In the past decade, interest has emerged in the large amounts of data generated by the increasing use of technology in education and what we can learn from it. Communities of researchers have arisen around the fields of learning analytics and educational data mining to look for patterns in various types of digital activity. Learning Management Systems can track every click a student makes from the time they enroll to the time they leave an educational program using it. Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques have been developed to analyze the specific online interactions and adapt learning experiences based on this.
Learning analytics research is often purely quantitative in approach and does not provide the full context surrounding student behavior. We can show “what” is happening (e.g. large drop-offs in participation in MOOCs), but not “why” it is happening. The “why” is important if we are to understand the motivations of students and how we can best design interventions to assist them. Artificial intelligence (AI) approaches can analyze how effectively and efficiently students move through a course, but not how satisfied they are with the experience. There is a link to research in social networks, which may lead to a richer set of interventions to support student success. Data science should be complemented with the qualitative methods of social science to help get to deeper issues involved in student interactions with educational experiences.
ASU’s online learning support division EdPlus has developed an Action Lab to set up the data collection infrastructure and coordinate the research expertise to make progress in this relatively new area. It is providing a unique angle to this work by integrating social scientists and data scientists with the goal of using data not only to improve the persistence and course completion of students, but to understand their motivations and how they can be best supported in long-term achievement.
Over the summer, I participated in the Realities 360 conference. This was a hands-on conference looking at how developing augmented (AR) and virtual realities (VR) can impact learning. Most of the participants were from a commercial rather than academic backgrounds, which is always makes for an interesting change of perspective. Here is a short clip of Maxwell Planck, one of the main presenters, that will give you a flavor of what was discussed:
Along with the presentation there were lots of hands on demos and workshops using various tools.
Although virtual reality is currently at a high level of hype, the concept in various forms has been around for some time ( see this article on the history of VR ). This article dates the concept back to 1930’s science fiction. It is possible to trace the concept even further back than this article does to the use of immersive panoramic paintings.
This picture illustrates the Battle of Borodino panorama created in Moscow in 1911:
There is also an earlier example in the US at the Gettysburg Museum, which attempts to give a sense of the last day of the civil war battle that took place there.
What was most revealing for me at the conference, was not VR, but the potential for augmented reality, which enables the projection of information and animations on a view of the real world. This is illustrated by a recent demo at the Apple developers conference, which introduced ARKit to app developers. Although initially this will probably be most used for entertainment apps, there is huge potential for creating a variety of learning related apps. I am looking forward to seeing how this develops when it becomes widely available.
Over the last year, I have had the pleasure of working with Rod Roscoe and Scotty Craig on an edited book project. Rod and Scotty are professors in the Human Factors Engineering program at ASU’s Polytechnic school. The resulting book “End-User Considerations in Educational Technology Design” lays much of the foundation for the definition of the new transdisciplinary field of learning engineering covered in last month’s post.
You can find out more about the book and its chapters on the publisher’s web site. The book will be released in July.
A boat elevator connecting two waterways in Falkirk, Scotland
All around us we see the benefits of a well-developed engineering profession translating the discoveries of modern science into all sorts of useful systems. Learning science is constrained by the fact that we do not have a well-developed equivalent of engineering to compliment and exploit the science. It may be part of the reason why despite producing decades of research in learning, many classrooms are little different from previous centuries in both the design and the activities that take place in them. (see previous post).
I have heard others make this claim and my answer was always that we have, in the profession of instructional design, the equivalent of the learning engineer (see previous post). The USA is unique in having developed a discipline of instructional design, and many colleges of education produce graduates in this field that are in high demand. However, I have begun to believe that this is not enough. We need a new kind of professional that has skills that traditional colleges of education are not able to provide.
