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

One Laptop Per Child (OLPC) implementation in Australia seems to bring positive results. In remote, largely indigenous northwest Queensland, Doomadgee, 3rd grade students' numeracy improved from 31 per cent last year to a staggering 95 per cent in 2011.

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

Program in Estonia designed to have all students age 7 to 16 learn to write code in a drive to turn children from consumers to developers of technology.

Hmmm.... I read about Estonia being very plugged in as well. I wonder if there is research on whether the kids are actually learning better as a result. I think that you have a point Jeffrey. It depends what the cost is. If kids are missing some critical lesson because they are coding at such a young age, there may be a trade-off. On the other hand, maybe the skills they are obtaining from coding are more critical. I wonder...

Ideally, the tech skills would be used to enhance and deepen some of the other curriculum areas. But, yes, 7 years old may be young.

In the US, 250000 students are enrolled in full-time public virtual schools in 30 states, according to Susan Patrick of the International Association for K-12 Online Learning, a trade association. Although that's just a fraction of the country's 50 million students, it has grown 30% each year. Some schools in Michigan already shown the advantage of digital learning.

This is an interesting article. I am just concerned that it is not unbiased or driven by an agenda other than improving education. I found this information about the Mackinac Center online: http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/mackinac-center-public-policy I am starting to realize that a lot of the technology in schools rhetoric is driven by corporate and political interests, and as the industry becomes ever more profitable, I'm worried that companies are going to jump in and try to influence policy, rushing through the movement toward the wrong kind of technology in schools- i.e. sacking half of the teaching staff and replacing them with cheap computers. I think one of our most important jobs as Harvard TIE students is to education the public about the right ways to adapt technology in the classroom, and the important role that teachers will continue to play in this movement.

Connected to a few class discussions (including one in HT 500 about multitasking)... *potential for greater/more diversity in discussion/participation than in person *what do we mean when we say "multi-task"? *weighty topics/140 characters Somebody's got to create something worth tweeting

Youth at Risk makes the sobering point in its findings that 'ICT driven initiatives targeting YAR are taking place but there is little systematic and in-depth information about them. Knowledge sharing and collaboration among stakeholders involved in YAR is still too limited (p. 29)'. Further, Youth at Risk states, 'There is evidence that ICT-driven initiatives can foster the reengagement of YAR in a variety of dimensions (education, vocational training, job searching, social engagement) by using ICT in their back-office activities and in their interaction with YAR (p. 29)'.

Along the lines of the discussions we've been having on the isites, mobile learning has major potential in the developing world. "Mobile phones are increasingly ubiquitous in poor countries, which now account for FOUR IN EVERY FIVE connections worldwide". This means that almost everyone owns or has access to a mobile phone. How can we leverage this reality? Well, we can't impose anything that requires a smart phone, since most of these mobile phones cannot access 3G or wifi networks. Perhaps we can start to send podcasts as voice notes? Audio wikis of information sent via sms? In-phone calculators for math homework completion? I think all we need is an educational system that supports this type of learning, and m-learning can possible change the face of education in the developing world. 

Emerging technology has had a strong geographical component. With Google Fiber up and running in Kansas City and tech start-ups burgeoning in Des Moines, we may see yet another wellspring of innovation in the Midwest. This could have significant implications on rural education and agtech.

There were numerous communities in Colorado that tried to lure Google Fiber; it looks like it's paying off for KC. It would be interesting to see the tech start-up numbers in comparison to other US locales. I would like more details as to why only two regions increased their share of angel investors.

My guess is that insufficient momentum or critical mass exists in other regions, Danna. The article mentions the Southwest and Great Plains as two regions with an increase in angel investors. The Southwest probably represents spillover from Silicon Valley, while the Great Plains benefits from large metropolitan areas, good universities, and a concentration of young professional residents. I also think that tech start-ups and VC firm naturally promote the growth of one another.

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.

To what extent should videogames be used in classrooms, and what is the research support for this?

Note the author characterizes the National Educational Technology Plan as a "manifesto." Quoting this article, "... in March, Arne Duncan, the secretary of education, released a draft National Educational Technology Plan that reads a bit like a manifesto for change, proposing among other things that the full force of technology be leveraged to meet "aggressive goals" and "grand" challenges, including increasing the percentage of the population that graduates from college to 60 percent from 39 percent in the next 10 years. What it takes to get there, the report suggests, is a "new kind of R.& D."

