In the best tradition of our Master of Education (Knowledge Networks and Digital Innovation) I would like to share my Assessment 2 submission.
In the creation of this assignment I discussed heavily with my PLE.
For this assignment we had to create a Microsoft PowerPoint to present to a group of people who had no knowledge of Digital Preservation. It could only be 12 content slides long and had to be presented in a 30 mins time slot with an accompanying script and annotated bibliography. The annotated bibliography was meant to act as a handout for session participants and needed to have a variety of rich media and text resources that a layperson would find helpful.
It helps to be creative when you have limitations like the number of slides, especially if you know how to use the software well, so I also included layered slides – which meant that I only used 12 slides (plus a cover slide) but in fact had 15 slides for a presentation point.
Please note that this assignment was completed in 2014 and in all likelihood the resource sites will need to be reviewed for currency.
I came to INF530 with a very different perspective, as I had already completed three other units and this semester saw me working my way through a further two units, almost an information overload! In the past I have seen my previous knowledge almost as unwanted baggage, but in INF530 I think I have now checked my baggage into the plane’s cargo hold for the rest of the trip.
This subject has helped revisit and consolidate a great deal of learning that I’ve already completed. I was challenged and able to delve into topics that were of interest to me and my work such as the impact of the Internet of Things, Big Data, Personal Learning Environments and Blended Delivery.
Throughout this course I have often felt that we are looking at a giant personalized jigsaw puzzle and we have to search to find the meaning and thus all the pieces will click into place.
The only way to discover what the personalized puzzle looks like is by engaging with the content and peers. Knowing how you learn and working to your strengths along with your peers is the way forward to successfully grapple the content into a manageable and meaningful form. This is why our tasks are designed to be authentic, active learning activities (Buzzard, Crittenden, Crittenden & McCarty, 2011; D’Aloisio, 2006; Day & Kumar, 2010; Herrington & Parker, 2013; Herrington, Reeves, Oliver, & Woo, 2010).
Learning by doing is almost the mantra of the whole of this course, and because of this fits with the makerspaces movement ethos well (O’Connell, 2015). In keeping with this philosophy of active learning and makerspaces to I try to challenge myself to create something different every unit with a new technology as part of my ongoing professional learning. The digital essay enabled me to trial Sway (Microsoft, 2015), so simple and I will be showcasing this again. I also created collage images using Adobe Photoshop and a nice simple jigsaw puzzle creation online software (BigHugeLabs, 2015). All of this means that I take away from this unit a new set of skills and a solid understanding of how these skills can supplement a VET practitioner’s bag-of-tricks in creating a satisfying digital experience for students.
I’m always happy to share snippets with others of information, such as around Digital Preservation – Snow Byte and the Seven Formats.
I featured this video in an INF443 assessment. Reviewing the Digital Preservation content from both INF530 and INF443 bought to light some serious issues in preservation of student’s digital content for audit purposes in the VET sector. This content has formed the basis of a webinar presentation I have created for the Department of Training and Workforce Development to inform organisations of their ongoing obligations.
The Big data topic really made me stop, think, research and reflect on the Unique Student Identifier code that has been rolled out for the VET sector. There is such an impact of big data and how we deal with it that this will be an ongoing issue into the future especially in relation to personal data which of course linked into the Internet of Things (IoT). I specifically chose a book about IoT for my scholarly review, to challenge and enlighten my throughs around this topic so I can inform others.
My journey is far from complete, and my puzzle still has more than a few pieces missing, (I may have to look under the table for them). The final destination of course is not where you learn. The journey and the people you meet and work with along the way will always be where you grow and learn. I look forward to moving onto the next step of my journey and finding the next set of puzzle pieces to help me finally complete my personal jigsaw.
