Digital learning futures

Digital Learning Futures

View more presentations from Steve Wheeler

As I write this blog post, the above slideshow has received almost 18,000 views in just 48 hours since it was posted up onto Slideshare. These slides accompanied my presentation during the Learning Technologies conference and exhibition held at London's Olympia on 25-26 January. I was pleasantly surprised by the huge turnout to hear me speak, and grateful to Don Taylor and his team for inviting me to speak at this excellent event.

During my talk, I discussed a number of possible scenarios that might result when wholesale adoption of digital technologies occurs in education and training. I touched on personal learning networks, mobile technologies, games and gamification, the use of social media in learning, the role of user generated content, the phenomenon of ubiquitous connection, and technological convergence. The latter in particular is a trend that is allowing us to use web-enabled television, dual view screens, and in the near future will enable a merging between e-mail and social media. I also discussed pedagogical issues such as deep and surface learning, creative thinking and the transformation of knowledge consumption. As a nod to the possible futures we might see, I discussed the development of semantic web technologies (Web 3.0 and Web x.0), touch screen tablets, non-touch technologies and smart objects, as well as the potential of Open Educational Resources, open learning and open scholarship to support a global democratisation of learning.

I'm immensely gratified to think that so many more people outside the auditorium at Learning Technologies are now downloading and viewing these ideas. My audience has been extended beyond the walls of the event to a global classroom through the amazing power of social media. Here's to all the possible futures of learning!


Digital learning futures by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Back to the future

I was lucky to witness firsthand some of the earliest attempts at educational computing in the UK. In 1976 we set up a project called Investigations into Teaching with Microprocessors as an Aid (ITMA). I was in the technical team that built some of the first personal computers from kit form, which we then deployed among our student teachers to explore how these new tools might possibly be used in teaching and learning. Educational computing was still very much in its infancy, and there was a lot of interest in whether they could or would actually change learning.

Later, in 1981 I changed jobs to work in a nurse training school in the National Health Service where the only computers were very large ones that were used for management and administration. They were kept behind locked doors, and only a few select individuals ever got to enter the room.

Around 1981, Acorn and the BBC joined forces to produce one of the first affordable educational computers. It was called rather obviously, the BBC Microcomputer. Various versions were released over the decade including the 'B', the 'Master' and the 'Archimedes'. Each had to be supplemented by an external 5.5 inch floppy hard drive and a metal cube screen Microvitec monitor. The entire set was cream coloured, and could be further supplemented by a plinth which housed the whole ensemble. My nursing school, with my encouragement, purchased a dozen or so, and then it was my job to deploy them in meaningful contexts to promote learning. I placed one in the corridor outside my office, and wrote a small programme which printed out on a dot matrix printer information about every single transaction that took place each day. When a student nurse accessed a programme, the printed record showed me the name of the programme, when it was activated, how long the student remained on the programme, and even what score they achieved in the tests on the software. I discovered that the programmes, simple as they were, had the effect of drawing students to engage with learning on a mostly informal basis, anytime they were passing my office on the way to the training rooms, library and coffee area. They were in effect, one of the first technology supported self-directed study methods ever used in nurse education.

I deployed a second BBC computer alongside the first, and the use increased. Very soon I procured a small room in which we positioned an entire suite of BBC computers. I began writing programmes in conjunction with the nurse tutors, and in no time at all we were selling the Computer Assisted Learning (CAL) packages to other nursing schools all across the country. The software was written in 'BBC Basic' (Beginners All purpose Symbolic Instruction Code) and were indeed basic, mainly consisting of text, questions and tests, and remedial loops with a score presented at the end. In the mid 80s, this was fairly leading edge, and seemed to align comfortably with the teaching ethos of the time, which in nurse education was essentially a behaviouristic 'drill and practice' approach. Today, the programmes would seem primitive, inappropriate and probably very very boring. In the mid 80s, they attracted students like bees to a flower garden. They queued to used the computers. One programme I wrote was a remix of the Basically Eliza programme, which mimicked a therapist by matching inputted questions with a small data base of responses. My programme had a twist. Instead of merely trying to converse with the student nurses, the programme threw insults back at them too, taking the conversation to an entirely new and hilarious level. It became the most popular programme in the suite, especially for our mental health nurses.

It was with a wonderful feeling of nostalgia that I walked into the National Museum of Computing dome at Learning without Frontiers and saw the array of BBC computers on display. They were even accompanied by the BBC Acorn User Guide with it's glossy coloured cover and spiral binder. The sight took me back over three decades to the time I wrestled with how to deploy new and untried technology in authentic learning contexts. I remember the excitement I experienced when I unpacked the BBCs for the first time, and connected and switched them on, to see what they were capable of. We have come a long way since those early pioneering days, but the same questions still remain. How can we embed new technology effectively? What can we do with this new technology that we couldn't do before? How will this new technology effect and affect pedagogy? Even then, 30 years ago, I believed fervently that computers would radically transform education and training, and I still hold that hope. Education has indeed changed, and continues to evolve as technology drives change. Radical change though, will only come when teachers everywhere see the potential and power of technology to extend, enhance and enrich learning for all.


Back to the Future by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Positive deviance and the IPD

We all know that organisations and institutions impose barriers to innovation. The larger they are, the more rules they tend to generate. This is because by nature large organisations are conservative and there is a perceived need to protect the status quo and maintain order. But this isn't always good news for creativity and innovation. James Clay once called such enforcing agencies 'Innovation Prevention Departments', and claimed that every institution has one. I think he's right. Trying to innovate in such circumstances, especially when there is an IPD saying 'that's against the rules', 'it can't be done' or 'it's too expensive' can be hard going, but innovation is never impossible. I was interviewed at the Learning Technologies conference, about my views on innovation, organisational constraints and positive deviance. The interview was actually recorded downstairs in the Learning without Frontiers dome zone, which explains the theatrical lighting. Above is the video of the interview in full (duration 90 seconds).

Interview by Martin Couzins


Positive deviance and the IPD by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Border crossings

As ever, the Learning without Frontiers conference and festival was a rallying point for those who are at the forefront of innovation in education. All sectors were represented, and with the Learning and Development professionals conference in tandem on the floor above, the joint event showed real attempts to embrace all education and training practices. A few of the invited speakers were shared across both events, giving presentations to two separate audiences in two different venues within the Olympia complex. Hosting the two major events in tandem for the first time was an experiment that was simultaneously exhilarating and frustrating. It was exhilarating because so many members of the extended UK learning community were together in one place for the first time, but frustrating because those of us who habituate both events were well and truly torn between what to attend. Both events are enjoyable and memorable, not least because of the enthusiasm, passion and openness of the people who attend.

