The way that any new thing spreads through a society has been pretty well studied in marketing. What we do with the innovation, of course, depends on the innovation itself, but the pattern of adoption is almost universal.

Every new thing goes through the cycle that starts with “doing the familiar” with it. Whatever the technology might be, it was conceived and produced in a context that dictates that whatever it was intended for has a direct relationship to something that’s already being done. Early adopters will use the innovation to see if it makes their efforts - somehow - better. It might be that they can do it faster, or with more consistent results, but whatever the tool is, the early adopters will give it a kind of “test drive” for the rest of society. If the outcomes are at least promising — they don’t have to be demonstrably better, but they do have to hold some kind of promise — more and more people will try out the innovation.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Technology | 10 Comments »

In our examination of the scope of distance education, we want to spend a little time talking about what we aren’t doing — or aren’t doing very well. Almost 20% of people older than 25 in the US don’t even have a high school diploma. Is that ok? One in five? Only 23% have a bachelors degree or higher. In the US economy that’s the base level credential that lets you apply for a job. But three out of four people don’t have one. So what? When you finish your MA’s you’ll be part of the rarified group (6%) of the population with an advanced degree.

What does that mean? And how does this apply to the issue of scope in distance education?
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 6 Comments »

Sometimes we need to remind ourselves that there’s a world beyond the Public Classroom. The Sudbury Valley School is a model that most people find incredibly unrealistic.

Sudbury Valley School • Online Library. Anxious Parents
Why Sudbury Valley School Doesnt Work for Everyone:
Real Learning Disabilities
From A Clearer View, by Daniel Greenberg

During our founding years, we thought that people would flock to the school. We thought we would be mobbed and wed be turning people away at the door. We expected a cast of thousands. Who wouldnt want happy kids? More to the point, what kids wouldnt do everything in their power to gain their freedom? We expected, even if the parents werent willing, that the kids would be knocking down the walls, making their parents lives miserable. “Send us to Sudbury Valley, or well go on a hunger strike.” We were very quickly disabused, and instead we underwent a long struggle to survive, to grow, to gain acceptance.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 1 Comment »

Angie put her finger on the crux of the problem:

On Scope
I like where we are going in this class in regards to learners taking an active role in their own learning, however, am concerned if this will ever become reality in our school systems. The curriculum is laid out, literally, day by day of what needs to be “learned”. I agree the state assessment is arbitrary, however, the state lives by it. Will it ever come to the point when our teachers are able to focus more on student need and interest rather than what the state wants them to “learn?”

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 4 Comments »

This week’s topic is scope. If we keep our theme of “everywhere, all the time” going, then what does it mean for us to be worried about scope? If everything is at a distance, then why are we asking questions like, “Who should be using distance ed?”

While we wrestle with scope, then, consider two things.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 9 Comments »

As we make the transition from definition to scope, these last few days of relative silence on my part proves that teachable moments can occur online. In spite of my bold claims to the contrary, a server problem took me away for the last 48 hrs or so. I’ve been here online, and checking into your blogs periodically — even IMing with some of you — but my attention has been elsewhere.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 2 Comments »

There isn’t a valid one because the construct of “distance education” is meaningless. Sure, Keegan has a nice list of diagnostic characteristics. Kearsley avoids the question. The Commission on Colleges Southern Association of Colleges and Schools defines it “for the purposes of accreditation review, as a formal educational process in which the majority of the instruction occurs when student and instructor are not in the same place. Instruction may be synchronous or asynchronous. Distance education may employ correspondence study, or audio, video, or computer technologies (see Morehead’s statement).” But each of the definitions is flawed by one basic assumption — that there is a distinction between distance and non-distance education.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | 15 Comments »

Last night’s chat with members of the class helped me clarify an idea that’s been banging around in my head for a while. It has to do with the way people think about Education and the idea is epitomized in the following question:

Will this be on the test?

In reviewing the transcript from last night’s chat, one of the themes was, ‘What am I looking for?’ This was evidenced by several lines of discussion like “If I get my work done by Friday, do I have to blog over the weekend?” and “What if I’m out of town?” and the like.
Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Education | Comments Off