Discuss

Which interactive technologies have the potential to be most widely adopted and why?

Edit

In one word, gaming. But I don’t mean that gaming is the interactive technology. It’s the technology that the games are built on that has incredible potential. Games are certainly one great way to engage students. But, the technology that provides the foundation for the games can also be the platform for inquiry-based learning, learning through challenges, team and collaborative learning and more. Gaming technology provides AI based choices for students and role-playing capabilities. The technology through it’s 3D visual representations and interactions can provide real-world situations for both authentic and relevant inquiry, challenges and projects but also for authentic assessment. The platform is highly interactive and already supports many concurrent learning styles and choices for interaction. The technology can provide customization of the experience by the student and allow choices for the student based on needs and learning interests. The platform can learn from the students behavior and adjust the learning experience to maximize outcomes. Today’s technology is optimized for and focused on games as entertainment. But, the preceding list and much more can be added into the commercial gaming engines. Or, maybe it’s time for a “OpenGame” open source project to be funded as an outcome of the Next Generation Learning Challenge!

Edit · Delete

Web 2.0 technologies enable interaction, information sharing and collaboration. I blog a lot about using Web 2.0 activities in teaching. http://ow.ly/22Dhj

Just a few examples from a post:

Online Photo Sharing – Users have space on the web to share photos. Visitors to the site can comment on photos and photos can be linked to blog sites.

Blogs (Weblogs) – Online journals that are usually updated regularly and are viewed in reverse chronological order. Some blogs are strictly individual observations or updates about family and friends and some are used to make political statements, promote products, provide tutorials or answer frequently asked questions.

Wikis (Community editable websites) – A Wiki is a Web page that can be viewed and modified by anybody with a Web browser and access to the Internet. Wikis are particularly effective for collaborative group projects. Shareable documents – Give users the ability to create and share documents on any Internet-connected computer.

Social networking websites – Online social networking involves connecting and sharing information with other people on the Internet. Sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter are specifically designed to connect individuals and groups directly with others who share common interests.

Social bookmarking sites – Sites such as de.licio.us and Technorati, applications that let users add their own keywords (or tags) to Web pages and blogs.

Edit · Delete

I agree with Bill that gaming is a huge new front. We are working in Blue Mars the new high def MMO to create games that engage the public in scientific inquiry and investigation.

With an NSF-funded grant to study the types of game elements and social supports in gaming that foster science learning – we have created a prototype game called Martian Boneyards in the land of Arcadia in Blue Mars.

In the first few weeks, with very little promotion, we already have hundreds of players working together to solve a scientific mystery. Come check us out at http://www.edgearcadia.com

Edit · Delete

Gaming engines have great potential in education to provide engagement for those averse to book reading.

For now, I’d have to agree with those who have already pointed out that gaming is much less efficient that other learning methods in terms of time spent by students. (I did check you out.) It’s certainly better to be gaming educationally than to do WOW so I’m not completely against the idea.

In terms of the posed question, I’d have to agree that gaming technology is the most likely to be adopted because it’s mature, widely understood, and engaging.

A more important question is which online technologies will produce the most learning gains with the least expenditure of student time and school funds, will be ready soonest, and are most scalable.

The costs of creating realistic games are astronomical. No one really knows if the learning gains are worth the effort. The huge downloads required to install games may limit access. So may the video capabilities required of the student computers. The development times tend to be long.

It’s an exciting field worthy of investigation. Let’s hope that it will bear fruit.

I would like, nevertheless (as a scientist), to offer a contrary opinion regarding using games to learn science. We all recognize that learning science involves two parts: content and process (excessively simplifying).

Many tools, both low and high tech may be applied to learning content. Games can do so too. The best way to learn process (the nature of science and scientific thinking skills) must be to do science. In a phrase, “Be a scientist.”

The National Research Council made clear that to learn the processes of science, students must encounter data from the “material world.” That’s not what games do. Furthermore, students learn about the nature of science best when they take their own individual data.

I’ll extrapolate from these conclusions to another. Students who begin to understand the true nature of science also are more likely to comprehend the content and to remember it. Science becomes less of a memory game and more of an exciting adventure in the real world.

We must be very careful that science learning games do not fall into the same trap as animated simulations of experiments. These virtual “labs” mask the nature of science and may mislead students into believing that science is something that it is not.

Although I certainly do not believe that it will be the number one answer to the question posed, I do believe that Java is the technology that can resolve the issue of how to deliver real science experiments to students in a manner that is engaging, inexpensive, safe, multi-platform, and scalable. It’s been doing so for ten years now and is one of the most readily available secrets of science education. It works.