Upstairs in the Learning Technologies event, over 500 delegates listened to presentations from the likes of Edward de Bono, Donald Clark, Joanne Jacobs, Nigel Paine, and myself as well as shared speakers Stephen Heppell, Jaron Lanier and Ray Kurzweil. Generally the same message was dominant in both events, namely that learning is undergoing a makeover, but that it needs to go more than skin deep. Indeed there were signs that things are changing, slowly but surely. I noticed a concerted effort this year for example, that 'downstairs' in the main conference exhibition area, efforts were being made to percolate some of the innovative practices talked about 'upstairs' into the free public vendor area. The LT Exchange stand hosted a number of live interviews with a variety of presenters amidst a relaxed environment, complete with a catering facility. Questions of the hour were pinned to the wall for open discussion with the presenters. This at least brought the cut and thrust of the live presentations downstairs for greater exposure and wider discussion outside the main conference. Videos of the keynotes were played out regularly to the downstairs delegates too, giving them a flavour of the proceedings in the main conference auditorium. Such features at least partially addressed the conceptual divide I wrote about in Upstairs Downstairs about last year's event.

Both events featured presentations with flare, but in my opinion it was within the Learning without Frontiers event that innovation was at its most evident. As ever, the LWF team were trying to push boundaries with a programme of quick fire main hall presentations and a fast moving programme of peripheral events. In yesterday's post I featured the iconic inflatable dome village, which was a tangible counterpoint to the more staid, traditional conference exhibition just across the landing.

The event focused on learning 'without frontiers', but conferences impose barriers by their very nature. The sentinels at the gate dividing the two exhibitions represented the organisational border point, and one passport (either conference badge would do) was scanned repeatedly as people passed from one 'country' into another. I was left wondering why the border crossing was necessary. Was it there to separate the two tribes - corporate and public sector? It created a log jam when several people wished to cross between the two exhibition zones simultaneously, and the bar-code scanners were working overtime.

For me, the border between the two events also signified a metaphorical divide between the conservative and the radical. In just a few paces, one was able to move from a traditional conference stand exhibiting corporate training packages and organisational planning tools to inflatable domes with interactive robotic displays or Lego building playzones. It reminded me of a backwards in time journey from the world of work and business to school. Significantly, good learning is required in both those spheres of activity, and the methods employs to deliver these opportunities can be vastly different. That was a part of the appeal of the marriage between the two events. The question running through my mind throughout the entire joint event though, was whether there will be a movement of business and industry learning and development towards the game based, interactive and exciting methods beginning to emerge in the compulsory education sector. And how far will public sector education be able to move in new directions without the funding available to most private sector initiatives?

We were reminded once more that the schools sector is itself far from perfect. Speakers such as Stephen 'remove your shoes' Heppell and Francis Gilbert eloquently challenged the tired old school formula with clarion calls for better learner engagement, student centred approaches and innovative technology applications in radical new learning environments. Others spoke repeatedly about the 'purpose of education', putting excitement back in to learning, and breaking the old paradigms. Ellen MacArthur inspired us all as she related her personal journey. Ray Kurzweil blinded us with computer science, whilst Michael Brooks urged us to be mavericks and to push the boundaries of possibilities to make the change. It was all heady stuff, but how much of the idealism and fervour of this event can and will be taken back and actually allowed to be embedded in everyday practice? We shall see, but I suspect that as always, it will be the lone rangers who forge ahead with their leading edge practices, and it will be a long time before most institutions change their ways. But it was another restart, a boost to our collective self esteem, a charging of the batteries .... and we can all hope that it won't be long before the border crossing disappears.


Border crossings by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Welcome to the pleasure domes

The dome village created by Graham Brown-Martin and his Learning without Frontiers team - at Olympia in London this week - seems to have been a great hit for many delegates. Edgy, futuristic and a visual spectacle in all their underlit splendour, the domes hosted debates, panels, presentations, demonstrations and a chance to get hands on lego, Nintendo games, retro computers, robots and a whole host of other interesting goodies. The two salons, 'Foucault' and 'Bourdieu' (after the famous French comedy mime duo) hosted a rolling programme of presentations throughout the two days of the conference/festival, and at times seemed to be bursting at the seams. (OK, I'm joking about Foucault and Bourdieu - I know they weren't a duo). Whether the move from the East End to Olynpia is a success will be debated for some time to come, but just about everyone I spoke to agreed that the conceptualisation of the domes was inspired. For me, the National History of Computing Museum dome was a draw, with its display of working BBC B, Master and Archimedes computers, complete with their external floppy disk drives and chunky Microvitec monitors. I was struck with a sense of nostalgia (and duly took two paracetamol) because computers of their ilk were the ones I cut my programmer's teeth on all those years ago in the early 1980s. The entire space for LWF12 was utilised in a creative way, with the main auditorium hedged on three sides by the dome village.

The invited speaker line-up was stellar, including video presentations from Noam Chomsky and Sir Ken Robinson, and live presentations for the likes of Mitch Resnick, Jaron Lanier, Conrad Wolfram, Ellen McArthur, Charles Leadbeater, Keri Facer, Stephen Heppell and Ray Kurzweil. Politicians from both sides of the house (specifically Lord Jim Knight and Culture secretary Ed Vaisey) also put in an appearance on the main stage - but sadly not together. Unfortunately, the close proximity of the arena stage to the open balcony made for a lot of noise problems, as just below was one of the largest learning technology exhibitions since BETT. The constant background drone of conversations rising from below was a little distracting, as was the sharp odour emitting from the freshly painted false walls of the arena, but most people seemed to successfully tune their senses out to concentrate on the presentations.

But it was around and inside the domes that much of the conversations, connections and creativity took place. The domes were a stark contrast to the adjacent conventional exhibition and speaker spaces in the Learning Technologies and Skills Conference, which ran concurrently on both days, a couple of floors above. I will discuss the issues surrounding the juxtapositioning of two of Europe's largest learning conferences in a future post, but for now, it is worth saying that the co-presence of the two events under a single roof brought benefits and limitations in equal measure. The domes were a triumph, the LWF programme was inspirational and GBM and his team have once again has delivered a superbly crafted, memorable, and inspirational event and a clear reference point for revolutionary and disruptive learning futures.

I will write more reports on Learning without Frontiers and also Learning Technologies in future blog posts.


Welcome to the pleasure domes by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Dead philosopher society

Remember the Dead Poets Society? It was a movie starring Robin Williams as a maverick teacher who causes ructions at an ultra-conservative American prep school when he uses his unauthodox methods to engage and inspire his students. It was a heart warming movie, and if you could get past Williams' emetic impersonations, it had a strong message for educators everywhere: dare to take a few risks. The fact that one of William's young charges commits suicide in the film is a bit of a dampener, but there is some interesting underlying philosophy in the screen play. Hmmm... philosophy...

