Only 33 percent of parents surveyed by the Learning Assembly said their child’s school did an excellent job using technology to tailor instruction.
Insufficient Modeling of Best Practices
A survey from Samsung found that 37 percent of teachers say they would love to use technology but don’t know how, and 76 percent say they would like a professional development day dedicated to technology.
implementations should start with the “why” and then address the “how.” Trainings should first model the best pedagogical approach, and how technology fits into this approach to support a learning objective. How to effectively use and troubleshoot the tool itself is also important, but it’s not the only factor.
How teachers integrate technology into their own teaching practices can have a dramatic impact on the results, even when they’re all using the same edtech tool. Videos that focus on scaling and modeling best practices (produced by places like the Teaching Channel and The Learning Accelerator) can help teachers and schools do this.
Teachers face initiative fatigue: They are constantly being asked to implement new programs, integrate new technologies, and add on layers of responsibility.
take the time to learn from the challenges of other schools, and recruit a coalition of the willing.
Real-World Usability Challenges
Relying on multiple devices (remote, clicker, iPad, computer mouse) to launch or navigate technology can be difficult. Additionally, teachers may start to use a tool, only to realize it is not flexible enough to meet their original needs, fit into the constraints of their particular school or classroom, or allow them to integrate their own content or supplemental resources.
The Right Data to Track Progress
Sometimes tech implementations fail because the products themselves don’t have the right depth of data for teachers or a workable interface. And sometimes they fail when eager IT directors lock down hardware and networks for security purposes in a way that makes the tool far less valuable for instructors.
Many educational institutions maintain their own data centers. “We need to minimize the amount of work we do to keep systems up and running, and spend more energy innovating on things that matter to people.”
what’s the difference between machine learning (ML) and artificial intelligence (AI)?
Jeff Olson: That’s actually the setup for a joke going around the data science community. The punchline? If it’s written in Python or R, it’s machine learning. If it’s written in PowerPoint, it’s AI.
machine learning is in practical use in a lot of places, whereas AI conjures up all these fantastic thoughts in people.
What is serverless architecture, and why are you excited about it?
Instead of having a machine running all the time, you just run the code necessary to do what you want—there is no persisting server or container. There is only this fleeting moment when the code is being executed. It’s called Function as a Service, and AWS pioneered it with a service called AWS Lambda. It allows an organization to scale up without planning ahead.
How do you think machine learning and Function as a Service will impact higher education in general?
The radical nature of this innovation will make a lot of systems that were built five or 10 years ago obsolete. Once an organization comes to grips with Function as a Service (FaaS) as a concept, it’s a pretty simple step for that institution to stop doing its own plumbing. FaaS will help accelerate innovation in education because of the API economy.
If the campus IT department will no longer be taking care of the plumbing, what will its role be?
I think IT will be curating the inter-operation of services, some developed locally but most purchased from the API economy.
As a result, you write far less code and have fewer security risks, so you can innovate faster. A succinct machine-learning algorithm with fewer than 500 lines of code can now replace an application that might have required millions of lines of code. Second, it scales. If you happen to have a gigantic spike in traffic, it deals with it effortlessly. If you have very little traffic, you incur a negligible cost.
President Donald Trump on Monday directed federal agencies to improve the nation’s artificial intelligence abilities — and help people whose jobs are displaced by the automation it enables.
t’s good for the US government to focus on AI, said Daniel Castro, chief executive of the Center for Data Innovation, a technology-focused think tank that supports the initiative.
Silicon Valley has been investing heavily in AI in recent years, but the path hasn’t always been an easy one. In October, for instance, Google withdrew from competition for a $10 billion Pentagon cloud computing contract, saying it might conflict with its principles for ethical use of AI.
Trump this week is also reportedly expected to sign an executive order banning Chinese telecom equipment from US wireless networks by the end of February.
Smartphones also provide an easy way for teachers to “inspire students to positively contribute to and responsibly participate in the digital world,” as espoused by the ISTE Standards for Educators.
research shows that when students are engaged in their learning — and they’re almost always engaged with their phones when given a choice — they are less likely to succumb to distractions.
