Who's Afraid of Friday 12a ?

Nope, me neither but it doesn't do any harm to be cautious!

Looking for the origins of why 'this day' is seen as unlucky on the web gives reports of all sorts of unlucky things happening throughout history on Friday the 13th.

There! I've typed it!!
I suppose I thought doing that was like mentioning the proper name of 'The Scottish Play'.

Considering there are only between 1 and 3 such days a year (the next one is December 13 2013) there are plenty of other days for bad things to happen too. But, in many parts of the world, Friday is thought of as an unlucky day and the number 13 is also often thought of as unlucky.

Combine the two and you get friggatriskaidekaphobia or paraskavedekatriaphobia (for those of a really sensitive disposition).

I prefer the Old English version where Friday comes from frigedæg or Freya’s day (a Norse goddess associated with love, sexuality, beauty, fertility, gold, sorcery, war, and death) and the Greek words tris (or treis) for 3, kai for 'and' and deka for 10.

In the UK at least, if there is a strange custom or belief that doesn't seem to have clear origins, you can bet it has something to do with the pagans and the subsequent Christianising of their beliefs and practices.

Amuse yourself by looking up the origin stories and let me know your favourite.....

Assuming I survive the day, I'll post again next frigedæg.

TGIF13

BYOD - Nice or Nasty?

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cainc/6283248242/

Sometimes it is good to look again at things that are commonly accepted norms. Many educational organisations are moving toward, or have already implemented, a BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) approach. This post looks again at the advantages and disadvantages of asking/allowing students to use their own technologies.

This BYOD discussion is closely related to, although quite different from, discussions around the suitability of mobile learning, mobile devices and social networks in education. The issue with BYOD is the ‘Your Own’ bit.

BYOD arose in the corporate business world in early 2010 where bringing ‘your own devices’ to work was promoted to reduce corporate costs and increase personal productivity. The business success has seen a diffusion of the approach into the world of education. This can be seen as part of the growing trend for staff and students to be able to choose their own digital tools. Traditionally, digital technologies are provided and controlled by central IT Services but the rise of web based ‘applications’ is shifting ‘ownership’ towards the user. BYOD goes a step beyond the software and focuses on the physical devices themselves.

For some, the BYOD approach means a ‘free-for-all’ in the classroom or around the campus where there are no limits imposed on what students bring and use. A recent document from Microsoft (Bring your own device to school - briefing paper K-12.pdf) says a BYOD approach should provide “equity to ensure that all students have equal access to technology-rich experiences, and simplicity to ensure that it is easy to manage and sustain”. They suggest 5 models of decreasing centralised control:

1. School-defined single platform laptop
2. School-defined single platform laptop, plus another device
3. School-defined multi-platform laptops
4. Student-choice of laptop or tablet
5. Bring your own whatever connects to the Internet

However, the Microsoft document looks primarily at devices and doesn’t really consider what will be accessed; organisational networks, the web, both or how the content may or may not be processed once transferred to a mobile device.

There is a large body of work on the web, much of it from the USA secondary school context, considering every aspect of BYOD but the following article gives a concise presentation of the “Questions to Consider” (the blog also has a number of other good posts on BYOD).
http://theinnovativeeducator.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bring-your-own-device-questions-to.html

Despite the obvious benefits for the learner, there are still concerns and some reluctance to engage from both managers and IT system specialists in schools for children up to age 16. University and Further Education institutions seem more likely to embrace BYOD but many of the issues discussed below are relevant. A good summary, following a #ukedchat session, of the pros and cons has been created by IaninSheffield (http://www.proconlists.com/list/education/byod-in-schools/863) where you can login and influence the balance of opinion (currently the Pros outweigh the Cons by 204 to 89).

I don’t want to over emphasise one person’s contribution to the debate but in all that I’ve read, IaninSheffield is the only one to have posted the thoughts of the students:

“Without performing a numerical analysis of how positive or negative the responses to this question were, I got the impression that they were largely favourably inclined to the possibility of BYOD. Some students provided positive responses; some negative and many produced balanced returns. However, whilst the general feeling was positive, it was nowhere nearly as focused and specific as the concerns they expressed:

• Batteries often go flat.
• You could lose them or have them stolen.
• Not everyone has their own device.
• Might be problems connecting to the WiFi.
• Can sometimes get distracted and go off task.
• I wouldn’t want someone else to borrow my phone.
• My mum wouldn’t let me bring it.
• Some people would text rather than doing what they should be.
• Where would be able to store them?
• I wouldn’t want it to cost me money.
• I prefer not to use mobile devices for learning, although laptops are OK.
• What programmes students use wouldn’t be controllable.
• With everyone using it, it might slow up the Internet.
• If it breaks, you wouldn’t be able to do any work.
• Although a good thing, we should still be allowed to use pen and paper if we want.
• Different students might have different programmes.”

http://ianinsheffield.wordpress.com/2012/07/07/wisdom-of-the-many/

A quick poll of some of our FE students, 53 Level 2 & 3 Tourism students aged 18 and 19, showed that at home 91% had WiFi, 68% had a tablet, 73% a smart phone and 36% had a laptop/PC. Only 46% said that they used these devices for college work when at home! While almost all students bring their phones to college, 59% would not use it for learning activities because of the small screen size. Only 30% of those with a tablet would bring it to college because of loss, damage or theft. Almost all students however would use tablet devices if provided by the college. It seems that this sample mostly use mobile devices at home for social activities and are wary of bringing their technology to college even though they are keen to use mobile devices if available.

The main advantages of BYOD seem to be:

1. Promotes participation in class and heightens interest.
2. More immediate and engaging especially when media rich resources are used / created.
3. Students more likely to take ownership of/responsibility for their own learning when they use technologies THEY have chosen.
4. Students can choose from a variety ways to produce and present their work.
5. Greatly extends the digital tools and resources available for support, assessment, learning and teaching.
6. With institution wide WiFi access, any location can become a digital classroom.
7. Easier to share/collaborate online wherever and whenever.
8. Reduces the barrier to school/home learning (extending the classroom).
9. Develops digital literacy practices and skills.
10. Fully managed access to WiFi can reduce some of the problems.
11. Free (or very cheap) apps available for anything you want to do (enthusiasts can easily create custom apps).
12. Students with disabilities often have customised devices that could be used in mainstream classes.
13. Many students already use devices that are more powerful, up-to-date and flexible than current classroom computers.
14. Reduces organisational costs (but cannot abdicate responsibility and force students to purchase own - this may come in time when devices are cheap and ALL students have them eg pen/biro, calculators).

Weighed against this are the disadvantages:

1. Status issues (equity divide) amongst students and financial pressure on parents.
2. Increasing the chances of problems from damage, theft, bullying etc.
3. Pupils may get distracted form educational task by social apps, gaming etc.
4. Charging of devices during the day for poor battery life.
5. Difficulty of filtering out inappropriate material (not if managed WiFi is provided).
6. Inappropriate material from home is easier to bring into school.
7. Security issues of confidential information going to/from home (data security).
8. Many teachers don't have the confidence or competence to use or troubleshoot mobile devices.
9. Wide range of devices and models and software within the classroom.
10. Cost to schools to provide WiFi infrastructure and devices for student loan.
11. No economies of scale if bought individually on the high street (consumerisation of IT).
12. Increase of non-standard IT kit and software and security issues for devices accessing organisations network.
13. Wireless and bandwidth issues needing the attention of IT support staff along with potential shift in emphasis from Network to User.

Many disadvantages can be overcome by the BYOD approach chosen and the way it is implemented and the resources provided (it is also true that many advantages can be lost without careful planning and implementation). Decisions on BYOD usually don’t rely on a simple weighing of pros and cons. It seems that it is the social implications that cause greatest concern. The effect of BYOD on children and their families where buying ‘the latest device’ is not possible is undesirable for some teachers especially for pupils at the ages where peer pressure is felt most strongly.

We work now in a more enlightened and compassionate era than when I was a school when we had to find our own way through the injustices of life. Currently, some states in North America don’t operate a BYOD policy for younger students but I can’t help feeling that that is not the answer.

Despite some reluctance shown by students themselves, learners are missing out on the benefits of mobile web access and mobile apps and could also be being given the message that learning in school is different and separate from home.

In the secondary school context, if this debate were about providing a hot meal for pupils at lunch time there would be little doubt that lunch would be provided and all steps taken to minimise the social impact of disadvantage. Similarly, we don’t ban students from bringing in their own lunch on the grounds that this might create undesirable peer-pressure due to financial/social inequality.

I don’t want to minimise the pressures that disadvantage can bring but why should digital devices be any different from other social pressures in schools? Do we really want Bring Your Own Dinner to be OK but Bring Your Own Device to be avoided?

And from the student voice mentioned earlier, perhaps the lesson to learn is that mobile learning using tablet devices with WiFi connectivity is popular and shows potential benefits but institutions need to make these resources available centrally rather than rely on students/parents to do the job for them.

This debate could run and run so TGIF ....

