Next Generation Learning Challenges is accepting grant applications through June 8, 2012.

Next Generation Learning Challenges (NGLC) is an exciting grant awarding collaboration between five education technology organizations, and they are currently on their third round of grants. Last year, NGLC awarded $17.5 million in grants to 48 organizations, including research universities, community colleges, start-up companies, state agencies, associations working with school districts, and more.

NextGenLearning.org

The NGLC is governed by EDUCAUSE, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the League for Innovation in the Community College, the International Association for K-12 Online Learning, and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

Wave III: Breakthrough Models for College Readiness and Completion
The latest round of grants (accepting proposals through June 8 of 2012) is focused on the development of new blended learning models that will, “provide support to educators and innovators who have a coherent vision for highly engaging learning pathways that span secondary school through postsecondary completion and that will prepare students for economic, social, and civic success.”

Wave III features two separate Request for Proposals: one for the postsecondary level and one for the secondary level (grades 6-12). The NGLC’s vision for Wave IIIa, “Breakthrough Models for College Readiness”, is to identify fundamentally redesigned scalable models that combine the best aspects of brick and mortar and online learning to result in more personalized learning and demonstration of subject mastery (application instructions here).

Wave IIIb grants will “spotlight innovative delivery models that generate high student outcomes at an affordable cost”, encouraging the development of next generation online and blended programs leading to associates or bachelor’s degrees (application instructions here).

Past Grants
The first two rounds of grants focused on “Building Blocks for College Completion”.

Wave I consisted of four challenges: deployment of open core courseware, scaling of blended learning programs, encouragement of deeper learner engagement and mobilization of learning analytics. Winners are listed here.

Wave II was comprised of two interdependent elements – next generation approaches to learning content, and next generation assessments. Winners are listed here.

Future Opportunities
NGLC appears to be in this for the long haul, so if you have some creative ideas about technology solutions that help students prepare for college or succeed in their postsecondary education, keep your eye on the Next Generation Learning Challenge’s website for future grant opportunities.

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
8 Great TED Talks About The Future Of Education And Teaching
10 Internet Technologies Educators Should Be Informed About – 2011 Update
Online Schooling and The Democratization of Education

Emerging technologies are not limiting teacher’s roles – they are expanding their tool kits, improving their availability, and empowering them in many exciting new ways.

Imagine a class of 50 students preparing for a biology exam on a digital learning platform. Patterns emerge from the students’ annotations in the cloud: perhaps more students are highlighting and discussing sections in the book related to Mendel’s Model of Inheritance than any other topic. From course analytics, the instructor can see which discussions are more likely to lead to an improvement on the exam, and which ones are correlated with discussions and exam outcomes in other subject matter. The result: the instructor can tailor his or her course curricula, and student understanding of Mendelian inheritance improves.

With more colleges using predictive analytics, this scenario has powerful consequences for the efficacy, affordability and relevance of a new model for the American university. There is always skepticism that disruptive technologies will harm the core of a profession, from music videos’ disruption of pop music to the online world’s perceived threat to quality journalism. In the case of higher ed, digital learning and the insights from these technologies can only be successful by improving the human element of education and enhancing the role of the professor, not diminishing it.

A visualization of what the Internet looks like, in its entirety. With dramatic increases in digital information-sharing between students, mapping collaborations between peers in a single college course can look similarly complex. Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons.

In Arizona, Rio Salado College has been able to predict via online activity – with 70 percent accuracy by the eighth day of class – whether a student will score a C or better in a course, according to the Chronicle of Higher Education. In one Harvard course, software algorithms match up students in groups based on their performance. Recently, eCampus News highlighted the role of analytics technologies in campus decision-making as one of the top educational stories of 2011. Many predictive analytics systems in education are currently focused on student actions in a vacuum, such as how often they view online material compared with their assignment completion rates.

As technology evolves, predictive analytics can be used to increasingly improve our understanding of student communication (whether to other students or professors) and the impacts on comprehension and subject retention. That will in turn give educators more knowledge on how to structure course curricula, develop assignments, and incentivize student engagement. This is particularly important as higher education faces a crisis of relevance to the increasingly advanced, globally competitive job market new college graduates are entering.