Are you interested in philosophy and have a Twitter account? If the answer to those questions is 'yes', it so happens that Twitter has its own Dead Philosophers Society. Yes, there are famous philosophers on Twitter - alive and tweeting. The accounts are all fake, obviously, but if you want a daily dose of philosophy to make you think, ponder life or something to quote to irritate your friends, colleagues or family, your favourite sage is probably out there somewhere, just waiting for you to follow them. Many of the accounts simply tweet unadulterated quotes from published works or well trodden aphorisms from their late authors, but one or two may engage in dialogue with their followers. Here are a few of Twitter's philosopher accounts I have stumbled across (and occasionally retweeted) in the past few days. Explore for yourself ... and follow whom you will:

Mikhail Bakhtin
Roland Barthes
Pierre Bourdieu (in French)
Gilles Deleuze
Jacques Derrida
Paulo Freire
Ivan Illich
Jacques Lacan
Friedrich Nietzsche
Claude Levi-Strauss
Susan Sontag
Ludwig Wittgenstein

If you know of any other dead philosophers who are still alive and tweeting, and want to recommend them, please add their links in the comments box below.

Image source


Dead philosopher society by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Me or the community?

I started off a discussion this morning on Twitter which had been fermenting for several days since I spoke at Brighton University earlier this week. We were discussing the differences and similarities between Facebook and Twitter. Specifically, we were interested in discussing what each was best for, and whether people found one better than the other for teaching, learning, discussion or socialising. I was wondering whether Twitter was actually more community oriented and outward looking than Facebook, which to me often seems to be more closed down and inward looking. To start, I asked: Facebook is all about 'me'. Twitter is all about community. Discuss.

Will Dayamport made a profound statement right at the start of the discussion when he tweeted: no social platform is a community. they are only vehicles for building a community. This is of course true, in the sense that platforms are tools that facilitate, but are they as neutral as we think? What about affordances of each tool? What do they suggest to us and how do we respond? Next, Frances Bell suggested that all social media have channels and services that host multiple behaviours, so simple dichotomies don't work. While these contributions were helpful, they reach the core of what I was interested in. I was trying to get to the root of the issue, which is whether people see Facebook as a more closed down and private space than Twitter, which I consider to be much more open. Jeffrey Keefer made another valuable comment when he pointed out that although social media platforms facilitate and support, they don't do the work for us. Social media are great tools for building online communities, but how do we use them, and is one tool better than another for a particular purpose?

Because Twitter is open, and you are not required to be 'friends' or have membership of a group to interact with others, I was really asking whether Twitter has the capacity to be more open and community oriented than Facebook. To me, Facebook seems very closed and compartmentalised, and is therefore potentially useful for protected discussions (for example where young people or vulnerable groups need to chat in a walled garden environment) but Twitter opens up chat for all, regardless of their status or relationship with others. Yes, I know that Facebook can be used as an open forum too, as can most social media platforms, but our expectations may militate against this. Is Twitter therefore the best social media tool for open, democratic discourse? Others contributed to this discussion, especially around the notion of digital identity, including Anita Devi who asked whether the 'me' can really exist in a Facebook vacuum. Anne Olsen argued that Twitter is more focused on learning and sharing with a likeminded community. In Facebook, she said, 'friends' don't always share the same interests, so it is more likely to be about 'me' than it is the community. Susan Bannister saw little difference between the two platforms in her own use, revealing that for her (and probably for many other users) although Facebook used to be about family and friends, and Twitter was more focused on work, now the boundaries have become blurred. Nic Laycock agreed, pointing out how complex relationships have become since the inception of social media. Others have managed to maintain their boundaries between the two platforms. Linda Kirkman for example, finds Facebook good to keep in touch with people she knows in real life, and used Twitter mainly for ongoing professional development and support for her post-graduate studies.

What do other people use the tools for? One of my own students Hannah Shelton said that for her Twitter is for sharing thoughts that interest others and help them to build their PLN, whilst Facebook is still about socialising. Malcolm Clarke sees Twitter as an open place of catharsis - somewhere to go where 'you can get it off your chest', whilst Lenandlar Singh suspects that we have come to expect Facebook to be a more private, closed environment. Another of my students, Megan Douglas made an interesting distinction based on what people see the two platforms doing for them personally. She tweeted: Facebook is personal 'what's on your mind?' yet Twitter 'what's happening?' and argued that Twitter brings people with similar interests together. This is after all, what a community is about. People who have shared interests, common purposes and the ability to share their ideas in conversation become the community. I'm still convinced that Facebook is more inward looking, and is more about personal connections, while Twitter is more focused on community, and wider connections, sharing and learning. My colleague Peter Yeomans has some marked views about Twitter and Facebook. Twitter he says, is a bear pit - a speaker's corner where you talk to the world and hope someone listens, whilst Facebook is where you seek approbation from those who like you. Facebook is self-indulgent, he says, but Twitter is altruistic. What do you think?

This is an interesting, wide ranging discussion I hope will continue. Please join in by adding your comments below if you have any.

Image source


Me or the community? by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Thinking on your feet

A woman takes her pet chihuahua with her to Africa on a safari holiday. One day the chihuahua wanders away and gets lost in the bush, and nearly runs right into a huge, hungry looking lion. The chihuahua realises he's in trouble, but, noticing some fresh bones on the ground, he settles down to chew on them, with his back to the big cat. As the lion sneaks up behind, the chihuahua smacks his lips and exclaims loudly, "Wow, that was a delicious lion. I wonder if there are any more around here?" The lion stops mid-stride, and slinks away into the trees. "Phew," says the lion, "that was close - that evil little dog nearly had me."

A monkey nearby sees everything and thinks he'll win a favour by putting the stupid lion straight. The chihuahua sees the monkey go after the lion, and guesses he might be up to no good. When the lion hears the monkey's story he feels angry at being made a fool, and offers the monkey a ride back to see him exact his revenge. The little dog sees them approaching and fears the worst. Thinking quickly, the dog turns his back, pretends not to notice them, and when the pair are within earshot says aloud, "Now where did that monkey get to? I sent him out ages ago to bring me another lion..."

Thinking on your feet means being able to solve problems as they arise. It is one of the key skills of the 21st century, and it's based on previous experiences, the ability to handle unpredictable events and creative thinking. It is the ability to recognise changing conditions and respond appropriately to them. It is the ability to recognise an opportunity and exploit it to your advantage when the time is right. It is also the very reason that Kodak, one of the giants in the photographic industry of the last century, is now in financial difficulty. The company, a pioneer in photography, used to own an unassailable share of the world market, but Kodak failed to adapt to the digital age as quickly as its competitors, and it is now paying the price. It didn't move with the times, and its leadership team didn't learn to think on their feet. Being able to adapt quickly to changing conditions is the stuff entrepreneurs are made of, and this is how young people need to be equipped when they emerge into the world of work. But how can schools, colleges and universities help students to learn these skills?

The recent Head Teacher Update (January 2012), features an article written by Graham Brown-Martin entitled 'What the future holds'. In it, he outlines some of the current limitations of school and critiques the failure of schools to respond quickly enough to the rapid changes currently taking place in society. He demonstrates how video games are the defining art of the 21st Century, but we clearly have to temper this view with the fact that we are only in the second decade of the Century, and with the rapid changes taking place, we can expect other art forms to emerge and even dominate in short periods. For the time being however, Graham is right - the video games industry is now grossing more worldwide than the publishing, music and movies industries combined, and is a defining feature not only of youth culture, but all western culture, because games are incredibly engaging. Graham makes a memorable statement when he declares that when we play games we rapidly solve abstract problems in real time. He points out that game playing often involves continual assessment by peers, and many games rely on teamwork and collaboration. These skills, he argues, are exactly the skills young people require in today's ever shifting world of work. Stanford University professor Elizabeth Corcoran takes a different stance, suggesting that gamification (the art of using games to engage and inspire learning... 'is creating an expectation among people that real-life interactions follow simple mechanics, and some disillusionment when they do not'.

Yet despite such objections, games based learning in all its guises is one of the most powerful methods currently available to engage young people in learning, and facilitate the learning of transferable skills that they will need to help them to think on their feet.


Thinking on your feet by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

10Q: Cathy N. Davidson

Cathy N. Davidson first flashed on to my radar last year when the Times Higher Education news magazine invited me to review her new book Now You See It. When I read the summary, I remembered that Cathy had been the prime mover in one of the first large scale iPod education projects at Duke University several years before. Then it all clicked. I have to say I enjoyed her book immensely and learnt a lot from reading it. I got paid to do the review and it felt a little like theft, because I would have gladly have paid to read the book for myself. You can read my review here, and I'm delighted to say that since it was published, I have been in touch with Cathy and have enjoyed some interesting conversations with her. She is truly one of the world's visionaries when it comes to rethinking learning, and as one would expect, she is controversial too. Her books, and other projects she has engaged with over the years have all received brickbats as well as bouquets. But that is the nature of innovation. It disrupts, and it discomforts. In today's article, Cathy responds to my 10Q interview questions:

Who are you? I am a lifelong innovator and a lifelong college professor - and if you think those two things are contradictory, you may be right! I've spent my life doing unconventional work, both in the academy and in communities and the workplace, pushing for educational reform. I'm lucky that my home institution, Duke University, has rewarded me for being an iconoclast. For eight years (1998-2006) I was essentially the R and D person for the university, Duke's first full-time Vice Provost for Interdisciplinary Studies (the first anywhere in the US in fact), charged with innovation across all eight schools of the university, and with the delicious mandate to "break things and make things." We made national news with our iPod experiment where we gave students iPods the year they came out and challenged them to come up with educational uses. Steve Jobs was no fool and he got a lot of free R and D out of Duke, where we held the first ever academic "podcasting" (the quotation marks were on the poster) conference. More than that, we created a paradigm shift, since students, not faculty, led the innovation. That's the byword of the kind of educator I strive to be, committed to learning (Kindergarten through the retirement home) that's motivated, engaged, inspired and inspiring.

What and/or who inspires you? So many things inspire me but if I could name one it would be the Open Web. The World Wide Web is not a technology--it is a mode of interaction and communication that potentially empowers any of us to contribute to one another's knowledge and well-being. It is the potential for participation, worldwide, with consequences that are real and palpable, that inspires me. It's not just Wikipedia (although that's inspiring enough) but the whole world of Do-It-Yourself possibilities that are really "Do-It-Together." Of course there are down sides, too, but you asked what "inspires" me, and that's it, the potential of collective change and participation. I like to remind people of historian Robert Darnton's idea that there have really been only four "technologies" in human history that have changed the very terms of how we communicate as a species: writing (4000 BCE Mesopotamia), movable type (10th C China and 15th C Europe with Gutenberg), steam-powered presses/mass printing (late 18th C), and the Internet (commercially available since April 1993 with the release of the Mosaic 1.0 browser). We need to take that in. We are now seeing the first generation to come of age during humanity's fourth great information age. That is inspiring.

Why did you choose to be an educator? Well, it's the last thing anyone would have predicted. I was one of those students who excelled in certain things (mostly certain areas of math and writing), and was pretty abysmal in everything else. I was also in trouble. A lot. At his recent 85th birthday party, my father did a pretty funny stand-up act rehashing all the times I'd been kicked out of school, from kindergarten (really!) to middle school and then four times in high school. It was a set-up because he'd organized the family to create a little plaque for me, honoring my confirmation by the Senate after being nominated by President Obama to serve on the National Council on the Humanities. ("Our favorite family delinquent" or some such thing). Okay, so there is your answer: I've spent my entire life fighting the standard educational system and just turned that into a profession in the end, one that I've been very fortunate to flourish in. Interestingly, I'm often at gatherings of educational innovators where it turns out we were all in trouble more than once as students--and, as adults, still tend to think we were right.

What did you learn from your iPod experiment at Duke University? It was a bit devious, that was its real charm. We only gave the shiny new Duke-branded iPods "free" to first year students. The second, third, and fourth year students were furious at us. Of course we knew they would be. So we challenged them. We said if they came up with new learning uses for what was in 2003 a "music-listening device," and if they could convince a prof to change a syllabus to include this new learning application in the course, then we would give a free iPod to the professor and every student in that class. Within one semester, we gave away more iPods to students who had come up with these learning applications than we had, without strings, to the first years. That's success! We didn't just come up with R and D for the late Mr. Jobs but we changed the terms of the conversation, acknowledging that the new generation had new technical skills but that their professors had much to offer in thinking not just about technology but about use, IP, safety, security, and on and on. We flipped the learning rules in an important way.

Sadly, we've heard from Apple that the experiment convinced them not to lead their marketing with the idea that a new release of a product was for formal education. They saw that we were creamed in the press and in the other media for this experiment when we announced it - and then there was silence when it was a big success. One Apple executive recently said to me, "You may notice we now talk about life, home, and inspiration - not education in our ads. That was a billion dollar insight, how unfairly Duke was treated, how afraid people, including the media, are of educational innovation." Now, I've heard the next Apple release will be taking on formal education. If that is true, I’d like to think we were the front-runners of that change. Maybe society is finally ready, almost a decade later.

What does brain science contribute to our understanding of how we learn? The pundits are pushing the myth of mono-tasking, and the idea that somehow this era's Internet and mobile technologies violate the otherwise straight, narrow, linear, focused ways we operate in the world. They argue that multitasking is making us inefficient, distracted, shallow, lonely, incapable of reading long or deep works, unable to memorize anything any more. That’s just bad neuroscience, not supported by research that isn't front-loaded to support those conclusions. You look at the research design of 95% of the monotasking research and it is fraught, loaded, unhistorical, selective, and just plain prejudiced. Blaming technology for human distraction isn't anything new. Socrates, after all, said similar things about the invention of the writing (the Greek alphabet and the diacritical mark), and it was all downhill from there.

On the other hand, we have hundreds, even thousands of years, of Eastern traditions devoted to attention and mindfulness. In those traditions, meditation takes place in a quiet room, supposedly isolated from all distracting influence. Instead of mindfulness, the world intrudes. That is what lifelong Buddhist practice is about, and neuroscience supports the Eastern idea that the mind is intrinsically (not extrinsically) susceptible to distraction. The work of Morcom and Fletcher at Cambridge and Raichle at Washington University suggest that 80% of the brain's energy is spent talking to itself, that there is no "baseline" of attention from which the world distracts us.

On the positive side, we know is that the brain learns by unlearning: when we are disrupted, when we make a mistake, we build on that. Habits are efficient, but they also get us into a lot of trouble since we can no longer see what is habitual. I believe in calculated, creative disruption as the single most important ingredient in learning. That’s how you write code, of course. You don’t memorize. You work on it until it works and, when it doesn’t, you figure out what does work.

You had a lot of criticism and praise about your recent book Now You See It. What's the fuss about? I would have been disappointed if no one was angry about the book because it would have meant I wasn’t pushing hard enough for change. (Yes, there’s a pattern here!) One point of the title “Now You See It” is about the phenomenon of attention blindness (in the jargon, “inattentional blindness”) that I discuss as neurobiology and as metaphor: the more you focus in one direction, the more you miss everywhere else. I advocate Learning 3.0, what I call “collaboration by difference,” where we learn best not from experts but by those who offer radically different points of view, including opposite forms of expertise (training, culture, age, experiences, all of the above).

The other point of Now You See It as a title is it strives for a major paradigm shift. If Frederick Winslow Taylor stamped the whole 20th century with “scientific labor management” that, I argue, was turned by the educational-industrial complex into “scientific learning management” that trained an Industrial Age way of learning and working, I wrote Now You See It for a similar transformation in the ways we measure, collaborate, learn, work, and, indeed, live. If you are aiming that high - for a reversal of a century’s worth of deciding what counts, what is valued, how you count, and who decides what counts - not everyone will love you. That said, I am so fortunate: I have given 41 invited lectures since September 7, all of them by institutions that are seeking to transform their methods for “humanity’s fourth great information age.” I can’t begin to accept all the invitations I receive. It is so gratifying and, yes, inspiring to know that many institutions are already moving in this direction. It’s not just me but a worldwide movement towards rethinking education for the 21st century. I see that in the HASTAC Scholars, the graduate and undergraduate students who are part of the nonprofit I co-founded, HASTAC, that is dedicated, as we say, to “learning the future together.”

You asked earlier what inspires me. This is what inspires me: all these millions of people around the world whose lives have changed since April 1993 and who now want to change the institutions of work and learning for this new way we all communicate and interact.

What interesting projects or research are you currently working on? Now You See It is a big book with an even bigger vision of how we need to transform not just education but also the workplace and the way we view our lives, from infancy to old age. I now want to do a series of small, focused Now You Do It books that are more activist in nature, that have url’s to lots of ordinary people who “see it” and are doing remarkable things to make a new interconnected vision happen. So I’ve been talking to a graphic novelist about a comics version, maybe even a YA version, intended for students, college and high school. I’m also interested in a book specifically for K-12 teachers and for parents explaining and giving possible, diverse blueprints for my idea that the “3 R’s” (reading, ‘riting, ‘rithmetic) were right for the 19th century schoolroom that was training people for the industrial workplace - but now we need to add a fourth R (pRogramming or algorithm ...you choose the ‘R’ word!). I’m convinced that if five year olds learned programming along with fundamental digital literacies, responsibilities, and possibilities that they would fight to keep the Web open. They would see themselves as contributors, not just consumers. And the Industrial Age division of the “two cultures” (with human and social sciences and the arts on one side of the equation and science and technology on the other) would be shown to be as nonsensical as, in everyday life, it is. The Web is a technology of life. But if we let others program it, if we aren’t participating and contributing, then we are being technologized. As Douglas Rushkoff says, “program or be programmed.”

Finally, it really bothers me that so many open Web tech gatherings I attend are almost entirely white, middle-class guys. You can’t have a truly diverse, open technology created by a homogenous group of creators. If everyone learned programming, you’d be learning a think-as-you-do method, a social method, a technology that was also about multimedia representation (the arts), and that would have profound social implications for a diverse future, with developers thinking of ways to reach an audience that was more diverse in every way.

If you could go back in time and do one thing differently, what would you change? I actually don’t like the idea of going “back in time and doing differently.” I want to go forward in time and do it differently! This year, for example, I’m learning how to draw again. I thought at one point in life that I wanted to be an artist but hadn’t drawn anything since college art classes. I love it. I’ve also taken an online writing course to see how those actually work. And want to take a TechCrunch coding course online since I definitely need a refresher course.

What changes in education would you like to see? Get rid of the tyranny of standardized testing. It was invented in 1914, to be as fast and efficient as the assembly line that turned out Model Ts, to deal with a teacher shortage in World War I. It never was meant to be for more than, to quote Frederick Kelly who created the test, to test “lower order thinking” for the masses. It’s the tail wagging the learning dog. Thank goodness for Finland and for a totally different model of thinking about learning that, ironically, turns out to test #1 in the world according to the OECD, even though their Dewey-esque learn-then-do system, with its emphasis on equality not excellence, bans standardized testing in classrooms. I see Pasi Sahlberg as a fellow traveler and recommend his Finnish Lessons: What Can the World Learn from Educational Change in Finland?

What's the most important advice you can give to educators? Focus on inspiring learning, not on test scores. Listen to your students. Don’t worry about expensive technology—worry about thinking about the way kids live and work today and how students, at any age, can be prepared for a world where, according to one study, 65% of 15-year-olds will end up in careers not invented yet, and will change careers (not jobs but careers) 4-6 times in the course of their lives. Teach for disruption. And teach disruptively. That’s the key.

Image courtesy of Cathy N. Davidson


10Q: Cathy Davidson by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

The Pelecon flies again

We have enjoyed 6 successful e-learning conferences in Plymouth over the past decade. In recent years, the Plymouth e-Learning Conference (or PeLC) has grown from a small local one day teacher conference, into a large, international 3 day event which showcases the very best and latest in digital pedagogies. Over the years, we have welcomed a galaxy of world class keynote speakers, such as Stephen Molyneaux, Gilly Salmon, Josie Fraser, Stephen Heppell, Sherry Terrell, David White, John Davitt, Graham Attwell, Mike Blamires, Jane Seale and Mark Stiles.

Other who have presented papers and workshops at the event over the years have included James Clay, Miles Berry, Shirley Williams, Pat Parslow, Helen Keegan, Malinka Ivanova, Neil Witt, Carmen Holotescu, Mike Phillips, Doug Dickinson, Craig Taylor, Matt Lingard, Lyndsay Jordan, Bex Lewis, Andy Ramsden, Dan Roberts, Thomas Fischer, Doug Belshaw, Catherine Cronin, Richard Hall, Sharon Flynn, Mark Childs, Fiona Concannon, Thomas Kretschmer and far too many others to list here on this blog. We have also welcomed many student presenters over the years, and showcased our own Plymouth University robotic football team and vision immersion theatre. Most delegates who have attended will tell you that Pelecon is an exciting and inspiring conference at many levels.

The 2012 Plymouth Enhanced Learning Conference (yes we replaced 'electronic' for 'enhanced' last year to reflect the shift in emphasis from tools to pedagogies) is number 7 in the series, and has been rebranded with a new logo and new website. This year's lineup of invited speakers is bigger than ever, as you can see from the picture above. Our four keynotes are Jane Hart, Alec Couros, Keri Facer and Simon Finch, and for the first time this year we also have 3 spotlight speakers in Leigh Graves Wolf, David Mitchell and Helen Keegan. Once again we are planning an evening Teachmeet, Student Voice Showcase and other shows that run parallel with the conference. One of our new ideas is to have a 'Failure Confessional' where we talk about what went wrong, and all learn from our mistakes. We also take over exclusive occupancy of the famous Glassblowing House restaurant on Plymouth's historic Barbican seafront for our social event on the second night of the conference. Many people have said that Pelecon is one of the friendliest conferences of its type, and this year's event will be no exception. With its idyllic setting 'twixt moorland and sea, wonderful weather (we have excellent connections) and the famous Devon cream tea (calorie free), what better place could you spend your time between 18-20 April this year? Full cost for the entire three day event is just £200. We hope to see you at Pelecon this year!

Visit the Pelecon website for further details.

Fishing boat image by Jose Luis Garcia


The Pelecon flies again by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

We learn by teaching

Although I am employed to teach, I consider it something of a disappointment if I don't learn something myself during my teaching sessions. Sure, it is my prime responsibility to ensure that my students are given the best opportunities to learn, and I take pride in creating the best possible learning environments and experiences I can offer. The real magic occurs when we are all learning together, and I would like to argue that this should be the case in any learning environment. In his 1968 book Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire wrote 'Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students.' 

Some might complain that 'only the expert has a right to teach', or that 'students should not be allowed to go off and find out for themselves', but sadly, this is really missing the point. Every student brings their own unique knowledge and experiences into the classroom, and it's impossible for 'experts' to know everything. Let me give you a recent example: During an ICT session this week, as I made hard work of 'wiping the interactive whiteboard clean', my students pointed out to me that on Smartboards, all you need to do is circle the text you wish to delete with the wiper and then tap the middle of the text, and hey presto - the entire text disappears. Well, that was new to me, and I won't forget it - it's a new skill that will save me a lot of time and effort in the future. Now that's learning - and I'm very glad it was me on this occasion that learnt something new - from my students. But you see, there is more to learn about this incident than the fact that the students taught the teacher a new 'skill'. The students and I had a good laugh about me (a so called expert in ICT) not knowing how to use an IWB, but ultimately, the secret to good learning is that often you can't afford to be afraid to admit that you are ignorant of something. Pride often gets in the way of good learning, but sometimes we need to admit 'I don't know', and we also need to admit that students know things teachers don't. Often, being honest about your ignorance, and being open to new ways of doing and new ways of thinking, opens the door for new learning, unlearning and relearning. How many of us have sat through a lecture or conference presentation, and have been afraid to ask a question because it might make us look stupid? If we all want to ask that same simple question but we are all too afraid to do so, then that is stupid - because then the entire room remains ignorant.

There is an old Latin aphorism - Doscendo discimus - which means, we learn by teaching. Must we be so rigid in our mind set as to not see the powerful potential of this idea? Can we not break away from the idea that students are only there to learn and teachers must only teach? Can't we each do both, and isn't this exactly what Freire meant? I insist that all my students present their learning in seminars, and I also encourage questioning during these seminars. It's for a very good reason - having to stand up and explain something, means the students need to learn it first. They need to become familiar with the concept, theory, idea they will be talking about in front of their peer group. Even better, in recent years several of our Plymouth University Primary Education students have presented at conferences, Teachmeets and other public events, in front of people they have not previously met. This is really dropping them in at the deep end, but I think it's important they have the experience. They are understandably very nervous, but afterwards, each and every one of them will tell you the same story: They are glad they have had the chance to present in public, and they learn a lot from this rich experience. If you want them to learn, get them to teach.

Image by Sneebly


We learn by teaching by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Build a powerful PLN

If you are a professional, you should have a PLN. Your PLN (personal or professional learning network) is the community of people you interact with and learn from on a regular basis. They may be people you meet on a daily basis, but more often than not in the digital age, many PLNs are comprised of people we interact with on social networking sites. In my opinion, the most powerful PLN building tool is Twitter. For me, Twitter is an incredibly powerful yet simple tool that enables me to connect with, and learn from, specialists, experts and enthusiasts in my chosen field of expertise. Put simply, I follow teachers, learning professionals and education experts from all around the world - over 1400 at my last count. I learn something new everyday, usually as a result of dialogue on Twitter, or clicking on a link someone has shared in my timeline. Many people I follow on Twitter I have never met, and perhaps I might never meet them face to face. Some are personal friends of mine. But all are individuals who I personally believe are important in the world of education. These are people I have selected to follow because they are saying things, or sharing content that interests me, and from which I can learn, contributing to my personal and professional development. You can gain an insight into ideas, content and events that would otherwise pass you by, and you can also engage in great conversations with people all over the globe who share similar interests, passions, problems and experiences. It's all a question of finding people, resources and sites that you can learn from. But how to do it, when you are in danger of being lost in a tsunami of web content? Well, there is a growing range of useful social media tools you can use to track down what you need. Such tools can help you to build your PLN into something that is powerful. The possibilities are endless, but let me share just five ways I have personally used:

One really easy way to find and connect with people who have the same interest as you is to follow hashtags on topics or events that you have an interest in. If you are a teacher for example, you may wish to follow #edchat or a Teach Meet event. If you do so, you will discover who else is following and participating in the discussion or event. Simply check out the profiles of these participants, and if you find them interesting or relevant to your own interests, click on the link to follow them. You can always unfollow later if it doesn't work out, but many Twitter users will also follow you back if they discover you have similar interests to theirs.

You can also scan the list of people other Twitter users are following and see if there are any there who might be of interest to you or relevant to your subject/topic. Select someone you are following whom you hold in high regard, and click onto their profile. Next click on the list of people they are following. If you find people on the list who interest you, click to follow them too.

Another way to find people who have a similar interest to you is to subscribe to a social bookmarking tool such as Diigo or Delicious. Such tools enable users to share URLs of web resources they find interesting. By searching and then saving useful website addresses to Diigo or Delicious, you will automatically be presented with links to other people who have also found the site interesting. One click enables you to subscribe to the feeds and bookmark collections of these people. You can also send them messages.

Still another way to build up your PLN contacts is to visit the Slideshare site and search for topics that interest you. You will quickly discover a rich vein of slide sets that have been shared by people with similar interests to you. Again, you can subscribe to their feeds and receive notification when they share a new slideset that may be of interest to you. Many of the slidesets on Slideshare are presented under Creative Commons license for free use - but do check the wording to see what the licence allows you to do.

