Search

‘How Many Ways Can an Articulate Alien Analyse an Animated Robot?' is a performative, becoming-blended, active learning lecture that has evolved into one modelled on the principles of active blended learning. The author assembles the thinking of Gilles Deleuze, Felix Guattari, Paulo Freire, and bell hooks, amongst others, to create a discussion about how working with students actively, collaboratively, and in modes of blended delivery can enhance critical thinking and student engagement. The structure of this chapter echoes the way the lecture is organised, as in a three-act play. This enables a form of immersive experience, as the acts and actions of the lecture, dissected throughout the chapter, unfold. Director’s Notes The active, becoming-blended, learning lecture ‘How Many Ways Can An Articulate Alien Analyse An Animated Robot?’ (HMWCAAAAAAR) was first presented in 2014 at London College of Communication (LCC) – part of the University of the Arts London (UAL). I was asked by the then Programme Director, and now Dean of the LCC Design School, Dr Nicky Ryan to give a talk to all postgraduate students in the school. This was to be in the slot of her lecture, ‘Critical Histories of Design’, that she had given to students for the previous three years. I was told to make it my own. Since its latest ‘performance’ in the Autumn term of 2020, and in thinking about writing it up for conferences, journal articles, and book chapters such as this one, the realisation has dawned that I had unconsciously constructed it like a classic three-act play – even, at times, having a 20-minute interval. It is in the realm of a Brechtian immersive performative lecture where the audience actively takes part – although hopefully is not alienated. I have also structured this chapter as if it were the script for a play or film. There are parallel temporal narratives throughout. One narrative describes what happened when the 14-plus iterations of the 60-90 minute lectures were delivered. Th

El practicum es un componente central del currículo universitario en la Universidad de Northampton. En 2016, el 40% de los estudiantes de pregrado realizó practicums de entre 12 horas y un año de duración. En 2020 esa cifra ascenderá al 80%. Estos practicums contribuyen significativamente a los resultados de aprendizaje de los alumnos, así como a su salida laboral. En esta presentación compartiremos la historia del practicum en la Universidad de Northampton – lo bueno, lo malo, lo lindo y lo feo. Mostraremos cómo alineamos el practicum con las prioridades estratégicas de la universidad y los “desafíos Changemaker”. El diseño curricular con énfasis en aprendizaje híbrido activo y en la “empleabilidad” han constituido un pilar fundamental en la incorporación del practicum en nuestros cursos. Compartiremos ejemplos que ilustran cómo ciertas aplicaciones tecnológicas han facilitado el uso pedagógicamente adecuado del practicum en un contexto académico a nivel regional, nacional e internacional. Utilizando la experiencia de Northampton y la de los participantes, tendremos oportunidades para consultas, discusión y debate sobre prácticas exitosas y transferibles en el diseño e implementación de estos currículos.

Research literature on Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) is still limited and tends to focus on the learner perspective. This paper reports on the experiences of ten UK-based individuals involved in designing, developing, or delivering MOOCs (learning technologists, coordinators, designers, course builders or facilitators). We focus on the following key areas: 1) reasons to offer MOOCs, 2) design, creation and delivery processes, 3) attainment and course evaluation, and 4) challenges and recommendations for the future. Findings show that MOOCs are usually collaboratively created to “follow the trend”, increase student enrolments, repurpose existing materials and/or address an international audience. The role of the teacher (also in the form of student moderators) centers on maintaining discussions on track. Evaluations of MOOC usually lack agreed indicators of success.

Although interaction is recognised as a key element for learning, its incorporation in online courses can be challenging. The interaction equivalency theorem provides guidelines: Meaningful learning can be supported as long as one of three types of interactions (learner-content, learnerteacher and learner-learner) is present at a high level. This study sought to apply this theorem to the corporate sector, and to expand it to include other indicators of course effectiveness: satisfaction, knowledge transfer, business results and return on expectations. A large Mexican organisation participated in this research, with 146 learners, 30 teachers and 3 academic assistants. Three versions of an online course were designed, each emphasising a different type of interaction. Data were collected through surveys, exams, observations, activity logs, think aloud protocols and sales records. All course versions yielded high levels of effectiveness, in terms of satisfaction, learning and return on expectations. Yet, course design did not dictate the types of interactions in which students engaged within the courses. Findings suggest that the interaction equivalency theorem can be reformulated as follows: In corporate settings, an online course can be effective in terms of satisfaction, learning, knowledge transfer, business results and return on expectations, as long as (a) at least one of three types of interaction (learner-content, learnerteacher or learner-learner) features prominently in the design of the course, and (b) course delivery is consistent with the chosen type of interaction. Focusing on only one type of interaction carries a high risk of confusion, disengagement or missed learning opportunities, which can be managed by incorporating other forms of interactions.

The authors recommend, based on their research and experience, further use of ADA with podcasts and voice boards for interactive learning. They discuss future research, such as: Can ADA’s impact on students’ performance be measured? How much extra time do students commit to using ADA? What does ADA cost? How does audio feedback spark student-tutor dialogues and what effects do these dialogues have? Can other disciplines benefit from using ADA and if so how? Are there advantages in using other voice tools such as voice e-mail and audio blogs to promote interactive learning? Further research is needed, although ADA interactive learning already offers much to learners at a distance and on-campus

Why is Openness in Education important, and why is it critically needed at this moment? As manifested in our guiding question, the significance of Openness in Education and its immediate necessity form the heart of this collaborative editorial piece. This rather straightforward, yet nuanced query has sparked this collective endeavour by using individual testimonies, which may also be taken as living narratives, to reveal the value of Openness in Education as a praxis. Such testimonies serve as rich, personal narratives, critical introspections, and experience-based accounts that function as sources of data. The data gleaned from these narratives points to the understanding of Openness in Education as a complex, multilayered concept intricately woven into an array of values. These range from aspects such as sharing, access, flexibility, affordability, enlightenment, barrier-removal, empowerment, care, individual agency, trust, innovation, sustainability, collaboration, co-creation, social justice, equity, transparency, inclusivity, decolonization, democratisation, participation, liberty, and respect for diversity. This editorial, as a product of collective endeavour, invites its readers to independently engage with individual narratives, fostering the creation of unique interpretations. This call stems from the distinctive character of each narrative as they voice individual researchers’ perspectives from around the globe, articulating their insights within their unique situational contexts.