As Inside Higher Ed wrote: “A growing body of research has all but obliterated the notion that distance education is inherently less effective than classroom education.” Indeed, a well-publicized review by the Department of Education – updated last year – of more than 1,000 empirical studies of online learning found that students performed modestly better than those receiving face-to-face instruction.

When more courses incorporate digital materials, there is less and less distinction between in-person learning and digital learning. Far from replacing the human aspect of education, this improved understanding of communications patterns and comprehension can lead to greater empathy and a more productive classroom. Consider two important factors:

• Technology can make instructors more accessible, not less. The rapid evolution of technology is helping instructors develop curricula more effectively and run courses more efficiently. Be it through the predictive analytics mentioned earlier or more powerful mobile devices capable of running sophisticated interactive educational software, technology continues to improve the efficiency and accountability of curriculum design and student assessment – in addition to simplifying the administrative demands of running a class – allowing professors more time to devote their attention to students on an individual level.
• Technology is removing the barriers to entry of communication. “Frictionless sharing” is a big concept in social networking. It also has applications for the classroom. Simply put: as new features like annotations or rating systems make it easier for students and educators to quickly give and receive feedback on material, classroom participants’ information sharing rises on a massive scale. When fostered in the right learning environment, that information sharing leads to productive discussions that result in better comprehension, plus new insights for teachers.

The conversations around education technology are probably not forward-thinking enough. Last month, IBM predicted the end of the digital divide in five years, as well as the availability of new smartphones linked directly to your brain. Think of the likelihood of mind-reading iPhones and Internet availability to seven billion people, and it may help to put our current frame of mind around ed tech into context. It can also put into context every generation’s concerns about disruptive technologies.

Looking back, video didn’t kill the radio star; it created a new vehicle for artists to reach and connect with their fans. For higher education, rapid advances in technology suggest that far from being replaced, the human element of learning will become more understood, more crucial and more effective. This monumental shift is a win for students and a win for their future employers.

Guest post by Andrew Clark, CEO of Bridgepoint Education. Clark was a recently featured speaker on technology’s effects on the landscape of higher education, at the HigherEdTECH Summit of the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas.

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Online Schooling and The Democratization of Education
Discussing The Future of Electronic Textbooks And Digital Course Materials With Jill Ambrose
10 Internet Technologies Educators Should Be Informed About – 2011 Update

Elaine Hirsch is kind of a jack-of-all-interests, from education and history to medicine and videogames. This makes it difficult to choose just one life path, so she is currently working as a writer for various education-related sites and writing about all these things instead.

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
The Changing Dynamic of Online Education
Succeeding With Reverse Instruction – One Instructor’s Inspired Approach
Getting The Most Out Of Student Blogging Assignments And Instructional Blogging

A look at the learning science behind flipping the classroom, through the lens of a fictional tale.

Last week we were introduced to Kieran Mathieson and the CoreDogs approach to the flipped classroom. This week we further explore the resources Mathieson has made available through CoreDogs, and how to leverage Reverse Instruction techniques to improve student learning outcomes.

Kieran has produced a variety of media to help to introduce and explain CoreDogs and the advantages of the flipped classroom, such as this video, “Teaching Web Stuff is Hard”. Another fun way in which Mathieson has introduced these ideas is through a story titled, “A Tale Of Two Students”, in which fictional university students Mike and Eric take the same “Web100” Web Development course with two different professors who use very different approaches to instruction.

While the tale is fictional, it is firmly grounded in Mathieson’s successful utilization of reverse instruction and what he has observed while employing the technique. In it, he offers insights into the learning science that informs the successful outcomes that flipping the classroom can help to produce.

Fictional instructor “Prof. Ishenul” uses the traditional lecture-based approach to delivering course content, using a standard, robust (i.e. lengthy and large) text book from an academic publisher. In contrast, “Prof E. Fective” uses on enhanced online textbook that covers the core concepts of web development in depth, and is organized around tasks, rather than specific technology concepts. Professor Fective’s course is blended, or “hybrid” - combining online learning and exercises with face-to-face classroom time that focuses on reinforcing the content learned by working through assignments and helping students understand material that challenges them.