Finally, a number of high quality blogs already exist, in just about every field of professional life. You can search for them using Google or another search engine, by selecting the 'blog' search section. When you find a blog you are interested in reading, you may be able to subscribe to it using the on site widget if there is one. If not, bookmark it on Delicious or Diigo for later use. Before you leave the blog, check to see if there is a blogroll. This is a list of other blogs the blog owner recommends, usually focused on the same or a related topic to the blog hosting the list.

Do you have other ways that are effective in building up a powerful PLN? Please share them with us in the comments box below...


Build a powerful PLN by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

10Q: Helen Keegan

We are fortunate to have many innovators in education. In the primary (elementary) and secondary (high) school sectors some can be conspicuous, because through various Teachmeets around the world, and also online during Twitter #edchats, they make their work known to the wider community. In the post-compulsory sectors of education too, there is a lot of innovation and creativity, but sometimes this can go relatively unnoticed.

One academic who personally springs to mind when we talk about creative innovation is Salford University's Helen Keegan. I first met her at a conference in Italy several years ago, and we have been friends ever since. Every time I meet up with her I'm impressed by her energy and drive, and her ability to come up with new and exciting ideas on how to engage learners. In today's 10Q interview, Helen answers questions about her philosophy on learning, social media and her current projects in higher education, including alternate reality games:

Who are you?

I’m Helen Keegan a.k.a. heloukee (online), Senior Lecturer in Interactive Media and Social Technologies at the University of Salford. I’m based in Computing, Science and Engineering, so it’s a great place to be as I get to work with techie students, but nowadays I focus on the social and cultural aspects of technology. I’ve always worked across the University, and am now based at MediaCityUK, which is ideal as it’s a multidisciplinary campus. I like to work across disciplines as I think it’s important for learners to understand different paradigms/disciplinary perspectives/assumptions. My approach to learning and teaching starts from digital identity development – I encourage learners to position themselves in their chosen field while still in education, in preparation for their professional careers.

What inspires you most about learning?

Transformation, empowerment and the unexpected: although learning what we’re ‘supposed’ to learn (I’m talking formal education here) can be empowering, the things that really excite me are often unexpected or accidental – I’m inspired by learners developing new ideas and understandings through making connections between seemingly disparate concepts and fields, and moving beyond their (disciplinary) comfort zone. While this is challenging it often leads to genuinely transformative experiences. Because I work with learners across a myriad of social platforms, I’m able to see them develop their ideas and their identities – both individual and collective - through time. This then drives the curriculum, which is ultimately inspiring: learners being able to confidently negotiate their own curriculum in collaboration with others. In terms of my own practice, students are my primary source of inspiration as reflecting on our learning journey and experiences pushes me to keep innovating. I’m also inspired on a daily basis by people I work with (especially Frances Bell, Ben Shirley and Cristina Costa) and of course my PLN (thanks to social media!).

What/who has been your biggest influence when it comes to learning?

I studied at the Royal Northern College of Music before going on to a degree in Linguistics, specialising in phonetics, speech synthesis and spectrographic analysis. During my time at the RNCM (1993-1995) I was involved in a Manchester-based multimedia collective. With a loan from the Princes Trust, we set up a studio with a 2-tonne acoustic dry room. We had a band (inc. 2 drummers – hence the dry room ;) and an orchestra. My visionary friend Carl Russell led the whole thing, although there were about 15 of us involved on a day-to-day basis. We did all sorts of live multimedia gigs with dancers, animation, video, poetry, classical music, dance music… it’s also how I got into building websites and programming (which led me through the study of Lingustics into Acoustics). It was completely informal, un-assessed, and gave me the opportunity to explore a range of disciplines (music, computing, writing, performing) and learn with a group of friends. It was a major influence on my beliefs with regards to interdisciplinarity, grassroots education and informal learning.

What does social media mean to you?

Connections and networks, serendipity and opportunity, creativity and a rapid flow/spread of ideas – energising and occasionally exhausting! In terms of my practice as an educator, I love the fact that learners can simultaneously be developing their knowledge and understanding alongside their personal portfolio and ‘professional’ online identities. They are able to make meaningful connections with others through expressing themselves as individuals and letting their personalities shine through; their opinions, interests, and activities outside of formal education. I get a real thrill seeing learners develop their digital identities and personal networks over time – I love the fact that the boundaries blur between education/industry, tutors/students, as they build their own networks and gain confidence in connecting with others online.

What is an Alternate Reality Game (ARG)?

An Alternate Reality Game uses the real world as a platform for a transmedia, interactive narrative, which unfolds according to player’s actions. Unlike video games, players don’t play as characters but generally play as themselves, interacting with the ARG designers as opposed to artificial intelligence. ARGs blur the lines between fantasy and reality, requiring collaboration and group problem solving in order to play the game. The overriding mantra for an ARG is This Is Not A Game, so it necessarily involves an element of deception.

 
How have ARGs featured in your work recently?

I recently ran a module as an ARG, as I wanted see if I could pique learners’ curiosity through introducing mystery and intrigue into their course. I worked with Hugh Garry (BBC) who had been involved with a few ARGs in the past, so his experience was invaluable. The students were fed clues in the physical world (within their scheduled classes) and also online, through blogs, Twitter, YouTube and Tumblr. It was quite intense, as we couldn’t control how students would react during the game, so there were a few tricky moments! The culmination of the ARG was the surprise public broadcast of their mobile phone films on the BBC Big Screen in the centre of Manchester – they were led to the Big Screen by a series of clues and puzzles that unfolded during the semester. It was an amazing experience! However, the jury is still out on ARGs – involvement and immersion bring the biggest rewards so there’s a risk of losing or excluding those who choose not to engage, and this was one of the biggest difficulties that we faced.

What other innovative technology supported projects have you been involved in?

The first project I worked on as a researcher/developer still sticks in my mind. My brief was to develop a multimedia CAL package (yes, back in the olden days ;) to ‘teach’ principles of acoustics. I spent a lot of time talking to undergraduate students who were struggling with certain concepts/formulas, and decided to develop a series of simulations that allowed learners to play around with waveforms using sliders, getting instant audio-visual feedback – leaving out the maths (gasp!) until they developed a more kinaesthetic sense of what was actually going on. Learners were able to get a strong feel for things like additive and subtractive synthesis, before moving on to the actual formulas. Once they had a feel for waveforms – both visually and aurally – then the formulas made a lot more sense. Very simple really, but certainly helped learners overcome the mental blocks they had developed as a result of not getting to grips with the maths in the book and on the board.
Another ‘innovative’ project would have been ESMOS – a European project that I directed/coordinated from 2004-2007. The original bid focused on the use of VLEs to support international mobility students (work placements and study exchanges) and I was brought it to run the project once the bid had been successful. I changed the focus from VLEs to open blogs, wikis etc. – might not sound like much now, but it was pretty innovative at the time (2004), and also risky in terms of it being a European funded project as it meant a significant shift away from the original proposal. However, we pulled it off and made a real contribution to international student mobility support (social, pedagogical and cultural), which was recognised by the European commission and had considerable influence on many other projects.

More recent ‘innovative’ projects have included introducing reflective practice and digital identity development through social media into science/engineering in 2006, and getting video technology students in a science faculty to make short films using their mobile phones in order to open their minds to new aesthetics and challenge their rule-governed disciplinary assumptions.

What is your recipe for good learning?

From the content perspective: relevance, personal interest and meaning (also important to understanding learner motivations). I do think emotion is important. A relaxed, happy atmosphere helps people to feel at ease, although that’s not so say that we have to be happy in order to learn - but it does help if learners are enjoying the experience. Open and honest dialogue - admitting that we all mess up sometimes, we all have valuable experiences and thoughts to share, and can all learn from one another. An environment where people aren’t afraid to make mistakes - no fear of saying the wrong thing or ‘sounding stupid’. And last but perhaps the most important ingredients – curiosity, and asking questions!

If you could change anything in higher education, what would it be?

Two things: large class sizes and assessment regimes. This is a personal perspective and not always practical in a mass HE system, but the relationships I have with my students are incredibly important in terms of our learning (I’m including myself as a learner here, because I do expect to be challenged by, and learn from, my students). Sadly, the larger the group, the less likely we are to be able to get to know one another and for me this is one of the most valuable and rewarding aspects of learning and teaching.
My second bugbear is the modularised assessment-driven culture, as this does tend to stifle curiosity. So many learners are focused on what needs to be done to pass a module with a certain mark. It’s a strategic approach to getting a degree, but I’m not a fan of the industrial model of education and sometimes it does feel more like a production plant than a place for imagination and intellectual growth. I don’t believe we should abolish Universities. Universities and academic networks play a vital role in development through research, and linking research to teaching. However, I’m not a fan of corporatisation and get frustrated with the shift towards a consumer culture.

What is your vision for the future of learning?

Greater flexibility in terms of what, where and how we learn; access to information for all; a move away from assessment culture – greater emphasis on curiosity and enjoying learning for its own sake. Alternative forms of assessment and accreditation that allow learners to define their own pathways and form communities of interest/inquiry away from modules and levels. Finally, I’d like to see greater emphasis on critical media literacy, interdisciplinarity and epistemological awareness alongside disciplinary-specific knowledge and skills. Having an open and flexible mindset is becoming increasingly important when we’re living in a rapidly changing world.

Helen Keegan is an invited Spotlight Speaker at this year's Plymouth Enhanced Learning Conference.

10Q Helen Keegan by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

10Q: Shelly Sanchez Terrell

Many would agree that Shelly Sanchez Terrell is at the top of the game when it comes to educational innovation. Just look at her profile: She is a teacher trainer, author, and international speaker, is the host of American TESOL’s Free Friday Webinars and the Social Media Community Manager for The Consultants-E. She has co-founded and organized the acclaimed educational projects, Edchat, ELTChat, The Reform Symposium E-Conference and the ELTON nominated Virtual Round Table language and technology conference. Her prolific presence in the educator community through social media has been recognized by several notable entities, such as The New York Times, UNESCO Bangkok, Edweek, Converge Magazine, the United Federation of Teachers, the 140 Conference, Mashable, English Central, Tefl.net, and T/H/E JOURNAL. Her education blog, Teacher Reboot Camp, is ranked as one of the top 10 language teaching and technology blogs and the 50 best blogs for education leaders. In 2012 her book, The 30 Goals Challenge for Educators will be published by Eye on Education. I'm very pleased that Shelly has agreed to contribute to my 10Q blog interview series:

How did you begin your professional career in education?
I began teaching in non-structured environments without any training until years later. I think this really helped me to observe how learning changes when we add too many rules and structure. In 1992, I began teaching innercity children through nonprofit programs and organizations in Texas. I was inspired to continue to reach out to these children and later homeless children and  troubled teens through creative writing, art, and literacy programs. In 2004, I became an English language teacher and taught students from 2 to 80 years-old in the US, Germany, and Greece. Now I train teachers online and face to face and get to see the incredible ways they are transforming their students’ lives.

What inspires you most about learning?
Learning is all around us and I am fascinated that there are always things to learn about the world and who we are and what makes us tick. As an educator I love to observe my students discover this about learning.

What does social media mean to you?
The ability to connect, collaborate, problem solve, and spread a message to millions is very powerful. Social media provides us the forum and we get to discover this incredible journey of learning and communicating with each other. This has literally been a life changing experience for me in the less than 3 years I began that journey with educators.

What is the Reform Symposium?
The Reform Symposium is a free online global conference that takes place over the course of 3 days and focuses on ways to transform education. The 3rd one took place this past July with over 4100 attendees from over 100 different countries entering online video meeting rooms where they could chat with each other, watch speakers on webcams, and see slides. Attendees could choose to attend any of the 80 presentations conducted by educators worldwide or watch our 12 inspiring keynote speakers, such as you, Steve! We appreciate you inspiring us. This conference is organised by educators for educators and the presentations are so moving that many of our attendees are moved to tears and say it is a life changing experience.

What other innovative projects are you currently working on?
The 30 Goals Challenge - Over 7000 educators worldwide have participated in accomplishing goals to transform their classrooms and impact their students. Educators who join receive a free ebook and have access to several videos and podcasts to help them achieve their goals. More importantly they get to reflect upon these goals on Twitter, Facebook, or on their blogs and receive the support of many educators also accomplishing these goals.
The Virtual Round Table E-Conference - another free online conference I help organize that focuses on language and technology. Participants can attend via a live video conference or in Second Life.
The Digital Storytelling for Young Learners EVO Session- a free online 5 week course that starts January 9th and ends February 12th. It is basically a MOOC (Massive Open Online Course). Over 200 educators worldwide have already signed up and will be playing with various tools while learning about digital storytelling.

What are the barriers to good learning?
I see many people who have gone through the rigors of the education system and lose their love for learning. They begin to equate learning to what is forced upon them in schools and forget the excitement of always being curious and searching for answers, finding different solutions, and having many more questions. I think the greatest barrier to good learning is that society tries too hard to control and standardized a process that is very individualized.

If you could change anything in education, what would it be?
I would change how education policy is decided and implemented. I would also change who gets to make the decisions about education policy.

What is your vision for the future of learning?
I hope many more teachers will become excited and passionate about learning through their participation on social networks. I think this trend will continue. Hopefully we can start some grassroots movements and inspire educators to get back to the roots of what makes learning so wonderful- having the ability to nurture our curiosity while exploring many solutions. In order for this to occur we have to get rid of standardized testing that teaches students there is only one right answer.

What important message do teachers need to hear?
Everyday that a teacher meets with their learners, that teacher will impact their lives. The choice and power is ours to decide what kind of impact that will be.

What links would you like to share?
I shared them above or in my bio :-)


10Q Shelly Sanchez Terrell by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.