Another dot in the blogosphere?

Posts Tagged ‘remote

I can tell a lot about an administrator or policymaker by testing them with this question: What do you think about remote proctoring technology?

If they are for it or if they have already implemented it, they are unlikely to be student-centric. If they are against it and understand why remote proctoring is not edtech, they are likely to be student-centric.

To pass this test of student-centricity, you need to read the following:

The Washington Post article that exposes the practices of remote proctoring companies is informative if you already know how bad they are. It is shocking if you do not. Either way, consider yourself educated.

But the providers of remote proctoring are not the only ones to blame. They are responding to an opportunity from institutes of higher “education” that stubbornly stick to exams even in the era of COVID-19.

My quick test is over and it is time for a test that matters. I challenge administrators, policymakers, and anyone who has a stake in higher education to answer this question: What are more effective and meaningful ways of evaluating students for learning?

Some of the answers are Googleable while the important answers are not. The latter set is something you should “cheat” on by cooperating with others. In fact, you need to do all the things that remote proctoring detects as negative: Look away to think, open many other tabs to do your research, consult others, etc.

This is an example of doing the same thing differently: Taking exams online instead of in-person and being subject to algorithmic proctoring.

What is the problem with algorithmic proctoring? The rules, regulations, and repercussions are worse than conventional proctoring. But don’t take my word for it, read this piece by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, Proctoring Apps Subject Students to Unnecessary Surveillance.

I concluded yesterday’s reflection with Alfie Kohn’s call to take our “chance to turn a(n) epidemiological crisis into an educational opportunity”. A testing vendor took the opportunity to reinforce the status quo, i.e., the old and increasingly irrelevant way of holding students accountable by first holding them captive. Progressive educators who focus on learners and learning can do better because we know better. We could start by rejecting such processes and products.

If you are a teacher who had to conduct remote teaching during lockdown, you might relate to the song featured in the video below.


Video source

I have the same reaction to those who confuse and conflate distance education and online learning with remote teaching. There are overlaps, but they are not the same things.

Recreating the face-to-face classroom in an online environment is not logical nor sustainable. It does not take into account the lack of immediacy and physicality. A teacher cannot use physical distancing to manage a class for instance. Constantly being on-call for synchronous video conferencing — student consultations, staff meetings — is draining.

Two recent articles have addressed both issues. The first was on emergency remote teaching and the second was about why Zoom meetings are tiring. The articles and my reflections offer design considerations for stepping around the pitfalls.

What is a person to do but watch YouTube videos for a laugh during a COVID-19 lockdown?

I rediscovered videos from Georgia Caney, a Brit living in Singapore, who shares her trials and tributes of living here as an expatriate.


Video source

This might be a sweeping statement to make, but here is my claim: No one living here for at least a year is immune to picking up some Singlish.

As I laughed through the video, I was also impressed with with how Georgia and her now husband, Justin, have adopted the language and mannerisms. This is likely a result of being immersed in our environment.

A few of the couple’s Singlish expressions might seem awkward to a more practiced person. But that same person might also appreciate their effort to explore and learn.


Video source

Occasionally the Singlish padawan surprises a master. Take how Georgia corrected a Singaporean about how we lazily say “very” as an example [jump to that video segment].

These two videos illustrate lessons about change. The conditions for such change are that the experience is immersive and the learning is authentic (principles are applied immediately and regularly), insidious (you do not know or care that change is happening), and sustained (it erodes old mindsets and behaviours).

If we think that home-based learning (currently our version of emergency remote teaching) will persist as long as SARS-CoV-2, then we might consider what changes we make to shift norms.

If we insist on recreating classroom practices online instead of embracing different opportunities, we stick to a language and practice that is out of place. We need to embrace the circumstances or at least get used to them. We need to immerse ourselves in that change before we change ourselves.

This is a reflection on yesterday’s reflection about doing less but better.

I took this photo in the restroom of a London eatery in 2015. It includes an oft cited quote that “less is more”.

Quote on the mirror at Zizzi, Little Venice (London, 2015).

I studied under two notable distance and online educators. One of them liked to say this: Less is less, more is more. It was his way of saying that preparing and conducting online courses was a lot more work than people bargained for.

I agree. I experienced that myself as a designer and creator of online content and as a facilitator of online professional development and courses. The more is more principle was true whether I was operating in the USA or in Singapore.

A low estimate for how long it takes to simply convert an hour-long face-to-face session is about 20 hours. So converting one university in-person class that is three hours long might take about 60 hours of preparatory, facilitative, and follow up work.