BigHugeLabs. (2015). Jigsaw: Create jigsaw puzzles from your photos [Computer software].retrieved from http://bighugelabs.com/jigsaw.php
Buzzard, C., Crittenden, V., Crittenden, W., & McCarty, P. (2011). The Use of Digital Technologies in the Classroom A Teaching and Learning Perspective. Journal of Marketing Education, 33(2), 131-139. doi:10.1177/0273475311410845
D’Aloisio, A. (2006). Motivating students through awareness of the natural correlation between college learning and corporate work settings. College Teaching, 54(2), 225-230. doi:10.3200/CTCH.54.2.225-230
Day, J., & Kumar, M. (2010). Using SMS Text Messaging to Create Individualized and Interactive Experiences in Large Classes: A Beer Game Example. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8(1), 129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2009.00247.x
Herrington, J., & Parker, J. (2013). Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4), 607-615. doi:10.1111/bjet.12048
Herrington, J., Reeves, T., Oliver, R., & Woo, Y. (2004). Designing authentic activities in web-based courses. Journal of Computing In Higher Education, 16(1), 3-29. doi:10.1007/bf02960280 Retrieved from http://link.springer.com.ezproxy.csu.edu.au/article/10.1007/BF02960280
Microsoft. (2015). Sway [Computer software]. Retrieved from https://sway.com/
O’Connell, J. (2015). Hackerspaces and makerspaces [INF530 Module 5.4]. Retrieved 20 May, 2015, from Charles Sturt University website: https://interact2.csu.edu.au/bbcswebdav/pid-249314-dt-content-rid-635373_1/courses/S-INF530_201530_W_D/module5/5_4_Hackerspaces_makerspaces.html
I came to #INF541 – Game Based Learning ready to be challenged and was not disappointed. I had read and studied Prensky and had read some of Karl Kapps work about Gamification so was up for a new style of unit, especially as I wanted to employ some of the information into training I currently deliver.
Early on I set myself a personal goal of creating a resource about a gamer and their perspective on games with a feature on Ingress (Niantic Labs, 2015). I set this personal task so that I could explore not only the game but also see some of the drivers and motivations behind why people play games, which has given me much material to reflect on. It was slightly more difficult than I imagined as I had chosen a hardcore Ingress (Niantic Labs, 2015) player as my subject. He was very forth coming with his views, I only wish I had the time to do a series of video pieces as it was fascinating. This self-imposed task had me filming, writing questions, and editing the film a whole new set of skills bagged thanks to #INF541, surely that means I level up!
I have developed a richer understand of games and the role that all forms of gaming can have in an educational context. The critical review exercise was challenging and made me drill deep into distinctly different papers. This was extremely difficult, but it made me feel comfortable about refusing to accept on face value what is said but to confront, and counter the arguments as my points are fair and valid.
The practical and experimental activities including virtual field trips has my learning experience a rich, dynamic and rewarding one. These field trips along with the immersion into Ingress (Niantic Labs, 2015) has had, I feel, the greatest impression on my thinking about games. I can use and demonstrate game based learning to colleagues in the Vocational Education and Training sector from first-hand experience of the technologies, warts and all, and have a wide selection of robust tools and literature that demonstrates the effectiveness of game based learning.
Simulations have excited me, especially immersive serious simulations that learners are engaging with the content to build skills for the workplace. Simulations and serious games where the trainer can actively redesign the scenario for students to be challenged every time they use the simulator are an exciting prospect for me, especially where the problems are designed for the student to be challenged but can achieve or ‘win’, unlike the Kobayashi Maru, are an exciting assessment prospect for VET.
Yet the most critical point for me in the adult learning space is that I need to be able to train VET trainers to facilitate pre and post game or simulation debrief sessions (Moore & Pflugfelder, 2010) and help them learn how to deal with the loss of control in being a ‘guide on the side or meddler in the middle’ rather than the ‘sage on the stage’ (Day & Kumar, 2010).
It frustrates me that the VET sector has come so far with elearning and yet there is still a chasm of thought around the use of games based learning, and it really does not matter what type of game you are referring to: serious games, commercial off-the-shelf games or simulations to support student outcomes there will be considerable pockets of resistance. As this is a major issue for the VET sector I wrote my final assignment around implementation of games for organization and trainers. For this I sourced as many examples as I could find of effective use of simulations to support training, as I personally feel simulations will be the first acceptance point for VET trainers.
Thanks to this unit I feel that I have grown my knowledge base and personal understanding of GBL. My next self-imposed challenge is to turn that knowledge and understanding into a productive output for the VET sector, which will be for a sector win.
CBS Studios Inc. (2014). Kobayashi Maru. Retrieved from http://www.startrek.com/database_article/kobayashi-maru
Day, J., & Kumar, M. (2010). Using SMS Text Messaging to Create Individualized and Interactive Experiences in Large Classes: A Beer Game Example. Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education, 8(1), 129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4609.2009.00247.x
Moore, K., & Pflugfelder E. H. (2010). On being bored and lost (in virtuality). Learning, media and technology, 35 (2) pp. 249 -253
The Certificate II Construction Pathways program largely consists of 16-18 year old males with high levels of disengagement with paper-based learning that have a preference for practical, ‘hands on’ activities. I have focused on this learning area to seek out resources for the Instructional Software 5 areas as outlined by Roblyer (2013).
In the VET sector we have been fortunate that the National VET eLearning Strategy funded a large amount of resource development that align to various curriculum documents.
Drill and practice; Tutorial; and Problem Solving.
This is a multilayered resource that actually comprises of all the Instructional Software areas. It deals with numeracy with a focus on Certificate II in Construction Pathways to ensure students have an appropriate skill level in numeracy as outlined by industry. Within the toolbox there are drill and practice activities that if you house in a Learning Management System such as Moodle can track the students’ progress as these are all SCORM learning objects that report through to the grade book.
Note this is an interactive learning simulation which I am classing as a serious game that will support the construction trades.
This game has the user work through measuring a deck to work out the cost of the timber needed to replace the decking boards for the customer. It particularly good for low literacy and numeracy level students working in the construction area.
The Certificate II Construction Pathways program lends itself to a blended delivery approach, in-particular when students have block release to a Registered Training Organisation. These e-learning resources a supportive and provide valuable underpinning knowledge that the students do require when they are on work placement. These resources could also be used in a ‘Flipped Classroom’ (Sams and Bergmann, 2013) style class format which lends itself to having the student work through formative activities at home prior to working with the teacher in the classroom to ensure that while on block release the students use their teacher class time to greatest advantage.
Nationalvetcontent.edu.au,. (2006). National VET Content:Estimating and costing carpentry jobs. Retrieved 20 January 2015, from https://nationalvetcontent.edu.au/share/page/document-details?nodeRef=workspace://SpacesStore/dfe8d668-bf05-4542-84ce-029915092f7c
Roblyer, M. (2013). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching. Harlow: Pearson.
Sams, A., & Bergmann, J. (2013). Flip Your Students’ Learning. Educational Leadership, 2013, Vol.70(6), P.16-20, Vol.70(6), p. 16-20.
The White Card Game,. (2013). The White Card Game. Retrieved 20 January 2015, from http://www.whitecardgame.com.au/
Toolboxes.flexiblelearning.net.au,. (2015). Flexible Learning Toolboxes – Numbers 14.01. Retrieved 20 January 2015, from http://toolboxes.flexiblelearning.net.au/series14/14_01.htm
As of the 1st January 2014 all students, in the Australian VET sector, have been allocated a Unique Student Identifier. This code follows the student through their life and enables registered training organizations (RTOs) easier access to a student’s VET records and provides a simpler way for students to provide evidence for credit transfer makes it easier for students to transfer between training institutions (Mills, 2013).
But this got me thinking about Big Data and the relationship that this USI could offer in the future for RTOs. On the positive side there is the possibility of responsive training based on the needs of the client making it a system that can contextualize a learning journey through skill sets for the student to eventually achieve a desired goal, but it could also have a darker side the side where direct marketing and disreputable RTOs denying students training based purely on past performances in previous qualifications. Currently the USI does not store informal comments regarding student’s performance currently, but you have to ask yourself does that mean that the system will always stay like this, especially if K-12 students are eventually linked into it.
Education providers, if engaging in digital learning, have the ability to garner information about their clients easily through the technology that we use. Every click a student does within a Learning Management System is recorded in the back end database, which will be archived along with the course in the VET sector for audit purposes. If utilizing social media every mention or micro-blog post can be saved to build a picture of the learners and their capabilities and needs. Now imagine this big picture that one RTO is able to build through, careful and critical analysis of the underlying data, an explicit picture of the student’s choices and make accurate predictions on the same students future study choices. If this data becomes part of public record then one bad grade somewhere in your past could in the future severely impact on what you are able to study in a dystopian world.
In all fairness the USI Registry System has been designed to keep training records and results safe, according to their website (Usi.gov.au, 2015) and goes on in subsequent pages to assure students that their information is safe. But the worry about security when it comes to student academic records is not an isolated concern for Australia but was raised in Education Week (Kamisar, 2014) that discussed issues around security for the organization inBloom which was touted as being the organization that would revolutionize personalized learning and target the needs of individuals based by synthesizing student data. Admittedly there are marked differences between inBloom and the USI Registry System. One stand out difference is that currently the USI is not being managed by a private third party but by a Federal Government agency, however, given recent privatization and the push to consolidate services to reduce Government employment burdens it does beg the question if this will become outsourced in years to come.
