�Ӱ�ԭ��

By Nestor B. Querido, CUOL Supervisor

This is the third and final blog in a three-part series about technology. Read and .

So where is our society heading? You decide. Maybe the question should be: how did we did get into this predicament? Somebody said, “You try to do more to earn more, and you end up on an accelerating treadmill.” Is technology controlling us? Aren’t technologies supposed to help us get more work done to give us more time? Where does all the “extra” time go?

In higher education, we are not as inclined and adept at embracing technology at first. Academics are cautious in incorporating technology into the classroom without proper evaluations and analysis to make sure the risks are worth the pay out – the desired learning outcomes.

An on Feb. 4, 2014 noted:

“Lord Puttnam said that many higher education academics are “dragging their heels” when it comes to educational change. He put the reluctance down to fear of status loss and fear of job loss prompted by a potential future generation of “super professors” who will challenge traditional methods of teaching.”

Almost 15 years ago, a report was published that suggested: “Almost half of the colleges and universities in Canada do not offer any online courses and that, even amongst those that do, there is not an extensive menu of online courses.” (Cuneo, 2000, p. 4). Now, reality has set in and this is changing. The recent is pushing for more online courses from the Ontario colleges and universities. At �Ӱ�ԭ��, along with the 100 or so online courses offered at CUOL, funded under the OOI umbrella are being offered this fall.

But how far will the use of technologies in digital learning go? If we compare the use of technologies in education and entertainment, there is still an increasing gap growing between the two. This trend will likely continue unless the infrastructure and programs to support digital learning are accentuated in academia.

The notion that academic institutions may become “edutainment” and that hypermedia is for entertainment only is a fallacy. It is difficult to expect the young generation to deviate from their interest in digital games if learning institutions do not find ways to adopt these technologies in higher education.

said, “We are watching a massively disruptive evolution within education, possibly for the first time in 100 years.” He continued, “A lot of people are finding that very uncomfortable, but on balance it’s remarkable and potentially very good.”

In the recent conference this year, one of the topics discussed was whether millennial students who were born into the digital world demand courses that are offered online. The future outlook for education seems to be pointing towards that direction – automation. One of the presenters said he believes technology will become a major paradigm shifter in education. There would be an initial period of trepidation as technology becomes integrated, but he said eventually, “We will see automated curriculum software linking into monitoring software, keeping tabs on pupils abilities, pushing them just enough and recording the outcomes. All automatically.”

An interesting note to point out: If “” is now a concept, how possible is it for some academic assessments to be completely automated? CUOL’s distance students have been involved with online assessment using cuLearn and a handful of instructors are using online assessment tools in cuLearn.

Furthermore, one particularly striking note mentioned at the NCTA conference about the future of education was the for most of the remedial curriculum, since all materials and content are readily available online, similar to current automated grading for computer-based tests. Moreover, future institutions could become “validating institutions” with no faculty or buildings, but rather MOOC “content commons”; prior learning assessment programs; credit by examination programs; badges/digital credentials in place of seat time/credits, etc. These were some of the stimulating and thought-provoking – though controversial – subjects and trends in education discussed at the sessions and they present some downsides—or upsides, depending on which way you look at it—towards technological shifts.

We are seeing these shifts happening today. Educational technologies continue to infiltrate schools, graduating from chalk and blackboards to electronic whiteboards; from paper to computers; from data and record archival library rooms to massive digital storage. in Alberta, formally created in 1978, now has over 40,000 students and is still growing. All classes are held online with no buildings to house the students! The University of London’s , which was founded in 1969, had over 253,000 students worldwide back in 2009-10. Many are professionals taking remedial/certification online courses. Both AU and Open University online students residing in the Ottawa area and neighbouring towns are invigilated at the newly renovated managed by CUOL. �Ӱ�ԭ�� 1,500 from AU and 210 from UK are proctored annually.

We need to take heed on the trends and changes in technology, otherwise we may become a fatality to the flurries of technological changes.

On August 6, 2006, to some of the basic features of the software that powers online education. This prompted angry backlash from the academic computing community, which is fighting back in techie fashion — through online petitions to help make its case.

I can’t help but also mention that the picture-perfect example of unwanted consequence is Eastman Kodak. Founded in 1880, Eastman Kodak was known for its pioneering technology and innovative marketing. They invented the very in 1975, and yet today their camera-making business is dying – a misplaced strategy to deal with their own invention.

So, there you go. The demand for technological transformation in global education is streaming through every nook of the global community—though gradual and uniquely directed, it’s out there, and there’s no turning back. In short, though the latest flow of educational technology is maybe too narrow and eclectic to have proved its worth definitively, it is just a matter of time before the different ‘channels and straits’ are patched together and channelled accordingly.

Postman wrote, “Surrounding every technology are institutions whose organization – not to mention their reason for being – reflects the world-view promoted by technology. Therefore when a new technology assaults an old one, institutions are threatened. When institutions are threatened, a culture finds itself in crises. This is serious business, which is why we learn nothing when educators ask, ‘Will students learn mathematics better by computers than by textbooks?’”

Finally, I want to finish by quoting Postman one more time, and perhaps set the proper tone for using technology in education. “What we need to consider about the computer has nothing to do with its efficiency as a teaching tool. We need to know in what ways it is altering our conception of learning, and how in conjunction with television it undermines the old idea of school.”

References:

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly, The surrender of culture to technology. NewYork: Vintage Books

Carl Cuneo (with Brian Campbell, Craig Foye, Julia Herzog, Edward O’Hara, and Laila Bastedo) (2000) The Underbelly of Online Learning in Canadian Post-Secondary Education. A special report for the Multimedia and Learning Division of Industry Canada.

Pellish, M. (2014). Conference, Online Learning: Today and Tomorrow, �Ӱ�ԭ�� University, Ottawa: August 28, 2014

NCTA Conference, (2014). Mining for Success, Denver, CO: September 3-6, 2014

Online References: