Smart learning

I spend most of my time in the future, but I do go home at weekends. At least, that is my explanation about why I am so fascinated with the future. I always have been, ever since I was a little boy and started reading science fiction novels. From Asimov to Heinlein, and Clark to Wells, I hungrily devoured them all and fed my mind on what was to come.

I'm in a dream job now, talking about technology and learning, and how we can optimise one from the other. Inevitably, people invite me to speak at events and ask me to give my ideas about what is just around the corner.

My recent involvement with the New Media Consortium Horizon Report committee was another outlet for thinking about the future. That came up in today's keynote at the 15th International Conference on Interactive and Collaborative Learning (#ICL2012), here deep in the Austrian Alps, in a little town called Villach. I spoke of Learning 3.0, and speculated on what learning might look like in a few years. I proposed that a great deal of learning will take place in the future through the use of mobile tools, and that tablets, phones and other handheld devices would be just the start of our new technology enhanced learning journey.

Learning 3.0 and the Smart eXtended Web from Steve Wheeler

Augmented reality, intelligent filtering, 3D spatial interaction, enhanced vision and other seemingly exotic or out of reach technologies will one day merge to become our new reality. The technology is already there, but as William Gibson once said 'the future is not widely distributed'. Eventually, all widely adopted technologies tend to fade into the background and become mundane, as learning breaks through to take centre stage. When will this happen? We can't say for sure, because other random factors continually intervene. Pictures and quotes from the past, shown in the slide set above, demonstrate that we are not always very good at predicting accurately what our future will hold, but with current trends, we can see farther than we have ever been able to see before down the corridor of time. And we can see that technology is not slowing down, and neither is our thirst for small gadgets, smart objects and embedded technologies. Learning 3.0 will be the nexus, the meeting point of all these smart tools, where people will connect seamlessly with other people, objects and information and learn when they need to, what they need to, where they need to. We will then be tapping into the combined intelligence of the entire globe, and that will be powerful beyond measure. At least, that is my vision for the future.

I hope you enjoy looking at the slides. I certainly enjoyed presenting them today, and discussing my ideas with delegates at ICL2012 in Villach, Austria.

Photo by Joaquim F. Silva


Smart learning by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

In an Internet minute

The futurologist Ray Kurzweil once said that 'change is not linear, it is exponential.' Sociologist Alvin Toffler described three waves of evolution in our interaction with tools. The first two, the agricultural and industrial revolutions laid the foundations for the larger, Third Wave - the technology revolution. Prior to the technological wave,  life changed relatively slowly, and change was linear, but in the advent of new technologies, we are lurching from change to change without pause. The technological Wave has changed everything in life, including the way we work and trade, learn, provide healthcare, entertain ourselves, conduct our relationships and interact. Arguably, old rubrics which described, but did not govern the pace of technological change (see for example Metcalfe's Law or Moore's Law) may already be outmoded.

The infographic on this page illustrates the sheer volume of  user generated content and user activity that occurs every 60 seconds somewhere on the Internet. In one minute there are over 2 million search queries on Google, 6 million Facebook views, over 200 million e-mails sent and 100,000 tweets. These staggering metrics are only the tip of the iceberg. We can expect to see exponential rises in all of these and the emergence of new and more dynamic social media and communication systems. One of the most marked changes are the upsurge in the use of mobile technology, with 1,300 new mobile users every minute. Mobile phones, tablets and laptops are portable gateways into the Internet, and it is predicted by 2015 that there will be twice as many mobile devices on the planet as there are humans. This means that access to the Web will increase, and there will be a steep rise in Internet activity, probably beyond what we can ever imagine. This assumes that the growth rate will continue at its current pace, which of course it won't. It also assumes that people will (and are) using more than one device to access the Internet. I currently have 3 devices with me, and I'm using two of them to write this blog post.