A bunch of especially interesting quotes toward the end: "This concept is something that Will Wright, who is best known for designing the Sims game franchise...refers to as 'failure-based learning,' in which failure is brief, surmountable, often exciting and therefore not scary... According to Ntiedo Etuk, the chief executive of Tabula Digita...children who persist in playing a game are demonstrating a valuable educational ideal.... 'They'll fail until they win.' He adds: 'Failure in an academic environment is depressing. Failure in a video game is pleasant. It's completely aspirational.' It is also, says James Paul Gee, antithetical to the governing reality of today's public schools. 'If you think about kids in school - especially in our testing regime - both the teacher and the student think that failure will lead to disaster,' he says. 'That's pretty much a guarantee that you'll never get to truly deep learning.'"

This article is interesting in light of Haste's article for class. Gladwell dismisses the "Twitter revolution" in Moldova and explains that real activism--real civic participation--is not seen in low-risk online networks, such as Facebook and Twitter. Perhaps new technology cannot empower individuals enough for real-life civic engagement?

I am not sure that online networks only form weak ties. I am somewhat surprised there was no mention of http://www.meetup.com/ and the soon to be released http://www.jumo.com/ as they both appear to consider themselves to be a means for social change. There is another point raised that we seem to have forgotten activism. This point, if true, may be a good explination as to why social media is not commonly used for social change.

Thanks for posting this Jessica! I've been thinking about this for sometime now and I don't think Gladwell is right in saying that Twitter and FB form weak ties just as the SM folklore claiming that twitter or FB is in the middle of real activism. Social media is a tool for organizing civic participation. Civic engagement is defined by how many participate and only later by the platform/tool they use. Couple of reactions to Gladwell's piece: http://rburnett.ecuad.ca/main/2010/10/1/the-anti-gladwell-small-change-indeed.html http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/tipping_point_author_malcolm_gladwell_says_facebook_twitter_cant_change_world.php

A contrarian view. "Some education experts say that the push to equip classrooms with computers is unwarranted because studies do not clearly show that this leads to better test scores or other measurable gains."

First of all - the girl in the picture of this article is reading Nancy Drew - who else spent most of their childhood with their head buried in a mystery series? :-) Secondly, I cannot tell you how valuable mud was to my childhood. Had I not been at a camp every summer where I was able to play around in mud and run through the woods all day, I would not be the person I am today. I think I did most of my growing and much of my learning in informal environments such as camp. It sounds to me like this school is trying to replicate those learning experiences...in a classroom. Not saying it's the way to go...but certainly an interesting model. Thanks for sharing!

Waldorf philosophy is different approach. For example, children learn to write first before they learn to read. As a result children may learn to read as late as 8 or 9. It's based on the anthroposophy philosophy. Children's who parents value these things will do well in a school without technology. Children who are plugged in at home would have a difficult time. This is effective for private school but not public school.

Example of AR in biology. Expected ban on animal dissection in India seems to encourage further AR adoption in classroom. I wonder if there are any other external factors that could put AR as ''must consider as an alternative soon'' rather than as ''nice to have in the future''. 

This article discusses one school's plan to implement effective learning technologies into the classroom. They looked at examples that were working in other parts of the world and incorporated them into their idea which includes many augmented reality applications. They discuss the divide between using technology effectively in our personal lives and not in education, so the classroom remains the same as it has been for 100 years. As we have discussed in class, the education system must use technology in the classroom to help prepare students for jobs that require skills adaptable to technologies that do not yet exist.

The school I am interning at (The Carroll School) is using this in their middle school math classes. Small class sizes typically (4-8 kids /  class), and it's a 1:1 school where every child has a laptop. But - it's working well for designated independent work time in the math classes I've observed- where each kid is asked to play the game for 15 minutes on their own. Kids have their own profiles- and there are several different math mini games they can play, each game focusing on different math skills. Each mini game involves different game mechanics and art styles. But all games involve using arithmetic skills and math concepts to solve problems that progress them in the game. Good performance gives the kids in-game credits/money that they can use to customize their in-gam avatar. 

Background on Augmented Reality. Reading for 9/14.