“What killed the mobile learning dream?” asks John Traxler in an article for Jisc’s Digifest. John goes on to say:

Mobile learning was e-learning’s dream come true. It offered the potential for completely personalised learning to be truly any time, anywhere.

Instead, we’ve ended up with mobile access to virtual learning environments that are being used as repositories. So, in practice, students reading their notes on the bus.

He’s right but I am not sure his reasons are sufficient. The main problem John sees is that when early projects were developed into mobile learning, they were based on supplying participants with digital devices. This was expensive and limited the scale and sustainability of such projects. Now new initiatives are emerging based on BYOD (bring your own Device). This is more sustainable but raises its own questions.

Bring your own device, enabling students to use their own equipment, introduces more questions: is there a specific range of technologies they can bring, what’s the nature of the support offered, and have we got a network infrastructure that won’t fall over when 20,000 students turn up with gadgets? What kind of staff development is needed to handle the fact that not only will the students turn up with many different devices but tomorrow they’ll have changed to even more different devices?

All this is true. And as we prepare to roll out the trial of our Learning Layers project funded Learning Toolbox (LTB) application we are only to aware that as well as looking at the technical and pedagogic application of Learning toolbox, we will have to evaluate the infrastructure support. The use of Learning toolbox has been predicated on BYOD and has been developed with Android, iOS and Microsoft versions. The training centre where the pilot will take place with some 70 apprentices, BauABC, covers a large site and is in a rural area. Telecoms network coverage is flaky, broadband not fast and the wireless network installed to support the pilots is a new venture. So many issues for us to look at there. However in terms of staff development I am more confident, with an ongoing programme for the trainers, but perhaps more importantly I think a more open attitude from construction industry trainers to the use of different technologies than say from university lecturers.

The bigger issue though for me is pedagogy. John hints at this when he talks about mobiles being used to access virtual learning environments that are being used as repositories. The real limitation here is not in the technology or infrastructure but a lack of vision of the potential of mobiles for learning in different contexts. Indeed I suspect that the primary school sector is more advanced in their thing here than the universities. Mobile devices have the potential to take learning into the world outside the classroom and to link practical with more theoretical learning. And rather than merely pushing learning (to be read on the bus although I have never quite understood why mobile learning vendors think everyone travels home by bus), the potential is to create a new ecosystem, whereby learners themselves can contribute to the learning of others, by direct interaction and by the sharing of learning and of objects. Dare I say it – Learning Toolbox is a mobile Personal Learning Environment (at least I hope so). We certainly are not looking to replace existing curricula, neither existing learning technologies. Rather we see Learning Toolbox as enhancing learning experiences and allowing users to reflect on learning in practice. In this respect we are aware of the limitations of a limited screen size and also of the lack of attraction of writing long scripts for many vocational learners. This can be an advantage. Mobile devices support all kinds of gesturing (think Tinder) and are naturally used for multimedia including video and photographs.

So what killed the mobile learning dream. Lack of understanding of its true potential, lack of vision and a concentration of funding and pilot activities with the wrong user groups. That is not to say that mobile learning cannot be used in higher education. But it needs a rethinking of curriculum and of the interface between curriculum, pedagogy and the uses of technology. So the dream is not dead. It just needs more working on!

If you would like to know more about Learning Toolbox or are interesting in demonstration or a pilot please contact me graham10 [at] mac [dot] com

Over the last few weeks I seem to have been bombarded with calls for submissions for conferences. Most I have ignored on the grounds that they are just too expensive. And if I can’t afford them, working as a relatively senior researcher with project funding, what hope do emerging researchers have of persuading their universities or companies to pay. But tto be honest I am bored with most of the conferences. Formal papers, formally presented with perhaps ten or twenty people in a session and very limited time for discussion. We know there are better ways of learning!

One conference I have submitted an abstract to is AMEE. – the International Association for Medical Education. Apart from short communications, research papers and PhD presentations AMEE invites posters, Pecha Kucha, workshops, points of view and organises a fringe to the conference. Sounds good to me and as you might guess I have submitted a point of view. Here goes (in 300 words precisely) ……

The future of work is increasingly uncertain and that goes just as much for healthcare as other occupations. An ageing population is resulting in increasing demand for healthcare workers and advances in technology and science are resulting in new healthcare applications. At the same time technology promises a revolution in self-diagnosis, whilst Artificial Intelligence and robots may render many traditional jobs obsolete.

So what can we say about healthcare skills for the future and what does it mean for healthcare education. Whilst machines may take over more unskilled work, there is likely to be increasing demand for high skilled specialist healthcare workers as well as those caring for the elderly. These staff need to be confident and competent in using existing technologies and adapting to technologies of the future.

