There is another MOOC that is being launched with connections to Stanford, NovoEd. One of the problems was how to manage free online courses with thousands of attendees or students. NovoEd seems to have a way to manage this problem by breaking down these masses into smaller groups.

One of the critical points of online education is how to dispense information and how students will demonstrate their mastery. Most options have been basically repackaging textbook material or serving as a medium for lectures – as anyone in education knows, these are very ineffective ways to instruct students as they do not allow for deeper learning.

NovoEd’s developers want to develop a platform that gears more towards collaboration. This is critical as students will be allowed to better demonstrate mastery and also, in a large group setting, will become more efficient in developing learning paths towards their ultimate goal with the study of a course.

Collaboration, as we have outlined, is a critical skill that will help shape 21st century learners. Platforms that allow for this will be more inline to help develop skills which will be in more demand for future jobs and industries and NovoEd’s team seems to be set on examining this trend and finding a solution. Read more at TechCrunch.

These bills are raising some concerns; most notably those regarding the supposed effectiveness of online education but also who should have access to public money. For an established giant in Florida, the Florida Virtual School (or FLVS) which has been in operation for over a decade now and has served about 130,000 students in 120 courses, this is an attack on their market. They surely do not want to lose out on their share of funding.

Yet the debate sheds light on more important notions; there should be a critical look at how effective online education can be and whether or not the public should be paying for it.

In regards to online education, its effectiveness varies and depends, in large part, on the students taking the course. Most of these systems basically take a textbook approach and digitize it – which hardly addresses a 21st century learning environment or the needs of students. We have outlined the “5 C’s of Educational Technology” as a means to establish some common ground when evaluating these systems and most of the time, these online educational courses fail to meet these guidelines.

Students need to be able to collaborate with one another, collect information, curate or update it, create content from their course, and communicate with one another. If the state assumes the right to award providers, who will evaluate the systems that are coming into existence? The best thing is to create competition, so we’ll see how these bills address any way to evaluate would-be providers.

Many critics of this movement say that this is not about providing better education, but about making a grab for profit. Indeed, there are a lot of charter schools that do fit the profile of simply going after public funding just to get profit whereas there are other charter schools that have lots of success. The same could be said for virtual education providers, but the state and the public should not be painted into a corner with a few companies and no competition. This is, in fact, the very model that is holding up FLVS at the moment and they do realize that with more money comes more incentive which means more competition. This also means more innovation for students and the rest of the “market” out there for educational needs.

A lot has to change within the online side of education. The modalities are still not as dynamic as the 21st learner, nor do they fit the needs of their students and futureproof any job markets going forward. In some ways, we have more of the same problems being carried forward from the traditional models into the virtual models. The difference is the overhead is cheaper and there is less capital required to get into the game. Legislators have to be careful, and there should be strong oversight and transparency, on what policies are formed now.

In the hands of our students, technology offers immediate access to information. Now, I’m not saying all of that information is particularly relevant to your class – just check out your students’ Twitter feed or take a quick glance at their Facebook profiles to find out how often the subject you teach gets mentioned. This means that from the perspective of most teachers technology becomes a distraction.

Consider two more words: “video games”. This is enough to make any teacher’s blood boil when those words are mentioned in any context of education. The fact of the matter is, we live in a new era where portable devices offer immediate access to not only information but also entertainment resources – video, music, podcasts. You name it, is all available at the swipe of a finger on a touch screen. But what about video games that can help students learn?

One such app that was brought to my attention, by a student of mine, is the Blueprint 3D app, available on iTunes. Currently the app is free, which is great because it gave me an opportunity to test it. In fact, my student suggested to me it would be handy when applied to examining or reviewing architecture for our AP Art History course. I thought this was a genius revelation because of the way the app was intended to be used could include an educational application.

First, how does it work? Developed by FDG Entertainment, Blueprint 3D gives the player a puzzle to figure out by turning, rotating, and lining up the image so that the puzzle’s true form is revealed. Using a 3D motion puzzle, the image appears “scrambled” which, after manipulation by the player using the touch screen on the handheld device, would become unscrambled when properly aligned. The game awards players for advancing through levels, unlocking achievements along the way. The social aspect of the game is integrated as when you are on an iOS device, you can share your score and achievements with your other friends through Apple’s Game Center.

A really cool addition to this though is the ability to create your own puzzles. The player has the ability to create 3D puzzles from images stored on their handheld device. That means any images you may have on your iPhone, for example, could be rendered into a 3D puzzle and played. You can even share these puzzles with friends – via Twitter, for example.

So, how can this apply to my class, you may be asking? Well, if you take a picture of an architectural feature, say the Pantheon in Rome, you could have a 3D puzzle made out of it and help students study for their upcoming Roman architectural exam. But it needs not stop there – you could render paintings and sculpture (even contemporary sculpture!) as well. You could have your students create a set of images for a chapter, for example, have them share the images and see who scores the highest. It would be a great way to have some fun reviewing for an exam and also addressing the needs of those kinesthetic learners in our classes who have the hardest time adjusting without the ability to manipulate images or ideas. If you teach foreign languages, you could even create images of words to help students learn to recognize vocabulary, perhaps in written sentences, but I haven’t tried this yet.

Still, the idea of “gamefying” your class’ subject matter is another way of making it relevant – and, gasp, fun! – to your students. This will help them become engaged more deeply in your class but also instill in them a curiosity for learning new ideas which is, ultimately, what we are striving to achieve.

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools

Powered by Twitter Tools