Data mining is big business for organisations and more so the art of predictive analytics. Marketing departments in retails stores have been onto this for years as outlined by Duhigg (2012), so why wouldn’t the education industry want to start move into this field especially with a ready made supply of information. This could become a very lucrative market place with the value of this data being almost priceless, and we the consumers may never even realize that our information might have been shared. One must ask the question do students know that the information stored within the registry may be provided to third parties such as regulators, researchers current and former VET RTOs to name a few for a variety of purposes. When a student is enrolling is this ever explained in full to them and all of the ramifications, as in the current system you cannot enrol in a VET qualification without have a USI. I have to say that I could (if I wanted to) create a USI on the website (Usi.gov.au, 2015) and it would have been up to me to have explored all of the sub-pages to dig into what will happen to my results and who has access to my details, but I am not convinced that all of our VET students will do this.
We do not have a perfect VET system, but we are trying to put in place systems that will streamline workloads for organizations. But I do have to wonder who is looking out for the students? This blog post is really the start of my exploration into this very interesting topic and one that could have ramifications in years to come within all sections of the education industry.
BBC News,. (2014). Apple confirms accounts compromised but denies security breach – BBC News. Retrieved 1 May 2015, from http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-29039294
Duhigg, C. (2012). How Companies Learn Your Secrets. The New York Times Magazine. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html?_r=2&
Finance.gov.au,. (2014). Cloud Computing | Department of Finance. Retrieved 4 May 2015, from http://www.finance.gov.au/cloud/
Kamisar, B. (2014). InBloom Sputters Amid Concerns About Privacy of Student Data. Education Week, 33(15), 1-13. Retrieved from http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/01/08/15inbloom_ep.h33.html
Mills, A. (2013). VET Transparency Agenda – what’s in it for me. Presentation, Training Providers Forum, Perth, Western Australia.
This is a nice easy read, that give a good solid base level introduction to the concept of The Internet of Things. The book itself is not primarily education focused, but you can apply some of the key points to the education space. Well worth a look at.
Kellmereit, D. and Obodovski, D., (2013) The Silent Intelligence: The Internet of Things. DnD Ventures 1st edition, California.
The Silent Intelligence: The Internet of Things by Daniel Kellmereit and Daniel Obodovski (2013) presents an extensively researched analysis about the Internet of Things (IoT) which primarily was written for businesses looking to leverage on practical lessons and guidance from experts and companies in this field. Through interviews and case studies the readers are presented with both authentic examples and future forecast scenarios of use for both industry and individuals. The key objective of the book is for readers’ awareness to be raised about how connecting the physical world around us to the digital world can result in gains. Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) also shared their own personal views with the reader on how to overcome obstacles with the IoT, which are specifically aimed at business investment and job opportunities.
Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) pose five significant questions about the IoT: What is the Internet of Things? How is it coming about? What are the key trends? What is the potential? What needs to be done? The authors use these questions as a framework to explore the IoT concept. As part of this exploration three key ideas connecting the chapters: data collection; data transport; data analysis, especially around the issues of the role human interaction will play in the rapid expansion of this technology and the management of data produced by the IoT became apparent. These issues and ideas will form the basis to critique the theories developed in this book.
It becomes apparent thanks, to Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013), that the IoT is not a far-fetched vision of a digital utopia with the IoT incorporating machine–to–machine (M2M), machine–to–person (M2P) and person –to–person (P2) networked technologies. All digital learning technologies currently used in education are part of the IoT, a point many educators may not be aware of yet as the IoT has not been extensively covered in popular media.
In the book there are four identified focal points that the technology industry has created encompassing networked nodes around; connected cities; connected homes; connected health; and connected cars. Connected cities, provide information to town planners for traffic management energy optimization and building automation is collected via sensor and wireless communication data collected. Connected homes are sensing if people are at home and assisting with for energy consumption and making people comfortable and safe. Connected health currently supports people with chronic illnesses and Alzheimer’s by collecting data and location information and providing this to caregivers. Finally connected cars, most cars have ‘drive–by–wire’ implemented. This provides valuable information to service technicians at a service, but also aggregated information can create better fleet management in transport industries. These connected digital technologies are all networked nodes of data collection outlined in this book.
The data is collected via networked nodes, discussed by Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013), and is stored as raw ‘big data’ that can either be used by the original collector or supplied to third parties, provided that the metadata schemas match to will allow simple and effective data mining. The authors believe that this information collection is going to help us all become better citizens and allow us to better manage our facilities, including educational facilities, this is supported by the current project between CISCO and Swinburne University (Johnson, Adams, Estrada, Freeman, 2015).
It is argued in the book that as ‘things’ around us become smarter machines will take over more tasks, the human error rate for activities will fall, for example the research and development Google X project for self-driving cars. However, in education, current technologies are successfully being employed that are filling a niche requirement. Technologies currently being used include radio frequency identification (RFID) tags in an elearning project using RFID tags in a cabinet making workshop (E-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au, 2008) and quick reference (QR) codes for map reading in an outdoor education class (Lai, Chang, Wen-Shiane, Fan & Wu, 2013). These project have had to overcome technology hurdles for successful real-world application.