They will need to be self-motivated lifelong learners, resilient and capable of coping with changing occupational identities. They will need to collaborate in multidisciplinary teams leading to a high premium on communication skills.

Present processes of education and training based predominantly on face-to-face courses cannot cope with the needs of lifelong learning. Learning needs to be embedded in everyday work processes. Technology is critical here; ubiquitous connectivity and mobile devices allow context-based learning. The same technologies can promote informal and social learning, learning from peers and sharing experience and knowledge in personal learning networks. Already there are many MOOCs dedicated to medical education. Healthcare professionals are using social media to build informal learning networks. But these are the exceptions not the norm. In the future machine learning algorithms can support individuals wishing to deepen their knowledge, VR to share experiences. Yet although there is a rich potential, medical educators have to steer the process. We need to know what works, what doesn’t, to evaluate, to share. That needs to start now!

Along with colleagues from the EmployID project, I’ve submitted  a paper f to the workshop on Learning Analytics for Workplace and Professional Learning (LA for Work) at Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference (LAK 2016) in April. Below is the text of teh paper (NB If you are interested, the orgnaisers are still accepting submissions for the workshop.

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we examine issues in introducing Learning Analytics (LA) in the workplace. We describe the aims of the European EmployID research project which aims to use

Image: Educause

technology to facilitate identity transformation and continuing professional development in European Public Employment Services. We describe the pedagogic approach adopted by the project based on social learning in practice, and relate this to the concept of Social Learning Analytics. We outline a series of research questions the project is seeking to explore and explain how these research questions are driving the development of tools for collecting social LA data. At the same time as providing research data, these tools have been developed to provide feedback to participants on their workplace learning.

1. LEARNING ANALYTICS AND WORK BASED LEARNING

Learning Analytics (LA) has been defined as “the measurement, collection, analysis and reporting of data about learners and their contexts, for purposes of understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs.” [1]. It can assist in informing decisions in education education system, promote personalized learning and enable adaptive pedagogies and practices [2].

However, whilst there has been considerable research and development in LA in the formal school and higher education sectors, much less attention has been paid to the potential of LA for understanding and improving learning in the workplace. There are a number of possible reasons for this.

Universities and schools have tended to harvest existing data drawn from Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs) and to analyse that data to both predict individual performance and undertake interventions which can for instance reduce drop-out rates. The use of VLEs in the workplace is limited and “collecting traces that learners leave behind” [3] may fail to take cognizance of the multiple modes of formal and informal learning in the workplace and the importance of key indicators such as collaboration. Once more key areas such as collaboration tend to be omitted and in focusing on VLEs, a failure to include all the different modes of learning. Ferguson [4]) says that in LA implementation in formal education: “LA is aligned with clear aims and there are agreed proxies for learning.” Critically, much workplace learning is informal with little agreement of proxies for learning. While Learning Analytics in educational settings very often follow a particular pedagogical design, workplace learning is much more driven by demands of work tasks or intrinsic interests of the learner, by self-directed exploration and social exchange that is tightly connected to processes and the places of work [5].  Learning interactions at the workplace are to a large extent informal and practice based and not embedded into a specific and measurable pedagogical scenario.

Pardo and Siemens [6] point out that “LA is a moral practice and needs to focus on understanding instead of measuring.” In this understanding “learners are central agents and collaborators, learner identity and performance are dynamic variables, learning success and performance is complex and multidimensional, data collection and processing needs to be done with total transparency.” This poses particular issues within the workplace with complex social and work structures, hierarchies and power relations.

Despite these difficulties workplace learners can potentially benefit from being exposed to their own and other’s learning processes and outcomes as this potentially allows for better awareness and tracing of learning, sharing experiences, and scaling informal learning practices [5]. LA can, for instance, allow trainers and L & D professionals to assess the usefulness of learning materials, increase their understanding of the workplace learning environment in order to improve the learning environment and to intervene to advise and assist learners. Perhaps more importantly,  it can assist learners in monitoring and understanding their own activities and interactions and participation in individual and collaborative learning processes and help them in reflecting on their learning.

There have been a number of early attempts to utilise LA in the workplace. Maarten de Laat [7] has developed a system based on Social Network Analysis to show patterns of learning and the impact of informal learning in Communities of Practice for Continuing Professional Development for teachers.

