Virtual Canuck

It was a very pleasant honor to be able to attend the retirement celebration and Design Based Research conference Georgia that honoured the  noted ed tech researcher, philosopher and activist – Tom Reeves.

The event was a very palatable love in for one of the most respect and loved academics in America. Tom has for 30 years been a professor of Instructional Technology at the University of Georgia. He has authored many articles, chapters and books, but is most known for his compelling presence as a speaker and advocate for meaningful research in education.

The conference featured a two day design based seminar  and conference for grad students and researchers focused on methods and results of design-based research. There were key note talks by Jan Harrington (Australia), Susan McKenny (Netherlands), Mike Spector, Michael Hannifin and Tom (University of Georgia).  There was also interesting mini sessions with scholars from Australia, Italy, South Africa  and from across the USA.

I was pleased to hear of many cases where design research is being used n local contexts from higher education, to classrooms, to professional education – with promising results. I also was busy scribbling references and resources (notably the 2007 Introduction to Design Based Research  booklet.) Tom’s own talk was both memories and inspiration as he demolished the focus on “rigour” that has marked the pendulum swing in the US as encapsulated in the No Child Left Behind and What Works thrusts of the Bush administration. Instead Tom championed, with many humorous and touching examples, the need for research that is relevant and makes a difference to real educators and most importantly real students.

There was a number of references for adding a fifth concurrent phase to design based research models based on a growing effort at understanding and promoting adoption of the design intervention in formal educational contexts.

I couldn’t help getting into a bit of a scrum with noted Ed tech author and publisher Michael Spector. Spector is the editor of the prestigious Journal Educational technology Research and Development, and the Handbook of Educational Technology, thus he is well positioned to present a “how to publish in Ed tech ” seminar. His talk ended with a listing of the 10″best” research journals in the ed tech field. However, only one of them was open access (Kinshuk’s Journal of Educational Technology & Society ). He dismissed all the other online journals as being of low quality. I had to jump up and dispute this claim and point out the growing list of Ed tech journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals. I further noted that as long as senior scholars like himself, keep reinforcing the value and sending papers to closed publications, the majority of people on the earth will continue to be  denied access to these works. It is especially relevant in that much of Tom’s talk focused on the lack of impact of ed tech research on real teachers and schools – perhaps because researchers who publish in closed journals effectively deny access to their work to the teachers who need and support their work.

The event ended in a tribute banquet, at which many of Tom’s current and former colleagues, friends and over 30 PhD students thanked Tom for the remarkable influence he has had on their lives.  The event featured Jazz,  blues and folk musicians and not just a few embarrassing stories dredged up from Tom’s past. Tom has traveled and spoken at all of the major educational conferences around the world, and there are few countries who cannot claim to have been influenced and blessed by Tom’s words and presence. Finally, I had my first tastes of southern grits and other southern delicacies as Tom and wife Trish opened their home for a farewell brunch.

Tom promises not to disappear in retirement and I doubt he will! I think he still has a few corny jokes and more than a few insights left for anyone looking for a keynote speaker at their next conference.

All the best Tom and thanks for a great career long, contribution to “research that matters”.

Dear Friends We are pleased to announce issue 11(1) of the International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning. This is a general issue featuring 7 research articles, 2 articles from the field, 3 CIDER session recordings, and 1 book review.

In the issue editorial, I discuss changes to our Creative Commons license and to IRRODL’s policy on papers previously distributed via blogs or conference proceedings.

We are confident that you will both enjoy and learn from the knowledge freely shared by our authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher. Enjoy.

Terry Anderson, Editor

Table of Contents

Editorial

Research Articles

Field Notes

Book Notes

CIDER Notes

George Siemens sent me a link  to a post by Cameron Neylon that attempts to pound yet another nail in the coffin of peer review. As an editor of a peer reviewed Journal (IRRODL) I was naturally both curious and a bit defensive about the charges.

Neylon argues that for peer review “ Whatever value it might have we largely throw away. Few journals make referee’s reports available, virtually none track the changes made in response to referee’s comments enabling a reader to make their own judgment as to whether a paper was improved or made worse. Referees get no public credit for good work, and no public opprobrium for poor or even malicious work. And in most cases a paper rejected from one journal starts completely afresh when submitted to a new journal, the work of the previous referees simply thrown out of the window.

Let me respond by describing some  IRRODL practices. We don’t make referee’s reports public, mostly because of the work that would be involved in cleaning them up, getting permissions and my questioning the value of these reports. Do the readers really care if reviewer A doesn’t like the wording of the abstract, or Reviewer B’s thinks the author has missed a major reference, or reviewer C says the statistical analysis of the data is weak? We return all these comments to the reviewer and ask them (using tracked changes and a point form response) how they responded (or why they choose not to respond) to the concerns and suggestions of the reviewers. Now of course this applies only if we want to see the article again for further review or publication. As Neylon suggests if we decline the offer to publish, the process may start anew with a second journal, but the work of the reviewers is not “simply thrown out the window”. In some cases the author gives up (often appropriately so, as the reviewers found fatal flaws or ones that demand more work than the author is willing to give to the paper). The author also gains the lesson learned and experience (hard though it may feel) of  how NOT to write a scholarly article. But in other cases, a smart author will take into account the comments of the reviewers and improve the paper- thus increasing its chances of successful publication elsewhere. This demonstrates the ongoing value of the reviewers’ work, even if the article is, or is not, published elsewhere. (more…)

I have often had problems helping students learn to analyze qualitative data such as interviews, meeting transcripts, field notes etc. It seems common understanding is to read and extract the themes- but what does that actually mean and how do you know if you are doing it correctly?