The following excerpt from an interview section in the story provides a sense of the shortcomings that can sometimes come with traditional lecture based course delivery:

Ann: How did the course go this semester?
Mike: Not good. The professor went so fast, it was hard to keep up. His examples were complicated. I didn’t understand them.

Ann: Did you read the book before class?
Mike: Sometimes. But there was too much to read. Maybe 50 pages per class. Usually, I only had time to skim. When I did read, there was so much going on that I got confused.

Ann: How about the projects?
Mike: People goofed off. Jim, on my team, left all the work to the rest of us. I didn’t want to grade him low on participation, because we’re going to be in other classes together.

Ann: Did Jim learn much?
Mike: No, but he got a good grade. He pulled all-nighters before the exams. I don’t think he remembers much now, though. Don’t ask him to make a Web site for you!

Ann: Do you know how to make a Web site?
Mike: I hate to say it, but no. I know some HTML tags and stuff, but I don’t know how to use them to build a site. Maybe I’m just not cut out for this.

In contrast, these excerpts from an interview with fictional student Eric give a sense of how the flipped classroom approach can be quite challenging, but highly effective:

Ann: How was WEB 100?
Eric: Tough. More work than I expected. Stuff to turn in every week. You had to keep up.

Ann: Ever get frustrated?
Eric: (Laughs) All the time. Making good Web pages isn’t as easy as it looks. When you use the Web, you don’t see all the work that goes into a good site. You have to think about goals. You have to learn how to find bugs and fix them. The HTML and stuff are only part of it.

Ann: What about the class itself? The textbook and such. Was that OK?
Eric: … The class was mostly online, easy to fit in my schedule… the thing that stressed me was that I had to do a lot of exercises. It helped being able to meet Prof. Fective in person. We could sit down and go over something.

Ann: Anything you particularly liked about the course?
Eric: Yes, I did like making my own site, the eMe. It’s pretty good. You can check it out. It’s at http://erictawney.com. Oh, and CoreDogs was the cheapest textbook I’ve ever had. Some profs make me spend ten times what I spent on CoreDogs, for books I hardly used.

The story goes on to provide further insights into the theory and benefits of reverse instruction. The following edited content from ”A Tale Of Two Students” is intended to convey some of the ideas shared there, and whet the reader’s appetite to click over to the CoreDogs web site and learn more!

Active Skill Learning
Research in the learning sciences suggests that the traditional approach has significant limitations, and the frustrations expressed by student “Mike” are common with the traditional model. Prof F. used a different approach, combining features of deep learning, outcome-based learning, and active learning. Let’s call it Active Skill Learning (ASL).

ASL courses are designed around learning outcomes. The author/instructor identifies skills students should possess by the end of the course, and then works backwards. Only material that helps meet course outcomes is included in the course. CoreDogs is a good example of outcome-based learning. Each chapter is about a task, like “Creating a Web page with text.” The chapter covers only the HTML tags and CSS rules that help with that task, and nothing more.

Traditional publishers don’t design textbooks around outcomes, instead they attempt to cover every topic that professors might think important. The result is that so many topics are included that few if any can be covered in depth. The course is “a mile wide and one inch deep.” Students only have time to learn facts, they don’t really have time to learn how to apply what they’ve learned.

Combining Summative And Formative Learning
Researchers often contrast “summative” and “formative” learning assessment and feedback. Summative feedback is separate from learning, with the goal of measuring how much students have learned in the recent past, versus formative assessment, in which students submit work, and get feedback about what could be improved. Students are then able to correct and resubmit their work. Summative and formative feedback can work best when used together. Formative feedback to help learning, and summative measures to assess student achievement. However, many professors only give summative feedback.

ASL makes heavy use of formative feedback. Students complete exercises every week, and submit them through the ASL software. Instructors assess the work, and ask for improvements. Students can change their solutions, and resubmit. The cycle continues until the grader is satisfied, and the student then gets a completion badge or other grade or ‘award’ for the exercise.

Wrapping Up
“A Tale Of Two Students” also discusses Deep Learning and Metacognition in the context of ASL and reverse instruction, and all these discussions are more in depth and informative than what we’ve summarized here, so please click over and give it a read.