There is a growing interest in the use of MOOCs for professional development and workplace learning. Most (if not all) of the major MOOC platforms have some form of Learning Analytics built in providing both feedback to MOOC designers and to learners about their progress. Given that MOOCs are relatively new and are still rapidly evolving, MOOC developers are keen to use LA as a means of improving MOOC programmes.  Research and development approaches into linking Learning Design with Learning Analytics for developing MOOCs undertaken by Conole [8] and Ferguson [9] amongst others have drawn attention to the importance of pedagogy for LA.

Similarly, there are a number of research and development projects around recommender systems and adaptive learning environments. LA is seen as having strong relations to recommender systems [10], adaptive learning environments and intelligent tutoring systems [11]), and the goals of these research areas. Apart from the idea of using LA for automated customisation and adaptation, feeding back LA results to learners and teachers to foster reflection on learning can support self-regulated learning [12]. In the workplace sphere LA could be used to support the reflective practice of both trainers and learners “taking into account aspects like sentiment, affect, or motivation in LA, for example by exploiting novel multimodal approaches may provide a deeper understanding of learning experiences and the possibility to provide educational interventions in emotionally supportive ways.” [13].

One potential barrier to the use of LA in the workplace is limited data. However, although obviously smaller data sets place limitations on statistical processes, MacNeill [14] stresses the importance of fast data, actionable data, relevant data and smart data, rather than big data. LA, she says, should start from research questions that arise from teaching practice, as opposed to the traditional approach of starting analytics based on already collected and available data. Gasevic, Dawson and Siemens [15]  also draw attention to the importance of information seeking being framed within “robust theoretical models of human behavior” [16]. In the context of workplace learning this implies a focus on individual and collective social practices and to informal learning and facilitation processes rather than formal education. The next section of this paper looks at social learning in Public Employment Services and how this can be linked to an approach to workplace LA.

2. EMPLOYID: ASSISTING IDENTITY TRANSFORMATION THROUGH SOCIAL LEARNING IN EUROPEAN EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

The European EmployID research project aims to support and facilitate the learning process of Public Employment Services (PES) practitioners in their professional identity transformation process. The aims of the project are born out of a recognition that to perform successfully in their job they need to acquire a set of new and transversal skills, develop additional competencies, as well as embed a professional culture of continuous improvement. However, it is unlikely that training programmes will be able to provide sufficient opportunities for all staff in public employment services, particularly in a period of rapid change in the nature and delivery of such services and in a period with intense pressure on public expenditures. Therefore, the EmployID project aims to promote, develop and support the efficient use of technologies to provide advanced coaching, reflection and networking services through social learning. The idea of social learning is that people learn through observing others behaviour, attitudes and outcomes of these behaviours, “Most human behaviour is learned observationally through modelling from observing others, one forms an idea of how new behaviours are performed, and on later occasions this coded information serves as a guide for action” [17]. Facilitation is seen as playing a key role in structuring learning and identity transformation activities and to support networking in personal networks, teams and organisational networks, as well as cross-organisational dialogue.

Social Learning initiatives developed jointly between the EmployID project and PES organisations include the use of MOOCs, access to Labour Market information, the development of a platform to support the emergence of communities of practice and tools to support reflection in practice.

Alongside such a pedagogic approach to social learning based on practice the project is developing a strategy and tools based on Social Learning Analytics. Ferguson and Buckingham Shun [18] say that Social Learning Analytics (SLA) can be usefully thought of as a subset of learning analytics approaches. SLA focuses on how learners build knowledge together in their cultural and social settings. In the context of online social learning, it takes into account both formal and informal educational environments, including networks and communities. “As groups engage in joint activities, their success is related to a combination of individual knowledge and skills, environment, use of tools, and ability to work together. Understanding learning in these settings requires us to pay attention to group processes of knowledge construction – how sets of people learn together using tools in different settings. The focus must be not only on learners, but also on their tools and contexts.”

Viewing learning analytics from a social perspective highlights types of analytic that can be employed to make sense of learner activity in a social setting. They go on to introduce five categories of analytic whose foci are driven by the implications of the changes in which we are using social technology for learning [18]. These include social network analysis focusing on interpersonal relations in social platforms, discourse analytics predicated on the use of language as a tool for knowledge negotiation and construction, content analytics particularly looking at user-generated content and disposition analytics saying intrinsic motivation to learn is a defining feature of online social media, and lies at the heart of engaged learning, and innovation.

The approach to Social Learning Analytics links to the core aims of the EmployID project to support and facilitate the learning process of PES practitioners in their professional identity development by the efficient use of technologies to provide social learning including advanced coaching, reflection, networking and learning support services. The project focuses on technological developments that make facilitation services for professional identity transformation cost-effective and sustainable by empowering individuals and organisations to engage in transformative practices, using a variety of learning and facilitation processes.