I thus was motivated to order two books from Amazon that arrived yesterday.

The first is the 3rd (2009) edition of well know qualitative author Harry Wolcott’s “Writing up Qualitative Research” (big chunks of the 2nd 2001 edition are available here from Google Books) The book is written for researchers facing a gigantic pile of transcripts and suffering from both writer’s block and anxiety. It has chapter themes like ready, set, go  then linking, tightening and getting published – thus it is a VERY practical book written for the student researcher. The main theme is to “get it down on paper” (ok make that on the screen), unless it is written it can’t possibly be edited into publishable text. I like the way Wolcott emphasizes ‘telling the story”-his way. He talks about taking the time to do a full draft of a qualitative writeup before asking the opinion of anxiety stricken dissertation writers like himself, or even his committee members. He also talks of techniques, sorting on paper and on machines files, creating the outlines and other practical content. His approach is not radical, critical or overly focussed on subject’s voice, but rather seems to be a gentle guide to writing the type of qualitative narrative that gets by supervisory committees and makes it into the academic press.

The second book The Coding manual for Qualitative Researchers by Johnny Saldana (2009) is alas not available for Google Book Preview. This book is a reference book that looks at 29 different (well marginally different) ways to code qualitative data. For each ‘method” he gives a source reference, a description, typical or suggested applications, a rather lengthy example (using data from hypothetical interview or observation transcripts) and an analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of that method. The book begins however with two introductory chapters – the first defining just what a “code” is and why and how they are used in qualitative analysis. The second chapter details the function and value of writing analytic notes or memos to oneself (which can and should be coded as well), and may end up in the finished work, but help get the writer to that finish line!

I think these two books complement each other well. Wolcott’s is one of many general qualitative methods books, written with a fatherly voice to help get this hardest part of the research process completed. And Saldana’s reference is very useful for someone looking to find a way to examine data that clicks with their own view of the world and intent of their study.

I was shocked last week to read a story in Globe and Mail that they were allowing Inukshuk Wireless (a telephone company owned by Rogers and Bell) to discontinue its funding of educational multi-media projects.

By way of background in 2000 the federal government offered bandwidth that was being reserved for educational use, to the private sector. But one of the conditions was that the winner had to propose a funding arrangement to return value to the education system. This bandwidth had been allocated to education back in the days when everyone thought that educational TV would be a big deal. In Manitoba and Sask, they were using the bandwidth, so they were not made to give up the bandwidth, nor reap any compensatory services.

So Inukshuk won the bid, began issuing calls for proposals to develop educational media and developed a system to administer this funding. The 2009 call offered $2.4 million for projects, as per the terms of the agreement. Naturally, Inukshuk would rather not have to cover this expense, so I assume, went whining to the federal government. Our Conservative government, not wanting to get involved in business nor displease their corporate backers, allowed them to cease funding the programming. This was done without consultation nor notification, beyond that the fund was no longer operational.

I realize that Canada is plagued with a system that does not allow for national learning programs, but why on earth – except for ideological bias, would a government allow a company to renege on a contractual agreement, that has brought needed investment to Canadian education?

I hope other Canadians  will join me in writing to Industry Minster Tony Clement, asking him who he is governing on behalf of and to demand that this contract be fulfilled as negotiated.

I have been neglecting the ‘Canuck’ lately and wanted to take a few minutes on this last day of 2009, to share a few odds and ends that I’ve been meaning to write about.

Earlier this month I had a great time in Second Life doing a guest appearance with Ross McKerlich in a  Danish Education Masters Class with Mariane Riss blogged by her SecondLife Avatar Mariis Mills at http://milmariis.wordpress.com/2009/12/24/case-mil09-didactic-design-discussion-4/. I was presenting on Community of Inquiry Model and our work on identifying COI indicators of social, cognitive and social presence in immersive environments. Technically the presentation went well, slides and audio was clear and then we had fund answering questions by positioning our avatars on a large wheel – with 5 point Likert like scale inscribed (see Mariis blog for a picture). Having to move and see where others clustered (and changed our locations) gave a more real expression of individual and collective ideas and gave opportunity to talk or whisper to others with same answer. A simple but engaging illustration of the value add of immersive contexts.

This month also marked the release of another distance education related book from AUPress. Dietmar Kennepohl edited Accessible Elements: Teaching Science Online and at a Distance that focuses on the unique challenges of teaching science (including labs) at a distance. I haven’t read all the chapters, (OK, I skimmed through my own ) but thought the book has both theoretical and practical insights into the special challenges of teaching science when physical labs and face-to-face interaction are not possible. Like other AUPress books, the full text is available online and paper copy can be purchased for $40 (Canadian).