One urban school with a 60% poverty rate used it without any fanfare and found that their 50% science pass rate increased to 66% in a single year. One in three failing students turned into passing students. Students did extra work because it engaged them in real science. And I think that we can do even better.

Games will be useful and fun. However, doing real science is how students will learn science. In the time that students do one hands-on lab, they could be doing 20 real science experiments and grasp how science works much better than any simulation, game, video, or textbook can help them do.

Stop by our old-fashioned web site at www.smartscience.net to find out more.

Edit · Delete

To answer the question specifically: technologies that show the potential to be most widely adopted will have a combination of network effects, a sticky user experience, and a low-resistance path-to-market that focuses on users and circumvents institutional decision making.   Student-centered web services like Chegg, CourseHero, Cramster, Notehall, Zinch, Unigo, GulliverGo, ULoop, and others have the chance to get the widest distribution.  

We can also assume that any innovative product will have highly social elements that tap into network effects.  Monetization does not necessarily follow distribution, (though Chegg is killing it).  The easiest way to monetize is to sell a product to the user or get in the lead gen game (like myedu.com did), but it’s also the easiest way to lose focus on bringing innovation to education.  In order to fully monetize the user base the service will need to offer products to the institution, using the extensive student distribution as a lever.  Zinch has this model, though it also plays the lead gen game.  The most high-profile company to pull this path-to-market off in the commercial world is Yammer.   When it comes to the thesis of Next Generation Learning, NextGen seems to skip the fact that consumer-focused products with sticky and simple user experiences will win big and be able to translate that into a new learning platform.  In particular, Watermelon Express has executed well on their product development. Grockit is also making a bold play with a similar test-prep like point of entry, but with a clear platform for a “DIY” Adaptive Learning Environment with gaming mechanics.   When it comes to course management products, either a disruptive model will have to back it’s way in or the new new thing will have to have an open-source distribution model with a value-added services business supporting it.  There’s simply not a real economy around EduPunks for the forseeable future, institutional adoption processes are slow and painful enough to kill any start up, and Blackboard is out to push out or scoop up anybody that gets traction.  In particular, I have hopes that someone will hone in on an opportunity around real-time classroom participation through the form of backchannelling here.  Drew Harry at MIT has open sourced his backchan.nl.  HotSeat came out of Purdue but I’m not sure how they plan to spin it off.  The good part about education is that there are lots of people willing to collaborate all across the world.  

I made this a blog post at:  http://bit.ly/daj8cl 

Edit · Delete

For the record, I had elegant paragraphs in the last comment but the comment box ate them.  Please disregard any clear idea breaks…..

Edit · Delete

@Harry

Many of the points you make are so true regarding the learning potential of games in the sciences. I just finished my Masters Thesis which focused on the deficiencies of online labs and the need for what I call Authentic Virtual Labs. I do, however, believe that all of the things that you rightly point out are needed for students to truly learn the process of science can be provided through games and the virtual worlds they can create. There are some capabilities missing in todays technology but the gaps are quickly closing. For instance, the games can be linked to real-world data collection devices and that data can then be used in the games and simulation by the students in their roles as scientists or carrying out scientific processes to progress in the game. I propose a mashup of todays virtual world and gaming technologies with new interface technologies, visioning technologies and real-time interfaces between virtual and real worlds. All of this and more is commercially available or will be soon. The one last piece is the full control of all parts of the inworld avatar by the real-world student with full interactivity between the avatar and inworld objects. That’s coming but not here yet.

Edit · Delete

I think something that is able to personalize the learning so that students can explore a dynamic learning pathway of their choosing. For example, to master writing, I may want to go to a video, collaborate, write a composition, then go back to a skills lesson once I’ve realized areas I’m low. Next, I may head to the cafe for a live reading of the essays. Or I go to an improv class where the topics are used to generate collaborative writing. For math, maybe I need direct instruction, or interactive modules that I replay over and over. Then I head to the museum or a library where they have a hands on class on using math with manipulatives. Next, I may take a test on what I learned in a gaming environment and a real life example. Like wikipedia, real people can continually add to the pathways, so that the learning is always the latest, and based on interest and diverse activities.

Edit · Delete

It seems to me that the institution is a major hurdle in realizing this completely. Why is an education broker needed to ensure the learning occurs, if the computer is the delivery and assessment system? Isn’t it possible that we lose millions of great ideas, and innovative thinking as a result of our gatekeeper system in place? Why should it matter if I passed 8th grade, if I can log on, and pace through the “curriculum” at break-neck speed on one area that I have a great talent for doing? What if the school-work could double as possible cash? Maybe I work in tandem on a project with a computer company, and I get paid for my insight, as well as getting credit? Or maybe ad agencies license work of students with unusual solutions?

Edit · Delete