3. LEARNING ANALYTICS AND EMPLOYID – WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO FIND OUT?

Clearly there are close links between the development of Learning Analytics and our approach to evaluation within EmployID. In order to design evaluation activities the project has developed a number of overarching research questions around professional development and identity transformations with Public Employment Services. One of these research questions is focused on LA: Which forms of workplace learning analytics can we apply in PES and how do they impact the learner? How can learning analytics contribute to evaluate learning interventions? Other focus on the learning environment and the use of tools for reflection, coaching and creativity as well as the role of the wider environment in facilitating professional identity transformation. A third focus is how practitioners manage better their own learning and gain the necessary skills (e.g. self-directed learning skills, career adaptability skills, transversal skills etc.) to support identity transformation processes as well as facilitating the learning of others linking individual, community and organizational learning.

These research questions also provide a high level framework for the development of Learning Analytics, embedded within the project activities and tools. And indeed much of the data collected for evaluation purposes also can inform Learning Analytics and vice versa. However, whilst the main aim of the evaluation work is measure the impact of the EmployID project and for providing useful formative feedback for development of the project’s tools and overarching blended learning approach, the Learning Analytics focus is understanding and optimizing learning and the environments in which it occurs.

4. FROM A THEORETICAL APPROACH TO DEVELOPING TOOLS FOR LA IN PUBLIC EMPLOYMENT SERVICES

Whilst the more practical work is in an initial phase, linked to the roll out of tools and platforms to support learning, a number of tools are under development and will be tested in 2016. Since this work is placed in the particular working environment of public administration, the initial contextual exploration led to a series of design considerations for the suggested LA approaches presented below. The access to fast, actionable, relevant and smart data is most importantly regulated by strict data protection and privacy aspects, that are crucial and clearly play a critical role in any workplace LA. As mentioned above power relations and hierarchies come into play and the full transparency to be aspired with LA might either be hindered by existing structures or raise expectations that are not covered by existing organisations structures and process. If efficient learning at the workplace becomes transparent and visible through intelligent LA, what does this mean with regard to career development and promotion? Who has access to the data, how are they linked to existing appraisal systems or is it perceived as sufficient to use the analytics for individual reflection only? For the following LA tools a trade-off needs to be negotiated and their practicality in workplace setting can only be assessed when fully implemented. Clear rules about who has access to the insight gained from LA have to be defined. The current approach in EmployID is thus to focus on the individual learner as the main recipient of LA.   

4.1 Self-assessment questionnaire

The project has developed a self-assessment questionnaire as an instrument to collect data from EmployID interventions in different PES organisations to support reflection on personal development. It contains a core set of questions for cross-case evaluation and LA on a project level as well as intervention-specific questions that can be selected to fit the context. The self-assessment approach should provide evidence for the impact of EmployID interventions whilst addressing the EmployID research questions, e.g. the effectiveness of a learning environment in the specific workplace context. Questions are related to professional identity transformation, including individual, emotional, relational and practical development. For the individual learner the questionnaire aims to foster their self-reflection process. It supports them in observing their ‘distance travelled’ in key aspects of their professional identity development. Whilst using EmployID platforms and tools, participants will be invited to fill in the questionnaire upon registration and then at periodic intervals. Questions and ways of presenting the questionnaire questions are adapted to the respective tool or platform, such as social learning programmes, reflective community, or peer coaching.

The individual results and distance travelled over the different time points will be visualised and presented to individual participants in the form of development curves based on summary categories to stimulate self-reflection on learning. These development curves show the individual learners’ changes in their attitudes and behaviour related to learning and adaptation  in the job, the facilitation of colleagues and clients, as well as the personal development related to reflexivity, stress management and emotional awareness.

4.2 Learning Analytics and Reflective Communities

The EmployID project is launching a platform to support the development of a Reflective in the Slovenian PES in February, 2016. The platform is based on the WordPress Content Management System and the project has developed a number of plug ins to support social learning analytics and reflection analytics. The data from these plugins can serve as the basis for a dashboard for learners providing visualisations of different metrics

4.2.1 Network Maps

This plugin visualizes user interactions in social networks including individual contacts, activities, and topics. The data is visualised through a series of maps and is localised through different offices within the PES. The interface shows how interaction with other users has changed during the last 30 days. This way users can visually “see” how often they interact with others and possibly find other users with whom they wish to interact.

The view can be filtered by different job roles and is designed to help users find topics they may be interested in.

4.2.2 Karma Points

The Karma Points plugin allows users to give each other ‘Karma points’ and ‘reputation points’. It is based both on rankings of posts and of authors. Karma points are temporary and expire after a week but are also refreshed each week. This way users can only donate karma points to a few selected posts in each week. The user who receives a karma point gets the point added to her permanent reputation points.

4.2.3 Reflection Analytics

The Reflection Analytics plugin collects platform usage data and shows it in an actionable way to users. The purpose of this is to show people information in order to let them reflect about their behaviour in the platform and then possibly to give them enough information to show them how they could learn more effectively. The plugin will use a number of different charts, each wrapped in a widget in order to retain customizability.

One chart being considered would visualise the role of the user’s interaction in the current month in terms of how many posts she wrote, how many topics she commented on and how many topics she read compared to the average of the group.  This way, users can easily identify whether they are writing a similar number of topics as their colleagues. It shows change over time and provides suggestions for new activities. However, we also recognise that comparisons with group averages can be demotivating for some people.

4.3 Content Coding and Analysis

The analysis of comments and content shared within the EmployID tools can provide data addressing a number of the research questions outlined above.

A first trial of content coding used to analyse inputs into a pilot MOOC held in early 2015 using the FutureLearn platform resulted in rich insights about aspects of identity transformation and learning from and with others. The codes for this analysis were created inductively based on [19] and then analysed according to success factors for identity transformation. Given that identity transformation in PES organisations is a new field of research we expect new categories to evolve over time.

In addition to the inductive coding the EmployID project will apply deductive analysis to investigate the reflection in content of the Reflective Community Platform following a fixed coding scheme for reflection [20].

Similar to the coding approach applied for reflective actions we are currently working on a new coding scheme for learning facilitation in EmployID. Based on existing models of facilitation (e.g. [21]) and facilitation requirements identified within the PES organisations, a fixed scheme for coding will be developed and applied the first time for the analysis of content shared in the Reflective Community platform.

An important future aspect of content coding is going one step further and exploring innovative methodological approaches, trialing with a machine learning approach based on (semi-) automatic detection of reflection and facilitation in text. This semi-automatic content analysis is a prerequisite for reflecting analysis back to learners as part of learning analytics, as it allows the analysis of large amounts of shared content, in different languages and not only ex-post, but continually in real time.

4.4 Dynamic Social Network Analysis

Conceptual work being currently undertaken aims to bring together Social Network Analysis and Content Analysis in an evolving environment in order to analyze the changing nature and discontinuities in a knowledge development and usage over time. Such a perspective would not only enable a greater understanding of knowledge development and maturing within communities of practice and other collaborative learning teams, but would allow further development and improvements to the (online) working and learning environment.

The methodology is based on various Machine Learning approaches including content analysis, classification and clustering [22], and statistical modelling of graphs and networks with a main focus on sequential and temporal non-stationary environments [23].

To illustrate changes of nature and discontinuities at the level of social network connectivity and content of communications in a knowledge maturing process “based on the assumption that learning is an inherently social and collaborative activity in which individual learning processes are interdependent and dynamically interlinked with each other: the output of one learning process is input to the next. If we have a look at this phenomenon from a distance, we can observe a knowledge flow across different interlinked individual learning processes. Knowledge becomes less contextualized, more explicitly linked, easier to communicate, in short: it matures.” [24]

5. NEXT STEPS

In this paper we have examined current approaches to Learning Analytics and have considered some of the issues in developing approaches to LA for workplace learning, notably that learning interactions at the workplace are to a large extent informal and practice based and not embedded into a specific and measurable pedagogical scenario. Despite that, we foresee considerable benefits through developing Workplace Learning Analytics in terms of better awareness and tracing of learning, sharing experiences, and scaling informal learning practices.

We have outlined a pedagogic approach to learning in European Public Employment Services based on social learning and have outlined a parallel approach to LA based on Social Learning Analytics. We have described a number of different tools for workplace Learning Analytics aiming at providing data to assist answering a series of research questions developed through the EmployID project. At the same time as providing research data, these tools have been developed to provide feedback to participants on their workplace learning.

The tools are at various stages of development. In the next phase of development, during 2016, we will implement and evaluate the use of these tools, whilst continuing to develop our conceptual approach to Workplace Learning Analytics.

