It doesn't have to be just student feedback about the operations and mechanics of the course, or as a replacement for a course survey tool. You can also use the platform as a way to engage students on the content relevant to the learning outcomes of the course. And use the platform to connect learners with people in the field of study.

Parents and students in the Mountain View school district consider their use of math software called Teach to One to be a failure.

The Mountain View school district apparently budgeted $521,000 to implement and operate this new-fangled math program in two local schools. Had they adequately beta tested the program beforehand, the school district might have discovered that Teach to One teaches math (we’ve found) in a disjointed, erratic, and non-linear fashion that leaves many students baffled and disenchanted with math. The program contains errors in the math it teaches. Parents end up having to teach kids math at home and make up for the program’s deficiencies. And all the while, the math teachers get relegated to “managing the Teach to One program rather than to providing direct instruction” themselves.

Sounds like they would have been much better off to just use http://khanacademy.org or http://schoolyourself.org So why are they using this expensive, seemingly untested service?

Sara Holbrook had two of her poems used on the Texas state assessment tests. She verifies what I thought as a student. The questions are ridiculous. The test makers seem to think that their interpretation of a work is the only interpretation, and that they can read the author's mind and know their intent.

"Texas paid Pearson $500 million bucks to administer the tests". Is that right? Was that for just one year? What else could we do with $500 million?

She mentions a study showing that the results of another standardized test could be predicted pretty well using just three data points about families in the community: the percentage with income over $200K; the percentage in poverty; the percentage with bachelor's degrees. So the standardized test tells you nothing that you can't guess by looking at local incomes and education levels.

What a scam.

The question that I think we should be asking ourselves is, what is it that my culture is preventing me from seeing?

...

It seems that education is more about filling brains, than teaching people to think.

Education ought to be about drawing something out, not putting something in. One of the things that people should be taught at school, is to think critically about the things that they consider most indisputably correct.

-- Iain McGilchrist (The Master and His Emissary: The Divided Brain and the Making of the Western World)

http://iainmcgilchrist.com/

Since there is no proven “right way” to assess and track student learning, the most effective option is to turn this responsibility over to the students. Because learning should stem from intrinsic motivation, teachers can spend time showing students how to track the feedback and their progress from long-term learning experiences. This way students will learn to reflect on their growth, set better goals, and be accountable for their own growth.

-- Starr Sackstein<br> http://hackingassessment.com/<br> http://hackinghomework.com/

Deborah Meier points out that democracy has to be learned, and we aren't teaching it adequately. Most schools are authoritarian environments where students are taught, explicitly and implicitly, to do what they're told. We need to give kids experience with democracy -- productive debate, compromise, trial and error, and acknowledging one's own mistakes.

Hypothes.is nicely bridges the worlds of social media and formal education.

Go to Chapter 18

Good advice for mentors and mentees, and why it's usually hard for a manager to be a mentor to the same person.

To me this is the heart of it, especially in so far as this use case overlaps with the educational/classroom one.

The less we expect of our people, the less democracy we have.

Technologies & education system changing in recent times tutors should consider educating students with the latest technologies available. In the evolution of technology with apps, projector screens, Digital media, and last but not the least online learning platforms some fundamentals of teaching remains as it is, so if tutors can implement these basic ideas in his/her tutoring style with students can cope up with the evolution of digital education.

According to the report of the UK Government, Department of Education (published on January 10, 2014), there were altogether 24372 public schools comprising of 16818 State-funded primary schools, 3268 State funded and 2420 other Secondary schools and 4476 independent schools. There are also 1039 special (state funded) and non-maintained schools. The same report says that there were 438000 teachers in state-funded schools in England on a full-time equivalent basis in 2012. The numbers at both ends have naturally increased at the time of writing this article. But the big question that is looming over the education system of England is whether, even after the best effort by the UK Government and the State schools, the public school system is successful in educating their children properly or not.

The education sector is witnessing the immense boom in the UK. It has various elements like schools, universities, institutions and nowadays the tutoring classes have been increased tremendously. It all creates the strong educational structure within the UK. The demand for the tuitions is increasing.http://blog.selectmytutor.co.uk/demand-for-extra-tuition-is-rising-as-britishers-are-likely-to-pay-high/

The education in the 21st century has offered a lot of predictions, and the future imperatives have also been utilized by the education in the 21st century which was obviously not done in the education strategies in the 19th century.http://blog.selectmytutor.co.uk/education-level-in-21st-century-from-19th-century/

"Wikity is social bookmarks, wikified." -- Mike Caulfield<br> http://rainystreets.wikity.cc/<br> https://github.com/michaelarthurcaulfield/wikity-zero/

as far as I can tell, Wikity is the simplest way to run a personal wiki on top of WordPress. But the focus is a hyperlinked bookmarking and notetaking system, because after a year of use and 2,000 cards logged, I can tell you that is where the unique value is.

I see similar patterns with print books. You can't rely on the bookstore (or library in many cases) to value true/false, enduring/ephemeral. They're both providing, to varying degrees, the stuff people want.

I'd disagree strongly with the idea that authors on the Internet don't have varying levels of credibility. That's done in so many ways.

So this first one is a technical distinction whereas the second and third are more pedagogical. But what occurred to me in reading this list of rationales was the way in which those pedagogical choices are effected by the tech we choose.

Sunil Singh asks us to stop promoting mathematics based on its current applications in business and science. Math is an art that should be enjoyed for its own sake.

This reminded me of A Mathematician's Lament by Paul Lockhart. This is a 25-page essay which was later worked into a 140-page book. (And Sunil Singh has read at least one of them. He credits Lockhart in one of the replies.)

It also reminds me of this article on the history of Gaussian elimination and the birth of matrix algebra. Newton's algebra text included instructions for solving systems of equations -- but it didn't have much practical use until later. (Silly word problems are as old as mathematics.)

We should let people learn at their own pace. We should neither rush them, nor hold them back. If they show a talent, then encouraging them to push themselves is fine.

Math isn't for everyone, and that's fine. The same is true of any other subject. We should help people learn what they are interested in learning.

"Germany proves tuition-free college is not a silver bullet for America's education woes"

How so?

Le tag «education» est ajouté ci-dessous. Cliquez dessus.

Khan Academy announces their goal to offer internationally-recognized diplomas.

our long-term goal is to develop internationally-recognized diplomas that provide direct access to economic and educational opportunities.

...

We will develop the diplomas in close partnership with educational institutions and employers to ensure relevance. In addition to academic skills, we will recognize metacognitive skills, like perseverance, not measured by traditional degrees. Unlike other offerings, we will track job placement and performance to measure the efficacy of the diplomas and continuously improve them.

This could hugely impact the education of children negatively.

Good questions. Is information literacy as ill-defined as the open in open ed?

This may not be as much schooling as America, but that is still pretty good compared to other countries.

For a skepticasl discussion of growth mindset: http://slatestarcodex.com/2015/04/08/no-clarity-around-growth-mindset-yet/

To me, the most interesting about this program is that it sounds like it’s targeting post-secondary institutions. There are multiple programs to “teach kids to code”. Compulsory education (primary and secondary) can provide a great context for these, in part because the type of learning involved is so broad and pedagogical skills are so recognized. In post-secondary contexts, however, there’s a strong tendency to limit coding to very specific contexts, including Computer Science or individual programs. We probably take for granted that people who need broad coding skills can develop them outside of their college and university programs. In a way, this isn’t that surprising if we’re to compare coding to very basic skills, like typing. Though there are probably many universities and colleges where students can get trained in typing, it’s very separate from the curriculum. It might be “college prep”, but it’s not really a college prerequisite. And there isn’t that much support in post-secondary education. Of course, there are many programs, in any discipline, giving a lot of weight to coding skills. For instance, learners in Digital Humanities probably hone in their ability to code, at some point in their career. And it’s probably hard for most digital arts programs to avoid at least some training in programming languages. It’s just that these “general” programs in coding tend to focus almost exclusively on so-called “K–12 Education”. That this program focuses on diversity is also interesting. Not surprising, as many such initiatives have to do with inequalities, real or perceived. But it might be where something so general can have an impact in Higher Education. It’s also interesting to notice that there isn’t much in terms of branding or otherwise which explicitly connects this initiative with colleges and universities. Pictures on the site show (diverse) adults, presumably registered students at universities and colleges where “education partners” are to be found. But it sounds like the idea of a “school” is purposefully left quite broad or even ambiguous. Of course, these programs might also benefit adult learners who aren’t registered at a formal institution of higher learning. Which would make it closer to “para-educational” programs. In fact, there might something of a lesson for the future of universities and colleges.