Kieran Mathieson is currently working on creating the site flippedtextbook.com, where teachers can create their flipped classroom content. We look forward to sharing more about this as the site evolves.

In closing, you know the drill … we love to hear about your experiences with this topic, so please comment and share you thoughts, experiences, or questions. Thanks!

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Succeeding With Reverse Instruction – One Instructor’s Inspired Approach
7 Stories From Educators About Teaching In The Flipped Classroom
The Khan Academy (offering 1100+ free tutorial videos)

EmergingEdTech has been a fan of EDUCAUSE for years now, but this particular initiative had slipped under our radar until we came across it last week.

“While EDUCAUSE serves those interested in advancing higher education through technology, ELI specifically explores innovative technologies and practices that advance learning. As these innovations mature, ELI works with the larger EDUCAUSE community to integrate them into the higher education mainstream.” Check out their About page for a more complete overview.

The EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI) began as the National Learning Infrastructure Initiative, which began in 1994, when most campuses had adopted information technology to some degree for administrative purposes, but not many saw it as part of their learning environment. NLII was a part of Educom at the time, and sought to bring about systemic change in higher education by identifying how technology could facilitate effective teaching and learning. In August 2004, the NLII examined its position in the market and the changes that might the organization stronger, and this ultimately resulted in a transition to the EDUCAUSE Learning Initiative (ELI) as it exists today.

The ELI Web Page contains a breadth of Resources, including the following:

• Links to events, like the 2012 ELI Annual Meeting (to be held Feb 13 – 15 in Austin Texas, but it will also have an expanded online presence).
• Podcasts and Video presentations and interviews
• A variety of upcoming online Focus Sessions and Seminars noted on the Events page, as well as Proceedings from those past.
• Another ELI resource we like is the “Learners” page, which groups resources into 3 subgroups – Net Generation Learners, Adults, and Faculty.
• EDUCAUSE’s first e-Book, “Educating the Net Generation“, published in 2005 (but still an informative and relevant read), as well as a variety of additional resources.

Stop by the ELI site today and learn about the resource available there, and get involved if you wish!

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Do You Know About The Many Free Resources For Education Available from Apple?
The Definitive Source for Information About IT Issues Effecting Higher Education
Learning about OER – Open Educational Resources

Part two of our interview with CourseSmart’s Chief Marketing Officer.

Last week we published Part 1 of this interview, in which we learned a great deal about digital course materials and CourseSmart, and this week we continue this learning journey with Part 2 of the dialogue.

In this interview we examine the following:

• What is it going to take for electronic textbooks to become the dominant distribution method, displacing paper text books?
• What are the key hurdles that digital textbook vendors have to overcome to make electronic texts the norm rather than the exception?
• Are there key areas, like specific academic subjects, types of institutions, or other market segments that have seen a higher adoption rate with digital course materials?
• How much of a challenge does reading device dependence present in terms of the proliferation of the eTextbook?
• What kinds of exciting developments can we look forward to from CourseSmart in 2012?

Our thanks once again to Jill Ambrose and CourseSmart for providing this in depth interview!

As always, readers are encouraged to share their insights and experiences with this topic, so please don’t hesitate to comment and share your thoughts!

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Learning All About Electronic Textbooks In A Video Interview With CourseSmart CMO Jill Ambrose (Part 1 of 2)
The Education Technologies That Educators Believe Can Have The Biggest Impact On Student Learning (Survey Results)
The year of the iPad in Education: they’re being distributed in more schools every day

Catching up on today’s digital textbook market and eTextbook functionality with CourseSmart’s Chief Marketing Officer.

This week on EmergingEdTech we’re delighted to publish an interview with Jill Ambrose. This is the first of a two-part video conversation in which we discuss CourseSmart’s offerings, and the future of the evolving electronic textbooks marketplace.

In this interview we discuss:

• eResourses – the future of digital course materials
• CourseSmart’s innovative new Offline Reader functionality
• Their effort to ensure device-agnostic access, making electronic textbooks and other digital course materials “easy to access anywhere, anytime, on any device, in the environment you’re already in”
• CourseSmart’s extensive offerings (they offer over 90% of the core textbooks in use in higher education institutions in North America today!)
• CourseSmart’s free instructor-specific web site and the functionality it offers
• And much more …

We hope you enjoy the interview and all it has to offer, and come back for Part 2, in which we discuss the following topics:

• While electronic textbooks are certainly gaining momentum, they still have a long way to go to overtake the printed textbook market. What are the key hurdles that digital textbook vendors have to overcome to make electronic texts the norm rather than the exception?
• Are there key areas, like specific academic subjects, types of institutions, geographic regions, or other market segments that are experiencing a higher degree of success than others in terms of gaining a foothold with digital course materials?
• How about reading device dependence? How much of a challenge does this present in terms of the proliferation of the eTextbook?
• What does the future of digital course materials look like?
• What kinds of exciting developments can we look forward to from CourseSmart in 2012?

Thanks again to Jill for taking the time to work with us to put together this insightful and informative interview.

Remember, other readers and viewers appreciate reading observations and feedback from colleagues, so please don’t hesitate to drop a comment and share your thoughts on this topic!

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Instructional Designer James Hill Discusses the Ups and Downs of Technology (Interview)
10 Internet Technologies Educators Should Be Informed About – 2011 Update
The year of the iPad in Education: they’re being distributed in more schools every day

Further examining educator’s technological preferences and commentary.

In Sunday’s post we examined some of the results from last month’s survey, which looked to gather educator’s insights into the question, “Which technologies can most impact student learning?” Today we wrap this up by looking at some additional data from the survey.

Top Votes for “Second Most” and “Third Most” Potentially Impactful Technologies
After focusing on technologies ranked as “Most Impactful” in our last post, we now move on to those chosen as either 2nd or 3rd most impactful. For “second most impactful“, one technological concept rose well above all the others: Technology-enabled Project Based Learning. For “third most”, a different technology rose slightly above all the others: Tablet Computers (iPad, etc.).

Here’s some of what educators had to say about why each of these technologies can make a meaningful difference in student learning:

Technology-enabled Project Based Learning

“Project based learning is the future of education as it allows for creativity and direct[s] students to learn what is needed to be successful, with the support of technology.”

“Project-based learning moves students into the realm of create, analyzing, and collaborating.  These skill are vital as they get ready for the “real world” and using technology to accomplish this will increase engagement, motivation, and involvement on their part.”

“Student based projects really touch on all 21st century learning skills”

Tablet Computers (iPad, etc.) 

“The possibilities for tablets [are] unlimited as far as I can see.  The flexibility, functionality, and usefulness of these are just now being explored.”

“Mobile and tablet will shape the way learning is delivered, not only for distance students, but on campus as well. They will promote a kind of engagement that has not been seen before. Although there are risks, the net benefit will be [a] higher standard of learning and efficiency.”

“Tablet PC’s are a gut call.  They haven’t been around enough to know for sure, but they [can] be used for inputting, sharing, retrieving, storing, and outputting information in a simple to use & portable way.  I’m betting these will be the biggest game changer since the Apple II.”

“ipad – innovative must have resource”

Combined Votes
The one thing that jumps out when we add votes for Most, Second, or Third most impactful and rank the technologies based on total combined votes is that “Technology-enabled Project Based Learning” moves from the number 9 slot (in this ‘most impactful‘ category ranking) to number 2, further supporting it’s importance.

(Please click on the pic to open a larger image)

 

Does the ability of education technologies to make an impact on student learning vary widely for different grade levels and/or in different subjects?
Nearly two thirds of survey participants responded “yes”. If we run this survey again next year to see how trends evolve, we’ll offer an incentive to get more feedback, which should yield larger sub-sets of data, which will then allow for easier comparison and contrast of how educators at different grade levels perceive the potential impact of different technologies.

Thanks again to all survey respondents for completing the survey and providing this great feedback!

---

Note to readers who submitted feedback to the 11/6/11 post, “iPad App Developer Seeks Teacher Input On New App (Plus, Win The App For Your School By Naming It!)” – Mobile Simplified has announced the winner of the app naming contest – click on over to the post and scrool down to the comments to read more!

