Good morning and welcome to the first day of our discussion on “How can technology transform adult education and current practice?”
We are very lucky to have adult education and technology experts Art Graesser and David Rosen to facilitate a discussion aimed at answering this question in the LINCS Community’s Technology and Learning group.
Drs. Graesser and Rosen will share their reflections on the draft report recently released on LINCS: Connected Teaching and Personalized Learning: Implications of the National Education Technology Plan (NETP) for Adult Education, produced through a contract with the American Institutes for Research (AIR).
To guide the discussion, we will concentrate on different sections of the report on each day of the discussion
Detailed Schedule of Discussion Topics:
· Tuesday – Wednesday, August 13-14 – Topic: Learning (discussion will be cross-posted to Disabilities in Adult Education group)
· Thursday, August 15 – Topic: Assessment (discussion will be cross-posted to Formative Assessment group)
· Friday – Saturday, August 16-17 – Topic: Teaching (discussion will be cross-posted to Evidence-based Professional Development group)
· Sunday – Monday, August 18-19 – Topic: Productivity and Infrastructure (discussion will be cross-posted to the Program Management group)
Please join us in the LINCS Community to share your comments! Those who are not yet registered for the LINCS Community will need to create an account to join the discussion.
Related Documents and Resources:
· National Education Technology Plan 2010: Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology
· AIR’s Open Education Resources to Support Adult STEM Teaching and Learning Project
About the LINCS Community Discussion: The report has been reviewed by two experts in adult education and technology: Art Graesser and David Rosen, who will initiate a discussion about the report during the week of August 13-19, 2013 in the LINCS Community’s Technology and Learning group. Dr. Art Graesser is a professor in the Department of Psychology and an adjunct professor in Computer Science at the University of Memphis. Dr. David Rosen, president of Newsome Associates, conducts education and evaluation consulting for adult education. Please join the Technology and Learning group in the LINCS Community to actively participate in this important discussion.
About the 2010 NETP Report: The 2010 NETP report titled Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology, upon which the NETP Implications for Adult Education report is based, was produced by the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Technology. The 2010 report outlines five goals and describes corresponding recommendations to address Learning, Assessment, Teaching, Infrastructure, and Productivity.
About the Project: The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Vocational and Adult Education, through a contract with the American Institutes for Research for the Open Education Resources to Support Adult STEM Teaching and Learning project, is pleased to announce the Connected Teaching and Personalized Learning: Implications of the National Education Technology Plan (NETP) for Adult Education (2013). The purpose of this project is to develop new and innovative ways to improve the teaching and learning of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) content in adult education using open educational resources (OERs). The project also aims to increase awareness of and access to quality STEM OERs for adult educators by gathering appropriate resources and developing courses to train educators on STEM OERs. You can find the project decription at http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/sectech/factsheet/open-education-resources-stem-teaching.html (OVAE's web page) and to the project description document directly: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/AdultEd/factsh/open-education-resources-stem-teaching.pdf.
For more information about the Connected Teaching and Personalized Learning: Implications of the National Education Technology Plan (NETP) for Adult Education report or the OER STEM project, contact Project Director Dahlia Shaewitz at dshaewitz@air.org.
Bios:
Dr. Art Graesser is a professor in the Department of Psychology and an adjunct professor in Computer Science at the University of Memphis. Dr. Graesser received his Ph.D. in psychology from the University of California at San Diego. His primary research interests are in cognitive science, discourse processing, and the learning sciences. More specific interests include knowledge representation, question asking and answering, tutoring, text comprehension, inference generation, conversation, reading, education, memory, artificial intelligence, and human-computer interaction. He served as editor of the journal Discourse Processes (1996–2005) and is the current editor of Journal of Educational Psychology. He is president of the Society for Text and Discourse and past president of Artificial Intelligence in Education. In addition to publishing approximately 500 articles in journals, books, and conference proceedings, he has written two books and edited nine books (one being the Handbook of Discourse Processes). He and his colleagues have designed, developed, and tested cutting-edge software in learning, language, and discourse technologies, including AutoTutor, AutoCommunicator, HURA Advisor, SEEK Web Tutor, MetaTutor, Operation ARIES!, Coh-Metrix, Question Understanding Aid (QUAID), QUEST, and Point&Query.
