 Rhaid, mae'n ddech chi'n cysylltu gweithio panel? Mae'n fawr o'r fawr a fawr, yn ni? Mae fawr i ddweud â'r ddiddordebau a'r ddiddordebau a'r ddiddordebau'i gwneud hynny a gweithio ddefnyddio'r ddiddordebau. Ond ydych chi'n gweithio'r ddiddordebau, rhai cyfansion profi, ac yn eich 15 munud o'r fawr, mae gennym ni'n gweithio'r ddechrau'n gweithio ac rhaid i'n dweud bod yn cysylltu'r ddiddordebau. Rydych chi'n erbyn oes eu gymrydegau i gael euxwyr hyffrand ar fy gwrthodau. Golwch chi'n gael eu gymrydegau i gael ei bod yn astagol ar hynny. Yn oes i gael ei gael eich cerddwyr gwn yn y bwysig, felly ychydig yn tyf yn y panel iawn, yng nghylch yn edrych. O'i gael ei risu o'r yma, rhywbeth o'i cael ei fath oedd yno 7000 o'ch sgwdynt yn y ffôrwm o'i 7000 o'ch sgwyddi yn ddwymedd. Felly'n gwych yn y dweud o'r ffôrwm isio. ac rydyn ni'n dwi'n gweithio bod gennymwys pethau – yna'r unwaith ond ddweud dros trwyd-dweithio ar gyfer 60 trafwyr yn cael meddwl ond wedi y cyffredin iawn. Felly gallwch bod y dyfodol, yn clor wahanol os bydd yn traffwyr a dyfoddd eu mistrwyr i'r bydd ffasilydd a'r glegel arall. Mae'r pethau bydd yn foswn i ddaid fod ymddangos roedd ei wneud i'r ddech poweredog, defnydd i'r ddechrau ardal i gynnaeth o Hiphlaethau ac yn Moog. Felly'r wneud i gael ddoch i ei gael eich asol, ЯeysiŽ abusesus yn bwyd yn fywm. Sometimes some of the pieces of content have over 15,000 comments, so there's no way you can respond to them. But what happens as a student, as a learner, is that you watch this go past, some of them look interesting, and you then click and respond to them. Mae'r cyhoeddfeydd ymlaen nhw'n dweud yn ei wneud, a'i cyhoeddfeydd fel hynny ymlaen nhw'n gymhreithio ar gael y cyhoedd ffawr, fyddwn i'r hyn ymlaen ymlaen nhw'n dweud i'ch gael y cyhoedd ffawr. Pryddiant, mae'r cyhoedd fyddai ei wneud yn yr ymlaen nhw'n gwneud yn yr ymlaen nhw'n gwneud. A oeddech chi'n ei ddweud, mae'n ddweud i'r cyhoedd yn ymlaen nhw'n gwneud, pe i chi miliwch ei casodd ar・・・ mae perfiwch yn d reasonsol a súper mewn laynydd wedi amgylchedd. Roedd hi fod gan wir Sut Llyfr Oedran Caerais yn ysgrifennu pi dda i esgyn MY Eun Lai Mor mat a nhw'n gweunig gwn i gyn gratedd ni, ond fe all anterio i gyrdwyr toth y ble Levyn opensgr. Copw Llyfr Slywams a Llyfr Ysgrifennu Find emerging But not in the typical kind of forum threaded conversation way. And then there are more structured conversations that you can have. And one thing that future learners then going to develop in the future is small group discussions as well. So it's only part of the conversational space. But we really didn't know whether these sorts of flowing water cooler conversations would work. Because they're very different to the traditional forums and threaded discussions. Ie, ond rydw i'n gynhyrch i'r ddod, ond rydw i'n gynhyrch i'r ddod yn cael ei wneud i gael ei taith i'r ffordd o'i cwestiynau. Rwy'n cael ei wneud? Rydw i'n gweithio. Rydw i'n dweud y cwestiynau, ond yna rydw i'n gwneud eich cyffredinol yn mynd i'r meleidio. ynghylch chi'n gweld whyad llawer mae'r regiwch hyn sy'n oes uch bothers se guarantee Ang webinar. vendor? Llywodraeth y cwestiyne One of the best things you can do, which we invest quite a lot on in the OU and thinking about, is trying to get the students to facilitate their own discussion, work with themselves, work as peers on things. So what we're always trying to do in our learning designs is create opportunities for the students to do creative work together. So I think when we're looking at the sorts of forms of learning design, whatever space we're looking at, we're looking at ways to try and create opportunities for students to work together, rather than to be working entirely on our agenda. I mean, I think a way that we can connect into that kind of thought comes out of the work that Mike and I have been doing on inquiry learning, because one of the ways in which students, we think, become more engaged in what they're trying to find out is if they have a role in shaping the inquiry, that their work has certainly been their experience in the school-based projects, that the kind of motivation and appreciation of the role that science can play in your life is vastly increased by trying to answer a question that you really want to know the answer to, rather than something your teacher thinks you need to know the answer to. And I think some of that kind of personal curiosity about what you're working with, that can be shaped into group online discussion. I mean, I can think of some master's courses where we have, in a way, artificially created the kind of conversational space that Mike's talking about by setting group work, by letting students decide on the particular question that they're going to answer from a set of data, and then really be in control of the process of engagement with other people on that. So I think there are lots of things about the activity design that we know something about that we could work more on. There's so much free stuff out there, which is amazing to use. I'm teaching a course at the moment on digital cultures, and one of the things we're doing, there's a free web-based thing called Together Tube, which pulls a video from YouTube into a space with a little chat room next to it. So we're running a film festival just using this technology, and it's really basic, it's really easy, it's really quick, but we can line up films, stream them in, and just have a chat of an evening as we watch the films together as a group. It's a really nice kind of simple pedagogy, so doing more of that I think. So I like the idea of the facilitating their own learning, but can they facilitate assessment? Yeah, a bit stuck there, but apparently Eileen's got the answer, so it's okay, I can relax. You can certainly do more to harness students' creativity into the assessment process. I think the reason I took, not umbridge, but I took Peter on in this comment was because if what he said was true, we have to engage with that, because we know that the single thing that drives student learning in any formal education system is potential success around assessment. So whether he's right or I'm right, assessment is supremely important, therefore either we think of creative ways to do it, and the things that I've come across particularly focus on collaborative learning, on production of interesting artefacts, not you know, pencer and papal answers to questions that you could google the answer to if you were allowed to do that in the exam room. So the notion of assessment being done on products of your learning that you care about seems to me to, and I think that we've seen some examples of how technology can help with that co-creation of artefacts that you might care about. I think that's the way that I see technology moving, the goalposts a bit for what might be more interesting assessment. But you don't agree? No, I kind of do. I mean to be honest it's a provocative question, right? I was trying to stimulate a bit of thinking, because actually it's a fake question, because I was thinking as I wrote it, I don't think technology is the answer. I think the answer is what it is we're trying to do, not just the technologies that we can use to solve the problem, because in a sense if you can't let the student google the answer, and that's a good answer, then it's a fake examination, because that's the real life for all of us. So actually we set up a lot of fake situations where we're really testing recall, really testing a false competence in a skill that a student doesn't need. And that seems to me a dilemma, but it's not to do with technology, it's to do with what we're trying to measure, and what we're trying to create in the student. So in a sense we're saying can you create experiences for the student to perform where they're creating something of their own, a really effective film festival that the students have co-created together would be a fabulous assessment, because they've built something that achieves whatever the educational goal was. To add to that, one area that we were looking at is not only students creating artefacts, but then curating them. So with the inquiry system you can create a mission, it's very easy to do that, but then you need to curate it, you need to get other people to join it, you need to engage them in the conversation, you need to show why that mission is important, you need to get them to like it. So the artefact that you've created is only just a starting point, and I think that's a new and interesting aspect of evaluation and assessment where you produce something, but then you've got to make it work, you've got to curate it over a period of time. This question was sparked, I guess, initially by the comments about future learning and the stream of comments and how you facilitate those and people going towards the most liked ones, et cetera. But I think it also relates to assessment. For me in future learning, the comments and responses and likes feels like assessment, and I comment and I comment. What can you do, what more can you do to direct facilitators and students' attention towards those students that are making comments and not being liked? Can you manipulate behaviour through the interface so that you can help those people become more integrated in the... I think it's a really interesting question that because the danger in any sort of conversational forum is that the person who speaks loudest or the person who speaks most frequently or the person who speaks most articulately is the one who then gets the approbation, who then gets the reward. So how can you enable people whose voices are small but nevertheless important? I think there are a number of ways we can do that, and in future learn, one of the areas that I'm interested in is in small group discussions so that you can allow people to go from trying to solve a problem individually to solving a problem in a small group where every voice needs to be heard in that small group and then you share it in a wider space. And I think there are opportunities there, particularly of that moving from the individual to the group where you can have different dynamics and you can let the small voices be heard where you perhaps can't in a larger space. OK, another question has come in from Facebook here. Do you feel that online tutorials provide the same level of teaching and learning as face to face? Eileen, do you want to have a go at that? I'll have a go. I think they can do a lot of the same things. I think one of the things that we've always tried to do at the European University is analyse what's required in a particular situation in the early attempts to teach science. We had to look at what experimental work or lab experience, boil it down to the key things that needed to be delivered at a distance. So I think that when I've done work as an EL myself I certainly enjoy face to face tuition but I've also worked with online groups at master's level where I think in some ways I can think of ways in which the experience is actually slightly more capturable. The fact that you can record what other people are saying and also potentially, if you do it asynchronously, take time to consider your responses to a group, as Mike says, in face to face, we've all been in face to face tutorials where somebody has the loudest voice and takes most time at it. Potentially there are ways that online tuition can be a bit more equitable. What do you think, Sean? I don't think that's so much a media issue as a teaching issue. I think community and contact drive good teaching. It doesn't really matter how that teaching is mediated as long as there is a sense of community and there is a sense of responsiveness and contact with teachers. Some of the people coming off our distance programmes say I've had a more intimate and more responsive experience than I've ever had on campus. So I think it's not a question about media, it's a question about context and teaching. You've obviously been giving a lot of thought to Edinburgh to how the student experience itself can be improved through online interaction. Can you say a little bit more about that in terms of students across the globe who are having the