---

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
10 Excellent iPad Applications for Teachers
The Education Technologies That Educators Believe Can Have The Biggest Impact On Student Learning (Survey Results)
Using The iPad As A Digital Whiteboard (Plus 4 Cool Free Apps To Try It Out) 

Survey results indicate several specific technologies as those that we should be investing in and focusing on if we want to effectively leverage technology in education.

Tough economic times have more people questioning what we are getting out of technology spending in our schools. Unfortunately, results are often being sought in overly broad terms, like improved grades and graduation rates, without trying to more directly relate technology program goals to specific outcomes.

One thing that frequently seems to be either lacking or overlooked in many of the school technology programs we read about is input from those who are responsible for leveraging these technologies in instructional application. Are teachers integral to the planning, rollout, and accountability cycles for these programs? Are administrators seeking their input about which technologies can have the biggest impact on student learning before they start planning and budgeting for large scale technology expenditures?

Last month EmergingEdTech ran a survey seeking input on this subject from teachers and their colleagues. In this article we will review some of the findings from that survey.

Respondents Profiles – Who Participated?
Before jumping into survey results, let’s take a brief look at the profiles of survey respondents. First, a look at their roles (respondents were permitted to indicate more than one role). Note that you can click on the picture to bring up a larger image.

(Click the pic for a larger image)

A small number of respondents also indicated other or additional roles, such as “Instructional Specialist”, “Instructional Coach”, and “Faculty Developer”.

Next, a look at the grade levels being taught by survey respondents. Over 70% of the respondents teach in High School or Higher Education. Perhaps it can be safely assumed that the level of interest in the potential impact of technology is greater in later grades, as older students can and should be exposed to a wider spectrum of technologies than younger students, for a variety of reasons.

(Click the pic for a larger image)

Examining Survey Results
Now to jump into the main issue – which technologies were selected by respondents as those that can have the biggest impact on student learning, and why? This graph shows a ranked analysis of which technologies were selected as most impactful (click on the image to bring up a larger view of the graph – one where you can read the text).

(Please click the picture for a larger image)

The top three selections were:

1. Professional Development
2. Providing every student a computer and Internet access
3. Mobile Technologies

Professional Development received the most votes by a decent margin. This is so frequently cited by educators (as in these survey results from earlier this year), yet often seems to be overlooked or shortchanged in technology implementations in our schools. Educational institutions and school districts spend large sums on technology procurement, but often fail to allocate sufficient funds and resources to train educators on how to use the tools and how best to leverage them in the classroom.

The fact that “Providing every student a computer and Internet access” was the second most selected response is encouraging in that it seems to indicate that teachers are in support of the many programs in our schools that are providing laptops, notebooks, or tablet computers to all students. Perhaps these investments are well advised – now if only we could put together more thoughtful assessments of how these may be benefitting students.

Note that open ended responses were allowed, but only two were received – “Learning Analytics” and “21st Century Learning Skills”.

Educator’s Comments
We asked respondents to indicate why they believe that the technology they selected can make the biggest impact on student learning, and they provided thoughtful feedback.

Professional Development

• “Teachers are the leaders in educational technology and its integration in the classroom. Until we can prepare them and get them to ‘buy in’ effectively, its impact will remain the same or lack progress.”
• “There are many ways to teach, many ways to learn, and many technologies (with more being added all the time).  Teachers need training & on going development to know which technologies to use with which subjects/objectives …”
• “Any one tech tool (ipad, google, etc.) is not as impactful as the acquisition of skills to utilize multiple technologies and to utilize technologies to collaborate with the world around you, near and far.”
• “Revamping how we teach is the only way learning is going to change.”
• “Our students can use technology. But our teachers need to educate our students in using the tools effectively …”
• “Teachers still have the power to determine what actually happens in the classroom. Effective PD is the key.”

Providing Every Student A Computer & Internet Access

• “The computer connected to the Internet is a great equalizer for those students in poverty, rural communities, or those without a strong support system to encourage learning.”
• “Provides 24/7 learning opps”
• “Not all students have access to technology at home – schools need to provide that for their students.”
• “Duh” (okay, not a particularly thoughtful comment, but slightly amusing, and on point!)