Instructional design was initially inspired by many of the early developments in software engineering. It has not developed as extensively as software engineering; it has been bounded by not being truly cross-disciplinary (Douglas, 2006). It needs to embrace a stronger technological component and have a connection to the emerging field of design science. It needs people skilled in the design of sociotechnical systems, not just the design of individual pieces of educational technology. This involves transforming traditional instructional design by integrating ideas from outside educational colleges such as software engineering, human systems engineering and design schools.
Design thinking has moved away from process heavy models focused on the systems, to models focused on the user experience (see previous post) with systems and the context in which they are used. It was the development of a design-oriented culture focused on user experience that helped to differentiate Apple in the technology sector. There is scope for innovative universities to create new educational programs in the field of learning engineering, a field focused on the conversion of learning research into successful large scale practice. A field that does not just integrate new technologies into existing models of education, but that seeks to transform the whole system. A field that can bridge engineering, education and design into a transdisciplinary expertise that will finally bring learning into the 21st century.
I. Douglas (2006). Issues in software engineering of relevance to instructional design. TechTrends, 50(5): 28–35.
Many people would agree there is a need for radical change in education. There is no shortage of ideas, technologies and research, but despite this what you often see in a twenty-first century classroom is not radically different from what you would see in a nineteenth century classroom. Even with online education, which would seem a radically new approach, the available models are often constrained by that with which instructors are already familiar.
Education is still largely dominated by methods of instructional design and teaching practice that are rooted in pre-internet thinking. Technology is often used to augment, rather than redefine the existing models. There is still a sense that many content-heavy courses should be taken before students can engage in more practically oriented courses. Assessment is still dominated by letter grade based on a broad non-standardized level of attainment in a course.
Learning science has been seen as the research field to help overcome these constraints and provide evidence-based models for more effective forms of learning. Learning science has its roots in cognitive psychology and initially was primarily focused on understanding learning processes in individual humans. More recently it has expanded to cover interests in areas such as learning environments, instructional methods, and the impacts of technology. It could be argued that it has not expanded quickly or broadly enough to cope with the rapid development of new technologies and the need for better models of teaching and learning support.
I think it is important to point out that when we think of learning – we tend to think of it in the context of formal learning in schools. I would say that there are three intersecting domains of life-long learning. In each of these areas there can be formal (e.g. courses) and informal (e.g. conversations with other learners) methods of learning. The study of the intersections of these areas and between the formal and the informal is the first area that needs more attention from researchers.
Over future posts I will highlight other areas where learning science can be expanded and improved.
Following up our showcase event last month we now have a colloquium series of excellent speakers.
Val Shute is a professor of education at Florida State University. While many people talk about 21st century learning, fewer talk about the need for a 21st century assessment to go with it. Dr Shute’s work around the idea of stealth assessment is a good example of new work on thinking about assessment.
Amy Baylor is currently a program officer at the National Science Foundation and talked about her work on designing virtual humans for teaching and learning. The reactions are not always what you might expect.
The good news about our colloquiums is that we are now able to record them. So rather than me describing more about the work, please visit the links above and view both these talks.
Following up on the last post here is a video of the showcase showing the energy of the event:
Abstracts, posters and videos of many of the presentations are now available here.
This time last year, we launched the ASU learning Innovation Showcase to demonstrate innovative work in teaching and learning occurring at ASU, and to connect the participants in new collaborations (see Feb 2016 entry). The event garnered great reviews and we promised to do it again on a larger scale. You can see by some of the pictures below that that is what we achieved. On January 11, 2017, we filled a ballroom with seventy-six diverse presentations, and had visitors not only from the ASU community, but external visitors from community colleges, libraries and museums.
In addition to our institute’s labs and support services, this year we were joined by a number of associated centers for research:
The Institute for Humanities Research and the ASU Library were also co-sponsors of the event. I was particularly pleased to see librarians taking an active role in promoting teaching and learning. Having previously worked in a school of library and information science, I know the role of the librarian is fast evolving along with the changes in technology. Librarians are very qualified to help faculty innovate learning in the digital age.
The list of presentations is available here. The list will be updated soon to include abstracts, posters, and some videos.