 Mae'n cael ei ddweud yn ymweld i'r rhan o'r ysgrifennu cyhoedd, a'n hyn o'n amlwg yma'n gweld yn ymddangos yn gweithio. Rwy'n ei oed yn gwybod a'u bod yn f yr adnodd. Felly mae'n gweithio o'r trefyn yn grannu'r cymdeithasol, ac mae'n ei ddweud i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r gweithio ar y cael ei ddweud. Rwy'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'n meddwl i'r holl yma, Fa myt sieged ydw i'n hoed. We're delighted to be back here and share with you what we've been up to in the last year Nancy,adswn i gyd nhw'n edrych! RHience of� yn rall sunshine Ma chi'n gmis? I was going to sit down but that really wasn't going to work but it's quite taken with Jesse하지 he was doing that this morning Really just to give you some context to what we've been doing We published a book earlier this year which has been the culmination of a lot of thought over the last fau, six or seven dref lecture ond gweld yn y gweithio, ond dyna hwrs, gallwn unigodd cyfweld sydd y cilio yn fawr, dwi'n teimlo hefyd yn teimlo gweld, felly mae'r gwahod yw'n gweithio a'r tynfodol yn rhan o'n gwahod a gallwn gwahodd, ac yn unigodd, os gallwn gwahod o'r cram, yna erbyn ni'n arweinydd y gwahod, yr arddangol yn gwahod ddodi'r llunio. Ond mae hyn sy'n gwahodd y byddai'n gweithio i ddim iawn i fynd i'r ardu â hyn, Felly we've been looking about what is a digital university, what does that mean, not in terms of finding an answer, but actually finding ways to have some of the discussions and the things that Jesse was talking about this morning, some of the critical discussions around what that actually means for staff and students and for a wider society. And we really were trying to, originally we didn't set about doing that, but the more we were doing this, we're really starting to try and find ways to challenge some of the neoliberalism that is all around us, the context that we're all living in. And it was very much a discursive or reflective process, and as we were doing that, it became very obvious to us that critical pedagogy was the theory that resonated most with the work that we were doing, and that really became our critical frame of reference. We're also all quite passionate about open education, so these were the kind of things that we wanted to bring into, I suppose, our narrative and our discussions. So in terms of critical pedagogy, obviously we have critical pedagogy of the oppressed, but we actually looked to some earlier work by Freer about education for criticality. I'm sorry, I'm going to forget the name of the book here, isn't that just typical when you're being live streamed, but education for critical consciousness. And some of the things that he was talking about there about the transformation of Brazil at that time from an agrarian to an industrial society really resonated with what we were seeing happening just now in terms of what was happening in our digital society, about the digital giants that were coming in, and in many ways I think oppressing us in our institutions and our wider society. So we were very much looking at that and looking at what praxis really meant and kind of unpacking our own understanding of that. And as we were doing that, our own praxis as well, but really we were looking at, and I'm going to read this. What do we mean when we were talking about praxis as a collective understanding that's derived from cycles of dialogue and experiential learning and a commitment to challenging and changing that which needs to be challenged and changed? As we were exploring and researching literature around digital education practice and the notion of change within the curriculum, within learning and teaching, within the university, we came across this word transformation an awful lot and you find that that's kind of proliferates across the literature on digital education practice and change. And we explored some of the literature surrounding some of the institutional initiatives around large scale change if you like, but we also looked at what had happened with some of the major institutional and digital education initiatives of the last sort of 20 years. Sheila and I have been involved in some of these. We looked at some of the work of the Pew Foundation in the States sort of 15 years ago or so. And one of the questions that's raised to us, when we talk about the use of digital within learning and teaching, within education, the question that comes back when you look at this literature is transformation of what and for whom. And as we looked closer, we could see lots of really good examples within institutions, within cross-institutional projects where there'd been real kind of enhancement to learning and teaching, to the curriculum, the emergence of, they're not new, but the emergence in digital contexts of participative pedagogic approaches, collaborative pedagogies and so forth. However, one of the things that struck us was that when we talk about this notion of transformation in relation to learning and teaching and significant change on more than a kind of isolated or local level of practice, what we tend to see with some of the projects that have been undertaken in recent years is often there's a very strong legacy. There's models, there's case studies, there's rubrics, there's things that can support ongoing change should we choose to use them. But really, most of what tends to happen is that there might be some continuing enhancement, but there's no broadening out of change across the whole institution or across a number of collaborative institutions or across the sector. And going back to Friery, in this notion of educational practice, challenging changing that which needs challenging changed, one of the things that we were most interested in as we developed this work was the role of digital spaces and practices in extending higher education as a public good, democratising higher education and allowing wider society to benefit from higher education regardless of whether individuals were aspiring to be in higher education. So really we were talking about the outputs of the curriculum, the worker students undertake, other aspects of what the digital helps the universities do. And ultimately a big theme that came out of our work in terms of looking at this against the neoliberal, dominantly neoliberal perspective was the focus on people in the pedagogy, not just the technology and the managerialism. So many of you have probably seen this at all presentations before. Bill and I originally started doing the work. We came up with this matrix as a way to help us understand the main things that were happening in the university in terms of digital things. So we chose these four quadrants. I won't go through them in too much detail, but things that we felt that most people in an institution could relate to. So we have curriculum and course design. We have the learning environment, the physical and the digital. Digital participation at that point there was quite a lot happening in the Scottish Government around about that. So again and then looking at the civic role and responsibilities of universities where they're situated and how they participate within local and global communities. We very much saw information literacy as a high level concept as well. We're seeing digital literacy as kind of a subset of that as well. So that's where we started and we got quite a lot of, I think we got good traction. We went to, did the usual things, we wrote some papers, went to some conferences, wrote some blog posts, that's where we connected with Keith. And this grew, but as we were doing, as I said, realised there was much more to unpack. So over the last sort of year and a half as we've been writing the book, this is what our model looks like now. So we've added a layer of academic development and open educational practice and we've tried to make this much more of a three dimensional tool if you like. And we see this almost, if you like, as just a starting point for discussions that people could use to start questioning their own context within an institution and actually the wider political context that we all live in. Jesse mentioned many things about the kinds of technologies that we buy in institutions and who makes the decisions. But also that doesn't happen just in the institution. There's a wider political environment that we're living in. There is a neoliberal agenda around about education and what people think education should be as a business, as a service that is driving some of these things as well. So we need to be able to start questioning that and have that wider discussion with people so that we can start developing, I suppose, tools and frameworks and ways of working that are meaningful to us and our students. And one of the things that we've come up with really in terms of academic development and roles of learning technologists as well, that we see academic developers and learning technologists as a central part of any kind of digital transformation. And actually, again, to echo that a lot was said this morning, we would see academic development itself as actually needs to be much more critical in terms of what it's doing and it can be very central to any kind of transformation. There's a lot of porosity between roles. Just now, many people are, you know, if you're an educational developer, if you're an academic, if you're a learning technologist, there's a lot of crossover in everything that we do, particularly around the use of digital technologies. And that's with our students as well. And I think there's a huge opportunity to work more closely together, but also to work in terms of giving some more bottom-up approaches to some of the strategic decisions that need to be taken within our institutions. And I think in terms of that criticality, we also need to be challenging some of the structures that we perpetuate as well, and looking at CPD that's provided, looking at the metrics that we're providing back to people as well. And we actually need to be modelling that kind of critical pedagogy notions of dialogue, of discursive dialogue, and actually getting people to realise that if you want to have transformation, it's not just about buying a system that will solve everything because it won't. It's as Jesse was saying, it's about investing in people. It's about having conversations with everybody and with our wider communities as well. So in the work we explore the ways in which we might re-centre or refocus the digital in relation to our institutions, our pedagogic practices, the notion of higher education as a public good. And one of the things that we kind of honed in on towards the end of our work was looking at the curriculum as an open and negotiated space, and trying to move beyond conceptions of the curriculum as the kind of syllabus that we engage or our students in, or the process of development, because hopefully it is also a process of personal development, but we were really interested in the curriculum as something that we're all engaged in within higher education, to some extent or another, as a co-located space and place, and what that might mean in relation to how we harness the digital. And in probably quite a modest way, we were seeking to try and extend, if we could, notions of the curriculum to a wider context that related to higher education being extended as a public good, and which also dealt with or perhaps sought to reframe aspects of things like open education practice as well. So, we won't go through this in detail in the recent time, and we're conscious to try and finish on 12, but we've put forward a model of the digitally distributed curriculum, if you like, which we've tried to make evidence-based. We've looked to drawn on our own work and looked at things in the sector to try and arrive at this model and conceptualise the curriculum as a kind of negotiated and co-located space and place. The way in which we conceptualise this is around values, enabling dimensions, and what we call instantiation and enactment, the practical ways of getting this done. So at the heart of the model, we're talking about praxis, participation and public pedagogy. Praxis in terms of challenging and changing, that which needs challenging and changed, public pedagogy in relation to not just how we engage externally, but how our pedagogies are negotiated with those in our wider communities. And participation. Participation in the activities of the curriculum, not just for our students and our lecturers or academics, but participation in the activities of the curriculum for those beyond the institution. One of the things that we thought was really important to this in terms of our enabling dimensions was co-location, co-production, porosity which Sheila's mentioned, and also open scholarship. And we go into these in a lot of detail within the work itself. One of the things, I'll just draw attention to very quickly, is around porosity and co-location. And we felt across both these dimensions it was really important to try and move away from quite a dominant rhetoric really around open in which we conflate open with the open online and open digital. And we were seeking to look at how the open online might co-exist and intersect with the open on campus and the open in the community. And for us there are lots of implications there around self-selected digital learning spaces, the intersection between formal and informal learning communities, and also our digitally rich spaces in the community. Not just our campus spaces, but our libraries are public spaces that can be used to provide opportunities to widen access to education formally and informally and to enact a more negotiated curriculum. Now we're conscious that we focus this on the digitally distributed curriculum. We explain in the work that actually this could easily have been framed as a digitally distributed higher education or digitally distributed learning and teaching. But there are particularly reasons why we sought to focus on the curriculum. And we're looking to, as we take our work forward, apply this in various contexts and further develop these ideas. And for anyone that happened to be at the session that Scott Conner and I did, I don't think we've got five minutes if we want people to get on, but we'll finish just now. In relation, if anyone came to session at Scott Conner I did yesterday, we are taking this as a key point to frame the development of a new open education framework at UHI. We are digitally in distributed university across a wide geographic region, so the intersection of the open online, open on campus and open in the community is something we want to use this to try and take forward. Sheila, have you got any concluding points? I think obviously we're just running through this very quickly. There's an awful lot that we've tried to pack in here, but I think we just want to say that actually the support and the interest that we've got from the Oat community has been really valuable to us as we've done our work, as we've written the book as well. So we really appreciate the opportunity to come back and speak to you. Also there's lots that we have done. There's lots that we haven't done. There are many areas that we just didn't have the time or the space to put into the book, so we'd be really interested in speaking to you more about this and having a longer discussion with you if you would like. Just come and see us, find us over the next day and a half, and we'd love to discuss this and talk about what we've done in our work and more about our thoughts and our philosophy behind it, so please do find us. Thank you. Idina's work with learning technologies helps to develop skilled data literate students who can change our world for the better. Teachers and students can develop and share coding skills with notable our Jupiter Notebook service. Our DigiMap services deliver high quality mapping data for all stages of education. Future developments include a text and data mining service, working with satellite data and machine learning, and smart campus technology.