Almost never did everyone feel that everyone else in the meeting was looking at them — or at the very least could be looking at them — at all times.
And then there’s the pressure to respond quickly: A 2014 study showed that delays in replying to a question or prompt as short as 1.2 seconds made other people in a teleconference perceive the responder as less focused.
Great bosses lead and manage by meaningful expectations and meaningful deliverables.
Although brain-computer interfaces (BCIs) are the heart of neurotech, it is more broadly defined as technology able to collect, interpret, infer or modify information generated by any part of the nervous system.
There are different types of it—some is invasive, some isn’t. Invasive brain-computer interfaces involve placing microelectrodes or other kinds of neurotech materials directly onto the brain or even embedding them into the neural tissue. The idea is to directly sense or modulate neural activity.
Noninvasive neurotech is also used for pain management. Together with Boston Scientific, IBM researchers are applying machine learning, the internet of things, and neurotech to improve chronic pain therapy.
As new, emerging technology, neurotech challenges corporations, researchers and individuals to reaffirm our commitment to responsible innovation. It’s essential to enforce guardrails so that they lead to beneficial long-term outcomes—on company, national and international levels. We need to ensure that researchers and manufacturers of neurotech as well as policymakers and consumers approach it responsibly and ethically.
The 7th International Conference of the Immersive Learning Research Network (iLRN 2021) will be an innovative and interactive virtual gathering for a strengthening global network of researchers and practitioners collaborating to develop the scientific, technical, and applied potential of immersive learning. It is the premier scholarly event focusing on advances in the use of virtual reality (VR), augmented reality (AR), mixed reality (MR), and other extended reality (XR) technologies to support learners across the full span of learning–from K-12 through higher education to work-based, informal, and lifelong learning contexts.
Following the success of iLRN 2020, our first fully online and in-VR conference, this year’s conference will once again be based on the iLRN Virtual Campus, powered by VirBELA, but with a range of activities taking place on various other XR simulation, gaming, and other platforms. Scholars and professionals working from informal and formal education settings as well as those representing diverse industry sectors are invited to participate in the conference, where they may share their research findings, experiences, and insights; network and establish partnerships to envision and shape the future of XR and immersive technologies for learning; and contribute to the emerging scholarly knowledge base on how these technologies can be used to create experiences that educate, engage, and excite learners.
Note: Last year’s iLRN conference drew over 3,600 attendees from across the globe, making the scheduling of sessions a challenge. This year’s conference activities will be spread over a four-week period so as to give attendees more opportunities to participate at times that are conducive to their local time zones.
##### TOPIC AREAS #####
XR and immersive learning in/for:
Serious Games • 3D Collaboration • eSports • AI & Machine Learning • Robotics • Digital Twins • Embodied Pedagogical Agents • Medical & Healthcare Education • Workforce & Industry • Cultural Heritage • Language Learning • K-12 STEM • Higher Ed & Workforce STEM • Museums & Libraries • Informal Learning • Community & Civic Engagement • Special Education • Geosciences • Data Visualization and Analytics • Assessment & Evaluation
##### SUBMISSION STREAMS & CATEGORIES #####
ACADEMIC STREAM (Refereed paper published in proceedings):
– Full (6-8 pages) paper for oral presentation
– Short paper (4-5 pages) for oral presentation
– Work-in-progress paper (2-3 pages) for poster presentation
– Doctoral colloquium paper (2-3 pages)
PRACTITIONER STREAM (Refereed paper published in proceedings):
– Oral presentation
– Poster presentation
– Guided virtual adventures
– Immersive learning project showcase
NONTRADITIONAL SESSION STREAM (1-2 page extended abstract describing session published in proceedings):
– Workshop
– Special session
– Panel session
##### SESSION TYPES & SESSION FORMATS #####
– Oral Presentation: Pre-recorded video + 60-minute live in-world discussion with
others presenting on similar/related topics (groupings of presenters into sessions determined by Program Committee)
– Poster Presentation: Live poster session in 3D virtual exhibition hall; pre-recorded video optional
– Doctoral Colloquium: 60-minute live in-world discussion with other doctoral researchers; pre-recorded video optional
– Guided Virtual Adventures: 60-minute small-group guided tours of to various social and collaborative XR/immersive environments and platforms
– Immersive Learning Project Showcase: WebXR space to assemble a collection of virtual artifacts, accessible to attendees throughout the conference
– Workshop: 1- or 2-hour live hands-on session
– Special Session: 30- or 60-minute live interactive session held in world; may optionally be linked to one or more papers
– Panel Session: 60-minute live in-world discussion with a self-formed group of 3-5 panelists (including a lead panelist who serves as a moderator)
Please see the conference website for templates and guidelines.
##### PROGRAM TRACKS #####
Papers and proposals may be submitted to one of 10 program tracks, the first nine of which correspond to the iLRN Houses of application, and the tenth of which is intended for papers making knowledge contributions to the learning sciences, computer science, and/or game studies that are not linked to any particular application area:
Track 1. Assessment and Evaluation (A&E)
Track 2. Early Childhood Development & Learning (ECDL)
Track 4. Inclusion, Diversity, Equity, Access, & Social Justice (IDEAS)
Track 5. K-12 STEM Education
Track 6. Language, Culture, & Heritage (LCH)
Track 7. Medical & Healthcare Education (MHE)
Track 8. Nature & Environmental Sciences (NES)
Track 9. Workforce Development & Industry Training (WDIT)
Track 10. Basic Research and Theory in Immersive Learning (not linked to any particular application area)
##### PAPER/PROPOSAL SUBMISSION & REVIEW #####
Papers for the Academic Stream and extended-abstract proposals for the Nontraditional Session Stream must be prepared in standard IEEE double-column US Letter format using Microsoft Word or LaTeX, and will be accepted only via the online submission system, accessible via the conference website (from which guidelines and templates are also available).
Proposals for the Practitioner Stream are to be submitted via an online form, also accessible from the conference website.
A blind peer-review process will be used to evaluate all submissions.
##### IMPORTANT DATES #####
– Main round submission deadline – all submission types welcome: 2021-01-15
– Notification of review outcomes from main submission round: 2021-04-01
– Late round submission deadline – Work-in-progress papers, practitioner presentations, and nontraditional sessions only: 2021-04-08
– Camera-ready papers for proceedings due – Full and short papers: 2021-04-15
– Presenter registration deadline – Full and short papers (also deadline for early-bird registration rates): 2021-04-15
– Notification of review outcomes from late submission round: 2021-04-19
– Camera-ready work-in-progress papers and nontraditional session extended abstracts for proceedings due; final practitioner abstracts for conference program due: 2021-05-03
– Deadline for uploading presentation materials (videos, slides for oral presentations, posters for poster presentations): 2021-05-10
– Conference opening: 2021-05-17
– Conference closing: 2021-06-10
*Full and short papers can only be submitted in the main round.
##### PUBLICATION & INDEXING #####
All accepted and registered papers in the Academic Stream that are presented at iLRN 2021 and all extended abstracts describing the Nontraditional Sessions presented at the conference will be published in the conference proceedings and submitted to the IEEE Xplore(r) digital library.
Content loaded into Xplore is made available by IEEE to its abstracting and indexing partners, including Elsevier (Scopus, EiCompendex), Clarivate Analytics (CPCI–part of Web of Science) and others, for potential inclusion in their respective databases. In addition, the authors of selected papers may be invited to submit revised and expanded versions of their papers for possible publication in the IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies (2019 JCR Impact Factor: 2.714), the Journal of Universal Computer Science (2019 JCR Impact Factor: 0.91), or another Scopus and/or Web of Science-indexed journal, subject to the relevant journal’s regular editorial and peer-review policies and procedures.
##### CONTACT #####
Inquiries regarding the iLRN 2020 conference should be directed to the Conference Secretariat at conference@immersivelrn.org.
At our physical iLRN conferences, the first day of the conference (Sunday) is typically devoted to one or more guided social tours of local attractions in which attendees have the opportunity to socialize and get to know one another while immersing themselves in the sights and sounds of the host city and/or region. As this year’s conference will take place entirely online, we are instead offering the opportunity for attendees to sign up for small-group “Guided Virtual Adventure” tours of 50 minutes in duration to various social and collaborative XR/immersive environments and platforms.
Proposals are being sought for prospective Guided Virtual Adventure tour offerings on Sunday, June 21, 2020. Tour destinations may be:
– a third-party XR/immersive platform with which you are familiar (e.g., Altspace, Mozilla Hubs, Minecraft, World of Warcraft, Somnium Space, OrbusVR, Second Life);
– a specific virtual environment that you, your institution/organization, or someone else has developed within a third-party platform;
– a platform that you or your institution/organization has developed and/or specific environments within that platform.
There are no fees involved in offering a Guided Virtual Adventure tour; however, preference will be given to proposals that involve environments/platforms that are freely and openly accessible, and that are associated with nonprofit organizations and educational institutions. Where possible, it is strongly recommended that multiple offerings of the tour are made available throughout the day so as to cater for different time zones in which the 8,000+ iLRN 2020 event attendees will be based.
Companies wishing to offer Guided Virtual Adventure tours involving their commercial products and services may submit proposals for consideration, but the iLRN 2020 Organizing Committee reserves the right to, at its discretion, place limits on the number of tours of platforms/environments of a certain type or that address a particular target audience/application vertical. In doing so, they will prioritize companies that have purchased a sponsorship or exhibition package.
– Guided Virtual Adventure proposal submission deadline: May 18, 2020
– Notification of proposal review outcomes: May 21, 2020
– Presenter registration deadline: May 25, 2020
– Deadline for providing final participant instructions: June 1, 2020
– Guided Virtual Adventure Day: June 21, 2020
Other upcoming iLRN 2020 deadlines (see conference website for details):
– Immersive Learning Project Showcase & Competition – expressions of interest to participate due May 14, 2020 (deadline extended, no further extensions will be announced)
– Practitioner Stream oral and poster presentations – 1-2 page proposals, not for publication in proceedings, due May 18, 2020 (will not be extended)
– Workshops, Panel Sessions, and Special Sessions – 2-3 page proposals for publication in proceedings as extended-abstract descriptions of the sessions, due May 18, 2020 (will not be extended)
– Free registration deadline for non-presenter educators and students – May 23, 2020
Second, another reason that there cannot be a definitive answer to this question is the diversity of stakeholders in online education. Yong Zhao: Does it Work? The Most Meaningless Question to Ask about Online Education https://t.co/LNqv2YYb40pic.twitter.com/SKG1jCyudo
— Ana Cristina Pratas (@AnaCristinaPrts) April 2, 2020
One of the most frequently and persistently asked questions about online education is “does it work” or “is it effective.”
The question is meaningless because there cannot be any definitive answer for a number of reasons.
First, online education (and its variants such a online instruction, online teaching, distance education and distance learning) is a big umbrella that covers a wide array of different practices, which vary a great deal in terms of quality. Comparing the effectiveness of online education with face-to-face education has been the most common research approach to examine the effectiveness of online education. And the answer has been, for a long time, that there is no significant difference between the two. This answer, however, does not mean online is effective or not, it simply means there are plenty of effective and ineffective programs in both online and face-to-face education. In other words, the within variation is larger than the between variation.
Second, another reason that there cannot be a definitive answer to this question is the diversity of stakeholders in online education.
And unfortunately what works for one stakeholder may not work for the others.
Third, even within the same program and with only students as the stakeholder, there cannot be a definitive answer because no program can possibly have the same effects on all students equally.
Fourth, yet another reason that the question cannot have a definitive answer is the multiplicity of outcomes. Education outcomes include more than what has been typically measured by grades or tests.
Fifth, the rapid changes in technology that can be used to deliver online education add to the elusiveness of a definitive answer to the question. While pedagogy, design, and human actors certainly paly a significant role in the experiences of online education, so does technology.
Device ownership alone doesn’t make people digitally literate; rather, digital literacy is about how and why they use devices to achieve particular goals and outcomes.
Definitions of digital literacy can include the ability to use and access digital devices, but studies from the past decade tend to deepen this definition. A commonly cited definition from Colin Lankshear and Michele Knobel asserts that digital literacy is “shorthand for the myriad social practices and conceptions of engaging in meaning making mediated by texts that are produced, received, distributed, exchanged etc., via digital codification.”
More recently, scholars including Jennifer Sparrow have suggested even adopting the term digital fluency instead of literacy in order to capture how students may need the “ability to leverage technology to create new knowledge, new challenges, and new problems and to complement these with critical thinking, complex problem solving, and social intelligence to solve the new challenges.”
instructional designers are key players who could take a more visible role in higher education to support educators in bringing explicit instruction on digital literacy engagement into their classes. University staff in instructional design and educational/faculty development spaces consult with instructors, lead workshops, and develop support documentation on a regular basis. People in these roles could be more empowered to have conversations with the instructors they support around building in particular lessons
Douglas Belshaw can be a source of inspiration for understanding how his essential elements of digital literacy may contribute to the development of students’ digital fluencies. In particular, some practices may include:
Integrating the use of different applications and platforms so that students obtain practice in navigating these spaces, learning how to locate relevant and reliable information. For example, guiding students to specific databases that provide articles, books, etc., for your discipline may improve information and digital literacy. This is critical because most students default to Google search and Wikipedia, which may not be where you want them to explore topics.
Developing student’s ability to curate content and how to follow academic integrity guidelines for citations and references.
Establishing the norms and purpose for effective communication in a digital academic space.
School districts are more connected than ever. The latest Infrastructure Survey report from CoSN shows that over 90% of districts have sufficient broadband. So why isn’t everyone using it to generate measurable outcomes?
How technology can be used in the classroom to help support learning and productivity How school leaders can calculate the value of their tech investments
The importance of video when it comes to keeping students engaged (hint: video is key)
The most important metrics to consider when collecting data on your technology (it’s ok to start small)
DataSense, a data management platform developed by Brightbytes.
DataSense is a set of professional services that work with K-12 districts to collect data from different data systems, translate them into unified formats and aggregate that information into a unified dashboard for reporting purposes.
DataSense traces its origins to Authentica Solutions, an education data management company founded in 2013.
A month later, BrightBytes acquired Authentica. The deal was hailed as a “major milestone in the industry” and appeared to be a complement to BrightBytes’ flagship offering, Clarity, a suite of data analytics tools that help educators understand the impact of technology spending and usage on student outcomes.
Of the “Big Five” technology giants, Microsoft has become the most acqui-hungry as of late in the learning and training space. In recent years it purchased several consumer brand names whose services reach into education, including LinkedIn (which owns Lynda.com, now a part of the LinkedIn Learning suite), Minecraft (which has been adapted for use in the classroom) and Github (which released an education bundle).
Last year, Microsoft also acquired a couple of smaller education tools, including Flipgrid, a video-discussion platform popular among teachers, and Chalkup, whose services have been rolled into Microsoft Teams, its competitor to Slack.
Submissions are invited for the IOLUG Spring 2019 Conference, to be held May 10th in Indianapolis, IN. Submissions are welcomed from all types of libraries and on topics related to the theme of data in libraries.
Libraries and librarians work with data every day, with a variety of applications – circulation, gate counts, reference questions, and so on. The mass collection of user data has made headlines many times in the past few years. Analytics and privacy have, understandably, become important issues both globally and locally. In addition to being aware of the data ecosystem in which we work, libraries can play a pivotal role in educating user communities about data and all of its implications, both favorable and unfavorable.
The Conference Planning Committee is seeking proposals on topics related to data in libraries, including but not limited to:
Using tools/resources to find and leverage data to solve problems and expand knowledge,
Data policies and procedures,
Harvesting, organizing, and presenting data,
Data-driven decision making,
Learning analytics,
Metadata/linked data,
Data in collection development,
Using data to measure outcomes, not just uses,
Using data to better reach and serve your communities,
Eureka: machine learning tool, brainstorming engine. give it an initial idea and it returns similar ideas. Like Google: refine the idea, so the machine can understand it better. create a collection of ideas to translate into course design or others.
Netlix:
influencers and microinfluencers, pre- and doing the execution
a machine can construct a book with the help of a person. bionic book. machine and person working hand in hand. provide keywords and phrases from lecture notes, presentation materials. from there recommendations and suggestions based on own experience; then identify included and excluded content. then instructor can construct.
Design may be the least interesting part of the book for the faculty.
multiple choice quiz may be the least interesting part, and faculty might want to do much deeper assessment.
use these machine learning techniques to build assessment. how to more effectively. inquizitive is the machine learning
students engagements and similar prompts
presence in the classroom: pre-service teachers class. how to immerse them and practice classroom management skills
First class: marriage btw VR and use of AI – an environment headset: an algorithm reacts how teachers are interacting with the virtual kids. series of variables, oppty to interact with present behavior. classroom management skills. simulations and environments otherwise impossible to create. apps for these type of interactions
facilitation, reflection and research
AI for more human experience, allow more time for the faculty to be more human, more free time to contemplate.
Jason: Won’t the use of AI still reduce the amount of faculty needed?
Christina Dumeng: @Jason–I think it will most likely increase the amount of students per instructor.
Andrew Cole (UW-Whitewater): I wonder if instead of reducing faculty, these types of platforms (e.g., analytic capabilities) might require instructors to also become experts in the various technology platforms.
Dirk Morrison: Also wonder what the implications of AI for informal, self-directed learning?
Kate Borowske: The context that you’re presenting this in, as “your own jazz band,” is brilliant. These tools presented as a “partner” in the “band” seems as though it might be less threatening to faculty. Sort of gamifies parts of course design…?
Dirk Morrison: Move from teacher-centric to student-centric? Recommender systems, AI-based tutoring?
Andrew Cole (UW-Whitewater): The course with the bot TA must have been 100-level right? It would be interesting to see if those results replicate in 300, 400 level courses
