• Wednesday, May 16, 2012

Previous

Next

Technology Is at Least 3 Years Away From Improving Student Success

January 13, 2012, 7:34 am

Las Vegas—At the very start of the Higher Ed Tech Summit here this week, James Applegate threw out a challenge. Mr. Applegate, vice president for program development at the Lumina Foundation, told an overflow crowd that the United States needed 60 percent of its adults to hold high-quality degrees and credentials by the year 2025.

During the rest of the day, technology executives described programs that could improve graduation rates and learning, but won’t be able to do so for several years. They collect many points of data on what professors and students do, but can’t yet say what results in better grades and graduation rates. “We’re beginning to get lots of data on things like time of task, but we don’t have the outcomes yet to say what leads to a true learning moment. I think we are three to five years away from being about to do that,” said Troy Williams, vice president and general manager of Macmillan New Ventures, which makes the classroom polling system called I-clicker. “These are really early days,” agreed Matthew Pittinsky, who runs a digital transcript company called Parchment and was one of the founders of Blackboard.

There’s lots of technology out there that’s outcome-related. For instance, at the meeting, which is part of the international Consumer Electronics Show, the interactive textbook publisher Kno announced a suite of new features. One of them, a performance gauge callled Kno Me, gives students information about how much time they spend on different sections of a book, the results of quizzes, and the kinds of notes they took. “With thousands of students using these books, we can show them which of these variables are related to students—anonymous, of course—who get A’s, or B’s, or C’s, so students learn what kind of activity leads to the best results,” said Osman Rashid, the company’s chief executive.

But he admitted that the grades were self-reports: Students would have to add that information themselves, since colleges did not supply it to Kno. So the outcome data might not be reliable.

Video lecture capture is another tool that could help professors fine-tune teaching techniques, said Fred Singer, CEO of Echo360, whose lecture-capture software is used by more that 400 institutions. The software could identify parts of a talk devoted to a particular concept, and also detect how often students went over that segment, how long they spent on it, and all that information could be related to how students do on tests about that concept. If students don’t seem to be doing well, then a professor could try a different explanation. And even borrow one from a professor teaching the same subject whose students are doing better. But while all that information is available now, it isn’t being tied together, Mr. Singer said.

Technology companies are only beginning to realize that the tools they created for interactivity—last decade’s education buzzword—are powerful devices for learning analytics—this decade’s hot term. So now they are going to have to work with colleges to connect the dots to teaching outcomes, said Mr. Applegate.

He added that this will also require colleges to agree on desirable teaching and learning outcomes in the first place, something they don’t do now. And that’s another problem.

[Photo by Flickr user LGEPR]

This entry was posted in Student Life, Teaching, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Paul-Wangsvick/26717288 Paul Wangsvick

    Does having a degree really mean that the degree-holder is “educated?” And between the cost of education soaring and the return on the investment decreasing (some fields more than others), what incentive is there for would-be college folks to go into debt only to have to repay that loan back for 10+ years?

  • goodeyes

    Technology is not the answer.   Leadership is the answer.  Fixing the problems is not rocket science. 

  • madamesmartypants

    My experience using technology in the classroom at a local community college suggests that we would do better to improve on access, speed and accessibility in what we already have than focus on developing better assessment tools. While I would like to use more technology in the classroom, there are a number of issues that make this difficult, such as the fact that my classroom computer is slow; tech support is virtually non-existent; and there’s no cables or set-up to use my own, more advanced laptop. The library is similarly crippled; ereserves, for example, are limited to 50 pages.  

  • history_grrrl

    What on earth do these corporate types know about how to help students learn in a higher education setting? They’re hawking products, not educating students.

  • ehmurray

    Eventually, I believe that we will have thinking machines with infinite patience and subject matter expertise. These machines will interact with humans and determine exactly the connection that the learner is not grasping and then be able to drive it home to the learner. Many modalities will be used: sight, sound, role playing, game playing, etc. This will be the old programmed learning from the 1960s and 1970s on steroids. Thus will learners progress to higher and higher levels of understanding, until they reach the natural limits of their ability.

  • 5768

    Love that headline: “Technology Is at Least 3 Years Away From Improving Student Success.”

    I know vast numbers of students who could improve their own success as soon as tomorrow if they would stop waiting for technology that promised to make them successes 3 years from now.

  • jwr12

    My personal, data-driven take on the changes we need to drive is that we are about 2 years, 11 months and 4 days from absolute bliss.  Partly it depends on the development of more goggles.  But if we can get those on line, by 2020 I estimate that we will be 98% of the way to education.  The key is to consider this a technological problem — one solved by rolling out new gadgets and best practices — rather than one that has to do with funding.  We can actually cut funding; also: don’t worry about geography or socio-economic issues.  Focus on the goggles.

  • csgirl

    What if we learn that viewing video lecture snippets (or live lecture snippets for that matter) have no correlation at all to learning? And what about disciplines where merely reading the book and taking notes isn’t ENOUGH? In my field, I constantly try to move students away from that mindset. They need to read the book as they sit at the computer, trying to tweak the examples in the book to do different things. They need to PLAY with the code. Data collection tools need to measure that type of effort, or else they will be useless in problem-driven fields like mine.

  • DaveKees

    5768, I not only absolutely agree with this but have enjoyed all of your posts that I have read. I hope you have a blog. Please contact me at: davekees1<>gmail.com

  • MikeKJones

    I think the headline is a bit off. Technology is already helping students learn. As the world  progresses more and more into the digital age, the need for technology in the class room will grow with it. 

    I use all types of digital media in my studies, from asking questions on student forums while in lectures (http://www.blikbook.com), to renting my textbooks and reading them on my pc or iPad. 
    Technology has already been woven into the class room, it’s just waiting for everyone to embrace it. 

  • http://chronicle.com/blognetwork/castingoutnines Robert Talbert

    When your technology supports pedagogical practice that’s firmly entrenched in the 1990s, then it’s no wonder that student success is 3 years away. The likelihood of a lecture that is recorded with lecture capture software being significantly more effective than just a plain, live lecture is basically zero unless the fundamental way universities and colleges approach teaching and learning is updated. Ditto for Blackboard, static ebooks, etc. 

  • jcvalken

    The technopundits have told us that technology will improve student learning for over thirty years!  It still hasn’t worked–for anyone except the hardware and software companies, that is.  In Michigan, as in many other states, there are very few teaching jobs available, and the various local Boards of Education continue to slash teachers from their budgets.  They always seem to find the money for more and “improved” technology.  The students, meanwhile, remain uninformed and dazed by an electronic media designed for distraction rather than attention and reflection.  If you wish, read my narrative “Attention, Reflection and Distraction,” at http://www.myatp.org/Synergy_1/Syn_16.pdf . You might also be interested in Todd Oppenheimer’s The Flickering Mind.

  • Emmadw


    “With thousands of students using these books, we can show them which of these variables are related to students—anonymous, of course—who get A’s, or B’s, or C’s, so students learn what kind of activity leads to the best results,” said Osman Rashid, the company’s chief executive.”

    I’m not convinced about this one, surely the able students will find it easier to identify what they feel their difficulties are & target their studies appropriately – which might include using alternative text books, online fora; etc (could all be electronic … just not related to the set text … )

  • rosered

    What I think is being reported here is that the technology created all ready can be used to better track what student behaviors lead to success.  Isn’t this similar in nature to what was done in the 1970s that led to the writing process and in the late 1980s and early 1990s to what is sometimes referred to as reading recovery?  Some students figure out on their own what to do to be academically successful.  With the demand that more and more individuals who are unable to figure this out on their own be academically successful, those with a vested interest in facilitating this success–teachers–benefit from systems like the writing process and reading recovery as aides in this challenging work.  We should embrace the efforts being made to provide us with these helpful tools. 

  • http://twitter.com/Furdaneta1 Felipe Urdaneta

    I tend to only partially agree with this concept. While I believe technology may be good and I am a user and a proponent, technology is not static, it is fluid and it will take more than 3 years to really show results.

  • clementj

    Why is technology still being touted as the answer?  This has been around for a long time, and it hasn’t had any effect.  The answer is NOT technology, but having the teachers do what research has shown works.  See: “The implications of a robust curriculum in introductory mechanics”, Am. J. Phys. 79 5 May 2011.  But don’t be decieved by the title.  Gain in learning went from 13% to 50% by changing what was done in class, and the content was essentially the same.  Jerry Epstein has found the same thing in his math studies.Using a research designed inquiry method produces much better results. Such methods can be used with or without a lot of high tech.  In the case of science appropriate tech is helpful in expediting the method.  But fancy presentations and multimedia is seldom part of the methods that really work.  Research of this type has been going on for over 40 years, so why isn’t it used?????  Thinking Science by Shayer & Adey can dramatically improve student thinking, but it requires NO high tech.  It requires a trained teacher who knows hos to use the materials that are all supplied.  And it is NOT scripted, but it does follow a set sequence.  But the teacher has to know how to react and ask the right questions.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.

  • clementj

    Why is technology still being touted as the answer?  This has been around for a long time, and it hasn’t had any effect.  The answer is NOT technology, but having the teachers do what research has shown works.  See: “The implications of a robust curriculum in introductory mechanics”, Am. J. Phys. 79 5 May 2011.  But don’t be decieved by the title.  Gain in learning went from 13% to 50% by changing what was done in class, and the content was essentially the same.  Jerry Epstein has found the same thing in his math studies.Using a research designed inquiry method produces much better results. Such methods can be used with or without a lot of high tech.  In the case of science appropriate tech is helpful in expediting the method.  But fancy presentations and multimedia is seldom part of the methods that really work.  Research of this type has been going on for over 40 years, so why isn’t it used?????  Thinking Science by Shayer & Adey can dramatically improve student thinking, but it requires NO high tech.  It requires a trained teacher who knows hos to use the materials that are all supplied.  And it is NOT scripted, but it does follow a set sequence.  But the teacher has to know how to react and ask the right questions.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.The claims of high tech are just advertising, and as such should be suspect.  When used for conventional pedagogy, it only increases the cost.  And when courses go online, there is now evidence that they are inferior.

  • cmorrissey

    The dearth of rigorous research on measuring learning outcomes will forever plague the answer to this important question.  Higher ed continues to fund ‘learning management systems” with litttle or no justification.  The full employment act is alive and well in higher ed IT management.

  • richarddeu

    Illinois’ new mandated mantra is “60 by 25″; so all those hawking goggles should apply here! The sad reality is found in a colleague’s comment to a sub-committee of the Illinois Board of Higher Education: “The only possible way to reach 60 by 25 is if China puts a woman on Mars, and even then it’s a slim chance.”  Of course we’re old and remember Sputnik.

  • chemistry_guy

    The headline implies the author knows much more than any one person is likely to know about the state of technology in education.  I’d suggest toning things down a bit. 

    If the author truly knows all there is to know about technology and outcomes in education, perhaps he can tell us what has happened at Illinois and Texas (and 50 other major universities) with respect to grade distributions in Calculus over the past four years. And perhaps the author knows what effect this is having on retention in STEM education?  I doubt this could be the case, since even the administrators at these schools struggle to find causation in outcomes and connect that directly to the amazing AI technology they are using to improve things.

    But there is no doubt that things are improving, and technology is playing a central role in the improvement.  

  • http://twitter.com/omamed Otis

    Student success would improve if we stopped looking for technology to improve it, or constructing  yet another way to assess their learning… and started teaching them without assuming they are all college material.

