An Introduction to Ludic Pedagogy, Webinar, October 20

Sharon Lauricella

Sharon Lauricella and Keith Edmunds will present "An Introduction to Ludic Pedagogy", online October 20, 5 pm Edmonton time. I had not heard of Ludic Pedagogy before, but apparently it is about students having fun while still learning in a rigorous way. This is part of Manisha Khetarpal's excellent Microlearning Series at Maskwacis Cultural College in Canada (I gave some talks in the series).

The idea of fun in education is something I have difficulty with. For me studying and teaching is highly stressful. As a result I find attempts at fun or play even more stressful. However, I have been a participant is ome successful, tightly run exercises, such as  Dr Stephen Danns' sessions of  Lego Serious Play for ANU staff and students.

Last week I took part in Johnnie Moore and Matt Moore's You Say You Want A Revolution: An Absurdist Encounter Group. But it was more perplexing than enlightening.

Assessing for understanding: Person, Process, Product

Naoko Masuda, Alberta University of Arts , will speak on "Assessing for understanding: Person, Process, Product", February 1, 1 pm Alberta time). This is part of Manisha Khetarpal's Maskwacis Cultural College Microlearning Series (also I am speaking each week on "Engaging Students Online" in the series).

Assessing for understanding: Person, Process, Product

Assessment in the visual arts and design is complex and often over-focused on a final product that may or may not represent understanding and learning. By assessing the design process, personal reflection, as well as the product, assessment becomes more holistic and meaningful for students and teachers.

Bio 

 Naoko is a practicing graphic designer, faculty member, and Associate Chair in the School of Communication Design at the Alberta University of Arts where she teaches graphic design, information design, and typography. Curiosity about how practitioners learn to become educators in the post-secondary art and design context lead her to study curriculum and assessment at the University of Lethbridge, where she is currently working on her graduate thesis. Her interests include curriculum design, practitioner-educator identity, and student engagement. 

 Cost: Free.

How small are the units in micro-learning?

Sean Gallagher writes "As Corporate World Moves Toward Curated ‘Microlearning,’ Higher Ed Must Adapt" (Nov 6, 2017, Edsurge). But how flexible are the alternatives to traditional institution programs and how small are the "micro-learning" units? Gallagher points to MOOC providers, such as EdX, as a new model for corporate learning, but are they? Also is the term "micro-learning" misleading: splitting learning in "micro" units may make the study more convenient, but does not reduce the thousands of hours required for a professional qualification.

The oldest reference to "micro-learning" I could find in the research literature was Brudenell and  Meier (1968). The authors provide "5Rs of Microlearning": Record, Review, Respond, Refine, and Reteach. This is from the age of analogue videotape, but the advice is just as relevant today. The authors suggest instruction videos of three to seven minutes. In contrast, today's MOOCs require more than an hour of study per day, over several weeks.

The "EdX Micromasters", described as "a series of higher-level courses recognized by companies for real job relevancy, and may accelerate a Master's degree...". But the courses making up the Micromasters are each twelve weeks long, with eight to ten hours study a week. This is about the same size as a conventional university course and at 96 hours study for each unit does not seem very "micro". In addition the student must complete a fixed set of courses from EdX and then a capstone assessment for the Micromasters, with no substitutions of other courses allowed, making this less flexible than a conventional university program.

The EdX Micromasters is similar to a university graduate certificate. However, a university will typically permit the student to incorporate courses from other institutions and give credit of prior learning (the Australian VET system provides even more flexibility).

A certificate under the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) requires 600 to 1200 hours of learning.  A VET certificate, such as the Certificate IV in Training and Assessment (TAE40116), has ten "Units of Competency". This works out to an average minimum of 60 hours per unit. In contrast a university certificate would be made up of only four courses, making for 150 hours per unit, two and a half times the size.

How small can a unit of learning be? At 60 hours a VET unit still seems quite large. At the other extreme the typical one to two hour workplace training course seems too short. There are structured, placed short on-line courses, such as ANU Online Coffee Courses, at one to two hours for a week long course. But could two hour courses be assembled ("curated") into a larger unit of learning? This would require thirty such courses for a VET Unit of Competency and three hundred for a AQF Certificate.

ps: The prefix micro denotes one millionth. If taken literally "micro-learning" is a very small amount of learning. The longest qualification under the Australian Qualifications Framework (AQF) is four years.  A full time year is 1,200 hours study, so a four year degree requires 4,800 hours. One millionth of a degree's worth of learning would be just over 17 seconds.

References

Brudenell, G. A., & Meier, J. H. (1968). INTERIM PROGRESS REPORT OF A REMOTE TEACHER TRAINING INSTITUTE FOR EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS (FUNDED BY NDEA TITLE XI). URL http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED017326.pdf