Topic 5 – Reflections on ONL211

It has been 3 months since I started on the ONL211 journey, and to be honest, I did not know what to expect when I signed up for it.  I was attracted by one of the topics (blended learning), which caught my eye because it was highly relevant to what I was going to do this year.  I thought I was going to learn about how to do blended learning, the best practices, tips and advice from educators that have done it.  Well, it did not quite turn out the way I imagined.

What I ended up experiencing for the past 3 months was a bit like a roller-coaster ride…a mixed bag of feelings of excitement, anticipation and apprehension.  I was excited to try the new online tools suggested by my PBL5 team mates (Christian was our tools guru), a bit confused about what to expect at every up-coming topic, and definitely apprehensive about the amount of work that we have to do.

First of all, I grossly underestimated the amount of time we had to spend on this program.  I knew there were some communicated hours, but to really appreciate the social learning aspect of this program, I had wanted to spend more time diving into each topic and immersing myself into the content before our group work.  Instead, I was playing catch-up amidst a very busy work schedule, barely had time to read up on the topic before going into our group discussions twice a week.  At some point, I wished I had signed up for this during my off-peak workload time instead and I felt guilty about not contributing enough to the group discussion (the effect of social contract at work).  Nevertheless, thanks to my wonderful group mates who somehow found the time and energy to get this going, we managed to complete all the group work for each topic. 

One benefit of problem-based learning (PBL) was that we could do whatever we wanted, so we had fun experimenting with different online tools.  However, navigating the multiple webpages, tools, resources and links all over the place was not the easiest, so I decided to summarise the tools we have used so far here.  Having a single location to aggregate all the links and content is probably a useful point to consider when designing an online learning experience.

Online Tools used for ONL211 (PBL05 group)

Topic 1 – Online Participation and Digital Literacies

Thinglink – A visual collection of our findings on the topics (audio, videos, articles, links etc.)

Topic 2 – Open Learning (Sharing and Openness)

SimpleShow – A tool to create simple videos based on text and story-line.

Miro – A virtual white board for visualisation and collaboration.

Topic 3 – Learning in Communities

Perusall – A tool for students’ collaboration and comments, to facilitate social learning.  Our experience is documented here.

Topic 4 – Design for Online and Blended Learning

Learning Designer – Tool for lecturers to create lesson plan considering various aspects of learning.

Loom – We used Learning Designer to create a blended learning program for ONL211 Topic 4 and explained our thinking in a Loom video.

Our group’s meme was ‘If you want to learn how to swim…just jump into the water‘.  So despite the stress of time pressures and the apprehension of getting into unknown territory, I managed to somehow ‘swim’ amidst the chaos.

One of my biggest learning from ONL211 is the experience of journeying through ‘open learning’ and ‘learning community’.  Being a digital marketing industry practitioner and subsequently pivoted my career to skills and competency-based training (CBT) for adult learners, my teaching has always been focused on skills acquisition that are outcome-driven.  Our adult learners will always ask what is it that they will learn that is relevant to their job and industry, and I will always strive to meet the learning outcomes stipulated at the beginning of the course.

In the final webinar where participants shared their reflections, one of the participant commented that he was not sure he learnt what he intended to learn from ONL.  That comment somewhat resonated with me and so I went back to the ONL website to look for the learning outcome at this point. There was none.  Instead I found the pedagogical approach of ONL which highlighted problem-solving approach, openness and the collaborative process. 

I had started out wanting to learn about the content topics such as blended learning.  Instead what I found was that I had to do my own work to acquire the knowledge about the content topics myself.  What I ended up learning from ONL is the process of social learning, collaboration with my team, and other incidental learning from the differences in culture and working styles.  Somehow, I also learnt about my own learning style along the way.  I realised that I preferred diving and exploring into one topic over a period of time instead of navigating through 1-hour sessions of webinars, group discussions in between work.  Jumping from working to ONL learning resulted in ‘fragmented learning’ in my opinion, and had considerable ‘switching costs’ which was inefficient.  I also reflected on how I could consider this in my own curriculum design for busy adult learners.

In the same session, another participant had commented that ONL is quite ‘Scandinavian’ in approach.  I was not exactly sure what she meant but in my mind, I had beautiful images of snow-capped mountains and vast open lands beckoning me to explore.  Maybe learning need not be purposeful all the time.  I did not learn what I had planned to learn, but maybe it is ok…I learnt something else – exploring community social learning, and being open to any forms of learning, and enjoying the journey all the same.

