Group items tagged

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

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

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.

Does anyone have any experience with this tool. It looks like a very interesting example of a Intelligent Web Filtering. Wow! Good side is that this is like Tivo for the web. Bad side is that you better have nothing else to do but look at the web. Also an interesting take on Personal Learning Networks.

But despite the prospects of BitTorrent being a great technology to allow sharing of digital content freely, to allow downloading of vast amounts of data that can then be stored offline and shared with anyone... the rest of the article (http://blog.vipeers.com/vipeers/2008/10/bittorrent-is-a.html) mentions that Google was unhappy with Khan's decision to use BitTorrent. Google actually blacklists BitTorrent content from its searches, and so is actually blacklisting Khan Academy content, despite being a recent financial backer of Khan. Why? This is the controversy: BitTorrent's power to share digital content in a decentralized way, where the more popular a file is, the faster it'll spread-- has led it to become the most popular method of digital piracy out there today. This has quickly become the most common use of BitTorrent, far exceeding the sharing of legitimate digital content. It's become a nightmare for the movie, music, software, and video gaming industries. A summary of the legal issues surrounding BitTorrent: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_issues_with_BitTorrent

Hey Bharat, I am so glad I asked. I had no idea. Very interesting. New dimension to the concept of free knowledge vs. intellectual property. I think the kids at my school are using this to share music. I'll have to check it out. I find this conflict- "Google actually blacklists BitTorrent content from its searches, and so is actually blacklisting Khan Academy content, despite being a recent financial backer of Khan. " so intriguing. At first glance it looked to me like a vision of networked learning that was aimed at an authentic task with authentic participants (as portrayed by actors :).

MOOCs, or "Massive Open Online Courses", are a relatively new model of distance e-learning where hundreds and sometimes thousands of participants all take an online course together. The instructional mode of the courses is fairly decentralized; since there are so many participants in the course, the individual students cannot typically expect to have much individual interaction with the professors running the course. As a result, individual members of the MOOCs take on roles of peer teachers, and these roles are assumed organically (i.e. nobody invites them to become teachers in the course, they simply step up and take the reins). The assessment of MOOCs is extremely flexible; there are no grades and people only participate in what they want to participate in. The theory is that the MOOC creators put the learning environment into place, and the participants learn what they want to learn; less participation simply means that they will not learn as much. Thought this was a though-provoking model of eLearning and the changing role of the instructor in an eLearning environment.

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.

"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).

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.

For those of you interested in trying out a bit of augmented reality at home, try out this green energy augmented reality application available from the GE web site. You will need a printout of the glyph (the black square design provided on the web site) and a webcam in order to get this to work. Audio volume adjust according to the distance of the glyph away from the webcam. This little AR app was designed using ARToolKit originally created by Dr. Hirokazu Kato.

Augmented Reality Sample created for General Electric using ARToolKit. You will need a webcam and a printout of the glyph (the black box design that the AR object will need to anchor to).\n\nI can't directly anchor to the augmented reality sample, so please bring your mouse pointer down to the bottom of the browser window to where it says, "Navigate the Smart Grid," and click the augmented reality icon on the far right of the navigation bar that appears.

Consider the possibilities for a performance assessment while playing through this simple "escape the room" game. The validity of the experiment involved in the solution is questionable.

Escape games are very big in the publishing industry right now due mostly to their inquiry based assessment and the low development cost compared to highly immersive first-person games. The biology lab escape is one of the better ones that I've seen out there. Thanks Chris!

I played for about 8 minutes and then grew tired of the game. I am curious how assessors would have graded my performance. I found the easier way to "escape the room" was to close the browser window.

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.

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.

This paper presents the first experimental evidence on the effects of live versus internet media of instruction. Students in a large introductory microeconomics course at a major research university were randomly assigned to live lectures versus watching these same lectures in an internet setting, where all other factors (e.g., instruction, supplemental materials) were the same. Counter to the conclusions drawn by a recent U.S. Department of Education meta-analysis of non-experimental analyses of internet instruction in higher education, we find modest evidence that live-only instruction dominates internet instruction. These results are particularly strong for Hispanic students, male students, and lower-achieving students. We also provide suggestions for future experimentation in other settings.

The authors are very misleading in their claim that this study is the first on live versus internet. There is a huge literature on this topic stretching back decades. The claims about the generalizability of the study are also very suspect.

Chris, I think the authors are claiming it is the first experimental trial where participants were randomly assigned to a treatment or control condition. They contrast their study with the DOE meta-analysis, which I don't think includes experimental studies--at least as experiments are defined within econometrics. My problem with the study is that they are aren't really comparing live vs. internet so much as live vs. recorded video. They are very careful to not take advantage of any of the potential affordances of internet mediated instruction, except broadcasting a lecture, to preserve the "purity" of their experiment. Of course, that's not a terribly interesting experiment. The more interesting experiments, which they deride as "not apples-to-apples," is to compare a traditional lecture format with an online course that takes full advantage of the affordances of the internet. These studies would confound the carefully balanced design of an apples-to-apples comparison, but no serious education technologist thinks we should just record all the lectures and post them...

About 16 mins in to this mostly political conversation about economic pressures and the political changes expected this fall, Matt Miller calls out higher education as a place likely to see major disruption in coming years, saying that like the medical establishment, it's a sector "where the costs of delivering services are much higher in the US than anywhere else in the world, [which has] been able...essentially through interest group politics...to keep the income flowing to their sector at the expense of the average consumer... You've got all these new...small firms...that will deliver, like, freshman year for a thousand dollars...and they're being blocked by the...status quo establishment that likes to keep the cost of higher education at 15, 20, 35 thousand dollars a year. If you've got this kind of economic pressure across the board, I think it's only a matter of time before the boom really falls on these sectors."

Designers of games need to consider the audience. Here is an example of a game that excludes left handed players. The DSi is a small hand held device with two screens. This game is played by holding the device open as you would a book. The problem is that numbers are moving from the left page to the right page and players are expected to use a stylus to interact with the right page. Left handed players block the view of the game and cannot play.

This is an opinion article that talks about immersion and the first-person camera angle in video games. He argues that game developers should re-evaluate the assumption that the first-person viewpoint is inherently more immersive than other gaming experiences.

As I chew through the Visions 2020 readings, I can't help my skepticism...and not due to the seamless integration of emerging ed technology. Alas, PEOPLE and the existing power structure of schools (reform) are not guided by a mission to reinvent, but to move the goal posts on ed standards around so as to insulate and protect the paradigm. Read on...

I would be for this. I could not believe a place so big on recycling (Harvard) murdered so many trees with the printing of course packs. I like this idea if you could get the material from other sources than just the school (say the author or publisher directly or something like Amazon). Otherwise, there is no opportunity for competition or bargaining.