  • fasteddie

    Always fascinating reading; 3-to-5 years really? Won’t this always be the mousehole? What happens in the gap in the meantime; same pirates different boats. Whether a typewriter or a laser, the tools as props can’t be mistaken for the learning experience. I say godspeed with the data and the analytics if they can open more doors to the kids I’m working w/ who can’t quite remember how to make change for a dollar. 

  • http://twitter.com/AiPODFaculty AiPODFaculty

    Interesting article.

  • Prof_truthteller

    I’m not sure if you honestly believe that or if you are being sarcastic. What you describe (infinite patience and subject matter expertise; interact with humans; 
    determine exactly the connection that the learner is not grasping and then be able to drive it home to the learner; use of multiple modalities) sounds to me like what real, live human teachers do every day. 

  • peitho

    I’m quite certain that the students are found to be reading the textbook are the ones who will performing well, and I don’t need a study to tell me that.

  • cmorgan

    Unless, of course, the problem has to do with rocket science.

  • tmac1245

    A contributing factor has to be some Administrators and Faculty at the middle-high school level…My daughter, who is an 8th grade honor student in a public school, experienced an incident last year that was shocking!…Almost 2 dozen of her classmates were caught cheating on a final exam. Not only did they receive little or no punishment, but were allowed to retake the exam!….IMO, Administrators are so caught up in there own performance, if students don’t perform well, they are scared of losing their job….it’s the equivalent of fraud…btw, this from one of the highest ranked schools in the state

  • betsyd

    I teach in China but no wifi access in my classroom-happy for electricity.
    I do use my ipod to share some examples in my Spoken English class. Access is important. Some classroom have computer systems but there is so much incompatibility.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Earl-Token/20714130 Earl Token

    Good point Paul. However, I still feel education is worth it despite cost and the return investment. It really depends on what type experience you get in college. Jobs are looking for students who are finishing up their degree with real-world experience in the field. If you can hold a degree plus real-world experience in a form of intensive internships (more than one), than I believe a student right out of college can be very competitive in the job market.

  • http://twitter.com/rpetersmauri Rebecca Petersen

    This headline is cringe inducing for many of the reasons mentioned below. I was dismayed that learning analytics was mentioned at the end of this article. This piece would be stronger if learning analytics was the focus. There is a missed opportunity to weave in how emerging technologies and practices are supporting the growth of this approach and its significance to the future of both classroom and online teaching. Perhaps a future story??? 

  • hohleman

    “Socrates said: ‘…for by telling them of many
    things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for
    the most part they know nothing, and as men filled, not with wisdom, but with
    the conceit of wisdom, they will be a burden to their fellows.’” (Plato,
    Phaedrus, 275 a-b).

    Posted not by a neo-Amish, but by a guy who owns an iPad, iPhone, and uses technology in the classroom. Advice: Just keep perspective on what technology can and cannot do for education.

  • ohsully7

    Three Years?  Do I have a surprise in store for you guys…..Stay Tuned

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1382989019 Eric Pierce

    http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/97/consultants.html

    The Once / Future Consultant
    By: Lucas ConleyAugust 1, 2005

    excerpts:
    …Dave Ulrich sees systems. Not just in the typical places — our offices, our halls of government, our sports fields — but in places you’d never expect. It started in college, at Brigham Young University. For his honors thesis, he examined the organization of the entire English department and asked: “Was the department designed to deliver value to its students?” The fall before he was to graduate, he presented his findings to the faculty. His conclusion: BYU fell woefully short in teaching its students how to write, and the university’s practice of hiring its own graduates reinforced the problem. They kicked him out of the department. Or, as the dean put it the next morning in his office, “We don’t think you should graduate with an English degree.” Ulrich’s diploma, unframed and stacked away, is for something called “university studies.”
    BYU’s professors may not have appreciated Ulrich’s diagnostic eye for organizational flaws, but today’s business leaders tell a different story. In 2000, Forbes named Ulrich “one of the top five business coaches in the world.” Business Week disagreed, ranking him the world’s number-one management consultant a year later. As a sounding board to CEOs at such corporations as GM and GE, Ulrich built his career listening to (and ultimately resolving) complex organizational problems. He has published eight books on organizational behavior, human resources, and change. Rather than relegate HR to mundane chores such as benefits and company picnics, Ulrich calls for strategic systems that instill a deeper feeling of culture and community. Such intangible assets, he believes, motivate workers to produce tangible returns like revenue and market value. “Dave really takes a problem down to its generic roots,” says Steve Kerr, a former professor and colleague of Ulrich’s who is now the managing director and chief learning officer at Goldman Sachs. “He frames things in a way that makes them susceptible to solution.”

  • 11272784

    “Technology Is at Least 3 Years Away From Improving Student Success.”

    Gee, that’s a big surprise to us, as we’re using various online technologies to extend education to thousands of students who wouldn’t have access to it otherwise.  We only will make $30 million this year doing it.

    I guess if it ever catches on, we might actually make a buck doing it!

    Seriously, technology is a moving target and technologies like radio have been used for education since the 1920′s. What we need to do is keep improving the way we use them – which in higher ed MOSTLY means that we need to get faculty to stop using teaching approaches that are 40 years out of date, and learn to actually use the technologies which are available. The biggest limiting factor today isn’t the technologies, it’s the way we use them.

  • mcphersonjan

    mixing learning with practical experience may provide better statistics for evaluating learning in the classroom.  learning a second language does not really mean either fluency or understanding the culture(s) of the language until one ‘dives’ into one of the cultures of that language, however that language is acquired.  going top Graz, Austria is quite different from spending -at least a year – in Hamburg, for example.  wouldn’t a similar approach of evaluation apply to many fields of learning?

  • todgsmith

    There are lots of exciting things coming into focus.  Good things.  However, most of the “texts” I see available seem to be driven by linear text supplemented by media to be sure, but basically still linear spoken or written text.  Better tools for presenting text?  Yes.  Better educational efficiency in class management?  Yes.  Better learning?  Hmmm. We have great self-help gizmos and great LMS tools to help student and instructor, but content (with a capital “C”) is most often cosmetic; i.e. reminiscent of traditional structures dressed up in amazing clothes.  In the classroom and in print or digital texts professors are still professing ever-expanding mounds of information.  The question most often facing a teacher is how do I get all the subject information I know is out there into one semester?  The question rarely asked is, what are the two or three lessons the student is able to learn in one semester that can be absorbed into their intellectual, spiritual, or skill-based lives?  The retention of information still trumps lessons learned, inspire of that information being available at the touch of a keyboard.  I am interested in what forms are coming down the pike that flip and disrupt our linear texts.  What is coming that encourages the student/teacher interaction both in and out of the classroom, and that drives the learning?  Learning still comes down to the electrical process between individual and tutor, between the individual’s experiences and her ability to explore, own, and understand those experiences.  What tools are coming that will promote those experiences and how can they be placed in the hands of teachers and students?  Not that there are not efforts in that direction, but new tools support the creation of new  types of content that in turn suggest new structures for learning?

  • kiwi_educator

    As Goodeyes sad:  Technology is not the answer.  The answer is what teachers do. Too many teachers start with the question;  How do I teach this subject? (Teacher centred) The better question to start with is; What do stduents have to do to learn this subject? Followed by;  What is my role in that process? (Student-centred).

     If you start with the second question/s teachers get diferent, and better, answers and that leads on how to teach the subject in ways that stduents have better learning experiences.  And if a teacher bases lessons around a learning therory, such as Honey and Munford’s Learning Cycle, then stduents will also have better learning experiences, as that leads to teaching to all student learning styles.

    For instace, the article talks about students taking notes – as a learner I take copious notes – and never read them again.  It is the act of writing things down that embeds them in my memory.  I know this about myself – and I never tell students how to take notes .. but I do talk to them about how they can discover how they learn best – and how note taking might help them. 

    All students learn differently.  As teachers we can all imagine the ideal student, but we rarely get them.  We teach the people sitting in front of us, not the ideal students we rarely get.

    Reading this, technology can possibly show teachers what students are doing in terms of their own work – and cross-referencing that with grades allows teachers to link what might be working – but there is no substititue for actual human interactions with the students in our classes.

    Teaching and learning are human activities, not technical activities.

  • kiwi_educator

    As Goodeyes sad:  Technology is not the answer.  The answer is what teachers do. Too many teachers start with the question;  How do I teach this subject? (Teacher centred) The better question to start with is; What do stduents have to do to learn this subject? Followed by;  What is my role in that process? (Student-centred).
     
     If you start with the second question/s teachers get diferent, and better, answers and that leads on how to teach the subject in ways that stduents have better learning experiences.  And if a teacher bases lessons around a learning therory, such as Honey and Munford’s Learning Cycle, then stduents will also have better learning experiences, as that leads to teaching to all student learning styles.
     
    For instace, the article talks about students taking notes – as a learner I take copious notes – and never read them again.  It is the act of writing things down that embeds them in my memory.  I know this about myself – and I never tell students how to take notes .. but I do talk to them about how they can discover how they learn best – and how note taking might help them. 
     
    All students learn differently.  As teachers we can all imagine the ideal student, but we rarely get them.  We teach the people sitting in front of us, not the ideal students we rarely get.
     
    Reading this, technology can possibly show teachers what students are doing in terms of their own work – and cross-referencing that with grades allows teachers to link what might be working – but there is no substititue for actual human interactions with the students in our classes.
     
    Teaching and learning are human activities, not technical activities.

  • x7c00

    Thank you 5768. I seem to remember the purveyors of audio visual technology making the same educational promises that the IT – Ed complex is making now. Fabulous teachers and involved parents turn out fabulous citizens.
    When I worked in A/V in the seventies I noticed that the really wonderful teachers had an almost mesmerizing effect on the students. The rest ordered movies, film strips, califones, opaque projectors, slide projectors – anything to kill the time. It worked. Time was killed.
    I work in IT now. Computers are really marvelous instruments but I think, for the most part, they just kill time. They are beautiful, marvelous, time killers.
    Many computer people feel the same way. Take a look at the NYT article from October 22, 2011 by Matt Richtel called “A Silcon School That Doesn’t Compute”. The CTO of EBay and many SV employees send their kids to a school without computers.
    While I’m at it let me thank all the beautiful, marvelous, teachers who who taught me how to write better than this. Please forgive me. My only excuse is that I’ve spent too many years talking to computers.

    Th

  • x7c00

    Thank you 5768. I seem to remember the purveyors of audio visual technology making the same educational promises that the IT – Ed complex is making now. Fabulous teachers and involved parents turn out fabulous citizens.
    When I worked in A/V in the seventies I noticed that the really wonderful teachers had an almost mesmerizing effect on the students. The rest ordered movies, film strips, califones, opaque projectors, slide projectors – anything to kill the time. It worked. Time was killed.
    I work in IT now. Computers are really marvelous instruments but I think, for the most part, they just kill time. They are beautiful, marvelous, time killers.
    Many computer people feel the same way. Take a look at the NYT article from October 22, 2011 by Matt Richtel called “A Silcon School That Doesn’t Compute”. The CTO of EBay and many SV employees send their kids to a school without computers.
    While I’m at it let me thank all the beautiful, marvelous, teachers who who taught me how to write better than this. Please forgive me. My only excuse is that I’ve spent too many years talking to computers.

    Th

  • sorem

    One of my assignments at my university is to coach instructors whose overall rating is less than 3 out of 5 (quantitative).  When I look at student comments,however (qualitative), it is not clear whether the instructor was superb or irresponsible.  How will technology help us with this.

  • http://twitter.com/Phillip_Bester Phillip_Bester

    I think we are three to five years away from being about to do that,” said Troy Williams on the ability to provide insight into student success

  • http://thesarkarinaukri.net/ sarkari naukri