Is this 1:20 ratio realistic? Just consider the preparatory work: Planning, re-reading existing material and/or reading new material for relevance, learning new technical skills, creating new artefacts like audio, animations, or video, etc. If you do not do this by yourself, you need to include the time invested by those you work with. The 1:20 ratio might start to look unrealistic only because you need more than 20 hours!

The ratio is just for converting a course so that it is suitable for basic online consumption. Imagine if you want to design and implement something transformative. For example, you might decide that information delivery is not sufficient for adult learners and that leveraging on their experiences matters. Simply finding out what matters to such learners is an investment of time and effort. Now factor in the design and implementation of learning experiences that require sharing, peer teaching, critiquing, etc.

So trying to redesign for simplified remote teaching — doing less but better — takes more work. But the opposite can also happen. Someone who puts in little design effort might create busy work for learners. Busy work is the equivalent of checking off tasks in chores or shopping list instead of participating in meaningful learning and reflective thinking.

The sad fact is that it is easier to do less but worse. And even if you put in a lot of effort, your rewards are not guaranteed. The tweet below illustrates that pictorially.

If there is anything we might learn from emergency remote teaching it is this: We will realise who we are, what we value, and how we respond in a crisis. Some will choose to do as little as possible to the detriment of their stakeholders. Others will put in earnest effort in redesigning and implementing emergency remote lessons, while little actually pans out as expected. Even fewer will learn from those failures or succeed at first try.

That last group will do more in their bid to do less but better or to learn from their mistakes. They are the ones we should appreciate and learn from. Will we?

I was inspired to reflect on this thanks to a tweet by George Couros.

Individuals and organisations have shared useful ideas and frameworks for planning and implementing what amounts to emergency remote teaching. One of the best is this table from the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.

I share a screenshot of it here with the CC-BY attribution because that is the right thing to do.

Source: https://dese.mo.gov/sites/default/files/curr-c19-support-for-district-leaders.pdf

Consider the practices under the orange header in column 1. Just like how we might approach a traffic light on amber, we need to be cautious on conducting the same classroom practices under different learning circumstances. Driving on stubbornly does not model critical and creative thinking, and it does not put learning and care for learners at the core.

The green column is for going ahead. It focuses on being flexible, purposeful, and authentic. I love these approaches and present them in a different way.

Principle 1: Simplify. To paraphrase Couros, do less but better.
For example, now is not the time to get hung up on administrative processes like roll calls. While attendance is important, doing this online is not the same as doing it in person. Simplify this by delegating students to monitor each other or use conference tools like gestures to see that everyone is on board.

Focus on what matters. If there is a thinking skill that students need to master, what is the shortest way there? What is the best way under the circumstances for students to show that they have internalised this skill — writing, speaking, performing, etc.? If everything needs to be done online, what are students already doing — using Tik Tok, sharing photos, planning parties — that you can leverage on?

Principle 2: Contextualise. Do not recreate the classroom.
In a classroom, playing a video or grouping students for cooperative work are no brainers. Depending on your conferencing tool and bandwidth, you might not be able to do this in real time. If this is the case, design for asynchronous work, e.g., get students to watch a video individually, record their thoughts with a scaffold, and co-create/critique content on a shared online document.

If you do this, do not set the asynchronous tasks as “homework”. The students are already at home and they have invested time and effort in what is actually classroom work. If the asynchronous work takes 30 minutes and your class is an hour long, then remove that 30 minutes by conducting a 30-minute synchronous session as follow up. If you do not factor student work as class time, you are creating more teacher talk time at their expense. Your students might choose not to put in as much effort the next time you give them work to complete.

Another aspect on contextualising learning is to use the home environment. The table above mentioned helping out at home as tasks for learning. Now consider how meal preparation might not just be a lesson on home economics but also on chemistry, visual design, resource management, and procedural thinking.

Then consider how taking advantage of household chores might ease home tensions by getting students to “Kondo” their rooms. We are all learning to live with less now and embracing what brings us joy, are we not? Now consider how donating our excesses might help those of us who are less privileged.

Principle 3: Ask. Learn about and from the learner.
Video conferencing gives teachers limited but useful insights into what their students lives are like at home. How about creating simple polls with honest questions like:

  • How are you doing?
  • What are you worried about?
  • What ideas do you have for our lessons?

Staying cooped up at home can be stressful because students cannot socialise in-person with their friends. Some students might not have home environments that are not conducive for learning, e.g., fighting parents, abuse, needing to take care of others, etc.

We will not know what difficulties they are facing or get inspiring ideas if we do not ask. If we do not first reach our students, we cannot teach them because they are not receptive.

But above all, I say we learn to do less, focus on what matters, and do these well. If we learn to do this, we will be better teachers and educators on the other side of the COVID-19 curve.

 
Many resources and opinion pieces emerged since schools and education institutes urgently went online in response to COVID-19. But I think this one is the most important.

Edubloggers, teachers, and other experts have shared tips, ideas, and strategies for home-based learning. That is good for the immediate need even though this also creates a lot of noise. However, relatively few rise above and look at the bigger picture, e.g., how is urgent home-based learning different from e-learning or distance education?

Facilitating online learning is not the same as face-to-face instruction. Certainly there are overlaps, but facilitating online learning is much more difficult. There are entire programmes of study that are dedicated in part or in whole to learn how to begin doing this. So the rush to “convert” face-to-face and classroom-based teaching to online and home-based learning is bound to suffer in quality.

The article I highlighted described how emergency remote learning compromises on learning:

“These hurried moves online by so many institutions at once could seal the perception of online learning as a weak option, when in truth nobody making the transition to online teaching under these circumstances will truly be designing to take full advantage of the affordances and possibilities of the online format.”

Why might the quality of courses, instruction, and learning suffer?

Typical planning, preparation, and development time for a fully online university course is six to nine months before the course is delivered. Faculty are usually more comfortable teaching online by the second or third iteration of their online courses.

In his reflection of the same article, A J Juliani said that he was still making errors despite years of experience facilitating online learning. What of teachers forced to do something they have not been prepared to do?

We can rationalise the need to rush teachers towards emergency remote teaching. By the same token, we should also recognise the effects it might have on teachers, e.g., increased stress, lowered morale, poorer impressions of e-learning, all because of the forced circumstance of emergency remote teaching.

So how might we respond logically and prudently when we have time to catch our collective breaths? I say we agree to compromise:

The need to “just get it online” is in direct contradiction to the time and effort normally dedicated to developing a quality course. Online courses created in this way should not be mistaken for long-term solutions but accepted as a temporary solution to an immediate problem.

I anticipate that the collective breath will be accompanied by a sigh of relief and the return to the previous normal. We need that compromise to explain why the temporary solution to an urgent problem did not provide valuable lessons on how to operate outside the timetable, classroom, and curricula.

 
It has been a hot month of April in more ways than one. 

I rarely rely on air-conditioning, but I have had to use it several times this month to get a decent night’s sleep. 

I have also enjoyed the most varied work ever since striking out on my own as an education consultant since August 2014. 

In early April, I evaluated the ability of future faculty to facilitate modern learning. Last week I sat with colleagues in what might be called a Board of Examiners meeting. We were bored of examining because the series of learning experiences is unlike anything I have ever been involved in. 

In the middle of April, I delivered a keynote and participated in a panel for the Social Services Institute, the professional development arm of the National Council of Social Services, Singapore. It was wonderful to see a major player wanting to shrug off the shackles of traditional education. 

Not long after that I flew to a conference overseas to facilitate conversations on the flipped classroom vs flipped learning. The strange thing is connecting with Singaporeans there that I could more easily meet at home. 

After returning from my trip, I met with a passionate edu-preneur and professor after we connected via my blog.

Another connection was a result of my keynote. It will take place via one of two Google Hangouts that will bring April to a close. I hope that it will bring more opportunities in the months to come.  

The other Hangout is a result of my flipped learning talk last January at Bett 2015. I am tempted to call it remote mentoring and hope to repeat a strategy I tried at the more recent conference. 

The exceptionally warm weather here is not the norm at this time of year. The variety of work I have had is not the norm either. While I hope the muggy days and nights go away, I do what I can to keep the sizzling work in play.

she drives em hard n’rides em rough (but by McBeth, on Flickr
Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 Generic License  by  McBeth 

Even though I am on official leave for a conference overseas, it is inevitable that I have to work over a distance.

Work is not limited to responding to email. That aspect is the easiest to deal with by getting Internet access (typically via a prepaid SIM in country X), and delegating the work before leaving.

Other things that are a bit more unwieldy are documents that require signatures. While I can delegate my two assistant heads to sign off on some things, CeL relies on SignNow. I like SignNow because it can be used on just about any mobile device.

Then there are things that you can only do if you are in the office, e.g., access an intranet or restricted work sites. But even then, it is possible to securely control a computer thousands of kilometres away. I use software like TeamViewer and LogMeIn to remotely control my home and office systems.

If that sounds like more work, then I say it is not because I can control the circumstances of work.


Archives

Usage policy

%d bloggers like this: