About Sonja Grussendorf

A learning technologist and very happy member of the Learning Technology and Innovation team at the London School of Economics (LSE). Main professional interests: social media, interactive classrooms (esp Electronic Voting Systems), theories of technology.

NMC Horizon Report 2017: Key trends and challenges of technology in the global HE Sector

The 2017 (Higher Education) horizon report was released a week ago by the New Media Consortium (nmc). It reflects on what the global HE sector is doing with and about (educational) technologies, how it deals with key trends and how it faces critical challenges. Most interestingly, it reflects on these trends and challenges and forecasts which technologies will be taken up by the sector in the short, medium and long term.

It is one report to which it really pays to pay attention, and is short enough to be read in a lunch hour. For a shorter read you might look at their summary 10 talking points.  Or you can stay with this blog post and have a look at my summary of this year’s trends, challenges and technologies below. I explain some of the terminology used in my summary of the 2015 Horizon report. Technology concepts are explained or linked to below.

Trends, challenges, technologies:


Key trends in the sector drive technology adoption, and in the short term these are:  Blended Learning Designs and Collaborative Learning. 

In the mid-term, the sector is driven by Growing focus on measuring learning and Redesigning Learning Spaces.

In the long term, the sector is driven by Advancing Cultures of Innovation and Deeper Learning Approaches. 


The sector faces plenty challenges, some that we know, understand and are able to meet ‘easily‘, because we have been facing them for a while now: Improving Digital Literacy and Integrating Formal and Informal Learning.

The Achievement Gap, which “reflects a disparity in the enrollment and academic performance between student groups, defined by socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity, or gender”, and its ‘complement’ challenge to Advance Digital Equity present more of a headache and are a difficult demand on the sector as a whole.

The report suggests as wicked challenges, those that are “complex to even define, much less address”: Managing Knowledge Obsolescence, and Rethinking the Roles of Educators.

The former refers to the rapid rate of technologies cropping up and (possibly) vanishing again, while the latter refers to how teachers are to cope with that and the shift towards proper student-centred learning. The latter was mentioned as a key trend for the first time in the 2010 report and continued to appear until 2013, after which it was dropped, presumably as something that had happened. That this year it is highlighted as a wicked challenge suggests that a) it has become a much more pressing issue and b) educators continue to struggle with adapting to the changes in the Higher Education sector, and/ or the 21st Century as such.

Technologies take-up projection:

In about one year: Adaptive Learning Technologies (Think of it as mimicking the luxury of personal tutoring which reacts to individual students’ progress through their learning as it happens); Mobile Learning (harnessing the awesome computing power that almost all of us have in our phones these days).

In about 2 to 3 years: The Internet of Things (your fridge tells your phone to tell you to buy milk; moodle tells your students’ Applewatch to remind them to eat porridge and finish their dissertation); Next-Generation LMS (Moodle, but a bit slicker? So Moodle with a make-over…).

In about 4 to 5 years: Artificial Intelligence (intuitive computer tutors; HAL); Natural User Interfaces (“speech recognition, touchscreen interfaces, gesture recognition, eye-tracking, haptics, and brain computer interface”).

How good at predicting are Horizon reports? In a follow-up post I will offer an overview of ten years of Horizon report predictions.

February 24th, 2017|Ed-Tech news and issues, TEL Trends|Comments Off on NMC Horizon Report 2017: Key trends and challenges of technology in the global HE Sector|

The perfect teaching experience: a Family Fun Day of coding at the LSE

On Saturday Stephanie Hellings (LSE IMT Infrastructure) and I did the teaching part of the BCSWomen Appathon Guinness World Record Challenge.

So, on a Saturday I went to work. Giddy with anticipation. To work. And it was one of the best work related days I’ve had in a while.

Stephanie had co-ordinated the day superbly, organised a great bunch of helpers, a lovely lunch, generally made sure everything ran smoothly. Steve Bond (LSE IMT Training), official time keeper, blew the whistle at 10.30 sharp and I took the start of the lesson.

What’s “android”? What devices have you brought? Have you ever programmed using Scratch? Java? Do you like playing games on your computer? Are you ready to create your first app today?

It wasn’t difficult to enthuse the audience – of all ages, all abilities – everyone wanted to be there, wanted to learn (and wanted to break that record), they wanted to create. The lesson outcome was deliberately kept simple: using the MIT AppInventor we got everyone to create a button made of a cat picture, which, when pressed would make a sound. Simple perhaps, but it isn’t often that you see the faces of a woman in her thirties, a man in his sixties, a 12 year old child, light up as they repeatedly press a button that shrieks meow back at them, knowing that they *made* their phone do this! When Steve counted us down to end the World Record Attempt, the moment he blew his whistle 40 participants filled the NAB Thai Theatre with meows. And across the UK, up to a 1000 participants were doing exactly the same.
The rest of the day then continued, mostly given over to everyone trying to create their own apps. Matthew Taylor (LSE IMT Integration & Data Management) and his daughter created a school quiz app; Imre Bard (LSE Methodology Institute), his girlfriend Isabella & two other participants created an app that asks you to categorise architectural features (Gothic or Baroque); others concentrated on playing around with delaying the meow of the cat, or adding a meow sequence – both apparently far more difficult than you’d imagine.

This is what made this Saturday extraordinary and memorable for me: it was an example of the perfect, the *ideal* teaching experience. Every participant was driven by a desire to learn and an urge to create. It was entirely free, entirely open, entirely voluntary. There was no competition. The group learned as a group. Nobody was bored or disappointed, and there was no pressure on anyone to achieve a set outcome. There was no pressure on anyone staying till 3pm, but most did. Some of the younger children were happy playing on their ipads, listening to animal noises, drawing, spending time with their parents. Some of the younger adults took the basic AppInventor principles and ran, flew off with it, leaving us helpers – certainly me, less so Steve – far behind (I hit on this ‘ruse’: “my lesson to you is this, look around you, who looks like they know what they’re doing? Go up and ask them for help. Don’t be fooled by my being a presenter, I already know less than you do.”)

This is what teaching and learning can be like. Not always – that kind of excitement, enthusiasm, giddiness would be physically and mentally unsustainable. But it’s good to know it can be had, it is an ideal to strive for – and I’d happily “give up” another Saturday for this in the future.

We still don’t know if we managed to break the record, nationwide. We might find out on Monday. But it’s a totally unimportant concern right now. The day itself, the experience of being in that room with such brilliant participants was, for me, corny a it sounds, reward enough.

June 14th, 2015|Open Education, Teaching & Learning|Comments Off on The perfect teaching experience: a Family Fun Day of coding at the LSE|

Horizon Report 2015: emerging technology trends

The NMC/Educause Horizon report 2015 demarcates key trends, challenges and technological developments that are likely to influence Higher Education over the next 5 years. If you haven’t the time to read the full 48 pages account, there is a 5-page preview available too. The Horizon report sets out to answer these questions: Which ideas are currently dominating educational policy and strategy discourse (= trends)? What stands in the way of improving the learning experience of our students in HE (= challenges)? Which  technologies or technological trends that are on the near, mid-, and far horizon should the sector look out for (= technologies)?
Below I list the key findings. Below that I explain what some of words mean and how LTI already engage with (some of) these trends and challenges. So this year, there’s no excuse for not knowing about what’s happening and/or what’s coming, eduTech-wise. 🙂

Part I – super quick summary:

Key trends (from short-term to long term):
– increasing use of blended learning; redesigning learning spaces
– growing focus on measuring learning; more open educational resources
– advancing cultures of change and innovation; increasing cross-institution collaboration
Key challenges (listed from “solvable” to “wicked”):
– improving digital literacy; blending formal and informal learning
– personalised learning;  teaching complex thinking
– competing models of education; rewarding teaching: “Many institutions provide more incentives for research over exemplary teaching”.
Key technological developments (1 yr to 5 yrs time to adoption horizon):
– 1 yr or less: Bring your own device (BYOD); flipped classroom
– 2-3 yrs: Makerspaces; wearable technology
– 4-5 yrs: adaptive learning technologies; The Internet of Things

Part II – what do the words mean?

