the horizon report in action: emerging technologies today and tomorrow (212034207)

8/12/2019 The Horizon Report in Action: Emerging Technologies Today and Tomorrow (212034207)

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/the-horizon-report-in-action-emerging-technologies-today-and-tomorrow-212034207 1/84

The 2014 Horizon Report

March 12, 2014

Malcolm Brown and Veronica Diaz

EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative



What’s new

Methodology

Trends & Challenges

The 6 “developments”

• James Harvey, George Mason

• Phil Regier, Arizona State

Examples of key trends



poll?



POLL: Which section of the Horizon

Report do you find most valuable?

Trends

Challenges

Technology descriptions

Example projects

Explanation of methodology All of the above



What’s new



2013



2013

2014



http://is.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pages/EAP/SCALECCR.html



Methodology



Horizon Report Advisory Board

mailto:http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/Advisory+Board

mailto:http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/Advisory+Board



KEY QUESTIONS



Key questions



Key Questions: 1

Which of the key technologies catalogued inthe Horizon Project Listing will be most

important to teaching, learning, or creative

expression in tertiary education within the

next five years?

Source: http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/home

http://horizon.wiki.nmc.org/home





Key Questions: 2

List among established technologies that

arguably ALL institutions should using broadly

to support or enhance teaching, learning, or

creative inquiry?

What technologies that have a solid user basein consumer, entertainment, or other

industries should higher education institutions

be actively looking for ways to apply?

What are the key emerging technologies you

see developing to the point that higher

education should take notice during the next 4-5

years?



Key Questions: 3

What do you see as the key challengesrelated to teaching, learning, or creative

inquiry that higher educational institutions

will face during the next five years?



Key Questions: 4

What trends do you expect to have asignificant impact on the ways in which

educational institutions approach core

missions of teaching, research, and

service?



Trends and Challenges



Trends

Challenges



Trends

• social media ubiquity

• learning integrationfast (1-2yrs)

• data-driven learning• students as creators

mid-range(3-5)

• agile approaches to change• OL learning evolutionlong range(5+ yrs)



POLL: Which of the trends do you

think is most important to higher ed?

Ubiquity of social media

Integration of Online, Hybrid, and Collaborative

Learning Rise of Data-Driven Learning and Assessment

Shift from Students as Consumers to Students as

Creators

Agile Approaches to Change Evolution of Online Learning



Challenges

solvable

• digitalfluency

• rewards forteaching

elusive

• new modelscompetition

• scaling

wicked

• expandingaccess

• relevancy



POLL: Which of the HR challenges is the

most pressing one for higher education to

address?

Digital fluency of faculty

Relative lack of rewards for teaching

Competition from new models of education Scaling teaching innovations

Expanding access

Keeping education relevant



The 6 technologies



POLL: Which of the six technologies will

have the greatest impact on teaching and

learning?

Flipped classroom

Learning analytics

3D printing

Games and gamification

Quantified self

Virtual assistants



Source: http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-annual-meeting/innovation-and-networking/eli-video-competition-2014-horizon-report

http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-annual-meeting/innovation-and-networking/eli-video-competition-2014-horizon-report






















Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yut0ZnorEYE#t=45

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yut0ZnorEYE#t=45





Horizon Technologies

1. Flipped Classroom

2. Learning Analytics

3. 3D Printing4. Games and Gamification

5. Quantified Self

6. Virtual Assistants

Video Submissions

1. Learning Analytics

2. Flipped

3. Games/Gamification4. 3D printing

5. Quantified Self



Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahMSn6wwwts#t=20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ahMSn6wwwts#t=20





POLL: Check all the technologies

you’re working with at your institution

Flipped Classroom

Learning Analytics

3D Printing

Games and Gamification

Quantified Self

Virtual Assistants



Source: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV-owT85K68#t=22

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV-owT85K68#t=22







POLL: What are the most significant

obstacles in implementing these emerging

technologies:

Cost

Lack of support and/or time to implement

Lack of student interest in using them Lack of instructor interest in using them

Minimal impact on student learning

Too difficult to integrate into teaching andlearning

Other (tell us in chat)



Guest presenters

Prof. James Harvey, George MasonUniversity

Phil Regier, Arizona State University



THE IMPACT OF COLLABORATION ON STUDENT PERFORMANCE IN

A BLENDED (HYBRID) DISTANCE LEARNING CLASS

EDUCAUSE Live! Webcast

March 12, 2014

James W. Harvey, Ph.D. [email protected]

Kevin F. McCrohan, Ph.D.

Frank Allen Philpot, Ph.D.

Jeffrey Kulick, MBA

School of Management, George Mason University

39

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]



Presentation Goals

• To provide a broad overview of our effort to launch a blended or

hybrid distance learning initiative for School of Management’s

required Marketing Principles course• To summarize two ways we assessed the effectiveness of the

project

• To provide a few of the many pieces of academic literature that

helped guide our course development and assessmentObjectives of the initiative included

• Providing students with greater time management flexibility

• Providing the university with improved space capacity by

employing online, asynchronous course content for 50% of the

class

• Reserving face-to-face time for discipline synthesis, problem

solving and collaboration

40



Current Study – Introduction to Marketing

Required of all Undergraduate School of Management Students

• Platform - 50/50 hybrid course (meet every other week)

• Typically 40 students per section• Hybrid portion of the course used McGraw-Hill Connect and

LearnSmart exercises to “FLIP” the class

• LearnSmart exercises use Adaptive Learning algorithm with

student-level and class-level feedback• End of Semester Marketing Plan Team Project posted on You

Tube

• Collaboration opportunities were face-to-face, Skype, Google+

Hangout, Blackboard Collaborate

• Four Tests - multiple choice

41



MKTG 301 Student Views of Online Assignments

42



Drag & Drop Example Online Assignment

43



Problem Solving Example Online Assignment

44

i L i d S d f



Distance Learning and Student Performance

Zhao, Lei, Yan, Lai and Tan (2005)

• No significant differences in outcomes exist between distance

learning and the face-to-face format. NSD hypothesis

• Researcher as Instructor Effects –

• Research is instructor - DL more effective than face-to-face

• Researcher NOT the instructor - no significant differences

• Status of Researcher unknown - DL more effective than face-to-face

• DL Programs with broad interactions between students and

instructors and among students reported more positive outcomes

• DL Programs with a combination of technology and face-to-facelearning result in the most positive outcomes

45



Best Practices - Boettcher and Conrad (2010)

• Develop explicit expectations

• Learners and Yourself

• How to communicate

• Weekly time expectations

• Use large group, small group, and individual work experiences

• Use synchronous and asynchronous activities

• Ask for informal feedback early in the term• Invite questions, discussions, and reflections

• Emphasize customized and personalized learning

Importance of Learning Nets – Hall (2006)

Learning Nets facilitated peer collaboration and instructor

feedback. LNs more effective than traditional classroom methods

46



Finding 1

Impact of Homework on Exam Performance

25.2% of variation in exam performance associated with on-line

exercise performance

47



Impact of Collaboration on Student Outcomes

Based on the considerable literature supporting collaborative

learning on student performance, especially Purzer’s (2011)findings that students gain confidence in their own skills by

supporting teammates.

Study prediction is there should be a significant positive

relationship between class performance and support they gaveand received from others.

48



Finding 2

Impact of Student Collaboration on Course Outcomes

Students who worked collaboratively viewed the on-line homework

assignments as

More interesting

More engaged in the course

More worth the money

Helped with the semester projectMade the textbook more interesting

Assignments helped with exams

Better understand the course

There were no statistical differences by demographics such asmajor, GPA, transfer student or gender

49



Benefits of Hybrid DL

Current Study showed

• Online assignments boosted test scores• Collaboration enhanced course enjoyment and student

performance

50



Reflections on Implementation

Best platforms to implement hybrid DL

Room utilization benefits of hybrid model

Make or buy online contentBest methods to encourage collaboration and Learning Nets

Managing collaboration and Learning Nets in 100% DL

Best approached to class FLIPPING

Impact of DL on brand dilution

51



Questions and Comments ?

52

d



End Notes

Boettcher, Judith V. and Rita-Marie Conrad (2010). The Online Teaching Survival Guide: Simple and Practical

Pedagogical Tips (Chapter 3). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Summarized in TOMORROW'S PROFESSOR(sm) eMAIL

NEWSLETTER TP Msg. #1091 by Rick Reis http://cgi.stanford.edu/~dept-ctl/cgi-bin/tomprof/postings.php.

Hall Jr., Owen P. (2006), “Enhancing Management Education Using Hybrid Learning Nets: A Perspective from

Working Adults,” Journal of Business and Management , 12 (1), 45-58.

Harvey, J. W., McCrohan, K. F., Kulick, J., & Philpot, F. A. (2012). The Effects of Peer Collaboration on Student

Evaluations of Distance Education in Marketing. In Kevin J. Shanahan (Ed.) Society for Marketing Advances, 1,

Annals of the Society for Marketing Advances, 196 - 200.

Harvey, J. W., McCrohan, K. F., Philpot, F. A., & Kulick, J. (2012). The Impact of Hybrid Distance Learning on Student

Performance. In Alireza Lari, Wake Forest University (Ed.) American Institute of Higher Education 7th International

Conference Proceedings, 5 (1), Williamsburg, VA: American Institute of Higher Education, 168-180.

Purzer, Senay (2011), “The Relationship Between Team Discourse, Self -Efficacy, and Individual Achievement: A

Sequential Mixed-Methods Study,” Journal of Engineering Education, 100 (4), 655 –679. http://www.jee.org

Zhao, Yong, Jing Lei, Bo Yan, Chun Lai and Sophia Tan (2005), “What Makes the Difference? A Practical Analysis ofResearch on the Effectiveness of Distance Education,” Teachers College Record , 107(8), 1836 –1884.

http://about.gmu.edu/a-new-way-of-learning-the-impact-of-hybrid-distance-education-on-student-performance/

53
































personalized learningusing continuously

adaptive technology

Dr. Philip Regier

Executive Vice Provost & Dean, ASU Online

EDUCAUSE eLive Webcast

Wednesday, March 12, 2014; 1:00pm-2:30pm ET

context



context

learning objectives for this session

• Understand the context for the personalized learning at

Arizona State• Distinguish different modes of personalized learning

• Explain key elements of a continuously adaptive model

• Explain how the role of the faculty member in thesecourses is changed from a traditional model

What does personalized learning



http://links.asu.edu/fleas

What does personalized learning

look like at ASU?

mission: enable student success



Objectives

• Improve student critical reasoning and subject

mastery

• Increase student retention

• Increase student satisfaction

• Improve instructor insight and performance

mission: enable student success

Why the rush to change?



Why the rush to change?

students failing intro math courses at alarming rates:• 28% college mathematics

• 44% enhanced freshman mathematics

• 48% college algebra

2011: complete redesign using adaptive/active learningapproach with Knewton and Pearson

• 20% college mathematics

• 22% enhanced freshman mathematics

• 38% college algebra

now we’re constantly improving courses based on the data

we’re collecting

Why start with math courses?



college algebra is a key foundational course

Students who earned

below a C have a:

Students who earned

a C or better in have a:

57% retention rate in

year one.

85% retention rate

in year one.

42% in year two. 75% in year two.

31% six-year

graduation rate.

64% six-year

graduation rate.

Why start with math courses?

modes



modes

• “mass personalization” is a possibility for the first time in education

• evolution is underway from passive lectures to interactive learning

• ICAP model of learning (CHI, Michelene; Active-Constructive-Interactive: A

Conceptual Framework for Differentiating Learning Activities; Topics inCognitive Science 1 (2009)

73 –105.

• interactive – for example, discuss and select problem solving strategies

• constructive – synthesize different ideas into new understanding

• active – do homework exercises

• passive – watch a lecture

modes passive: mass produc

ed students in



enter header here

p p

lecture halls

modes: active & constructive, individually



modes: active & constructive, individually

challenged with adaptive learning

systemsstudents areengaged

instructors answerindividual questions

student attendanceis strong

modes: interactive, personalized



modes: interactive, personali ed

group problem solving

key elements: pedagogy




mastery of each concept rather than passing a test

• to advance, students must master 100% of all concepts at acertain proficiency level

• no longer is it possible to pass the course with holes in one’sknowledge – the “Swiss cheese approach”

supportive learning environment

• both individualized and interactive learning activities areprovided

• applied exercises are emphasized to improve critical reasoningskills





flexible pacing

• students can accelerate their progress through thematerial

continuous monitoring

• at all times, both the student and instructor knowexactly what the student has mastered

key elements: technology



enter header here

key elements: technology

Library

Student

Instructor

Adaptive

Systems

Tracking

Systems

Activities

Gradebook

Grouping

Systems

Syllabus Progress Mastery

Materials Use/

Value

Demographics

Degree/Major

Learning StyleAssessments

Assistance

key elements: analytics,



enter header here

key elements: analytics,

knowledge graphing

best practices



enter header here

best practices

fostering a community



• faculty support structure:

committees, coordinators

• transparency, support

from administration• weekly video newsletters

• large group trainings

where instructors share

best practices• mentor system for new

instructors

oste g a co u ty

data-driven decisions



structuring faculty support systems

recruiting additional resources




evaluating and creating new content




planning lab space based on pacing for exams

rethinking completion policies and linear milestones

role of the faculty



enter header here

y

role of faculty



y

We’re moving up the list to higher order activities…

• develop innovative learning methods/materials

• lead interactive exploration of concepts• answer questions

• lecture

• grade work

• produce, distribute, collect work(problem sets, etc.)

• take attendance

role of faculty



y

• lecturing less

• leading problem solving activities with students

• addressing student performance/problems• providing personalized attention for students

• having higher order interactions with students



ELI Faculty Development Program



ELI Faculty Development Program

• Part 1: ELI Online Seminar:

Determining the EffectivenessFaculty Development Programs:

March 17, 1-4p ET

• Part 2: ELI Online Focus Session:

Faculty Engagement andDevelopment: Effective and

Innovative Practice: April 1-3

• Part 3: ELI Online Short Course:

Faculty Development: June 4, 11,and 17

educause.edu/eli/events

mailto:http://www.educause.edu/events/eli-online-seminar-faculty-development


mailto:http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-online-spring-focus-session/2014










ELI Online

Spring Focus Session

….. Faculty Engagement

and Development:

Effective andInnovative Practice

April 1-3, 2014http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-online-

spring-focus-session/2014

http://www.educause.edu/eli/events/eli-online-spring-focus-session/2014














Management of faculty development programs

(CRM systems; tracking efforts; using data to

inform future work/investments) Connecting faculty development initiatives with

institutional needs--demonstrating the

alignment (improved instruction; innovative

instructional approaches; instructionalexpertise in new instructional models; effective

use of instructional technologies; student

engagement/retention)

Faculty development financial and/or business

models (governance model?)



Faculty development in emergent/highly

innovative areas/approaches: learning

analytics, new instructional models, CBE,

adaptive learning; faculty working across

departments; new faculty roles (tech

developers, coaches, etc.)

Faculty development evidence of impact

(practices that lead to faculty adoption of

new approaches, new instructional models,new technologies)

POLL: Pick your Top Area of Interest



POLL: Pick your Top Area of Interest

Management of faculty development programs Connecting faculty development initiatives with

institutional needs

Faculty development financial and/or business

models Faculty development in emergent/highly

innovative areas/approaches

Faculty development models to engage,

incentivize, and reward faculty Faculty development evidence of impact

the horizon report in action: emerging technologies today and tomorrow (212034207)

Documents