Embedding Youtube Video in PowerPoint 2010

As resources become much more media rich, learners (and teachers) need to know how to find or create audio and video clips and then use them in their teaching/assessment materials.

This post describes how to embed a Youtube video into PowerPoint 2010 and what to do when that doesn't work!

In PowerPoint 2007 the only video you could easily add to your presentation was one that you had on your computer as a video file. Techie types were able to create and edit a Shockwave Object to embed a Youtube video (see later for details).

Firstly, find a Youtube video that you want to embed in your presentation.

Underneath the video, click on Share and then on Embed.

Make sure that the Use old embed code box is ticked and then copy the code and paste it into the PowerPoint dialogue box (see below for how to open the dialogue box).

PowerPoint 2010 added an option to use 'Video from website' (click on Insert and then under Media click on Video then on 'from website').

A dialogue box opens ready for you to paste in the Youtube embed code. However, the embed code from Youtube DOESN'T WORK (at the time of posting) but there is a fix.


The embed code looks like this:

In the PowerPoint dialogue box, edit your embed code as shown below:

value="// should be edited to value=http://
src="// should be edited to src=http://
version=3&amp should be edited to version=2&amp (this appears twice)

Click on the Insert button and a black box appears on your PPT slide.
Right click on the Movie box and select Preview. The movie start image and controls should appear ready to play.


If you prefer, you can watch Ron Bosch's movie of embedding a video and fixing the code problem:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1V0gm98Xj4g

or embedded in Blogger (this does work OK :-)

PowerPoint 2007
A friend gave me the following PowerPoint that contains a slide with a Shockwave object that you can copy into your PPT 2007 presentation and then edit for your chosen Youtube clip. The instructions are on the slide also.

Download and save a copy of the PPT file from Google Drive:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4qrMq-w6bVwN0JkRmFkWXFvWDA/edit?usp=sharing

Have fun with these over the weekend ....

TGIF

The Qualities of a Good Teacher and Learner (HE in FE)

Towards the end of the last academic year I asked for the thoughts of our HE staff on what makes a good teacher and learner. I asked;

 What are the main qualities which make a good (I guess I mean effective) teacher?

I used an open ended question so that I wouldn't influence the responses. I was however interested in what staff would say about the use of computers and the Internet (and maybe mobile devices and Apps).
There was quite a diversity of words and phrases used with relatively few items appearing in all responses.

For the teacher, a few words were mentioned by a number of respondents:

• knowledge
• patience
• humour
• challenging

And for the learner, words mentioned multiple times:

• motivated
• confident
• willing
• interested

The following paragraphs show what roughly 10% of my HE teacher sample think make a good teacher and learner.

A good/effective teacher is:

• Patient with a sense of humour and somebody who respects and is interested in students as individuals and is fair and consistent.
• Approachable, caring, honest, encouraging, positive, constructive, enthusiastic, engaging, inspirational, innovative, adaptable and challenging.
• Skilled and knowledgeable in their subject area and knows how to make difficult things understandable, interesting, enjoyable and relevant.
• Able to see things from a student perspective and welcomes student input and collaboration while empowering and instilling confidence without pretending to know everything.

A wordle analysis of replies about teacher qualities

A good/effective learner is:

• Willing to make an effort, get involved, make mistakes, accept advice and support and has a desire to succeed to the best of their abilities.
• Receptive, enthusiastic, positive, interested, responsive and resilient.
• Self-disciplined to meet deadlines, manage time, attend class, listen and has the confidence to question and challenge.
• Able to study, use resources and demonstrate their learning.

A wordle analysis of replies about learner qualities

Qualities common to teachers and learners:

• Effective teachers and learners are good communicators, they take time to listen, are organised and manage their time well, confident, resilient and use reflection to improve their performance.

I don’t think too much can be inferred from the fact that the ability to use computers and the Internet to teach or study/learn effectively was not mentioned. It may be that this is being taken for granted, in the same way that being literate and numerate were not mentioned. The question itself asked respondents to focus on qualities, probably understood by respondents to mean ‘personal’ qualities, rather than specific skills or competencies.

The list itself however is informative - how many of the qualities shown do you posses?

TGIF
(and a Bank Holiday Monday too - :-))))

PS My thanks to those people who took the time to reply (about 18% of the FE staff that also deliver HE courses).

Some thoughts on VLEs now they are teenagers

Before VLEs were developed, the Internet (and I use the term deliberately here as opposed to the World Wide Web which is something subtly different) was used in teaching only by those who had the technical skills and were innovators/pioneers in Internet technologies. Personal websites, TelNet groups, gopher etc. were the tools used to provide digital resources and communication.

CMS/VLEs where first being adopted in the UK around 2000 with a relatively wide variety of systems being available. An early review by ASTDs LearningCircuits (2001) listed over 50 systems (see this link for over 150 current CMS, LMS, LP & VLEs from C4LPT). The new VLEs offered a website specifically designed for teaching and learning with a single sign-on providing access to a variety of tools built into the system. The benefits were see by educational institutions so uptake was relatively rapid. The main benefits being:

• Standardised interface and procedures for all staff and students
• Organisational deployment and user account management
• Integration of tools and user data

It is true that no one system can provide everything that all users want, have the best tools available or even be liked by all users. However, the 'integration benefit' seemed to be the most significant of all. Integration was the thing missing from the DIY approach of the pioneers. Teachers and institutions need the learner progress and achievement data and system interoperability provided by these VLEs.

The brief history above is by way of explaining why many institutions currently have a VLE and probably not the first VLE chosen. Discussions about "which is the best VLE?" start as soon as the system is deployed. Early in its use, changing your VLE causes only minor problems and many organisations did indeed change system after initial experience showed what were the important features. Once a system has been in use for a number of years the problems of change increase rapidly; content creation, user data, teacher and learner skills and familiarity do not easily (if at all) transfer to a new system. Despite the massive time and effort investment made to an organisation's chosen VLE, discussions around the theme of 'the grass is greener ...' surface regularly. The truth is that there is no 'best' VLE and the grass is always greener where it's well cared for!

Another truth is that VLEs do meet a number of needs, few (if any) institutions have decided that a VLE is not for them and simply abandoned the whole concept. The situation is a bit like one's relatives; you may not like them but you cannot get rid of them, you just have to learn to live with them and see their good side. All VLEs do roughly the same sort of job, they provide tools/facilities for teaching and learning:

1. provide facilities for course/module management
2. provide facilities for learner/group management
3. present information and skill resources
4. present instruction for learning activities
5. provide tools for individual and group study/collaboration
6. provide communication for learning and support
7. offer opportunities for reflection and formative assessment
8. provide tools for summative assessment and feedback

The rise of the Read/Write web (aka Web 2) around 2004 changed the nature of the digital world, over the last 5 or so years and there has been an increase in really useful 'software/application websites' often featuring self-publishing and networking opportunities. Unless an organisation fundamentally changes the way it goes about teaching and learning however, any popular VLE will provide the tools that are needed and VLE change becomes more about fad and fashion. The big questions are how can you know if there is a real need for change? What other VLE may be better? Is the potential improvement worth the disruption? Care is needed, a perceived improvement may not actually exist. A pig in a tuxedo looks glamorous but underneath it is still just a pig!

Having considered the nature of VLEs and issues around change, the rest of these notes cover the VLEs recently mentioned in the Learning Technology community.

The results of the 6th Annual (2012) Learning Tools Survey, as voted for by 582 learning professionals worldwide, and compiled by the Centre for Learning & Performance Technologies can be found here http://c4lpt.co.uk/top100tools/. Entries relating to VLEs are shown below.

Moodle is still the most popular VLE around and to consider the North Wales region, over 90% of secondary schools and colleges are using Moodle v2. The exceptions are using Kalidus and Joomla but are considering switching to Frog or Kite. Schools who have not so far engaged with VLEs, mostly Primary/Junior, will probably be trying out Learning Possibilities Hwb+ over the next couple of years.

The UK ILT Champions Network have, this academic year, commented on other platforms new to the community:

• PedIT (Norwegian - http://pedit.pedit.no/web/PageND.aspx?id=99006)
  Pedagogicaly flexible but mostly features a social constructivist approach.
• Canvas (American - http://www.instructure.com/)
  An LMS 'native to the cloud' which means upgrades etc happen seamlessly in the background. The Canvas API (Application Programming Interface) is openly published for ease of integration with third-party systems or for custom development and reporting.
• BuddyPress Courseware (A Wordpress plugin - http://buddypress.coursewa.re)
  Although primarily a blogging tool, there are many plugins available to provide a range of educational tools. BuddyPress is similar to Edmodo in terms of providing learners and staff with the rich networking that other VLE's lack, but has the advantage of customisability.

Professional networks in other countries have recently pointed to the following as noteworthy:

• Lore (American - http://lore.com/about)
  The new startup is using a Facebook type platform and tailoring it for education. Along with more traditional VLE features, the social network structure allows teachers and learners to communicate, follow one another, and discuss class work and lectures.
• Eliademy (Finnnish - https://eliademy.com/about)
  Launched in Feb 2012, it is free and open source providing online classrooms that enable teachers to create, share and manage courses anytime, anywhere featuring a smart and friendly interface, fast and easy to use features. Free tech for school
• its learning (Norwegian - http://www.itslearning.eu/features)
  A digital learning platform which allows educators to create, use and manage a wide variety of digital resources to support best practices such as: blended learning, flipping the classroom, personalized learning, professional learning communities, and other innovative digital learning environments.

In 2011 Google added an EDU category to its Apps Marketplace. Over 2 years later there are 70 education Apps available providing a variety of tools, from a variety of companies, that integrate with the standard Google Apps. Recently some Google users have been looking at the LMS Apps available; Engrade, CourseDirector, Docebo, Edubrite, OpenClass, Digication and ThinkWave. There are few tools that beat the standard apps for real-time collaboration and communication but the jury is still out on effectiveness of the LMS apps.

Thirteen years on, the Learning Technology landscape is very different to when modern VLEs were being designed. Application and networking websites abound but new LMS entrants appear every year. The VLE seems far from dead. Despite alternatives, the smart move is to embed, within the organisation, aspects of the established VLE that are key to the core business and management of the institution (see points 1-8 above). Then , encourage 'variation around the edges' where individual users are free to choose external tools/facilities that provide the aesthetics and enhanced functionality they want. This type of 'distributed VLE' seems to provide the best of all worlds.

TGIF
(but I expect this topic to run and run)

Of Cubs and Men

I really wish I had a photograph of me aged 10 proudly showing my cub scout badges sewn neatly, by my mum, down the arm of my uniform.

I could tie knots, make Meccano models, give first aid and, I think, I was proficient at doing things with an 'A frame'.

What carefree days they were.

Many many years on, having put childish things aside, I have just created my own digital badges to represent different levels of skill in using the GoToMeeting software being introduced at work.

Primarily designed as eMail signature images for staff who have been trained as 'attendees' or 'presenters' the badges would help raise awareness of the new software.

and

But how will staff respond to the badges?
Do real men, or women, collect badges once they've grown older?

Learning In Digital Wales 3

This is the third post in a series looking at the National developments in Wales to promote the use of digital technologies and resources for learners aged 3 to 19.

1. Task & Finish Group Review
   http://the-friday-feature.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/find-it-make-it-use-it-share-it.html
2. Ministerial Response
   http://the-friday-feature.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/learning-in-digital-wales.html

Lots of work in the background by government officials, interest groups, practitioner panels etc led to an invitation to tender for developing an 'All Wales Learning Platform' affectionately titled Hwb.

The contract was awarded in September to Learning Possibilities
(see their News Item: https://learningpossibilities.lpplus.net/Pages/News.aspx)

A series of meetings with key stakeholders are scheduled during the next few months to outline details of the proposed platform.

The National Digital Collection of teaching and learning resources will be accessed via the Hwb. The development of a system for unique learner IDs has been mentioned and this would provide a huge step forward in learner transition and progression.

An iTunes U channel will also be created to showcase the best courses available in Wales.

The National Digital Learning Council for Wales will oversee the direction and development of these initiatives plus other longer term plans. The council met yesterday for the first time and members include:

• Dr Tom Crick (Senior Lecturer in Computer Science, Cardiff Metropolitan University and Computing at School),
• Janet Hayward (Headteacher Cadoxton Primary School, Vale of Glamorgan),
• Sue Burnett (University of Glamorgan, RCT),
• Maldwyn Pryse (Estyn),
• Geraint James (ADEW ICT, Director of Education, Conwy),
• Simon Pridham (Headteacher Casllwchwr Primary School, Swansea),
• Hannah Mathias (St David’s College, Cardiff),
• Peter Sishton (eSkills UK) and
• Chris Britten (Headteacher Ashgrove Special School, Vale of Glamorgan).

Professional experts and "associate members" (ie students) will also be involved from time to time. I'll post in a month or so with details of the team of 'Digital Leaders' who will work directly with schools and teachers.

Things seem to be moving quickly and so they need to if The Minister is to have a Hwb to unveil in December. I have seen the 12th December mentioned as a possible date.

I'm not given to superstition but 12/12/12 seems to have a rather eerie feel about it.
At least that gives us 9 days before the end of the 'Fourth Mayan World Age' on 21st December when cataclysmic* events have been predicted.

I guess another interpretation could be that the cataclysmic* event is happening 9 days early in Wales - hold on to your hats - only time will tell.

TGIF (only 11 more to go - possibly !-)

*note - some writers see the translation from the Mayan not as cataclysmic but as transformative (hope on the horizon?).