To me, the most interesting about this program is that it sounds like it’s targeting post-secondary institutions. There are multiple programs to “teach kids to code”. Compulsory education (primary and secondary) can provide a great context for these, in part because the type of learning involved is so broad and pedagogical skills are so recognized. In post-secondary contexts, however, there’s a strong tendency to limit coding to very specific contexts, including Computer Science or individual programs. We probably take for granted that people who need broad coding skills can develop them outside of their college and university programs. In a way, this isn’t that surprising if we’re to compare coding to very basic skills, like typing. Though there are probably many universities and colleges where students can get trained in typing, it’s very separate from the curriculum. It might be “college prep”, but it’s not really a college prerequisite. And there isn’t that much support in post-secondary education. Of course, there are many programs, in any discipline, giving a lot of weight to coding skills. For instance, learners in Digital Humanities probably hone in their ability to code, at some point in their career. And it’s probably hard for most digital arts programs to avoid at least some training in programming languages. It’s just that these “general” programs in coding tend to focus almost exclusively on so-called “K–12 Education”. That this program focuses on diversity is also interesting. Not surprising, as many such initiatives have to do with inequalities, real or perceived. But it might be where something so general can have an impact in Higher Education. It’s also interesting to notice that there isn’t much in terms of branding or otherwise which explicitly connects this initiative with colleges and universities. Pictures on the site show (diverse) adults, presumably registered students at universities and colleges where “education partners” are to be found. But it sounds like the idea of a “school” is purposefully left quite broad or even ambiguous. Of course, these programs might also benefit adult learners who aren’t registered at a formal institution of higher learning. Which would make it closer to “para-educational” programs. In fact, there might something of a lesson for the future of universities and colleges.

Sign of the times? One part is about economics as the discipline of decision-making. Economists often claim that their work is about any risk/benefit analysis and isn’t purely about money. But the whole thing is still about “resources” or “exchange value”, in one way or another. So, it could be undue influence from this way of thinking. A second part is that, as this piece made clear at the onset, “education is big business”. In some ways, “education” is mostly a term for a sector or market. Schooling, Higher Education, Teaching, and Learning are all related. Corporate training may not belong to the same sector even though many of the aforementioned EdTech players bet big on this. So there’s a logic to focus on the money involved in “education”. Has little to do with learning experiences, but it’s an entrenched system.

Finally, there’s something about efficiency, regardless of effectiveness. It’s somewhat related to economics, but it’s often at a much shallower level. The kind of “your tax dollars at work” thinking which is so common in the United States. “It’s the economy, silly!”

Ha! The Chronicle’s summary framed these categories somewhat differently. Interesting. To me, the “application” part is really about student retention. But maybe that’s a bit of a cynical reading, based on an over-emphasis in the Learning Analytics sphere towards teleological, linear, and insular models of learning. Then, the “representation” part sounds closer to UDL than to learner-driven microcredentials. Both approaches are really interesting and chances are that the report brings them together. Finally, the Chronicle made it sound as though the research implied here were less directed. The mention that it has “the potential to influence institutional practices and interventions” may be strategic, as applied research meant to influence “decision-makers” is more likely to sway them than the type of exploratory research we so badly need.

Useful breakdown. Research, predictive models, and recognition are quite distinct from one another and the approaches to data that they imply are quite different. In a way, the “personalized learning” model at the core of the second topic is close to the Big Data attitude (collect all the things and sense will come through eventually) with corresponding ethical problems. Through projects vary greatly, research has a much more solid base in both ethics and epistemology than the kind of Big Data approach used by technocentric outlets. The part about recognition, though, opens the most interesting door. Microcredentials and badges are a part of a broader picture. The data shared in those cases need not be so comprehensive and learners have a lot of agency in the matter. In fact, when then-Ashoka Charles Tsai interviewed Mozilla executive director Mark Surman about badges, the message was quite clear: badges are a way to rethink education as a learner-driven “create your own path” adventure. The contrast between the three models reveals a lot. From the abstract world of research, to the top-down models of Minority Report-style predictive educating, all the way to a form of heutagogy. Lots to chew on.

Sounds fairly damning for a business based on helping diverse students with the labour market…

The term may still sound somewhat misleading to those who work in, say, museums (where “curator” is a very specific job title). But the notion behind it is quite important, especially when it comes to Open Education. A big part of the job is to find resources and bring them together for further reuse, remix, and reappropriation. In French, we often talk about «veille technologique», which is basically about watching/monitoring relevant resources, especially online.

Coursera announces Coursera for Business, shifting toward corporate learning. Udacity has already followed the same path.

Coursera mission statement from early 2012: "We are committed to making the best education in the world freely available to any person who seeks it." 2016: "Meh."

Let's just highlight a root problem here, then: "statewide budget cuts".

Why should any public school ever have to do fundraising?

Encouraged to find this report from opening with an idea that is central in the MentorsOnline project, which asks: "What would YOU want to do, if you could be with your students, right there in the browser?" Glad to have found this. (Glad for the course correction back to good material.)

test

Page 15

Rockwell and Sinclair call for

a new kind of literacy that allows us to continue our pursuits as humanities scholars in the changing world we find ourselves in.

This is the primary motivation for the MentorsOnline project. By making it convenient for teachers to share links, we make it easier for students to learn on the Internet.

This install guide closes a gap. Now, users can 1) register an account (click the face, use "mentor" as pass key), 2) add links to database, 3) create a lesson, 4) DL/install the browser extension, and 5) SEE THEIR LESSON in the application.

More info here: https://azwaldo.com/wordpress/category/project/ (blog category)

Yes! I love this idea of the "non-actual possible worlds" being the stuff of higher education. The multiversity.

Education should open up the possible, not constrain to the already known.

"If given the opportunity all teachers would stop grading their students. You’ll never find a teacher who loves grading papers, projects or tests. In 20 years as a classroom teacher, I heard more complaints about grading than anything else."

"So, if they hate it so much, why don’t teachers stop grading? Because parents, administrators, and bureaucrats won’t let them."

Mark Barnes

"Real gifted education (not gifted programs) involves seeing every student as an individual, finding out what they need, what they want to learn, and what they care about, and then adapting the instructional environment and curriculum to those needs, wants, and passions."

"There’s no reason we can’t do this for everyone, letting gifted students soar without the downsides of selective gifted programs."

Gerald Aungst

The Others.

There is. But it might be shifting a bit. Or, at least, there are people around who are proposing another Sphere of Agency, one which relies much less on content and does a lot more with openness. As with Berkana, our job might be to connect these people who sing in a different voice. We might reach richer harmonies when we don’t expect unison.

At the risk of sounding cynical (which is a very real thing with annotations), reaching a global market can be very imperialistic a move, regardless of who makes it.

One might think that those other languages are well-represented. People connected with the Open Knowledge Foundation are currently tackling this very issue. Here, Open Education isn’t just about content.

Much hiding in this passing comment. As adjuncts, our contributions to the system are perceived through the exploitation lens.

Like how about open education tools and app stores?

Though that may not really be the core argument of the piece, it’s more than a passing point. Watters’s raising awareness of this other type of “military-industrial complex” could have a deep impact on many a discussion, including the whole hype about VR (and AR). It’s not just Carnegie-Mellon and Paris’s Polytechnique («l’X») which have strong ties to the military. Or (D)ARPANET. Reminds me of IU’s Dorson getting money for the Folklore Institute during the Cold War by arguing that the Soviets were funding folklore. Even the head of the NEH in 2000 talked about Sputnik and used the language of “beating Europe at culture” when discussing plans for the agency. Not that it means the funding or “innovation” would come directly from the military but it’s all part of the Cold War-era “ideology”. In education, it’s about competing with India or Finland. In other words, the military is part of a much larger plan for “world domination”.

Don’t know what the stats are for “non-profit universities and colleges” but it does feel like an increasing portion of their budgets go to marketing, advertising, PR, and strategic positioning (at least in the United States and Canada).

Somewhat surprising, in the current context.

In education as in health, things get really complex when people have an incentive for people not to improve.

Another side to Open Education: open opportunities. While they still mean “opportunities for success in the current system”, it’s compatible with a view of student success which goes beyond the current system.

Nice pun, giving another connotation to the term “learner”.