Whichever way we look at this, we know beyond reasonable doubt that demands on the Internet will continue to rise. Are we prepared for this exponential rise in use? The biggest challenge facing us now is not how to use the Internet, but being able to futureproof it so that we have enough bandwidth, capacity and storage space to hold all of the user generated content that is coming. Another challenge is to ensure that the Internet improves in terms of speed, security and usability.

Image source


In an Internet minute by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Live to learn

As I was walking in to the university yesterday, a thought struck me. I asked myself the question, why do I work at the university? It certainly isn't because of the money. Firstly, I could earn a heck of a lot more in other industries. Secondly, I don't really need to work any more. I don't have a mortgage on the house now, and my children are grown up and independent (two of them have their own homes now). So why do I stay employed? The answer came clearly, as if from the skies above. I 'work' at the university because I love to learn, and going to the university, spending time with my colleagues and students, doing research and exploring all the many possibilities of my chosen subject of study, is incredibly rewarding. I realised that I don't go to university to 'work', but I'm very fortunate that I do get paid doing something I really love. I live to learn. And my university is the closest place to home I know where I am free to explore all the possibilities of that learning - to push the boundaries, try out new things, take risks and see how far I can go with learning new things.

This is also why (I realised, as I was walking to university) that whenever I launch a new student course, module or programme, I always try to agree a contract with my students. I tell them 'I know you want to learn from me, but I would also like to learn from you.' About that point I usually get some strange looks from some of them, but my students all 'get it' in the end. We make an agreement to learn from each other, because even the greatest minds on the planet don't know everything. The wisest minds on the planet are those who realise they actually know very little, and who seek out to try to discover and explore to fill some of the void. Have you ever stood at the edge of the ocean, or gazed up at the stars on a clear night, and felt so very, very small? That's the kind of awe we should feel when we consider learning.

Learning is lifelong and life-wide, but I didn't always know that. I believed the lie I was fed in school that learning stops when you leave formal education. It took me a while to discover that learning is actually only beginning when we leave school. Most people don't actually discover a passion for learning until they have entered a world of work. Tragically, many never discover a passion for learning at all. In a recent post I quoted Ashley Tan who said 'teachers teach, but educators reach'. For those of us who aspire to be educators, to reach beyond mere teaching, this has to be the line in the sand. Are we simply going to teach, or are we going to reach out to a lost generation of learners?

I know why I continue to work in education. Because I have fallen in love with learning. What about you?

Photo by Terry Robinson


Live to learn by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

The future is a big place

If I have learnt nothing else this week, I have learnt that the future is a very, very big place. I wrote recently that we live in exponential times, and this was brought home to all of us this week at The Windsor Debates. We are simply not prepared for the future. We are not ready for the rapid and wide reaching changes that will impact us all in the next few decades. But at least, if we begin to spot the trends, we can try to prepare as best we can.

The Debates are hosted at Windsor Castle at least twice each year, under the auspices of the Thames Valley Chamber of Commerce, and have gained a reputation as a gathering point for the good and the great of business and industry and a nexus for grown-up debate around the issues of the day. On this occasion the economy, science and innovation, technology supported education and training, healthcare, globalisation, technology enhanced humans, world population trends, gender and race issues all came under scrutiny. It was a little surreal to be talking about such futuristic ideas in such an ancient setting as the Windsor Castle dungeon, but that simply added to the appeal and atmosphere of the event. You can view the list of invited speakers at this site. My own presentation outlined the problems of traditional education in a changing world, and called for a closer alignment of business and higher education, so that at least we can begin to understand what we need from each other. Other than that, I'm not at liberty to divulge who said what (Chatham House Rules, see), but I can summarise some of what was said for you.

Many of the speakers were interested in discussing how we can prepare for a future we cannot clearly describe. Some cited seriously frightening statistics about the trends of population growth and decline in the world. China's population will shrink by the middle of this century (to be overtaken by India) while Nigeria's and Indonesia's will rise precipitously. What will be the jobs we will do in the next few years, and where will the work be done? Will there even be a workforce in a few years time, or will we look back on the past 200 years or so and say, yes, that was the era of employment and it was merely a strange blip in human history? Organised, industrial work practices have only existed for that amount of time, it was argued. Prior to that, people generally worked for themselves or for a ruler. Global distribution of products, outsourcing of workforces, ubiquitous technology, new divisions of labour and ways of working, all are contributing to a seismic shift in the way business is being shaped. A lot of soul searching is going on inside companies. One speaker called for an end to hierarchy in the workplace, to be replaced by heterarchy (more on this in my next blogpost), which promotes a more democratic way of working, and gives ownership to all employees. Another advocated Punk HR - a quirky idea that turns out  not to be so strange after all, and may yet gain as much traction as it's pedagogical counterpart - Edupunk.

Essentially, the mood was that we are in a post-modern age, where all the rules we previously held dear are being challenged, eroded and supplanted by other, looser ideas. Many of the companies represented at the Debates are household names. Top ranking executives attended from each. Together, these people pack a big punch, and have impressive pedigrees, and each more or less agreed that we need to start moving in new directions, and do things differently if we are to survive into this new century. The demise of Kodak was cited.  Kodak was a leading global corporation that stuck to its old practices and business model, and paid a severe price, because it believed in a product that non-one wanted anymore. It didn't adapt to the trends, looked inward instead of outward, and ultimately paid the price.

Some of the futurologists present gave us insight into technological trends, and we discussed what it means to be a modified, enhanced human being. The ethics surrounding this debate were disturbing and complex, and the animated conversations lasted long into the night. Some of the statistics cited about ubiquitous computing, Giganomic trends (look it up), population growth and decline, and economic flow were as imposing as making your entry through the Henry VIII gate, past the stern armed police officers, and into the Castle compound. If you are ever invited to attend a Windsor Debate, grab it with both hands. You certainly won't be disappointed.

Image source


The future is a big place by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Limitless learning

The personal learning environment (PLE) is still a bone of contention. Over at the Open University of Catalonia, in Barcelona, Ismael Peña-López has been doing some stirling work on theories surrounding Vygotsky's learning model and PLEs. His article can be accessed here in its entirety. Ismael starts by simplifying Vygotskian theory. He reasons that for Vygotsky, learning features three distinct layers: 1) What learners can achieve independently, 2) what they can do with the help of someone else (he calls this a more knowledgeable other or MKO and 3) that which is beyond the learner's reach, even with the help of an MKO.

Layer two can be defined as the Zone of Proximal Development or ZPD. What is interesting about Ismael's model is the way he incorporates the ZPD into a general model of the PLE, and argues that in fact, both MKOs and ZPD can constitute a PLE. This is all premised on whether we conceive of a PLE as a learning philosophy rather than simply a set of tools as most people see it. I'm in agreement with Ismael on this - I see the Personal Learning Environment as more than just a set of tools, or experiences, or environments. For me, the PLE is also more than a counterpoint to the centralisation/standardisation philosophy that spawned the institutional content management systems and services we see commonly today in schools, colleges and universities.

For me, the PLE is peculiar to the individual who makes it. It reflects his personality, learning characteristics and preferences. PLEs are constructed by the individuals who use them. This requires individuals to manage the connections between the tools, experiences, spaces and people, and this is often achieved within a digital framework. It is at the point that we accept that PLE is a learning philosophy, says Ishmael, that the entire vista of possibilities begins to open up to us. Ismael then makes the bold claim: "A PLE can be conformed by virtually everything that exists out in the cyberspace. If virtually everything is at reach, virtually everything can be understood as the more knowledgeable other. With a full, total, comprehensive access to the more knowledgeable other there virtually is no upper limit of the Zone of Proximal Development, there virtually is no level of problem solving that is unreachable for the student." The diagram above illustrates this vast potential very clearly. This is a bold and interesting theoretical punt which should serve to reinvigorate the debate about the purpose and scope of Personal Learning Environments. It means that potentially, if we have the appropriate tools and are connected to the right people, learning will be limitless.

Image by Ismael Peña-López


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

Exponential times

We live in exponential times. Change is rapid and events often take us all by surprise. Social, economic, environmental and political challenges roll across our screens every day. Now, more than ever, we need good education to negotiate our way through the turbulence of our times. There is a distinct separation forming between those who are teachers and those who aspire to be educators. Anyone can be a teacher, and indeed, whether they know it or not, just about everyone does do some teaching during an average week, usually on a very informal basis. Although we all teach, not everyone can be an educator. Educators are a breed apart, and although the professional title of 'teacher' is sustained in schools, it is often the educators that make all the difference. Not everyone can see the difference between teachers and educators, and many tend to think they are synonymous as this online discussion forum demonstrates. But there are distinct differences, and it is essentially the attitude of the individual that is at the heart of the question. I read an excellent blog recently which brings the differences into sharp focus:

Ashley Tan's blog Another dot in the Blogosphere? features an excellent exposition of the differences between educators and teachers, and I really believe it needs a wider audience. So here, on this blog, is a summary:

A teacher teaches; an educator reaches.

A teacher typically focuses on curriculum and assessment. An educator focuses on development and evaluation.

In the curricular race, a teacher perspires. In the journey of lifelong learning, an educator inspires. (An educator goes the extra mile.)

A teacher works with content. An educator deals with people.

Teaching is a job. Educating is a calling.

Some teachers do this to earn. Educators do this to learn (about themselves, their learners, better ways to inspire, etc).

A teacher might network locally. An educator is connected globally (and thinks and acts that way too).

The world needs individuals who will go the extra mile. This is what true educators do. They reach out to our young people, and they make a difference. It's not simply a job for them, and no amount of money would recompense them for all their commitment and overtime spent engaging their students, preparing, marking, planning and studying. As a teaching profession, we all need to work more with people than we do with content. In 1962, President John F. Kennedy stated that 'a child miseducated, is a child lost'. During my lifetime I have encountered many individuals who were miseducated, and took the wrong pathway in life. We need to be so careful how we execute our roles as learning professionals, because the future of an entire generation is in our hands. Any poor decisions we make can influence our students badly, but conversely, any good decisions we make can inspire that same generation to succeed, to burn brightly, and be a real force for good in this world. What an opportunity we have, but what a frightening prospect, if we get it wrong.  Yes, we live in exponential times, with change and uncertainty all around, but I have met some incredible educators in the last few years that give me a lot of hope for the future. They are more connected that any previous generation of educators, and they are more passionate. They will be the ones who make a difference to young lives. I believe that one day we'll look back on this period of time and say 'that was an extraordinary generation of educators.'

Photo by Anders Hoff


Exponential times by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.

Uncertainty principles

It's extremely difficult to predict the future accurately, because as futurologist Ray Kurzweil once said, change isn't linear, it's exponential. I often consult The Horizon Report, which is published every year and attempts to predict what will be the widespread adoptions of technologies in education and training. The annual report is published after extensive consultation with an international panel of technology and pedagogy experts. Yet even this is problematic, because the farther you move away from the present, the more opportunity there will be for unforeseen and unpredictable events to occur. And experts are not infallible. You really have to turn to science fiction and read something like Isaac Asimov's Foundation Trilogy to appreciate some of the complexity associated with this kind of uncertainty. What does the future hold? We can't be certain, because right now it's imaginary. The Horizon Report is usually quite accurate in the 1 year cycle. When we examine the predictions in the 2-3 year cycle, it becomes a little hit and miss, and by the time we attempt to predict what will be widely available on the 5 year horizon, it becomes even more tricky to maintain accuracy. The farther out we move in projected time from the familiarity of 'here and now' the less accurate we are in our predictions.

I was invited to speak at the Learning and Performance Institute's annual conference - Learning Live - at St Paul's in London recently, on the subject of Learning Futures, and afterwards talked to Martin Couzins, who recorded the brief video interview below (yes, I know it says 'learning tends'... but perhaps that's a fortuitous error):



Uncertainty principles by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License. Based on a work at steve-wheeler.blogspot.com.