#Change11 #CCK12 Creativity – Where is it coming from? Why is it important?

I have been exploring creativity for a few years.  I have shared them here and here.

I have posted questions:

  1. What is creativity?
  2. Why creativity and creative learning?
  3. What are the dimensions of creative learning?
  4. How could one nurture creativity within him/herself?
  5. How would creativity foster the development of new and emergent knowledge at this digital age?
  6. What technologies would support creativity and creative learning?
  7. What should be introduced in a curriculum of creativity and creative learning in networks or institution?
  8. What sort of environment would support creativity and creative learning?
  9. How would creativity and creative learning be designed and developed in MOOCs?
Creativity is the act of turning new and imaginative ideas into reality. Creativity involves two processes: thinking, then producing.
2. Where does creativity come from?

Tina Seelig develops a model called “The Innovation Engine” that fosters creativity.    It includes inside and outside things:

Inside things:

A person’s knowledge, attitude, imagination

Outside things:

The environment: Culture, Habitat, Resources

Tina mentions that knowledge and resources are related, in that the more you know, the more you are able to unlock the resources available, and thus become more creative.

Sounds interesting in fostering creativity: to find new ways to solve problems.

3. Here in this report on creativity:

1. Unlocking creative potential is seen as key to economic and societal growth.

2. There is increasing pressure to be productive rather than creative at work.

3. Japan is seen as the most creative country, followed by US.

4. Where do good ideas come from?


A great post on How geniuses think?

#Change11 #CCK12 Lecturing Part 2

I do see something interesting with mass lecture. Dating strategy based on Game Theory.  Don’t miss out the first 15 minutes 🙂  That’s funny.

Would you be doing the same or would you like to do it differently?



#Change11 #CCK12 Is lecturing – the cream of teaching, at the mercy of learning? Updated 14 July 12

Is lecturing the cream of teaching, at the mercy of learning?

Photo: Credit from anonymous source.

Lecturing is the win-win-win solution in teaching, from last century till this decade, right?   May be it is still a predominant way of disseminating information from the lecturer to students, be it a video lecture like Khan Academy or the mass video lectures throughout the Education Video series on Youtube Education.

Relating to the use of videos in higher education, certain trends are clear, where video production and consumption rate are exploding.  Every minute, approximately 13 hours of video are uploaded to Youtube.  University lectures on Youtube are exploding at an exponential rate too, though it is still not yet fully known on their use as an OER among students, except  by checking on the number of hits on those lecture videos.

Besides, there are education videos on TED.COM that is competing for the attention of general public, educators and learners.

Mass lecturing or classroom based lecturing is still the holy grail that would last for another decade.

What are the views of educators and learners in lecturing as a means to achieve the educational learning goals?  Here in a post:

Easy! Easy! Easy!

Is it any wonder students want Powerpoint slides of their lectures? They know that there is a world of knowledge available to them on any given subject. They also know that they will be tested on some of this information. Why not demand that the lecturer condense, organise, and present the information that is considered most important – saves the student from having to do it themselves.

Not a surprise, aha! Lecturers teaching in accordance to what is required in the course curriculum, and ensure the learning outcomes are met, through exposition of the deep-down-to earth content, case-by-case, point-by-point, and checking whether the students comprehend what has been taught through quizzes, tests, and examinations.  Isn’t it what the administrators want to achieve, in terms of making sure the lecturers are satisfying the students’ needs and expectations, in providing a summary of learning, the cream of knowledge and wisdom.  This would make sure that the students would conform with the requirements set by the potential employers in future work, as these students are accredited with a degree of excellence in achievement and are ready for employment.

What about the lecturers?

 Lecturing is easy to do. In one hour (or 90 minutes or whatever) you can deal with 40, 50 100, 200 or 1000 students. In and out with minimal effort (plus the accompanying buzz). In addition, lectures are sustainable – easily recycled and reused. They are an easy way to teach.

Here Professor Chris Lloyd comments:

I am not sure that there is much interaction in most lectures anyway. Moreover, I think Gen Y and their kids will consider 400 students in a lecture hall an anachronism. I wonder whether they will be able to concentrate for more than five minutes in a row.

Electronic interactions through small groups will be the absolute norm. Students will like it; financial administrators will like it.

I think Chris’s assertion of using electronic interactions with small groups would be significantly better than the mass lecture, as I have shared also in my past post of to teach or not to teach, to learn or not to learn.

Instead of mass lecturing, what are some of the options?

1. In University 2.0 Sebastian Thrun envisions the use of tools and technology in reaching hundreds of thousand of students throughout the world, with small video clips of short duration to provide snapshots of knowledge, just like what Salman Khan has been doing.  The use of practice and quiz may be a good way to check one’s understanding of basic knowledge.  However, when it comes to higher order learning, then such practice and quiz is not sufficient.

What could be used instead? Project-based learning is a dynamic approach to teaching in which students explore real-world problems and challenges. See dozens of articles, videos, webinars, and more at Edutopia website: http://www.edutopia.org/project-

This is a constructivist approach towards learning, apart from the instructivist approach to learning.

2. A MOOC, Mobile MOOC or MOON approach to articulate and integrate the learning – both institutional and personal learning.  This is based on a Connectivist approach to learning, though at times fused with the COPs, Situated Learning, Rhizomatic learning, and Constructivist Learning throughout the networks and communities, with individuals building their PLE/PLN.

3. What about other options? I have shared some of the future learning here.

What may be underpinning theories behind all these “exciting present and future scenarios”?  How about Netagogy?


Here Terry summarises some of the recent distance education theories.

Postscript: Refer to this post on university-lectures-are-a-legacy-of-our-predigital-past. 12 July 2012.

Another nice post on who-would-choose-a-lecture-as-their-primary-mode-of-learning.

#Change11 #CCK12 Why is personalised education and learning important?

“It’s people finding a place in their learning.”

“What’s your passion?”

“What should we learn as a 21st century learner?”

There are all sorts of questions raised in education.

Howard Gardner remarks that there are lots of people who are good in IQ.  However, it seems that more important things include sensitizing young students  to develop their potential, so they could contribute in doing “good work project” in community and society, and focus on respect, ethics and responsibility.  It is also about respect on people, on not only those who are agreeing with us, but also those who are holding different views from us, and those who may have power on us.

I think this is also an important way of connecting with others in a sensitive, and open way, in order to learn from each others, in a global network and community.

I reckon there is also the fundamental question that we have to respond:

Why is personalized education and learning important at this era?

Tony adds flavor here on Designing online learning for the 21st century.

He concludes that:

  • we know how to teach well online; follow best practice
  • however, we also need to innovate: incrementally and evaluate
  • innovation in teaching needs to be rewarded more
  • systematic training of both instructors and senior administrations is essential for success
These concepts are also illustrated in the video here.
Whilst I agree that more emphasis would be necessary for workforce development, in particular on the training of instructors and administrators, I think it is important to reflect on the purpose of education and learning – that goes beyond good teaching.  These include the combination of innovative teaching and technology which support learning.
To what extent is the statement true?“…if innovative teaching practices are connected without technology you get great experience with no scale; technology applied without great teaching, you get very little change…; great innovative teaching with great technology you get scale and change and lasting impact” in Anthony’s presentation and shared in the post by George.
Here I would like to relate to my previous post:

Construction of knowledge through play, sounds more in alignment with the Constructionism that was conceived and invented by Seymour Papert. That seems to be the mastermind of learning among the younger generations, when learning with learning objects, games and digital artifacts.

People realize that digital devices – mobiles and computer technology and media are available at our finger tips, and so they could learn at a place where, when, how they found most convenient to them.  Such modes of learning make up a substantial portion of our overall learning, and often around 70 to 90% of learning could be derived from learning through games, conversation over virtual networks, discursive learning over different social media, and serendipitous learning while navigating networks, videos, or artifacts.

So, it seems that learning through games and play has been one of the characteristics of MOOCs, where learning and conversation might be built on fun and game activities, as is in the case of DS106 developed by Jim Groom, where digital stories were created and developed by the learners.

I am particularly attracted to the video referred by Heli on learning where Dr. Otto Sharmer highlighting the two different sources of learning.

