George Siemens, at the Connectivism blog, has written an interesting article that highlights several of the difficulties associated with open approaches to education. Siemens focuses on the policy changes needed to make open resources viable for education. There are especially two points that Siemens makes that I think are most relevant and I agree with entirely. First is the systemic nature of education, and especially, that education is made up of complex systems within systems. Second is the need for more future oriented thinking in education. This latter point is one that I highlighted in a recent post, although I put it more in terms of the tendency for reactive policy making in education. Siemens' point (at least one of them) is that change in education tends to be incremental because these two points are seldom addressed.
I am in total agreement with Siemens regarding the issues of the systemic nature of education and the need for future oriented policies. However, I think there is another equally important issue that Siemens misses and that is often left unmentioned, especially in discourse about technology and educational change. This is that policy making is a very difficult process and changing educational policy even more so because education is so closely tied to society, culture, and individuals' value systems. Siemens says, "When trying to change a complex integrated system that includes numerous stakeholders - such as universities - a seat is required at the power table." This is certainly true, but I would argue that in the case of education, especially when significant change is involved, a "seat at the power table" is not enough. The type and level of change we can expect to achieve will also depend on the social values of the broader stakeholders, which in the case of education includes the general public. Before we can expect considerable change in education, we have to ensure that those changes are consistent with society's values.
Ensuring consistency with social values can take at least two routes. The first is that expectations for change are modified. This is the most common process and usually results in lesser expectations. The second is to change the value system. This can be a lengthy and complicated process but is most likely to result in significant change. There are, however, some successful examples of the latter. One of the most talked about (and that I tend to mention a lot) is Finland (See for example Hargreaves, 2008). Finland has radically transformed their educational system over a couple of decades. What I think are a couple of the key developments in Finland that have facilitated these changes. First, the social status of teachers was raised considerably to one where they are a trusted authoritative voice on educational matters. Second, educational policy is closely integrated with several other policies that have to do with social change and economic growth. Thus, they have created a society that values and promotes change and is able to bring about change fairly rapidly based on expert authority.
Many people point out that a country like Finland has it fairly easy in this regard because it is a largely homogenous society. This is certainly a viable point, but I still think that the Finnish experience can provide valuable lessons for any society, including multi-cultural societies. True, it'll probably be more difficult, but it's still a reasonable goal.
For the past year, I've been researching the integration of technology in education, and most recently the use of cell phones, as I mentioned in a recent post. What I have seen is that the use of communication technology in education is more driven by reactionary responses to technology than proactive. There are a number of things that contribute to this tendency; gaps in teacher training, parents' assumptions about education and technology, students' assumptions about education and technology (yes, students themselves are often just as skeptical about technology in education as the adults around them), and unclear or misinformed policies. What we end up with are educational systems where the use of technology is always at least one step behind what's happening outside of the system. My question is, can we formulate policies that accommodate rapid responses to technological changes?
A very good example of technological skepticism in education is the cell phone. Cell phone ownership and cell phone use has spread all over the world at a phenomenal rate. According to a BECTA report from last year, cell phone ownership among 12 year olds in the UK is almost universal and there is little reason to think that other developed countries are any different. One would think that this would be an exciting opportunity for learning, which is essentially a communicative activity. But, no, instead they are most often treated with suspicion and skepticism, labeled distracting, and very often banned. Yet, for students these devices have become one of their primary means of exchange and transfer of knowledge and opinions. The educational system, however, seems determined to encourage the belief that these exchanges using accessible technology are inherently inferior to the exchanges that go on within the classroom, and students seem very prepared to accept these beliefs.
An anomaly in all this is that many in development circles have been quick to point out that cell phones may be the transformative technology that will bring education to parts of the world where opportunities for learning have been few. Why this difference in attitudes toward cell phones in developing countries? The only response to that question that I can think of is that it takes a dire situation for cell phones to be seriously considered as a learning technology.
The few and limited experiments that have been carried out using cell phones in education show that educational systems have already missed out on an exciting opportunity and will have a lot of catching up to do. While they are catching up, technology will continue to develop and they will likely fall behind in regards to those as well.
One way that educational policy can perhaps address this issue is by formulating clearer policies regarding the relationship between formal, non-formal and informal learning. Many policies already do address these different arenas of learning, but the do so in a manner that keeps each seperate, i.e. there's one policy for formal learning, one for non-formal, etc. What is needed is a more holistic view of learning that incorporates all of these learning arenas into one systemic vision of learning that views the classroom as an open conduite for the flow of information and knowledge from a range of sources. Perhaps the reason that cell phones have received more attention in the context of developing countries is that in many regions traditional classrooms haven't existed and education is more closely integrated within the community as a whole (I really don't know - this is pure conjecture). Whether or not this is the case, it might suggest that a more open approach to educational institutions could be helpful.
