#sxswEDU: Thoughts, Reflections & Then Some…

Time sure flies when you’re conferencing, volunteering and travelling… so my thoughts on South By South West Edu (#sxswEDU), are delayed by exactly 2 weeks. My bad.

Due to my love of Austin and enjoyment of SXSW, I thought SXSW Edu would be a great conference to engage with other educators and expand professionally. There were a number of things I liked – such as being on public transit, new perspectives on learning, and connecting with tweeps (Shout out to: @tjoosten, @gsiemens, @veletsianos, @audreywatters & more #iamEDU friends!). I also appreciated the lively banter our Social Media in Higher Ed (#smHE) panel had on the topic, and the great follow up conversations with other instructors, practitioners, and researchers. 

Essentially, I got what I wanted out of the #sxswEDu conference – connect, social, interact and learn. I sort of expected something else from this conference, specifically with regards to the education (K-12 and Higher Ed) involvement. I was a bit disappointed to see that the Panel Picker selected more sessions with industry, rather than any educators. It was odd. I was not alone in noticing the tensions were felt between the industry and education. Why were the instructors, teachers, principals, faculty, higher education professionals, and educational administrators not sitting in these #sxswEDU seats?

Although the education presence was not the “sage on the stage” approach, I am glad I was present to listen to what industry and technology leaders think the “future of learning” will be. I know that many of these sessions were challenged and talked about outside the formal #sxswEDU program, and I was curious as to how other educators interpreted the conference message(s). 

One thing that was very noticeable = the repetitive rhetoric being shared from room to room. To mix it up I, jokingly, initiated the  #SXSWedu Terms to Know, Use, Love & Hate Google doc to note the key words, terms or phrases I heard at the conference. Some might say I was being jaded (*cough* Siemens *cough*), but really I was just having fun with the common language of the conference. After curating this list, I decided to create a game (…which had multiple players, I might add): 

Note: Another suggestion was to draft a blog post with the complete list of terms. I decided to respectfully decline said challenge; however I will stay alert to the language and context of these words. It’s not a bad idea to keep your ears open and listen every once in a while… Thanks for reminding me of that #sxswEDU.

#SXSWedu Panel: Social Media in Higher Ed – Where Are We Going? #smHE

Are you attending the SXSW Edu (#SXSWedu) conference in Austin this week? Why not drop into our panel just after the opening of #SXSWedu? Join our session on Monday, March 4th from 1:30-2:30 pm in the Austin Convention Center Room #15. Here is the skinny on our panel:

Panel: Social Media in Higher Ed – Where Are We Going?

Image c/o Justonescarf

100% of Colleges and Universities are now adopting “social media” tools to engage students. While strategies and tactics vary per institution there has been little analysis into the effectiveness of these networks both from the student and institutional perspective. Social Media Managers have been hired, consultants have been giving “best practices” on how to use “free tools” but is all this network chasing really getting us anywhere? In this panel we’ll showcase examples of good and bad social media implementation, and use these as a framework to discuss what a meaningful social media strategy and guidance looks like.

Intended Audience: Higher Education; Student Affairs; Academic Affairs; Faculty; Ed Tech Start Ups

Join the dialogue with Tanya (@tjoosten), Brandon (@bcroke), Brad (@bradpopilolek), and myself (@laurapasquini) as we chat about these three central questions proposed by our panel:

1. What does a failed social media strategy look like? How do we know social media failed OR was successful? Do we need social media strategy, guidance, or policy on our campus?

2. What does a successful social media strategy look like? What are three pillars every social media initiative should have? What works really well with using social media? What initiatives have you seen?

3. What role should institutions play in engaging students with social media? How should institutions engage  social media? Why should we use social media? How can the different players on campus (faculty, administrators, students, developers, industry, & start ups) work together and collaborate for purposeful social media use?

If you have a question and you want to chime in during the session (near or far), I’ll be tracking the conversation with the hashtag #smHE to collect your questions, thoughts, and contributions before and during our panel session. What questions do you have about social media in higher education? Let me know.

UPDATED: Slide Deck & #smHE Tweets Collected. Enjoy. 

#SXSWed Panel: Social Media in Higher Ed – Where Are We Going?#smHE (with images, tweets) · laurapasquini · Storify or http://bit.ly/Z422Pw

Implications for Use of Technology in Advising @NACADA 2011 National Survey

In Fall 2011, I was asked to review data collected from a national survey sponsored by The Global Community of Academic Advising (NACADA) and contribute to the chapter on advising technology. The survey posed a few questions about technology in advising, such as assessment of institutional advising types (e.g. online, on-campus, and blended), communication with advisees, and student information management practices. The entire 2011 NACADA National Survey results and chapters can be found in the NACADA Clearinghouse; and my chapter, “Implications for use of technology in advising 2011 National Survey” are available to read online.

One final sentiment I shared in the conclusion, was to push higher education administration to consider how they assess technology in advising as holistic process connected to other campus divisions:

“When assessing technology usage, postsecondary leadership must also consider future significant challenges such as economic pressures and new modes of scholarship (Johnson et al., 2012). Through researching these technological trends and challenges, conducting campus-wide assessments, and establishing strategic plans, advising stakeholders can effectively integrate technology in advising practices that support both advising units and institutional goals” (Pasquini, 2013).

I did include a few recommendations and guiding questions to consider when considering and  evaluating technology for advising:

“Many students bring expectations about using technology to campus, and therefore, many institutions participate in community advising approaches in which technological solutions provide seamless support and communication for academic planning and progression. When advising units address the use of technologies for both managing student information and communicating with students, they may impact student support and retention initiatives on campus. Higher education institutions, who deploy technologies for communication and information management, benefit from having both the data and ability to effectively connect to their student populations” (Pasquini, 2013).

What was key from this data analysis, was that the advising and a number of student service providers lack specific information about the WHY, WHAT, and HOW technology is being used in the advising profession. With the 2011 NACADA survey and encouragement from the NACADA Executive Office, development of the 2013 Technology in Advising Use in Higher Education Survey (which is still OPEN FOR RESPONSES until March 4, 2013 at 11:55 pm CDT) was initiated. I hope that this instrument helps us critically evaluate HOW the field of advising IS using technology at colleges and universities around the globe.

In developing this instrument, our working group discovered that, overall, any assessment of technology in advising was lacking. The last time information about advising and technology was collected was circa 2002, and a number of the instrument items are already obsolete (e.g. overhead projectors, Netscape web browser, and Palm Pilots). Needless to say, information about where the advising community and technology stood was missing, and the overarching idea about use, perceptions, and  the current state for technology in advising.

Here are the objectives for the 2013 Technology in Advising Use in Higher Education survey:

1. Establish what the current use of technology in advising among the advising profession – student management, regular use, applications, software, etc.
2. Understand how technology in advising is being used for communication purposes with students, professionals and faculty
3. Identify the relevance of technology for advising on a global scale for the advising profession
4. Understand the current perspectives and perceptions of how technology in advising is being utilized in the profession today

So far we have 523 responses to the survey. The data collected will help to better inform the advising profession beyond anecdotal assessment, and critically evaluate how technological solutions effectively support our advising practice.  Without any real assessment for technology use in advising, how can we determine what direction we should move forward? I hope that survey responses and data analysis can provide some of these answers. More to come…

Reference:

Pasquini, L. A. (2013). Implications for use of technology in advising 2011 National Survey. NACADA Clearinghouse. Retrieved from http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/Resources/Clearinghouse/View-Articles/Implications-for-use-of-technology-in-advising-2011-National-Survey.aspx

Guiding Social Media at Our Institutions [ARTICLE]

Remember last fall when Tanya Joosten (@tjoosten), Lindsey Harness (@LindseyHarness) and I asked for your input on how your institution guides social media? No? Too long ago to remember?  Well regardless, we appreciated those who could respond as it helped us gather information on what we are (or are not) doing to direct social media use in higher education.

The results from the research are in, and published! Here is the recently published, peer-reviewed article for the Society for College and University Planning (SCUP).

Access the article in PDF form here.

This article expands on Chapter 6 from Social Media for Educators to understand HOW higher education is guiding social media use. Through our open-ended questions, we learned more about how instituions are supporting and guiding social media. Often we see social media used a broadcast medium and there has also been a shift to designate new roles or responsibilities to support its use on campus.

Thanks to the SCUP Change-Disruption Mojo for featuring some of the findings as this week’s topic, specifically to Alexandria Stankovich (@thinkstank) for sharing both sides of the issue:

• Concerns: monitoring online behavior, identity thief, privacy, FERPA/FIPPA, maintaining university image, control, ownership, required trainings

• Benefits: interaction and engagement beyond the formal learning environment

Want to learn more about the research and/or article findings? Take a gander at the SCUP Google+ Hangout interview with Dr. Tanya Joosten, who shares her own insights and research highlights from this study.

Key takeaways:

• Social media is often used as a “broadcast channel”
• We should engage and develop a culture through the use of social media tools
• Institutions need fluid access to information regardless of the technology
• Simplicity principle to build capacity for the social web
• We need to develop models of effective practice for LEARNING!
• Trust the faculty you hire – they have some great ideas
• Recognize that learners are MORE than sponges
• Match technology with task & building digital literacy opportunities
• Is social media in your strategic plan? Is social media or technologies part of your learning outcomes on campus? THIS is where your efforts need to be
• Institutional encouragement is needed for collaboration ON YOUR CAMPUS to identify how to best guide social media models & effective practices

“The pedagogical benefit of social media use beyond its application as a motivational technique continues to be unaddressed by many universities.”

This study was just the tip of the iceberg. There is definitely more research on learning, social media use, and higher education to be done. Time to get at it (says my faculty advisor @drjeffallen)! Back to the dissertation proposal grind…

Reference:

Joosten, T., Pasquini, L. A., & Harness, L. (2013). Guiding social media at our institutions. Society for College and University Planners – Integrated Planning for Higher Education, 41(2), 1-11.

2013 Technology in Advising (#AcAdv) Use in #HigherEd [SURVEY]

Dear Academic Advising Professionals, Faculty & Administrators in Higher Education,

The division of Undergraduate Studies at the University of North Texas (UNT) is hosting the 2013 Technology in Advising Use in Higher Education survey to assess how technology in academic advising is being utilized in colleges and universities around the globe. The NACADA Technology in Advising Commission sponsored study is designed to examine the current use and perception of technology in advising among academic advising professionals, faculty advisors, and advising administrators in higher education.

If you agree to participate, you will be asked to respond to a 20-question survey, which will take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete.  The questions will ask for your opinion of technology in advising use at your college and/or university institution, and your own perception about how technology is supporting the field of academic advising as a whole. Your responses are completely confidential and no individual participant will ever be identified with his/her answers.

SURVEY: 2013 Technology in Advising Use in Higher Education or cut and paste the following URL link into a web browser: http://bit.ly/AdvTechSurvey2013

This survey will close on Monday, March 4^th at 11:55 pm CST.

If you have any questions or comments, please free to contact me. On behalf of the Global Community for Academic Advising (NACADA) and the advising profession, I would like to thank you for your time and input. Please pass this survey along to other advising faculty, professionals, and administrators at your college and/or university.

Thank you,

Laura Pasquini (@laurapasquini)

NACADA Technology in Advising Commission Chair 2011-2013

Academic Counselor, Office for Exploring Majors – Undergraduate Studies, UNT

This blog post is cross-posted at The Official NACADA Blog.

Using Verbs for Specific Learning Outcomes

Student learning outcomes is a very common term in education. For many of my k-12 colleagues we have used this term from graduate course work, to teaching practicum, and for curriculum planning. The challenge in writing student learning outcomes happens when you have to find actionable items and SPECIFIC methods for learning assessment.

Last week I attended “Writing student learning outcomes and the GSTEP teaching template:  How they inform your teaching” for the G*STEP program presented by Shana Cole & Nancy Fire from CLEAR.

We talked about components of a teaching strategy, which included:

A. Context for your teaching strategy
B. Selecting learning challenges to address with your teaching strategy
C. Objectives for this experience
D. Foundational knowledge necessary for students to participate in teaching strategy
E. Step by step planning
F. Ground rules (if needed for you strategy)
G. Assessment: How do you plan to assess the effectiveness of your learning strategy?
H. Anticipated Challenges: Indicate how you plan to deal with any of these challenges that may apply. Describe.
I. Journal Reflection

The three level model for student learning outcome development, which included the following levels:

1. Goal
2. General Learning Outcomes (GLOs)
3. Specific Learning Outcomes (SLOs)

The last step – Specific Learning Outcomes (SLOs) – is where we focused our attention. Specific learning outcomes are highly measurable and possess detailed requirements. As an instructional designer who is often involved in program evaluation or course design, I appreciated the cross-disciplinary conversations on how to meet various subject matter content issues with the needs of the learner. A helpful resource to keep us on the same page and to guide our SLOs discussion was the Bloom’s Taxonomy verb wheel. This was a practical tool that helped to focus our planning and here were some of the key points I gleaned from the overall workshop:

• be clear, specific & measurable
• identify what the students should be able to do as a result of a learning experience
• display evidence that learning has occurred at a specified competency level
• focus shifts from what “I will teach” to “what students will learn”
• define content, expectations, assessments & creates constructive data i.e. data, percentage, and understanding of student learning

For student learning outcomes to work they have to connect to the learning. A great way to assess your expectations of your SLOs is to share these with other educators,  both inside and outside your discipline or subject matter expertise. Student learning outcomes need to be written at a general level to ensure clear communication, and limit subjective language. By using SLOs you are able to modify course objectives, assess curriculum design, and measure how your instruction impacts learners. By creating 3-7 overall goals in your course, you will want to consider at least 3-5 specific learning outcomes to measure each goal. These goals will help address your teaching strategy and how you assess your learner’s progress.

How do your specific learning outcomes (SLOs) fit into your entire course planning and content delivery?

Registered for #et4online yet?

The Emerging Technologies for Online Learning Symposium in Las Vegas now has the full program posted online and early bird registration ends on February 12, 2013 so Register NOW. If you are in the field of learning technologies, as a student, educator, entrepreneur, or researcher, then you not want to miss the joint #EdTech symposium hosted by the Sloan Consortium and MERLOT. Here are a few more updates and announcements from the #et4online conference planning committee:

6th Annual International Symposium for Emerging Technologies for Online Learning
April 9-11, 2013
Planet Hollywood Resort, Las Vegas, NV

There are some world-class presentations being offered at this conference – check out the FULL PROGRAM. This also includes a complimentary workshop, Creating Your Own MOOC with Udacity, by Sebastian Thrun, co-founder of Udacity, Vice President/Fellow at Google, and a Stanford University research professor. Workshops and the Unconference Session are included in the conference registration at no additional fee! Also, be sure to check out the newest additions – The Launch Pad &  Career Forum. 

Can’t travel to Las Vegas? Learn more about our virtual attendee option. Also, feel free to get a preview of the virtual #et4online attendee options during the FREE webinar on Wednesday, Feb. 27 @ 3 pm EST => Register HERE.

Are you planning to attend the #et4online conference? If so, I look forward to connecting soon. For now, feel free to find me online or join the conversation about the conference here:

Twitter hashtag: #et4online 
Follow us on Twitter @et4online

Reflecting on Values & Identity from #Dalton13

Over the past few days at the 2013 Dalton Institute, I have been encouraged to think about the cross-section of how our cultural norms, use of technology, and institutional practices intersect to support students. Educational reform for higher education is not new; however it was refreshing to have a group of graduate students, faculty, scholars, and practitioners to be part of a thoughtful collective to think deeper about these challenges.

Although the institute’s focus was self-promotion, social media, and student development, it was great to hear a number of conversations emerge about the disruptive forces and potential opportunities to embrace change in Student Affairs. The philosophical narratives and analysis of technology’s impact on identity was enriched by listening to personal perspectives and such varied experiences.

Photo c/o @DaltonInstitute {Thanks @vanessaballer!}

As the final keynote of the institute, I gave my “triple threat” perspective as a student, instructor, and professional in higher education. My goal was to share ideas and practices to develop a richer learning experiences; specifically ones that I have valued as an active scholar. So, doing my best to follow the amazing #dalton13 featured speakers – I shared my own narrative, critiques, and insights on how emerging technology can support and challenge student development. I gave some tangible examples and ideas of how to move beyond the gadget, application, or “next big tech thing” by considering ways educators can be actively pushing their learners. I talked about everything from exploration to collaboration, specifically by empowering students to be part of the solution to our institutional challenges.

My #Dalton13 Keynote – Notes & Then Some! (thanks for the photos & tweets #dalton13 backchannel!)

I appreciated the conversations (although some were far too brief!) around identity and student values that  I had with a number of #Dalton13 attendees, especially the FSU HESA graduate students. Although a number of ideas were shared at the institute, I am still left thinking and reflecting about these key questions:

• How are student values demonstrated in a digital environment?
• Can educators have an impact on the character development of learners?
• Is student development really impacted by technology? How so?
• Does there need to be a shift in how we support our student population on campus?
• How can our graduate programs do a better job of challenging and supporting scholar-practitioners with “self-promotion” questions?
• Will higher education cultural norms and institutional practices be changed, or will we be left behind?

A Kinder Campus to Collaborate

There are a  number of students, staff, and faculty in my life who I have gotten to know along my academic and professional journey – as colleagues and as friends. I have been fortunate enough to experience college/university life as a student, professional, and instructor  at various types of institutions and in more than one country.  Each new experience has afforded me to work with insightful colleagues, learn about effective practices, understand a variety of student populations, and consider innovative ways to  support students, staff, and faculty.

In a recent Inside Higher Ed article I shared my thoughts on why our divisions in higher education need to think beyond their own areas. Some of the challenges ahead in higher education will require our departments/divisions to step our of their silos to collaborate and reach shared goals for our institutions. It does require some risk; however I think there are larger rewards for reaching out and conversing with others. In considering some of the opportunities and challenges in higher education – such as financial, legislative, staffing, and more – perhaps it is just the right time to sit down to chat and connect to others on campus. Institutional units will need to put their heads together to think creatively and collectively about some of these issues – if they are not doing so already. 

Over the last few weeks, I have been thinking about what a “kinder campus” means in higher education. I am currently participating in a Collaborative Learning Community (CLC) at UNT that brings students, staff, and faculty together to work towards a shared solution to a problem/challenge at our institution [more to be shared on this later]. Since we have diverse representation on this CLC, as the co-chair with another faculty member we have been considering the following needs to keep our group moving forward:

• introductions are important – find out what everyone “does” on campus
• use common language and define terms
• establish purpose and goals for the CLC
• share and distribute information/facts that are not known
• establish a meeting time/day of the week
• create agendas to guide, not limit the conversation/sharing
• record meeting minutes for those who might be absent
• online space for resource sharing 
• flexibility and understanding for attendance is a must
• define roles to guide actionable items & project initiatives
• bringing food/treats is never a bad thing

Although cross-departmental meetings can be challenging, as it requires stepping outside our own domains and sharing across disciplinary boundaries, I have had some of the most productive conversations and ideas to emerge from these gatherings.

Are you part of a collaborative working group at your higher ed institution? What tips do you have to “be kind” and connect with colleagues outside your division/department?

 

 

 

#Dalton13 – Google + Interview & Keynote Teaser

Thanks so much to the Dalton Institute (@DaltonInsitute) coordinators, Jessica Dean (@j_deanSAys) & Emily Fox (@EmilyFox526), for hosting my Google + Interview on Tuesday (1/9). I appreciate the great questions from the both of them, and the #Dalton13 backchannel. Everyone really made me reflect and ponder my own technology and student development path – so thanks!

In watching the video recording (which I rarely do), it helped me think more about my talk and how to best shape the focus. Here’s a sneak peak at my #dalton13 keynote title and abstract, for those of you who will be attending the session on February 2nd:

Here is my 2013 Dalton Institute Character Clearinghouse Interview and a preview to my keynote next week:

Title: 

Student Development 2.0: Optimizing Social Media to Connect Your Campus

Abstract: Today’s college student operates in a world that is informal, networked, and filled with technology. Digital interactions are influencing both our students’ characters and values, with increasing access to information and continual contentedness  With the emergence of social web resources, student development professionals and faculty have the ability to engage in experiential and applied learning objectives for their campus environments. Social media creates a space where “everybody and anybody can share anything anywhere anytime” (Joosten, 2012, p.6). Educational paradigms are shifting to include new modes of online and collaborative learning and student-centered, active learning to challenge our students to connect curriculum with real life issues (Johnson, Adams & Cummins, 2012). As new generations of students create and share content on campus, college educators need to realize the potential social media has to construct a culture of participatory, open learning. Emerging technology platforms and devices are beginning to disrupt higher education as we know it. To co-evolve and positively impact our learners’ success, it is critical that we consider the influence and impact social media has on our student populations. This keynote plenary will share ideas and suggested practices to develop a richer learning experience to help students thrive in the changing digital frontier.

References

Johnson, L., Adams, S. & Cummins, M. (2012). The NMC Horizon Report: 2012 Higher Education Edition. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

Joosten, T. (2012) Social media for educators. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.