Technology in the past has been problematic, according to Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013), as the uptake has been prohibited by the expense especially specialist scanning hardware. With the arrival of QR codes to the digital landscape and cheap simple smart technology production using, for example, Rasberry Pi (Raspberrypi.org, 2015) and Arduino (Arduino.cc, 2015) modules means that there is a change in the landscape. This is fast becoming a core topic in many universities computer science courses such as the Open University’s My Digital Life course (Kortuem, Bandara, Smith, Richards & Petre, 2013). The exponential growth of the IoT and M2M arena is being driven by research projects in both industry and educational institutions.
The IoT according to The Silent Intelligence: The Internet of Things (2013) is a rapidly expanding dynamic space and one which Moores Law (Mooreslaw.org, 2015) can be applied to technologies involved. With this rapid expansion of the M2M technology the central challenge, according to the authors, is that people do not understand the reference architecture that is required to grasp the potential of the IoT. Peggy Smedly, from connected Worlds M2M, in the book suggested increasing the profile of IoT in the mass consumer marketplace by packaging technology into something that is easy for both companies and consumers to use, so not only offering a complete solution but from known and trusted brands, which directly contradicts Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) focus for technology start-ups who will bring the creative edge to the market rather than staid traditional trusted companies. Once again universities adjusting programs in a responsive manner and supporting students in learning about, engaging with and building IoT technology (Callagaghan, 2013; Kellogg, Parks, Gollakota, Smith & Wetherall, 2014; Zhang, Callaghan, Shen, Davies, 2011) they will support the creative edge needed in this new space that Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) see crucial for success.
A key theme in the book is the phenomenal rate of change that society is experiencing in all aspects of life due to the interconnectivity of smart devices. It is this silent revolution that humanity will not notice due to the pervasiveness of the IoT technology. Everything will become nodes on a network in a world where knowledge is universally accessible (Anderson & Rainie, 2014). Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) alluded to well–defined old problems that the IoT can solve such as increased track ability, increased productivity, improved risk management, reduction in the guess work for planning projects and better connection to our environment. They do point out that the ‘human element’ is a key risk factor, but stop short of a definitive statement regarding issues resulting from the removal of people from the equation in the input of data in the IoT environment.
Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) are quick to point out that the ‘human element’ is important and not superfluous to data analysis especially the interpretation of data and the subsequent recommendations for implementation. Data analysis is seen to be a growth area for companies with networked devices feeding systems that can improve tracking and tracing capabilities, such as the DriveCam example (Lytx, 2015) as discussed in the by Mark Wells interview (Kellmereit & Obodovski, p.93, 2013).
Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) have a positive view of the IoT and handing over data collection, transport and analysis to digital technology. This ideology causes the reader to pause and reflect that our ‘smart devices’ are disrupting and in the very near future, if not already, are going to re-define society’s ways of living, interacting and learning, and consequently, will challenge our belief of what it is to be human (Theinternetofthings.eu, 2015).
Shared business models and industry standards, according to the book, are currently deficient in the IoT sector. Bill Gates said “In an age of interconnectivity, businesses need an architecture that extends outward to partners and customers. The successful companies select a few standards and enforce them strictly” (Gates & Hemingway, 1999). Setting standards and creating shared business models is an important step for industries to make in the IoT and M2M arena, because viable data linking from a variety of sources will allow the true potential to be discovered. Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) put forward that without industry standards the IoT and M2Ms scale will always be defined by the narrow structures that each individual business use.
With the IoT being a relatively new concept and one which the possible ramifications are not widely understood there are some concerns that Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) raise. One significant controversy outlined are ethical issues around the big data being captured by M2M, M2P and P2P technologies and the sovereignty of the data, especially as not all data retention and access levels are the same and similarly the treatment of data should not be the same. Sovereignty of data will become a crucial issue in years to come as the collection and use of data from sources versus the rights of individuals who are linked to the data will have ongoing ramifications to all industries, including the education sector.
Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) mention very little regarding the responsibility of the carriers around data preservation and sharing, simply that there will be regulatory restrictions in other countries (this book was written and published for the American market). They discuss that data acquisition will be the growth market area for industries to capitalize on; this is a concern as there is little regulation regarding how metadata is managed, retained or shared by companies or countries, as seen in current media about metadata retention in Australia (Ag.gov.au, 2015). This lack of regulation has ramifications on data collection, transport, storage and analysis.
