George Veletsianos, PhD

Author: George Veletsianos Page 26 of 82

Digital Transformation in BC Higher Education

By

On June 10, 2019

In sharing

I’m working on a report examining the digital transformation of Education in Canada, and more specifically in BC. I thought others might be interested in relevant information that is contained within the 2018/19 – 2021/22 service plan produced by the BC Ministry of Advanced Education, Skills and Training.

The service plan includes the following relevant goals and objectives

  • Goal 2: Learners are supported to achieve their full potential with accessible, affordable and equitable education and training opportunities
    • Objective 2.1: Ensure affordable access to post-secondary education and skills training
    • Objective 2.2: Respond and adapt to the diverse and changing needs of learners
  • Goal 3: Ensure a high quality and relevant post-secondary education and skills training system that provides the services people count onfor good-paying jobs and opportunities to reach their full potential
    • Objective 3.1: Build on current strengths to enhance the quality and relevance of the post-secondary education and training system
    • Objective 3.2: Empower learners, educators, industry and government to make informed decisions

Relevant strategies listed include include the following

  • Ensure access to post-secondary education by providing operating funding to support public post-secondary education delivery throughout the province.
  • Provide tuition-free Adult Basic Education and English Language Learning programs for domestic students.
  • Continue to advance the development of free digital open textbooks and open education resources.
  • Provide learners hands-on experience to explore a variety of careers, as well as valuable information on high-demand jobs offered by employers in specific regions and throughout B.C. through the Find Your Fit Tour
  • Leverage digital technology options to cost-effectively expand the ability for post-secondary institutions to deliver education and training programs to more rural and remote communities
  • Support B.C.’s comprehensive transfer system that enables students to easily transfer courses and credits across the public post-secondary system.
  • Continue to ensure a seamless transition of students from the K – 12 system into post-secondary education and training.
  • Maintain a two per cent annual cap on tuition and mandatory fee increases at all public post-secondary institutions.
  • Provide programs, services, tools and resources for those who are struggling to gain a foothold in the job market through targeted programs for youth, Indigenous persons, persons with disabilities and women in the trades to help them to gain needed skills and secure sustainable employment.
  • Under a new Canada-B.C. Workforce Development Agreement ensure vulnerable, unemployed, and under-employed people can access skills training needed for good paying jobs.
  • Develop, in partnership with the post-secondary system, a single, unified application system to make it easier for students to plan, search and apply to public post-secondary institutions in B.C.
  • Partner with employers and economic sectors to deliver skills upgrading to employees.
  • Work with other provincial ministries and partners to ensure B.C. students have the skills, experience and creativity that they need for careers that support the tech industry
  • Ensure the best available labour market information is used to align skills training priorities with labour market needs.
  • Continue to share labour market information on WorkBC.ca using innovative platforms and social media to help all British Columbians make informed education, training and career decisions and to promote entrepreneurship


Strategies for addressing the Canadian post-secondary sector crisis

By

On June 4, 2019

In flexible learning, future education, futures, Ideas

I was on a flight from Toronto to Vancouver on Saturday morning, and spent some of my time thinking about the strategies that Tony Bates believes may be helpful in addressing the coming crisis in Canadian post-secondary education.

I share Tony’s qualms concerning the future of higher education in Canada. In this post, I am going to share some thoughts in response to one question that he raised: What other suggestions would you have for making our institutions more relevant for a digital age?

People sitting on grass having a conversation
People sitting – by Ben Duchac on Unsplash

Before I go further, I should clarify two points:

I agree with Tony that we need radical curricular reform and compulsory training for every faculty member on how to teach. I also agree that we need new digital universities, which incidentally says nothing about the appetite for and/or challenges of such an endeavour. I imagine that Tony calls for new digital universities because a blank canvas offers space room for new/different ideas than revisiting henceforth established practices. While the BC government is exploring such a feat with the expansion of post-secondary opportunities on Vancouver Island’s West shore, these opportunities aren’t bountiful. So, within the existing system, what may be some strategies for current universities beyond the ones that Tony proposes?

1. A team-based approach to every course. A team-based approach invites the knowledge and expertise of multiple groups of people to the design and development of a course. For instance, this might involve every single course employing the services of an instructional designer in a meaningful way. To truly involve an instructional designer, as opposed to merely asking for input that may or may not be taken up, we need to restructure course design, development, and evaluation practices. At a fundamental level, this requires involving faculty, instructional designers, learning scientists, evaluation consultants, and media professionals in what is typically a solo approach.

What problem does this address? Improving teaching and learning. This proposal works in conjunction with Tony’s recommendation to provide compulsory training in digital learning. Such training will be invaluable in the act of teaching and facilitation, and will be helpful in having conversations with a team of professionals about course design, but we need to do more.

2. An education that is flexible to the needs of society. Our institutions are often grounded on structures that invite students to fit neatly within a template that we’ve created (e.g., courses start in September) or make drastic changes to their lives in order to fit that template (e.g., moving to a different city).

How much flexibility is there in typical degree programs? How many courses are electives? In how many courses do students select from a menu of assignments, assessments, or outcomes? This is not to satisfy mere preferences but to provide education that is responsive to needs and and realities that people face – people who have multiple and competing responsibilities.

I’ll use the practice of flexible admissions here to illustrate. Imagine someone who ended their undergraduate studies ten years ago in order to care for a family member. Or someone who holds a diploma and has been working in their chosen profession for the last 15 years. Or, someone who holds multiple diplomas and has 3 years of work experience. Now imagine these three individuals desiring further learning through an undergraduate or graduate degree. Institutions that are relevant to the needs of society should be able to offer paths to credentials that not only recognize prior coursework, but value prior experiences, learning, and knowledge. We know that universities do not have a monopoly on learning and knowledge and that a classroom of people from diverse backgrounds may provide an enriching learning experience for all. Why then exclude learners who may not have followed a typical path to learning? Flexible admissions policies address this issue by providing alternative paths to education. While some universities in Canada do this (including Royal Roads University, UOIT, and Athabasca University), flexible admissions that recognize prior learning, competence, effort, and accomplishments are not the norm.

What problem does this address? Life is complicated and many people follow non-linear paths to education either by choice or due to forces outside of their control. A relevant higher education institution is inclusionary, and flexibility is one approach to eradicating exclusionary and limiting practices.

This area requires caution: There might be a tendency here to eliminate student barriers without concomitantly providing supports that will enable students to succeed. One form of flexibility for example may be a self-designed, self-paced, and self-guided program of study that imagines students as individualistic and autonomous individuals who succeed without institutional and societal support.

3. Rapid engagement. Imagine that your institution wishes to launch a new program, perhaps an MA degree on Indigenous Knowledge or Educational Entrepreneurship or Critical Animal Studies or FinTech or Climate Emergency or any sort of programming that is new to your institution. Is it possible to go from concept to launch in matter of a few months? Probably not at present, but that’s what we should be striving for. To do so we need to eliminate bureaucracies that impede innovation both at the institutional level, but also at the provincial level (where programs are approved). This is not to say that institutions should strive to chase the next high-enrolling program or to abandon the deep critical work that universities do, but to say that innovation is a staple – a characteristic even – of universities, and we should strive to reduce the barriers facing it. Removing such barriers may also do something else: it might enable academia to set the stage for discussion rather than respond to a discussion.

What problem does this address? Slow responsiveness to changing societal needs and barriers to innovation.

There’s little in the notes above regarding research, commitment to research, affordability, social justice, and so on, which are issues that I believe are also at the core of this conversation. Over to you: What are your thoughts, recommendations, and suggestions on this topic?

In education, what can be made more flexible?

By

On May 27, 2019

In flexible learning, future education, futures, instructional design, my research, scholarship, sharing

Even though flexibility and flexible learning most usually focus on enabling learners some degree of control and freedom over the location, time, and pace of their online studies (hence the terms “anytime anyplace” learning), flexibility may be applied to a wide range of pedagogical and institutional practices. Here’s some examples:

  • Flexible assessments (e.g., providing learners with “a menu” of assessment options to select from. Dr. Joan Hughes for instance allows students to complete a proportion of pre-determined set of badges in her course. This could also apply to assignment deliverables, wherein some students, for example, may produce essays while others may create videos)
  • Flexible admissions (e.g., providing multiple admission paths. For instance, at Royal Roads University students who do not hold an undergraduate degree may apply for admission under a flexible path that asks them to demonstrate how prior coursework and experience has prepared them for graduate study)
  • Flexible “attendance” (e.g., providing learners to attend class based on their emerging needs. Dr. Valerie Irvine for instance calls this multi-access learning; a situation where a face-to-face classroom is set up in a way that allows learners to choose whether they can attend in f2f or online mode, and to make that decision as needs arise/change).
  • Flexible pacing, not only with respect to activities pertaining to a course, but also with respect to program pacing (e.g., start-end dates).
  • Flexible exit pathways. While flexible admissions refers to an entry pathway, exit pathways refer to how learners choose to finalize their program (e.g., thesis vs. coursework vs. work-integrated learning project options).
  • Flexible coursework options. This is the option where students have some control about the courses they enroll in. Imagining this on a continuum, on the one end students have no option of electives and at the other end students create their own unique interdisciplinary degrees. Typically, students have electives that they select, though that option could be made more flexible through, for example, allowing learners to choose electives from institutions/organizations other than their own.
  • Flexible course duration and flexible course credits. At the typical institution, courses last for X weeks and are worth Y credits (e.g., semester-long and 3-credits, or some variation of the 3-credit system including 1-credit, 6-credits and so on). Flexibility could be applied to this form of structure as well, with course duration and credit dependent on learning needs vis-a-vis a predetermined calendar/schedule. One could imagine for example a 2-credit course, or a 1.5-credit course within a university that typically offers 3-credit courses.

While there’s benefits to flexibility, such as empowering learners through greater agency, I am not arguing for flexibility to embedded in all of these forms. There’s philosophical questions to explore. And practical concerns that need to be overcome: Student information systems for example, might prevent the creation of fractional-credit courses, as I’m certain many of of you know.

What are some other ways that institutions, courses, learning design practices, and education more broadly can be made more flexible?


What does a radically different future of higher ed look like?

By

On May 13, 2019

In sharing

tl;dr There’s no real answers in this post, so if you’re looking for an actual future in this particular post, you’ll be disappointed.

In a recent paper around “flexible learning” (pdf) we argued that what is often described as an accommodating approach to online learning (aka flexible offerings that allow students who work and who have a family to complete their studies) may end up being oppressive (aka in addition to all other responsibilities, individuals are asked to make space for study, to upskill, to reskill, to efficiently fill in the remaining time that is remains in those paltry 24 hours with more productive activities… after work is done, after the family is fed, and so on). In other words, to pursue more education, the individual student is asked to be more flexible. To do more.

This, along with other work that I’ve been following, like Catherine Cronin’s and Laura Czerniewicz’s reflections from OER19, raise many questions about what a radically different future of education looks like. If, as some believe, there isn’t much difference between public higher ed and for-profit higher ed, then what does a public higher ed that is radically different look like?

  • Would it look to alternative areas to support one’s studies rather than the individual? In the example above, the onus on the individual invites one to subscribe to a particular ideological position. Why shouldn’t the employer make space for the employee’s study? Why is the individual asked to be flexible and not the employer?
  • What does teaching look like in this radical future? Who does it, and why? How do we harness field expertise, pedagogical expertise, and digital expertise without requiring instructors to be experts in all of these areas?
  • What do courses look like?
  • What is the role of instructional designers in developing visions for the future and how does one ensure that their voices are heard and valued in this conversation?
  • In a radically different future, are institutions “selective” or do they they open their doors wide?
  • In this future, do all institutions look alike? In proposing a radical future, should we be proposing multiple futures?
  • Whose interests are being served in radically different futures?
  • What would higher ed look like if it were more kind, more inclusive, more equitable?

Zed Creds at Royal Roads

By

On May 7, 2019

In oer, open, Royal Roads University, sharing, z-degree, zed cred

There’s a lot of work happening in the province of BC around OER and Zed Creds/Degrees, much of it facilitated by government funding, the expert guidance of BCCampus, and early adopters such as Kwantlen Polytechnic University.

With my colleagues Elizabeth Childs and Jo Axe, we’ve been slowly transitioning our MA and Graduate Diploma in Learning and Technology into Zed Creds. A press release yesterday announced that we completed the process.

For our students, this means no textbooks to purchase and greater transparency on the full cost of their program.

For our faculty, this means more freedoms to work with OER than with copyrighted materials to achieve desired outcomes.

For the field of educational technology, this means that we now have an example of an MA degree that is completely textbook-free and mostly OER-based. Zed Degrees aren’t just for other disciplines and aren’t just for diplomas/certificates.

So you want to publish your #edtech or digital learning book in an open access format?

By

On April 2, 2019

In future education, oer, online learning, open, scholarship, work

Every now and then someone asks me whether I know of any non-commercial publishers that don’t charge thousands of dollars in OA fees to publish open access books in the field. In this post, I’ll share two such efforts that I support:

  1. A new venue for your open access book publishing in our area is EdTechBooks.org Not only is this project ingenious, I believe it will quickly scale and grow into something extraordinary. I have a long personal and professional connection to the people running this project, so take that prediction with a grain of salt. If you’re interested in publishing with them, contact them at admin@edtechbooks.org
  2. Athabasca University Press publishes the award-winning Issues in Distance Education book series. Partly because AU Press is one of the few university presses that publish books in open access formats in our field and partly because I’d like to help expand the conversations that we are having in our field I recently agreed to co-edit this series with Dr. Terry Anderson. If you’re interested in publishing with AU Press feel free to contact me. As far as my personal interests go, I am keen to support and see more books from:
  • Under-represented authors, such as women and people of color, whose perspectives and research on topics pertaining to digital education challenge the dominant ways of thinking.
  • Authors who are interrogating various aspects of the history of the field.
  • Authors who are conducting rich ethnographic work (e.g., What’s life like as an instructional designer? What’s it like at an online program management company?)
  • Authors who are conducting critical investigations of various aspects of the field, such as for example, interrogating discourses pertaining to online learning, or interrogating issues relating to power and privilege.
  • Authors whose work provides practical recommendations for addressing the significant challenges and tensions that our community is facing.


Are there any other non-commercial open access publishers in the area that you would recommend?

Royal Roads joins MITx MicroMasters pathway

By

On March 20, 2019

In future education, futures

I’ve been doing some work on higher education futures, which is where this post fits in. One would be remiss to explore what the future may or may not hold for higher education without first exploring their local contexts — a point that the Unbundled University project drives home through investigating unbundling in the UK and South African context.

The alarmist narratives around the disruption and transformation of higher education relied on the idea of imminent change. And even though sometimes things do change rapidly (e.g., see recent small university/college closures in the US, rise of public not-for profit online offerings/enrollments), more often than not, such change is gradual.

Royal Roads University has joined the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s MITx Micromasters pathway. Under the pathway agreement, graduates will be able to apply 9 credits of their credentials in Supply Chain Management, Principles of Manufacturing or Data, Economics, and Development Policy towards completion of Royal Roads’ Master of Business Administration in Executive Management. “I’m very pleased to see Royal Roads University become the first Canadian university to offer pathways for students from MITx MicroMasters programs to master’s degrees,” said Krishna Rajagopal, MIT’s Dean for Digital Learning.

News Release

Page 26 of 82

Previous

Next

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén