Innovations in Education

 

Many of us working in the education sector are now faced with the dizzyingly fast succession of innovations, particularly in technology.  Some love it, but the majority, I think, are becoming a little confused.  Let’s have a look at the scenario today, in terms of three concerns:  key trends now,  significant challenges, and the technologies to watch.

According to the 2012 report (higher education edition) of the New Media Consortium, an international community of experts in educational technology, the six key trends are the following:

1.     People expect to be able to work, learn, and study whenever and wherever they want to.   That’s where Open Universities are moving towards.

2.     The technologies we use are increasingly cloud-based, and our notions of IT support are decentralized.  Access is our main concern now, no matter where you are at anytime which means it includes cloud computing.

3.     The world of work is increasingly collaborative, driving changes in the way student projects are structured.  Teamwork and group communication are more important now than they ever have been.

4.     The abundance of resources and relationships made easily accessible via the Internet is increasingly challenging us to revisit our roles as educators.  Increasingly, we in the universities are going back to mentoring rather than mere “credentialing.”

5.     Education paradigms are shifting to include online learning, hybrid learning, and collaborative models.  We’re increasingly looking for alternatives to the traditional face-to-face models of teaching-learning.

6.     There is a new emphasis in the classroom on more challenge-based and active learning.  In the past we were satisfied if the learners simply listened without even doing anything else – that’s passive learning, and it’s on its way out.

Now, here are the current challenges, according to NMC:

1.     Economic pressures and new models of education are bringing unprecedented competition to the traditional models of higher education.  We’re increasingly looking at new technologies to facilitate learning even in the absence of teachers.  Still, we won’t be able to completely get rid of teachers.

2.     Appropriate metrics of evaluation lag the emergence of new scholarly forms of authoring publishing, and researching. Social media are changing the way we evaluate information through peer review processes, for example, but our own transformation to this new processes is rather slow.

3.     Digital media literacy continues to rise in importance as a key skill in every discipline and profession.  Techno-literacy is becoming a necessary requirement for all.

4.     Institutional barriers present formidable challenges to moving forward in a constructive way with emerging technologies.  We’re all getting out of our own comfort zones to begin embracing the new things around us but this is also taking time because we’re not moving fast enough.

5.     New modes of scholarship are presenting significant challenges for libraries and university collections, how scholarship is documented, and the business models to support these activities. We’re now able to access information from sources other than the libraries and university collections.  Will they cease to be useful?  Not likely but we’re increasingly using more other sources.

Now, here are the technologies to watch in the next few years:

Within the next 12 months, according to the NMC, we’ll notice rapid increase in use of mobile apps in all disciplines.  We’d like to be always connected to the Internet using at least 3G tools.  Additionally, we’ll witness rapid increase in the use of tablet computing.  This is now pervasive among most students in universities.

In the next two to three years, we’ll witness increased use of the following: game-based learning, and more efforts in learning analytics (the art of using complete profiles of students – including both their tacit and explicit knowledge) as basis for instructional designers to design learning experiences.

In the next four to five years, we’ll see more gesture-based computing, and the Internet of things.  Gesture-based computing is shifting from use of mice, keyboards, and touch screens to body gestures and voice controls and interpretations to operate computers or smart phones.  Now, the Internet of things refers to our ability now to assign unique identifiers to various small objects on demand.  Because of the new ability of assigning new Internet protocols, objects will now have their own IP addresses.

We do understand that the NMC will continue to chart the landscape of emerging technologies that will reshape our perspectives of providing higher education services.

###

Towards Devcom as Mindset

About a few days ago, in a brief moment of self reflection, a stream of thought crossed my mind again.   For whatever it is worth, I have tried to jot down at least part of what I could recall after a few minutes because the fleeting moment was lost quickly.  I thought, though, that, crude as it may still be, it is good enough to start from again.

My mentor, Professor Nora Quebral, first defined development communication as the “art and science of human communication applied to the speedy transformation of a country and the mass of its people from poverty to a dynamic state of economic growth that makes possible greater social equality and the larger fulfillment of the human potential” (1971).   After four decades, Professor Quebral (2012) is now saying that development communication is the “science of human communication linked to the transitioning of communities from poverty in all its forms to dynamic over-all growth that fosters equality and the unfolding of individual potential.”  There may be a difference in the phraseology used, but the deeper meaning  remains the same.  On the whole, the measure of development remains founded on economic precepts although in the new definition it has become much clearer that the measure of development has expanded to include non-pure economic concepts.   

What this is telling us is that the definition of development communication could change, as it has many times, usually depending on who the definer might be, or the context in which the definition is anchored.  But as a concept, development communication has not changed.  The definition, in spite of what appears to be some differences, actually remains because that is what  definitions are for, as anchor for everybody to maintain their moorings to the concept..   What does change is the manner in which the individual constructs the meaning he or she attaches to it and its processes, which becomes the basis for the development of a mindset.  For example, in the early years of devcom, I personally considered devcom as a vocation, some kind of a calling.  I still do, and I have, in fact, stuck to that mooring much more deeply as I have learned to view development phenomena from a more personal perspective.

In the decade of the sixties, development meant economic development.  Then, beginning in the seventies and eighties, the social and even spiritual dimensions were added to the equation.  Necessarily, this made the whole process much more complicated and more difficult to measure and achieve.  So from a largely economic development orientation in the sixties, devcom practitioners in the succeeding decades became increasingly concerned about total human development.   It was in this transformation that I somehow internalized at least a little bit more what devcom was all about given the totality of my own experience and exposure to human conditions under varying circumstances.  During the first decade after the introduction of devcom, I may have been preoccupied with economic development and was personally detached a bit from the realities of the other social and perhaps psychological aspects of the human development agenda.  This largely influenced my own personal concept of what communication could do as a variable in the development equation. 

Today, I am trying to look at devcom more as a communication mindset rather than mere variable in the development equation.  Well, to be sure, I have not yet achieved fully that psychological state although I know that once one has achieved that state one has reached a level of mental preparedness, readiness, and willingness to pursue with single-minded confidence and commitment to achieving, through the use of communication, a human development purpose or end-goal.  It is a mental state that predetermines how we might respond to and interpret a situation in order to be better prepared to pursue it through various means of communication.  For me personally, it has come to a point where when I look at an activity designed to benefit individuals and communities I immediately have that feeling of connection where I can say “this is a devcom situation” or “this is not a devcom situation.”  The first time that this idea of devcom being a mindset crossed my mind was in 2007 when I was speaking before participants of an international seminar on development communication at Kasetsart University in Bangkok (Librero, 2008).   At that time, I had considered devcom as mindset but at a very crude stage.  Today, I’m looking at it as a comprehensive psychological state that, to me, at this point, defies any sort of formal definition itself but may be heavily influenced by the current definition of the concept of development communication.  It is as if the condition is having attained a semblance of self actualization.  It means one just knows when he or she is doing development communication work.  It is a situation where you do things automatically without thinking about definitions.  When you consciously go by definitions and perhaps even sets of criteria, you are clearly doing things more mechanistically.  This makes you less sincere, therefore, less effective.

How does one reach this point or level of awareness and commitment?   I guess one has to start with a definition of the term because that’s where we anchor our understanding of it.  The definition may be necessary but far from being sufficient in transforming one’s mental processes towards concretization of beliefs, knowledge, and behavior.  The bottom line is, we have to internalize what it means to be unable to achieve one’s potential as human and gain a deep understanding of what it takes to achieve such potentialities.

In general, devcom, according to how it is currently defined, focuses on the achievement of what the United Nations refers to as the Medium-Term Development Goals (MDGs), which do have very specific targets.  This is how Professor Quebral (2012) puts them in perspective, as follows (p. 7):

1.      halve by 2015 the proportion of people whose income is less than one dollar a day;

2.      halve by 2015 the proportion of people who suffer from hunger;

3.      ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and girls alike, will be able to complete full course of primary schooling;

4.      eliminate gender disparity in primary and secondary education, preferable by 2005, and to all levels of education no later than 2025;

5.      reduce by two-thirds, by 2015, the under-five mortality rate;

6.      reduce by three-quarters, by 2015, the maternal mortality ratio;

7.      have halted, by 2015, and began to reverse the spread of HIV/AIDS;

8.      have halted, by 2015, and began to reverse the incidence of malaria and other major diseases;

9.      integrate the principles of sustainable development into country policies and programs and reverse the loss of environmental resources;

10.    halve by 2015 the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water;

11.    by 2020 to have achieved a significant improvement in the lives of at least 200 million slum dwellers.

Hitching the focus of development communication to these MDGs shall remain until they shall have been fully achieved or at least substantially achieved, then communication efforts would be refocused again on what shall then be considered major goals of human development.  By then, perhaps there would be another context.  But the manner in which individuals would view the role and function of communication would perhaps remain because it shall have become a mindset.

If, in fact, devcom is a mindset, then it is much like equating development communication with the pursuit of happiness, instead of mere economic development.  After all, happiness would be the pinnacle of the achievement of the human potential.  Then, perhaps the pursuit of nations could be the pursuit of national happiness, which could be measured in terms of Gross National Happiness (Revkin, 2005).  The GNH is a measure of quality of life or social progress in a more holistic and psychological terms in contrast to the highly economic-based indicator known as the GDP.  The GNH was introduced in 1972 by Bhutan’s Fourth Dragon King, Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who has managed to steer his country to modernization and a happiness index much better compared to other developing countries in spite of low economic development in recent decades (Thinley, 2002).

References

Librero, Felix.  (2008).  Quo vadis, development communication? (thoughts on the practice of devcom in a knowledge society).  Original version was presented in an International Seminar on Development Communication, Kasetsart University, Bangkok, September 2007.  The revised version appeared in the Maiden Issue of The Philippine Journal of Development Communication, 2008.

Quebral, Nora C.  (2012).  Development Communication Primer.  E-book. http://www.southbound.my.   Penang, Malaysia: Southbound Sdn. Bhd.

Quebral, Nora C.  (1971).  Development communication in the agricultural context.  Paper presented at the symposium on the theme ‘In Search of Breakthroughs in Agricultural development’ in honor of Dr. Dioscoro L. Umali, College, Laguna, Philippines, 9-10 December.

Revkin, Andrew C.  (2005).  A new measure of well-being from a happy little kingdom.  The New York Times.  http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/04/science/04happ.html

Thinley, Lyonpo Jigmi Y.  (2002).  Gross national happiness as measurement of development.  Theosophical Digest, 2^nd Quarter, pp. 36-45.   

2012 Fine Year, And Not Over Yet

Age?  None of Your Business

June 24^th, we had a simple brunch trip to Tagaytay.  It was Jeg’s birthday (never mind how many years).  This was my first time to visit the popular stop-over called the Bag of Beans Coffee Bar.  Nice place. Jeg’s guests were niece  Danyelle, sister Ruby, and mom Lita.  The place is actually nice.  Wouldn’t mind going back there for a tumbler of coffee, together with their over-sized wafer cake.

Jegs is looking just great these days.  Of course, both of us do need to get rid of some amount of excess luggage such as on the midsection.  But it’s difficult to go against centrifugal force.  Even the earth can’t.  See, as the earth rotates on its axis, it tends to bulge on the middle, which is why the point that is farthest from the center of the earth isn’t Mt. Everest, the highest point on earth, but Mt. Chimborazzo in the Andes mountain range in South America, which is located one degree above the equator.  As the earth rotates on its axis, it bulges on the midsection, which is where Mt. Chimborazzo is nearest.