Topic 3 – Learning in Communities

The topic of learning in communities or networked community learning is relatively new to me, especially with participants across the world.  ONL211 provides an experience and a glimpse into that, although we are still considered a cohort or group.  We orchestrated an experience of a small community learning experiment using Perusall, a website where we can comment on content and engage in discussions.

Perusall Tool – An example of collaborative learning where comments and feedback can be directly embedded into the media itself (eg. video, articles etc).

The ONL211 webinar conducted by Oddone (2021) talks about the difference between an online learning community (with strong intentional ties, shared goals, known membership) and an online learning network (which is organic, flexible, changing, navigated to meet personal goals).  Our current ONL group set-up, would be considered an online learning community by that definition, and maybe the larger ONL cohorts an online learning network.  The key difference to me would be the level of accountability due to the group dynamics.  Participating in an online learning community comes with an unspoken ‘social contract’ since the members are known to one another, and a responsibility to contribute, engage and respond with reciprocity, where an online learning community would be ‘free and easy’ where participation will be optional.

Our group used Perusall as a social learning experiment where we commented on the topic of online learning community and network using the ONL resources – webinar and articles.  As we watched the videos and read the articles, we added comments, thoughts and critique in the Perusall tool.  After that, we summarised our learning of the social learning process.  You can see our video here.

Thoughts on our Learning Experiment on Perusall

Social learning has its advantages and disadvantages.  The first reflection I have on the process, is not to underestimate the amount of time social learning requires.  In additional to time spent on knowledge acquisition and consuming content, students need to set aside additional time to reflect, critique, comment and to respond to others’ feedback.  That provides opportunities for deeper learning, and alternative perspectives.  The interaction with group members, albeit asynchronously also provides the sense of belonging and social support that the learning journey is not lonely.

Advantages of Social Learning

The disadvantages of social learning is that the beginning and end of learning is not specified.  The tendency of responding and commenting on others’ comments may overtake the process of self-reflections and ingesting the materials.  There could be possibilities of group think instead of in-depth critique.  Social learning probably requires even more self-discipline, motivation and focus, in order to reap more benefits from the process.  

Disadvantages of Social Learning

Social learning however, is here to stay, especially for the youths very much connected to social media, who are ‘residents’ in this space (White, 2011) and native to collaboration, co-creation and connections (Ito et al., 2013).  In fact, Ito and colleagues (2013) propose the term ‘connected learning’ where resourceful youths can leverage the internet to build their own learning environment that is connected to others who share their passions and interests.  Three inter-related aspects will then support the learning, namely peer-supported networks of fluid interactions and engagement, interest-powered topics which are personally relevant and academically-oriented connections to career opportunities (Ito et al., 2013).  Not only do the youths learn from their network, through their passion, but they could eventually make their passion relevant to their academic work and to their careers.

However, it seems that our traditional education model has not caught up with what our youths do in their leisure time.  The clear divide between what is academic learning (in school) and what is non-academic learning (anytime outside school) is stark.  Students are expected to follow the school curriculum and advance along the pre-determined paths with national exams milestones.  The non-academic component is labelled as CCA (co-curricular activities), useful for holistic character development but clearly differentiated from academic pursuits.  While advances are made in the alternative pathways for students, we are still a long way off from connected learning where non-curricular activities merge and support academic activities.

Even for adults, there has been talks about ‘learning in the flow of work’ and LXP (learning experience platforms) (Raybould, 2021) in recent years, where learning for employees is no longer restricted to classroom or courses, but anywhere, anytime, and taught by anyone.  It seems that educators need to rethink the format of education and challenge themselves on the new concept of learning and the role of education. 

Designing such a connected learning environment can be tricky for it needs a few elements to be in place as suggested by Ito and colleagues (2013). For example, the environment needs to be open for anyone to participate.  Learning needs to be experiential, participatory and supported with tools, resources and challenges to keep engagement going.  The experience also needs to be fully connected, with opportunities to create, plan, reflect, track progress, and to provide feedback (Ito et al., 2013).  Learning can be ‘natural’ and part of life instead of artificial divisions between school and leisure, work and classroom learning.  It is a way of life, and a part of the culture and environment where we live, play and work. 

I am grateful for the opportunity to immerse myself temporarily in the space of social and connected learning for a few months.  The experience has been interesting and eye-opening.  The bigger question remains – how can we design such a learning environment such that it can transform the way education is being defined today into something else…and how would that work out in the social, political, cultural nuances of different countries.

REFERENCES

Ito, M., Gutiérrez, K., Livingstone, S., Penuel, B., Rhodes, J., Salen, K., . . . Watkins, S. C. (2013). Connected learning: An agenda for research and design (9780988725508). Irvine, CA: Digital Media and Learning Research Hub. Retrieved from http://dmlhub.net/wp-content/uploads/files/Connected_Learning_report.pdf

Oddone, Kay (2021).  Webinar with Kay Oddone (University of Southern Queensland, Australia) on learning in communities and personal learning networks.  ONL211 Topic 3 webinar. Learning in communities.  Retrieved from https://play.lnu.se/media/t/0_xde8hz17

Oddone, Kay (2019). Teachers’ experience of professional learning through personal learning networks. PhD thesis, Queensland University of Technology.  Retrieved from https://eprints.qut.edu.au/127928/

Raybould, J. (2021). Introducing LinkedIn Learning Hub, an LXP, a skills taxonomy, and so much more.   Retrieved from https://www.linkedin.com/business/learning/blog/learning-and-development/introducing-linkedin-learning-hub-an-lxp-and-so-much-more

White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011) Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049

Topic 4 – Design for Online and Blended Learning

Blended Learning is a topic close to my heart because I am currently leading an internal task force to propel ourselves quickly into this area.  The learnings from ONL211 give me some ideas and insights into this space, although there are a lot more to explore when it comes to implementation.

The tweet chat session started with the first good question on ‘what will the learners actually be doing’ when it comes to designing for blended learning.  This flips the instructional design perspective to first consider the learner and not just the teaching from the lecturer’s perspective.

As part of our PBL05 group FISH presentation, we decide to use the Learning Designer tool to design the blended learning experience of ONL211 Topic 4, but with the perspective of the learner and what they will be doing.  We have also documented the entire process via Loom video.

This free Learning Designer tool is useful to help instructional designers visualise the types of learning activities that are planned for the learners.  The key is to have a balance of different types of activities to engage and motivate the learners.  As you can see from the pie chart, we have designed a balance of 6 learning activities across the blended program.

Sample of Blended Learning Program using Learning Designer

The tool uses 6 learning activity types proposed by Laurillard (2012), which includes learning through Acquisition, Inquiry/Investigation, Discussion, Collaboration, Production and Practice.  Each of these activities focus on different aspects of learning. Learning through Acquisition involves knowledge accumulation while learning through inquiry and investigation requires exploration, analysis, comparison and critique.  Learning through discussion and collaboration involves social participation, sharing and negotiation in the process of building knowledge.  Lastly, learning through practice and production enables the learner to apply the knowledge and consolidate their thinking.

Six Types of Learning Activities (Laurillard, 2012)

We have used these learning examples in our PBL05 Learning Designer – including Read/Watch/Listening to webinars, Investigate using the FISH model, Collaborate in PLB meetings, Discuss and review our approach to present the findings, Practice in using the Learning Design tool and lastly to produce the loom video as an output for topic 4.  See example below.

Sample of Blended Learning Course using Learning Designer

Loom Video for PBL05 Group – Designing a sample Course for Blended Learning

I find this way of organising the learner experience useful and it also serves as a reminder that blended learning is not just viewing of videos online.  There are multiple types of learning activities that we can use to engage and motivate the learners as well.  In fact, I have shared these 6 learning activity types with my own organisation as part of the guidance in instructional design, so that our lecturers will incorporate a wealth of these activities in their blended learning design.

Another question asked in the Tweet Chat is about ‘what should a teacher do in order to engage students online’.  This is a rather difficult question to answer.  Due to the difference in space, time and context when students learn in the digital space, teachers are unable to read the signals of engagement directly.  As such, indirect methods such as consciously designing in opportunities for discussion, collaboration, practice and production of some output would become essential to indicate engagement and learning.  Nevertheless, looking at the multiple LMS (Learning Management Systems) in the market, most are still focusing on the ‘teaching’ aspects rather than ‘learning through collaboration’ or social learning aspects.  As such, we will need to consciously add these elements through alternative online tools.

Using the Community of Inquiry Framework (Garrison et. al., 1999) as a reference, the entire educational experience for the learners depends on three areas of presence, cognitive, social and teaching.  Not only does the lecturer need to provide the right content to drive engagement, they also need to support regulated learning through direction, goals, motivation or nudging.  The social aspects of learning and engagement with other participants also need to be incorporated in instructional design to provide a constant source of support and spirit of community and belonging.  I find this classic framework a good reminder of what we need to consider when we design for blended learning.  Our lecturers are subject matter experts and tend to gravitate more towards the content delivery (cognitive presence), leaving the other two aspects to chance.  By using this framework, I would influence our lecturers to also consciously design the necessary conditions for learning.

One interesting approach proposed by Salmon and Wright (2014), is the use of the method ‘Carpe Diem’ learning, to co-create instructional design through an interactive workshop.  This looks very similar to the design thinking workshops that I conduct, where the power of the group is being harnessed for focused ideation and co-creation.  This is an area which I am keen to explore when we work on our blended learning curriculum design.  By focusing on the learners, their activities and experience throughout the flow of the learning journey, and by including alternative perspectives from other lecturers, we may be able to produce a prototype quickly and iterate it along the way.

Another interesting 2×2 framework proposed by Salmon (2014, 2016) on innovation in learning design, is to examine the current strengths, capabilities and technologies of the universities and consider which quadrant of innovation the organisation would like to pursue.  According to Salmon (2014, 2016), Quadrant 1 and 2 relate to incremental innovation.  In quadrant 1, understanding current organisational capabilities and technologies help to fine-tune and improve learning experiences, where in quadrant 2, there is a stretch to explore new markets, new type learners and new missions.  In Quadrant 3, the focus in on offering new technologies, new prototypes and experiments of learning experiences driven by technologies.  In Quadrant 4, learning takes a radical innovation approach, entailing going to a space ‘untraveled’ exploring and navigating a new dimension and creating a new experience and product for a new audience.  This is another useful framework for considering our strategy for blended learning, and I would explore this further within the team.

Finally, Salmon (2019) speaks about Industry 4.0 and subsequently the need to spearhead our thinking for Education 4.0 for a new generation of learners.  Indeed, the education space is ripe for disruption and this will be a new and exciting space to play in and to explore in the near future.

REFERENCES

Garrison, D. R., Anderson, T., & Archer, W. (1999). Critical inquiry in a text-based environment: Computer conferencing in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 2(2), 87-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1096-7516(00)00016-6

Laurillard, D. (2012). Teaching as a design science: Building pedagogical patterns for learning and technology. New York, N.Y: Routledge.

Salmon, G. (2014). Learning innovation: A framework for transformation. European Journal of Open, Distance and E-learning, 17(2), 220-236.

https://www.gillysalmon.com/uploads/5/0/1/3/50133443/learninginnovation_salmon_2014_oa.pdf

http://www.eurodl.org/?p=current&article=665

Salmon, G. and Wright, P. (2014) Transforming future teaching through ‘Carpe Diem’ learning design. Education Sciences, 4(1), 52-63.  https://res.mdpi.com/education/education-04-00052/article_deploy/education-04-00052.pdf

Salmon, G. (2016). Keynote Speech at the ETinEd Conference, UCT, 2015: for BJET Special Issue 47(5), 2016.

https://www.gillysalmon.com/uploads/5/0/1/3/50133443/realmoflearninginnovation_salmon_2016_preprint.pdf

Salmon, G. (2019).  May the Fourth Be with You: Creating Education 4.0, Journal of Learning for Development, v6 n2 p95-115 2019.  https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1222907

Topic 1 – Online Participation and Digital Literacies

Open Network Learning (ONL) topic 1 looks at online participation and digital literacies.  Despite wishful thinking, I cannot be a digital native, but I have previously considered myself as an early digital migrant, having dabbled in this space since the turn of the century.  Having heard the webinar from David White, I cannot help but agree that the terms digital native and migrants are already outdated given that they have been coined more than 20 years ago at the stage where the masses are starting to get online to the internet era.

Today, the term ‘digital’ is already passé.  Ask any young student and you will get a blank look because there is no differentiation between digital and non-digital to them.  I recall a time when I try to talk to my teenager while he is on his mobile.  I insist that he prioritises our conversation because I am standing in front of him face-to-face, and so his mobile can wait.  Obviously, he does not buy that argument because his friends are ‘online too’, and to him, virtual presence at the moment is as real and as important as someone physically present.

David White offers an interesting lens to view the different attitudes, beliefs and persona different people have with regards to online participation. Since age is not a determinant, he offers the view of visitors and residents, where visitors literally uses the online spaces as specific events or visits while residents choose to leave a part of themselves in online spaces to be connected to others.  That role and relationship with online spaces can also be mapped from a personal or institutional perspective.  An example below.

His mapping of visitors and residents effectively captures the relationship one has with online and is an interesting reflection and visual representation tool.  I would consider to use his tool for some of my social media and digital marketing classes, and get students to reflect and consider where they are.

Besides this tool, our PBL05 team also went out to research on various aspects of digital literacies, specifically on the learning skills (blue), ICT literacies (red), and informational literacies (black).

You can check out our thinglink presentation here.

https://www.thinglink.com/scene/1427936896402587650

From a study with three higher education institutes in Scotland, Ireland and Greece (Martzoukou et al., 2020), it is found that digital literacies of students are related to their exposure and experiences in their daily lives.  The more they are involved in experiencing digital interaction for their daily tasks, the more likely they will perceived themselves as being competent to handle digital literacies.  For educators, possibly, we can consider providing opportunities for students to participate in online learning and team collaboration by re-designing our curriculum.  Although this study focuses on higher education students, I believe that it can also be true for adult learners.  From my observation from class, adult learners whose daily jobs involve dealing with software and applications usage, or online tools, transit a lot faster to online synchronous learning, as compared to those with limited exposure.

Moreover, it is important to note that students with higher digital competence also perform more digital informal learning (He & Huang et. al., 2020).  This is especially important for adult learners, to keep their skillsets current, as the world of work changes and when organisations go through digital transformation.

As informal learning involves students’ control in their environment, digital competencies do matter. Whether students engage in digital information learning also depends on their attitudes, digital competence, perceived behavioural control, and perceived ease of use. Hence, it is important that the user experience of digital learning tools be useful and enjoyable for students in consuming the content and educators can play an important role here.

In fact, corporates like Microsoft is recognising value of informal learning beyond classrooms delivery.  They have just announced an employee experience platform encompassing different aspects of learning.  Viva Learning, provides opportunities for adult learners to discover and access resources relevant to their work, in one central location, aggregating learning content from various sources such as LinkedIn Learning, Skillsoft, Coursera and edX.  This potentially changes in mode and format of learning to informal sources, and competencies in digital literacies play an even more important role in learning and development.

REFERENCES

White, D. & Le Cornu, A. (2011) Visitors and residents: A new typology for online engagement. First Monday, 16(9). http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/3171/3049

David White – Visitors and Residents Mapping

http://daveowhite.com/vandr/vr-mapping/

He, T., Huang, Q., Yu, X., Li, S. (2020).  Exploring students’ digital informal learning: the roles of digital competence and DTPB factors, Behaviour & Information Technology, DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2020.1752800

Martzoukou, K., Fulton, C., Kostagiolas, P., & Lavranos, C. (2020). A study of higher education students’ self-perceived digital competences for learning and everyday life online participation. Journal of Documentation, 76(6), 1413-1458. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-03-2020-0041

Microsoft Viva Press Release

https://news.microsoft.com/2021/02/04/microsoft-unveils-new-employee-experience-platform-microsoft-viva-to-help-people-thrive-at-work/

Topic 2 – Open Learning (Sharing and Openness)

I would count myself lucky to be with ONL PBL Group 5 because our group definitely embodies the spirit of sharing and openness.  I have learnt a lot from the group members, from the discussions to the tools and techniques that the team use.

For example, in the presentation of Topic 2 on Open Learning, we have used SimpleShow to create the storyline and Miro board to present the story.  You can check out our work here.

https://miro.com/app/board/o9J_lNlNVVQ=/

The topic of open learning is relatively new to me, as it is not a regular topic for discussion in my context.  In Singapore, education is free and compulsory (MOE) for at least 10 years, for any child aged 7 onwards.  Even for those who cannot afford post-secondary education, there are abundant opportunities for application of study aids and bursaries. For working adults, the government heavily subsidies skills-based training via the SkillsFuture Movement, and corporate organisations are incentivised to provide training their staff via various schemes.   Indeed, Institutes of Higher Learning (IHLs) have provided free content in the form of Learning Days, free talks, webinars, seminars and workshops from time to time.  As such there is no lack of content and opportunities for anyone who wishes to learn.  In this environment where access to education is encouraged, the concept of social justice (Hodgkinson-Williams & Trotter, 2018) and reason for open education seems to be less urgent.

Besides, curriculum in Singapore is highly regulated by MOE (Ministry of Education) for PET (pre-employment training).  For CET (continuing education training), the SkillsFuture Singapore (SSG) plays a strong role in providing Industry Transformation Maps and Skills Frameworks to guide organisations, individuals and training providers in emerging skills required by the country.  As such open education will pose challenges on decision making on curriculum, content and relevant knowledge sets in such settings.  

There is no lack of ‘free content’ available on the internet.  With over 90% of households in Singapore having internet and broadband access (IMDA), access to global educational resources is easy.  However, such content is usually perceived as ‘informal learning’ and not recognised as formal credentials and certifications.  Sometimes, educational content are created free by organisations not for ‘social justice’ reasons but for personal gains. Reasons such as positioning themselves as thought leaders or encouraging industry usage of their products are prevalent. Some examples are Google Analytics, Facebook Blueprint, and AWS Academy where educational resources are freely available, but the corporates are also the biggest winners.

While open and free sharing content is beneficial for those who are unable to pay for it, it is on the goodwill and onus of the content creator to constantly update and keep the content relevant.  As such, we sometimes find free but outdated (and potentially misleading) content on the internet.  This may affects learning eventually since students’ prior knowledge influences their learning of new knowledge (Ambrose et. al., 2010). When something is paid, there is a responsibility and accountability on the content and experience provided, not to mention sustainability for the content creator to continue to create and update new content.

Nevertheless, for educators, some form of sharing and openness in education resources can be useful in the sense that we do not need to ‘reinvent the wheel’ each time.  Costs can also be kept low.  Cross-sharing of content also optimises the amount of time educators spend on content creation and frees them to spend more quality time in students’ interactions.  In a Google Analytics class, my student shares that she has already learnt the topics we spoke about, from the internet because resources are readily and freely available.  “I watch all the videos, and I already know the ‘hows’,” she says, “…but I never know the ‘whys’ until I come to your class”.  In my opinion, the real value that educators bring, is not content but knowledge, insights and experience to help students connect the dots and teach them how to fit the pieces of content into a jigsaw. 

Hodgkinson-Williams & Trotter (2018) advocates integrating and combining different forms of educational materials, sometimes from open resources and sometimes from local teachers.  This requires integration and pedagogically sound practices where teachers access a wide variety of resources available and hand-picked those most relevant to their students, and curate them in a customised package.  However, copyright restrictions could be difficult to understand and manoeuvre, especially in cases where educators are employees and their work belong to their organisation.  The lines between ‘fair use’ and privacy are also blurred, and educators may not be in the best position of deciding whether their work can be shared or not, and in cases where it is created jointly with colleagues, whether they have the rights to openly circulate the content. 

In an ideal world where resources can be shared and curated by artificial intelligence, human intelligence can be freed to provide more value-added interactions and experiences for the learners.  But before that, the issues of trust and copyrights need to be resolved.

REFERENCES

MOE (Ministry of Education)

https://www.moe.gov.sg/primary/compulsory-education

IMDA (Infocomm Media Development Authority)

https://www.imda.gov.sg/infocomm-media-landscape/research-and-statistics/infocomm-usage-households-and-individuals

SSG (SkillsFuture Singapore)

https://www.skillsfuture.gov.sg/skills-framework

Hodgkinson-Williams, C. & Trotter, H. (2018).  Social Justice Framework for Understanding Open Educational Resources and Practices In the Global South.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/332468165_A_Social_Justice_Framework_for_Understanding_Open_Educational_Resources_and_Practices_in_the_Global_South/link/5cb72cd9299bf120976b0d00/download

Ambrose, S.A., Bridges, M.W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M.C., Norman, M.K., Mayer, R.E. (2010).  How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching.

https://www.wiley.com/en-sg/How+Learning+Works%3A+Seven+Research+Based+Principles+for+Smart+Teaching-p-9780470484104

Google Analytics Academy

https://analytics.google.com/analytics/academy/

Facebook Blueprint

https://www.facebook.com/business/learn

AWS Academy

https://aws.amazon.com/training/awsacademy/

Virtual Talk

2020 was certainly a year of virtual engagement and connection. This was one of my talks that was conducted virtually. While I am physically in the studio, my audience is connected with me virtually via zoom.

The visuals and 3D objects are virtually displayed online, while on site and on set, I can only guess where they are. Different experiences but virtually connected.

• 

  Adult Learning Symposium 2020 – Virtual Event