to show someone the sole of your foot. In other cultures, nudity is perfectly acceptable. Culture consists of shared symbolism and understanding. When the symbolism isn't shared by everyone, problems arise. How do visitors learn and understand these conventions?

While I was driving around the mid-west of America on project work, I had to adjust and adapt my previously learnt driving skills to driving in another culture. 30 years on from my driving test I consider myself fairly adept and practised at driving in the UK. This wasn't enough though. I had to adapt to the new environment of driving on the right side of the road, and the left side of the car. It took a little practice before I was comfortable. The gear shift had to be changed by my right hand (I am used to changing with my left) and there was a need for me to understand not only the unfamiliar road signs, but also different conventions and unwritten rules of driving in America. These were literacies that I had to build around the basic skills I had already mastered. I still made mistakes, some quite embarrassing, but the longer I drove around, the better I got at not annoying other road users. Gradually I became road literate by my immersion in that culture of road use.

In the same way, when we take our first steps into new environments such as social media, mobile telephony, or online forum discussions, we need to assimilate those cultures, which probably have existed long before we grace them with our presence. In texting or e-mail for example, most people know that using CAPITAL LETTERS is tantamount to shouting. There are subtler distinctions, such as the use of abbrevations. My 83 year old father made the mistake of breaking some bad news on Facebook, and supplementing it with LOL. To him it meant Lots of Love. To my teenage children, it means Laughing out Loud. Appropriate for him in his own understanding, but innappropriate and potentially offensive to those already assimilated into the culture of sqeezetext.

In summary, skills are essential elements for any practice. Literacies take us beyond functionality into a deeper level of participation where we begin to appreciate and then adapt our behaviour to the demands and expectations of a new culture. If you can't read the signs, how do you know which direction to go?

Image from Wikimedia Commons


Skills or literacies? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.