One essential part of this conceptual approach is that supporting learning of individuals with learning analytics is not just as designers of learning solutions how to present dashboards, visualizations and other forms of data representation. The biggest challenge of workplace learning analytics (but also learning analytics in general) is to support learners in making sense of the data analysis:

1. What does an indicator or a visualization tell about how to improve learning?
2. What are the limitations of such indicators?
3. How can we move more towards evidence-based interventions

And this is not just a individual task; it requires collaborative reflection and learning processes. The knowledge of how to use learning analytics results for improving learning also needs to evolve through a knowledge maturing process. This corresponds to Argyris & Schön’s double loop learning [25]. Otherwise, if learning analytics is perceived as a top-down approach pushed towards the learner, it will suffer from the same problems as performance management. These pre-defined indicators (through their selection, computation, and visualization) implement a certain preconception which is not evaluated on a continuous basis by those involved in the process. Misinterpretations and a misled confidence in numbers can disempower learners and lead to an overall rejection of analytics-driven approaches.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

EmployID – “Scalable & cost-effective facilitation of professional identity transformation in public employment services” – is a research project supported by the European Commission under the 7th Framework Program (project no. 619619).

REFERENCES

[1] SoLAR(2011).Open Learning Analytics: An Integrated & Modularized Platform. WhitePaper.Society for Learning Analytics Research. Retrieved from http://solaresearch.org/OpenLearningAnalytics.pdf

[2] Johnson, L. Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2014). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium

[3] Duval E. (2012) Learning Analytics and Educational Data Mining, Erik Duval’s Weblog, 30 January 2012,  https://erikduval.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/learning-analytics-and-educational-data-mining/

[4] Ferguson, R. (2012) Learning analytics: drivers, developments and challenges. In: International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 4(5/6), 2012, pp. 304-317.

[5] Ley T. Lindstaedt S., Klamma R. and Wild S. (2015) Learning Analytics for Workplace and Professional Learning, http://learning-layers.eu/laforwork/

[6] Pardo A. and Siemens G. (2014) Ethical and privacy principles for learning analytics in British Journal of Educational Technology Volume 45, Issue 3, pages 438–450, May 2014

[7] de Laat M. & Schreurs (2013) Visualizing Informal Professional Development Networks: Building a Case for Learning Analytics in the Workplace, In American Bahavioral Scientist http://abs.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/03/11/0002764213479364.abstract

[8] Conole G. (2014) The implciations of open practice, presentation, Slideshare, http://www.slideshare.net/GrainneConole/conole-hea-seminar

[9] Ferguson (2015) Learning Design and Learning Analytics, Presentation, Slideshare http://www.slideshare.net/R3beccaF/learning-design-and-learning-analytics-50180031

[10] Adomavicius, G. and Tuzhilin, A. (2005) Toward the Next Generation of Recommender Systems: A Survey of the State-of-the-Art and Possible Extensions. IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, 17, 734-749. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TKDE.2005.99

[11] Brusilovsky, P. and Peylo, C. (2003) Adaptive and intelligent Web-based educational systems. In P. Brusilovsky and C. Peylo (eds.), International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education 13 (2-4), Special Issue on Adaptive and Intelligent Web-based Educational Systems, 159-172.

[12] Zimmerman B. J, (2002) Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview, in Theory into Practice, Volume: 41 Issue: 2 Pages: 64-70

[13] Bahreini K, Nadolski & Westera W. (2014) Towards multimodal emotion recognition in e-learning environments, Interactive Learning environments, Routledge, http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10494820.2014.908927

[14] MacNeill, S. (2015) The sound of learning analytics, presentation, Slideshare, http://www.slideshare.net/sheilamac/the-sound-of-learning-analytics

[15] Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Siemens, G. (2015) Let’s not forget: Learning Analytics are about learning. TechTrends

[16] Wilson, T. D. (1999). Models in information behaviour research. Journal of Documentation, 55 (3), pp 249-70

[17] Bandura, A. (1977). Social Learning Theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

[18] Buckingham Shum, S., & Ferguson, R. (2012). Social Learning Analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15 (3), 3–26

[19] Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative Content Analysis. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2). Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs0002204

[20] Prilla M, Nolte A, Blunk O, et al (2015) Analyzing Collaborative Reflection Support: A Content Analysis Approach. In: Proceedings of the European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (ECSCW 2015).   

[21] Hyland, N., Grant, J. M., Craig, A. C., Hudon, M., & Nethery, C. (2012). Exploring Facilitation Stages and Facilitator Actions in an Online/Blended Community of Practice of Elementary Teachers: Reflections on Practice (ROP) Anne Rodrigue Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario. Copyright© 2012 Shirley Van Nuland and Jim Greenlaw, 71.   

