Group items tagged

Tying into discussions this week about bringing access to mobile devices to all via non-prohibitive costs, while still reaching a set of bare-minmum technical specs for actual use: India's "$35 tablet" has been a pipedream in the tech blog-o-sphere for awhile now, but it's finally available (though for a price of roughly $60). Still though, as an actual Android color touch tablet, with WiFi and cellular data capability - I'm curious to see how it's received and if it's adopted in any sort of large scale

I had heard months ago that India was creating this, but was not going to offer it commercially - rather, just for its own country. Just like the Little Professor (Prof Dede) calculator, when tablets get this affordable, educational systems can afford classroom sets of them and then use them regularly. But to Prof Dede's point - can they do everything that more expensive tablets can do? Or better yet - do they HAVE to?

I think this is what they're aiming to do - all classrooms/students across the country having this particular tablet. They won't be able to do everything today's expensive tablets can do, but I think they'll still be able too to do plenty. This $35 tablet's specs are comparable to the mobile devices we had here in the US in 2008/2009. Even back then, we were able to web browse, check email, use social networking (sharing pics and video too), watching streaming online video, and play basic 2D games. But even beyond those basic features, I think this tablet will be able to do more than we expect from something at this price point and basic hardware, for 2 reasons: 1. Wide-spread adoption of a single hardware. If this thing truly does become THE tablet for India's students, it will have such a massive userbase that software developers and designers who create educational software will have to cater to it. They will have to study this tablet and learn the ins-and-outs of its hardware in order to deliver content for it. "Underpowered" hardware is able to deliver experiences well beyond what would normally be expected from it when developers are able to optimize heavily for that particular set of components. This is why software for Apple's iPhone and iPad, and games for video game consoles (xbox, PS3, wii) are so polished. For the consoles especially, all the users have the same exact hardware, with the same features and components. Developers are able to create software that is very specialized for that hardware- opposed to spending their resources and time making sure the software works on a wide variety of hardware (like in the PC world). With this development style in mind, and with a fixed hardware model remaining widely used in the market for many years- the resultant software is very polished and goes beyond what users expect from it. This is why today's game consoles, which have been around since 2005/6, produce visuals that are still really impressive and sta

"School of One uses technology to develop a unique learning path for each student and to provide a significant portion of the instruction that is both individualized and differentiated." I liked the definitions of individualized (pacing), differentiated (learning preferences/methods), and personalized (pacing, preferences, and content/objectives).

Gateway source for all students: high school and college composition and journalism and student of life. Bookmark this source and then bookmark the hyperlinks in this article. Do you have the 10 (11 for the bonus) tech skills down? I certainly can improve in some of these areas.

full disclosure: classmate Alex Schoenfeld first shared this with the us in the TIE facebook group :). But it brings an interesting trend in the adoption and pricing of mobile apps: Article outlining what lots of us know when it comes to moblie apps and pricing - free, $1, and $2 are the price-points that sell, and allow us to try out an app with minimal regret. But with the rise of more and more high-quailty, high-profile, and high-budget educatioanl apps, will the pricing structure change? Will parents and educators be willing to spend the prices of traditional computer software ($50 or more?) for really great mobile apps? The article brings up an interesting model that seems to already be coming to life looking at how apps are being sold and updated lately: "Donahoo and Russell propose there's a better way: subscriptions and content expansion packs.  Launchpad Toys follows the latter tact. The initial price the Toontastic app for $3 (though it's currently free). Users can use that fully functioning app, or choose to add additional characters and themes with $.99 expansion packs. This way, they contend, costs are controlled; it's cheap for parents and children to evaluate an app, and the model encourages regular updates."

A small but very pertinent article in the recent edition of the International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning (IRRODL) by Seth Gurell, Yu-Chun Kuo and Andrew Walker called The Pedagogical Enhancement of Open Education: An Examination of Problem-Based Learning1 is a real gem. The Pedagogical Enhancement of Open Education is a gem because it is focussed on pedagogy and online open learning. Gurell et al argue from a review of the literature and practical experience that problem based learning can work well with online open education. For example, traditional problem-based learning requires the learner to find and review resources which are usually print based materials such as books, journals, newspapers and so on, many of which take time to locate and access. However, using problem-based online learning using open education resources can remove much of the distraction of finding resources and enable greater attention to the learning task. Although problem-based learning (PBL) may not be suitable for all types of learning, a review of the research does indicate that students perform equally well using PBL as they do in traditional learning. Students engaged with PBL also perform better on retention tasks and on explanatory tasks, reveal Gurell et al. There are many sources of open educational resources. Two such examples that are well known are the Open Education Resource (OER) Commons, the Open Courseware Consortium. However, others such as Academic Earth, Scientific Commons, and Project OSCAR are also interesting. The Pedagogical Enhancement of Open Education is a very succinct review of online PBL and its fit with open online learning. Gurell et al have provided an excellent review of the versatility of online open education and how to maximise pedagogy to achieve improved learner outcomes.

The idea of "showing what you know" and earning badges instead of degrees? In this economic downswing, could something like this become the new emergent way of learning and of assessing? Thoughts?

Sounds like the digital badge is more lke a digital portfolio- which I would more likely support. I find it interesting that our education system (which strives and struggles to provide consistent, high quality education from coast to coast) is seen as deficient but this badge proposal will be the answer? It's like the flood of support for home-schooling after a home-schooler wins a national competition but no one knows about the tens of homescholers I had to remediate in rural NH. Standardization is the key for any system to be integrated into another system. The variety of education models we have in our country makes it difficult for employers to integrate employees. If this digital badge concept relies on a variety of models, they will have the same problem.

The prospect of digital badges to show what you know is both exciting with its potential affordances and worrisome with some of its limitations and ambiguity. It'd be great if the ideal came to pass that digital badges would allow valid demonstration of super-specific skills and knowledge over a greater range of fields and topics than what having a B.A. or B.S. currently does. Digital badges could represent the most particular concepts or skills at a granular level even-- those that are essential in the real-world (whether that be desired by employers or otherwise). If the task or test or challenge, or whatever else would be the means of assessment for earning a badge, was carefully designed and evaluated to be a truly valid measure of proficiency, then earning a badge for something would be a clear indication that you know something. But like Allison said, standardization would be key. What would these assessments/ badge challenges be- so that they would be truly valid indicators of proficiency? Who would be the purveyors or authorities to determine the assessments or challenges to accomplish a badge? Given the medium (completing badge assessments on one's own computer or mobile device - from any site they're at potentially) - what's to stop a user from going "open book" or "opening another tab" in order to look up answers to questions or tutorials on how to do a task, in order to complete the assessment? Doing this would allow a user to ace the assessment and earn the badge- but would defeat any value of the badge in truly demonstrating knowledge or skill. By imagining if digital badges did reach mass-acceptance and use in the real world, and we were to ultimately find them all over the internet like we're now finding social media widgets, it made me realize that the "prove proficiency anywhere I am in any way I want" won't work. I changed fields and career paths from what I studied in college, so I definitely appreciate the value in being able to truly show e

Here is the link to the archived version of the SIIA webinar I posted about a few days ago: "The Learning Resource Metadata Initiative (LRMI) is working to create a standard metadata framework for tagging educational resources on the web to enhance search, discovery and delivery of educational content. The project is funded by the Gates and Hewlett Foundations, administered through AEP and Creative Commons, and builds on the broader Schema.org project by leading search engines Bing, Google, and Yahoo! This webinar provides an overview of the LRMI goals and deliverables, an update on progress and timelines, a look at the technical specifications, and a discussion of its implementation and impact with a focus on content publishers, aggregators and other digital learning providers."

One teacher claims that "The idea is to invert the normal rhythms of school, so that lectures are viewed on the kids' own time and homework is done at school." - Do you agree that this is a good solution? 

I too am intrigued by this "inverting" of time spent in the classroom and at home. My idealized model would be to introduce learners to new material at their own pace out of the classroom (allowing for pausing, note taking, reflecting and/or rewinding) and focus classroom time on face to face guiding and coaching of clusters of students or individual students engaged in applying or exploring the current material. To help facilitate this (and assist with accountability) some brief form of pre-assessment before class or at the start of class could illuminate for student and teacher alike what material has been mastered and what needs more attention. The research report from the TIE Foundations summer reading appears to support this type of hybrid approach. => Marsha Lovett, Oded Meyer, and Candace Thille (2008). The Open Learning Initiative: Measuring the effectiveness of the OLI statistics course in accelerating student learning.

An added benefit of tools such as Khan Academy is the option for reinforcement. In a traditional K-12 school environment students do not have the option to watch a video of their class or spend personalized time reviewing a concept they need more time with during class time due to the required pace of school curriculum. An online learning tool allows a student to watch a lesson as many times as needed and to learn from an expert. Often if a student needs help outside the classroom the only people they turn to is parents, who may or may not know about the content themselves.

The role technology can play in expanding the time during which learning can take place.

Another article about "expanded learning time" both online and via community-based "brick and mortar" locations like libraries, YMCA, and Boys & Girls Clubs. "Out-of-school programs can be strong partners for schools who want to leverage expanded learning time to help their students achieve global competence. Youth-serving organizations share the broad mission to promote student success in work and life in the 21st century. Out-of-school program organization and management is often based on an asset model that values diversity. In order to attract and retain participants, out-of-school programs are centered around youth engagement through hands-on and experiential learning, often with a focus on 21st century skills, service learning, science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) education, and others."

I wonder what Helen Haste would think of this organization . . .

'Quest to Learn' is a New York City public middle and high school, supporting collaborative student-led learning: "Quest to Learn has used research in game-based learning to create a rigorous and engaging collaborative learning space where students feel safe taking risks and using their successes and failures to create and apply new knowledge." "Nurturing social and emotional learning (SEL) and 21st century skills like inventiveness, risk taking and collaboration."

Background on Augmented Reality. Reading for 9/14.

Uche, you keep posting stuff I have a problem with- OK I understand that BYOD policies may not be so great but I really believe that familes should shoulder some of the costs for hardware since degredation is such a problem. The schools can have agreements with vendors to provide certain laptops or tablets for a certain price point and they can design their systems to support these items. Parents are expected to purchase backpacks, binders, and school supplies. When parents can't provide these back-to-school supplies, schools cover it. The same should be for computers. Speaking as a middle class parent (refer to above article) I believe this is an important investment in our schools so that they can focus on hardware support and software implementation/ integration.

I still believe that a system properly designed could mitigate some of your concerns. In reality, schools can not support any device that a student brings in. They are capable of supporting a certain number and if they build relationships with the vendors to sell those devices that the school is capable of supporting then families will be aware that the school will offer the best deal on the items that are compatible. Every year the school recommends items for back to school supplies. If the laptop could replace all of the binders it might be worth it. There are many factors to consider but the biggest obstacle is that schools maintain such old equipment because of their budget woes. Even when we can purchase the latest and greatest software, the computers can't run it.

What a great debate you guys are having! One point worth considering is that typically the parents are responsible for purchasing the supplies, while the school is responsible for providing the content (textbooks, workbooks, handouts, worksheets, videos, etc). In the near future these devices may also be the primary sources of content, replacing textbooks altogether. I would hope perhaps funding for textbooks could be transferred to funding for these devices. I would also hope that the price of these devices drops significantly (is the $35 tablet in our future?). Then of course the question of who pays is less important. In my job producing educational video for publishing companies, I spend way too much time dealing with various formats and compatibility problems with browsers, so I'd love to see a future where this becomes more standardized.

A new proposal calls for a Consumer Reports-like rating body to evaluate new digital learning tools. Ed tech innovators like the idea in theory but they worry that it won't work in practice.

