Archives for category: Uncategorized

Back in the day I was involved with this Jisc project on the Challenge of eBooks  in academic institutions. There was a great team, pulling together expertise across Libraries, Publishing and academic practice domains to look at Consumption, Creation and Curation. I really liked the infographic approach!

It’s old now, 2012, but I found myself looking back at it recently.

At my institution we’ve started to look at how we organise ourselves to select, procure, integrate and support e-books and their associated digital content. It became clear early on that there’s often not a clear line between whats an e-book and what’s a digital resource, or what’s a Library decision and what’s an IT decision.

Speaking to a publisher recently I thought it might be useful to share a grid that we put together about who cares about what. This is very much a working draft and I’m not sure what our next steps are to make sense of this space but I’m happy to share it.

eBook Considerations

Authors: Amber Thomas, with Lynne Bayley, Russell Boyatt and Kerry Pinny, (c) University of Warwick

IMPORTANCE: High / Medium (otherwise it’s Low or none!)

  Depts Library ITS Procurement
Subject coverage H H    
Academic user experience


H   H  
Student user experience H M H  
Support (within dept)


M   H  
Support model for adoption and integration support (potential economies of scale)


M   H  
Licensing cost (and potential for pooled costs)


H     H
Licensing model


  H M M
User accounts/access model


  H H  
Usage monitoring model (and whether a VLE integration changes that)


  H H M
Integration options (deep links, book links, whole service links, sustainability)


H M H  
interoperability with Talis Aspire


Integration technology approach (LTI, webservices/API… other)


Information security  


  H M

Authors: Amber Thomas, with Lynne Bayley, Russell Boyatt and Kerry Pinny, (c) University of Warwick

I think our challenge is working out what order to ask the questions in, so that if there is an integration blocker we know before we pay for the product, or that if there is a data security issue we know before we integrate it, or that if there is a pricing breakpoint that makes bulk purchase much better Value for Money, we know in time to sound out the other departments about the scope of the purchase. Which comes first?

I’m fairly new to this so I’d be very interested to hear from other large HE institutions with devolved decision-making how you make these decisions.



On 12th September 2018 I had the great honour of keynoting at my favourite conference. The Association for Learning Technology Conference, #altc .

I shared my personal career history, mapped against Martin Weller’s 25 years of edtech.

work history

I didn’t include it in my talk but I did actually get carried away in my preparation and marked myself 0-3 on a spreadsheet. I also noticed that there were some missing: lecture capture, polling tools and learning space design?

25 years

Then I shared a personal Venn diagram (gotta love a Venn diagram) and admitted to a large dose of imposter syndrome.

Onto the main talk:

Disruptive Innovation is often assumed to come from the outside.

And yet there is lots of state-funded innovation

It’s not all commercial vendors and market forces imposed on us:
We’ve done some great things together: shared services, open standards, open source.

I’m particularly proud to have worked at Becta and Jisc.

We did a quick poll – I will find a screenshot!

HE is not unique
Maybe we should stop talking about how unique we are
Digital transformation is a thing!
It’s not just our challenge

Consider what we talk about vs what we do: we talk a lot about things like learning analytics, even though we’re busy doing work about VLEs and e-assessment.

You won’t get traction just because something is interesting to you
It has to be the right time

Yes, we’re still talking about it: some topics we talk about are issues of practice. Why should we stop talking about it, if it’s still useful to talk about it?

Change takes time. I gave an example from the “50 things that changed the modern economy series about electrification“.

So 2018 is the year of Critical Ed Tech? It’s hard to be an institutional learning technologist in 2018. Are we the baddies????

I then shared some thoughts on “How to be good institutional learning technologists”:

  • It’s not about the technology
  • But technology matters (and I quoted Anne-Marie Scott “maintenence is a thing“)
  • Money matters
  • Subject discipline matters
  • Evidence matters
  • Its not about perfect
  • Don’t design services for early adopters (and I quoted Kerry Pinny’s “silent majority vs deafening minority“)
  • Be the one to ask the stupid question
  • Recognise the dead birds (and I quoted Lawrie Phipp’s Dead Birds)
  • Recognise your power
  • Mediate gracefully: digital education is made of academic labour, we need to be respectful of our role in that. (and I quoted Melissa Highton on lecture capture and strikes)

Institutional learning technologists should be ethical, respectful and most of all: useful.

