A presentation delivered at the ASEAN Cyber University Project 2nd Working Group Meeting held on 31 August 2017 at COEX, Seoul, Korea. Project is anchored and coordinated by the Korea Education & Research Information Service

1. Innovating Higher Education
Pedagogy for the Digital Age
31 August 2017
by
Prof. Dato’ Dr. Ho Sinn Chye
Vice-Chancellor & CEO
(Questions we ought to be asking!)

2. Higher Education Landscape & Trending

3. Business industries that would be disrupted
by digital technology in the next 12 months
Source: Digital Pulse 2015 – Russell Reynolds Associates
DIGITAL DISRUPTION BAROMETER

4. EDUCATION
ECOSYSTEM
Education 4.0
(Industrial Age
Universities)
Keeping Education
Relevant
Employable
Graduates
(21st Century
skilled workers
and global digital
citizens)
Will
shape
To fill
jobs
Industry 4.0
(Smart Factories
Smart Services)
Jobs Killer
Jobs Creator
(White-collar;
Blue-Collar Jobs)
(Comp. Engineers;
Coders; Maths.)
Disruptive Impact of
Emerging Technologies
Industry 4.0 needs Education 4.0

5. 21st Century Pedagogy
… is about developing:
• Information fluency
• Media fluency
• Technological
fluency
• Knowledge seeker
and producer
• Thinking skills
• Problem solving skills
• Project based
learning
• Personalized
learning

6. Right Job
Skills VITAL
Are we ready for
Education 4.0?
* As categorized in PwC 2016
Global Industry 4.0 Survey.

7. Technology’s affordances for
Higher Education
Access
(open, synchronous, online digital tools,
on-demand info/data, 24/7, informal, etc.)
Engagement
(LMS, hands-on, mobile, media-driven,
game-based, project/problem/inquiry-
based learning, constructivist learning,
social networking, etc.)
Customization
(interactive modules, learner-centered,
adaptable, personalized learning, flipped
class approach, OERs, MOOCs, etc.)

8. Some market-driven factors
1. The quest for contemporary knowledge and skill
sets is opening up learning
2. More learners seeking programmes with shorter
completion time plus other value propositions
(e.g. academic relevance and recognition, lower
fees, full/part-time switch options, online, etc.)
3. Employers are seeking short-duration CPD type
courses for themselves and their employees

9. 1. Learning can take place anytime, anywhere
(learner mobility), and in smaller size (bundles
of shorter courses)
2. Learners are able to create their own learning
agenda and process
3. Learners will receive dedicated personalized
learning support from their instructors
4. Learners could complete their study speedily
Teaching-learning mode
will continue to change

10. 5. Learners will achieve their learning outcomes
through a combination of formal, informal,
self-directed or instructor-led blended learning
6. New approaches to assessment of learning
outcomes will be devised and adopted
7. New certification models and credentials will
emerge to meet the specific needs of learners
and employers
Teaching-learning mode
will continue to change

11. Academic programmes
will look different
1.More programmes with shorter completion time
(micro-credentials; nano degrees, etc.)
2.Greater emphasis on experiential learning and
joint industrial training (internship) with external
corporate partners
3.Increased recognition of credentials and credit
transfer for programmes among universities
locally and regionally (ASEAN?)
4.More use of OERs including MOOCs

12. Selection and Evaluation of
Technology for Pedagogy
Key considerations:
• Value emanating to the learner
• Teaching-learning effectiveness
• Financial implications to the institution
How prepared are we to function in a learner-centered
environment and support personalized learning?

13. 3 Key Stakeholders
Learner
Instructor University

14. 1. Does the technology enable ubiquitous
access to learners?
2. Does it allow flexibilities in terms of time
and space for learning?
3. Does it allow learners to access content,
tutor support and learning resources
effectively and efficiently?
4. Does it translate to reasonable cost/fees?
Learner’s Perspective
Note: Adult learners want 4 things: convenience, customer
service, credentials, and speedy completion time!

15. How about Instructors?
1. Does this technology-supported pedagogy
enhance learner engagement?
2. How receptive are our instructors to engaging
learners not just as consumers but also as co-
producers of content?
3. How prepared are our instructors to learn new
technologies continualy?
4. Can our instructors develop skills to mentor
learners in project-based learning?

16. Instructor’s Perspective
1. Does the technology allow instructors to adopt
an inclusive approach to teaching all types of
learners?
2. Does it provide opportunities for instructors to
engage with learners in different ways?
3. Does it allow instructors and learners to work
as co-producers of learning content?
4. What about capacity building for instructors?

17. 4. Does it allow for learner participation and
feedback during and after the teaching-
learning process?
5. Does it allow for effective assessment of
learning outcomes?
6. Is it practical to use and enhance on a regular
basis?
7. Does it facilitate utilization and evaluation of all
critical domains of learning?
Instructor’s Perspective

18. Technology Enabled Pedagogy
Critical Thinking Tools

19. 1.Change is inevitable, hence universities must
innovate to evolve with the market
2.Relevance, value and goal shape the strategy
3. Financial constraint is a constant challenge
4.Quality assurance must remain imperative
5.Competition among universities will increase
6.New business models might have to be
developed
Demand on the Institution
Doing nothing is NOT an option!

20. Institution’s Perspective
1. Are the necessary enabling policies already in
place?
2. Does the chosen technology lead to overall
learning effectiveness and efficiency?
3. Does it provide the institution for wider outreach
and access to markets efficiently?
4. Does it add to financial sustainability (e.g. cost
of acquisition, renewal and cost per learner)?

21. 5. Does it tie up the institution in long-term third-
party contracts? What’s the ROI?
6. Does it enable seamless data flow within the
institution’s database systems; also to and
from all stakeholders?
7. Does it extract actionable learning analytics
and commercially relevant info to enable
timely decision making?
8. Is it free or open source?
Institution’s Perspective

22. • Institutional commitment
• Senior management support
• Enabling policies and infrastructure
• Mainstreaming of faculty capacity building
• Developing quality assured and
pedagogically sound course contents
• Providing the right product, support, and
management for ubiquitous learning
Critical Success Factors

23. We are often held back not by
technology but by our concern for
the last person in the queue!
Instructors Learners
“When education fails to keep pace with technology,
the result is INEQUALITY” (Economist, Jan 14, 2017)