Couple of Publications

The year 2012 seems a good year for me.  During the first half of the year a couple of books came off the press,  Both carried works I’ve done earlier (meaning the previous year and earlier).  Let me tell you about these two books.

The first book, titled Development Communication in Directed Social Change, A Reappraisal of Theory and Practice.  It was edited by Professor Srinivas R. Melkote of Bowling Green State University in Ohio, USA.  Professor Srinivas is an expert in communication for social change. This book, organized in four parts (Introduction; Rethinking Theories in Communication and Directed Change; Social Change Communication in Action: Macro & Micro Contexts; Case Studies in Communication and directed Change).  All in all, the book has 13 chapters, the 12^th one I prepared.  This chapter is titled Development Communication Education in Los Baños: Contribution from Graduate Research.

In 2011, Dr. Sundeep Mupiddi, Secretary-General of AMIC in Singapore, visited Los Baños and specifically requested me to contribute to a book he was organizing at AMIC.  He did mention that the book would deal with some kind of reappraisal of devcom from a theoretical point of view.  Well, I’m not a theoretician, but I did tell Dr. Sundeep that I would gladly participate in the project although I would prefer to write on a specific topic of my choice, to which he agreed.  I chose to write about the role of graduate research in the training of devcom specialists at UPLB.  I focused on the PhD dissertations produced at the College of Development Communication at UPLB from 2000-2010.

In general terms, the thesis of my chapter is that graduate research in devcom done at UPLB is a good measure of how devcom is taught in Los Baños.  Devcom graduates of UPLB are highly skillful in the use particularly of ICTs.  However, due to the heavy expectations on devcom experts in the university to help solve the development problems of the country, they (experts) have not been able to do substantial research that contributes to theorizing.  In fact, the great bulk of staff and graduate research done in Los Baños has been focused on solving development problems, largely from the points of view of government agencies or the mother institutions of graduate students.  There has not been enough time and financial resources to do research that substantially leads to theorizing in development communication, which is one reason why devcom remains a skills-oriented field for many practitioners and academics.

This book is available from AMIC in Singapore.  Visit this website: www.amic.org.sg.

The other book is titled People’s Radio (Communication Change Across Africa), authored by Dr. Linje Manyoso, a development broadcasting expert from Malawi in Africa, and currently lecturer and director of the MSc Programme in Media and Communication at the London School of Economics and Political Science.  This book is Linje’s doctoral dissertation at La Trobe University in Australia.  I’m honored that he  made substantial use of my book titled Rural Educational Broadcasting, A Philippine Experience, which was published in 1985.

Dr. Linje asked me in 2010 if I could write a preface to his book since I, too, have been in the field of development broadcasting plus the fact that my book was a major reference in his dissertation.  Little did I know that the piece I wrote for him would end up as a special chapter in his book, titled Manifesto for a Development Radio Broadcaster.

This book was published by Southbend Sdn. Bhd., publisher of development communication books, based in Penang, Malaysia.  People’s Radio is one of the titles in the  Communication for Development and Social Change Series, where a good friend, Professor Jan Servaes is Series Editor.  I invite those interested in this book to email my friend Chin, owner of Southbend: chin@south.pc.my.  You may also visit: www.southbend.com.my.

Visit the UPOU HQ

Do find time to visit the campus of the UPOU in Los Baños.  But don’t pick the luscious-looking bignay berries just yet.  They have been sprayed with chemicals, perhaps to get rid of the excessive ants.  Perhaps the UPLB Institute of Food Science has contracted the berries for their wine-making project.

By the way, Dr. Armand Palijon, the UPOU Landscape Architect, has been really taking care of the landscaping requirements of UPOU.  Quite easily, I’ve heard someone else say so, the UPOU frontage is much more beautiful than any of the other campuses of UP.  Well, you gotta be in the place to appreciate its beauty.

We’ll see when the entire frontage will be full of sunflower during graduation next summer.  Could be more beautiful than that of Diliman.  We’ll take bets later.

###