Data transportation in the digital realm is a concern for all areas of industry as well as the general community. The need to provide secure transport networks, be it via hardwire/cable, cellular, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth or RFID for short range communication which all have unique security protocols around the network to ensure that the data is safe during transport as well as during storage. This book did not provide any key information around this area other than that a company needed to develop a robust M2M policy to ensure that their data would be protected.
It is outlined in the book that business and industry need to optimise the technology architecture, which can be driven by work and research in the education sectors. This book perceives a disconnect between the high-tech community and industry Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013), however with the education sector making strong inroads into this space there will be a reconnection and synergy between these key market players on the IoT space.
Bill Gates once wrote “Business is going to change more in the next ten years than it has in the last fifty” (Gates & Hemingway, 1999) and this is especially true when looking at the IoT technology and the exponential growth that all industries, including education, will experience thanks to the prevalence of the IoT which will form the starting point for the next digital revolution if Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) have it right.
Overall Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) were successful in presenting a book that offered a broad overview of the IoT which then drilled down to specifics related to investment and business strategies. Their discussions around the new changing digital world and the way businesses, including education institutions, must adapt was illustrated by interesting use cases and interviews which met the writers aims set out in their introduction. However, this book only scratches the surface of the IoT and M2M technology and further reading would be necessary for an educator to fully grasp the implications both the IoT and M2M in relation to their current methodologies and technology systems being used. This is a challenging topic and one that Kellmereit and Obodovski (2013) provide a very broad base level introduction to.
Ag.gov.au,. (2015). Data retention | Attorney-General’s Department. Retrieved 18 April 2015, from http://www.ag.gov.au/dataretention
Anderson, J., & Rainie, L. (2014). The Internet of Things Will Thrive by 2025. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project. Retrieved 3 April 2015, from http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/05/14/internet-of-things/
Arduino.cc,. (2015). Arduino – Home. Retrieved 18 April 2015, from http://www.arduino.cc/
Callaghan, V. (2013). Buzz-Boarding; practical support for teaching computing based on the internet-of-things. In Higher Education Academy STEM: Annual Learning and Teaching Conference 2013: Where practice and pedagogy meet.. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from http://journals.heacademy.ac.uk/doi/abs/10.11120/stem.hea.2012.015
E-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au,. (2008). 2008 Emerging Technology Trials – Emerging Technology Trials – Funded Projects – Research – E-standards for Training. Retrieved 2 April 2015, from http://e-standards.flexiblelearning.net.au/research/funded_projects/emerging_technology_trials/2008_emerging_technology_trials.php
Gates, B., & Hemingway, C. (1999). Business @ the speed of thought. New York, NY: Warner Books.
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Estrada, V., Freeman, A. (2015). NMC Horizon Report: 2014 Higher Education Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
Kellogg, B., Parks, A., Gollakota, S., Smith, J. R., and Wetherall, D. (2014) Wi-Fi Backscatter: Internet Connectivity for RF-Powered Devices, University of Washington, retrieved from: http://iotwifi.cs.washington.edu/files/wifiBackscatter.pdf
Kellmereit, D. and Obodovski, D. (2013) The Silent Intelligence: The Internet of Things. DnD Ventures 1st edition, California.
Kortuem, G., Bandara, A., Smith, N., Richards, M., & Petre, M. (2013). Educating the Internet-of-Things Generation. Computer, 46(2), 53-61. doi:10.1109/mc.2012.390
Lai, H., Chang, C., Wen-Shiane, L., Fan, Y., & Wu, Y. (2013). The implementation of mobile learning in outdoor education: Application of QR codes. Br J Educ Technol, 44(2), E57-E62. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01343.x
Lytx,. (2015). DriveCam Driver Monitoring & Fleet Tracking System. Retrieved 18 April 2015, from http://www.lytx.com/our-solutions/drivecam-programs
Mooreslaw.org,. (2015). Moore’s Law. Retrieved 17 April 2015, from http://www.mooreslaw.org/
Raspberrypi.org,. (2015). Raspberry Pi. Retrieved 16 April 2015, from https://www.raspberrypi.org/
The internet of things,. (2015). The internet of things | Are you ready for the Internet of Things?. Retrieved 11 April 2015, from http://www.theinternetofthings.eu/
I feel the Internet of Things and Big Data will both impact even more on the education in the next few years. I’m very interested in both the internet of things and big data in relation to information being retained about our students in a variety of forms the influence that it will have on education and ways we are using technology in both the classroom and the storage of data. In my current job role it is important that I have a solid understanding of this dynamic changing space that is evolving very quickly, though very quietly. Hopefully it will provide me with some new insights into a very interesting topic.
I never have admitted to colleagues before, but yes I am a gamer. From the very basic hand-held version of ‘Pong’ called ‘Blip’ to the much cooler ‘Simon Says’ I have been into digital games. In the early 1990’s when you saved your money to upgrade from 4 MB of RAM to 8 MB of RAM simply to play ‘Sam and Max Hit the Road’. I vividly remember moving our lounge chairs into the study to play ‘Myst or Riven’ for the evening, yes quite simply I was hooked.
However, I could also see that games could be used by educators to have students explore concepts in different ways for example ‘Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego’ to have students demonstrate through puzzle solving their geographic understanding of the world.
Listening to Golding (2015) certainly made me think of the many different game types and styles I have used in the past and are still using now, both personally and as a launch pad of ideas in classes. As an educator my passion is for using technology in my teaching, where appropriate, while adhering to the moto; less screen, more green.
My current thinking on gaming in education is impacted on by my current work context, teaching adults in the VET sector to use technology to enhance training practices. As an educator of adults I am aware of the lazy stereo types regarding the abilities and motivation of older students (Jelfs & Richardson, 2013) and know that today’s adult students will use technology as a key part of their learning experience, which is why any ‘gaming tasks’ for education need to be authentic (Herrington & Parker, 2013)
The article by Jennings in the Sydney Morning Herald (2014) which discusses the ‘highly motivational’ aspect of games made linked to Herrington and Reeves’ (2010) reflection on how GenMe (Generation Me Twenge, 2006 students) are positively affected by the interactive games and simulations they have played. This makes GenME are open to having authentic simulation tasks, which mimic real world activities, in their training to enhance their learning and make them real world ready. It is an area that often the VET sector falls down on as games of any nature are often seen as frivolous and not meaningful learning experiences, where as if ill-structured problems of the kind found in the real world (Reeves & Herrington, 2010) are used as the basis for a simulation (utilizing gaming principles) then gaming in a VET classroom could be advantageous for student understanding
One aspect in this unit I am keen to explore is authentic learning through personal learning experience via branching activities. This is something that could be constructed in both digital and non-digital classrooms. An example of the branching activities that I am thinking of is the interactive YouTube video Choose a different Ending (2009). This was created by the United Kingdom Metropolitan Police Service to help combat knife crimes by teenagers. It is an authentic activity that steps the users through a series of choice and consequences.
I am also keen to explore the use of gaming principles in existing mainstream technology, such as Learning Management Systems, for simulated learning experiences for VET students via conditional release and badges. This work I also want to link to workplace learning and seeing how onsite work can also be included using gaming principles in an assessment strategy for VET students.
Broderbund Software. (1996). Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego (Version 3.0). The Learning Company
Cyan Worlds. (1993). Myst. Red Orb Entertainment.
Cyan Worlds. (1997). Riven. Red Orb Entertainment.
Jelfs, A., & Richardson, J. (2013). The use of digital technologies across the adult life span in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 338-351. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01308.x
Jennings, J. (2014). Teachers re-evaluate value of video games, Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from http://www.smh.com.au/national/education/teachers-reevaluate-value-of-video-games-20141130-11jw0i.html
Purcell, S. (2002). Sam and Max Hit the Road. Lucas Arts.
Reeves, T. C., & Herrington, J. (2010). Authentic Tasks: The Key to Harnessing the Drive to Learn in Members of “Generation Me”. In M. Ebner, & M. Schiefner (Eds.) Looking Toward the Future of Technology-Enhanced Education: Ubiquitous Learning and the Digital Native (pp. 205-222). Hershey, PA:. doi:10.4018/978-1-61520-678-0.ch012
Twenge, J.M. (2006), Generation me: why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive, entitled – and more miserable than before. New York: Free Press
Technology surrounds us in our daily lives and it makes sense to incorporate it into a VET classroom. As adult students today see technology as a critical part of their learning (Jelfs & Richardson, 2013) it’s important to choose technology that’s easy to use and learners are familiar with (Luckin et al., 2009). The choice of technology and effectiveness of activity design are critical for remote learners to prevent students disengaging from the content (Hai-Jew, 2011).
Design of activities for adult learners needs to be authentic, active learning tasks which include scaffolding. Tasks using technology that are linked to the workplace, as in VET, allow for transference of skills into the ‘real-world’ tasks, allowing a deeper understanding of the content (Herrington & Parker, 2013). It’s critical to for teachers to be aware of their content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge and personal level of technological knowledge, which forms the TPACK framework (Koehler & Mishra, 2009). A teachers TPACK will change depending on what curriculum and class cohort they teach. A TIPS process can help the teacher utilize their TPACK for designing an e-learning augmented program (Roblyer, 2013).
Being able to evaluate the technology using the affordances empowers a teacher to ensure technology being chosen links to curriculum. Technology use should be driven by the curriculum and design and not the other way around (Bower, 2008). Many Western Australian VET practitioners work in enterprise government agency Registered Training Organisations delivering training and, from time to time, are told a specific technology to use for delivery with no consideration to curriculum. Technology used goes through a stringent approval process in government, which does not guarantee access to technology requested for training, due to ICT department restrictions (Bigum, 2012). Using Bower’s affordance framework to outline specific needs for technology, such as the use of mobile technology or social media, means that ICT are informed regarding educational use.
Mobile technology and social media is starting to have a greater impact in the classroom. Many educators are harnessing Web 2.0 technologies to create engaging and student centric learning environments (Cochrane, 2010). There is a misnomer that all ‘digital native’ students (Prensky, 2001) know how to use mobile technology and social media to manage information for education (Callens, 2014). In her 2014 article Callens outlined Bloom’s Digital taxonomy in relation to social media and provides lessons on how to utilize social media in a classroom to augment students learning and exploration of content, which can be transferred into any adult training situation. For example a State Training Provider in Western Australia implemented LinkedIn as a key technology for their training (DTWD, 2014). As part of implementing technology an audit and quality assurance process to select the right technology is very important.
When choosing a technology it’s useful to implement a ‘use audit’ to understand technologies that students are familiar with for ease of integration into classes (Lukin et al., 2009). O’Brien & Maor (2013) concluded that teachers focusing on transferable knowledge by structuring authentic activities and using appropriate technologies enable adult learners to achieve deeper understanding of content and apply to their workplaces smoothly. A lofty ideal for VET, but one individual teachers can work towards.
Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D., (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman
Bower, M. (2008). Affordance analysis – matching learning tasks with learning technologies.Educational Media International, 45(1), 3-15. doi:10.1080/09523980701847115
Callens, M. V. (2014). Using bloom’s taxonomy to teach course content and improve social media literacy. Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies in Education, 3(1), 17-26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1636419730?accountid=10344
Cochrane, T. (2010). Exploring mobile learning success factors. Research in Learning Technology, 18(2). doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/rlt.v18i2.10758
DTWD. (2014). Passion for teaching, Training Matters, (20), 17. Retrieved from http://www.dtwd.wa.gov.au/employeesandstudents/training/otherinformation/trainingmatters/previousversions/Documents/April%202014/Training%20Matters%20April%202014%2017.pdf
Hai-Jew, S. (2011). Structuring and Facilitating Online Learning through Learning / Course Management Systems. In V. Wang (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Information Communication Technologies and Adult Education Integration (pp. 257-274). Hershey, PA: doi:10.4018/978-1-61692-906-0.ch016
Herrington, J., & Parker, J. (2013). Emerging technologies as cognitive tools for authentic learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(4). doi:10.1111/bjet.12048
Jelfs, A., & Richardson, J. (2013). The use of digital technologies across the adult life span in distance education. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2). doi:10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01308.x
Koehler, M., & Mishra, P. (2009). What is technological pedagogical content knowledge? Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 9(1). Retrieved from http://www.citejournal.org/vol9/iss1/general/article1.cfm
Laurillard, D. (2009). The pedagogical challenges to collaborative technologies. International Journal of Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning, 4(1). doi:10.1007/s11412-008-9056-2
Luckin, R., Clark, W., Logan, K., Graber, R., Oliver, M., & Mee, A. (2009). Do Web 2.0 tools really open the door to learning: practices, perceptions and profiles of 11-16 year old learners?. Learning, Media and Technology, 34(2). Retrieved from http://ezproxy.csu.edu.au/login?url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17439880902921949
McCorkle, D., & McCorkle, Y. (2012). Using Linkedin in the Marketing Classroom: Exploratory Insights and Recommendations for Teaching Social Media/Networking. Marketing Education Review, 22(2), 157-166. doi:10.2753/mer1052-8008220205
O’Brien, T & Maor, D. (2013). Pipe dreams or digital dreams: Technology, pedagogy and content knowledge in the vocational educational and training sector. Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org/conferences/sydney13/program/papers/O’Brien.pdf
Roblyer, M. (2013). Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching. Harlow: Pearson.