1. Create short videos.
Videos can express any type of learning in any style, from music videos to interviews, book trailers, historical re-enactments, tutorials and stop animations.
Flipgrid is the one of the best educational video-creation sites
Gartner predicts that nearly 38 percent of companies will stop providing devices to workers by 2017 — but 20 percent of those BYOD programs will fail because of overly restrictive mobile device management measures. So how can IT pros devise a BYOD strategy that stays afloat? Here are six guidelines to accommodate legitimate IT concerns without sinking a policy’s odds of success:
Look to Existing Policies
Before creating a BYOD policy, take a look at existing HR and legal procedures. Many email, VPN, and remote access security policies can be applied to mobile devices, as well.
Provide Training and Education
Employees are using personal devices at work, whether the company realizes it or not. But that doesn’t mean they are using them correctly. Employees often use file-sharing and other tools of their choosing without IT’s knowledge, which could put sensitive corporate data at risk. Use a BYOD policy to trainemployees how to correctly use their applications
Specify Devices
BYOD isn’t limited to smartphones. According to Gartner, a “new norm” is emerging in which employees manage up to four or five devices at work.
Enforce Passwords and Encryption
passwords aren’t foolprool. Data encryption is an additional security measure
A smart BYOD policy doesn’t mean IT is off the hook. Rather, successful policies rely on IT and employees sharing security obligations.
Set Ownership Expectations
Employees often fail to realize that all data on their devices is discoverable, regardless of whether the device is personal or company-owned. The question of who owns what is still a legal gray area, though companies increasingly take the liberty to remote wipe employees’ personal devices once they leave their job. Avoid the guessing game with a clear exit strategy.
These tools are used not only to lock down your security and anonymity on the known internet, but also to access the portions of the internet that are normally hidden — “The Dark Web.”
TAILS is an acronym for “The Amnesic Incognito Live System.”
TAILS is a highly-secure operating system (and a host of cool applications) designed to be booted off of a DVD or USB thumb drive. This not only makes TAILS easy to transport, but also ensures that TAILS can be booted and instantly useful from nearly any PC, Mac, or Chromebook. TAILS is built on Linux, a name you might recognize because it’s a popular, free, and open-source operating system that’s been available since 1991. TAILS, in particular, runs on a variant of Linux known as “Debian,” which became available in 1996.
Third and most importantly, when setup correctly, TAILS helps ensure that all of your communications — email, web browsing, chat, and more — are encrypted, made anonymous, and then routed in such a way that it’s extremely difficult to detect or trace them.
Its unique approach to offering such well-regarded security is the creative use of two virtual machines (or VMs) running in tandem on one host computer. One of these VMs is known as the Gateway while the other is known as the Workstation.
Compared to TAILS, Whonix only provides a few free, open-source applications and those need to be set up fairly extensively. The list includes:
The TOR browser, for safe web browsing
Firefox, for less secure web browsing
Icedove, for emailing, secured by the Enigmail extension to encrypt and authenticate emails using a well-know and secure protocol called “OpenPGP”
HexChat, for internet chats
VLC, to open and view every kind of video file that’s ever existed
violent deaths in schools have stayed relatively constant over the last 30 years, according to data from the National Center for Education Statistics. But then there’s the emotive reality, which is that every time another event like Sandy Hook or Parkland occurs, many educators and students feel they are in peril when they go to school.
RealNetworks, a Seattle-based software company that was popular in the 1990s for its audio and video streaming services but has since expanded to offer other tools, including SAFR (Secure, Accurate Facial Recognition), its AI-supported facial recognition software.
After installing new security cameras, purchasing a few Apple devices and upgrading the school’s Wi-Fi, St. Therese was looking at a $24,000 technology tab.
The software is programmed to allow authorized users into the building with a smile.
“Facial recognition isn’t a panacea. It is just a tool,” says Collins, who focuses on education privacy issues.
Another part of the problem with tools like SAFR, is it provides a false sense of security.
CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS Proposal Submission Deadline: February 12, 2019 Leveraging Technology for the Improvement of School Safety and Student Wellbeing
A book edited by Dr. Stephanie Huffman, Dr. Stacey Loyless, Dr. Shelly Allbritton, and Dr. Charlotte Green (University of Central Arkansas)
Introduction
Technology permeates all aspects of today’s school systems. An Internet search on technology in schools can generate millions of website results. The vast majority of these websites (well over 8,000,000 results for one simple search) focuses on advice, activities, and uses of technology in the classroom. Clearly teaching and learning with technology dominates the literature and conversations on how technology should or could be used in classroom settings. A search on school safety and technology can produce more than 3,000,000 results with many addressing technological tools such as video cameras, entry control devices, weapon detectors, and other such hardware. However, in recent times, cyberbullying appears to dominate the Internet conversations in references to school safety. With an increase in school violence in the past two decades, school safety is a fundamental concern in our nation’s schools. Policy makers, educators, parents, and students are seeking answers in how best to protect the physical, emotional, and social well-being of all children.
Objective of the Book
The proposed edited book covers the primary topic of P-12 school safety and the use of technology and technology used for fostering an environment in which all students can be academically successful and thrive as global citizens. School safety is defined as the physical, social, and emotional well-being of children. The book will comprise empirical, conceptual and case based (practical application) research that craft an overall understanding of the issues in creating a “safe” learning environment and the role technology can and should play; where a student’s well-being is valued and protected from external and internal entities, equitable access is treasured as a means for facilitating the growth of the whole student, and policy, practices, and procedures are implemented to build a foundation to transform the culture and climate of the school into an inclusive nurturing environment.
Target Audience
The target audience is leadership and education scholars, leadership practitioners, and technology coordinators. This book will be used as a collective body of work for the improvement of K-12 schools and as a tool for improving leadership and teacher preparation programs. School safety is a major concern for educators. Technology has played a role in creating unsafe environments for children; however it also is an avenue for addressing the challenges of school safety
Recommended topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
Section I – Digital Leadership
Technology as a Climate and Cultural Transformation Tool
School Leadership in the Digital Age: Building a Shared Vision for all Aspects of Learning and Teaching
Ensuring Equity within a “One to One” Technology Framework
Infrastructure within Communities
Accessible WiFi for Low SES Students
Developing Culturally Responsive Pedagogy
Professional Development for School Leaders
Section II – Well Being
Social Media and School Safety: Inputs and Outputs
Tip lines: Crime, Bullying, Threats
Communication and Transparency
Platform for Social Justice
Teaching Strategies to Promote Healthy Student Interactions in Cyberspace (Digital Citizenship?)
Building Capacity and Efficacy, Platform to lower incidence of Cyber-Bullying, Boosting Instructional Engagement
Literacy and Preparedness for the Influence and Consequence of Digital Media Marketing Campaigns directed toward Children, Adolescents, and Teens.
Pioneering Innovative Technology Program in Curriculum: Fostering “Belonging” beyond Athletics & Arts.
Competence in the Blended/Hybrid/Flipped Classroom
Technology to enhance learning for all
Assistive Technology
Accessibility issues
Internet access for Low SES Students in the Blended/Hybrid/Flipped Classroom
Personal Learning Design
Differentiation for Student Efficacy
Strategies for Increasing Depth of Knowledge
Design Qualities for Enhanced Engagement
Submission Procedure
Researchers and practitioners are invited to submit on or before February 12, 2019, a chapter proposal of 1,000 to 2,000 words clearly explaining the purpose, methodology, and a brief summary findings of his or her proposed chapter. Authors will be notified by March 12, 2019 about the status of their proposals and sent chapter guidelines. Full chapters are expected to be submitted by June 12, 2019, and all interested authors must consult the guidelines for manuscript submissions at http://www.igi-global.com/publish/contributor-resources/before-you-write/ prior to submission. See Edited Chapter Template. All submitted chapters will be reviewed on a double-blind review basis. Contributors may also be requested to serve as reviewers for this project.