Though it’s not exactly the same thing, you could call this “instrumental” or “pragmatic”. Of course, you could have something very practical to amplify learning, and #EdTech is predicated on that idea. But when you do, you make learning so goal-oriented that it shifts its meaning. Very hard to have a “solution” for open-ended learning, though it’s very easy to have tools which can enhance open approaches to learning. Teachers have a tough time and it doesn’t feel so strange to make teachers’ lives easier. Teachers typically don’t make big purchasing decisions but there’s a level of influence from teachers when a “solution” imposes itself. At least, based on the insistence of #BigEdTech on trying to influence teachers (who then pressure administrators to make purchases), one might think that teachers have a say in the matter. If something makes a teaching-related task easier, administrators are likely to perceive the value. Comes down to figures, dollars, expense, expenditures, supplies, HR, budgets… Pedagogy may not even come into play.

Mike Caulfield envisions OER production and utility being enhanced by "choral explanations" via websites similar to StackExchange or Quora.

A familiar narrative in our nation

We often think of the hype cycle but two things this post reveals about MOOC hype: 1) There can be regional differences in the timing of those cycles. 2) We might be in a broad shift from MOOC as a thing to MOOC as a pretext for openness.

In a world where education is free and certification is not… how much does certification cost? How much does it limit access to good jobs and institutions to those already possessing wealth?

How about Higher Ed.?

Valuing the teaching profession.

A big part of both Competency-Based Education and the open-ended side of Open Education.

I think there's a distinction to be made between "giving kids agency" (as in, we bestow agency upon thou) and "sustaining an environment wherein kids can exercise their own agency". In the former case we lay out the choices and the kids pick, in the latter case the kids construct the choices and then choose. It's a subtle distinction and there are likely ways to see it as a non-distinction but I think even as a linguistic distinction it can help frame what we're actually trying to do in a way that leads us towards a slightly better world.

That comment aside (and I slip all the time on making this distinction), I love this point.

I can relate. I have deep respect for AK but often find myself flipping back and forth between strong agreement and feeling somewhat off-put by what he writes. That seems like a healthier relationship to have with any public intellectual though than 100% agreement 100% of the time. I'm so glad his writing exists in the world and I'm glad yours does too. Seems like this kind of layered relationship is just part of dealing with complex systems. :-)

To develop their own "mindsets" in a nurturing environment that values their agency and supports them in seeing and realizing the possibilities in their lives? :-)

Amen. Systemic vs. individual approaches to improving education are absolutely both necessary.

Good to know. Somewhat surprising.

adaptive learning - a broad range of software and techniques that attempt ongoing customization of lessons for each student.

Ideally, adaptive learning is like providing a personal tutor for each student. It can also help a teacher determine which topics need more attention for individual students or the class as a whole. And it may free up class time that would otherwise be used lecturing on basics.

three definitions

perhaps a transformation is necessary here. To many (too many), education means grades and scores and standardization. Capacity for self-directed learning is more important and difficult to quantify.

This is the heart of the open ed/info lit connection. If the perception is that students go to school to be taught, the more important goal of learning how to learn is so much more difficult to achieve. But fostering lifelong learning means ceding some control over what is to be learned to the learner.

I think it can, but does higher ed want it to? Does anyone other than the open evangelists? The attempts at transformation in the 70s failed pretty hard. Maybe we need to transform teh public vision of what education looks like.

love the extended list, esp. "open for discussion/debate" Most definitions don't get past "free." "Open to competition" is an interesting thought. Open to cooperation would be more ideal. What would the competition be? For-profits?

Work with OpenStax here on grant application? Could we somehow piggy back on their relationship with Hewlett and build for them their annotation solution--most recently articulated as requiring better teacher-student communication?

Name names...

Could h provide that metadata?!

Possibly where h fits in...

We're already working with grantees: OpenStax, Lumen, Rebus.

Perhaps the OpenStax collaboration could get funding to enhance 1:1 communication within textbooks.

In so far as collaborative annotation might be critical to a broader OER infrastructure, then perhaps it does contribute to scale.

What infrastructure would hold this together, especially if textbooks are remixed and mashed up by both students and teachers. Perhaps an annotation system?

HUGE, especially the part about "meaningful learning experiences."

This is something Kathi Fletcher (OpenStax) alluded to in the edu board meeting: using h to provide a line of communication between students and teachers.

This is at least part of h's play IMO. Annotation should be part of this infrastructure, not only for post-publication discussion but for production and discovery of such resources as well.

This stage of funding is focused on scale.