Learning from the past, with learning from reflection of the experiences of the past and learning from the future as it emerges.  I think this is based on future emergent learning, and is different from that at school.  One needs to retreat and reflect more deeply, and listen to everything we have learned, and how it relates to who I am, and to explore the future, using different feedback. This requires open mind, open heart, and open will, which are the deeper mode of learning and emerging into the future.   This requires suspension of judgement, and one needs to overcome the fear often associated with learning in an unknown future.

I think Howard Gardner sums it up well in this video why personalised education and learning is important in his Multiple Intelligence.

#Change11 #CCK12 Is MOOC the solution to future learning?

This is an update of my previous post.

Is MOOC the solution to future learning, especially online education and learning in Higher Education?

Our past experience with MOOC has interesting results.  There are huge potential in its use, though there are still lots of challenges as I would like to share “our views” and experiences below:

There has been a few rounds of MOOC conversation and lots of unanswered questions, relating especially to Stephen’s response to David Wiley’s response on knowledge transfer.

I think this depends on what sort of knowledge that we are referring to.

Is learning related to the transfer, transmission or replication of information or knowledge in MOOC?  This has been an interesting debate in previous CCKs and there is still no absolute answer to this.  From what I could sense and experience, learning is AN EXPERIENCE WITH THINKING AND REFLECTION and might be embedded in a conversation, an activity, a problem, a project, or reading and commenting.  It may be unintentional as cited by Stephen, especially when learning relates to higher order, critical thinking and reflective learning.  It emerges out of the conversation, and would likely take up a pattern as shown in the COW cartoon in previous post.  It is not easily predictable, as the emerging knowledge would change over time, based on the interaction and engagement amongst the networkers.

So, there are differences in views and understanding of the concept of knowledge and learning within a complex learning environment (epistemology and ontology), amongst academics, scholars, researchers, educators and learners.  Even more challenging would be whether such learning are “best” based on one of the below approaches and theories.

Photo credit: from George Siemens

The first challenge is: Should the learning design of MOOC be based on Cognitivism, Constructivism, Social Constructivism, Situated Learning and/or Connectivism?

For me, MOOC is an experimental educational and learning model simulating the education and learning on and through the Web, Internet, Networks (Learning and Social Networks) and Communities.  Here learning by individuals are based on the navigation, creation and building of networks and  such “information nodes” and knowledge webs are the basis of the Personal Learning Environment (PLE).

Depending on the needs, experience and capabilities (competence in certain domains and capacity in forming learning networks), an individual would consume and or create “information, knowledge, wisdom” through the MOOC, which would also be part of an ongoing educational and learning experience on the web and internet, and or within educational institutions.

So, I think the notion of course in an MOOC is to set up the boundaries upon which certain purpose,  goals and learning outcomes are to be achieved, with the content and process established in the initial course design, within or outside educational institutions.  Whether such goals and outcomes are shared by the course participants in an MOOC are however, nuanced as the emergence of the course often shifted the course goals towards those likely shared and adopted by some of the participants.  Connective learning occurs where the course and networks intersected and fused to form an adaptive learning  system, which keeps changing its shape and structure as the participants interact and engage with the networks, leading to new understanding of networked learning within an MOOC.

Once people have built their PLN, would they more likely move on to (Massive Open Online Network (MOON ), or the Massive Open Educational Community Networks (MOECN)? These networks and communities are often a continuation of connective and collaborative inquiry and conversation after the MOOCs. Such learning and community networks are often  not bound by timelines, fixed schedules of topics designated by course or network organiser or facilitators.  The participants of post MOOCs would likely form their own COPs (Community of Practices) or NOPs (Network of Practices) and develop along different trajectories. The topics of interests are most likely relating to current news or trends that relate to education and learning, technology and tools, education economy, and the implications resulting from the emergent technologies and education.

As shared in my previous post, learning via MOOC is like using the social media and technology (the goose) to enhance teaching and learning.  Here the goose would bear golden eggs (as artifacts and PLNs).  It’s the process of development of eggs inside the womb of the goose, and hatching of the eggs to give birth to another baby goose that constitute the learning.

Would a structured course like that offered in Stanford University on AI also be called a MOOC? They have even got instructor’s resource here.  Lisa shared her views here and Rebecca shared her views here.  George welcome the MOOC. It seems that the views are pretty divided. Whether such a course is a MOOC seems to be perceived quite differently using different lenses, by educators and learners, as discussed here.

I think MOOC could equally be defined with an AI course, where openness (open access) is achieved – that is, it is open to the public for registration, only that it may not be absolutely free of charge (as you need to buy the text, or else you have to borrow such texts from library or peer learners).  The course does require some requisite knowledge and skills that may be a challenge for those who haven’t got enough skills to learn through.

The answers to some of the problems as set off in the AI course may also be well known in advance, based on prescriptive knowledge, and so diversity of opinions may not be the answers to the problem.

Learner autonomy might be compromised if the designed quiz, assignments and examinations are catered only for those who followed the pre-determined learning pathways.   So, what would be the reactions of participants who have accustomed to the connectivist learning approach – where diversity, autonomy, openness and connectivity within learning networks is emphasized?

The second challenge would be whether structured education and learning is better suited to learners to semi-structured education and learning, in the case of MOOC.  How much structure should a MOOC or MOOOC has?

My interests have shifted to research on the design of the MOOC/MOOCC (Massive Open Online Connectivist Course) as proposed by Edgar.  I reckon structured MOOC would attract learners who are more accustomed to “structured facilitation and assessments”.

How about Community – Colleges? Would MOOC be a feasible solution?

This Community-College students perform worse online than face to face tells a different story.  MOOC within such environment could be difficult and challenging, both for instructors and learners.  Lisa has already shared her views here.

Would participants of previous MOOCs still be doing more MOOC or MOOCC?  Let’s wait and see.

The MOOC is surely on a big move since Khan Academy, University of People, Stanford University and MITx joined the massive education movement.

What are the impacts of MOOC on educators and learners?

David comments here:

“I am a college professor and am interested in the MOOC phenomenon primarily because it seems to have the potential to reduce demand for college professors. If Stanford can award hundreds of thousands of degrees online, why would anyone go to a lesser ranked institution (e.g., Iowa State U., where I work)?”

In the short term, educators may feel the “powerlessness” of change in the education process, when MOOC are directly affecting their own job, as learners may choose to learn with various providers or educators throughout the web.  That is the reality.  What are the options that one could consider?

Would MOOC disrupt the education and learning in formal setting?

Stephen provides an unique perspective on the rise of MOOC. ” It’s about actually empowering people to develop and create their own learning, their own education. So not only do they not depend on us for learning, but also, their learning is not subject to our value-judgements and prejudices…. It’s about reducing and eventually eliminating the learned dependence on the expert and the elite – not as a celebration of anti-intellectualism, but as a result of widespread and equitable access to expertise.”

I think this is also addressing the core values of re-thinking and re-shaping in education (MOOC as an experiment), in order to ensure that our education and learning is based upon a transformation basis, where learners could develop themselves based on their needs and potential, whilst accessing a wide spectrum of expertise available on the networks and webs.  This is significant as never in history have learners been able to be connected to so many sources of information, knowledge and “wisdom” (experts, knowledgeable others, networks, OERs, and universities resources).  When connected through the MOOC (or MOON as mentioned above), we could not only overcome the tyranny of physical spaces and time in education and learning, but also the limitation of accreditation of learning within formal education setting.   The movement towards getting badges in online informal learning is still under debates.

Open badges seem to provide lots of benefits, as an alternative form of certification and accreditation in Higher and Further Education.  “The result: helping people of all ages learn and display 21st century skills, unlock career and educational opportunities, and find new life pathways.”

David Wiley posted here on why universities would be the biggest  awarder of badges.  David remarks that learning outcome-aligned badges (LOBs) is a move in which both the institution and the learner win.  Rita Kop responded here with stuff badges.

Assessment and the award of badges is an interesting area where MOOC would need to address.  I have reflected here on the significance of assessment and accreditation within a MOOC ecology.  Jenny and her colleagues have developed  assessment and certificate in their first MOOC.  Professor Curt Bonk would also be offering his MOOC with  badges.  The course will be free and open to anyone with Web access.

George summarises different views and reflects on the significance of MOOC – MOOC on the win.  He says “In education, there are many points of innovation in response to global trends: open education resources, internationalization, joint partnerships with universities in developing economies, adoption of new technology, and new pedagogical models.”

I think MOOC is just one of the catalyst in steering into innovation in education and learning, where all education stakeholders, educators and learners could become change champions in their course of learning journey, leading their networks and communities to continuous improvement, and a more innovative and creative economy that benefits the netizens and community networkers.

#Change11 #CCK12 Technology in Teaching and Learning Part 1

In last week’s session by Diana Laurillard – Digital support for teaching as a design science, she says:

that teachers need and deserve better digital support to help them take learning technologies into more interesting terrain than has been explored so far

There are four propositions Diana would like to cover over the course of the week.

1. The fundamental nature of the learning process in formal education is not likely to change much, but the means by which we do it will

2. Digital technologies have much to offer formal education, but have been badly under-exploited so far, so we must look to teachers to drive more interesting forms of pedagogy using technology

3. Teachers, like other design professionals, need to build on each others’ best ideas for how to teach to intended learning outcomes

4. The digital support teachers need includes (i) an ontology for pedagogical patterns; (ii) a user-oriented interface for expressing pedagogic ideas; (iii) a common repository where pedagogical patterns can be published, organised, and accessed; (iv) a knowledge base that is capable of responding to the community of users; (v) an advice and guidance wiki that the teaching community can develop, and the design tool can draw upon for advice on designs.

I would respond in 3 parts, with Part 1 here.

Based on the propositions of Diana, I have the following questions in mind, together with my responses:

1. What is the role of technology in teaching and learning? 2. What sort of technology affordance is most effective for (a) teaching, (b) learning?

In this Digital learning now:

“Digital learning is any type of learning that gives students some element of control over time, place, path and/or pace. It allows students to learn in their own way, on their own timetable, wherever they are, whenever they can.

Students are using digital learning everywhere – except school. They are gaming, texting and posting on the Internet. Imagine if we channel those digital skills into learning? Student achievement would skyrocket!”  See this digital learning report too.

Technology that is not too hard or too soft, just about right as elaborated by Ailsa would be helpful.  I have also shared my views about the role of technology – based on pedagogy.

The not too hard, not too soft, just right approach in MOOC  and orchestration of phenomena for some use, where Jon says: “It can thus become many technologies. On reflection, and looking at the video, I realise that it was a mistake to describe the stick itself as a soft technology it is not. The stick is a part of a great many (probably an infinite number) of soft technologies.

I think that this cuts to the heart of a great many of the mistakes that we make when we talk about learning technologies. We often make the assumption that, because the same thing is involved from one context to the next – a learning management system, a discussion forum, email, a whiteboard, a classroom, a teaching method, etc – that we are talking about the same technology. We are not.”

To this end, I think it sounds similar to the Yin and Yang in the use of technology here and here. The affordance of technology is based principally on the evolving Yin and Yang, and how you “manipulate” technology to accomplish the task, solve the problem, or to connect to the nodes or networks, thus creating, navigating the networks (distributed knowledge and learning) both creatively and sustainably.

In so it ends by Jon Dron, he suggests a number of relatively simple collective-based solutions:

  • collaborative filtering
  • tag clouds
  • reputation management
  • visualisation
  • adaptive hypermedia
Steve elaborates Digital Learning Future here.

Technology in itself might not necessary provide the desirable outcome in education, but it surely serves a wide range of purposes in informal learning.  It is the appropriate application of technology based on particular contexts that would provide meaningful and valuable learning experience to the educators and learners in formal learning scenarios.

On Parenting and Tiger Moms

Is tiger mom the way to go in bringing up children to success? In this Tiger moms not great for human children, the author says NO.

Here are a series of videos about parenting and tiger moms.

What do you see are some important parenting skills?  Do you think strict disciplines are important in bring up children?  What are some parenting strategies that you have adopted?