Mobile Technologies

• “Because mobile technologies are being carried into the classroom anyway, and have the capability to support every other category in the list.”
• “Students use their smart phones for everything. Students should be able to search for classes, browse a course syllabus, and register all through their phone. Once class has started, the instructor would have the ability to send class announcements via their smart device.”
• “By grades 7 and 8, most of my students have a SmartPhone of some sort.  Mobile tech offers great opportunity, and as the technology grows, it’s potential should expand exponentially.”

Continuing Our Analysis Of Survey Results
In Wednesday’s post, we’ll further examine survey results, looking at the technologies selected as second and third most impactful and some of the feedback provided regarding those choices. We’ll also look all the responses as a whole to see which technologies rise to the top when we combine votes for them across the three options provided (as either most, 2nd, or 3rd most impactful). Some of these results are particularly interesting, as technologies that did not get a lot of votes in the “most impactful” category prove to have more perceived potential than this initial analysis indicates.

A Note About The Number Of Survey Respondents
A key factor in the review of any set of survey results is knowing how many participants completed the survey. Response to survey was lower than hoped for – this site has been viewed by over 34,000 unique visitors in the 4 weeks since the post with the survey was published, yet only 66 educators completed the survey. Perhaps we should have offered an incentive, like a random give-away, but we wanted participants to answer genuinely and not just click through it half-heartedly in hopes of winning something. In any case, 66 educators spread across a spectrum of roles and grade levels provides a very useful and informative level of insight into the technologies that can matter the most.

What do you think about this? If you did not take the survey but still want to weigh in, please share your thoughts in a comment!

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
8 Great TED Talks About The Future Of Education And Teaching
The Definitive Source for Information About IT Issues Effecting Higher Education
10 Internet Technologies Educators Should Be Informed About – 2011 Update

A different approach to the question of whether or not technology makes a difference in student learning and outcomes.

We want to know what YOU think – if you are a teacher, or work closely with teachers in a supporting role, please take a few moments to answer these 6 brief questions about which technologies, or technologically-related actions or concepts (like Professional Development or ‘Flipping the Classroom’) you think can have the biggest impact on student learning. Then, please take a moment to provide some of your thoughts about why you think those specific technologies can matter the most.

Please click here to take the survey (thanks!)

The discussion and analysis of whether education technology expenditures are improving learning outcomes seems to be on the rise, and it is a valid and important question. No one wants to see increased spending without discernable positive outcomes.

Unfortunately, it often seems that “outcomes” are looked at from an overly generalized perspective - if tests scores aren’t improving, then technology must not be making a difference. While this makes some sense from a macro perspective, the reality of most large scale projects is that they are intended to meet specific goals, which in turn support the larger goal of a business or institution. The benefits of the project(s) are defined up front. When we look at test scores and grades as an indicator of successful expenditures, we’re ignoring the more immediate intended benefits of the implementations of each specific technology.

Some technologies are intended to engage – in those cases, we should be discussing how to measure ‘engagement’ and looking for results along those lines. Some technology exposure provides skills that translate to the work place and career goals - if that was an intended benefit of a given instructional technology rollout then we should be asking if that happened. For each technology project that is budgeted for and approved, we should be defining up front what the desired benefits are, and planning how to ultimately assess the effectiveness of the project at delivering those benefits. How will the technology help the students succeed?

Of course, this all starts from an assumption that a given technology will have certain benefits. Unfortunately, it seems that the perspective of one of the most critical stakeholders in education, the teacher, is often missing (or at a minimum, under-represented) in project and budget planning dialogue. Who better to provide insights into which technologies might make the biggest difference in student learning and outcomes? Gathering (and reporting on) that perspective is the main goal of the survey we are asking you to complete.

Thanks in advance for your time and your valuable insights! Please share this post with your colleagues, and encourage them to offer their input. In a couple weeks we will publish detailed analysis of the results of the survey.

Related Posts (if the above topic is of interest, you might want to check these out):
Education Technology Is An Enabler, Not A Magic Wand
8 Great TED Talks About The Future Of Education And Teaching
Let’s stop misspending education technology dollars