David J. Rosen was the Director of the Adult Literacy Resource Institute/SABES Greater Boston Regional Support Center, sponsored by the University of Massachusetts Boston, from 1986 to 2003. As an independent consultant since 2003, he has provided consulting and professional development services to:
• The Philadelphia Youth Network, Youth Essential Services and the Center for Literacy for workshop presentations on GED2014®
• The Massachusetts System for Adult Basic Education Support to design and offer for teachers in central Massachusetts technology training and professional development modules on integrating technology
• Portland State University (Oregon) as a Regional implementation Advisor and trainer for the national Learner Web project, a blended learning model used by community colleges, One Stop Career Centers, and ABE programs in 10 states.
• Literacy Partners, a community-based adult literacy program in New York City, to assist with a shift to managed enrollment, and to integrate instructional technology
• Georgia State University’s Center for the Study of Adult Literacy
• A partnership of international funders of children’s literacy on the design of an international competition to advance children’s reading skills through the use of technology
• YouthBuild International for a multi-year vocational training program for out-of-school youth in Haiti, including establishment of digital literacy centers in YouthBuild vocational training centers
Dr. Rosen has also made many presentations and keynote speeches at national and state adult education conferences on integrating technology in adult education. A complete list of these will be found in his resume at http://newsomeassociates.com
Comments
David and others,
I totally agree with the vision of a portal you have sketched. We are in perfect harmony on this.
The CSAL Center (Daphne Greenberg) is taking some initial steps by conducting some of the surveys of the teachers and tutors of adult learners. The Portal would need a comment facility for practicianers to provide feedback, as well as the adult learners and researchers. CSAL is a research center rather than a service center so there needs to be a government sponsor or group of sponsors (no doubt including OVAE).
Debra,
I too teach a multilevel ABE/GED class it is a struggle
I have tried and failed on a few online freebee programs some are good. i.e. Khanacademy.org, MyEFA.org and a growing list of others. I tell my students that they are a special class that is helping me discover and test programs for GED students that can be used by other classes in the district. So far they are buying it and it keeps them somewhat engaged.
My needs are:
Prue
Prue,
I think you've identified a reasonable list of expectations for a national online portal/tool for ABE skill building. I am especially drawn to the idea of the virtual homeroom because I think it could provide an opportunity for collaboration amongst learners in discussion boards/chat rooms, especially important if your list describes what is needed of an online distance learning environment.
Effective distance learning requires a range of diverse interactions including both social interaction and individual independent work. Interaction could/should include learner-to-learner and learner-to-instructor interaction in addition to more independent activities provided in most proprietary online learning tools (Askov et al., 2003, p. 67). This idea comes from constructivist learning theory, where “the learner actively imposes organization and meaning on the surrounding environment and constructs knowledge in the process” (Driscoll, 2012, p. 40). Constructivist learning is a desirable approach to online and distance learning because it places the learner in the center of making meaning. For this to occur, two things need to be present: opportunities for interaction with other learners and a high degree of involvement of the instructor in the role of facilitator. Interaction with other learners creates socially constructed knowledge and can occur when students interact with classmates in working groups via email or on asynchronous discussion boards (Askov et al., 2003). Like what we are doing right now!
Similarly, in a study of adults studying Spanish online, Furnborough (2012) found that collaborative interaction builds interdependence, and that interdependence (rather than complete independence) best builds the autonomy required for persistence and motivation in distance language learning courses. The idea is that learners learn by watching and engaging with others who participate, and they are (hopefully/perhaps?) more motivated to participate in such learning. Consequently, the goal of online courses and their facilitators, Furnborough asserts, should be to foster interdependent autonomy, rather than independence, by encouraging opportunities for interaction amongst learners. Teachers become facilitators who encourage collaboration. No one gets to hide or just click through m/c and fill-in-the-blank exercises.
I think this is an attainable expectation for online learning opportunities for ABE learners. Face-to-face support in labs can scaffold tech skills needed to support such interaction (Silver-Pacquilla and Reder, 2008). As a bonus, learning how to communicate online while learning academic skills might prepare learners for the real-life web tasks in which web-proficient adult workers and college students engage.
Jen
Askov, E., Johnston, J., Petty, L., & Young, S. (2003). Expanding access to adult literacy with online distance education. Cambridge: National Center for the Study of Adult Learning and Literacy. Retrieved from http://www.ncsall.net/fileadmin/resources/research/op_askov.pdf
Driscoll, M. (2012). Psychological foundations of instructional design. In R. Reiser & J. Dempsey (Eds.), Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology (3rd ed., pp. 35–44). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc.