[22] Yeung, K. Y. and Ruzzo W.L. (2000). An empirical study on principal component analysis for clustering gene expression data. Technical report, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Washington.http://bio.cs.washington.edu/supplements/kayee/pca.pdf

[23] Mc Culloh, I. and Carley, K. M. (2008). Social Network Change Detection. Institute for Software Research. School of Computer Science. Carnegie Mellon University. Pittsburgh, PA 15213. CMU-CS-08116.

http://www.casos.cs.cmu.edu/publications/papers/CMU-CS-08-116.pdf

[24] R. Maier, A. Schmidt. Characterizing Knowledge Maturing: A Conceptual Process Model for Integrating E-Learning and Knowledge Management In: Gronau, Norbert (eds.): 4th Conference Professional Knowledge Management – Experiences and Visions (WM ’07), Potsdam, GITO, 2007, pp. 325-334.

http://knowledge-maturing.com/concept/knowledge-maturing-phase-model

[25] Argyris, C./ Schön, D. (1978): Organizational Learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading.

I like Cristina Costa’s blog, “Is technology changing learning habit(u)s?” (and not only because she cited me). Cristina says how her study on students’ digital practices shows how students’ learning habitus (their histories/experiences with education) have not changed that much in the formal setting, even when they are presented with new pedagogical approaches. It is not so much an issue of their digital competence but an issue that the informal uses of technology do not simply transfer into formal contexts.

Students, she says, “have a feeling for the ‘academic game’ and do their best to adjust to the field’s rules in order to succeed in it.” It seems to me their was always something of a game in academia and especially in undergraduate education. Even in the early 1970s we had well developed strategies for getting through exams (for instance I undertook a rather more in depth study of past exam questions than I did of the overall curriculum and it worked well for me).

But there are more profound contradictions in today’s higher education system. On the one hand universities are supposed to be about education and learning – as expressed through Humboldt’s idea of Allgemeine Bildung—or well-rounded education—to ensure that each person might seek to realize the human potentialities that he possessed as a unique individual or more modern appeals for a broad liberal education (unless such an education can be seen as improving their employability). On the other hand in the UK students are paying substantial fees for a system designed to provide them with a qualification to realise the so called graduate wage premium in the world of work. In such a situation it is little wonder that students are reluctant to participate in the innovative pedagogies – described by Cristina as  Freirean and Deweyan type of pedagogical approaches – designed for them to explore ideas and knowledge – quite simply they want the knowledge and skills they need to pass the exams and thus justify the expenditure. In this situation students will readily adopt productivity apps – office tools, citation databases, revision apps etc – and of course will use technology for social purposes and entertainment. But I am afraid asking them to use social software for learning within the political and social habit(u)s of present day universities may be going to far.

Just a quick note following up on my blog of yesterday noting the lack of new ideas in the exhibition at Online Educa Berlin. Today I read an interesting article entitled “Caputalism: Will Capitalism Die?” by Robert Misik on the Social Europe blog. Most of the article, as the title implies is given over to an analysis of the lack of growth and “secular stagnation” in western economies.

Misik says that “despite superficial impressions, the past 15 years may have produced practically no more genuinely productive innovations.” He quotes the economist Robert J Gordon who says:“Invention since 2000 has centered on entertainment and communication devices that are smaller, smarter, and more capable, but do not fundamentally change labour productivity or the standard of living in the way that electric light, motor cars, or indoor plumbing changed it.”

And that seems to sum up much of the developments in Technology Enhanced Learning. Whilst in the 1990s and the first years of this century there was something of an explosion in innovative uses of technology for learning through mainly the development of Virtual Learning Environments, since then genuine innovation has stalled, as least through the ed tech industry. Games based learning, Learning Analytics, mobile learning, MOOCs are all interesting but they do not, to paraphrase Gordon, fundamentally change education and learning, still less pedagogy. As Phil Hill says: “Didn’t we have bigger dreams for instructional technology?”

Misik speculates on the slow emergence of a new economy in which “more decentralized, self-managed firms, co-operatives and initiatives play a gradually more important role – so that, in the end, a mixed economy emerges composed of private companies, state enterprises and co-operatives and alternative economic bodies.” And that may be the way forward to for Technology Enhanced Learning, where the behemoths of the Ed Tech world play a lesser role, where governments continue to invest in innovation in teaching and learning with technology in education, where the importance of state involvement in education is recognised and where smaller more agile private sector enterprises become partners in developing new initiatives and pedagogic approaches to learning. Its nice to be optimistic!

2016 and it is time to return to the blog after a crazy December of meetings, conferences, travel and exhaustion.

First a quick catch up from Online Educa Berlin. Online Educa is always enjoyable if only because so many friends and colleagues attend it. I am also always interested in the very large exhibition which provides a quick overview of market and to a lesser extent pedagogic trends in technology supported learning. Decembers exhibition was strange, though. Firstly there were no big stands. Go back five or six years and the big stands were from the public organisations supporting the adoption of technology in universities and education in general. The UK Jisc always had a big presence, so too did the Netherlands SURF network. When they dropped away – probably as a result of funding cuts, The Middle East countries took over with colourful booths, even if somewhat lacking in content. And of course there were the VLE suppliers – Blackboard (later to become Pearsons) could always be relied on for a free glass of wine at the end of a busy conference day. At Online Educa 2015 they were all missing. The largest stand was Egypt Arising. However – whether because of their materials not arriving or for some other reason- they has no content and seemingly no representatives on what remained an empty stand. Instead the exhibition was dominated by the cheaper to rent small stands, some from projects but mainly it appeared from start up companies.

It was hard too to discern any particular trends. A few years ago the exhibition was dominated by virtual world type apps. Another year it was all about interactive whiteboards. And the next year it was video apps that were dominating the scene. In 2015 it seemed to be a bit of everything and a bit of nothing.

It left be wondering if the days of educational technology are numbered. Yes we are moving to software as a service and this will impact of education. And of course data (sometimes big data) is making an impact in the form of Learning analytics. Learning management Systems or VLEs stubbornly refuse to go away although all the suppliers seem to stress how their platforms support personal learning pathways. But in truth much of the technology used for learning is little different from the productivity apps and social software being used in everyday business and living. Will 2016 be the year when – depending on how you look at it – educational technology becomes part of the mainstream or the mainstream is just technology used for learning. After all a blog is just a blog.

In what by now has become an annual event, we will be presenting Sounds of the Bazaar, the official online radio from Online Educa Berlin, on Thursday 3 and Friday 4 of December this week. The broadcasts will be from 11:00 to 11:45 CET. If you are a regular, we have a new venue this year –  in the area of the Internet Café. If you are lucky enough to be at the conference and  are willing to come on the programme could you email Graham Attwell – graham10 [at] mac [dot] com – saying which day is most convenient for you and what time in the programme suits you best. In general each slot lasts around 5 minutes.

And if you would like to catch up in person we will be preparing the shows in the Marlene Bar from about 1500 onwards tomorrow afternoon.

If you can’t make to to Online Educa in person, don’t despair. You can listen to all the best of the conference in our live radio shows. Just tune in at 11:00 CET on Thursday and Friday by pointing your internet browser to SoB Online EDUCA 2015 LIVE Radio  and the live stream will open up in the MP3 player of your choice. Or go here to our new stream webpage.

This years The OEB Debate, provides discussion on one of the hottest topics for learners with the motion: ’This House believes 21st Century skills aren’t being taught – and they should be´.

Keynotes this year include Prof Ian Goldin, Chair at Oxford’s Martin Institute and former Vice President of the World Bank; Cory Doctorow, activist, author and journalist; David Price, learning futurist and the author of OPEN: How We’ll Work, Live and Learn In The Future’; Anka Mulder, Vice President for Education of the Delft University of Technology; Toby Walsh, Professor of Artificial Intelligence at the University of New South Wales; John Higgins, Director General of DIGITALEUROPE and Lia Commissar, leader of the ‘Education and Neuroscience Initiative’ at the Wellcome Trust.

The NMC Horizon Project, an ongoing research project designed to identify and describe emerging technologies likely to have an impact on teaching, learning, and creative inquiry has released its library edition. Six key trends, six significant challenges, and six important developments in technology are identified across three adoption horizons over the next one to five years, giving library leaders and staff, they say, a valuable guide for strategic technology planning.

The NMC Horizon Report > 2015 Library Edition identifies “Increasing Value of the User Experience” and “Prioritization of Mobile Content and Delivery” as short-term impact trends driving changes in academic and research libraries over the next one to two years. The “Evolving Nature of the Scholarly Record” and “Increasing Focus on Research Data Management” are mid-term impact trends expected to accelerate technology use in the next three to five years; and “Increasing Accessibility of Research Content” and “Rethinking Library Spaces” are long-term impact trends, anticipated to impact libraries for the next five years or more.

Thanks to a Tweet by @francesbell I picked up this olden but still golden video (around discussions in the first ever MOOC). As the Youtube blurb says “WARNING : This is not a real conversation. It is intended as a good-humoured parody of conversations about Groups and Networks that took place on CCK08 and elsewhere. This video is a mashup of the words of Bob Bell, Lisa Lane, Ariel Lion, Frances Bell, Stephen Downes, Ailsa Haxell, Roy Williams and possibly others, with a few extra words thrown to glue the conversation. You will have been quoted out of context, and otherwise had your words twisted but I hope you take this in good spirit.”