Some VLE thoughts Martin Weller Outline The VLE

Some VLE thoughts Martin Weller

Outline • • • The VLE choices Current state of play Tools and pedagogies Technology succession VLE 2. 0

The VLE choices • • In-house development Commercial VLE Open Source Service oriented architecture

Current state of play • • • OECD/OBHE 2004 survey in 13 countries All had VLE 37% have institution-wide VLE 90% expect to have single VLE in next 5 years 52% use commercial system Rest use combination of in-house and open source No institution had just OS 31% had portal 6. 6% had CMS

Changing times • • Nearly all institutions had moved to an institutionwide system. Few institutions operated an in-house solution. The VLEs will be divided equally between commercial and open source solutions. Specialization and localization will occur through the use of services.

A flexibility continuum SAKAI Standards Commercial VLE OS SOA

Moodle as reasonable compromise • – – – • – – Gain: Functionality Time Community Profile Flexibility Technical consensus Lose: Some flexibility Some control

VLE as toolset • • • Conferencing Content Tracking Assignment handling Assessment Synchronous tools • • • Blogs Wikis Podcasting Social bookmarking Eportfolio

Trends • Technologies are not developed for use within education • There is a move towards socially focused tools and away from content-focused ones • Technologies move from niche to mainstream in a short time frame • The tools occupy a specific communication niche

Match to pedagogy 1. Community of Practice 2. Resource based learning 3. Peer learning 4. Content-led/Instructivist 5. Complex learning 6. Problem-based learning 7. Collaborative learning 8. Instructor-led 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. Conferencing Content Tracking Assignment handling Assessment Synchronous tools Blogs Wikis Podcasting Social bookmarking Eportfolio

Technology clusters Conferencing Synchronous tools Community of Practice Content: Range of resources Wikis Personal file store Blogs

Plant succession

Technology succession “technological environments are not merely passive containers of people but are active processes that reshape people and other technologies alike” (Mc. Luhan 1962)

Web 2. 0 • • • Users must be treated as co-developers, … The open source dictum, “release early and release often” in fact has morphed into an even more radical position, “the perpetual beta, ” in which the product is developed in the open, with new features slipstreamed in on a monthly, weekly, or even daily basis…. Both an approach and a set of technologies This time, though, the clash isn't Web as platform between a platform and an application, but between two platforms, each with a radically Harnessing collective intelligence different business model: On the one side, a single software provider, Evolutionary development whose massive installed base and tightly integrated operating system Lightweight programming models and APIs give control over the “users add value and the technology or site needs to be set up so that it encourages participation” programming paradigm; on the other, a system without an owner, tied together by a set of protocols, open standards and agreements for cooperation

VLE 2. 0 • How would a VLE 2. 0 be constructed? • Service oriented • Tools tested and released • Standards based • Unique configurations • Incorporate external tools • Localized configurations • Personalised • What does web 2. 0 education feel like? • Students as co-creators • Reuse • Less rigid boundaries • Social

Question • What would a VLE be like to ideally meet your needs?