My final thoughts were that perhaps the edges are where we learn, and where we are useful, and perhaps we are not one field. But i think we are important to the future of education.

And here is a fab sketchnote by James Clay:


I really enjoyed doing the Keynote, and thanks to everyone who has responded in person and on twitter, I hope what I had to say resonated!

… since I blogged here.

I feel like I should get back into blogging so will start with a catch-up blurt-out and see where I go from there.

Back from 10 days in the Netherlands, seeing Amsterdam, meeting with Dutch relatives, and hanging with close family. Highlights: food, company, canal trip, Stedalijk gallery, centreparcs, fresh air, relaxing and trying out a ninebot segway. The ninebot was amazing, really intuitive to control. (I didn’t need to have my arms out, I was just pretending to fly).

Physical and mental health has been on my mind for lots of reasons. I am grateful to be healthy at the moment but am feeling very aware that I can’t take that for granted. I must do more bike rides with the boys, more solo runs and find time for things that bring happiness to me and my loved ones. Maybe I need more Segways in my life 🙂

I managed not to read my email in the ten days I was away, but I know I have some office move shenanigans to get back to. Grateful for Kerry Pinny leading on that in my absence.

Last summer I got my Senior Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (SFHEA). I’ve started my CMALT portfolio but not finished it yet. I’ve also got more involved with the Heads of eLearning Forum (HELF) which is a self-organised group of institutional leaders who share practice: I really value this forum and have joined the steering group.

I am very pleased to report that my efforts and skill at work have been recognised and I have been promoted up a grade, making me officially senior management. My team has been making great progress in supporting the uptake of technology in teaching and research. My task now is to use my increased authority and broader scope to make more good things happen. There’s such a lot to do, the trick will be prioritising.

Thinking about my online communications, I plan to take a look at the beta digital perceptions tool developed by Lawrie, Donna and Zac. I only really use Facebook these days, I’m just a Twitter daytripper now, WhatsApp is for people I already know face to face, and I haven’t touched Instagram. I really respect people who write regular posts like weeknotes, but I worry that so much of what I do wouldn’t be appropriate to share: so much is about people management or might be strategically or commercially sensitive. I need to find a way of communicating with my external peers without oversharing!

This autumn I’m off to the Educause annual conference for the first time. It’s in Denver this year and I’m going with three colleagues. Would love to hear from anyone else going, and I’m especially interested in meeting up there with people doing big projects with their Learning Management Systems / Virtual Learning Environments.

Before that though, in a month I will stand in front of 500 of my peers and give a keynote at the annual conference of the Association of Learning Technologies. I am so honoured to have been asked and despite everything I can feel a big whoosh of imposter syndrome waiting to trip me up so I’d better get preparing!!

A buffet of thoughts at the beginning of 2018 and nearly my 42nd birthday. This picks up from my previous posts about my 40th birthdayspace/sci-fi and feminism. Things on my mind …

People. My kids and husband, my family and friends: their health and happiness. I didn’t post much on Facebook over xmas, sometimes I feel a bit like it’s all humble-bragging but I really am lucky when it comes to family. And I enjoy making new friends, glad to have made more in 2017.

Big world stuff. Brexit and Trump. I am proud to be a Remainder/Remoaner and I hope that Labour will get an opportunity to counter Brexit in a way that the Tory press won’t rip them apart for. And Trump, Trump, Trumpety Trump, wtaf!? Please make it stop.

My job and the opportunities for technology support for teaching and research. How I manage, how I plan, how I influence decisions. Being a woman in IT. Being professional services staff in a University. How to collaborate with my great colleagues to make progress, however subtle or predictable: keeping things moving. 

Digital. Part of my job is about understanding “digital”. To me “digitisation” is about turning analogue to digital, but I’ve never had much time for the word “digitalisation”, it’s too much like “electrification”: too broad to be useful. One of the podcasts on 50 things that made the modern economy talked about how long it it took for factories to redesign to benefit from electricity: often decades. The opportunity to change processes only arises sometimes, and the people in charge of the redesign need to have the appetite for change. So it’s not surprising that organisations are not yet fully “transformed” by digital. Its not digital pixie dust. It takes time for change to cycle through and it needs people like me and my husband and my peers to patiently assist that transition. So maybe digitalisation is a useful word after all.

