A significant Lifeline broadband benefit separate from the current Lifeline service, designed primarily to support phone service.
Financial support for community-based emergency efforts to help unconnected households find and makes use of the affordable internet access options available to them. These funds would need to go to local organizations who are already trusted by households who are not connected. Unconnected households tend to be low-income and/or older adults.
ISTE Standards and Computational Thinking Competencies can help frame the inclusion and development of AI-related projects in K–12 classrooms. The ISTE Standards for Students identify the skills and knowledge that K–12 students need to thrive, grow, and contribute in a global, interconnected, and constantly changing society. The Computational Thinking Competencies for Educators identify the skills educators need to successfully prepare students to become innovators and problem-solvers in a digital world.
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.
Accessing Higher Ground – Accessible Media, Web and Technology Conference
Virtual Agenda November 14-16, 2018
++++++++++++++++++
Not So Fast: Implementing Accessibility Reviews in a University’s IT Software Review Process
Crystal Tenan, IT Accessibility Coordinator, NC State University
Bill Coker, Software Licensing Manager, NC State University
Summary
In this presentation, we will provide an overview of NC State’s IT Purchase Compliance process and focus on the accessibility review process. We will discuss the process of implementation, important considerations for working with the campus community and vendors, and the impact of the IT Purchase Compliance process on campus.
Abstract
Before a university purchases software, it should review the software to ensure it complies with university standards and follows Federal and State guidelines for security and accessibility. Without review, there is a higher risk that purchases put sensitive university data at risk, do not meet the needs of the campus population with disabilities, or require integration with enterprise level applications.
In a joint effort between the Office of Information Technology, the Office of General Counsel and the Purchasing Department, NC State University implemented a process to review purchases of software prior to issuing a purchase requisition.
In this presentation, we will provide an overview of NC State’s IT Purchase Compliance process and focus on the accessibility review process. We will discuss the process of implementation, important considerations for working with the campus community and vendors, and the impact of the IT Purchase Compliance process on campus.
Keypoints
Participants will learn the importance of software reviews prior to purchasing.
Participants will be exposed to an example format of how to structure a software review process.
Participants will learn techniques for collaborating with various campus departments for software reviews.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++
Math Accessibility in Word, Canvas, Conversion and More!
Paul Brown, Vice President, Texthelp
Rachel Kruzel, Assistive Technology & Accommodations Specialist, Augsburg University
This session will overview Texthelp’s exciting math accessibility program, EquatIO. Learn how students and professors easily insert math into Word, Canvas, and more as well as make STEM textbook conversion a much easier process. Augsburg’s Rachel Kruzel will provide an inside look into how EquatIO is making math accessible across her campus.
Abstract
EquatIO is Texthelp’s game-changing math software program that gives students and professors multiple means of producing, engaging with, and expressing math with ease. This session will overview how to easily insert math into Microsoft Word, Canvas, and other programs as well as how it can save valuable time and resources in STEM textbook conversion. The program’s core features including math-to-speech, speech-to-math, math prediction, math OCR capabilities and many other tools will be demonstrated, helping empower students in this traditionally challenging area. Attendees will not only learn the program, but also how they can gain free access to its premium features as well as assist their students in utilizing the freemium and premium tools.
Keypoints
Math accessibility is here!
EquatIO is a digital math solution for all students and staff.
Save time and resources in STEM textbook conversion.
Disability Areas
All Areas, Cognitive/Learning, Vision
Topic Areas
Alternate Format, Assistive Technology, eBooks, Faculty Instruction/Accessible Course Design, Including Accessibility in Curriculum, Information Technology, Uncategorized, Web/Media Access
Speaker Bio(s)
Paul Brown
Paul Brown has been in education for 20 years as a teacher, technology coach, manager, and currently is a Vice President at Texthelp. Paul’s team oversees the successful implementation of the Read&Write and EquatIO product lines. Paul is a Cleveland Browns fan for life and asks for your pity ahead of time. He and his family live in Edina, MN.
Rachel Kruzel
Rachel Kruzel, ATP, is the Assistive Technology & Accommodations Specialist at Augsburg University in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and is a RESNA Certified Assistive Technology Practitioner (ATP). She has over 8 years of experience working in in the CLASS Office (Disability Resources) focusing on assistive technology, educational technology, transitioning from K-12 to higher education, academic accommodations implementation, and digital, electronic, and web accessibility. Rachel has presented both regionally and nationally on a variety of topics about assistive technology, as well as accessibility, transition, assistive technology tools such as the QIAT-PS and specific software program demonstrations and trainings, as well as general consultation with students, parents, schools, and organizations. She also provides consulting and direct consumer support through assistive technology consultation and the implementation process.
++++++++++++++++
“We don’t have enough staff assigned to making IT accessible!”
Summary
How often do we hear people say this or feel this way ourselves? In this session the speaker will engage with attendees on promising practices for making the most of limited resources toward a more accessible IT environment on campus.
Abstract
How often do we hear people say this or feel this way ourselves? In this session the speaker will engage with attendees on promising practices for making the most of limited resources toward a more accessible IT environment on campus. Topics will included but not be limited to convening a high level task force of key stakeholders on campus, developing policies and guidelines, offering training on accessibility within other training opportunities, presenting at regularly occurring meetings and special interest groups, developing partnerships, supporting a group of IT accessibility liaisons to extend the reach of central services, securing funds to proactively caption videos and remediate inaccessible documents (particularly those that are high impact/use), providing online resources for specific target groups, and purchasing accessibility tools for campus-wide use. The speaker will provide examples and the audience will contribute their own ideas, experiences, and lessons learned.
Keypoints
Organizations promoting accessible IT on campuses are often under staffed.
Promising practices have been developed at some schools for maximizing the impact of available resources.
Promising practices have been developed at some schools for maximizing the impact of available resources.
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Administrative/Campus Policy, Information Technology, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Sheryl Burgstahler
Dr. Sheryl Burgstahler founded and directs the DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology) Center and the ATC (Access Technology Center) as part of her role as Director of Accessible Technology Services at the University of Washington (UW). These centers promote (1) the support the success of students with disabilities in postsecondary education and careers and (2) the development of facilities, IT, services, and learning activities that are welcoming and accessible to individuals with disabilities. The ATC focuses efforts at the UW; the DO-IT Center reaches national and international audiences with the support of federal, state, corporate, foundation, and private funds. Dr. Burgstahler is an affiliate professor in the UW College of Education. She developed and taught the Accessibility and Compliance in Online Education online course offered by Rutgers University and currently teaches graduate courses in applications of universal design in higher education at City University of New York and Saint Louis University.
(handouts available: ask me)
++++++++++++++++++
Evaluating and Repairing Word and PowerPoint Files
Summary
In this hands-on workshop, learn to evaluate and repair common accessibility issues in Microsoft Word and PowerPoint.
Abstract
Both Word and PowerPoint contain a very useful accessibility checker that can identify many potential accessibility issues within a document. However, like any automated checker, there are also many issues that it cannot detect–accessibility evaluation is always a combination of evaluation tools and manual checks.
During this workshop, participants will practice evaluating and repairing many common accessibility issues of Word and PowerPoint files. We will use practice files and a printable evaluation checklist to evaluate Word docs and Power Point slides.
Keypoints
Learn to use the built-in Microsoft Office Accessibility Checker
Identify accessibility issues that must be analyzed manually
Practice evaluating and repairing the accessibility of Word and PowerPoint files
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Uncategorized, Web/Media Access
Speaker Bio(s)
Jonathan Whiting
o: Jonathan Whiting is the Director of Training at WebAIM, based at Utah State University. His main passion is helping others learn to make the web more accessible to people with disabilities. Jonathan is also currently involved in the GOALS Project, a program to assist institutions of Higher Education in improving their accessibility system-wide. With a Master’s Degree in Instructional Technology and over fifteen years of experience in the field of web accessibility, Jonathan has published dozens of articles, tutorials, and other instructional resources. He has traveled extensively to train thousands of web developers and other professionals who develop or maintain web content.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++++++++++++++
Powerful Presentation Skills for the Accessibility Professional
Christa Miller, Director of Inclusive Media Design, Virginia Tech
Summary
As subject matter experts in disabilities and accessibility, we are often called upon to provide training and professional development to others. However, it is uncommon for us to receive formal training in this area ourselves. Through discussion and small group activities, participants will explore and practice techniques for giving presentations
Abstract
As accessibility and disability professionals we are well equipped with the content knowledge needed to provide motivation, or justification on the what, why and how of accessibility. Unfortunately, we are often called upon to provide this to experts in a wide range of unrelated fields who do not intrinsically know what it means “to be accessible”. Not only is the audience challenging to reach, but the content challenges the audience on multiple levels. That being said, by using best practices for training adult learners, accessibility training can become a pleasure.
This session aims to provide techniques and practice on critical presentation skills for accessibility professionals including but not limited to: increasing audience engagement, developing powerful slides and visuals, checking your work for accessibility, and practicing before presenting.
Keypoints
Presentations by accessibility professionals should exemplify best practice for accessibility
Successful presentations are part performance and part technical know-how
Accessibility presentations should contain more application and practice than background information
Christa Miller is a proud Virginia Tech Hokie and is currently the Director of Inclusive Media Design. She first became interested in assistive technologies (AT) while earning her BS in Electrical Engineering. Her passion for accessible technology and universal design then led her to pursue her MS in Industrial Systems Engineering, concentrating in Human Factors Engineering.
Between 2006 and 2018, Christa has worked in many roles for Assistive Technologies, part of Technology-enhanced Learning and Online Strategies (TLOS). Notable among these was as the lead Braille Transcriber for Braille Services, an initiative to provide in-house production of Braille materials for the University for which she received the Excellence in Access and Inclusion Award in 2012. Her unique knowledge of the tools and technologies needed to produce Braille for Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) courses has led her to consult with disability service providers from many other post-secondary institutions and share that knowledge at national conferences.
In her current role, Christa has enjoyed co-leading a several professional development programs aimed at providing Teaching Faculty, Instructors and Graduate Teaching Assistants with the knowledge, skills and confidence necessary to create inclusive learning environments.
(handouts available: ask me)
++++++++++++++++
IT Colleagues: from Accessibility Newbies into Accessibility Auditors
Kristen Dabney, Assistive Technology Instruction Specialist, Tufts University
Summary
Tufts Student Accessibility Services office created accessibility testing guidelines designed to help IT professionals complete basic accessibility audits for digital products before they are purchased.
Abstract
As Tufts implemented its accessible procurement protocol, the need for a streamlined accessibility audit process became crucial. For a university to be proactive and evaluate product accessibility before purchase, a comprehensive auditing system must be in place. These audits (completed by our SAS-trained IT team) provide a more in-depth view than that described by a vendor’s VPAT. This simple to use guide enhanced campus-wide buy-in while also making forward progress on procurement audits. Attendees will learn the process used to initiate and develop these guidelines, the arguments successfully used to get the procurement process firmly in the IT office, the training process for IT auditors and best practices for sustainability beyond the initial training workshop. This session will conclude with a walk though of an example application using the guidelines developed by Tufts Student Accessibility Services office.
