Interviews, discussions, and
presentations from thought
leaders, innovative educators,
and inspirational learners.

Search form


(0)

David Kinane's Blog

Elearning planning framework

David was speaking at ULearn12 - find out about other upcoming CORE conferences >>

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

David Kinane's Blog

Elearning planning framework

David was speaking at ULearn12 - find out about other upcoming CORE conferences >>

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

Speaker: David Kinane

David Kinane, an independent consultant from Auckland, discusses an issue that faces many schools. We put a lot of time, money and energy into developing the elearning capacity of teachers at our schools. David asks how are we sustaining this so that the capacity stays with the school when a teacher leaves.

Views 24,600
Date added: 7 Jan 2013
Duration: 4:39

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

Date added: 01/07/2013

Building sustainable elearning capacity

David Kinane, an independent consultant from Auckland, discusses an issue that faces many schools. We put a lot of time, money and energy into developing the elearning capacity of teachers at our schools. David asks how are we sustaining this so that the capacity stays with the school when a teacher leaves.

Views 24,600 Date added: 07/01/2013

Building sustainable elearning capacity

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

Date added: 07/01/2013

Building sustainable elearning capacity

David Kinane, an independent consultant from Auckland, discusses an issue that faces many schools. We put a lot of time, money and energy into developing the elearning capacity of teachers at our schools. David asks how are we sustaining this so that the capacity stays with the school when a teacher leaves.

Views 24,600 Date added: 07/01/2013

Building sustainable elearning capacity

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

My name's David Kinane, I'm an independent elearning consultant based in Auckland. I work with mostly primary and intermediate school, but some secondary. And I do work in the Waikato etc and Northland. 

I want to talk about IP - intellectual property. Conferences such as Ulearn, very exciting and get people going, very motivated to work with elearning. The thing that really interests me in conjunction with the elearning planning framework is the intellectual property aspect of all of that. Not in a negative sense but in a positive growth sense.

Schools spend an inordinate amount of money investing in equipment and investing in training and empowering individual teachers, and they grow their individual capacity. But how do we move, my question is, schools need to start thinking about the impact the loss of one or two key teachers have, does and can have on their elearning performance in terms of the frames of the elearning planning framework, to grow that capacity of the entire team. I am finding that the responsibility if you like, from the senior management team's point of view, is being delegated down to these key individuals. These key individuals - their capacity grows, their skill set grows, and they get promoted, they move schools. 

And the difficulty, that loss of IP to a school can actually, you can be the most progressive school you like, and if you lose two or three key personnel, if you haven't actively managed the intellectual property that you as a school own, you can go backwards. You can go back two, three, four, five years. And you have to, what is more, reinvest in the training to get those people back up to speed. So I am very interested in how schools can actually harvest and curate, or senior management teams can actually put in place processes, strategies, resources, that actually actively curate the intellectual property of those teachers that are growing in schools so that other teachers can use this intellectual property that you curate as a just in time learning resource. Such that you can look back in two years time, you might be able to look back and say how a particular person was very proficient at using the interactive whiteboard. And they might have left but because you have been actively curating how they use that interactive whiteboard then you have actually kept that lesson and the school can grow rather than keep moving backwards and forwards.

I describe the, there's an event horizon between the emerging, engaging, and empowering, and enabling stages of the elearning planning framework and my fear is and my observations are that many schools move from emerging to engaging, their key staff get up to speed, they leave, and then they slip back again. It's like snakes and ladders.

Teachers should be encouraged to capture their own practice. Rough and ready stuff but at least we can see how they manage it in the classroom, how they manage the tools, how they manage the students, how they introduce stuff. And at the same time I think senior management teams need to be much more proactive in how they induct new staff into the school. So we create an induction strategy to get these new teachers up to speed with "our school's way". Manage them all through the school and as you get that resignation letter how do you actually squeeze the last bits of their intellectual property so there is nothing left over. There are no question marks left as the teacher leaves, the school still has access to all the student data that was created during the career of that teacher while they were at that school. 

I think it is a very interesting area that senior management teams particularly need to look very closely at and start archiving not only their digital heritage, but their digital expertise that they've got within schools. Because if you don't you will never get to those last two strands, or not easily, of the elearning planning framework. And always have the potential of having a devastating couple of resignations and moving backwards. 

Date added: 07/01/2013

David Kinane's Blog

Elearning planning framework

David was speaking at ULearn12 - find out about other upcoming CORE conferences >>

Be the first to post a comment on this video.

Related talks

Content
Latest Content

New content on the way from the World Literacy Summit, and many more NZ educators talking about learning.

The numbers
Total viewed videos: 9,189,858
Total videos: 543