In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote
âą
4 gefĂ€llt mirâą862 views
Web 2.0 tools are of great value for various e-learning scenarios, however, do they make the centralizes and managed learning management system (LMS) at the universities irrelevant? I don't think so. In this talk I will give you some hints why the LMS will remain the future base of e-learning in universities. This talk was a part of a keynote speech I made with Andrea Back with the title: "Do LMS have a Future? A Conversation between Criticism and Defense of today's LMS" http://www.slideshare.net/andreakback
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere Àhnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (8)
Andere mochten auch
Andere mochten auch (17)
Ăhnlich wie In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote
Ăhnlich wie In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote (20)
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen
KĂŒrzlich hochgeladen (20)
In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? Eduhub days 2011 Keynote
- 1. In the age of Web 2.0, do we really need an LMS? eduhub days, march 2011, Lugano Florian GnÀgi, frentix GmbH
- 2. Management Summary: gnaegi t weets: Yes, of course!* eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com *but what the heck is it good for?
- 3. Bio: Florian GnÀgi Founder team OLAT LMS 12 years e-learning frentix GmbH e-learning, olat, development soft ware developer eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com entrepreneur gnaegi@frentix.com
- 4. eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools
- 5. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools B AT T L E O F TH E TOOLS eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com
- 6. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools File and folders dropbox.com Documents docs.google.com Learning units openlearn.open.ac.uk Blogs blogger.com Wiki wikispaces.com Calendar calendar.google.com Study groups groups.yahoo.com eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com AAI openid.org Video streaming youtube.com Course participants list facebook.com
- 7. LMS tools vs. Web 2.0 tools File and folders dropbox.com Documents docs.google.com Learning units openlearn.open.ac.uk Blogs blogger.com Wiki wikispaces.com Calendar calendar.google.com Study groups groups.yahoo.com eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com AAI openid.org Video streaming youtube.com Course participants list facebook.com SCORE: 97 WINNER ==> SCORE: 100
- 8. Cool, the Web 2.0 stuff does everything the LMS did in the 1.0 age! eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com It must be the future!
- 9. eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com BUT WAIT! not so fast!
- 10. eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com Build on stable tools
- 11. Who is in charge? Management is a university core business: learners, lectures, assignments, credits etc. Implement organizational workïŹows Availability, reliability, interoperability eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com Credibility and public perception LMS is of strategic importance manageability control stability availability reliability
- 12. It is all about business Facebook's value swells to $50bn after Goldman Sachs investment January 3rd 2011, www.guardian.co.uk Twitter's Value? Up To $10 Billion, 'Wall Street Journal' Reports February 10th 2011, online.wsj.com eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com Tiger Global Said to Invest in LinkedIn at $2 Billion Valuation February 10th 2011, online.wsj.com
- 13. Who is paying the bill? milton friedman t weeted 1975: There's No Such Thing As Free Lunch âfreeâ Web 2.0 ser vices sell ads or your data Outsourcing of vital teaching infrastructure including ïŹnancing and control over data eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com LMS is a centralized university service sustainability independence service infrastructure
- 14. Lawyer PhD required âBy submitting [...] to SlideShare, however, you hereby grant SlideShare a worldwide, non- exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Submissions in connection with the Site and SlideShare's (and its successor's) eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Site (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels [...].
- 15. Lawyer PhD required âBy submitting [...] to SlideShare, however, you hereby grant SlideShare a worldwide, non- exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the Submissions in connection with the Site and SlideShare's (and its successor's) eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com business, including without limitation for promoting and redistributing part or all of the Site (and derivative works thereof) in any media formats and through any media channels [...]. http://www.slideshare.net/terms
- 16. Who checks for legal issues? University law vs. Google usage terms Universities must conform with swiss data protection law Force students to accept third party usage terms to get ECTS points is questionable eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com LMS offers a legally secured teaching environment credibility trust security ects
- 17. eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com Trust me, Iâm Eric!