Keypoints
Training guide for IT professionals new to testing accessibility
Administrative/Campus Policy, Assistive Technology, Information Technology, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Kristen Dabney
Kristen Dabney graduated from Grinnell College with a degree in Physics, and later from University of Connecticut with a Postsecondary Disability Services Certification since the Physics degree wasn’t saying “I’m interested in accessibility” loud enough. She currently works as an Assistive Technology Instruction Specialist at Tufts University.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++++++++++++
Social media and accessibility
Gian Wild, Ms, AccessibilityOz
Summary
Gian Wild goes through the accessibility issues of each of the four main social media sites (Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and LinkedIn) and discusses ways that you can make sure your social media content is accessible.
Abstract
Social media accessibility is an incredibly important tool in modern society. It is not just the young who access social media, with close to 30% of people over the age of 65 interacting on social networking sites, and 50% of people aged 50 – 64. As the percentage of recruiters who use LinkedIn is now 95%, social media is becoming an essential part of negotiating the current working environment. The main reason why social media is not accessible is that social networking sites and apps are almost continually refreshed. Facebook sometimes changes twice a day. This, coupled with a lack of a formal testing process, means that what may be accessible today may be literally gone tomorrow.
Keypoints
Social media networks cannot be relied upon to be accessible
A number of easy things you can do to make your social media more accessible
The most improved and the most accessible social media networks of 2018
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Uncategorized, Web/Media Access
Speaker Bio(s)
Gian Wild
Gian works in the area of web accessibility: making sure web sites and mobile apps can be used by people with disabilities. She spent six years contributing to the international set of web accessibility guidelines used around the world and is also the CEO and Founder of AccessibilityOz. With offices in Australia and the United States, AccessibilityOz has been operating for five years. Its clients include the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet, Gold Coast 2018 Commonwealth Games, Optus, Seek and Foxtel. A 2017 Australian of the Year award nominee, Gian splits her time between Australia the US. A regular speaker at conferences around the world, in 2015 she presented to the United Nations on the importance of web accessibility at the Conference of State Parties to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++++++++++
I Was Wrong! Build Your Successful Accessibility Program by Learning from My Mistakes
Angela Hooker, Microsoft
Summary
Whether or not you’re new to the field, when you manage an accessibility program, you can fall into common traps–but there’s no need to! Learn from my observations and old mistakes! Get tips for running a successful program and avoiding poor management choices, poor policy, poor planning, and more that can hinder your program.
Abstract
So, you’re leading an accessibility program…how’s that working out?
If you’re a new accessibility program manager or a seasoned pro, you can still make rookie mistakes. I sure have, and that’s after over 16 years of running accessibility and user experience programs!
Has your laid back nature defeated your process-driven “evil twin”? Does your site’s written content defeat the accessibility features that your other team members created? Are you unsure why your developers still “don’t get it”? Do your leaders avoid you and conversations about accessibility, except to say that “It’s great!”? Or perhaps your web management direction–when it comes to overall content, design, and development choices–doesn’t quite support the needs of your audience, and you’re not sure where things are going wrong.
My experience from the corporate and government sectors will help you plan your program, whether it’s for a higher education, corporate, or government environment. Get on track with process, program management, setting proper expectations, and more to help you drive great user experiences and real accessibility across your organization.
Keypoints
Learn the common mistakes in creating and sustaining an accessibility program and how to avoid them.
Understand the importance of setting boundaries for accepting and establishing program responsibilities.
Get tips to manage the overall content, design, development, and testing–which drive your program’s success.
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Uncategorized, Web/Media Access
Speaker Bio(s)
Angela Hooker
Angela Hooker is a Senior Accessibility Product Manager at Microsoft, where she’s built a center of expertise for accessibility, user experience, and universal design. She’s brought her web management, development, design, accessibility, and editorial and content management expertise to the government and private sector for over 20 years. Angela also advocates for role-based accessibility and believes that teaching people how to incorporate principles of accessibility in their everyday work creates a sustainable program and produces the most accessible user experiences. In addition to accessibility and universal design, she supports plain language and web standards. Angela speaks on and writes about accessibility, user experience, and plain language.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++++++++++++++
Trending Tech Tools: What’s New, What’s Improved & What’s on the Horizon for Assistive Technology & Accessibility Tools
Rachel Kruzel, Assistive Technology & Accommodations Specialist, Augsburg University
Summary
The field of Assistive Technology and Accessibility is constantly changing. Tech giants are making more frequent updates to their products. As a result, knowing the latest updates is essential. Assistive Technology and Accessibility software updates from major tech companies such as Texthelp, Sonocent, and Microsoft, as well as free and low cost tools to support students on campus will be featured and shown.
Abstract
Both the Assistive Technology and Accessibility fields are constantly changing. Software companies are soliciting user feedback continuously and deciding which suggestions are the most important to develop and update. These updates and developments are released every six to twelve weeks. Much of this AT is central for students to access courses and curriculum in an accessible way. This presentation will focus on the most recent updates from the major assistive technology companies who are making waves in the tech field. The latest releases from companies like Texthelp, Sonocent, Microsoft, as well as other tech giants will be shown. Free and low cost assistive technology tools that are on the cutting edge or are strong supports for students will be featured in this session as well. Participants will leave with updates to tools they are using to support students on their campuses and ideas on how to use these tools on campus to implement both Assistive Technology and Accessibility.
Keypoints
Assistive technology companies are releasing product updates every six to twelve weeks on average.
Latest updates and features to commonly used Assistive Technology tools in higher education will be shown.
Both for-purchase and free/low cost assistive technology tools can be easily implemented to support students.
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Assistive Technology, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Rachel Kruzel
Rachel Kruzel, ATP, is the Assistive Technology & Accommodations Specialist at Augsburg University in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and is a RESNA Certified Assistive Technology Practitioner (ATP). She has over 8 years of experience working in in the CLASS Office (Disability Resources) focusing on assistive technology, educational technology, transitioning from K-12 to higher education, academic accommodations implementation, and digital, electronic, and web accessibility. Rachel has presented both regionally and nationally on a variety of topics about assistive technology, as well as accessibility, transition, assistive technology tools such as the QIAT-PS and specific software program demonstrations and trainings, as well as general consultation with students, parents, schools, and organizations. She also provides consulting and direct consumer support through assistive technology consultation and the implementation process.
(handouts available: ask me)
++++++++++++++++
The Big Ten Academic Alliance’s Shared Approach to Procurement and Vendor Relations
Bill Welsh, Rutgers University
Charlie Collick, Director of IT Accessibility, Rutgers University
Nate Evans, Manager, Digital Content & Accessibility, Michigan State University
Summary
Learn how the Big Ten Academic Alliance is working together to develop policies, processes and procedures for procurement of accessible IT as well as assisting each other with managing vendor relationships that can foster better product accessibility within the Big 10. Also, each presenter will share their own institutions practices in this area.
Abstract
The Big Ten Academic Alliance are working together through a CIO sponsored group called the Information Technology Accessibility Group to leverage their coalition in regards to the accessibility of IT products purchased. The presenters will provide insight into their current collaborative efforts and share the four goals that the ITAG/Procurement Working Group is developing to improve best practices and shared basic standards for accessibility in IT procurement processes. This partnership has identified the following four goals to address IT accessibility: 1.Education & Marketing 2. Shared Solicitation Requirements for IT purchases 3. Standardize Evaluation 4. Leverage the BTAA purchasing power to work with vendors to improve accessibility and develop shared repository of IT accessibility evaluations. Participants will discover methods of alignment, and see how shared approaches to vendor relationship management can leverage economy of scale and foster vendor commitment.
Keypoints
Product accessibility best practices
Establishing product accessibility repositories
There are resources available in this arena for others to utilize and assist in developing
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Administrative/Campus Policy, Information Resources, Information Technology, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Bill Welsh
Bill is the Associate VP of Rutgers Access and Disability Resources. He has worked at Rutgers since 2013. Previously, he worked at Penn State University (1999-2013) and Drexel University (1994-1999) as Director of Disability Services
Charlie Collick
Charlie is the Director of IT Accessibility at Rutgers University. He is responsible for the accessibility of all enterprise academic and administrative technology and digital content. He also serves as Director of Software Site Licensing where he is responsible for vetting all central funded technology purchases for the University and the distribution of the licenses to staff, faculty, and students. Charlie has been an employee of Rutgers OIT since 2008. Before serving in his current role, Charlie was the Acting Director of Teaching and Learning with Technology where he lead a team of instructional designers, education technologists, and LMS support staff. His professional experience includes accessibility, instructional design, instructional technology, functional management, organizational development, strategic planning, and technology procurement. His broad technical background spans general IT, applications and systems support, web design and development, and the delivery of related services.
Nate Evans
Nate works with students, faculty, staff, and administrators across the institution to help create more inclusive environments, and shape better digital experiences. He leads Michigan State University’s digital accessibility program, and the Digital Content & Accessibility team to provide central support and resources, and to measure digital accessibility improvement.
(handouts available: ask me)
+++++++++++++++++
Not Another Lecture-Style Presentation
Brad Held, Accessible Technology Coordinator, University of Central Fl
Summary
Disability Professionals struggle to garner interest for their presentations or workshops. Just getting faculty or staff to register for their training doesn’t guarantee that the topics will be practiced. In this presentation, the presenter will share tips for designing a memorable educational experience that doesn’t involve a projector/clicker.
Abstract
As accessible technology experts, we often find it difficult to fill the seats at our presentations. This might be because of the topics we discussed are overwhelmingly complicated to understand, or because attendees do not believe enough students are affected by our subject matter. Regardless of the reason, the attendee doesn’t always leave with a lasting memory of how they can create access to their environment. What if we could take some of the visual elements of our technology and incorporate it with inclusive principles, then design an experience that is FUN? Based on the popular escape room game concept, you can challenge teams to be locked in a room full of barriers. Have them escape by identifying and removing the barriers within the room with more accessible approaches within the time allotted. UCF will share their design secrets for creating an escape room activity that will have your entire institution buzzing. The presentation will end with an interactive demonstration.
Keypoints
How to create a different activity other than a lecture style presentation
Designing a memorable experience involving accessibility.
Incorporating accessible technology and inclusive principle.
Disability Areas
All Areas
Topic Areas
Other, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Brad Held
Brad Held has been the Assistant Director – Accessible Technology for the Student Accessibility Services office at University of Central Florida (UCF) for the past four years. He earned his Bachelor’s degree in Applied Biotechnology at the University of Georgia in 2006. Prior to arriving at UCF, Brad worked in Assistive Technology for almost ten years: four years in a public school K-12 setting with Gwinnett County Public Schools in Georgia and five years in higher-education at The University of Georgia and The University of South Carolina. He is certified in Assistive Technology Applications. Aside from helping UCF students received academic supports, Brad also has a learning disability. Brad uses his personal experience to aid students in being active participants in the accommodation process.
++++++++++++++++++
Interactive 3d printed tactile campus maps
Holly Lawson, Assistant Professor, Portland State University
Shiri Azenkot, Assistant Professor, Cornell Tech
Lei Shi, PhD Student, Cornell Tech
Michael Cantino, Research Assistant, Portland State University
Summary
This presentation introduces the Markit and Talkit iOS software, which enables an individual to add text or audio annotations to a 3d printed model. Presenters share the use of this toolkit with 3d printed tactile maps.
Abstract
Recent advances in 3d printing technology have made tactile models more available to individuals who are visually impaired. With grant funding from the National Science Foundation, we have developed and field-tested iOS technology that empowers individuals to modify models by adding audio or text annotations. Using this technology, a modified model can provide voice output or display a description of a model component when it is touched by a user. In this session, we will introduce the 3d printing technology and its application with 3d printed tactile maps for use with individuals with visual impairments at Portland State University and Portland Community College.
Keypoints
interactive 3d printed models can provide greater access to campus environments than traditional tactile maps
interactive 3d printed maps can be customized to include wayfinding information most pertinent to the user
the use of interactive 3d printed models is a cost effective solution for institutes of higher education
Disability Areas
Mobility, Vision
Topic Areas
Assistive Technology, Uncategorized
Speaker Bio(s)
Holly Lawson
Dr. Holly Lawson is an Assistant Professor at Portland State University and
the coordinator of the Visually Impaired Learner program. Since 1994, she has worked in the VIL field, beginning as a residential instructor for the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired and then the Peace Corps in Morocco. Her master’s and PhD are from the University of Arizona where she held several positions in teaching and research. She came to PSU in 2014, having previously worked as an assistant professor and the coordinator for the Virginia Consortium of Teacher Preparation in Vision Impairment at George Mason University.
Shiri Azenkot
Dr. Shiri Azenkot is an Assistant Professor at the Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute at Cornell Tech, Cornell University, and a field member in the Information Science Department. She is also an affiliate faculty member in the Computer Science Department at the Technion–Israel Institute of Technology. Currently, her research is funded by the NSF, AOL, Verizon, and Facebook. Before arriving at Cornell Tech, she was a PhD student in Computer Science & Engineering at the University of Washington, where she was advised by Richard Ladner and Jacob Wobbrock. Shiri has received the UW graduate medal (awarded to just one PhD candidate at the university each year), a National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship, and an AT&T Labs Graduate Fellowship.
Lei Shi
Lei Shi is a fourth-year Ph.D. student at Cornell University and an AOL fellow at Cornell Tech, where he is advised by Shiri Azenkot. His research interests lie in the fields of accessibility, human-computer interaction, and design. Specifically, he explores how to combine 3D printing technologies and innovative design to help people. Previously, Lei got his bachelor degree in Electrical Engineering from Zhejiang University, with a double degree in Industrial Design.
Michael Cantino
Michael Cantino worked in K-12 special education for 11 years before coming to Portland Community College in 2017. During that time, he specialized in supporting students with behavioral challenges, Autism Spectrum Disorder, and students with visual impairments. Michael is a Library of Congress certified braille transcriber and is skilled in the production of tactile graphics and 3D models for visually impaired learners. At PCC, Michael provides a broad range of supports for students experiencing disabilities, with a focus on assistive technology, alternative formats, and in-class supports. In addition to his work at Portland Community College, Michael is also a Research Assistant at Portland State University where he is studying the use of interactive 3D models to support visually impaired learners.
Equity and Citizenship Advocate: Leaders use technology to increase equity, inclusion and digital citizenship practices.
Visionary Planner: Leaders engage others in establishing a vision, strategic plan and ongoing evaluation cycle for transforming learning with technology.
Empowering Leader: Leaders create a culture where teachers and learners are empowered to use technology in innovative ways to enrich teaching and learning.
System Designer: Leaders build teams and systems to implement, sustain and continually improve the use of technology to support learning.
Connected Learner: Leaders model and promote continuous professional learning for themselves and others.
“As administrators, our responsibilities cover many areas, including technology, which has become a necessary component of living and work,” said Curt Mould, director of digital media, innovation and strategy at Sun Prairie Area School District in Wisconsin. “The world our students are walking into is increasingly global and diverse – and technology is often the leverage point needed to bring global and diverse ideas together. In this regard, technology can be a game-changer in our schools. We need a new plan to help operationalize our work for the long-term benefit of our students.”
1. Determine what the customer craves and deliver it. In the case of college and university students, there are limits. Balancing student wants and desires with what they actually need to be successful students and engaged citizens can, in fact, be extremely challenging. “The customer is always right” philosophy practiced by many businesses simply does not fit with the mission of postsecondary institutions. Instead, the role of educators is to advance and apply knowledge, facilitate the exploration of ideas, foster cognitive dissonance, prepare students as lifelong learners and productive workers, and even, hold them accountable for their actions or inactions. Ideally, the college experience should be transformational—helping students become the best person they can be. With that said, failing to align teaching methods, curriculum, academic programs, and institutional services with the needs and expectations of students is a perilous path.
2. Create unexpected value. Incumbent institutions tend to focus on known problems (e.g., student attrition causation factors, poor service delivery, cumbersome processes, undersubscribed programs, insufficient class availability). True disruption seldom occurs in this space. Creating value where it did not exist before or was not expected spawns disruption. In the private sector, such intuitive value ideation is seen in Disney’s “Imagineering” the attractions in its theme parks, Apple’s invention of the iPhone, and Airbnb’s alternative to staying with the multitudes at expensive, disturbingly uniform hotel chains. This is what the authors of Blue Ocean Strategy characterize as swimming in the “blue ocean”, where there are few, if any, competitors (Kim, W. C. & Mauborgne, R., 2005). No disruptor is found in the “red ocean” crowded with similar competitors.
3. Avoid being average. If your school is one of the elite, well-known few, with highly selective admissions, it is not average. However, the vast majority of colleges and universities do not fit this profile. They have to find other ways to distinguish themselves. A capstone student experience, an innovative curriculum, guaranteed internship placement or study abroad, digital career portfolios, or a unique pricing model represent just a few examples. While it would be ideal to find something that makes your institution distinctive throughout the nation or the world, that is highly improbable. A more attainable goal is to position your institution uniquely among your direct competitors.
4. Identify the potential for expansion. As it relates to student enrollment growth, expansion opportunities are usually found within one or more of four domains: (1) thorough penetration of your existing primary market, where the institution and its academic programs have a strong presence, (2) the introduction of new programs into your primary market, (3) promotion of the institution and existing programs in a new market, and (4) diversification—new programs and new markets. Each domain has inherent risks and potential rewards. Risk levels are illustrated in Figure 1 and are described here.
Primary market penetration possesses the lowest risk, requires the least investment of resources, and has the fastest return on investment. Depending on an institution’s primary market, this domain also may produce only modest new enrollments. Option two, mounting new programs in an institution’s existing primary market has risks associated with conducting the proper market research to determine student and industry demand as well as market saturation. Another common risk relates to the degree to which new program offerings are adequately promoted. An obvious upside to this domain is that the institution already has visibility in the market. Takingthecurrent program array to a new marketrequires the time and resources to develop a presence where none has previously existed. Sending recruiters to a new territory once or twice a year is woefully insufficient. Creating such visibility requires a sustained physical presence with area recruiters or alumni volunteers, targeted advertising, networking with schools and other organizations in the region, and strategic partnerships. Finally, diversification carries with it the highest level of risk because it involves assuming all the risks of launching new programs in a market with no prior visibility. If executed effectively, however, this domain can generate an abundance of new students.
5. Disruption always comes at a cost. It is true that your institution may create a disruption by leveraging existing technologies and human capital. Yet, no organization can avoid the cultural and real costs associated with unlearning old ways, creating new programs and business models, scaling innovations, or marketing a new approach. These costs must be weighed judiciously against potential benefits of such a paradigm shift. Once a decision is made to pull the trigger, the change process must be managed carefully with the upfront inclusion of key stakeholders.
6. Equate disruption with innovation, not extinction. The rise of educational disruptors can be unsettling. If disruption is simply perceived as a threat to the way of life in the academy or ignored, the results will be devastating for many higher education institutions. Conversely, if disruption pushes college leaders and enrollment managers out of their comfort zone and they reinvent their institutions, the educational experience of students will be greatly enhanced. In a time of creative destruction, the winners are those who exert extraordinary efforts to go beyond traditional norms, which is not always the early adopters of a new educational model or practice.
7. Successful disruptors pursue four disciplines simultaneously. The four disciplines translated into the higher education lexicon include low costs, relational connections with students, program innovations, and rapid time-to-market. Of these, student connections is the only discipline college and universities excel at consistently. To thrive in a future with a seemingly infinite number of nimble disruptive innovators, educators must compete in the other three disciplines as well.
the Center for the Advanced Study of Technology Leadership in Education – CASTLE
Vision
If a school’s reputation and pride are built on decades or centuries of “this is how we’ve always done things here,” resistance from staff, parents, and alumni to significant changes may be fierce. In such institutions, heads of school may have to steer carefully between deeply ingrained habits and the need to modernize the information tools with which students and faculty work
Too often, when navigating faculty or parental resistance, school leaders and technology staff make reassurances that things will not have to change much in the classroom or that slow baby steps are OK. Unfortunately, this results in a different problem, which is that schools have now invested significant money, time, and energy into digital technologies but are using them sparingly and seeing little impact. In such schools, replicative uses of technology are quite common, but transformative uses that leverage the unique affordances of technology are quite rare.
many schools fail to proceed further because they don’t have a collective vision of what more transformative uses of technology might look like, nor do they have a shared understanding of and commitment to what it will take to get to such a place. As a result, faculty instruction and the learning experiences of students change little or not at all.
These schools have taken the time to involve all stakeholders—including students—in substantive conversations about what digital tools will allow them to do differently compared with previous analog practices. Their visions promote the potential of computing devices to facilitate all of those elements we now think of as essential 21st-century capacities: confidence, curiosity, enthusiasm, passion, critical thinking, problem-solving, and self-direction. Technology doesn’t simply support traditional teaching—it transforms it for deeper thinking and gives students more agency over their own learning.
Fear
Another prevalent issue preventing technology change in schools is fear—fear of change, of the unknown, of letting go of what we know best, of being learners again. But it’s also a fear of letting kids have wide access to the Internet with the possibility of cyberbullying, access to inappropriate material, and exposure to online predators or even excessive advertising. Fears, of course, need to be surfaced and addressed.
The fear drives some schools to ban cellphones, disallow students and faculty from using Facebook, and lock down Internet filters so tightly that useful websites are inaccessible. They prohibit the use of Twitter and YouTube, and they block blogs. Some educators see these types of responses as principled stands against the shortcomings and hassles of digital technologies. Others see them as rejections of the dehumanization of the education process by soulless machines. Often, however, it’s just schools clinging to the past and elevating what is comfortable or familiar over the potential of technology to help them better deliver on their school missions.
Heads of school don’t have to be skilled users themselves to be effective technology leaders, but they do have to exercise appropriate oversight and convey the message—repeatedly—that frequent, meaningful technology use in school is both important and expected. Nostalgia aside, there is no foreseeable future in which the primacy of printed text is not superseded by electronic text and multimedia. When nearly all information is digital or online, multi-modal and multimedia, accessed by mobile devices that fit in our pockets, the question should not be whether schools prepare students for a digital learning landscape, but rather how.
Control
Many educators aren’t necessarily afraid of technology, but they are so accustomed to heavily teacher-directed classrooms that they are leery about giving up control—and can’t see the value in doing so.
Although most of us recognize that mobile computers connected to the Internet may be the most powerful learning devices yet invented—and that youth are learning in powerful ways at home with these technologies—allowing students to have greater autonomy and ownership of the learning process can still seem daunting and questionable.
The “beyond” is particularly important. When we give students some voice in and choice about what and how they learn, we honor basic human needs for autonomy, we enhance students’ interest and engagement, and we truly actualize our missions of preparing lifelong learners.
The goal of instructional transformation is to empower students, not to disempower teachers. While instructor unfamiliarity with digital technologies, inquiry- or problem-based teaching techniques, or deeper learning strategies may result in some initial discomfort, these challenges can be overcome with robust support.
Support
A few workshops here and there rarely result in large-scale changes in implementation.
teacher-driven “unconferences” or “edcamps,” at which educators propose and facilitate discussion topics, can be powerful mechanisms for fostering professional dialogue and learning. Similarly, some schools offer voluntary “Tech Tuesdays” or “appy hours” to foster digital learning among interested faculty.
In addition to existing IT support, technology integration staff, or librarians/media specialists, some schools have student technology teams that are on call for assistance when needed.
A few middle schools and high schools go even further and assign teachers their own individual student technology mentors. These student-teacher pairings last all school year and comprise the first line of support for educators’ technology questions.
As teachers, heads of school, counselors, coaches, and librarians, we all now have the ability to participate in ongoing, virtual, global communities of practice.
Whether formal or informal, the focus of technology-related professional learning should be on student learning, not on the tools or devices. Independent school educators should always ask, “Technology for the purpose of what?” when considering the inclusion of digital technologies into learning activities. Technology never should be implemented just for technology’s sake.
Males participate more frequently in courses taught by female instructors
Other studies show the opposite
Non traditional students participate more frequently
Instructors’ gender also returns mixed results
Class size as variable is important, smaller classes, more participation
Class participation – grading
Make the students grade themselves at the end of each class period. By making them grade themselves, they reflect and makes them more aware of their contribution.
0 – absent
1 – present but did not verbally participate
2 – verbally participated one time
3 – verbally participated more than once
4 – made an equitable contribution to discussion in terms of both quantity and quality
The well-known and established belief that smaller classes spur more participation.
Jay Howard maintain his sociological research in 20th centuries constants: physical classroom, no technology surrounding.
In the 21st century, clickers changed the opportunity for immediate feedback. They changed also the discourse of the traditional student participation and classroom discussion: https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims/?s=clickers&submit=Search
Traditional forms and techniques for discussion and participation
Weih, T. G. (2015). Discussion Strategies for the Inclusion of ALL Students. Online Submission, http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED561060
Don’ts:
call on student
instructor’s personality issues:
Does the instructor really care of what students have to say
lecturing does not predispose to discussion
The 10 second rule: students discuss in pairs the concept/question
Think-Pair-Share: discussion strategy before or after lesson, similar to 10 second but longer
Quick writes: write their thoughts and then share. Loose paper, names on top,
Recorder-reporter. Post-lecture. The person reps the group, who is working on a specific question. Each group different question.
K-W-L. what we know, what we want to learn, what we learned. Teacher instructs students that K = what they know, W = what they want to learn and L = what they learned. . work in small groups, but each student works on h/er chart, thus if student disagrees with rest of the group, has record. L is left blank for after the discussion.
Simich-Dudgeon, C., & National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, W. D. (1998). Classroom Strategies for Encouraging Collaborative Discussion. Directions in Language and Education. http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED435188
Using storytelling
Chen, W., & Looi, C. (2007). Incorporating Online Discussion in Face to Face Classroom Learning: A New Blended Learning Approach. Australasian Journal Of Educational Technology, 23(3), 307-326. Discussions and participation in hybrid environment
For each OTD topic, the instructor randomly assigns two to four student discussion leaders who are in charge of organizing OTD for the assigned week. Each of the discussion leaders is asked to generate one or two discussion questions related to the topic based on reading assignments. The use of student discussion leaders is a strategy to encourage active participation and help develop ownership of learning. Once student discussion leaders post their questions, other students are encouraged to contribute to the discussion by answering each question, commenting on the ideas of others, or asking questions of peers or the instructor for the next two days. When the week’s discussion is complete, the student leaders and instructor work together to summarize the discussion and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric. (p.242)
Implementation (p. 243):
preparation : On the first day of the course, the instructor introduces topics, how-tos, expectations, grading procedures, and required reading assignments for OTD, and organizes discussion leaders for each online discussion (2–4 leaders for each)
Opening and Responding: Posted discussion questions become open at the time of the class and students who are not the leaders are required to post at least one response per question within 48 hrs. During this time, the leaders facilitate discussion by responding to comments, raising questions, or redirecting discussion to encourage active participation and ensure the discussion is on track
Summary and Assessment: The job of the leader is to moderate, summarize discussion threads, and assess them at the end of the discussion. When the week’s discussion is complete, the leaders meet with the instructor to debrief and evaluate each student’s participation and contribution to the discussion using a scoring rubric given by the instructor. After the meeting, each leader posts his or her summary of the discussion to BBCMS and reports at the next in-person class.
D2L
Beyond CMS (D2L)
Discussions and participation in online environment
Darabi, A., Liang, X., Suryavanshi, R., & Yurekli, H. (2013). Effectiveness of Online Discussion Strategies: A Meta-Analysis. American Journal Of Distance Education, 27(4), 228-241. doi:10.1080/08923647.2013.837651
Beyond CMS (D2L)
Lin, P., Hou, H., Wang, S., & Chang, K. (2013). Analyzing knowledge dimensions and cognitive process of a project-based online discussion instructional activity using Facebook in an adult and continuing education course. Computers & Education, 60(1), 110-121. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.07.017 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360131512001819
111 results suggest that using Facebook is not necessarily harmful to a student’s learning performance. Adequate learning activity design and pedagogical goal setting could, in fact, exploit the social and information-sharing function of Facebook, thereby supporting academic learning (Gray et al., 2010). this study seeks to advance the understanding of adult learners’ behaviors in online project discussions using Facebook.
In the process of project-based learning, learners must utilize different kinds of knowledge (e.g., discrete declarative knowledge and dynamic procedural knowledge) (Lou, 2004). Meanwhile, students can develop higher level of cognitive skills for a specific domain as well as the ability to apply adequate knowledge to a specific domain or context during PBL (Barron et al., 1998; Blumenfeld et al., 1991).
118 Select driving questions or controversial issues as project topics: Blumenfeld et al. (1991) noted that driving questions could facilitate students to explore the project topic. In the exploration process, students must first collect information and propose diverse viewpoints on the project topics. They could subsequently filter out and reach consensus during online discussions. This process involves diverse and converging phases that can move students toward higher-order thinking (Jorczak & Bart, 2009).
Allow ample time for online discussion: Results of this study indicated that student online discussions lacked diversity in both knowledge and cognitive process dimensions. One possible reason could be that the allotted time for online discussions was not sufficient. Considering the multiple roles that adult learners play in family and/or work, they may not be able to respond to the discussions in a timely manner. Therefore, allowing more time for students to discuss may provide opportunities for students to demonstrate more diverse and deeper thinking (Scherling, 2011).
Provide a structured rubric for online discussions: Well-designed discussion guidelines and evaluation criteria, i.e., posting protocols or rubric for grading, could serve as scaffolds for student online discussions, which may, subsequently, lead to more meaningful learning (Gilbert & Dabbagh, 2005). Following that, more diverse type of knowledge and levels of cognitive process could be expected to be shown.
Pay attention to the effects that individual differences may exert on the learner’s interactions: Our results showed that, in the context of online discussions, females and older learners are more likely to have off-topic discussions than their male and/or younger counterparts. These findings are in accord with previous research that suggested effects of individual differences on learning as well as on the use of SNSs (Glynn et al., 2012; Muscanell & Guadagno, 2012; Price, 2006; Yukselturk & Bulut, 2009). Therefore, considering the potential effects that gender and age may exert on online discussions, instructors are advised to consider individual differences when grouping students for online discussions, as a balanced group composition of evenly distributed age and gender could be a better approach than a skewed distribution of individuals.
social interaction, which was considered as irrelevant discussion, may also leading to meaningful thinking and echoes the viewpoints from previous studies, which suggest social interaction can be a critical element in the CSCL environment (Abedin et al., 2011a, 2011b).
Incorporating online discussion in face to face classroom learning: A new blended learning approach
Wenli Chen, Chee-Kit Looi
Abstract
This paper discusses an innovative blended learning strategy which incorporates online discussion in both in-class face to face, and off-classroom settings. Online discussion in a face to face class is compared with its two counterparts, off-class online discussion as well as in-class, face to face oral discussion, to examine the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed strategy. By integrating online discussion into the flow of the classroom, learners are given dedicated time to foster a habit of critical thinking, reflection and articulating these online, which can subsequently seed further in-class oral discussions, and off-class online discussions. It is found that in-class, online discussion can provide a wider spectrum of discussion perspectives, equalise participation in discussion, and promote cognitive thinking skills and in depth information processing. However, the lack of face to face interactions and the need for sufficient time to do online postings pose challenges in implementing online discussion for face to face classroom learning.
Last year at G4C Nick Fortugno threw some controversy into the conversation about Minecraft by suggesting Minecraft was not a game but a toy. The proposed panel extends that conversation by asking what is the Minecraft experience, can it be defined or categorised and what as game designers and exponents can we take from understanding its zeitgeist and the impact it has had on the serious gaming landscape?
In 2012/23 at both GLS and G4C many presenters made jokes about including the obligatory Minecraft slide and for very good reasons. Minecraft is arguably a game of immense impact. It has been embraced as part of learning programs focussing on seemingly disparate areas from digital citizenship, history, coding and the maker movement. It is probably the first game brought into the classroom by teachers to leverage the out of school groundswell of existing player excitement. It’s impact is multi generational and perhaps more global than any game before it. The fan base and user community/ies are strong and well supported and exemplar of the potential Jim Gee describes for Big G game. This panel proposes to leverage that Big G space in the lead up to Games for Change 2014 and to honor the voices of its players.
Minecraft has been variously described as a game, toy sandpit, learning space, creative environment, virtual world, and game-infused service. But what really are the affordances of this blocky 16 bit program and how can we even begin to define its value to learning? Enter the Minecraft Experience, a global crowdsourced program managed by Bron Stuckey of The Massively Minecraft Project. People engaging in Minecraft activities about the globe are being invited to describe Minecraft in all its contexts and adaptations. The categories for these experiences will emerge from the crowd sourced content as members contribute thoughts, media, resources and questions to build the __Minecraft Experience__ evidence base.
This panel of notable speakers has been drawn together to answer provocative questions about Minecraft’s success and define its relationship to and impact on learning. The panelists have been chosen to represent play in many contexts formal education, informal learning, self-organised learning, schools and non-school contexts. They include game designers, educators, researchers, learners and parents who have each had a personal and professional experience of this and many other games.
Panelists take a position on the Minecraft experience and use the resources provided by members of the project to inform, support and evidence their case.
How are players, educators and researchers invited to contribute?
project wiki to prod, poke, stimulate and support crowd sourced content and dialog
live youth speakers on the panel
social media and wiki activity in lead-up using selected #minecraftproject
video inclusions of educators, parents, kids/youth arguments, evidence and questions
promotion of youth media pieces from existing YouTube etc to support and stimulate various provocative dialogs
livestream of the panel to global contributors with live feedback and questions.
Who could benefit from joining this project and attending the G4C 2014 panel session?
Educators seeking to understand Minecraft’s value to learning
Programs seeking to adapt Minecraft as part of a program of impact or change.
Game designers seeking to build in its wake
Anyone wanting to consider issues of fidelity, adaptation, constructionism, popular culture, and impact in gaming.