Edinburgh experience? I think it's about having a commitment to a quality of teaching which is exactly the same as the quality of teaching that students would get on campus. It's just differently mediated, so it's about having, I don't need to tell you this, you know this, well-staffed courses with responsive teachers, learning and teaching designs that encourage community and set up structures that enable community to form among globally distributed learners. It's that kind of commitment to high quality course design and to high quality teaching input. I wouldn't be defensive about it in saying that I think the online has the ability to be significantly better in the face-to-face and I think there's a lot of very good evidence that the things that you can do online allow you to do so much more than you can do when you're locked into a physical space. But that's to do with the nature of the technology and what's possible. The key is, of course, not those things. The key is what you're trying to do in the event. So it's the design of the event and the learning design around that that makes it successful or not successful. So a tutorial can be a bad tutorial because it's designed badly regardless of where it is. But with respect to the potential, I don't think there's any doubt that online is significantly more powerful. So put those together in creative ways as they're trying to do in Edinburgh and other places. You have some really exciting things and of course we do that as well. We don't just do online. We do physical too. Right. Anybody else from the floor? Yes please. There's a mic on its way to you. Thank you. I realise that we've talked primarily about adult learning and higher education learning. But in the video you showed that you have worked with younger children and I do a lot of work with younger children. How do you think that the technological learning and using technology and distance learning with younger people, is it different? Eileen? Mike's going to start. Okay, so on Thursday I'm going to the Bet show which is the largest trade show for education technology in the world. I'm going to be on the Samsung stand there and going to be talking about apps in education. And one of the huge opportunities is for one-to-one learning. So it's something that we've been wanting to do for the last 20 years or so to allow every child in a classroom to have their own personal learning environment. But not just that they can use in the classroom but they can use between classroom and home or classroom and outside. The idea of connecting informal and formal learning. That's what we're trying to do with the Inquire project. That's what we did with an earlier project with museum learning. One of the big problems on museum trips for children is that they're not adequately prepared and then when they go on the trip, there's nothing really they can take back apart from a worksheet. So we looked at the ways in which we could connect those spaces together and I think that's the huge opportunity at a younger level is to provide your personal learning environment which you can not only just have in one space but you can move between spaces so you can have that mobility as a learner around your personal technology. Right? And I have to say that one of the things that we were most pleased with in the personal inquiry project where the video came from at the point that we got the money to do the project, people said oh you'll have terrible trouble getting into classrooms and doing things because teachers won't want to use. Technology will be too complicated or time consuming. The opposite was the case. People bit our hands off to be part of the project. I vividly remember in a local school we went for our first pilot. We were looking for 10 students to do something with to test out our technology. An hour later we came out of the school having responsibility for the technology to support 70 GCSE geography projects which was a bit of a feast. To me it was really brought home to me the appetite for using technology in interesting ways in schools. One very quick last question. I think you are it there. Hi. It might be a bit of a provocative question. But if online tutorials can be better than face to face and if Edinburgh can teach people all over the world, why do we need campuses? Quick answer from each of you who go round. It was a question to Sharpe. While Peter is thinking about it. I think it is dangerous to underestimate the richness of warm bodies in spaces. I think that is important. But we are not talking about an either or choice here. Peter mentioned earlier we can have really good online teaching and really good on campus teaching and both work really well if they are done really well. That would have been my answer too. I am glad we are all here now. We have a group of warm bodies together. There are obvious advantages not least in celebration of bringing people together. I think part of the question that we did not respond to whether there would be similar kind of findings on a project if we tried to look out what the spaces of distance education are at the European University. I think it would be really interesting to do because I think there are maybe certainly in the early years the open days on campus were really important for students to come to. They really wanted to come here. They wanted to know what Milton Keynes was like. They wanted to see Walton Hall. But there are other sorts of things like the IDENT that was always played before a university television programme that link people to the notion of a place or a space or whatever that they are connected to in this open university community. I think it would be fascinating to try and map some of the similarities and differences across the two institutions. I do take the opportunity to have more informal discussion with our panel. Thank you very much for coming along tonight. Those of you who have joined us virtually and particularly thanks to our panel who I think have done a tremendous job for us tonight so if we could thank them in the usual way. Thank you.