At this point, it's probably best I stop with the guesswork and refer back to a previous post on "Opening Up Education".
I'm preparing a 1cr. workshop on the use of cell phones in education to be offered through the Leapfrog Institute here at the University of Minnesota this fall. I thought I'd share the bibliography so far. At least some of this will probably be of interest to readers. If you know of more interesting literature, blogs, etc. on this topic leave a message in the comments. Click here or "Continue reading" below for my annotations.
Exam students can 'phone a friend'. (2009). Ananova. Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3391974.html
Coopman, T. M. (2008). Toward a pervasive communication environment perspective. First Monday, 14(1). Retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2277/2069
Costabile, M. F., Angeli, A. D., Lanzilotti, R., Ardito, C., Buono, P., & Pederson, T. (2008). Explore! Possibilities and challenges of mobile learning. Paper presented at the CHI 2008.
Edweek.org (2009). Cellphones as Instructional Tools Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=lobby.jsp&eventid=154461&sessionid=1&key=F6D1D2D288709C1B15A12F74A57B0660&eventuserid=26731318
Hartnell-Young, E., & Heym, N. (2008). How mobile phones help learing in secondary schools. Nottingham, UK: Learning Sciences Research Institute - University of Nottingham.
Kolb, L. (2008). Toys to tools: Connecting student cell phones to education. Washington, D.C.: International Society for Technology in Education.
Librero, F., Ramos, A. J., Ranga, A. I., Trinona, J., & Lambert, D. (2007). Uses of the cell phone for education in the Philippines and Mongolia. Distance Education, 28(2), 231-244.
Prensky, M. (2005). What can you learn from a cell phone? Almost anything! Innovate, 1(5).
Exam students can 'phone a friend'. (2009). Ananova. Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_3391974.html
A teacher in Austria allowed secondary-school students to use their cell phones to call a specialist and ask questions during an exam. This is an effective example of a very simple and innovative way educators can use cell phones in education.
Coopman, T. M. (2008). Toward a pervasive communication environment perspective. First Monday, 14(1). Retrieved April 9, 2009, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/2277/2069
The author puts forth a theoretical framework about how communications from a variety of sources impact specific situations. The framework is based on a holistic consideration of communications through a range of media, whether they are present in the specific situation or not. This is particularly relevant for discourse on the use of cell phones in education since we know from existing research that cell phone use is widespread among students and that they use these and other devices for a range of learning activities outside of the classroom.
Coopman particularly emphasizes the way that messages are filtered through multiple means of communication and feedback loops to impact a specific situation. Coopman seems to assume that communications device impact equally on situations, forming "multi-modal and trans-locational access to an integrated communications infrastructure". This may well be the case, however Coopman fails to address tendencies to try to block certain communications devices in certain situations. This is certainly a tendency that would be relevant to educational situations, but may also be relevant for other situations. It seems reasonable to assume that, despite "blocking", messages that have previously been communicated using the blocked devices may nevertheless impact the situation. However, the blocking tendency may also affect perceptions about the appropriateness of certain technologies and types of communication as they relate to specific situations.
Costabile, M. F., Angeli, A. D., Lanzilotti, R., Ardito, C., Buono, P., & Pederson, T. (2008). Explore! Possibilities and challenges of mobile learning. Paper presented at the CHI 2008.
The authors describe a study involving the use of mobile communications technology in an "excursion-game" learning activity at the middle school level. Excursion-games are activities that combine exploration and discovery with gameplay and learning. For this study, the researchers had one group of students using technology and another not using technology. The non-technology group received a pamphlet in which the stage was set for the activity in story-form and included a number of "missions" that the students had to complete. The technology group received text messages, 3D images and maps by cell phone, in a predetermined sequence, that included the plot and the missions to be completed.
The researchers discovered a problem with the technology-based version of the game in that the pre-determined sequence constrained the group. This was not the case with the paper-based version. However, the learning outcomes of both groups were the same. The authors conclude that, despite the limitations of the technology-based activity, the technology did not distract the students from the learning activity. Further experimentation and development of the technology-based activity is warranted and likely to deliver better results.
This paper provides valuable insights for educators wanting to use mobile communications technology in learning activities by highlighting both benefits and potential weaknesses in the design of activities.
Edweek.org (2009). Cellphones as Instructional Tools Retrieved August 1, 2009, from http://event.on24.com/eventRegistration/EventLobbyServlet?target=lobby.jsp&eventid=154461&sessionid=1&key=F6D1D2D288709C1B15A12F74A57B0660&eventuserid=26731318
This archived webinar includes three presentations on the use of cell phones and other mobile communications technologies in primary school education.
The first presentation describes the way that mobile communications technologies are already transforming education in various parts of the world. The presenters claim that mobile technologies can make learning more personal, more engaging, and produce better learning outcomes.
