Design Bash update

Due to holidays etc I’ve been a bit late in reporting back on the Design Bash we held in conjunction with the 2010 European LAMS conference last month at the University of Oxford.

This is the third design bash I’ve been involved in organising, and they’re probably closest in style and structure to an un-conference. There is no pre-set agenda and the main aim of the day is to foster meaningful extended dialogue between delegates. In other words, just allowing people to speak to each other. This year, the groups divided along a number of lines. One group spent most of the day discussing the ” critical success factors for curriculum design”. Paul Bartholomew from the T-SPARC project at BCU, helpfully created a mindmap of the discussion.

In contrast to these more cerebral discussions, there were a number of mini-demonstrations of tools and systems including the GLO tool, ldshake, and compendium LD, and wookie. Again links to all the tools are in the available online from the Design Bash Cloudworks site.

James Dalziel demoed a number of new features of the LAMS system such as embedding which many of the delegates were interested in. At last year’s design bash, embedding and previewing of designs was a key theme of many of the discussions, so it was great to see how over the year the discussion has developed into an actual implementation.

Members of the LDSE project team attended and the day provided a great opportunity for the team to discuss and develop potential integrations from others. For example, Bill Olivier and Diana Laurillard had a very fruitful discussion about LDSE using the IDIBL framework that the University of Bolton have developed.

Unlike last year’s event there wasn’t very much activity around sharing of designs, and I’m not sure if that was due to the size of this year’s event – there were quite a few more people in attendance. Or, if it was simply down the the overriding interests of participants this year. If we run the event again next year, we may have a slightly more structured agenda and dedicated demo slots and a slightly more structured technical stream. We did also discuss the possibility of running a similar event online. This is something we may well investigate further, and certainly it has possibilities. The cloudworks site itself does allow for a level of interactivity, however I did notice that there wasn’t as much external contribution this year compared with last. However, again this just maybe down to fact that we had more people there in person.

Overall though, there was very positive feedback from delegates on the day. You can view (comment and contribute too) all the resources from the day from Cloudworks.

Making assessment count, e-Reflect SUM released

Gunter Saunders and his team on the Making Assessment Count project (part of the current JISC Curriculum Delivery programme), have just released a SUM (service useage model) describing the process they have introduced to engage students (and staff) in the assessment process.

“The SUM presents a three stage framework for feedback to students on coursework. The SUM can act to guide both students and staff in the feedback process, potentially helping to ensure that both groups of stakeholders view feedback and its use as a structured process centred around reflection and discussion and leading to action and development.”

You can access the e-Reflect SUM here.

APIs and Design Bash 2010

This Friday (16th July) in conjunction with the LAMS 2010 European Conference we’re hosting another Design Bash. We’ve got 37 people signed up for the face to face meeting, so it should be a great day for sharing ideas around designing for learning.

Once again we’re using Cloudworks during the day to showcase projects, designs, tools and provide some online feedback during the day and after the event. A number of participants have already created their own clouds and hopefully the number will grow over the next few days. If you’re interested but can’t make it along to Oxford on Friday, then please do feel free to contribute to the day online.

David Sherlock here at CETIS has been having a play with the recently released Cloudworks API and so we have a couple of alternative views of the resources within the Design Bash cloudscape which you can see here. Any thoughts/comments would be welcome. We’re hoping to develop this work into something a bit more stable over the next month or so. David is also going to be blogging some more detail on how he used the API and visualization libraries to create the demos over the coming weeks.

Use of repositories and data mash-ups in the Curriculum Delivery Programme

Formal repositories didn’t feature to highly in the programme with only one project (COWL) really integrating content into an institutional repository. Learning materials tended to be stored in the VLE. However a number of projects have been using of more online sharing or “fauxpository” services. Photosharing services such as Flickr proved to have multidisciplinary appeal being used in this programme in design and geography courses.

Institutional Repository
* Cowl – Curve, University of Coventry repository

Flickr
*Atelier-D (this project also developed its own flickr like sharing, Open Studio)
*Morse
*Middlesex

Diigo
*Morse

In terms of data mash-ups, the MORSE project used a number of audio, photographic and geo-location services on geography field trips feeding back to their VLE. However the project did also note that lectures felt that in enabling these approaches, students were losing some traditional field work skills particularly field sketches.

Qik
*Morse
Instamapper
*Morse
Gabcast
*Morse

Morse also explored the the use of AR technologies, in particular Layar and Wikitude.

The Design Studio is also perhaps turning into another fauxpository where selected resources created by the programme are showcased.