I also noticed this week a new online journal (published by the E-learning Network of Australasia, using the Open Journal System) Impact: Journal of Applied Research in Workplace E-learning.  I have often thought that we focus too much of our time and energy as DE researchers on formal education, ignoring the value and impact of Net based learning in the workplace and informal learning. The first issue features articles on Connectivism, Heutogogy (the study of self-determined learning), a good lit review of e-learning the workplace and a couple of good articles on evaluation. I look forward to following this journal into the future and congratulate the editors on offering a quality, open access journal in an important area of study.

Finally, I see that Gilly Slamon and her colleagues in the Beyond Distance Research Alliance at the University of Leichester are offering their 5th online/F2F learning and research festival. Positively Disruptive: Learning Futures Festival Online The week long affair features Elluminate keynote sessions, break outs and lots of blog and twitter action. Seems like good value and likely good learning for 70 pound registration fee

Well, Best of the season and New Year to all!

Terry

Happy Holidays!
For your holiday reading, The International review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL) offers a final edition, featuring 6 research articles, one note from the field, a book review, and 5 web conference recordings from the Canadian Institute for Distance Education Research.

This issue marks our tenth year and largest number – 6 of issues.  This success makes us mindful of the support of our publisher, Athabasca University Press, our sponsor, Athabasca University, and the many academics and students who volunteer their time and talents in creating, reviewing, and promoting open education research.

Best wishes for a rejuvenating, yet learning-filled holiday and New Year!

Terry Anderson, Editor

IRRODL and the Virtual Canuck

Table of Contents  from www.irrodl.org

Editorial

Research Articles

Field Notes

Book Notes

This has been quite an eventful last week. It started with the 16 hour flight to Melbourne and the publication  of a short article in the Journal of Distance Education.  A Rose by Any Other Name: Still Distance Education – A Response to D.R. Garrison Implications of Online and Blended Learning for the Conceptual Development and Practice of Distance Education. In the article, I challenge Randy’s assertion that distance education is really only independent study and that e-learning has a completely different epistemological history. I came out in favour of the inclusiveness of the term “distance education” to encompass print, mass media, conferencing and other web based mediated forms of teaching and learning.

But since being in Australia, I see that the term distance education is quite out of favour. I spent three days at a symposium at Deakin University that focused on flexible learning. Flexible learning is defined very broadly  at Deakin but MAY (where appropriate) include pace, place, content, approach, form of interaction, teaching types, content etc. We spent some time trying to clarify the “where appropriate” and realizing that sometimes flexibility is either too expensive or not even desired by students – and then of course a teachers’ perspective on flexibility may be radically different than students’.

I then prepared for a presentation on Boundless Learning” for a group from Haaga-Helia University of  Applied Sciences in Helsinki Finland, that I presented using Adobe Connect. I won’t whine about the performance of Connect, except to say the sound quality, not to mention the dropping from the system, leaves it far behind competitive web conferencing systems. After a few reboots of both my own machine and the Connect server, I managed to do the show, but it wasn’t great. I tried to explore some of the potential of OERs, open publication, open courses etc the need to form some sort of boundaries – on the boundless and often overwhelming opportunity of learning in a new infused society.

All of which, made me realize again that “distance education’ at least when considered from a geographic notion of distance, is but one dimension of flexibility, boundlessness and openness. Maybe I will have to give up the term, but then, to be inclusive, I’d have to become Canada Research Chair in Boundless, Flexible, Open, Customizable, Adaptable, Configurable, Learner-centered, and Distance Education! I think I’ll keep with the status quo for my last 2 years as Canada research Chair in Distance Education!

We are pleased to present this very topical issue of the International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL) on openness. Notions of open scholarship, open access publication, open educational resources, tuition-free institutions, and open source software continue to gain popular, research, and commercial interest. Thus, I was very pleased to receive an email 18 months ago from David Wiley offering to guest edit a special issue of IRRODL on openness.

He and his colleague John Hilton III coordinated a call for proposals and had over 25 responses. From these, 12 were selected for full paper development, and 8 survived peer review and appear as the contents of this issue. Brigette and I would like to thank David and John for their considerable efforts in very actively managing the editorial work involved. I am sure you will join me in congratulating David and John as well as the authors for contributing to this very important and timely special issue. Finally, links are provided to the archived recordings of 5 sessions presented by Athabasca University as part of our Open Access Week celebrations. Enjoy!
Terry Anderson
Editor, International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning

Special Issue: Openness and the Future of Higher Education

International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning 10(5)

Table of Contents (more…)

Glenn Groulx, a student in our Masters of Distance Education programming, has been doing significant work on EduBlogging. He presented at a CIDER session last month (recording here and Powerpoints here) where he outlined a set of metaphors that helps us recognize and appreciate the different types of blogs and motivations of bloggers in educational contexts.

Most recently he has also done a series of two podcasts with graphics  on Field blogging – blogging where and whenever  the occasion is right. These postings will help newcomers get a handle on both blogs and podcasts as very inexpensive ways for learners and teachers to express themselves digitally and gain network presence.

Thanks for this work Glenn- much appreciated.