Blended learning: refers to a) blending online and offline learning components and b) blending formal and informal learning. At the LSE, we’ve covered much of (a) and will continue to explore online learning possibilities, but (b) remains a challenge. How might we encourage students to take their serendipitous, informal learning experiences and connect them meaningfully to their classroom learning? In LTI, we are reviewing our training programme to provide a deeper understanding of online teaching and learning and to enhance the LSE’s capacity to deliver innovative and effective online and blended programmes and courses.
Redesigning learning spaces: as part of the trend of blending (online/offline; formal/informal) learning, and the spread of mobile device use, that which we think of as learning spaces has become more fluid. And that in turn makes it necessary to rethink how our physical campus spaces are designed. We encourage group work and creativity, but where are the spaces in which that might take place? We’re asking our students to help come up with ideas – with the chance of winning an iPad.
Digital literacy: an important learning skill occasionally still undervalued insofar it is assumed that this is a skill newer generations of students acquired through being surrounded by digital technology. Students have a world of information at their fingertips (pun intended), but they need to develop their scholarly practice, including their digital literacy to critically sift through and evaluate the information as part of their becoming academically well-rounded. Jane has been instrumental in getting the School to recognise the importance of a Digital Literacy framework informing teaching and learning practices. For more information visit our LTI Digital Literacy page. You might also be  interested in our SADL (= Student Ambassadors for Digital Literacy) project.
Open educational resources (OER): the open in OERs is an exciting word excitingly fought over. For the basics, visit our LTI OER page. For a very good take on ‘open’ in the context of education, read Audrey Watters blogpost (November 1014).
Makerspaces: “workshops that offer tools and the learning experiences needed to help people carry out their ideas.” Think hack labs or hackathons or any other ugly word for the idea that  it is a good to bring together people in one place and give them one big task or project to work on, to experiment, to actually create and make something,with pizza, without distraction. It is not a new idea as such (surely cottage industry turned homes into ‘makerspaces’), but it’s new in the context of education. The emphasis is on creative inquiry – how can we engage in this for and with our students?
Wearable technology: In 1985, Casio brought us the calculator watch, so we could do sums on our wrists. Today we have google glass(es). Tomorrow, earmuffs that make coffee. In the context of education, tiny technologies that can be worn as accessories may prove invaluable for fieldwork, e.g.
Adaptive Learning Technologies: as we also see a push towards more personalised learning, adaptive learning technologies come into their own. Think of it as mimicking the luxury of personal tutoring which reacts to individual students’ progress through their learning as it happens.
The Internet of Things: Wikipedia explanation. For a more alarmist take, a recent Guardian column (9 Feb 2015). In the context of education, the IoT is about ‘hypersituations’, ie being in spaces, locations, which communicate through technology knowledge about themselves. Think sociology of space, fieldwork, geography, truly situated learning and augmented reality.
Bring your own Device (BYOD): what are you shlepping around with you? I bet at any one time you are carrying a camera, a voice recorder, a typewriter, a telephone, a television, a browser, a notepad , a calculator and a library of a gazillion books. Yes you do, and so do your students. It’s called a smartphone, or a tablet, laptop, notebook. BYOD is short for wanting to use that incredible computing power in your pocket for more interactive, creative learning. One of our LTIG strands, “Students-as-producers” encourages (funds!) projects that ask students to use their devices (or ours if they haven’t got a suitable one) to make stuff for each other.
Competing models of education: think “MOOCs”. Though there’s a wave of scepticism washing over that particular fad (!), MOOCs have put the cat amongst the pigeons a bit. Do different models of education pose an existential threat to the HE sector? Probably not, but universities can’t be complacent.

LTI Staff Survey 2014

In July this year we conducted our annual staff survey about our services, i.e. the support and guidance we provide and the technologies we promote/ support. The survey tells us what academics think of our workshops, what else they need from us, what they think about the benefits of using educational technologies as well as what obstacles to using them exist, and more. You can find the fairly short report on our website.
Two things stood out for me that I would like to raise here. 1. “lack of time”, an issue that has cropped up in our surveys since at least 2010. This isn’t unique to our staff, nor is it only related to learning technology, and it isn’t a modern phenomenon either: we are all time-poor, “there are only so many hours in a day”. Hence, one must prioritise, and it seems that to engage with the benefits of educational technologies isn’t high on everyone’s list. We can only hope to raise the profile of our work even more to tip the scales in our favour. 2. A final comment explains that “I get the impression you are trying to push a solution for a problem that doesn’t exist, i.e. too much tech does not necessarily get students to study better, or for learning to improve”. That second clause is of course trivially true: we would never say otherwise. But that is exactly why we do not push technologies for their own sakes only. Rather, our role as learning technologists is to explore the benefits of technological solutions to problems that we know do exist. For example, we know that students feel that they don’t get consistent feedback, so we offer staff a variety of ways of providing better feedback, more conveniently, e.g. through moodle (including use of voice tools for audio feedback). Or we do know that students like to revisit aspects of lectures that they didn’t understand at the time. If staff agree to be recorded, we offer a lecture capture system that allows students to review those lecture sections. And we allow staff to take control of how they release these lectures, too. We know that very large lectures can be alienating and aren’t particularly good learning opportunities. So we offer ways in which lectures can be changed to make them more engaging, by introducing video elements, or using instant voting systems to allow students to think through their learning together.
But at no moment do we push any of these and certainly not if we haven’t at first identified a problem to which these technologies might be a solution. If you think that we are too pushy (perhaps we have been too enthusiastic in conversations?), then do always feel free to come and speak to any of us, engage us in the debate, explain to us what we can improve about how we go about embedding educational technologies. That is the main purpose of our annual survey, but if we get to speak with you in person, that’s even better!