Assessment technologies in use in the Curriculum Delivery Programme

Developing practice around assessment is central to a number of the Curriculum Delivery projects. There has been an emphasis on improving feedback methods and processes, with a mixture of dedicated formal assessment tools (such as Turnitin) and more generic tools (such as excel, google forms, adapting moodle modules) being used. The later often proving a simple and effective way to trial new pedagogic methodologies, without the need for investment in dedicated software.

Excel
*Ebiolabs (excel macros embedded into moodle for marking)
*ESCAPE (WATS – weekly assessment tutorial sheets, again used for submission, also generates a weekly league table)

EVS
*Escape

Turnitin
*Making the new diploma a success
*Integrative Technologies Project

Moodle
*Cascade (submission extension)

ARS
*Integrative Technologies Project

Google forms
*Making Assessment Count

IMS QTI
None of the projects have actually implemented IMS QTI, however the Escape project did highlight it in their project plan, but didn’t actually need to use the specification for the work they undertook.

More information on the projects can be found by following the specific links in the text. More detailed information about the the technological approaches is also available from our PROD database. Specific assessment resources (including case studies) are also being made available through the Design Studio.

Video/audio conferencing tools in use in the Curriculum Delivery programme

There has been considerable use of video/audio conferencing technologies for synchronous communication and podcasts for content delivery across the programme. The increasing ubiquity of MP3 players and free audio software is increasingly making podcasts a relatively simple way to augment course content.

Conferencing software
*Elluminate: Atleir-D, Escape
*Megameeting: Cowl (trialled, but then moved to skype)
*Skype: Cowl (with conjunction with the mikago plug-in)
*WimbaClassroom: Cowl

Podcasting (creation and delivery)
*Echo360: Cowl
*Quicktime: Middlesex
*Riffly: Cowl
*Wimba voice board: Duckling
*Audacity: Kube
*Garageband: Kube

(most podcasts are available in mp3 format)

More information on the projects can be found by following the specific links in the text.
The projects have all developed resources for staff and students around the integration and use of all the technologies which are being made openly available through the Design Studio.

Online environments in use in the Curriculum Delivery programme

As the curriculum delivery programme is rapidly approaching its end (October 2010) over the next few days I’m going to be publishing a number of posts outlining the technologies in use across the programme. As with other programmes, CETIS has been recording the use of technology in our PROD database.

As I posted previously, over 60 different technologies and standards were investigated and used across the programme. As no technologies or standards were mandated the range of technologies used is not surprising. The programme is really about developing innovative approaches and processes involved towards curriculum delivery which in “this context is meant as shorthand to embrace the many ways in which learners are enabled to achieve the outcomes offered to them by a curriculum. Teaching, learning support, advice and guidance, coaching, mentorship, peer and collaborative learning, feedback and assessment, personal development planning and tutoring, skills development and practice, and enabling access to curriculum resource”
(http://www.jisc.ac.uk/whatwedo/programmes/elearning/curriculumdelivery.aspx)

The most common technology in use is the VLE, with Moodle being the most popular platform – 7 out of the 14 projects are using it. I think this probably reflects the increase in adoption of Moodle across the UK. Despite the technorati debates around the death of the VLE, they are alive and kicking and more importantly as the work of all the projects demonstrate, people are adapting/enhancing them to meet the real needs of students and staff.

The usage is as follows:

*Moodle
eBiolabs, Cowl, Cascade, G4, Integrative Technologies Project, KUBE, Making the New Diploma a Success.

*Blackboard
Duckling, Morse, Making Assessment Count

*webCT
Making the New Diploma a Success (project co-incided with institutional migration to Moodle).

*LearningNet
KLTV

*Studyspace
Kube (project co-incided with institutional migration to Moodle)

A number of project have also been experimenting augmenting course delivery with using social networking environments.

*Facebook
Atelier-D

*Ning
Atelier-D

*Elgg
Morse

Three of the projects (Atelier-D, Duckling, G4) have also been investigating the use of immersive worlds – in particular Second Life. G4 have been continuing the development and use of the Virtual Patient and Open Labyrinth which has been specifically designed for medical education.

Although offering potential for certain educational contexts, there are a number of issues around impact and cost-effectiveness of using such environments. The Duckling project have produced a useful summary of the impact and cost effectiveness of all the technologies they have trialled.

More information on the projects can be found by following the specific links in the text.
The projects have all developed resources for staff and students around the integration and use of all the technologies which are being made openly available through the Design Studio.

Say hello to Archi

CETIS has developed a free, open source, cross platform ArchiMate modelling tool, Archie, which is now available for download @ http://archi.cetis.org.uk/.

