Big Data, Adaptive Learning and the Assumptions behind Part 1

This post on adaptive learning and big data sounds interesting. Thanks to Stephen Downes for the reference.

What are the significance of big data?

What is adaptive learning?

What are the assumptions behind the relationship between big data and adaptive learning?

Here is my previous post relating MOOC to adaptive system.

Before I could address the three questions above, here is my comment to my previous post:

What questions of learning would lead to a particular learning theory? If you ask me a question of learning based on behavior learning theory, surely I could gather evidences which could match your questions.
Similarly, if you ask me if instructivist approach is best for teaching, like those in xMOOCs, I could show you all the great, positive and praising and thankful responses from the learners on the professors, and course content, and the high distinctions result of the students, as evidence of great pedagogy of mastery learning, and the cognitivism/behaviorism play a major role in the whole notion of learning. Experiments and empirical researches surely have demonstrated these under classroom environments.
Would these be equally true and effective in virtual learning environment? If we are to use the assessment results like an improvement and grades or scores as evidence of learning achievement, we may likely end up with the theory that cognitivism relates to learning most directly, as the intellectual capability of a person is demonstrated through the achievement of results in test, examination or assignment. These seem certainly be the case, under a formal education system.
However, how about the social aspects of learning? Could we assume that a highly intelligent person (who is tested with high IQ or highest achiever) be socially capable in connecting with others in classroom, workplace or community? What assumptions have we made in judging the correlations between individual intellectualism and social skills and social intelligence? Would we be able to easily delineate the relationships between all these various parameters and factors? You could quote examples in real life indicating that many highly intellectual scholars won’t socialize, and these included Issac Newton, Albert Einstein, etc, but that they were highly successful in their academic achievement, and should be role models for many learners. Did this prove anything about personal learning or social learning as explained under learning theories? Again, this depends on what assumptions you have made, and what questions that you are asking in your scientific research, or inquiry in learning.

If you ask me if connectivist approach is best for learning under a complex learning environment, I could show you social network analysis, and how the 4 properties of openness, diversity, autonomy, interactivity and connectivity lead to better networked learning, under Connectivism.

In summary, it is not what I want it to be that would lead Connectivism to become a learning theory. It is what you could demonstrate and theorise that would lead one to “believe” in certain validity and reliability of a learning theory such as Connectivism.

How would I relate the big data to adaptive learning?  I would explore these in the coming posts.

What would be the implications of MOOCs on Higher Education?

Here is a provocative post on moocs and other ed tech bubbles.  My first response below:

I would like to write a detailed response, but by now a few questions and comments first. 1. Would technology undermine formal education? 2. Could learner pick and choose their education? 3. When none of the peers is an expert, is there too much risk of misconceptions and bad habits becoming established within the cohort? 4. Who are the experts? How are these experts identified and recognised? Are we looking for experts as “teachers” or “facilitators”, or machine based AI generated experts? 5. Are experts available for “free” in mooc or  would they only “teach” when paid? 6. Why would professors want to teach in MOOCs? What are their motivations? Are they assuming the role of a teacher, or a learner among the networks?

My comments: Sebastian Thrun has tried his experiment with the AI MOOC as he is a highly enthusiastic educator and is willing to devote time and efforts in doing the “extra” teaching. Could we presume and assume all the professors in MOOCs are having and sharing the same spirit of teaching, apart from their research loads?

One of the questions is: If the mooc is better than the existing teaching and learning in the elite or most universities, wouldn’t that be the greatest disruption to their own “mainstream” teaching and pedagogy? If the mooc is far less valuable, attractive and useful than their mainstream teaching and pedagogy, who would be losing? Would that be the professors teaching in the MOOCs? So, no matter whether MOOCs are providing a better or worse pedagogy to the mainstream teaching, either way would not be beneficial to the HE institutions and the professors. But without the MOOCs as the starting point, what would happen? No change, no innovation needed? Would that be totally different if the pedagogy is aligned with cMOOCs? I don’t know the answer.

To me, the xMOOCs are still organization driven and well developed online courses, which seem to be significantly different from the adhoc organization driven and adhoc (COP, mentoring) and the cMOOCs which are learner driven and adhoc (social networks, forums, wikis, blogs).  The cMOOCs are leveraging the affordance of emerging technology and tools, together with the social networks to achieve learning (both formal and informal learning).  This seems to be a race between technology affordance and professors and the associated pedagogy employed in the conversation and engagement of learners in the MOOCs.

Do you want learners to learn from the organizations or from the self-initiated networks (PLE/PLN)?

Would it be possible to sustain education with prescriptive knowledge and emergent knowledge?

What would be more valuable for learners – in terms of knowledge duplication or knowledge creation?

Which would be the model of education (push or pull in knowledge generation and creation) that would fit into the learners’ present and future needs?

Would that be a matter of sensemaking and wayfinding if the digital learning is employed?

A reflection of MOOCs

Would MOOC transform higher education?  Some say yes, others still hesitate….

Do we need more or less universities? Most would say yes, more please, but the reality is, may be less, because of MOOCs.

What does a MOOC look like?

This post on MOOCs experience provides a good glimpse about what MOOC is like.  To me, that sounds quite a familiar approach similar to most university courses teaching and learning, with lectures, quizzes, forums, and assessments and or examinations.  It is interesting to realize that there aren’t any “unexpected” learning or pedagogy, as they are all based the typical behavioral-cognitive approach, where you could learn alone, by accessing all the available resources and artifacts.  May be the peer assessment is still not typical in our “traditional classroom teaching” where most students would have expected the professors to do all the markings.

The old concept that “professors” are expected to carry out a duty of care, and to exercise responsibility in conducting the assessment is still current under certain education system.  That is also why professors are needed, in order to assess the participants appropriately.

There are lots of praises and promotion by individual bloggers and professors, and surely, many have enjoyed the xMOOCs, see here on how great they are.

What is the emergent trend of MOOCs?

It seems that we are now having Universities chains competing with Universities chain, as we see both UK universities are now joining in the competitions with the MOOCs chain, as I have shared this in my previous post.

“Futurelearn will carry courses from 12 UK institutions (see list), which will be available to students across the world free of charge.”

It will follow in the footsteps of US providers including Coursera, edX and Udacity, which offer around 230 Moocs from around 40 mostly US-based institutions to more than 3 million students.

The new platform will operate as an independent company, majority owned by The Open University, although details of other investors have yet to be confirmed.

We are looking for solutions to HE, and MOOCs seem to provide that solution to tackle the problems in education, as revealed here.  Dominick concludes here:

I don’t think our MOOC which combines features of both c and xMOOCs with traditional online and blended learning, is any more successful at this than any other form of education. The general advice, viz, “give students as many ways of interacting with each other, the subject and the teachers, as possible” also contains the seeds of its own downfall. More ways of interaction mean more opportunities for learning and personalizing one’s own educational progress. But they also mean more opportunities for confusion and more ways of encountering demotivating experiences.

Are we ready to introduce MOOCs to K-12 education?

Relating to this call for MOOC in size – small please, for k-12, what I found were a lot of questions that need to be addressed.  Though I am pretty impressed with the opportunity afforded by MOOCs in the education of k-12, I just don’t think we are ready yet.

How would MOOCs be accreditated?

Accreditation relates to individuals, not institutions.  Is it true?

Are MOOCs about new teaching strategies?

If MOOCs are about new teaching strategies, then I think we might have already got some of these teaching strategies developed with cMOOCs.  Mark sees MOOCs differently, as he critically summarises his views, relating to the disruptive nature of such Future initiatives.

How to decide whether to adopt MOOCs be good or not in HE?

The iron triangle of “cost, access and quality” seems to be the deciding factors in deciding whether it’s worthwhile to pursue MOOC in HE, as mentioned in  this:

Molly Broad, president of the American Council on Education, refers to the “iron triangle” of higher education: cost, access and quality. The assumption has always been it’s a zero-sum game – you can improve any one of those only at the expense of the others.  No matter how technology improves, a string quartet simply can’t be performed (well) by fewer people than in Beethoven’s day. So the relative cost of college (and musical performance) will always rise, relative to other things where efficiency does improve.

What would I like to see in MOOC education?

I would like to see education outside and inside the Ring of MOOC, as I have elaborated in my previous post here.

John Seely Brown says here.  ”You can imagine new forms of education that now become possible with the Internet and all kinds of other types of capabilities surrounding that.  We don’t have to think about just getting educated by going to classical schools.  Now you can get educated in brand new ways. “

It’s about connecting the dots, going beyond our comfort zone, and thinking and adopting brand new ways of education and learning.

What are some ways of keep tinkering with the MOOCs?

It seems that the Lord of the MOOC Ring is drumming along, with students creating these wonderful videos.  Aren’t they all creating their own education and learning journey?