October 10th, 2014|Surveys|Comments Off on LTI Staff Survey 2014|

Good news: Learning technology not rocket science!

I’ve been a learning technologist since 2002, at the LSE since 2009. Ten years ago I presented a short paper at a conference about the purpose of the learning technologist, because even we as a group didn’t really know. It’s only short and it ends with a suggestion that what we learning technologists should be doing is stamp on people’s toes, and so it is, if not agreeable, still interesting, and still relevant. If you’re in the mood for speculative musings on what learning technology is about, give it a read: ‘What are we for?.

Fast forward ten years and puzzlement as to what we do or what we are for remains. That’s fair enough, after all, if you’re an engineer and you meet someone who tells you they are a dentist, you would also ask “oh, dentist, I see, but what does that mean, I mean what do you actually do?” And so with Learning Technologists. We’re a bit like dentists. Unfathomable. Mysterious.

I’ll try once more to lift the lid on that mystery.

Here’s the good news: what we do is really easy to understand, you just have to be prepared to listen. To prove this, and to allow for different tastes and learning styles, I offer you three different explanations, with the keywords highlighted, so you can skim through.

1. Generic: in short

Here’s a generic overview of what LTI (found on our LTI page):
“Learning Technology and Innovation (LTI) supports staff in the use of technologies to enhance teaching and learning at the London School of Economics. We […] promote the integration and use of technology in teaching and learning by supporting key technologies, through staff development, advice and guidance, research, collaboration and networking.”

Put differently: we provide pedagogical support and guidance to academic teaching staff with a focus on technology.

Or as a question: How can technology help improve your teaching and your students’ learning? We’re here to find out for and with you.

2. Concrete: drilling down

Academic staff (incl GTAs) are our core focus, but in many cases we deal with administrative staff too, especially in dealing with routine queries about setting things up in Moodle, or using TurnItIn and so on. We write materials too, from basic training materials, to guides on how to use educational technologies, to policy and guidance documents on copyright for example. A large part of our work is staff development. We develop and run workshops on the use of educational technologies – each of which will always incorporate theoretical discussions on how these might impact on student learning. We work closely with TLC, and teach about learning theories on the PG Certificate in Higher Education. We do research – you can’t really expect to persuade academics at a research intensive university about the benefits of changing practices, adopting different pedagogical approaches, trying out technologies etc if we didn’t. We read up on what’s new, engage with our colleagues across the UK and further afield. We make connections with interested teachers and persuade them to try new things – that is, we track them down and buy them coffee and have exciting chats and then we hit them over the head with a mallet and force them to do a pilot with us. Maybe with clickers, or iPads, or flipping lectures or eAssessment.

3. Contradictory: we are not

We are not a lending service. So you want to borrow an iPad from us to see what it can do? Of course you can. First of all, we are super approachable and we all tend to say yes rather than no. Nevertheless, there should always be a “using it for teaching” aspect.
We’re not IT training.  While our workshops have elements of ‘hands on how to use technology x’, the main emphasis is on how it impacts on teaching and learning, how best to use the technology in a teaching and learning context. Most of our workshops are discursive.
We are not technical support. Most of us are pretty tech savvy, but all of us focus on impact that technology (as concept) and educational technologies.

See, that wasn’t so hard. And one of these days dentists will be equally well understood.

Moodle upgrade to version 2.6

On 3rd September 2014 we are upgrading Moodle from 2.4 to 2.6 – it’ll include improvements and new features, and the theme will differ too. moreinfo

Here’s a quick summary:

  • default theme no longer mimics the LFY look, but uses LSE black red and white and we’ve gone back to three columns (main middle section, blocks on either side). Note: you can set a different theme for yourself if you prefer.
  • more responsive design, which means Moodle will work better across different screen sizes and devices (smartphones, tablets etc)
  • Collapsible navigation: you can dock blocks to the side, to keep the work area cleaner
  • Editing tools have been grouped together to in a simple dropdown menu for easy accessibility across desktop and mobile devices and editing forms are now shorter as sections have been made collapsible.
  • Uploaded PDFs (in assignments by students) can be annotated in a browser

summaryWe’ve also produced a  screen-cast showcasing improvements and highlights, a webpage with a fuller summary (and even more screen-casts) and a preview copy of moodle (called muddle), which you can log into and have a look at to get an idea what it will be like as of September.




August 13th, 2014|Uncategorized|Comments Off on Moodle upgrade to version 2.6|

Beyond institutions: Stephen Downes at NetworkEDGE

Yesterday I attended our new series NetworkEDGE: The Future of Education online, because we live stream (and record) these things and therefore I could. We were lucky enough to have Stephen Downes inaugurate, and I watched, listened and tweeted along.

(I’m ambivalent about tweeting during talks. Tweeting is great for note-taking, sharing, interjecting, pondering publicly, chatting with others in the audience while keeping an eye on the main speaker. But it’s hard work, difficult to do well, and distracting from careful listening. It helped to have seen the slides beforehand, as Stephen posts them on his site.)

Downes shared his utopian anti-institutional view of education with us and that’s the kind of thing I lap up. He pleaded for “learning beyond institutions”, towards personal learning in a networked world. This is the impression I got: here’s a dedicated anti-establishment guy, who despairs at the capitalist ideology at the core of education; who dislikes that learning is now an industry; who thinks that most educators waste time and effort in their attempts to improve their teaching, their learning. Wasted, because it goes towards improving essentially capitalist systems, structures, models, even though these fail us (us = the learners, the educators) time and again. How much better to smash our educational idols, and to break away, move away:

  • Move towards learner autonomy.
  • Move towards anarchic learning, based on no models, no systems, no traditional ideals.
  • Move beyond institutions and towards self-organised networks of learners.

(“Smash”, “idols”, “beyond” – of course Downes is no Nietzsche, but there is a certain Nietzschean sentiment in his ideas).

“The right model is to do away with models” he told us. – this is an idea I can get behind, a nicely phrased aporia, along the lines of “O my friends, there is no friend”. Now, one might argue that Sugata Mitra’s Hole in the Wall, which Downes referred to, is itself a model, Mitra often suggests so: that’s why he was able to translate the idea from rural India to schools in England. His model is anti-institutional, it seeks to depose the teacher, but it is still a model. Like Downes, Mitra is interested in self-organising systems – and where you have systems, you have a model! The point is that there are no standards or rules which apply consistently or work universally and at all times. This is a good thing to bear in mind. Standards (rules, regulations) are always exclusive, limited and limiting. They hinder innovation, stifle creativity and reduce everything to sameness. We need people like Downes to remind us of this. We need to be asked that we do away with ALL such rules, so that at the very least we might discard some of them, and re-introduce autonomy into our sector. As he told us later “Autonomy, rather than control, is essential in education”. This is as uncomfortable an idea for institutions as it is for the individual. Control is something we desire (if not need), whereas autonomy can often be disquieting. However, some claim, control is an illusion anyway, so we might as well move away from trying to control our learners and allow them their autonomy.

I agree with many of Stephen’s principles, even if I do so at my peril (i.e. by sort of wishing the hand that feeds me would whither and die). Wouldn’t an anarchic utopia be fun? Yes it would. Will it happen? Not any time soon. Still I applaud Stephen for demanding it.

But I don’t agree with everything he claimed. Take his starting assertion that “pretty much anything works better than the traditional lecture method” – it’s neither true nor very scandalous. (But it is a standard opening in ed talks these days.) I learnt a lot from Stephen Downes’ lecture yesterday, and I know that discussing an article or blog post of his instead would not have worked better; it would have worked worse. Naturally, he addressed the irony of him lecturing (a full 90 mins!), but suggested that the lecture itself was secondary to its becoming  a resource to be shared. Yet my engagement was greatest at the actual time of listening, and throughout I wished I had been in the room with others. Yes, I agree that his lecture was “about creating the opportunity for dialogue and interaction” and that it served this purpose well. But surely this is what all lectures (can) do. No one working in education seriously believes that learning is about remembering, about recall. Yes, assessment practice tends to reward recall, and thus it places value on it, but this is what is fundamentally wrong about assessment practice, it is not evidence that we think learning is recall. Call the paradox a logical error, do not extrapolate that it shows a greater truth about our values.

Secondly, at some point I started to wonder if Downes equated learning too much with reliance on resources. Resources (and tools to create and share these) are central to his connectivist MOOC, as are the connections between learners and the conversations they have. But I missed a closer inspection of that elusive thing, ‘learning’. Sure, he reminded us: “content is only the MacGuffin” (think Maltese Falcon), there to move the conversations and relationships along, and he insisted that “learning is the conversations that happen’ – but this is not quite clear or useful enough for me. Learning cannot all be conversation, and often it benefits from leadership too. Autonomy and self-organisation are all well and good, but I’ve overheard serious conversations so dumb they’d blow your socks off, and they could have benefited from an expert gently pointing out that what had just been discussed was a) factually wrong and b) badly argued. But where does such expertise come from in self-organising networks? Also, in Downes’ self-organising networks, won’t the “filter bubble” prevent networks from being properly diverse? Won’t these self-selected online communities, be obstructed from benefiting from ethnically, socio-economically, politically different perspectives?

Finally, I am skeptical about his over reliance on technology. I tweeted a question to that effect, and he did his best to answer, but he thought I was worried only about “what happens when the lights go out” and reassured me that there are bigger threats (authoritarianism, big corporations – I know that, they too are technological systems!) than running out of fossil fuels. Rather, I meant to ask what effect our over-reliance on technology might have on our way of being: our relationships, attitudes and social behaviours. I don’t share Downes’ optimism about technology. I think it is important to evaluate our use of it critically at all times, and question its proliferation, especially in education. I imagine Downes doesn’t disagree with proper critical questioning, but I nevertheless suspect that he thinks technology overall is a boon.

And that’s fair enough.


Exploring social media as data sources for research – workshop

Yesterday, CLT ran for the second time a workshop exploring the use of social media AS research data (as opposed to using it as tools TO DO research). We first ran this in June 2013 as an experimental, exploratory workshop, which was a great success, but this time we wanted to shorten and improve it based on the feedback we received. By all accounts, it was a great success. I say “by all accounts”, because as misfortune would have it, I was struck with illness and could not make an appearance, after weeks of organising and preparing for it. Unfair beyond belief – especially since my colleagues raved about to me how good everyone’s presentations were.

March 20th, 2014|Events & Workshops (LTI), Research Skills, Social Media|Comments Off on Exploring social media as data sources for research – workshop|

Survey 2013 results: Device ownership, ‘BYOD’ & social media for learning

The results of our IMT student survey 2013 are in. We asked about student ownership of, habits with and attitudes towards mobile devices, and about their use of social media in a teaching and learning context.

Ownership of mobile devices amongst students at the LSE is very high – and practically all devices are used in some way to support their learning on campus, from accessing materials and writing notes and assignments on tablets and laptops, to using smartphones for communication and finding rooms or other campus information. We were keen to know if they would mind teachers asking them to use their devices in lectures, e.g. to participate in live online polls and about two thirds said that they would be fine with it (more than a third agreed to using mobiles and tablets). On average, students describe wifi provision good to fair, complaining mostly about frequent drops in connection.

On the social media side, LSE students are fairly strong users of social media, and use them in their learning for communication and collaboration, and to create and share files and documents.  The most frequently used one was, unsurprisingly, facebook, but the most frequently used ones in a learning context were document creation tools such as google docs and dropbox. We asked if students would mind using facebook with students and teachers, and while 62% said they would mind with teachers, only 23% said they’d mind using it with fellow students. One main reason for this is that they do not want to mix the personal with the professional, and another that students quite strongly believe that social media are not conducive to supporting learning.

We will be analysing these results further to see what implications they have for future projects in CLT, i.e. for Learning Technology and Innovation in particular and IMT in general.

A full report of the survey results can be accessed on LSE Research online

August 13th, 2013|Announcements, Social Media, Surveys|Comments Off on Survey 2013 results: Device ownership, ‘BYOD’ & social media for learning|

Centre for Learning Technology (CLT) now part of new Information Management & Technology (IMT)

From today, Monday 4th February 2013,the Centre for Learning Technology (CLT) has merged with IT Services to become the combined, restructured and re-branded Information Management and Technology (IMT) department.

General key changes and benefits can be found listed on the LSE IT News Blog.

For CLT in particular it means a renewed and extended focus on leading on “innovation” as well as greater support from and closer working relations with the former IT Services department.
For you, our friends and colleagues across the School, it means we remain the go-to people for all your eLearning needs, hopes and dreams, and our doors (STC.S169), emails ( and telephone lines (020 7948 4697) are always open. Well, at least from 9.00 -17.30, Mondays to Fridays… 🙂


February 4th, 2013|Announcements|Comments Off on Centre for Learning Technology (CLT) now part of new Information Management & Technology (IMT)|