The tool creates models using the ArchiMate modelling language. As described on the site, the tool has been developed primarily for the “newcomer to ArchiMate and not an experienced modeller. They do not intend to become a “modeller” per se, nor to be an “Enterprise Architect” but to borrow and apply techniques or Architecture modelling in piecemeal (often opportunistic) IT developments in a mixed HE/FE institution. The Archi user is interested in connecting IT developments to institutional strategy . . .”

The team would really welcome feedback on the tool and have set up a forum area on the site for community contributions. So, if you have any thoughts, please post them into the forum. They will all help towards further development of the tool and user guides.

Talis platform day

Last Friday I attended one the current series of Talis platform days in Manchester. The days are designed to give an introduction to linked data, how to work with open data sets and show examples of linked data in action from various sources including Talis.

In the morning the Talis team gave us overview of linked data principles, the Talis platform itself and some real life examples of sites they have been involved in. A couple of things in particular caught my attention including FanHubz . This has been developed as part of the BBC backstage initiative, and uses semantic technologies to surface and build communities around programmes such as Dr Who.

Dr Who fanhubz

It did strike me that we could maybe start to build something similar for JISC programmes we support by using the programme hash tag, project links, and links from our PROD database (now Wilbert is beginning to semantify it!). This idea also reminded me of the Dev8 happiness rating.

Leigh Dodds gave a comprehensive overview of the Talis platform which you can free account for and play around with. The design principles are solid and it is based on open standards with lots of restful service goodness going on. You can find out more at their website.

There are two main areas in the data store, one for unstructured data which is akin to an amazon data store, and one structured triple store area – the metabox. One neat feature of this side of things was the augmented search facility, or as Leigh called it “fishing for data”. You can pipe an existing RSS1.0 feed through a data store and the platform will automagically enrich it with available linked data and pass out another augmented feed. This could be quite handy for finding new resources, and OERs ran through my mind as it was being explained.

The afternoon was given over to more examples of linked data in action, including some Ordinance Survey open maps and genealogy mash-ups leading to bizarre references to Kajagoogoo (and no, I can’t quite believe I’m writing about them either, but hey if they’re in DBpedia, they’re part of the linked data world).

We then had an introductory SPARQL tutorial. Which, mid afternoon on a Friday was maybe a bit beyond me – but I certainly have a much clearer idea of what SPARQL is now and how it differs from other query languages.

If you are interested in getting an overview of linked data, and an overview of SPARQL, then do try and get along to one of these events, but be quick as I think there is only one left in this current series.

Presentations from the day are available online.

There be dragons

Dragons, of varying natures, and presence were a bit of a theme at the JISC Curriculum Delivery and Design programme meetings in Birmingham last week. Christina Smart has provided an excellent summary of the delivery day. Including a summary of the dragons den activity, where the projects had to give five-minute pitches around the sustainability and embedding plans for their projects.

Dragons of a different sort came to my mind during the course of the Design meeting the following day. In fact many of the conversations reminded me of the recent BBC programme The Beauty of Maps. It seems to me that charting the journey of course related information is very much akin to the development of cartography. For some institutions, there is an almost mythical path that course related documentation goes on to find the holy grail of course approval. Many systems and places help it on its journey, but very few of them really know very much about each other, often provide duplicate information, and the actual course (or map) may bear very little relation to what is actually taught in the course. Adapting the course information and updating can also be problematic.

From the baselining exercise the projects have undertaken. It seems that currently most institutions course documentation do illustrate some information about a course, but not the whole picture. In the wider teaching and learning context there are lots uncharted areas. Some existing course approval documentation, may have some interesting and, to continue the map analogy, some rather lovely illustrations which bear no relation to the reality of the taught course – those uncharted gaps where there be dragons. Others may be contain lots and lots of information, but like the Klencke Atlas are the height of an average man and takes two people to open the pages, so are kept locked away and only brought out for special occasions – like QA audits.

As well as having uncharted waters, where indeed there may be dragons, a number of the projects also pointed to the risk of their project being hijacked by institutional dragons or maybe pirates. Most UK Universities seem to be in some state of transition at the moment, either technologically in terms of reviewing their core service provision, or personal wise with changing senior management – not to mention the wider changing political and funding environment. A number of projects highlighted the difficulties of working within these changing environments and the problems of scope creep from the project focus to an institutional one.

Accessing, sharing and using course information data is of course central to these processes and ideally we want move from these medieval maps to something more dynamic and open with many levels of representation such as google maps, or perhaps openstreetmap. This is starting to happen but there are still some choppy waters ahead. What is encouraging is the work that is starting to emerge from both the design and delivery projects to address this e.g. Dynamic Learning Maps at the University of Newcastle and work around including MLO into course representation at MMU .

Again, an overview post of the day again has been provided by Christina.