The Future. The last few months I find myself speculating about the future, the bigger picture. I’ve read some of Yuval Noah Harari’s Homo Deus, the Ashlee Vance Elon Musk biography, and various pieces on economic ideas and technology futures. What follows is my musings on that …

Anything to do with Elon Musk. SpaceX, Tesla, tunneling, solar … he thinks big futures. He’s obviously ruthless and probably a nightmare to know, but I love the mix of business models, technology and strategic economic thinking. He pays his taxes, he worries about AI, he open sources their engineering. Fascinating.

Autonomous Vehicles
. They will transform our roads, our models of car ownership, our use of space. The transition will take decades, and that might be the most interesting and challenging phase. Shared ownership, multi-function vehicles, melding public transport concepts with intelligent routing: I look forward to it!

Waste, Recycling and Food. When I think of what might change, I think this whole area is ready for reform. Our century-old sewage systems, our over use of plastic packaging, the politics of food supply chains, meat, organic, food biodiversity. Shout out to my talented film-making cousin Holly Black for educating me with her film about food. Here’s a thought: will we eventually have homes that include plug-in pipe sockets and flaps with automated food deliveries and waste removal? So much could change.

Intersectional Feminism. I like to think of myself as a confident feminist and progressive. I’m 100% behind Black Lives Matter, Everyday Sexism and Me Too. But if I’m honest I haven’t kept up with the thinking around transgender and there are things I’ve yet to process. The onus is on me to do that, and I am mindful of this piece: Are you an Ally?. My kids views are so much more enlightened than social views when I was young. They are so much more liberal/accepting/open on disability, mental health, race and gender. That gives me hope that things do change and will change.

Data Privacy. I’ve struggled with this, as I think privacy is a blip in history. I think of the swathe of humanity living in villages, and of novels by George Eliot and Jane Austen: how people’s real or misunderstood histories catch up with them, and I wonder why we expect to avoid that. So I found Mike Caulfield’s “some predictions” post section on “the erosion of privacy” very timely “the mailman doesn’t get to read my mail”. I’m still not quite sure what I think.

Universal Basic Income. This policy concept is growing in popularity and being piloted. It could be a game changer, mitigating the impact of robotisation/AI replacing human jobs, rewarding unpaid labour such as caring and community work, and reducing the overheads of means-testing. It’s a radical concept and whatever happens the idea is shaping  the future: I’ll be watching that space with interest.

And on a final note: a little part of my brain is always reserved for boots, good food and music. Because yes.

Happy New Year!

On 11th September 2017 I went to the Leicester University’s event “Implementing Lecture Capture: what are we learning?“. Lots of useful discussion, and I presented one of three case studies in addition to Leicester’s own story which is told well through their videos, (see event page).  Thanks to my colleague Jon Owen, Service Owner for Lecture Capture Service for his info into the presentation below.

Here’s my talk on Warwick’s lecture capture journey,



So what have we learnt?

Lecture capture is an educational technology driven by student demand

The Warwick echo360 pilot started as replacement for Camtasia Relay. That was a tutor-managed approach where they had to finish session early to process recording in time, and there was no standard way to provide recordings to students. The A/V Service Owner knew better options were becoming available and started the pilot in 2012 with the equally forward-thinking Chemistry Department (what is it about Chemists that make them technology early adopters?!)

Lecture capture quickly became a hot topic on campus and was in every Student Union education officer candidate’s manifesto since 2012.

The service got students attention, and we’re making it happen: a definite good news story for responding to student demands.

I forgot to mention this but Sarah Williamson from Loughborough reminded us that the withdrawal of the Disabled Students Allowance meant that HEFCE/BIS put the onus on universities to replace the paid-for notetakers with institutional lecture capture systems.


Lecture capture shines a spotlight on different approaches to teaching

I’m not just talking about the frequent debates about chalkboards!

Talking with academics about their use of, and concerns around, lecture capture highlights:

  • the balance of their teaching between large lectures, smaller lectures, seminars, group work etc
  • the extent to which they teach as part of teams or quite autonomously
  • the implicit content delivery models, relationship to textbooks, coupling between teaching delivery and curriculum, how often content changes, whether content contains commercially sensitive materials or possibly high value research material
  • attitudes to attendance – how much does it matter, is it monitored, do students have choices?
  • approach to discussions – do they happen in lectures? how do staff and students feel about being recorded? does it deter them from asking questions, is that because of learner culture or potential future use of recordings?
  • position on use of screens in sessions: do we want students to be looking at screens as well as the lecturer? Some academics happy with focussed screen use for small group teaching but not ok with use in lecture theatres

Lecture capture is a battleground for intellectual property and academic freedom

Lecture capture highlights staff concerns about:

  • terms and conditions of copyright ownership
  • surveillance and monitoring
  • team staffing models and job security

By its nature it is a central service with centrally-imposed policies,which in some institutions automatically attracts suspicion and dissent!

The technical landscape is complex

There are multiple teams involved in Lecture Capture, with different concepts of “rollout” and different support models. A/V specialists are used to providing time-critical responsiveness, VLE teams often need a few days or a week or longer to fully resolve a user’s issues. We have different but complimentary service cultures.

Integrating with the VLE adds value but also different dependencies and constraints: information structure and end-to-end workflows

Software infrastructure: video capture, editing, management and sharing is a confusing converging marketplace. Alongside echo360 we have planet estream integrated to the VLE for video management and streaming, and as we already have Turning Technologies Responseware we have an overlap with echo360’s Active Learning Platform. I know from other institutions too that this is a tricky space to manage and predict: overlap seems inevitable but it can look like duplicated spend.

Timetable-driven lecture capture is harder than it should be. My colleague Russell Boyatt has created some scheduling middleware between our cached timetable data and our lecture capture system, but the data itself is complex and the additional workflows required to handle a fluid timetable are challenging.

How much do the added value features and analytics get used? We pay for them as part of the platform, and its great to hear when people are using them. But in my experience they’re not used very much, and we’re not pulling them through to any kind of learning analytics data aggregation yet. And a seperate issue: editing. Do you encourage staff to top and tail recordings, or do you encourage release of raw footage and let students move the slider bars? If topping and tailing feels like a steep learning curve for staff, is it justified by benefits to students? I think raw footage is fine.

What do we do about transcripts and captioning? How do we optimise for accessibility and inclusion in an affordable and scaleable way? This is an area of fast moving technology development, so we need to keep a watching brief. But that alone could take someone half a day a week, can we afford to do that? or will we need to wait for lecture capture suppliers to have approved integrated suppliers at a reasonable cost on an on-demand basis with some authorisation involved from someone appropriate at the university!

It is an opportunity to think ahead

What will the best technical infrastructure be in 5 years time? As I said, its a complex technical landscape with many players, its hard to plan far ahead.

Retention. How long should we keep recordings, for the purposes of revision and audit, and how do cloud cost models change that? There was a useful discussion of this later in the day.  Basically many institutions retain materials for the programme duration plus one year. Which is usually four or five years. Many institutions started their lecture capture service in the last five years. So only a few people in the room had gone through the process of deleting recordings. Some institutions don’t delete. Because many institutions make recordings available through the VLE, lecture recording access is determined by VLE access. So the important time is when students lose access to the VLE and therefore to recordings: that is the de facto end of access. 

Lecture capture brings elearning teams into the world of capital spend and corporate comms, how do we benefit from the visibility? Leicester University speakers stressed how their lecture capture system is part of their Digital Campus and integrated into their overall investment plan.

Are we capturing normal lectures or trying to changing lectures? Are we promoting a service, developing a practice or enforcing a policy? This was one of the recurrent themes of the days discussions.

Closing Thoughts

My final slide was:

  • Build on the momentum to enhance the wider technology-enhanced teaching landscape
  • Amplify the student voice but explain the limitations and concerns
  • Recognise staff concerns but challenge them:
    • Attendance
    • Copyright
    • Bootlegging
  • Have an explicit policy to counter rumours and myths
  • Value the many roles that go into providing and supporting lecture capture
  • …. and don’t forget to switch on the mic!



A good event, thank you to Leicester for the invite.

There’s a huge amount of data and information on lecture capture practices but I wanted to highlight a few:

Barbara Newland’s data from Heads of eLearning Survey

Emma Kennedy’s post “Opposing lecture capture is disablist”

Matt Cornock et al’s work on student use of lecture recordings

WIHEA funded projects at Warwick:




This is my 5 minute talk on Business Cases from our ALT-C Session on Evidence Bases and Business Cases (1702). This was composed jointly with Dr Melissa Highton.