Funny, I was just talking with someone about this very idea the other day. We absolutely need something like this and my guess is that we will have a few competitors, at least early on, for the top ed tech review site. I think there is space for both an organization that specializes and for a yelp like site that essentially crowd sources the reviews. It will be tough to keep up, but think of how many products and areas Consumer Reports deals with- we can do this, and need to do this, for ed tech to get used wisely in our schools.

With regards to e-learning, I think inevitably some company or organization will provide ratings of the quality of online degree programs and learning tools. Whether this is Consumer Reports or US World & News Report or some new player (investment opportunity?), the need for objective assessments of digital learning tools is definitely needed. The Benchmarking e-learning wiki is interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benchmarking_e-learning

A letter to President Obama about MOOCs and higher education, from his council of advisors on science and technology. This was released just a couple of days ago and highlights some of the potential benefits and current issues in the ongoing MOOC debate which we have all discussed. "Although the new technologies introduced by MOOCs are still in their infancy, and many questions and challenges remain, we believe that they hold the possibility of transforming education at all levels by providing better metrics for educational outcomes, and better alignment of incentives for innovation in pedagogy."

Principles of networked learning, constructivism, and connectivism inform the design of a test case through which secondary students construct personal learning environments for the purpose of independent inquiry. Emerging web applications and open educational resources are integrated to support a Networked Student Model that promotes inquiry-based learning and digital literacy, empowers the learner, and offers flexibility as new technologies emerge. The Networked Student Model and a test case are described in detail along with implications and considerations for additional research. The article is meant to facilitate further discussion about K-12 student construction of personal learning environments and offer the practitioner a foundation on which to facilitate a networked learning experience. It seeks to determine how a teacher can scaffold a networked learning approach while providing a foundation on which students take more control of the learning process.

How test designers are trying to move away from standardized tests to computer programs that can measure a myriad of skills simultaneously through simulations and "stealth monitoring."  Both Chris Dede and Howard Gardner are mentioned.

Edmodo And Common Sense Media Partner (the authors of the 0-8 report some of us read for Joe Blatt's class this week) to offer free teaching tools based on Dr. Howard Gardner's work at HGSE. The partnership provides teachers with a set of student activities based on Common Sense Media's free K-12 curriculum, "Digital Literacy and Citizenship in a Connected Culture," for the Edmodo platform. The curriculum introduces the basics of using social networks and other digital technologies safely, responsibly and respectfully and is based on the work of Dr. Howard Gardner and the GoodPlay Project at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Sebastian Thrun, CEO of Udacity, has openly admitted that his company's MOOC courses are a lousy replacement for actual university class and instead will be taking his company to focus more on corporate training. I personally will reserve further judgement until after I finish the readings for next week.

Grif - where did the Stephen Downes quote come from ? I read the Rebecca Schuman article and don't really agree with her. To expand on the Schuman quote you posted - it's really interesting how she says the massive lecture format doesn't work but then provides two examples of massive technology that do work - texting and World of Warcraft. This relates directly to some of what we talked about earlier this semester. I don't think it's the 'massive,' as Schuman implies, that causes the failure of a MOOC. It's part of the design. Once the design is better and more engaging, then MOOCs may find that they have higher retention rates. Schuman: Successful education needs personal interaction and accountability, period. This is, in fact, the same reason students feel annoyed, alienated, and anonymous in large lecture halls and thus justified in sexting and playing World of Warcraft during class-and why the answer is not the MOOC, but the tiny, for-credit, in-person seminar that has neither a sexy acronym nor a potential for huge corporate partnerships.

The Downes quote was from OLDaily, which is a daily listserve of his that I subscribe too. I think the difference between texting/WoW and MOOCs is that, while both have many many users, the former two have means in which those groups are disaggregated into smaller units that are largely responsible for the UX/individual growth that goes on. I agree with you that massive is not necessarily the failure, in fact, I think it's the best thing they have going for them. However, until the design can leverage meaningful collaboration, like WoW and texting, the massive will remain a burden.