Archive for the ‘ectel07’ Category


Smartness and innovativeness of learning ecosystems

November 9, 2016

Last ICWL 2016 conference in Rome made me reconsider the innovative learning ecosystem concept in my studies and instead consider using the smartness of learning ecosystems since innovative is a relative concept while smartness is not, as well as smartness may be nicely interpreted as a niche providing fitness and flow experiences.

I liked an interesting keynote by Carlo Giovanella from Tor Vergata University of Rome – Dept. of Educational Science and Technologies. He described a survey done in several universities to capture the smartness of educational learning ecosystems – Smartness of learning ecosystems and its bottom-up emergence in six european campuses (2016): Survey with university students at different campuses: a) the detection of the degree of satisfaction related to the levels of the Maslow’s Pyramid of needs, and b) the detection of indicators related with the achievement of the state of “flow” by the actors involved in the learning processes. Identifing: a) the set of the most relevant indicators; b) a “smartness” axis in the plan of the first two principal components derived by applying a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) to the spaces of the selected indicators.

He refers to smartness as follows:

The smartness or attractiveness of an ecosystem does not depend exclusively on its ability to run “all gears” in an effective and efficient manner. It, rather, depends on its ability to create an environment able to meet the individuals’ basic needs and keep them in a state of positive tension in which their skills are stimulated by adequate challenges, to favor the achievement of the self-realization (Giovanella, 2014)  –

Giovannella C., Smart Territory Analytics: toward a shared vision. In: SIS 2014, CUEC, (2014).

NOTE: that actually is the definition of the niche in ecology, but Giovanella in 2016 article combines the Flow state as the required quality of satisfaction for people in this learning nichestate where challenges are exciting and adequate to the skills owned by the individuals, which, in turn, are expected to be improved due to the challenges.

In his previous paper of smart cities Giovanella defines smartness of cities as follows: a city is smart “when investments in human and social capital and traditional (transport) and modern (ICT) communication infrastructure fuel sustainable economic growth and a high quality of life, with a wise management of natural resources, through participatory governance“.

This captures the systemic, organizational view to smartness and incorporates implicitly bottom-up self-organization in an ecosystem, and explicitly sustainability of the learning ecosystem as a common good and high quality of individual’s life as the evaluation criteria.


Giovanella’s approach technically was very similar what we have done in studying the school learning ecosystem services in Georgian, Ghanan schools (see below). However, we used observation and interviews (the external view to the existing niches).  We mapped data on the digital service grid quantitatively as an input. So we yet cannot measure the ecosystem fit to user’s challenges as the quality of smartness but rather we may set learning type variables such as learning and facilitation services related with classical ICT teaching or innovative ICT teaching and see how the other ecosystem services determine those.


Georgian papers:

Jeladze, Eka; Pata, Kai (2016). Digitally Enhanced Schools and Service-based Learning Ecosystem. EDULEARN16 Proceedings: 8th Annual International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona (Spain), 4-6th July, 2016. IATED, 1569−1578.

K-means cluster analysis was run and 2 models of schools were identified using developed instrument. Discriminant analysis was run to identify predictor variables for further analysis of the schools’ belonging to certain model. Innovative and non-innovative schools differed by teacher-student partnership, authentic and flexible learning environment, but the biggest difference was in change management domain.Discriminant analysis detected following variables as predictors: school’s ICT vision and agenda, motivation and support system promoting innovative practices, teachers’ professional learning relevance to the curriculum requirements and school strategy.

Eka Jeladze and Kai Pata (2016). Technology Investment and Transformation Efforts in the Public Schools of Georgia (2016) ICWL 2016

Beyond the previous study we built Bayesian Dependency model for innovative schools’ cluster to find probabilistic dependencies of the services in digitally enhanced schools illustrated the model with qualitative case study descriptions. The findings suggested that trade-off type of services requiring schools initiative to get service and change management services were the biggest determinants of the schools belonging to the innovative technology-enhanced learning ecosystem type.

Ghanan papers:

Quaicoe, James Sunney; Kai, Pata; Jeladze, Eka (2016). Digital Learning Ecosystem Services and Educational Change in Ghana’s Basic Schools. EDULEARN 16 : 8th Annual International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona(Spain) 4th to 6th July 2016. Ed. L. Gómez Chova, A. López Martinez, & I. Candel Torres. iated, 4887−4895. (EDULEARN 16 Proceedings).

This paper mapped descriptively Internal, External and Transactional Infrastructure, Learning and teaching and Change management services in Ghana and revealed the developed and undeveloped service areas for Ghanan schools and the mismatch between externally provided and internally applied services.

Quaicoe,James Sunney; Pata, Kai (2016). Digital Divide in Learning Services in Ghana’s Basic School. Advances in Web-Based Learning – ICWL 2016: International Conference on Web-based Learning – ICWL 2016 in Rome, Italy, 26-29 October 2016.. Ed. M. Spaniol, M. Temperini, D.K.W. Chiu, I. Marenzi, U. Nanni. Spring: Springer International Publishing, 83−88.

The results of Canonical Discriminant function analysis indicated that external digital learning services informed digital divide in two school clusters – the less advanced schools were not able to proactively transact external digital learning services into their schools.


Since our grid data contain many services, the system view to services’ interaction appears to be complex. We have reduced services to the following domains:

Innovative ICT learning
Classical ICT learning in computer class and lessons, factual learning
Centrally provided technology, connectivity and resources
Transactionally obtained technology, connectivity and resources
Norms and ownership of ICT related aspects
Training and professional learning for ICT
Open access to resources
Resources provided by external business
Maintenance, Security and monitoring
Incentives and motivation
Peer-learning, networking, sharing resources
Satisfied access to ICT and teaching competences
Collective Involvement to change management if ICT in organization
Authoritive ICT development in organization

Linear modelling with stepwise method with united dataset from Ghana and Georgia indicated school learning ecosystem factors that determine certain ICT learning to be prevailing in schools:

  • the predictors of classical ICT teaching in school learning ecosystem are the availability of services from types: Incentives and motivation, Authoritive ICT development in organization, Open access to resources
  • the predictors of innovative ICT teaching in school are the availability of services from types: Peer-learning, networking, sharing resources, Transactionally obtained technology, connectivity and resources, and Open access to resources

super-peer network

September 20, 2007

Ideas from the ECTEL 07 presentation ‘A p2p framework for interacting with learning objects’ by Andrea Clematis et al.

I am using learning objects and i am recording my practices how i am using these objects.
And i will share my practices with my peers in the network who are using the objects as well.


Herman Maurer keynote at ECTEL07

September 20, 2007

Herman Maurer keynote
Tackling new problems in learning and elearning

He started his presentation with blaming plagiarism and the main message was not so much touching the topic of the keynote heading. But it was interesting in another way, bringing in the negative message about Google and Wikipedia.

maurer talk

We are in process by creating the reality by googling.

Plagiarism concerns: institutions, other organizations

We can use Google as a powerful tool to detect plagiarism.

From ‘papermills’: i would like to get a paper about web 2.0 teaching to send to the journal that has full rights 35 000 dollars was the offer (Maurer experiment)

Anti-plagiarism software: changes words with synonymes and the plagiarism detection tools will not find it out.
If we translate the paper from one language to another, it is plagiarized, but it cannot be detected.

I don’t care if the report is copied from another country, its nice if 20 000 euros was earned with 5 minutes by changing only few words.

We need international agreements what is allowed at data-mining.
Google is doing nothing illegal but it violates laws of data-mining.

Problems with Google and Wikipedia:
Google is invading privacy of persons and companies because of combined undertakings (Google earth etc.).
Google is the best detective agency in the world.

We are googling reality as Google and Wikipedia want to see it.
Companies can rank their information upwards, Google does interferred ranking.

Entries in Wikipedia in search engines: 200 random words from wikipedia, its strange enough that in google the wikipedia pages ranked among firts 10. It is proof that Google and Wikipedia do cooperation.

About the Google-Wikipedia issue

These two machines that many people consider reality are starting to change the googled reality.

Google can ruin the stock market.

My only hope is that Google is clever enough not to kill the cow they are milking.
They are using the knowledge in stock market, they probably realize that they should not go too far.

Antitrust against Google
Break-up between Google search engine and the other Google tools is needed so that there was no serious data-mining possible in economy with different google tools.

Problem in Wikipedia is keeping the information updated. It was better if from Wikipedia the link goes to the original site (of Herman Maurer webpage or Irakleon town page) rather than storing information in Wikipedia that is not new enough.

Difference between Wikipedias of countries.

You can cite only material that is stabile in time – thus you must not cite Wikipedia.

I have lots of criticism against wikipedia, i think it is too late to change the current version of Wikipedia. We probably need new start, but it may not happen.

The modern cellphones are getting close to what i think the future will look like. My basic concept is that we always will have computer with us, but not visible way (computers in the pocket, screens on the glasses).

Computer does powerful image processing, everything we want to be recorded can be sent to the computer.
Cameras and electronic compasses will be related with tools like Google Earth, knowing where we are and what information we need and create.

We are approaching towards collaboration and consulting society. The search engines are too much overloaded with cloned information. We need to specialize to smaller fields. We search from google some contacts and ask about real information.

There is usually 1-2 pearls in each research paper. I doubt is anyone reading the whole papers. What i consider is someone to open something like the ‘journal of pearls’.

Information retrieval is going to change. We want search engines that do find millions of entries and then produce certain 15 papers that are really relevant to our questions in mind.

Communicate experiences!

In 20 years: continuous recording what we see, hear, make and we make it accessible to the friends

In 40 years continuous recording of total sensory experience of persons, it will be made (partially) accessible to friends.
‘Diary of senses’
Fastforward techniques will help to re-experience the past.

This will make it possible to experience something FOR THE OTHERS.
This means that mankind is developing without noticing common memory.
Everything suddenly becomes an experience we have already felt.


technology enhanced learning in FP7 projects

September 19, 2007

My notes from introduction about FP7 projects of technology enhanced learning by Patricia Manson (EU, head of cultural heritage and technology enhanced learning, Information society and media)

Past guides us to the future:
Implentation of what has been done in the past has not been easy.
Using eLearning ideas to change the world has not taken place.
eLearning has become mainstream not merely a research area.
New approaches in research.

Some principles for good FP7 projects:
acceptance of discontinuity (resources, standards, multidisciplinary work, no technology coctails)
incorporating under what conditions and how better learning outcomes could be achieved with elearning
Pedaogy and organizational change
Dialogue between communities and researchers must be strengthened
Outcomes: what we expect to achieve?

3-7 years market in short term
5-10 years market for longer term

Limited number of challenges
Digital libraries and technology enhanced learning
Responsive environments that should be motivating, embedded in business process, systems that are anchored in reals situations,
Support in the transformation of learning outcomes into valuable knowledge assets (use and reuse of knowledge)
Personalization of learning experiences (which must be well defined eg. what, why?)
Interdisciplinary approach between cognitive and technological

Longer term target outcomes:
adaptible and intuitive (capable of intuitive perception)
learning and cognition
learning and humans and machines

Clusters of project proposals:
Exploring elearning strengths and learning weaknesses
Personalization and adaptive learning, dynamic mentoring
Services based on high performance distributed computing infrastructures
Learning and knowledge: interaction between learning and knowledge management technologies
Learning and cognition: understanding human learning
Collaborative learning

In current FP7 proposals there was greater focus on responsive learning environments, not yet on intuitive systems
Strong continuity of FP6 research

Technologies in most proposals:
semantic technologies and ontologies (60-70 %)
Conceptual modelling
Social software and tagging
Delivery of learning with PC and mobile

Expected trends:
From one pedagogical scenario to mix and match of pedagogical scenarios
Personalization (COMING FROM FP6): problems what personalization means, FP6 was more about personalizing content
Individual relationship between pupils and teachers
Autonomy of the learner
Learning at workspace
Stronger emphasize on learning and creativity, the use of creativity in workspace
Constructive approach of learning science, adaptivity
Personalization and adaptivity
Infrastructures and LMS’s

Projects that were successuful
Theories and technologies of game-based learning, focusing on learning sciences
Embedding learning seamlessly in work process, where knowledge matures
Adaptivity and guidance, language technologies
How creativity can be better supported at workspaces

Unsuccessful proposals:
– why we need solutions
– no definition of problems
– no learning objectives
– better is rather to stick to one of the FP goals than to many
– technology pushed projects without learning and cognition


elearning on the social semantic information

September 19, 2007

I was listening at ECTEL07 the presentation (see the proceedings) by Sebastian Kruk et al., which was very much technically supporting what we would like to do in the study of making school library 2.0 practically happen in one master study.

The main idea in the presentation was integrating blog (of the book), bookmarks and tags (of the teacher and the learners), and digital library work together in learning tasks.

Some environments for realising the idea, which i still need to test out:


Bruce Sterling keynote ECTEL 2007

September 19, 2007

ECTEL 07 keynote by Bruce Sterling, a fiction writer and computer science visioneer

About himself:
25 years in front of the computer
technology enhanced learning
technology enhanced literature

manual typerwriting 2 first books
3rd novel Technology enhanced literature

We don’t have technology enhanced literature, we have literature enhanced technology.

Architecture, engineering, industrial design, manufacturing – all technology enhanced…
Why are we doing it digital? Why don’t we do the real things and instead we do it over web. Are we doing actually better?

They all have same problems about software, necessity to educate people.

What it means that technology enhanced learning reaches full potential – then nothing will be left from previous order.

Nightmare scenario is also the ideal scenario, young people do not draw distinction between previous media forms and current. They live in the flow of liquid micromedia. They do not distinguish forms of media.

“I read first part of your books and then i could not get the concept, but then i went to your Flickr account and looked the graphs and i got it!”

Bruce Sterling of his new and unpublished novel:
It is about technology enhanced learning at 2050ies
Action takes place at the institution at small island,
an attention camp web 5.0 technology enhanced learning environment to do just in time learning,
everyone else in the world is horrified.
Most modern people are middle-aged women, these middle aged city women are offered a different life on the island, id-tags and they play the architecture of participation, recording everything what they see, labelling every plant day by day, weed by weed learning botany,
they use glory as the source of the community identity, the reason to be.
The most basic from women refugee camp life – from bad it becomes the real life, if communalities were found, if social networks emerged.
Social software was developed keeping in mind the gender differences, because men were not so successful and the tools became the tools of power. The camp as a search engine, learning machine.

The informal learning strategies of the society will rule.
Nobody have license, diploma in this future technology enhanced informal learning society.

Information society has no democratic patrol over digital revolution.

What will be left in 20 years of what we are doing now? New techniques, artifacts…

Its a compost a fertile soil what we do now..our roots are strong because they are in compost.