Over the past year, interest in eXtended reality (XR) technologies (such as virtual, augmented, immersive, and mixed reality) has surged. New and more affordable XR technologies, along with voice activation and sophisticated visual display walls, provide promising directions and opportunities to immerse learners in the curriculum, offering deeper and more vivid learning experiences and extending the learning environment. But what’s the curricular reality with respect to these technologies? What is hype and what is substance? Specifically:
What practical applications do “XR technologies” have for teaching, learning, and research?
How are these technologies being applied to engage learners as consumers and creators of XR experiences?
What evidence is there to support XR technologies as effective tools in the learning environment?
How can these technologies be integrated into learning spaces?
What are the ethical questions we should consider as we explore XR?
the power of storytelling. Which allows brands to be more memorable and build more meaningful connections with the audience.
Every business website has an “About” page. Most businesses fill this page with boring stats and statements when they should be using it to tell their story.
According to a case study by HBR, making an emotional connection with your audience is much more important than customer satisfaction.
Getting your customers to share their own stories, also known as brand-driven storytelling, is a powerful approach that can increase your authority and brand awareness at the same time.
Basically, my response to ed tech is “It depends.” And one key consideration on which it depends is the reason given for supporting it.
ads in education periodicals, booths at conferences, and advocacy organizations are selling not only specific kinds of software but the whole idea that ed tech is de rigueur for any school that doesn’t want to risk being tagged as “twentieth century.”
Other people, particularly politicians, defend technology on the grounds that it will keep our students “competitive in the global economy.” This catch-all justification has been invoked to support other dubious policies, including highly prescriptive, one-size-fits-all national curriculum standards. It’s based on two premises: that decisions about children’s learning should be driven by economic considerations, and that people in other countries should be seen primarily as rivals to be defeated.
But the rationale that I find most disturbing—despite, or perhaps because of, the fact that it’s rarely made explicit—is the idea that technology will increase our efficiency…at teaching the same way that children have been taught for a very long time.
a deeper question: “What kinds of learning should be taking place in those schools?” If we favor an approach by which students actively construct meaning, an interactive process that involves a deep understanding of ideas and emerges from the interests and questions of the learners themselves, well, then we’d be open to the kinds of technology that truly support this kind of inquiry. Show me something that helps kids create, design, produce, construct—and I’m on board. Show me something that helps them make things collaboratively (rather than just on their own), and I’m even more interested—although it’s important to keep in mind that meaningful learning never requires technology, so even here we should object whenever we’re told that software (or a device with a screen) is essential.
more worrisome are the variants of ed tech that deal with grades and tests, making them even more destructive than they already are: putting grades online (thereby increasing their salience and their damaging effects), using computers to administer tests and score essays, and setting up “embedded” assessment that’s marketed as “competency-based.”
we shouldn’t confuse personalized learning with personal learning. The first involves adjusting the difficulty level of prefabricated skills-based exercises based on students’ test scores, and it requires the purchase of software. The second involves working with each student to create projects of intellectual discovery that reflect his or her unique needs and interests, and it requires the presence of a caring teacher who knows each child well.
a recent review found that studies of tech-based personalized instruction “show mixed results ranging from modest impacts to no impact” – despite the fact that it’s remarkably expensive. In fact, ed tech of various kinds has made headlines lately for reasons that can’t be welcome to its proponents. According to an article in Education Week, “a host of national and regional surveys suggest that teachers are far more likely to use tech to make their own jobs easier and to supplement traditional instructional strategies than to put students in control of their own learning.” Last fall, meanwhile, OECD reportednegative outcomes when students spent a lot of time using computers, while Stanford University’s Center for Research on Education Outcomes
Ed tech is increasingly making its way even into classrooms for young children. And the federal government is pushing this stuff unreservedly: Check out the U.S. Office of Education Technology’s 2016 plan recommending greater use of “embedded” assessment, which “includes ongoing gathering and sharing of data,” plus, in a development that seems inevitable in retrospect, a tech-based program to foster a “growth mindset” in children. There’s much more in that plan, too—virtually all of it, as blogger Emily Talmage points out, uncannily aligned with the wish list of the Digital Learning Council, a group consisting largely of conservative advocacy groups and foundations, and corporations with a financial interest in promoting ed tech.
In April, a PLAYlive Nation lounge in Tracy, Calif., hosted its first Fortnite tournament and sold out. Hundreds of players bought tickets to play against one another and win prizes.
Joost van Dreunen, the CEO of Superdata Research, a video game analytics firm, says most shooter games are serious and simulate violence. Fortnite, he says, is more like a friendly game of tag.
His company estimates the game has made about $223 million across all platforms in March alone. In lifetime sales, it had made about $614 million. The game is free to play, but Epic Games, the company that owns Fortnite, makes money through microtransactions. Players can spend real money to make cosmetic changes to their characters in the game. They can buy things like skins, which are like costumes, for their characters or emotes, which are celebratory dance moves their characters can do after winning or killing another player in the game.
Ninja, the gamer name taken by 26-year-old Tyler Blevins, is now a legend in the Fortnite world. He is a master at the game and rocketed into popularity after playing in an online battle with rap artists Drake and Travis Scott on March 14. That battle has been watched more than 9 million times.
++++++++++++++++++++
Educators Battle ‘Fortnite’ for Students’ Attention
Many educators want to ban the game from their classrooms, but some are taking the opposite approach, attempting to weave students’ interest in Fortnite into class discussions and assignments.
Nick Fisher, a science teacher at Fort Zumwalt North High School in O’Fallon, Mo., said his students like to take screenshots of gameplay and send them to friends over Snapchat. Teenagers want to broadcast their victories, and because the game is on their phones, it’s easy to post updates to social media, making Fortnite “the perfect concoction of addiction,” said Fisher.
North High blocks all social media and gaming sites on its WiFi, said Fisher, but students tell him how they circumvent the restriction: They use virtual private networks, or VPNs, to establish independent internet connections. (Dozens of YouTube videos provide step-by-step tutorials for students looking to get around school WiFi controls.)
“Kids can’t multitask,” she said. “Even having a digital device within sight can cognitively distract the student enough that they can’t focus on the academics.”
Schools and teachers should be guiding parents when it comes to appropriate limits around screen time, said Kolb. Most parents will appreciate research-based recommendations, such as turning off all screens a set amount of time before bed, she said.
Games like Fortnite can even have social benefits, said John Velez, an assistant professor of journalism and electronic media at Texas Tech University. Velez, who studies the positive effects of video games, has found that playing violent games cooperatively with helpful teammates promotes pro-social behavior.
Chris Aviles, the coordinator of innovation, technology, and 21st century skills for the Fair Haven Public Schools in New Jersey, wrote “A Teacher’s Guide to Surviving Fortnite,” an exploration of ways the game can be used for instructional purposes. The guide, posted to his blog Teched Up Teacher, suggests how to integrate the game into writing prompts, math lessons on probability, and physics.
Aviles doesn’t advocate playing the game at school. There isn’t any educational value in letting students engage in virtual combat during a lesson, he said. Instead, teachers can build a lesson around one aspect of the game, such as having students calculate the best angle of approach as they jump from the “Battle Bus,” the floating bus that drops players onto the map at the beginning of each match.
++++++++++++++++++
Instagram, Snapchat, Fortnite: The distractions are endless. Here’s how to help kids cope.
In January, two of Apple’s shareholder groups asked the company to look at the addictive effects of iPhones on children. Google’s recent developer conference highlighted tools to help users better control smartphone usage.
A 2015 survey of more than 1,800 teachers and 400 principals in Alberta, B.C., found that nearly three-fourths of teachers frequently or very frequently observed students multitasking with technology, and 67 percent of teachers believed that the number of students negatively distracted by digital technologies in the classroom was growing.
The best approach is to use empathy, compassion and collaboration to help the young people in your life find ways to manage their digital workflow.
Encourage visualization for inspiration and motivation. The first step is getting students to buy in and to want to make behavioral changes.
Focus on compartmentalization. A 2009 study from Stanford researchers found that people who juggled several streams of electronic information were not able to pay attention, remember key information or switch tasks as effectively as those who completed one task at a time.
Using the Pomodoro technique of spending 25 minutes focused on one task followed by a five-minute break can be an easy way to have students begin to shift from a multitasking to a monotasking mind-set.
Make focus fun. There are now numerous ways to use technology to help us be more productive with technology, and it doesn’t have to be arduous. Students in my office use apps such as Forest or Flipd to motivate them to stay off their phones during class or when doing homework. Forest has a simple interface that will build a digital tree for users who stay off their phones. Flipd allows users to hide certain apps, allot time off their phone based on their schedule and, for a premium, track their progress over time.
Provide structured support as needed. A middle school student with whom I worked recently was relieved when his mother used the Mac OS app SelfControl to block YouTube and ESPN while he was doing his homework (Cold Turkey is a similar PC-based app).
Allow opportunities for regrouping. Even the best plans can go awry (for adults and kids alike). It’s important to focus on progress rather than perfection. Create time daily or weekly for students to think about what went well in terms of managing distractions and improving productivity, and what they would like to do better. Ask open-ended questions without judgment or expectation
Open Discussion: VR in Education | Тема: Виртуалната реалност в образованието
Where | Университет Пловдив https://goo.gl/maps/bLBYXkp5S1S2 and online ( виртуално) When | Кога: 3. май, 2018, 15 часа | May 3, 2018, 3PM local time (Bulgaria) Who | Кой: преподаватели и суденти | faculty аnd students How | Как: използвайте “обратна връзка” за споделяне на вашите идеи | use the following hashtag for backchanneling #BGtechEd
Виртуална реалност в учебния процес – теория и практика- 1-1, 1/2 час продължителност Virtual reality in teaching and learning – theory and hands-on
Уточняване на понятията относно различните видове реалност: виртуална реалност, video 360 ; разширена реалност; смесена реалност. VR/AR/MR in education.
Подход и усвояване на различните видове реалност в образованието. Връзка между трите вида реалност в образованието и конструктивизма като теория на преподаването. Връзка между трите вида реалност в образованието и игровия подход и игрофикацията на образованието. Оценяване на обучението базирано на различните видове реалности.
When a student is brilliant on the street corner but falling asleep in class, something is wrong with the schooling system Ако учащ се е страхотен на ъгъла на улицата, но се проваля или заспива в клас, тогава нещо е грешно с учебната система https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/2018/04/17/education-teched-frenemies/
Дискусия относно методиката на приложение в учебния процес
2 min video from the entrance of your University is viewable through Google Cardboard and your laptops. Study the video and seek answers to the following questions:
******https://youtu.be/VmOpsrVhEQE ********
– what are the advantages of Video 360 to all other known-to-you media formats?
кои са предимствата на Видео 360 в сравнение с всички други медийни формати, които познавате?
– what would you do better in terms the video footage?
какво бихте заснимали, което да подобри видео материала за преподавателски и учебни цели (например: както друго място бихте избрали)
– how is / can be this medium advantageous to implementing core learning / teaching techniques
как този медиен формат може да се използва за да се подобрят съществуващите условия за успешно преподаване и обучение
По избор – разговор с Марк Гил от Щатския университет Сейнт Клауд и демонстрация на виртуална реалност в учебния процес – 10-15 мин
Recording Capacity is 100GB cloud storage, shared between the 25 accounts, 100 participants per host
Here is the Zoom pricing plan showing the Basic vs. Pro account plans. https://zoom.us/pricing
Happy to set you up with an account (email provided below) as soon as one become available (5/14 or sooner).
I only ask for your assessment on this tool – pros, cons and overall impression.
CMDLN (Central Minnesota Distance Learning Network) is one of the six regions that make up the LNM (Learning Network of Minnesota). The LNM Board is made up of MinnState and the UofM representatives. It is a State of Minnesota Grant funded organization connecting Higher Ed to Higher Ed and Higher Ed to K-12. Developed in 1995 to extend education throughout Minnesota. Core role today is connecting campus to campus with interactive video and audio.
Yes, CMDLN is paying for the Zoom Host accounts. SCSU is a member of CMDLN (1 of 8) giving them access to this Zoom account. Yes, as long as Zoom is working as well as it has, CMDLN will continue funding.
I do not see Zoom as competition with Adobe Connect, just another tool. Just as Skype or Cisco CMS.
Connect does not connect to the video codec classrooms (30 that CMDLN takes care of).
Adobe Connect does not currently connect to China without issues. We use Zoom for the SCSU-Binhai meetings.
Chosen to pilot upon recommendation from my colleagues in other states that are serving the same needs.
All that to say, Zoom is in a three year pilot for CMDLN members with interactive video needs.