I talked about Diana Oblinger’s keynotes in an earlier post. But the other two keynotes, from Tim O’Shea and Stephen Heppell provided a fascinating contrast in all sorts of ways.

Both in very different styles and from very different perspectives were addressing the key question of what will education be like in future. For Tim there were real challenges ahead. The future was tough and the universities best placed to survive and thrive were the traditional academic powerhouses like Edinburgh. They have the strength, capability and resources to be best placed to develop exciting and innovative e-learning.

Stephen argued that traditional universities run the risk of becoming increasingly irrelevant. The future was open, participatory and collaborative. Traditional structures and traditional institutions would break down and disappear. He compared universities today to British Rail of the 1950s. arguing that BR carried on in its own way, assuming it knew when and where we wanted to go and was oblivious to the fact that we were all buying cars that allow us to chose our time and destination

New technologies give the possibility for the incredible creative and innovative potential of all citizens to be expressed. He outlined new forms of collaboration, assessment and accreditation through which this potential would be realised

For me what was particularly striking was the incredible speed Stephen believed this would happen. His timescale was only a few short years while Tim tended to emphasise tradition and continuity. In Tim’s vision the traditional residential university (if it was the quality of Edinburgh) would not only survive but flourish for the foreseeable future.

I suspect that many listeners, like me will probably see themselves somewhere between the two positions outlined. Optimistically perhaps wanting to reach out towards Stephen’s vision but recognising that while our current modes of education are indeed changing they are based on much of value. ALT had plenty of papers on collaborative work and worktools, repositories, open access developments etc to suggest that we are already doing significant work within existing structures.

It is then, not so much a stark alternative but a recognition that we need to continue to work to use the possibilities offered by ICT to open up and enrich learning environments for all and that universities still have much to contribute to this endeavour.