Furnborough, C. (2012). Making the most of others: autonomous interdependence in adult beginner distance language learners. Distance Education, 33(1), 99–116. doi:10.1080/01587919.2012.667962
Silver-Pacquilla, H., & Reder, S. (2008). Investigating the Language and Literacy Skills Required for Independent Online Learning.
Jenifer,
Thanks for your research and comments. I will refer to it.
I just finished teaching an Intermediate ESOL class at the Queens Library in LIC, NY. The results were an eye opener and it will guide me in my next class in the fall. I am happy that I have a supportive manager that allowed me to teach this class with laptops available to them so that blended learning was possiblle. The goal of blended learning is to empower the students to continue their English practice outside of the classroom. In our next teachers' meeting, I will discuss my findings and also provide tools so that other teachers can use them.
This LINC conversation that we have been having in the last few days, I think is great and I thank David and Art (and Nell) for having it. But are we preaching to the converted? The question to ask is, how do we engage the non-techie teachers that will be the facilitators for their students? CCSS is coming to ESOL/ABE/Pre-GED/GED, if it is not here already, with its requirement for integrating technology. The technology and the choices that are available are overwhelming. I know in using a wiki for my class, I kept asking myself, was that the best one? Or should I have used a blog? Or should I have used "Schoology" or some other all-in-one system like that? Too many choices for me to evaluate. And yet I expect my associates to be asking me for best practices and help in their getting started.
I think this discussion should continue and maybe expanded beyond commenting on the AIR "Connected Teaching and Personalized Learning" report. And more importantly, how do we bring along all the teachers (and associated infrastructure, i.e. managers) on this journey to "flip the adult classroom" (personalized learning) with blended learning (ICT v2.0)?
Regards,
Harry
Thanks Harry, and of course, you are right. The people in this discussion are at least interested in incorporating technology; many are doing it well; and some are experts. Since we are on the topic of professional development, since you asked about this in an earlier message, and since I have devoted many years to providing professional development myself, I have a few comments on this.
When I was first becoming interested in using computers in adult/out-of-school youth education what skyrocketed my interest, and the interest of a handful of colleagues, some of whom are probably in this discussion today, was intensive, sustained, hands-on professional development over time. Once a month, all day, for many months we went to a K-12 technology center where in the morning a fabulous professional development and technology expert demonstrated software that he thought had potential for adult education. In the afternoon we each had access to a computer with all the software loaded, where we could hands-on, individually or in pairs, learn more about the software we were interested in. It was a costly model. The Massachusetts Department of Education at the time apparently could afford it. It may not be replicable for many adult education teachers now, but I can tell you it worked!
We need professional development models in integrating technology that are sustained over time, hands on, and that include demonstration, practice, time for trying them out with students and opportunities for individual and group reflection. Perhaps this professional development can now be done at a distance, or as a blended model. There is a need -- and for many adult education teachers now -- a hunger for these models. I hope the NETP Adult Education report might address that head on.
If we don't address professional development in a serious way, and if we do get funding for hardware and software, I can predict -- based on others' experiences in K12, higher ed and adult ed -- the hardware and software will be a disappointment; it won't be used, or at least used well.
While I admire the NETP, and think this report on it is substantial, it is critically important that we see some new resources as a result, or the time spent may have been wasted. Of course, hardware and software is important, but equally important -- and more likely to be ignored by funders -- is sustained (and costly) professional development.
David J. Rosen
djrosen@newsomeassociates,com
Harry and others,
The number of alternative technologies has become overwhelming. We need a Consumer Reports for software, with lists of alternatives, features, capabilities, and feedback from teachers and tutors. Ease of use needs to be considered if the technology is to be used by a large number of people. Newcomers are frightened off when the systems are too complex to install and use. As expressed earlier, some systems are motivating but don't help learning of complex material. The different forms of media are also changing rapidly, which adds to the complexity. My generation uses email whereas the young generation uses chat. Few people blog, more tweet, and many do Facebook. Wiki is too complex for some folks. Who knows where the social media will be a year from now?
Drawing new people in can be accomplished by the peer approach mentioned in the NETP Report and the comments of many of us. So pair a learning tech savvy teacher with one who is not. The community can grow that way.
Hi Art et al:
This has been a great discussion so far and I really appreciate everyone's input to the report, in particular the challenges brought up by teachers on the front lines who actually have to implement the technology. I think that what has been mentioned in this particular line of posts--the overhwelming amount of technology--demands an approach to: searching for technology, identifying the right tool for a given situation, managing those tools and resources in some type of sharable web-based format, evaluating those tools for applicability in the adult learner environment, getting those tools into the hands of learners to support self-directed learning, and updating those resources in a fast-changing technological environment. There are tools that are approaching this, like the social bookmarking sites, personal blogs and websites, etc. But we haven't figure out the best way yet.
I think having an oline portal such as that mentioned above, perhaps sponsored by OVAE, would require ongoing updates by a crew of not onlyl tech-savvy trend-watchers, but a slew of teachers providing input to the evaluation, use, applicability, etc. of those resources. I can imagine a colalborative place like this--much like wikipedia--where some folks spend a lot of time, some just come to visit and learn, etc.
Thanks for some inspiring conversation!
Best, Dahlia
Dahlia Shaewitz
dshaewitz@air.org
Hi all,
There are a couple of sites that can help when looking for new online tools to use. They don't focus on adult ed and the need for a repository for more specific information on using tech for adult ed is a much needed addition to the field.
But for now three sites I have found useful are:
http://www.iear.org/ "A community effort to grade educational apps" (for iPads) Teachers write their own reviews of apps including grade level adn subject areas
http://www.go2web20.net/ A web application index with rich tagging process that makes the search process less arduous.
http://c4lpt.co.uk/top100tools/ Top 100 Tools for Learning as voted on by educators around the world. Includes descriptions of how people have used the tools. Twitter has been number 1 for several years. And you can help the selection for the top 100 tools for 2013. http://c4lpt.co.uk/top100tools/voting/.
best,
Nell
Jen,
Collaboration and interdependence (rather than independence) is indeed an activity that helps motivation and lowers attrition. It also helps learning if done in productive ways. Collaborative learning and collaborative problems solving have only recently been explored in depth. This should be an important research initiative. Again PISA is assessing collaborative problem solving in 2015 -- several dozen countries. How will US compare to other countries?
Excellent references.
Prue,
Yes indeed these needs need to be filled. Not only a learning management system, but also facilities for social networking, commenting, sustaining a community, E-Portfolio's, and so on.
One important addition are messages from peers, techers, tutors, or "the system" that nudges them or engages them when they are dropping oput. Retention is a problem with the adult learners. We know that attrition is extremely high with MOOCs. So the adult learners need to be nudged and when they do become active there needs to be a response by someone or the system (interactivity). The system could act when people don't through intelligent agents.
Hi Art,
Could you say more about what intelligent agents are, where someone might see an example, and how these can be used?
David
David J. Rosen
djrosen@newsomeassociates.com
David and others,
Great question. Let me start with the simplest of intelligent agents and get more complex.
1. The simplest of agent is just a message that is sent by the computer system in email or chat under specific conditions. For example, the learning management system at the University of Memphis and elsewhere (Desire2Learn) has afeature called "Intelligent Agent" that automatically sends an email to student under conditions decided by the instructor (not attending for 3 classes in a row, a reminder of an upcoming paper being due, a student who misses and exam). This is the most likely use of intelligent agent agents in the near future.
2. A more complex intelligent agent would look like a person (perhaps a static image) and be a print message. For example, there is some cyber agent called Dave in a recent operating system by Microsoft. Dave sends messages under a complex set of conditions.
3. Another layer of intelligent agent is the conversational agents, with talking heads and possibly full bodies (Microsoft Agents were among the first, but now there are much better text-to-speech engines and visual depictions). I mentioned some examples of these the first day, such as AutoTutor, ISTART, Operation ARA, Deep Tutor, Guru Tutor, and so on. Some of these hold conversations with the learner in natural language. Also groups of agents can interact with each other and model patterns of social interaction. The virtual humans also respond to learner emotions and display emotions.
4. Yet another level is intelligent agents in virtual worlds. The Institute of Creative Technologies at USC (http://ict.usc.edu/prototypes) has many of these and has been funded by the army for nearly $100 million. The Tactical Language and Culture System by Lewis Johnson has been used to help people learn languages in other cultures. It is an open question as to when these virtual worlds will be more accessible, but virtual worlds with avatars already are widespread in commercial games. The avatars in virtual world games are more scripted than intelligent currently, but this is changing.