It is fashionable to roll your eyes about “management concerns”  as if it’s somebody else’s problem. But when you get to a certain level as a learning technologist you have to develop some understanding of management issues and administrative domain Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou illustrated in her opening talk.

If you don’t trust “them” to make good decisions, you need to get better at understanding what decisions “they” are making, and how.

I thought about making a Jargon Bingo card for this talk. But this isn’t a spoof talk. I’ve worked in this field for nearly 20 years, at an institutional and national level. and I am very bored of learning technologists who like to snigger at institutional management. Here’s what I’ve learned along the way …

Business Cases

Business Cases are a structured way of laying out the evidence that a proposed investment in people, time and cash, is a worthwhile risk that will create benefits in the right places at the right time, to a big enough extent that it is worth it. Laying out the Cost Benefit Analysis. And that “is it worth it?” is known as Return on Investment. There are models for all of that, but don’t be blinded by it being management speak: learn it.

It’s not always scientifically applied. But if a senior manager wants to champion your proposal, you need to know how to provide that sort of argument. It goes both ways: if someone important wants to block your proposal, they might ask for the business case. You can’t even have the argument if you don’t speak the language.

Strategic Alignment

I think there’s a paradox to learning and teaching strategies. If they are good, they are obvious, and they make you think they are unnecessary. But we need them. We set strategic direction because anything is possible with unlimited resource but there is never unlimited resource. So how do we avoid exhausting ourselves exploring every new piece of software, academic’s idea, technology practice? We describe our priorities and try to combine our efforts to get us there rather than all do everything at once. So always explain how your proposal will help the institution make progress.

Have I cracked that, personally? Of course not. But I have learned that strategy does matter and if you always ask yourself about what your institutional priorities are then you have a better chance of securing support for what you think is important.

Who makes decisions at your institution, and when? Understand your planning cycle and the priorities of major stakeholders.

So …

Where do learning technologists go wrong? This is from my experience at Becta and Jisc as well as at the institutions I’ve worked at …


Academic time is the biggest cost on campus. You might call it three hours of CPD, but they may see it as three hours mandatory training. Try to be honest about their time: estimate the cost of the learning curve so that it can be weighed up against the benefits. Academic stakeholders will prefer honesty to evangelism.

IT and Library is often treated as an invisible cost, just stretchy infrastructure that doesn’t need quantifying: its just there. Don’t make that mistake. Yes they are there to support the rest of the university but they are also people that are paid for 36.5 hours a week, they’re not magic.

Be realistic about costings: suppliers calculate costs in different ways, make sure you do your research, whether its an upfront cost by FTE banding, or whether it monitors concurrent users, and whether it includes VAT. Do the numbers.

By the way, cash costs are usually the least problematic. And capital spend, one-off spend, is the accountants favourite, they’d much prefer spend £100k this year than £20k a year over four years.


Learn the language of Use Cases: use cases are our friends. And be alert to those early adopters and innovators who push for meeting edge cases.

(Improving 50 people’s fulfilment of use cases by 80% might not be as good an investment as improving 500 people’s fulfilment of use cases by 20%)

Helping the majority of neutral users and solving their pain might be more important than added value for the already active users. That might sound counterintuitive, but think about it.

Also, on benefits: not all benefits need to be pedagogical improvements. They might be efficiency gains to free up departmental administrators from maintenence tasks to planning tasks. They might be PR gains, or data quality gains. Don’t confine yourself to pedagogical impacts: broaden your vocabulary.

Option Appraisals

Management want transparent decision making about a particular approach or product is best. Share your workings. You can say which is your preference, but understand that if people help make a decision a) it’s more likely to be a good decision and b) they’re more likely to help it to success.

It might not be the outcome you expected but by respecting the process you become trusted as part of it.

Sustainability and Scaleability

When I evaluated bids at Jisc I was often surprised how many bidders didn’t understand what we meant when we asked for a sustainability plan. Many said “another Jisc grant”. Others assumed IT Services will take it on, without evidence that has been discussed with them. Imagine future you five years from now inheriting management of today’s proposal. Take the future seriously.

So here’s my provocation …

Institutional learning technology is not about perfection

As Diana Laurillard might say, anyone with unlimited time and resource could design a perfect bridge. But in institutional capability building terms, which approaches can be repeated and supported, another 20 times, 100 times, 1,000 times? It’s a bit like the National Institute for Clinical Excellence: what is efficacious and affordable at scale?

If you want to influence your institution, learn the language of management. ITIL, Prince2, Business Models. Understand them as much as you want them to understand you. Bring senior managers fully costed business cases with options clearly indicated. Bring them proposals they can say yes to.

I convened a panel to create a workshop drawing on various sessions and discussions I’ve been part over over the last year or so.

The session is Evidence Bases and Business Cases, session 1702, and it runs on Wednesday 6th September at 1pm.

Panel is Dr Kyriaki Anagnostopoulou, Bath Spa University, Professor Neil Morris, University of Leeds, Professor Don Passey, University of Lancaster and Sarah Davies, Jisc. Melissa Highton, University of Edinburgh is unable to attend but jointly composed the Business Cases talk.

I will link here to relevant posts and slides when available

My post on Business Cases : Business Cases and Learning Technologists.

I was very flattered to be asked to speak at a debate-style session at Jisc Digifest. The Motion was “Digital technology is fundamentally changing learning and teaching in Higher Education”. Prof Neil Morris of Leeds University was speaking for the motion, I was to speak against. The opposite of preaching to the converted: my job was to put the cat amongst the pigeons.

I went about preparing for it in my usual fashion: grand plans, exploratory conversations with colleagues and a lot of procrastination. My ideas for visual gags involving devils horns on avocados or Advocaat bottles were rejected by people with more sense than me. I hadn’t really pulled all my ideas together so in the end my contribution came in three parts that don’t quite join up. The article was written with the help of journalist Michelle Pauli who worked from a transcripted conversation we had to create something printable. Then there was my script for my opening statement. Then it went a bit more freeform with my responses to Neil Morris.

I’ve had a good response to this slight mish-mash of positions, and in conversations with people and I’ve realised I have more to say, hopefully more articulate than what I’ve managed so far. So I now have an ambition to come at this again and write a coherent blog post.

But for now, this post will serve as an archive of my contribution to the talk. And a record of my personal impact, which I like to call “pimpact”.

Article in Jisc Digifest (thanks to Michelle Pauli)

Script – See Below

Recording – Session starts at about 4:50:00 minutes, towards the end. Not sure how long this video will be available.

Storify – curated by me in a brief spell of “vanalytics” (my phrase for vanity analytics)

Huge thanks to Sarah Davies at Jisc for inviting me to do this, and to Neil Morris for his side of the debate.
Thanks also to people for their help with my prep: Mary Stott, Kerry Pinny, Jim Judges, Melissa Highton, Helen Beetham, Tim Dumbleton-Thomas, Sue Thomas, Emma Melia, Russell Boyatt, Ross Mackenzie, Lawrie Phipps, Mark Stiles, Paul Hollins … and without her knowledge, Audrey Watters ;-). Plus anyone else I forgot to thank.

Script – Opening Statement

What kind of idiot would come to a jisc event and argue against that?


I’ve worked in educational technology since 1999. For national agencies Becta and Jisc, and for five universities. I’ve worked on big change initiatives: National Grid for Learning, Ferl, National Learning Network, and in HE open access research, Jorum and open educational resources.

Now I lead the central eLearning team at Warwick University.

I’ve spent my career working with digital technologies in education

And yet I’m here to argue against the motion that digital technologies are fundamentally changing teaching and learning in HE.

Why? Have I been wasting my time?

Some people argue that HE isn’t changing.

Some people argue that the main modes of teaching and learning remain unchanged over the past century or more. People sat in rows in classrooms and lecture theatres, factory style education. Chalk. Mortarboards. Reading textbooks. Submitting handwritten essays to the departmental secretary. Looking up marks on the noticeboard in the corridor.

Some of those things still happen.

But some things have changed, YES …

The students might not be sat in rows.

They might have screens, in their pocket or in front of them.

The academic at the front might have moved through banda photocopies to OHP acetates to overhead projectors, to digital screens. The presentation technology might actually have changed a lot. And maybe the academic’s delivery style might be a bit different as they become comfortable with it.

And beyond the classroom, there are new forms of digital content: there are ebooks now, ejournals, content on the VLE, video/audio resources, all easily accessible on the student’s own device. That wasn’t possible 20 years ago.

The essay is word-processed and submitted online. It might be marked online. It is probably plagiarism checked online. The marks and feedback are available online.

YES. Digital technologies have changed the way that digital content is produced, presented and consumed. You can have that one.

Digital technologies have also changed the way people communicate across space and time. Email is ubiquitous. What people do with it is an interesting question.

But yes. Content is different these days. And email use is widespread.

Has that created a fundamental change to teaching and learning? Is that enough?

Often what people can do at university is less than what they can do in the wider world.

* When I bought my last car, I provided a digital signature to a graphics pad.

* When I need to upgrade my phone, I chat with an advisor online.

* When I go to the airport I used to print my own ticket, now I just scan the QR code.

We’re living in the future, people. It’s pretty cool.

Lets use these technologies to streamline the administrative transactions required to move into, and through, university. Lets go paperless and self-service and more efficient. Lets do it.

But we’re looking for fundamental change, and I think that means in how we teach, maybe even what we teach?

We talk about interactivity, flexibility and personalisation.

Teams like mine spend a lot of our time encouraging academics to try basic things. Sometimes they don’t see why they should.

We all know some excellent practitioners. But many many others are not convinced, and they are not making use of the tools beyond the obvious. They don’t see the need to change.

Technology is a tool, it has to be used.

If academics don’t want to change the design of their programme and modules, then they won’t use technology to do it. The practices won’t change just because “there’s an app for that”.

If we don’t remind ourselves of that, as institutional educational technologists, we fall into a dangerous trap.

We encourage a belief in digital pixie dust.

I think we have to tell the hard truth: that this is about staff decisions, about curriculum design, about changes to what and how we teach.

There is no pixie dust.

But there are plenty of expensive products available for universities to waste their money on and blame us when the products don’t work.

In summary

I think digital technologies have changed content and communication. But if we’re looking for substantial change in what and how we teach then I don’t think digital technologies have fundamentally changed teaching and learning in HE.

And we should be very wary of claiming that it could.

Notes – Discussion

I said something about the barriers to flexibility, something about scale (how much adoption of new practices count as change?) and something about speed. Something about information literacies and post-truth, and whether universities were fast enough in responding to that. We touched on unbundling, and the dangers of Uberification and Neil had some very good answers about what might drive the adoption of new models of provision.

Image result for space creative commons

IMAGE CREDIT: My Space Sim Seat by Gabriel L. Marginean. Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License


The last few years I have crowdsourced my fiction reading and have found people in my network to be an excellent aggregated recommendation service. Somehow Marieke Guy managed to read a book a week during 2016. How?! I am in awe. And some of my friends online get through a huge number of non-fiction books. I’m very jealous of that, I just can’t concentrate enough. But I do always have a book on the go and I recently blogged about rediscovering feminism, much of which was books and films.

My creeping obsession of 2016 has been space-based sci-fi.

Escapism is much needed given the state of the world. Brexit and Trump were not things I imagined or welcomed. But there’s more to it than that. I have been drawn to grand plans, to huge ambitions, to sketches of life in the far-future. I’m not one for space battles and intergalactic war. If I’m honest, Star Wars leaves me a bit cold. The books and films I’ve enjoyed nearly all include some daily life: the living arrangements, the food, the hobbies, the space ships and planet-ports and the science that becomes everyday tools and technology. So many things I haven’t seen and read yet, this is only a partial snapshot of the genre, but everything I’m about to mention has nourished me this year.

So to usher in 2017, I present to you some highlighted Films (F) and Books (B) imagining the future, in space …

Interstellar (F). Liked this, especially the end, the vision of how people might live. (Not to be confused with Gravity, which I confused this with in an earlier post!)

The Martian (F). Loved the science, and the potatoes-with-ketchup, the extent of the ambition.

Mars (TV), National Geographic. Am a bit behind on this, so no spoilers, but enjoying it very much. Again, the ambition and the science.

A recommendation led me to The Book of Strange New Things (B) by Michel Faber. I didn’t expect it to be science fiction so it felt like a genre-surprise. (Recommendation from Morag Eyrie or Jackie Carter??)

My biggest discovery was Anne Leckie, the Imperial Radch Trilogy (B). I think I found that myself. Wow, wow, wow! Far future, exploring life in space, huge vistas of history, artificial intelligence, culture and politics.

That led me back to Anne McCaffrey, the Ship Who Sang (B): older but really good, and clearly a big influence on Leckie. Speculative fiction about AI, small stories in a huge world. I have read some Ursula Le Guin but owe her a revisit I think.

Then I accidentally found The Long Way to a Small Angry Planet (B) by Becky Chambers. Powerful, closely painted world, feels a bit McCaffrey, a bit Leckie. Just about to start her second book “A Closed and Common Orbit”. She self-published the first one and if you like the idea of a spaceworld a bit Dark Star, a bit Red Dwarf, space ships with the wires showing and people just jobbing it, try it.

My final mention goes to Seveneves (B) by Neal Stephenson (Recommended by Paul Walk or Mark Power or Ian Dolphin?). The hugeness of it, and the engineering, the science, and the effect of space on human culture. I hear there is a film being made, and I will be crossing my fingers they do a good job of it.

Many of these books gave me great dreams, but Seveneves and the Imperial Radch Triology painted the most enduring pictures in my mind.

Let’s Boldly Go into 2017. Cheers!







Over the last year I have been exploring the new wave of feminism, through light entertainment, novels and manifestos. It’s happened by accident really, just jumping one book or website to the next.

The obvious recent books that I haven’t read (yet?): Lean In by Sheryl Sandberg, BossyPants by Tina Fey. There are some themes I haven’t really explored yet. This is a very anglocentric, white, middle class, hetero, able-bodied, born-female list. I know it’s only a tiny corner of women’s experience. See the end of this post for what this slice of feminism means to me.

Enough disclaimers. Let me tell you what I have been reading/ skimming/ admiring. Consider this a scrapbook of my recent aventures in feminism.

Amy Poehler. I read “Yes Please“. Somehow her feminism shines through. She’s body-positive, she likes men, she’s worked incredibly hard at being good at what she does, collaborated a lot, and she’s funny. I then found her Smart Girls initiative. Fantastic stuff here.

Other impressive campaign-based approaches are Pink Stinks, and of course Everyday Sexism.

On a more serious note, the Counting Dead Women project is important testimony to the unspoken facts about the overwhelming pattern of violence in our society.

The Natural Way of Things” is a novel by Charlotte Wood, also exploring female vulnerability and sexual violence. In a funny kind of way it reminded me of a very different novel, “The Vegetarian” by Han Kang. Difficult to explain why, but they shared a dreamy yet visceral quality. Also see the less recent Charlotte Roche’s “Wetlands“, with its uncomfortably frank physicality.

Dietland” by Sarai Walker is a great fiction read, an imaginative tour of contemporary western feminism. Flavours of Fight Club. I recommend it.

I’d still like to find more fiction about being in a woman’s body: boobs, pubic hair, periods, sex, childbirth, breastfeeding. But with humour and self-acceptance. Recommendations very welcome.

Amy Schumer is my other American comedian crush, alongside Poehler. She’s so … sassy. And if you haven’t seen her sketch The Last F*ckable Day, watch it. It’s about Hollywood double standards but she’s really rocking that theme. I love that these glamorous women are standing together to resist the stupid questions that wouldn’t be asked of men. Along the same lines, a quick mention for Lena Dunham who I wish I could get into but perhaps she’s a generation a bit younger than me. Glad she does her thing though!

I enjoyed My Mad Fat Diary on Channel 4. Based in my era, gosh I wish I’d been able to watch that when I was that age. But my real spokesperson, my experience growing up as a mouthy feminist socialist in the Midlands, is Caitlin Moran. Her “How to be a Woman” is a wonderful wonderful book.

Now: Rebecca Solnit’s “Men Explain Things To Me” is clearly important. I haven’t read the whole of it but the concept of mansplaining has been a significant one for me.

That led me to my latest discovery, “Feminist Fight Club” by Jessica Bennett. Just finished this, it’s a tactics playbook for dealing with the more subtle dynamics of the workplace. Mansplaining, and bropriation. See this great infographic for an idea of what the book explores.

A final mention for the very wonderful Man who has it all.


More where that comes from: @manwhohasitall .

My refreshed feminism

As I acknowledged above, I absolutely do not claim that this is the way to frame feminism for other women. But I’ve found my recent explorations to be strangely fortifying. I’m married to a wonderful man who breaks most stereotypes: he cooks, cleans and nurtures our two boys. I chose well ;-). I work full time in a well-paid job, and I work with many powerful women and some fantastic feminist men. I live a life of privilege. I’m not claiming victim status. But I want to inhabit my female body, my woman’s life, as fully as I can, and in a very personal way, that’s my feminism right now.