MoodleMoot2011 Keynote:

(3) Intro: Karakia (Michelle), introduce eTeam: TPA, ELDAs, ELCCs.

(2) Twitter Wall #mootnz11

(3) Google Doc QR Code & tinyurl – Tweet link


external image YwLqAKmaVSMGLiVZfIRH6orzRw_Y_EIkRQwcj2QbpOYoToiK_lOsduucIvqeaariNXTDOfLn0jJ1_8kjH7KA_vk4MccHiOTVIr95m2oZutaefM6Eews
  • SMS ‘CODE’ to 710 to download inigma
  • get Upcode__
  • or Download Kaywa Reader__http://reader.kaywa.com__
  • iPhone users: download the free app "QR App" from the iTunes Store
  • Android users: download the "Barcode Scanner" or "I-nigma" apps from the Android Market

(3) Movie Trailor

– what happens when we introduce technology?
Reinventing the Western?

(2) Tom Reeves: 3 innovation outcomes

“Authentic Tasks and Collaborative Group Work: Key Factors for Effective E-Learning”

Any technology implementation project in education will have three basic outcomes:
1. There is no significant difference in student achievement
- between students using the technology and those taught 'traditionally'
- as these types of studies do not change anything
- all they do is teach the same way with new technology!
2. Student and teacher access to information will be improved.
3. Student engagement will be higher.

(2) For example: The Orewa College iPad Debate!

Should new technology like iPads be in schools?
21 July 2011 9:33 AM
Orewa college has asked Dr David Parsons, a senior lecturer in information technology at Massey University,
to evaluate its pilot iPad programme next year.
Dr Parsons is also the editor-in-chief of the International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning.

How can we move beyond “no significant difference?”

– design for change!

Two examples:

(5) PASA students

Hardcore Parkour (iSquad) __
PASAstudentFeedback2011 __

(5) iArchitecture 2010

ArchiFail Prezi __
Wikitude Layer – Archifail, Live from iPad2
Student Blog Tutorial & feedback

2 Prezi’s

(10) Transforming Pedagogy – an emergent eTeam Model


(10) Why MLearning?


(5) Summary: Education in a Changing Environment: MLearning

Facilitating pedagogical change in higher education is often a difficult and slow process. The introduction of mlearning into a course can act as a catalyst for pedagogical change by disrupting existing power relationships within the teaching and learning environment, creating a foundation for facilitating student-generated content and student-generated contexts. Thus a move from pedagogy (lecturer-directed and lecturer-generated content) to Andragogy (student-centred and student-generated content) and finally heutagogy (student-directed or student-negotiated and student-generated contexts) can be facilitated. This has been illustrated by critical reflection upon four years of action research on mobile web 2.0 at Unitec, with an evaluation of twenty five mlearning projects within eight case studies that have evidenced different levels of pedagogical change. Six critical success factors for mobile web 2.0 integration have been identified throughout the twenty five mlearning projects implemented at Unitec between 2007 and 2010.
The identified critical success factors combine to form the basis for facilitating ontological shifts, creating the foundation for lecturers to reconceptualise pedagogy, and for learners to reconceptualise their role as learners becoming co-creators of content and situated learning contexts enabled by the integration of WMDs. Key to this has been the sustained engagement of a supporting community of practice comprised of a collaboration between the course students, the course lecturers and a technology steward, focusing upon scaffolding the pedagogical integration of mobile web 2.0, creating the foundation for an ontological PAH shift among the participants. This can be illustrated by Figure 1.

Figure 1:external image GsHrkOCTRk9Ofzh4lQLznUHgYd5k_28grMP-eDUzeFOHFK0GuCJGfblXnstuf395huv7O9T67aFCuTFEsW2jEkfd38WXMsk6HSf536tC45sX0xTYtFg