The second presentation describes a specific project carried out in an elementary school in Keller, TX. The goals of this project were to increase technology skills, increase students knowledge and understanding, and to extend learning beyond the confines of the classroom and school day. The project produced very admirable results, both intended and unintended. The presenter concludes with a number of useful points for anyone wanting to do something similar in their classrooms, including curriculum considerations, cyber-safety, resources, and how to garner support from administrators and parents.
The third presentation is a general overview of a variety of possible ways to use cell phones in education. The presenter demonstrates a number of freely available tools that can be used by teachers. The presenter also points out important policy considerations regarding the use of cell phones in education.
Hartnell-Young, E., & Heym, N. (2008). How mobile phones help learing in secondary schools. Nottingham, UK: Learning Sciences Research Institute - University of Nottingham.
This report was the result of a BECTA (the UK government agency concerned with the use of technology throughout learning) research grant. The researchers found that cell phone ownership among 12 year olds in the UK is nearly universal. However, existing policies discourage the use of cell phones in schools. The authors of the report evaluate a number of initiatives that have tested the viability of using cell phones for education. They conclude that cell phones do support learning in a number of ways and make several recommendations concerning the use of cell phones in education.
The authors 8 primary recommendations are:
1. Identify and support champions: volunteer teachers who are
prepared to take some risks
2. Involve those who have responsibility for curriculum, student
management, technical support to plan and work through
responses to the issues raised in this report.
3. Initiate discussions about using mobile phones for learning
(perhaps using student voice work) and survey current
ownership, device capability and the ways mobile phones are
already being used in the school.
4. Provide hands-on, small-scale opportunities for teachers to try
out appropriate uses for mobile phones.
5. Encourage teachers to design activities that make the learning
purpose clear and to anticipate management issues at the
classroom level (such as rules, etiquette)
6. Inform parents of the learning purposes for mobile phones, and
involve them in establishing appropriate ownership,
management and ethical arrangements.
7. Anticipate and address technical issues ranging from battery
charging to network access and security, data protection, etc.
8. Develop new school policies that shift the focus of policy
attention away from the device to the uses, security and
behavioural issues that are the real concern.
This report highlights important considerations concerning the use of cell phones in education from the point of view of policy makers, administrators, teachers and students.
Kolb, L. (2008). Toys to tools: Connecting student cell phones to education. Washington, D.C.: International Society for Technology in Education.
The author, Liz Kolb, is currently one of the main authorities in the U.S. on the use of cell phones in education, having recently completed her doctoral research on the subject. This book is a very practical handbook for K-12 teachers interested in using cell phones in education.
Kolb's approach to the use of cell phones in education is based on the way that students use their cell phones in their daily lives. She considers the currently prevailing tendency to limit the use of cell phones in schools to constitute a "digital divide" between students' school lives and their daily lives. Increasing the use of cell phones in schools are considered a means of opening up the classroom to youth culture.
This book provides valuable insights into various aspects of young people's use of communications technologies and how these can be used in formal education environments to make learning more meaningful and relevant. It includes a number of sample lesson plans that teachers can work from to incorporate cell phones into their classroom activities.
Librero, F., Ramos, A. J., Ranga, A. I., Trinona, J., & Lambert, D. (2007). Uses of the cell phone for education in the Philippines and Mongolia. Distance Education, 28(2), 231-244.
This paper describes a study of the use of cell phones in non-formal education administered by higher education affiliated institutions in the Philippines and Mongolia. The authors discuss the instructional design aspects of the use of cell phones and other mobile communications devices. The project discussed uses a blended learning approach combining cell phone use with traditional classroom activities.
The authors found that cell phones are an attractive option for enhancing and expanding learning opportunities. They emphasize the need for preparation and clear design goals to ensure that learners remain engaged. The authors claim that cell phone learners are very quick to terminate learning activities when they feel that they are not engaged. The authors also emphasize the importance of design when dealing with technology that is rapidly changing.
This paper offers a comparative perspective to the largely Western focus of much of the available literature on the use of cell phones in education. Cell phones have achieved considerable penetration in many developing countries and can be an effective means of expanding learning opportunities, as the projects described in this paper demonstrate.
Prensky, M. (2005). What can you learn from a cell phone? Almost anything! Innovate, 1(5).
Marc Prensky coined the term "digital natives" which has been stirring up a fair amount of debate recently. In this article, Prensky turns his attention to the cell phone as a computing platform. He emphasizes the need for sound instructional design to turn cell phones into learning tools. Prensky discusses the various functions of cell phones, such as voice communications, text communications, etc., and how each might be used to facilitate learning. He provides several examples of each type of use. Finally, he discusses the need to change educator's attitudes regarding cell phones. Cell phones continue to be perceived as "toys" that have no place in an educational environment. Prensky, however, points out that students already use these devices for a range of learning activities. He urges educators to consider these aspects of their students' social lives and think about how they can deliver their product (i.e. learning) in a way that suits students' social reality.