Top 30 Technologists, Transformers & Trailblazers of 2016

Top 30 Technologists, Transformers & Trailblazers of 2016

I was honored to learn that I have been named one of the Top 30 Technologists, Transformers & Trailblazers of 2016 by the Center for Digital Education (CDE). Each year, CDE recognizes K-20 education leaders who have transformed learning through the innovative use of technology in its annual Top 30 awards program and publication. Recognizing the Top 30 Technologists, Transformers and Trailblazers across America, CDE aims to honor pioneers in education technology and showcase the accomplishments and best practices of award winners. Nominations are judged on:

  • Efforts to improve education with digital tools
  • Impact of those efforts on student achievement; the institution; and the local, state and national scene
  • Creativity and initiative to make change
  • Display of leadership qualities

More details and a the complete listing of award winners are available at www.centerdigitaled.com/top30.

Keys Issues in Teaching and Learning for 2016

2016 Key Issues in Teaching and Learning Infographic

With a broad membership of over 350 institutions spanning a variety of Carnegie classifications, states, and several countries, EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI) is well aware that there’s significant power in community. This is why, for the past six years, ELI has surveyed its higher education community to determine key issues & opportunities in post-secondary teaching & learning.

ELI surveys every year the wildly complex landscape of teaching and learning. This year, over 900 of community members selected the most pressing issues to form a final list of 15. These key issues will serve as the framework, or focal points, for all of ELI’s discussions and programming throughout 2016. Here’s a listing of the Key Issues in Teaching & Learning for 2016 Infographic.

  1. Academic Transformation
  2. Faculty Development
  3. Assessment of Learning
  4. Online and Blended Learning
  5. Learning Analytics
  6. Learning Space Design
  7. Accessibility & Universal Design for Learning
  8. Open Educational Resources & Content
  9. Working with Emerging Technology
  10. Next Gen Digital Learning Environments (NGDLE) & Services
  11. Digital & Informational Literacies
  12. Adaptive Learning
  13. Mobile Learning
  14. Evaluating Tech-Based Instructional Innovations
  15. Evolution of the Profession

The high-resolution infographic is available here via Educause.

2015 #et4online Conference Preview

2015 Emerging Technologies Symposium

Recently, I had the opportunity to join my colleagues from the Online Learning Consortium (formerly Sloan-C), MERLOT, and the Emerging Technologies steering committee to share a sneak peek of what lies ahead at #et4online. We hung out to share details about the upcoming conference being held April 22-24, 2015 in Dallas, Texas.

Who attends #et4online?

who-attends-et4online

image c/o @brocansky

6 Reasons Why You Should Join Us for #et4online

Or hear what the #et4online Steering Committee Members have to say in our 1/30 Google+ Hangout ON AIR (recorded):
Michelle Pacansky-Brock Conference Chair – @brocansky
Jason Rhode, Assistant Conference Chair – @jasonrhode
Jane Moore, MERLOT Program Chair – @janepmoore
Laura Pasquini, OLC Program Chair – @laurapasquini

Here are just a few of the MANY highlights for the #et4online program that we shared:

  • The Unconference – dig into topics and direct the agenda as you like it
  • Technology Test Kitchen – a maker space to explore, play & learn for ed tech
  • Keynote & Plenary Speakers – talks about connection to learning, networked identity, collaborative knowledge, and then some
  • Featured Sessions & Workshops – are just a few of the program items NOT to miss and learn from
  • Discovery Sessions with VoiceThread – to augment interaction and learning between presenters and attendees
  • The Launch Pad & Teacher Tank- Where #edtech start ups can show case their wares to our Ed Tech “sharks.” Submission Deadline Closes February, 13, 2015 – apply now!

Interested in attending (virtual or on site)? Register TODAY! Early bird pricing ends on February 25, 2015. Do you have questions about the conference or program? Leave a comment or hit me up on Twitter @jasonrhode

2014 Inside Higher Ed Survey of Faculty Attitudes on Technology

Inside Higher Ed’s third annual survey of college and university faculty members and campus leaders in educational technology aims to understand how these groups perceive and practice online learning and other emerging opportunities for delivering course content.
Faculty Attitudes on Technology
Some of the questions addressed in the study are:

  • Can online courses achieve learning outcomes that are equivalent to in- person courses?
  • What are the most important quality indicators of an online education?
  • How does the quality of online courses compare with the quality of in- person courses?
  • To what extent have faculty members and technology administrators experienced online learning themselves, as students?
  • To what extent have faculty taught online, hybrid, and face-to-face courses? For those who have not taught online, why is that?
  • How supportive are institutions of online learning?
  • Which should cost the student more — online degree programs or those delivered face to face?
  • Who should be responsible for creating and marketing online degree programs?
  • Are institutions expanding online learning? Should they do so? To what extent do faculty feel that they are appropriately consulted in this decision- making process?
  • How do faculty use learning management systems (LMS) and early warning systems?