Note: There are no submission or acceptance fees for manuscripts submitted to this book publication, Leveraging Technology for the Improvement of School Safety and Student Wellbeing. All manuscripts are accepted based on a double-blind peer review editorial process.
Publisher
This book is scheduled to be published by IGI Global (formerly Idea Group Inc.), an international academic publisher of the “Information Science Reference” (formerly Idea Group Reference), “Medical Information Science Reference,” “Business Science Reference,” and “Engineering Science Reference” imprints. IGI Global specializes in publishing reference books, scholarly journals, and electronic databases featuring academic research on a variety of innovative topic areas including, but not limited to, education, social science, medicine and healthcare, business and management, information science and technology, engineering, public administration, library and information science, media and communication studies, and environmental science. For additional information regarding the publisher, please visit http://www.igi-global.com. This publication is anticipated to be released in 2020.
Important Dates February 12, 2019: Proposal Submission Deadline March 12, 2019: Notification of Acceptance June 12, 2019: Full Chapter Submission August 10, 2019: Review Results Returned August 10, 2019: Final Acceptance Notification September 7, 2019: Final Chapter Submission
Inquiries can be forwarded to
Dr. Stephanie Huffman
University of Central Arkansas steph@uca.edu or 501-450-5430
In simple words, a blockchain is a ledger that records transactions of a certain type. It uses mathematical functions such as integer factorization, which is easy to solve in one direction but hard in the other direction for security.
Quantum entanglement is a phenomenon in which the quantum states of two or more objects have to be described with reference to each other, even though the individual objects may be spatially separated.
What’s the future of blockchain in the world of Quantum computing?
One of the potential solutions is Quantum Blockchain, which uses quantum cryptography. This has been proposed by Del Rajan and Matt Visser of Victoria University of Wellington in New Zealand. The idea is simple — if computers can compute fast, make the puzzle more complex.
Session 2: The Digital Age: The Impact and Future Possibilities Offered by Data and Technology
Thank you for registering to participate in the second Reimagining Minnesota State forum. The Forums have been designed to spark not only individual reflection but what we hope can serve as catalysts for discussions in a variety of venues. The Forum will be recorded and available for viewing on the Reimagining website.
Below are the directions whether you are attending in person or by live stream.
Catherine Haslag: Is there any research to show students retention in an online class vs a face-to-face course?
the challenge is not collecting, but integrating, using data.
silos = cylinder of excellence.
technology innovation around advising. iPASS resources.
adaptive learning systems – how students advance through the learning process.
games and simulations Bryan Mark Gill. voice recognition,
next 3 to 5 years AR. by 2023 40% with AR and VR
AI around the controversial. Chatbot and Voice assistants.
Unizin: 13 founding members to develop platform, Canvas, instructional services, data for predictive analytic, consistent data standard among institutions,
University innovation Alliance. Analytics as the linchpin for students’ success. graduation rates increase. racial gap graduation. Georgia State.
digital ethics. Mark Gill and Susana Nuccetelli. digital ethics: Susana Nuccetelli brought her students from the Philosophy Dept to Mark Gill’s SCSu Vizlab so we can discuss ethics and AI, last semester. jobrien@educause.edu
assistant vice president for student success and prevention Morgan State U
the importance of training in technology adoption
Dr. Peter Smith, Orkand Endowed Chair and Professor of Innovative Practices in Higher Education at University of Maryland University College
social disruption, national security issue,
Allan Taft Candadian researcher, 700 hours / year learning something. 14 h/w.
learners deserve recognition
free range learning.
how do we get a value on people from a different background? knowledge discrimination. we value it on where they learned it. then how you learned it and what you can do with it. talent and capacity not recognized.
we, the campus, don’t control the forces for a very first time. MIT undergrad curricula is free, what will happen. dynamics at work here. declining student numbers, legislation unhappy. technology had made college more expensive, not less. doing the right thing, leads to more disruption. local will be better, if done well. workplace can become a place for learning.
learning is a social activity. distance learning: being on the farthest raw of 300 Princeton lecture. there is a tool and there is people; has to have people at the heart.
what will work not only for MN, but for each of the campuses, the personalization.
staying still is death.
Panel discussion
what is the role of faculty in the vendor and discussions about technology. a heat map shows that IT people were testing the vendor web site most, faculty and student much less.
At democracy’s heart lies a set of paradoxes: a delicate interplay of identity and anonymity, secrecy and transparency. To be sure you are eligible to vote and that you do so only once, the authorities need to know who you are. But when it comes time for you to mark a ballot, the government must guarantee your privacy and anonymity. After the fact, it also needs to provide some means for a third party to audit the election, while also preventing you from obtaining definitive proof of your choice, which could lead to vote selling or coercion.
Building a system that accomplishes all this at once — and does so securely — is challenging enough in the physical world. It’s even harder online, as the recent revelation that Russian intelligence operatives compromised voting systems in multiple states makes clear.
In the decade since the elusive Satoshi Nakamoto published an infamous white paper outlining the idea behind bitcoin, a “peer-to-peer electronic cash system” based on a mathematical “consensus mechanism,” more than 1,500 new cryptocurrencies have come into being.
definition: Nathan Heller in the New Yorker, in which he compares the blockchain to a scarf knit with a single ball of yarn. “It’s impossible to remove part of the fabric, or to substitute a swatch, without leaving some trace,” Heller wrote. Typically, blockchains are created by a set of stakeholders working to achieve consensus at every step, so it might be even more apt to picture a knitting collective creating that single scarf together, moving forward only when a majority agrees that a given knot is acceptable.
Unlike bitcoin, a public blockchain powered by thousands of miners around the world, most voting systems, including Votem’s, employ what’s known as a “permissioned ledger,” in which a handful of approved groups (political parties, election observers, government entities) would be allowed to validate the transactions.
there’s the issue of targeted denial-of-service (DoS) attacks, in which a hacker directs so much traffic at a server that it’s overwhelmed and ceases to function.
Although a distributed ledger itself would likely withstand such an attack, the rest of the system — from voters’ personal devices to the many servers a vote would pass through on its way to the blockchain — would remain vulnerable.
there’s the so-called penetration attack, like the University of Michigan incursion, in which an adversary gains control of a server and deliberately alters the outcome of an election.
While it’s true that information recorded on a blockchain cannot be changed, a determined hacker might well find another way to disrupt the process. Bitcoin itself has never been hacked, for instance, but numerous bitcoin “wallets” have been, resulting in billions of dollars in losses. In early June 2018, a South Korean cryptocurrency exchange was penetrated, causing the value of bitcoin to tumble and resulting in a loss of $42 billion in market value. So although recording the vote tally on a blockchain introduces a new obstacle to penetration attacks, it still leaves holes elsewhere in the system — like putting a new lock on your front door but leaving your basement windows open.
A blockchain is only as valuable as the data stored on it. And whereas traditional paper ballots preserve an indelible record of the actual intent of each voter, digital votes “don’t produce an original hard-copy record of any kind,”
In the end, democracy always depends on a certain leap of faith, and faith can never be reduced to a mathematical formula. The Economist Intelligence Unit regularly ranks the world’s most democratic counties. In 2017, the United States came in 21st place, after Uruguay and Malta. Meanwhile, it’s now widely believed that John F. Kennedy owed his 1960 win to election tampering in Chicago. The Supreme Court decision granting the presidency to George W. Bush rather than calling a do-over — despite Al Gore’s popular-vote win — still seems iffy. Significant doubts remain about the 2016 presidential race.
While little doubt remains that Russia favored Trump in the 2016 election, the Kremlin’s primary target appears to have been our trust in the system itself. So if the blockchain’s trendy allure can bolster trust in American democracy, maybe that’s a net positive for our national security. If someone manages to hack the system, hopefully they’ll do so quietly. Apologies to George Orwell, but sometimes ignorance really is strength.