- 18. Who is who? Know your students and your teachers Are students and teachers buddies? Implement real-world roles in tool Fake personalities and multiple personality disorder eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com LMS deals with authentication of users and data and implement roles credibility identity authenticity manageability
- 19. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers? eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com
- 20. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers? eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com
- 21. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers? eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Editor_Trends_Study
- 22. Side notes Research vs. teaching vs. learning Did users really convert to prosumers? Alternate question: âIn the age of Web 2.0, do we really need a university?â eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com vs. âiLikeâ social credits* University ECTS credits** *valid world-wide **valid in Europe or so
- 23. Conclusion: gnaegi t weets: LMS provide a save and stable learning context with didactical guidelines and basic tools. This context is necessary for ECTS relevant teaching, learning and assessment processes. Tags for LMS: Rating: security stability availability control eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com reliability sustainability manageability context identity authenticity service credibility independence interoperability trust infrastructure ects didactics
- 24. eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com Syntheses
- 25. LMS 2.0 Focus on management, content, assessment and didactics, not coolness Provide robust solutions for collaboration Integrate web 2.0 tools using IMS LTI eduhub days 2011, Florian GnĂ€gi, www.frentix.com Offer public REST and JavaScript APIâs Connect with social net works
- 26. University 2.0 Distributed inter-university research and knowledge net work, social, open Based on trust, credibility and open content Funded by universities, not advertisement eduhub days 2011, Florian GnÀgi, www.frentix.com Connectors to commercial social net works Integrate with LMS
Hinweis der Redaktion
- \n
- \n
- \n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- How did that happen, I think I took the wrong slides!\n\nWhy did web 2.0 win: \n- more tools\n- more specialized \n- fancy\n
- \n
- I have 1000 tools, how are they held together\nHow do I implement a learning context\n- course structure\n- what didactical concept\nWhere is the root point of my lecture?\nAnd how is the lecture embedded in the context of the university?\n\nMany opened questions, picked four areas where LMS perform a lot better that I find important\n\n
- What if your lecture was based on DimDim?\n\nSalesforce buys Dimdim for $31 million, bolsters Chatter collaborationJanuary 6th 2011, www.zdnet.com\n
- Data is save, protected, backed up\nTools are managed and operated\nScaling of decentralized architecture is difficult\n\nNetwork outage, Power outage, vgl. Japan, Unterseekabel\n\nInstitutional: You are at university, it‘s official, it‘s the real deal. It‘s no game\n\n
- But for users, it is all free. Hm...\n\n
- Advertisement in the lecture room?\nViagra commercial during medicine lesson?\n\nNo financial dependencies to external tool provider\n\nTeaching is a core competency, don‘t rely on external financing/infrastructure\n\nYou‘re not doing your lecture in a public coffee or a train, you go to the lecture room that offers the right context\n
- Slide Share business: could also include a selling business\nSlides could be sold, mixed with other stuff, royality-free\n\nCan be used in advertisement\nCan be remove without notice (e.g. also during the semester)\n\nThe point is: I don‘t understand those terms. Do you? Do your students?\n\n
- Students have a right to get education, credit points.\nThey have a contract with the university, university law\n\nCan you as a teacher force students to accept third party usage terms that might conflict with swiss data protection law? \n\nTeacher as obligation to user tools that conform with university law and swiss data protection law\n\n
- Experiment by journalist Michael Arrington, October 2010\n\nFacebook auto - address book scanning feature used to connect to hundreds of top shots\n\n
- follow on twitter does not implement this role. everybody can follow everybody\n
- All I said applies mainly to the official teaching/learning process.\n\nStudents have no choice, they must use the tools the teacher dictates to get the ECTS points\n\nDifferent in self driven learning process, user has a choice\n\nDifferent in research, researcher has a choice\n
- Bad news for the prosumer theory: wikipedia has trouble finding those active users\n\nBolder the fear that ...\nEverybody syndicates, aggregates, remixes, mashes up existing content - but who creates the new knowledge (e.g. Gutenberg doctoral thesis)\n
- \n
- \n
- \n
- LTI: Learning Tools Interoperability\nIMS: Global E-learning consortium\n\nCentral services to support management, content creation/distribution, assessment, didactics\nMust not be one large LMS, but controlled by university\n\nlearn from web 2.0: API‘s, more user interactivity\nrespect users choices of social networks, integrate them but don‘t rely on them\n
- Web 2.0 research and learning from universities for universities\n