Snapshot of Findings

  • Few faculty members (9 percent) strongly agree that online courses can achieve student learning outcomes that are at least equivalent to those of in- person courses. Academic technology administrators are more likely (36 percent) to strongly agree with this statement.
  • Asked to rate the importance of factors reflecting quality in online education, faculty members and academic technology administrators alike say it is “very important” that an online course or program “provides meaningful interaction between students and instructors” (80 percent for faculty, 89 percent for administrators), “is offered by an accredited institution” (76 vs. 84 percent), “has been independently certified for quality” (66 vs. 52 percent), and “leads to academic credit” (50 vs. 68 percent).
  • While a larger proportion of technology officers than faculty members say online courses are of better quality than in-person courses in a set of eight areas, in neither group did any of the eight areas garner a majority reporting this view. But faculty members thought online courses could be at least as good as in-person
    during class and 77 percent of faculty say the same about the ability to reach “at-risk” students.
  • Very few faculty members (7 percent) believe the tuition for online courses should be higher than for face-to-face degree programs. A much smaller proportion of faculty who have taught online courses believe online courses should have a lower tuition than face- to-face programs (20 percent), while nearly half of their peers who have never taught an online course (48 percent) believe that this should be the case.
  • More technology administrators (53 percent) than faculty members (32 percent) have taken an online course for credit. Nearly half of those who have taught an online course (49 percent) have also taken an online course as a student, compared to less than a quarter (23 percent) of those who have never taught an online course.
  • About one in three professors say they have taught an online course, with some variation across position type. Among those who have never taught an online course, the three main reasons they give are never having been asked, not being interested, and not believing that online classes have educational value.
  • More than 8 in 10 instructors say they have converted a face-to-face course to a hybrid course. The majority report that this conversion decreased face-to-face time.
  • Half (51 percent) of faculty believe improving the educational experience for students by introducing more active learning in the course is a very important reason for converting face-to-face courses to blended or hybrid courses.
  • Nearly three-quarters of faculty believe that professors own the online course content and material they create.
  • Less than half of faculty and technology administrators strongly agree that their institution offer instructors strong support for online learning, as measured by eight indicators.
  • Nearly all professors (96 percent) agree that institutions should produce their own online degree programs and be responsible for marketing them (85 percent).
  • About one-third of faculty strongly agree that their institution is planning to expand online course offerings, though only about one-sixth strongly agree that their institution should do so. A larger proportion of those who have taught an online course than their peers who have never done so strongly agree to the above two statements. Most faculty do not feel that they have been appropriately involved with decision making surrounding the expansion of online course offerings.
  • A small fraction of faculty believe that spending on IT infrastructure (8 percent) and digital initiatives (7 percent) is too high. Faculty are split on whether spending in these areas are too low or just about right.
  • The majority of faculty always use learning management systems (LMS) to share syllabus information with students (78 percent), record grades (58 percent), and communicate with students (52 percent). Only 20 percent of faculty members always use the LMS for lecture capture.
  • Only 15 percent of faculty strongly agree that digital humanities has improved their teaching, 14 percent strongly agree that it has improved their institution, and 23 percent strongly agree that digital humanities has improved their research.
  • The vast majority of faculty (89 percent) say their institution uses an early warning system, and 81 percent believe that those warning systems help students make significant learning gains.

The full report can be downloaded here.

EDUCAUSE 2014 Study of Students and Information Technology

Since 2004, EDUCAUSE has partnered with higher education institutions to investigate the technologies that matter most to undergraduate students. In 2014, the EDUCAUSE Center for Analysis and Research technology survey was sent to approximately 1.5 million students at 213 institutions, yielding 75,306 responses across 15 countries. This year’s findings are based on a stratified random sample of 10,000 U.S. respondents and shed light on a number of topics.

Study 2014 Infographic

General student technology experiences and expectations

  • Technology is embedded into students’ lives, and students are generally inclined to use and to have favorable attitudes toward technology. However, technology has only a moderate influence on students’ active involvement in particular courses or as a connector with other students and faculty.
  • Students’ academic use of technology is widespread but not deep. They are particularly interested in expanding the use of a few specific technologies.
  • Most students look online or to family or friends for technology support. The minority who use institutional help desks report positive experiences.

Anytime, anywhere access to learning that is enabled by device proliferation

  • More students own mobile devices now than ever. Although students rate network performance as generally good, projected increases in connected devices could soon challenge even the most robust campus networks.
  • Many students use mobile devices for academic purposes. Their in-class use is more likely when instructors encourage such use; however, both faculty and students are concerned about their potential for distraction.

Learning environments

  • More students than ever have experienced a digital learning environment. The majority say they learn best with a blend of online and face-to-face work.
  • Undergraduates value the learning management system (LMS) as critical to their student experience but rarely make full use of it. Today’s undergraduates want a mobile-friendly, highly personalized, and engaging LMS experience.
  • Most students support institutional use of their data to advise them on academic progress in courses and programs. Many of the analytic functions students seek already exist in contemporary LMSs.
  • Few undergraduates have taken a massive open online course (MOOC). Students still view traditional college degrees as the gold standard for résumés. Few students would include digital badges, e-portfolios, or competency creden- tials on their résumés.

Although technology is omnipresent in the lives of students, leveraging technology as a tool to engage students is still evolving. We know from looking at longitudinal data from past student studies that students still have a complex relationship with tech- nology; they recognize its value, but they still need guidance when it comes to using technology in meaningful and engaging ways for academics. Students are still ready to use their mobile devices more for academics, but we haven’t yet seen widespread application of this. Students also still prefer blended learning environments, and their expectations are increasing for these hybrid online/face-to-face experiences.

The following study materials and resources are available: