I would love for the film to raise a discussion around dating app culture and online dating and sexual violence. I was really not aware of this, I would say, relationship between dating apps and rape culture before I started interviewing young women for the film.
Eliza, 29, said she’d mostly abandoned using swipe apps for their intended purpose. “Tinder transitioned from being a thing where I actually wanted to meet people to being, ‘I’m bored, tell me I’m pretty,’” she said. “I don’t really meet people on it anymore.”
Talking to women in their 20s and 30s about the ways they avoid swipe burnout (or at least make swiping more pleasant), almost all of them said basically the same thing as Serena, 34: “I can only stand dating apps at this point because I delete them frequently. It feels less like a full-time job that way.” She was contemplating joining Match.com, one of the oldest and most traditional dating sites, in hopes that it might mean sifting through fewer profiles in search of decent, mature people looking to go on real dates.
p. 172 there is no doubt that digital technologies and social media have contributed to a major alteration in people’s interpersonal communications and relational practices. Inter- personal communications have substantially altered, at least in Western and developed countries, as a result of the culture of increased connectivity that has emerged from social media’s engineering sociality (van Dijck, 2013 ), which allows anyone to be online and to connect to others. Physical presence is no longer a precondition for interpersonal communication.
The Pew Research Center ( Smith & Duggan, 2013 , October 21) indicates that one in every ten American adults has used an online dating site or mobile dating app to seek a partner, and that in the last eight years the proportion of Americans who say that they met their current partner online has doubled. Another study conducted by the same organization ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11) shows that 25% of married or partnered adults who text, have texted their partner while they were both home together, that 21% of cell-phone owners or internet users in a committed relationship have felt closer to their spouse or partner because of exchanges they had online or via text message. Another 9% of adults have resolved online or by text message an argument with their partner that they were having difficulty resolving person to person ( Lenhart & Duggan, 2014 , February 11). These results indicate that digital technologies are not simply tools that facilitate communications: they have a substantial impact on the way humans interact and relate to one another. In other words, they affect the dynamics of interpersonal relations
the impact of social media on dating patterns (e.g. more like shopping around for a commodity) and dating relations (e.g. more temporary, unstable), along with many positive effects as well
1. Goal: introduce students to” a) social media b) the sociological impact of social media on family and dating issues
2. Learning outcomes: a) at the end of the session, students will have firm grasp of popular versus peer-reviewed (academic resources). b) students will be able allocate sources for information c) students will be able to evaluate [and compile? Zotero] information d) students will be able to discuss the impact of social media in general e) students will be able to discuss and evaluate the impact of social media on family and dating f) at the end of the session, students will understand the concepts of netiquette and privacy (digital citizenship, digital anthropology)
3. Possible q/s for the class:
a) why Tinder, Hinge, etc.?
These are the best pickup lines with the highest success rates, according to dating app Hinge
c) how do family values change, based on the changes in [online] dating?
d) how does online dating differ across race, gender, sexual orientation, age and cultures
e) privacy, security, surveillance
f) mail brides on steroids? how does online dating apps change dubious practices?
g) does online dating impact marriages? are marriages better or weaker after online dating?
Finkel, et al. (2012).Online Dating: A Critical Analysis From the Perspective of Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 13(1), pp. 3–66. http://www3.nd.edu/~ghaeffel/OnineDating_Aron.pdf
the authors say “yes” to online dating but “we see substantial opportunities for improving the way online dating is practiced. Some of this improvement can come from closer collaboration between scholars and service providers.”
UWire and The Guardian have a long list of reports. Academia.edu has also plenty of serious academic research. While UWire and the Guardian are explicitly centered on the Anglo-Saxon world (with one exception of report on Iran), Academia.edu presents a great choice of cases from around the world (different cultures) in mostly serious academic research
Toma, C. L., Hancock, J. T., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Separating Fact From Fiction: An Examination of Deceptive Self-Presentation in Online Dating Profiles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(8), 1023–1036. http://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208318067
Cacioppo, J. T., Cacioppo, S., Gonzaga, G. C., Ogburn, E. L., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2013). Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(25), 10135–10140. http://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1222447110
Masden, C., & Edwards, W. K. (n.d.). Understanding the Role of Community in Online Dating. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 535–544). Seoul, Korea. http://doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702417
P 4. But all that “disruption,” as people love to collect, is over looking the thing that’s the most disruptive of them all call on the way we relate to each other will never be the same. That’s because of something called presence.
Presence is the absolute foundation of virtual reality, and in VR, it’s the absolute foundation of connection-connection with yourself, with an idea, with another human, even connection with artificial intelligence.
p. 28 VR definition
Virtual reality is an 1. artificial environment that’s 2. immersive enough to convince you that you are 3. actually inside it.
1. ” artificial environment ” could mean just about anything. The photograph is an artificial environment of video game is an artificial environment a Pixar movie is an artificial environment the only thing that matters is that it’s not where are you physically are
p. 44 VR: putting the “it” in “meditation” my note: it seems Rubin sees the 21st century VR as the equivalent of the drug experimentation in the 1960s US: p. 46 “VR is potentially going to become a direct interface to the subconscious”
p. 74 serious games, Carrie Heeter. p. 49
The default network in the brain in today’s society is the wandering mind. We are ruminating about the past, and we are worrying about the future, or maybe even planning for the future; there is some productive thinking. But in general, a wandering mind is an unhappy mind. And that is where we spent all of our week in time: not being aware of everything that we are experiencing in the moment.
Hester’s Open meditation had already let her to design apps and studies that investigated mediate meditations ability to calm that wandering mind
p. 51 Something called interoception. It is a term that is gaining ground in psychologist circles in recent years and basically means awareness of battle associations-like my noticing the fact that I was sitting awkwardly or that keeping my elbows on the cheers armrests was making my shoulders hunched slightly. Not surprisingly, mindfulness meditation seems to heighten interoception. And that is exactly how Heeter and Allbritton Strep throat the meditation I am doing on Costa Del sole. First, I connect with the environment; then with my body; Dan I combined the two. The combination of the VR and interception leads to what she describes as “embodied presence”: not only do you feel like you are in the VR environment, but because you have consciously work to integrate your bodily Sensations into VR, it is a fuller, more vivid version of presents.
p. 52 guided meditation VR GMVR
p. 56 VVVR visual voice virtual reality
Just as the ill-fated google glass immediately stigmatized all its wearers as “glassholes”- a.k.a. “techier-than-thou douche bags who dropped $1500 to see an email notification appear in front of their face”-so to do some VR headset still look like face TVs for another it’s
p. 61 Hedgehog Love
engineering feelings with social presence. p.64 remember presents? This is the beginning of social presence. Mindfulness is cool, but making eye contact with Henry is the first step into the future.
p.65 back in 1992, our friend Carrie heeter posited that presence-the sensation did you are really there in VR-head treat day mentions. There was personal presents, environmental presents, and social presents, which she basically defined is being around other people who register your existence.
p. 66 the idea that emotion can be not a cause, as sweet so often assumed, but a result of it of behavior
p. 72 in chapter 1, we explain the difference between Mobile VR and PC driven PR. The former is cheaper and easier; all you do is drop your smart phone into a headset, and it provides just about everything can eat. Dedicated VR headsets rely on the stronger processors of desktop PCs and game consoles,So they can provide a more robust sense of presence-usually at the cost of being hit Earth to your computer with cables. (it’s the cost of actual money: dedicated headset systems from hundreds of dollars, while mobile headsets like Samsung’s deer VR or Google’s DayDream View can be had for mere tens of dollars.) There is one other fundamental distinction between mobile VR and high-end VR, though, and that is what you do with your hands-how you input your desires. When VR reemerged in the early 2010s, however, the question of input was open to debate. Actually, more than one debate. p. 73 video game controllers are basically metaphors. Some, like steering wheels or pilot flight sticks, might look like that think they’re supposed to be, but at their essence they are all just collections of buttons. p. 77 HTC sales small wearable truckers that you can affix to any object, or anybody part, to break it into the Vive’s VR.
p. 78 wait a second – you were talking about storytelling.
p. 79 Every Hollywood studio you can imagine-21st Century Fox, Paramount, Warner Bross.-Has already invested in virtual reality. They have made VR experiences based on their own movies, like interstellar or ghost in the Shell, and they have invested in other VR companies. Hollywood directors like Doug Liman (Edge of Tomorrow) and Robert Stromberg (Maleficent) have taken VR project. And the progress is exhilarating. Alejandro GOnzalez Inarritu, a 4-Time Oscar winner for best director 2014 movie Birdman, won best picture, received this special achievement Academy award in 2017 for a VR Schwartz he made. Yet Carne Y Arena, which puts viewers insight a harrowing journey from Mexico to the United States, is nothing like a movie, or even a video game.
When you premiered at the Cannes film Festival in early 2017, it was housed in an airplane hangar; viewers were a shirt, barefoot, into a room with a sand-covert floor, where they could watch and interact with other people trying to make it over the border. Arrests, detention centers, dehydration-the extremity of the human condition happening all around you. India announcement, the Academy of motion picture arts and sciences called the peas “deeply emotional and physically immersive”
p. 83 empathy versus intimacy. Why good stories need someone else
p. 85 empathy vs intimacy: appreciation vs emotion
Both of these words are fuzzy, to say the least. Both have decades of study behind him, but both have also appeared and more magazine covers in just about any words, other than possibly “abs”
Empathy: dear Do it to do identify with and understand dollars, particularly on an emotional level. It involves imagining yourself in the place of another and, therefore, appreciating how do you feel.
Intimacy: a complex sphere of ‘inmost’ relationships with self and others that are not usually minor or incidental (though they may be a transitory) and which usually touch the personal world very deeply. They are our closest relationships with friends, family, children, lovers, but they are also the deep into important experiences we have with self
Empathy necessarily needs to involve other people; intimacy doesn’t. Empathy involves emotional understanding; intimacy involves emotion itself. Empathy, at its base, isn’t act of getting outside yourself: you’re protecting yourself into someone’s else experience, which means that in some ways you are leaving your own experience behind, other than as a reference point. Intimacy, on the other hand, is at its base act of feeling: you might be connecting quit someone or something Else, but you are doing so on the basis of the emotions you feel. p 86. Any type of VR experience perfectly illustrates the surprising gap between empathy and intimacy: life action VR. p. 87 unlike CGI-based storytelling, which full somewhere in between game in movie, live action VR feels much more like the conventional video forms that we are used to from television and movies. Like those media, people have been using VR to shoot everything from narrative fiction to documentary the sports.
p. 92 every single story has only one goal at its base: to make you care. This holds true whether it is a tale told around a campfire at night, one related to a sequence of panels in the comic book, or dialogue-heavy narrative of a television show. The story might be trying to make you laugh, or just scare you, or to make you feel sad or happy on behalf of one of the characters, but those are all just forms of caring, right? Your emotional investment-the fact that what kept us in this tale matters to you-is the fundamental aim of the storyteller.
Storytelling, than, has evolved to find ways to draw you out of yourself, to make you forget that what you are hearing or seeing or reading isn’t real. It’s only at that point, after all, that our natural capacity for empathy can kick in. p. 93 meanwhile, technology continues to evolve to detaches from those stories. For one, the frame itself continues to get smaller. Strangers still, this distraction has happened well stories continue to become more and more complex. Narratively, at least, stories are more intricate then the have ever been. p. 94. Now, with VR storytelling, the distracting power of multiple screens his met it’s match.
p. 101 experiencing our lives- together
What videos two cannot do, though, he’s bringing people together insights VR, the way re-McClure’s sinking-multicoloredat-blogs-at-each-other tag-team project is VVVR does. That’s why even V are filmmaking powerhouses like Within ( https://www.with.in/get-the-app) are moving beyond mere documentary and narrative and trying to turn storytelling into a shared experience.
Make no mistake: storytelling has always been a shirt experience. Being conscripted into the story, or even being the story.
p. 103 like so many VR experiences, life of us defies many of the ways we describe a story to each other. For one, it feels at fonts shorter and longer than its actual seven-minutes runtime; although it’s seems to be over in a flash, flash contains so many details that in retrospect it is as full and vivid is a two-our movie.
There is another think, though, that sets life of us apart from so many other stories-it is the fact that not only was I in the story, but someone else was in there with me. In that someone wasn’t a field character talking to a camera that they some calling about it, or a video game creature that was programmed to look in ‘my’ direction, but a real person-a person who saw what I saw, a person who was present for each of those moments and who know is inextricably part of my old, shard-Like memory of them.
p. 107 what to do and what to do it with . How social VR is reinventing everything from game night to online harassment.
p. 110 VR isn’t given Romo’s first bet on the future. When he was finishing up his masters degree in mechanical engineering, a professor emailed him on behalf of two men who were recruiting for a rocket company there were starting. One of those man was a Elon musk, which is how Romo became the 13th employee at space X. Eventually, she started the company focusing go solar energy, but when the bottom fell out of the industry, she shut down the company and looked for his next opportunity. Romo spent the next year and a half researching the technology and thinking about what kind of company might make sense in the new VR enabled world. He had read Snow crash, but he oh soon you get our hopes for DVR future could very well end up like gay themed flying car: defined-and limited-bite an expectation that might not match perfectly which what we actually want.
p. 116 back in the day, trolling just trim forward to pursuing a provocative argument for kicks. Today, the word used to describe the actions of anonymous mobs like the one that, for instance, Rolf actor Leslie Jones off Twitter with an onslaught of racist and sexist abuse. Harassment has become one of the defining characteristics of the Internet is for use it today. But with the emergernce of VR, our social networks have become, quite literally, embodied.
p. 142 increasing memory function by moving from being a voyeur to physically participating in the virtual activity. embodied presence – bringing not just your head into your hands, but your body into VR-strengthens memories in the number of ways.
p. 143 at the beginning of 2017, Facebook fit published some of its. New Ron’s in internal research about the potential of social VR. Neurons INc. The agency measured eye movements, Brain activity, and pools of volunteers who were watching streaming video on smart phones and ultimately discovered that buffering and lag were significantly more stressful than waiting can line it a store, and even slightly more stressful than watching a horror movie.
p. 145 after the VR experience, more than 80% of introverts — is identified by a short survey participants took before hand-wanted to become friends with the person they had chatted with, as opposed to less than 60% of extroverts
p. 149 Rec Room Confidential: the anatomy in evolution of VR friendships
p. 165 reach out and touch someone; haptics, tactile presence and making VR physical.
p. 171 Zhao laid out two different criteria. The first was whether or not to people are actually in the same place-basically, are they or their stand-ins physically close enough to be able to communicate without any other tools? To people, she wrote, can either have “physical proximity” or “electronic proximity” the latter being some sort of networked connection. The second criterion was whether each person is corporeally there; in other words, is it their actual flesh-and-blood body? The second condition can have three outcomes: both people can be there corporeally; neither can be there corporeally , instead using some sort of stand in like an avatar or a robot; or just one of them can be there corporeally, with the other using case stent in
“virtual copresence” is when a flesh and blood person interacts physically with a representative of a human; if that sounds confusing, 80 good example is using an ATM call mom where are the ATM is a stent in for a bank teller
p. 172 “hypervirtual copresence,” which involves nonhuman devices that are interacting in the same physical space in a humanlike fashion. social VR does not quite fit into any of this category. Zhao refers to this sort of hybrid as a “synthetic environment” and claims that it is a combination of corporeal https://www.waze.com/telecopresence (like Skyping) and virtual telecopresence(like Waze directions )
p. 172 haptic tactics for tactile aptness
Of the five human senses, a VR headset ca currently stimulates only to: vision and hearing. That leaves treat others-and while smell and taste me come some day.
P. 174; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aldous_Huxley Brave New World. tactile “feelies”
p. 195 XXX-chnage program: turning porn back into people
p. 221 where we are going, we don’t need headsets. lets get speculative
p. 225 Magic Leap. p. 227 Magic Leap calls its technology “mixed reality,” claiming that the three dimensional virtual objects it brings into your world are far more advanced than the flat, static overlays of augmented reality. In reality, there is no longer any distinction between the two; in fact, the air are by now so many terms being accused in various ways by various companies that it’s probably worth a quick clarification.
Virtual reality: the illusion of an all-enveloping artificial world, created by wearing an opaque display in front of your eyes.
augmented reality: Bringing artificial objects into the real world-these can be as simple as a ” heads-up display,” like a speedometer project it onto your car’s windshield, or as complex as seen to be virtual creature woke across your real world leaving room, casting a realistic shadow on the floor
mixed reality: generally speaking, this is synonymous with AR, or eight at least with the part of AR that brings virtual objects into the real world. However, some people prefer “mixed” because they think “augmented” implies that reality isn’t enough.
extended or synthetic reality (XR or SR): all of the above! this are bought catch old terms that encompass the full spectrum of virtual elements individual settings.
p. 231 in ten years, we won’t even have smartphone anymore.
p. 229 Eve VR is these come blink toddler, though, AR/MR is a third-trimester fetus: eat may be fully formed book eat is not quite ready to be out in the world yet. The headsets or large, the equipment is far more expensive than VR Anthony in many cases we don’t even know what a consumer product looks like.
p. 235 when 2020 is hindsight: what life in 2028 might actually look like.
Blockchains, which use advanced cryptography to store information across networks of computers, could eliminate the need for trusted third parties, like banks, in transactions, legal agreements, and other contracts. The most ardent blockchain-heads believe it has the power to reshape the global financial system, and possibly even the internet as we know it.
Now, as the technology expands from a fringe hacker toy to legitimate business applications, opportunists have flooded the field. Some of the seekers are mercenaries pitching shady or fraudulent tokens, others are businesses looking to cash in on a hot trend, and still others are true believers in the revolutionary and disruptive powers of distributed networks.
Mentions of blockchains and digital currencies on corporate earnings calls doubled in 2017 over the year prior, according to Fortune. Last week at Consensus, the country’s largest blockchain conference, 100 sponsors, including top corporate consulting firms and law firms, hawked their wares.
Here is a noncomprehensive list of the ways blockchain promoters say they will change the world. They run the spectrum from industry-specific (a blockchain project designed to increase blockchain adoption) to global ambitions (fixing the global supply chain’s apparent $9 trillion cash flow issue).
Things Blockchain Technology Will Fix
Bots with nefarious intent
People not taking their medicine
Device storage that could be used for bitcoin mining
a learning management system (LMS) is never the solution to every problem in education. Edtech is just one part of the whole learning ecosystem and student experience.
Therefore, the next generation digital learning environment (NGDLE), as envisioned by EDUCAUSE in 2015 … Looking at the NGDLE requirements from an LMS perspective, I view the NGDLE as being about five areas: interoperability; personalization; analytics, advising, and learning assessment; collaboration; accessibility and universal design.
Content can easily be exchanged between systems.
Users are able to leverage the tools they love, including discipline-specific apps.
Learning data is available to trusted systems and people who need it.
The learning environment is “future proof” so that it can adapt and extend as the ecosystem evolves.
The learning environment reflects individual preferences.
Departments, divisions, and institutions can be autonomous.
Instructors teach the way they want and are not constrained by the software design.
There are clear, individual learning paths.
Students have choice in activity, expression, and engagement.
Analytics, Advising, and Learning Assessment
Learning analytics helps to identify at-risk students, course progress, and adaptive learning pathways.
The learning environment enables integrated planning and assessment of student performance.
More data is made available, with greater context around the data.
The learning environment supports platform and data standards.
Individual spaces persist after courses and after graduation.
Learners are encouraged as creators and consumers.
Courses include public and private spaces.
Accessibility and Universal Design
Accessibility is part of the design of the learning experience.
The learning environment enables adaptive learning and supports different types of materials.
Learning design includes measurement rubrics and quality control.
The core analogy used in the NGDLE paper is that each component of the learning environment is a Lego brick:
The days of the LMS as a “walled garden” app that does everything is over.
Today many kinds of amazing learning and collaboration tools (Lego bricks) should be accessible to educators.
We have standards that let these tools (including an LMS) talk to each other. That is, all bricks share some properties that let them fit together.
Students and teachers sign in once to this “ecosystem of bricks.”
The bricks share results and data.
These bricks fit together; they can be interchanged and swapped at will, with confidence that the learning experience will continue uninterrupted.
Any “next-gen” attempt to completely rework the pedagogical model and introduce a “mash-up of whatever” to fulfil this model would fall victim to the same criticisms levied at the LMS today: there is too little time and training to expect faculty to figure out the nuances of implementation on their own.
The Lego metaphor works only if we’re talking about “old school” Lego design — bricks of two, three, and four-post pieces that neatly fit together. Modern edtech is a lot more like the modern Lego. There are wheels and rocket launchers and belts and all kinds of amazing pieces that work well with each other, but only when they are configured properly. A user cannot simply stick together different pieces and assume they will work harmoniously in creating an environment through which each student can be successful.
As the NGDLE paper states: “Despite the high percentages of LMS adoption, relatively few instructors use its more advanced features — just 41% of faculty surveyed report using the LMS ‘to promote interaction outside the classroom.'”
But this is what the next generation LMS is good at: being a central nervous system — or learning hub — through which a variety of learning activities and tools are used. This is also where the LMS needs to go: bringing together and making sense of all the amazing innovations happening around it. This is much harder to do, perhaps even impossible, if all the pieces involved are just bricks without anything to orchestrate them or to weave them together into a meaningful, personal experience for achieving well-defined learning outcomes.
Making a commitment to build easy, flexible, and smart technology
Working with colleges and universities to remove barriers to adopting new tools in the ecosystem
Standardizing the vetting of accessibility compliance (the Strategic Nonvisual Access Partner Program from the National Federation of the Blind is a great start)
Advancing standards for data exchange while protecting individual privacy
Building integrated components that work with the institutions using them — learning quickly about what is and is not working well and applying those lessons to the next generation of interoperability standards
Letting people use the tools they love [SIC] and providing more ways for nontechnical individuals (including students) to easily integrate new features into learning activities
My note: something just refused to be accepted at SCSU
Technologists are often very focused on the technology, but the reality is that the more deeply and closely we understand the pedagogy and the people in the institutions — students, faculty, instructional support staff, administrators — the better suited we are to actually making the tech work for them.
Under the Hood of a Next Generation Digital Learning Environment in Progress
The challenge is that although 85 percent of faculty use a campus learning management system (LMS),1 a recent Blackboard report found that, out of 70,000 courses across 927 North American institutions, 53 percent of LMS usage was classified as supplemental(content-heavy, low interaction) and 24 percent as complementary (one-way communication via content/announcements/gradebook).2 Only 11 percent were characterized as social, 10 percent as evaluative (heavy use of assessment), and 2 percent as holistic (balanced use of all previous). Our FYE course required innovating beyond the supplemental course-level LMS to create a more holistic cohort-wide NGDLE in order to fully support the teaching, learning, and student success missions of the program.The key design goals for our NGDLE were to:
Create a common platform that could deliver a standard curriculum and achieve parity in all course sections using existing systems and tools and readily available content
Capture, store, and analyze any generated learner data to support learning assessment, continuous program improvement, and research
Develop reports and actionable analytics for administrators, advisors, instructors, and students
Introduction to functional programming principles, including immutability, higher-order functions, and recursion using the Clojure programming language. This workshop will cover getting started with the Clojure REPL, building programs through function composition, testing, and web-development using ClojureScript.
This workshop will do a deep dive into approaches and recommend best practices for customizing Blacklight applications. We will discuss a range of topics, including styling and theming, customizing discovery experiences, and working with Solr.
Proposed by: Chris Beer, Jessie Keck, and Jack Reed
We all encounter failure in our professional lives: failed projects, failed systems, failed organizations. We often think of failure as a negative, but it has intrinsic value — and since it’s inevitable that we’ll eventually experience failure ourselves, it’s important to know how to accept it, how to take lessons from it, and how to grow from it professionally. Fail4Lib, now in its 5th year, is the perennial Code4Lib preconference dedicated to discussing and coming to terms with the failures that we all face in our professional lives. It is a safe space for us to explore failure, to talk about our own experiences with failure, and to encourage enlightened risk taking. The goal of Fail4Lib is for participants to be adept at failing gracefully, so that when we do fail, we do so in a way that moves us forward. This half-day preconference will consist of case studies, round-table discussions, and, for those interested in sharing, lightning talks on failures we’ve dealt with in our own work.
Amazon Web Services currently offers 58 services ranging from the familiar compute and storage systems to game development and the internet of things. We will focus on the 20-some services that you should be aware of as you move your applications to their cloud.
The morning session will be mostly overview and the afternoon session will be more practical examples and discussion. This could be broken into two sessions.
Proposed by: Cary Gordon, t/b/d, and t/b/d
FOLIO is a library services platform — infrastructure that allows cooperating library apps to share data. This workshop is a hands-on introduction to FOLIO for developers of library apps. In this tutorial you will work with your own Vagrant image through a series of exercises designed to demonstrate how to install an app on the platform and use the data sources and design elements the platform provides.
Have an idea for an app? Want to work with FOLIO developers and others in the community on the FOLIO platform to make it happen. Come to this half-day hack-a-thon! Ideas for new developers will be posted in the project Jira, or bring your own concepts and work with others to make them reality.
REQUIREMENTS Laptop (4GB) with Vagrant installed. Attending the FOLIO Tutorial is recommended, but not required.
In this workshop, we will step through the various types of applications that can be built with Google Apps Script.
(1) Custom cell formulas
(2) Spreadsheet Add On Functions (menu items, time based triggers)
(3) Google Apps Script as a Web Service
(4) Google Apps Script Add-Ons that can be shared globally or by domain
In this workshop, we will build sample instances of each of these types of applications (wifi-permitting) and spend some time brainstorming additional applications that would be useful for the library community.
Calls to mindfulness and self care can have mixed reception in our field. While some view this important work as navel-gazing or unnecessary, it is integral to being present and avoiding burnout. Often this skewed attention to output comes at the expense of our personal lives, our organizations, our health, our relationships, and our mental well-being. Learning to prioritize self-care is an ongoing project among those who perform emotional labor. While some view the work of mindfulness as self-indulgent, it has proven to keep many on the track of being present and avoiding burnout.*
The purpose of this preconference is to provide a short introduction to self care and mindfulness with practical work we can use regardless of setting. We’ll discuss microaggressions and allyship (microaggressions being the brief and commonplace verbal, behavioral, or environmental indignities that marginalized people of various groups experience daily and allyship referring to the powerful role that individuals from privileged groups can play in supporting marginalized individuals). We will then transition to a modified unconference setting where participants can practice scenarios and learn practical solutions. Each of the presenters has different set of skills and experiences that allow for many techniques and strategies to be explored. Preconference attendees will participate in sessions like “Mentor Speed Dating” where they get to talk to and question potential mentors/mentees. They may be coached through a guided meditation or walked through a calming breathing exercise. For those looking to a more physical space, office yoga and stretching techniques may be shared depending on the outcomes of the unconference interest.
Foundational materials and articles will be shared with the registrants prior to the meeting with the option of further discussion at the workshop. An open access guide to all the resources and readings will be available after the preconference, and people will be encouraged to share additional their tools on a website.
Suggested Hashtag #c4lselfcare
* Abenavoli, R.M., Jennings, P.A., Greenberg, M.T., Harris, A.R., & Katz, D.A. (2013). The protective effects of mindfulness against burnout among educators. Psychology of Education Review, 37(2), 57-69
Proposed by: Carmen Mitchell, Lia Friedman, and Torie Quinonez
In this preconference, participants will be introduced to Virtual Reality uses in library settings, notably, by way of the VR Reading Room. Within the VR Reading Room prototype, users can collaboratively explore digital collections (e.g. HathiTrust) by way of VR headsets. Participants of this workshop will have the opportunity to experience HTC Vive functionality. The system will be setup with a prototype e-book experiment in order to model several VR affordances. Once attendees have been introduced to the HTC Vive hardware and sample project, groups of participants will have an opportunity to further brainstorm novel uses cases.
Python has become one of the dominant languages in scientific computing and is used by researchers around the world. Its popularity is due in large part to a rich set of libraries for data analysis like Pandas and NumPy and tools for exploring scientific code like Jupyter notebooks. Join us for this half-day workshop on the basics of using Pandas within a Jupyter notebook. We will cover importing data, selecting and subsetting data, grouping data, and generating simple visualizations. All are welcome, but some familiarity with Python is recommended, e.g. the concepts covered in the Codecademy or Google Python courses.
Learn about the features and capabilities of Sufia, a Hydra-based repository solution. Attendees will participate in a hand-on demonstration where they deposit content, edit metadata, create collections, and explore access control options. Attendees should bring laptops with Chrome, Firefox, or Safari installed. Please plan on bringing at least one image, document, or other digital content that you’re comfortable uploading and using for demo and experimentation purposes 🙂
The web can be a trove of openly accessible data, but it is not always readily available in a format that allows it to be downloaded for analysis and reuse. This workshop aims to introduce attendees to web scraping, a technique to automate extracting data from websites.
Part one of the workshop will use browser extensions and web tools to get started with web scraping quickly, give examples where this technique can be useful, and introduce how to use XPath queries to select elements on a page.
Part two will introduce how to write a spider in Python to follow hyperlinks and scrape several web pages using the Scrapy framework. We will conclude with an overview of the legal aspects of web scraping and an open discussion.
You don’t need to be a coder to enjoy this workshop! Anyone wishing to learn web scraping is welcome, although some familiarity with HTML will be helpful. Part two will require some experience with Python, attendees unfamiliar with this language are welcome to stay only for part one and still learn useful web scraping skills!
Paper prototyping is a low-cost, structured brainstorming technique that uses materials such as paper and pencils to better understand the way users interact with physical, visual, and textual information. It can help us learn how to better think through workflows, space design, and information architecture. Session attendees will learn about the ways low-fidelity prototyping and wireframing can be used to develop ideas, troubleshoot workflows, and improve learning and interaction.
In the first half of the workshop, participants will step through activities in icon design, persona development, and task development. In the second half they will develop a low fidelity prototype and step through a guerilla usability testing process with it.
Proposed by: Ekatarina (Eka) Grguric and Andreas Orphanides
How it works: Businesses collect multiple data points, helping to create hyper-specific marketing for users, while making better predictions with more information from a larger data set.
Examples: You’ve already seen this when Target figured out a teen was pregnant before her dad did. Even though she didn’t buy diapers or formula, her purchasing habits correlated closely with other customers’ who were pregnant, and Target sent her coupons for her upcoming baby.
Factors: Big data is being powered by the reduction in costs of data storage, as well as an explosion in the ability of businesses to capture data points. Never before have retailers been able to capture as much data about purchases, never before has online tracking been so robust, nor have social platforms offered access to so much data about users.
How to Prepare: As a user, you can expect to see much more targeted marketing, and not necessarily what you may expect. By drawing conclusions from large sets of data, companies might be even a little creepy in being able to predict your life – like the Target pregnancy. For marketers, you can expect to find new ways to streamline your sales funnel and get more analytical data about customers through social networks, web analytics groups and at retail.
2. Social Tool Aggregation
How it works: More and more third-party tools are springing up to help marketers and social network users make sense of multiple networks. Furthermore, networks themselves are offering ways of connecting to other apps and networks.
Examples: Tools like IFTTT and Zapier use social network APIs to trigger responses, while others like HootSuite allow users to aggregate multiple network communication into one tool. At the same time, tools like About.me allow a combined view of an individual’s social activity. Furthermore, networks themselves are beginning to integrate. Facebook allows cross posts from Instagram, Foursquare, Yelp and a variety of others.
Factors: It’s already taking too much time for individuals and marketers alike to keep up with just a couple social networks, and both the social networks and third-party tools know this. By consolidating social network interaction into a single place, users may be able to spend less time trying to make sense of the chaos.
How to Prepare: Users and marketers alike should keep an eye out for how this data is being used. What happens if you like Eminem on Facebook, but check into a venue during a Taylor Swift concert on Foursquare? What happens if you listen to the Glee channel on Pandora? What says more about who you really are? Do these networks share that information? Is it part of the authorization you okayed? The future may tell.
3. Social Network Consolidation
How it works: Social networks and tool providers are consolidating to remain competitive, both in creating a better offering for users, as well as buying market share.
Examples: Facebook has had nearly 40 different acquisitions since 2005 including technologies that help import contacts, manage photos, create mobile apps, and more, with their largest acquisition being Instagram for one beelion dollars (Doctor Evil style, of course.) Not to be outdone, LinkedIn has scored about 10 of their own acquisitions including Slideshare. Twitter has acquired tools like TweetDeck, platforms like Posterous and has created Vine, but acquisitions aren’t limited to social networks, they extend into social tools as well. Salesforce just had their largest couple years so far acquiring Radian6, Buddy Media and most recently, their largest, Exact Target. Adobe purchased Omniture, and Google bought YouTube and Wildfire Apps, and Oracle took over Involver social apps. Everyone is finding some value in social.
Factors: Not only is social the big thing, but it’s the logical next step after Social Aggregation. People want to be able to easily publish across social networks and marketers want to have the ability to create one true set of data. Rather than having multiple tools these companies are attempting to offer consolidated suites for data creation, storage and analysis.
How to Prepare: Marketers need to be aware of evolving tools and networks. When Twitter bought TweetDeck, it dropped many of the supported features for Facebook, LinkedIn, Myspace and others. Be aware of these types of changes so you can make plans for uninterrupted service.
How it works: Companies are offering bigger roles to consumers.
Examples: Small and medium business often resort to sites like DesignCrowd, who offers thousands of designers the opportunity to design a logo, print piece or something else. The customer picks the best designs, offers revisions and the winner gets about $200. Starbucks turned to crowdsourcing for coming up with new product ideas, with over 50,000 ideas coming through My Starbucks Idea. Doritos, Lincoln, Pepsi, Pizza Hut, Toyota and others have even crowdsourced Super Bowl ads.
Factors: Customers want to have a stake in companies. As more businesses go to greater and greater lengths to spotlight influential users or creative user-generated work, consumers are expecting to interact more and more with companies in these ways. Furthermore, consumers are expecting more unique messaging rather than traditional corporate marketing speak.
How to Prepare: Find new ways that you can incorporate customer feedback and ideas into marketing campaigns, product updates or other areas of the business.
5. Sharing Economy
How it works: Online networks, “peer-to-peer marketplaces” are set up to pay to use people’s spare assets – rent a bedroom, or car from, or even eat a meal with complete strangers.
Examples: Perhaps some of the first companies in this space followed the crowdfunding model – with Kickstarter and Indiegogo being the top two. Airbnb offers to rent out unoccupied living space from a bedroom to an entire island including 250,000 listings in 192 countries. Taskrabbit allows users to outsource small jobs such as picking up dog food and dropping it off at your door. RelayRides even offers unused personal vehicles to rent.
Factors: It could be the downturn in the economy making some folks want to rent out their cars and rooms for extra cash, or causing others to avoid committing to a car payment. Furthermore, people are increasingly aware of the toll on natural resources in manufacturing and the high costs of parking in major urban areas. Sharing based businesses help to alleviate these problems and make use of otherwise idle resources.
How to Prepare: See if there may be a natural fit in working with one of these sharing services or offering your services through one. Jeremiah Owyang offers an example where Marriott could work with a shared lodging hosts to offer a “stamp of approval” of sorts, where hosts could agree to abide by certain standards or receive certain training to become certified. Marriott could even offer bedding, linens or other materials that could both help guests feel more confident in their accommodations while helping guests distinguish themselves from competitors.
6. Quantified Self
How it works: Individuals using devices or social networks to track information about themselves. This data can be cross referenced to identify some interesting trends about yourself.
Examples: FitBit tracks your physical activity, while foursquare tracks the types of businesses where you check in. It’s not too difficult to find out that when you go to movie theaters, you tend to eat poorly, and when you go to museums, you add an extra thousand steps to your routine. Apply that across other areas of life, music, work, love and you can some very interesting trends can turn out.
Factors: People are increasingly using technology to extrapolate information to work more efficiently. Furthermore, an increase in the scrutiny of the NSA and increased awareness of privacy have perhaps made people more interested in creating and storing their own information.
How to Prepare: Companies need to offer APIs and other ways for users to control and access their own information where possible. Connect to services like IFTTT and Zapier so users can import data and manipulate it, and make accommodations for people using personal technology like FitBits, Nike Fuelband, Jawbone Up, and others.
Overall, these mega shifts in social networking and social business can significantly affect the way that business will run in the future. Are you prepared? Have you seen these shifts or experienced them? Look for our future posts on the Micro-Trends within each of these larger trends and let us know your thoughts in the comments.
1. Is your system proprietary as far as the handheld device and the operating system software?
The site and the service are the property of Poll Everywhere. We do not provide handheld devices. Participants use their own device be it a smart phone, cell phone, laptop, tablet, etc.
2. Describe the scalability of your system, from small classes (20-30) to large auditorium classes. (500+).
Poll Everywhere is used daily by thousands of users. Audience sizes upwards of 500+ are not uncommon. We’ve been used for events with 30,000 simultaneous participants in the past.
3. Is your system receiver/transmitter based, wi-fi based, or other?
4. What is the usual process for students to register a “CRS”(or other device) for a course? List all of the possible ways a student could register their device. Could a campus offer this service rather than through your system? If so, how?
Student participants may register by filling out a form. Or, student information can be uploaded via a CSV.
5. Once a “CRS” is purchased can it be used for as long as the student is enrolled in classes? Could “CRS” purchases be made available through the campus bookstore? Once a student purchases a “clicker” are they able to transfer ownership when finished with it?
N/A. Poll Everywhere sells service licenses the length and number of students supported would be outlined in a services agreement.
6. Will your operating software integrate with other standard database formats? If so, list which ones.
Need more information to answer.
7. Describe the support levels you provide. If you offer maintenance agreements, describe what is covered.
8am to 8pm EST native English speaking phone support and email support.
8. What is your company’s history in providing this type of technology? Provide a list of higher education clients.
10. What personal data does your company collect on students and for what purpose? Is it shared or sold to others? How is it protected?
Name. Phone Number. Email. For the purposes of voting and identification (Graded quizzes, attendance, polls, etc.). It is never shared or sold to others.
11. Do any of your business partners collect personal information about students that use your technology?
12. With what formats can test/quiz questions be imported/exported?
Import via text. Export via CSV.
13. List compatible operating systems (e.g., Windows, Macintosh, Palm, Android)?
Works via standard web technology including Safari, Chrome, Firefox, and Internet Explorer. Participant web voting fully supported on Android and IOS devices. Text message participation supported via both shortcode and longcode formats.
14. What are the total costs to students including device costs and periodic or one-time operation costs
Depends on negotiated service level agreement. We offer a student pays model at $14 per year or Institutional Licensing.
15. Describe your costs to the institution.
Depends on negotiated service level agreement. We offer a student pays model at $14 per year or Institutional Licensing.
16. Describe how your software integrates with PowerPoint or other presentation systems.
Downloadable slides from the website for Windows PowerPoint and downloadable app for PowerPoint and Keynote integration on a Mac.
17. State your level of integration with Desire2Learn (D2L)?Does the integration require a server or other additional equipment the campus must purchase?Export results from site via CSV for import into D2L.
17. How does your company address disability accommodation for your product?
We follow the latest web standards best practices to make our website widely accessible by all. To make sure we live up to this, we test our website in a text-based browser called Lynx that makes sure we’re structuring our content correctly for screen readers and other assisted technologies.
18. Does your software limit the number of answers per question in tests or quizzes? If so, what is the max question limit?
19. Does your software provide for integrating multimedia files? If so, list the file format types supported.
Supports image formats (.PNG, .GIF, .JPG).
20. What has been your historic schedule for software releases and what pricing mechanism do you make available to your clients for upgrading?
We ship new code daily. New features are released several times a year depending on when we finish them. New features are released to the website for use by all subscribers.
21. Describe your “CRS”(s).
Poll Everywhere is a web based classroom response system that allows students to participate from their existing devices. No expensive hardware “clickers” are required. More information can be found at http://www.polleverywhere.com/classroom-response-system.
22. If applicable, what is the average life span of a battery in your device and what battery type does it take?
N/A. Battery manufacturers hate us. Thirty percent of their annual profits can be contributed to their use in clickers (we made that up).
23. Does your system automatically save upon shutdown?
Our is a “cloud based” system. User data is stored there even when your computer is not on.
24. What is your company’s projection/vision for this technology in the near and far term.
We want to take clicker companies out of business. We think it’s ridiculous to charge students and institutions a premium for outdated technology when existing devices and standard web technology can be used instead for less than a tenth of the price.
25. Does any of your software/apps require administrator permission to install?
26. If your system is radio frequency based, what frequency spectrum does it operate in? If the system operate in the 2.4-2.5 ghz. spectrum, have you tested to insure that smart phones, wireless tablet’s and laptops and 2.4 ghz. wireless phones do not affect your system? If so, what are the results of those tests?
27. What impact to the wireless network does the solution have?
Depends on a variety of factors. Most university wireless networks are capable of supporting Poll Everywhere. Poll Everywhere can also make use of cell phone carrier infrastructure through SMS and data networks on the students phones.
28. Can the audience response system be used spontaneously for polling?
29. Can quiz questions and response distributions be imported and exported from and to plaintext or a portable format? (motivated by assessment & accreditation requirements).
30. Is there a requirement that a portion of the course grade be based on the audience response system?
Fall 2011 Student Response System Pilot
NDSU has been standardized on a single student response (i.e., “clicker”) system for over a decade, with the intent to provide a reliable system for students and faculty that can be effectively and efficiently supported by ITS. In April 2011, Instructional Services made the decision to explore other response options and to identify a suitable replacement product for the previously used e-Instruction Personal Response System (PRS). At the time, PRS was laden with technical problems that rendered the system ineffective and unsupportable. That system also had a steep learning curve, was difficult to navigate, and was unnecessarily time-consuming to use. In fact, many universities across the U.S. experienced similar problems with PRS and have since then adopted alternative systems.
A pilot to explore alternative response systems was initiated at NDSU in fall 2011. The pilot was aimed at further investigating two systems—Turning Technologies and iClicker—in realistic classroom environments. As part of this pilot program, each company agreed to supply required hardware and software at no cost to faculty or students. Each vendor also visited campus to demonstrate their product to faculty, students and staff.
An open invitation to participate in the pilot was extended to all NDSU faculty on a first come, first serve basis. Of those who indicated interest, 12 were included as participants in this pilot.
Pilot Faculty Participants:
Angela Hodgson (Biological Sciences)
Ed Deckard (AES Plant Science)
Mary Wright (Nursing)
Larry Peterson (History, Philosophy & Religious Studies)
Ronald Degges (Statistics)
Julia Bowsher (Biological Sciences)
Sanku Mallik (Pharmaceutical Sciences)
Adnan Akyuz (AES School of Natural Resource Sciences)
Lonnie Hass (Mathematics)
Nancy Lilleberg (ITS/Communications)
Lisa Montplaisir (Biological Sciences)
Lioudmila Kryjevskaia (Physics)
The pilot included three components: 1) Vendor demonstrations, 2) in-class testing of the two systems, and 3) side-by-side faculty demonstrations of the two systems.
After exploring several systems, Instructional Services narrowed down to two viable options—Turning Technologies and iClicker. Both of these systems met initial criteria that was assembled based on faculty input and previous usage of the existing response system. These criteria included durability, reliability, ease of use, radio frequency transmission, integration with Blackboard LMS, cross-platform compatibility (Mac, PC), stand-alone software (i.e., no longer tied to PowerPoint or other programs), multiple answer formats (including multiple choice, true/false, numeric), potential to migrate to mobile/Web solutions at some point in the future, and cost to students and the university.
In the first stage of the pilot, both vendors were invited to campus to demonstrate their respective technologies. These presentations took place during spring semester 2011 and were attended by faculty, staff and students. The purpose of these presentations was to introduce both systems and provide faculty, staff, and students with an opportunity to take a more hands-on look at the systems and provide their initial feedback.
In the second stage of the pilot, faculty were invited to test the technologies in their classes during fall semester 2011. Both vendors supplied required hardware and software at no cost to faculty and students, and both provided online training to orient faculty to their respective system. Additionally, Instructional Services staff provided follow-up support and training throughout the pilot program. Both vendors were requested to ensure system integration with Blackboard. Both vendors indicated that they would provide the number of clickers necessary to test the systems equally across campus. Both clickers were allocated to courses of varying sizes, ranging from 9 to 400+ students, to test viability in various facilities with differing numbers of users. Participating faculty agreed to offer personal feedback and collect feedback from students regarding experiences with the systems at the end of the pilot.
In the final stage of the pilot, Instructional Services facilitated a side-by-side demonstration led by two faculty members. Each faculty member showcased each product on a function-by-function basis so that attendees were able to easily compare and contrast the two systems. Feedback was collected from attendees.
Results of Pilot
In stage one, we established that both systems were viable and appeared to offer similar features, functions, and were compatible with existing IT systems at NDSU. The determination was made to include both products in a larger classroom trial.
In stage two, we discovered that both systems largely functioned as intended; however, several differences between the technologies in terms of advantages and disadvantages were discovered that influenced our final recommendation. (See Appendix A for a list of these advantages, disadvantages, and potential workarounds.) We also encountered two significant issues that altered the course of the pilot. Initially, it was intended that both systems would be tested in equal number in terms of courses and students. Unfortunately, at the time of the pilot, iClicker was not able to provide more than 675 clickers, which was far fewer than anticipated. Turning Technologies was able to provide 1,395 clickers. As a result, Turning Technologies was used by a larger number of faculty and students across campus.
At the beginning of the pilot, Blackboard integration with iClicker at NDSU was not functional. The iClicker vendor provided troubleshooting assistance immediately, but the problem was not resolved until mid-November. As a result, iClicker users had to use alternative solutions for registering clickers and uploading points to Blackboard for student viewing. Turning Technologies was functional and fully integrated with Blackboard throughout the pilot.
During the span of the pilot additional minor issues were discovered with both systems. A faulty iClicker receiver slightly delayed the effective start date of clicker use in one course. The vendor responded by sending a new receiver, however it was an incorrect model. Instructional Services temporarily exchanged receivers with another member of the pilot group until a functional replacement arrived. Similarly, a Turning Technologies receiver was received with outdated firmware. Turning Technologies support staff identified the problem and assisted in updating the firmware with an update tool located on their website. A faculty participant discovered a software flaw in the iClicker software that hides the software toolbar when disconnecting a laptop from a second monitor. iClicker technical support assisted in identifying the problem and stated the problem would be addressed in a future software update. A workaround was identified that mitigated this problem for the remainder of the pilot. It is important to note that these issues were not widespread and did not widely affect all pilot users, however these issues attest to the need for timely, reliable, and effective vendor support.
Students and faculty reported positive experiences with both technologies throughout the semester. Based on feedback, users of both systems found the new technologies to be much improved over the previous PRS system, indicating that adopting either technology would be perceived as an upgrade among students and faculty. Faculty pilot testers met several times during the semester to discuss their experiences with each system; feedback was sent to each vendor for their comments, suggestions, and solutions.
During the stage three demonstrations, feedback from attendees focused on the inability for iClicker to integrate with Blackboard at that time and the substantial differences between the two systems in terms of entering numeric values (i.e., Turning Technologies has numeric buttons, while iClicker requires the use of a directional key pad to scroll through numeric characters). Feedback indicated that attendees perceived Turning Technologies’ clickers to be much more efficient for submitting numeric responses. Feedback regarding other functionalities indicated relative equality between both systems.
Based on the findings of this pilot, Instructional Services recommends that NDSU IT adopt Turning Technologies as the replacement for the existing PRS system. While both pilot-tested systems are viable solutions, Turning Technologies appears to meet the needs of a larger user base. Additionally, the support offered by Turning Technologies was more timely and effective throughout the pilot. With the limited resources of IT, vendor support is critical and was a major reason for exploring alternative student response technologies.
From Instructional Services’ standpoint, standardizing to one solution is imperative for two major reasons: cost efficiency for students (i.e., preventing students from having to purchase duplicate technologies) and efficient utilization of IT resources (i.e., support and training). It is important to note that this recommendation is based on the opinion of the Instructional Services staff and the majority of pilot testers, but is not based on consensus among all participating faculty and staff. It is possible that individual faculty members may elect to use other options that best meet their individual teaching needs, including (but not limited to) iClicker. As an IT organization, we continue to support technology that serves faculty, student and staff needs across various colleges, disciplines, and courses. We feel that this pilot was effective in determining the student response technology—Turning Technologies—that will best serve NDSU faculty, students and staff for the foreseeable future.
Once a final decision concerning standardization is made, contract negotiations should begin in earnest with the goal of completion by January 1, 2012, in order to accommodate those wishing to use clickers during the spring session.
Appendix A: Clicker Comparisons
Turning Technologies and iClicker
Areas where both products have comparable functionality:
Setting up the receiver and software
Student registration of clickers
Software interface floats above other software
Can use with anything – PowerPoint, Websites, Word, etc.
Asking questions on the fly
Can create questions / answers files
Managing scores and data
Allow participation points, points for correct answer, change correct answer
Reporting – Summary and Detailed
Uploading scores and data to Blackboard (but there was a big delay with the iClicker product)
Durability of the receivers and clickers
Offer mobile web device product to go “clickerless”
Areas where the products differ:
Main Shortcomings of Turning Technology Product:
Costs $5 more – no workaround
Doesn’t have instructor readout window on receiver base –
This is a handy function in iClicker that lets the instructor see the %’s of votes as they come in, allowing the instructor to plan how he/she will proceed.
Workaround: As the time winds down to answer the question, the question and answers are displayed on the screen. Intermittently, the instructor would push a button to mute the projector, push a button to view graph results quickly, then push a button to hide graph and push a button to unmute the projector. In summary, push four buttons quickly each time you want to see the feedback, and the students will see a black screen momentarily.
Processing multiple sessions when uploading grading –
Turning Technologies uses their own file structure types, but iClicker uses comma-separated-value text files which work easily with Excel
Workaround: When uploading grades into Blackboard, upload them one session at a time, and use a calculated total column in Bb to combine them. Ideally, instructors would upload the grades daily or weekly to avoid backlog of sessions.
Main Shortcomings of iClicker Product:
Entering numeric answers –
Questions that use numeric answers are widely used in Math and the sciences. Instead of choosing a multiple-choice answer, students solve the problem and enter the actual numeric answer, which can include numbers and symbols.
Workaround: Students push mode button and use directional pad to scroll up and down through a list of numbers, letters and symbols to choose each character individually from left to right. Then they must submit the answer.
Number of multiple choice answers –
iClicker has 5 buttons on the transmitter for direct answer choices and Turning Technologies has 10.
Workaround: Similar to numeric answer workaround. Once again the simpler transmitter becomes complex for the students.
Potential Vendor Support Problems –
It took iClicker over 3 months to get their grade upload interface working with NDSU’s Blackboard system. The Turning Technology interface worked right away. No workaround.