My name is Ryan Buchanan. I used to be an average Joe teacher. Then . . . I was changed. Now,
I'm an EdTech Strategist! Maybe . . . er, E-learning Consultant . . . perhaps, Instructional Designer.
What's that?! Hmmm. This . . . is my origin story.
I love it! Another great reminder. Or, perhaps, an exemplary primer for many young teachers.
The first paragraph on page 192 lays it all out and is some of the best instruction that can ever be given to a "teacher" (though, big brothers and sisters, parents, grandparents, leaders, coaches, co-workers, etc., could all benefit from this wonderful advice!): "The learning environment might want to keep the learner confused (i.e., in a state of cognitive disequilibrium) and leave it to the learner to actively deliberate and reflect on how to restore equilibrium . . . learners need to experience cognitive disequilibrium for a sufficient amount of time before they adequately deliberate and reflect via self-regulation (Lehman, 2012)."
I've watched many "teachers" jump to answer a student's question as soon as it is put forth by the student. This does two very negative things, in my opinion.
First, the student gets "no-cost" information immediately and effortlessly. The lack of "payment" or the student's own hard searching for the answer to the question (even if it is only a Google search) discounts the value of the given answer to the student's problem. We all know how much value we put on something that is free of charge. "一分钱一分货 or Yi fen qian, yi fen huo." (Did I get that right? One of my very favorite Chinese sayings.) The student, in my experience, is less likely to value the knowledge gained (if it is even considered "knowledge" in the student's mind) and less likely to value the source of that "knowledge" - our dear teacher - if information comes that quick and easy.
Second, the student is robbed of the feelings of self-efficacy, achievement, pride, and the subsequent dopamine that comes with discovering the answer on his or her own. It is that whole "Don't tell me! I got this. Just give me a minute." feeling that one gets in mental pursuit of an tricky answer. I believe that when that light bulb goes off, and you see it on the student's face, they have cemented a concept or bit of knowledge, purely because they have come to it all on their own. And, it is a beautiful thing!
I also love the digital attractiveness of our dear AutoTutor. I assume it may be individualized a bit depending on the student user. I used to ask my Saudi boys to download the mobile app Assistant (2014) as an English tutor & oral practice buddy:
They absolutely loved it! A pretty girl with a soothing voice is a great study buddy, digital or not.
When asked whether or not teachers will be replaced by machines, Sir Arthur C. Clarke once said, "Any teacher that can be replaced by a machine should be." Ominous words in light of AutoTutor. However, we are not yet to the point of strong AI that can sense a user's emotion to the degree a teacher should be able to. But that time will come, as certain as Gordon Moore's Law will keep predicting technological advancement. We'd better make darn sure that we're able to allow "puzzlement" emotions ("confusion" just has negative connotations for me) and be able to spot it when it happens.
I really liked how the authors refer to creating visuals as “encoding.” Although, I did think that it was rather quaint that they refer to “video camcorder [as] a convenient tool for students to practice creating and presenting ideas and events” (Smaldino, p. 55).
Rather than have my students perform PowerPoint presentations or English oral exams, I would have them create video projects demonstrating performance on their individual modalities, i.e. turbines, electrical, pumps, instrumentation, personal protective equipment, etc.. I really had to guide and coax them the first semester that I taught this. Students had never received this kind of assignment before. But the results were fabulous. (ANd, of course, the second semester I simply had to show the previous semester’s project to my new students and the competition was really on!)
Most of the students used their own iPhones, which I thought was a brilliant use of technology in the classroom. Without my asking or prompting, many included fading in titles, cool transitions, background music, dramatic skits, and even gag reels up there bloopers while filming their projects.
A brilliant and unconscious intuitive leap that the young men made was that their projects included the six types of visuals which can be encoded, as per our clever authors:
Realistic: Their presentations were quite realistic. They would use real footage of the pumps or turbines that they were demonstrating use up. And of course it was really them, the students, though some of them used some really cool photoshopping to dramatize their productions.
Analogical: By creating dramatic skits of how they might perform on the job, say for a personal protective equipment demonstration, they were making an analog of what could actually happen, though it was only similar to what would happen.
Organizational: Some would show instrumentation that would demonstrate maps and charts of their potential future worksites for their audience to get a better understanding of how this project was practical. One young gentleman who did this with great facility and professionality received an instant promotion from his future employer - as he shared the video on YouTube with his company!
Relational: Some students might even give statistics on how things might be safer if their performance was better. Modeling the whole “96 days on the job and no accidents” banners.
Transformational: Of course, since the projects were videos they were illustrating movements and change - sometimes in dramatic ways. For example, students might show how to disassemble an impeller on a pump. And then reassemble it. Or, one group simulated an accident, using fake blood, no less! Very creative.
Interpretive: The vocational school, of course, had an electrical modality. So, they often would include either the actual schematic diagram of an electrical circuit, or they might insert (somehow, I didn't even understand the video apps they were using at the time - but as they say, necessity is the mother of invention) actual graphic printed visuals into their videos.
I was not aware at the time that they were actual applying the six types of visual. But it just shows you how students can actually teach you more, sometimes, than you can teach them sometimes. Bravo boys!
I love how practical these articles are! And this one bullet points & gives incredibly practical examples of what Professor Wiggins is talking about.
My absolute favorite from the article, and debatably the most poignant, is the history task entitled "The Trouble with Textbooks" (Wiggins, p. 93).
In order to "[a]ssess students' ability to adopt a critical perspective," says Dr. Wiggins, this task asks students to read an excerpt from an "'odd' U.S. history textbook [my italics]" based on the American Revolution. Brilliantly, the set up of the tasks asks student to pose as an attorney. And, of course, they're supposed to be able to argue either side of the case for adopting this supplemental textbook - the progressive teacher or the angry parent. This sort of juxtaposition not only requires the student to look at the two extremes of the debate, but the way the questions and tasks are presented they must also consider a communist's viewpoint, a capitalist viewpoint, a rich man's (the bourgeois) viewpoint, a poor man's viewpoint, a Native American's viewpoint, a woman's viewpoint, a black man's viewpoint and a Chinese person's viewpoint. Wow! That is a lot to grapple with, dear learners.
Wiggins points out, as he does with previous points, that it is not enough for the student to "know" something. In this case, "[i]s the student aware of different ways of knowing?" The student must go beyond knowing and understand "other ways of making meaning."
These methods of questioning provided me with quite an awakening as an honors student many years ago. And while they are undoubtedly painful for young students (and their parents, unfortunately), they really require the student to learn about their own thoughts.
As Socrates meta-analytically pointed out, "The life unexamined is not worth living."
The foundation of learning!
Bravo again, and thanks for the reminder. Sometimes I really miss teaching, and you're not making it any easier, my Friend.
This article is meant as a demonstration of the developer's competence & creativity using Unity & Android SDK to create a mobile VR game application for Cardboard. The app consists of: a start interface; a play room, where the user may solve a familiar puzzle; and, a restart interface that congratulates the user's success & prompts another round of play. The article will also give the reader an idea of the relative ease of the process with which one can create from scratch & deploy a mobile VR app. Hopefully, the reader & user will be excited & inspired by the simplicity yet potential of mobile VR.
Contents
Unity skills employed in creating this app include graphic user interface design, motion mechanics, addition of audio for ambiance, sound/lighting feedback & the deployment to Android-based mobile. As a precursor to Unity workflow, the article demonstrates the developer's low-fidelity sketching. And following the low-fi sketching & Unity work, user testing is likewise documented.
Puzzler
Below is an end-to-end walkthrough of the completed Puzzler app.
Process Section Statement of Purpose: Puzzler is a mobile VR application to introduce “presence” to new VR users & educators which challenges them to solve a familiar type of puzzle in a new way.
“I want to find an exciting way to engage my teenagers so that they can learn and stay out of trouble during the afternoons.”
Crystal is a librarian at the local library. She’s seen many teenagers getting in trouble, lately, or simply loitering around the library with nothing to do. She’d like to have a way to engage teenagers with the emerging VR educational technology. But she's not sure how to do that. She wants to test VR out first and become competent with it (even learn how to create content) before she recommends it to her teenagers. She’s very excited about VR for her after-school programs.
VR Experience: Only hands off and word-of-mouth recommendations - Crystal's never put on a headset.
. . .
Sketches
Initial sketches include a very rudimentary interface in a simple yet very clear way to get the user immediately engaged in the puzzle game. Once the basic idea was in mind, the developer used color & style to enhance the potential design of the app interfaces & set the theme for the overall app.
Initial Low-fi Sketch
Iterated Low-fi Sketch
User Testing
User Test 1: Graphic User Interfaces
Initial GUIs
During the first test, the user was asked to a) identify the start/restart interfaces; b) comment on the scale of those GUIs; and, c) determine the use of each GUI. The user was able to identify the purpose of each GUI. The user suggested that the start panel was about the right size, but might be a bit too close. Based on user feedback, the developer backed off the camera a bit to allow the user a better, more comfortable vantage point.
During the second test, the user was a) cautioned about potential simulator motion sickness & what to do at possible onset; b) asked about the speed & feeling of the movement ("Do you feel sick, at all?") from the start GUI through the puzzle room to the restart GUI; and, c) questioned on the feeling of user height changes through the motion mechanics. The user responded that the speed felt correct & that no feeling of sim sickness occurred. Based on user feedback, no changes to motion mechanics were made.
During the third & final test, the user was asked to walkthrough the Puzzler game end-to-end. While playing, the user was asked a) if sound was identifiable & how the volume was; b) how the sound made the user feel; c) what the user's overall impression of the app was; d) about the distance placement of game objects (orbs); and, e) for any further comments or questions. The user responded that opening sound was identifiable ("crickets"), at a good volume & that in-dungeon play sound gave the app a "spooky" ambiance, as well as, made the user feel "anxious." The user also commented that, though there was no explanation at the play waypoint in the game room, the purpose of the game was discoverable quickly, easily mastered & would be a "fun little time-waster" (with several giggles). Based on user feedback, very minor adjustments were made to movement speed, sound volume & lighting to tighten up the game for final draft.
The opening interface gives the user the prompt to "Enter" the dungeon play room, if the user dares. This is meant to create a sense of apprehension & excite the user for what is to come in this VR experience. The user clicks on the "Enter" button & is "railed" into the dungeon play room.
Play
Play Waypoint
In the dungeon play room, there are five different colored orbs at differing distances & heights that give light & sound feedback if the user hovers their gaze over them. The five orbs give light & sound signals to the user in a random pattern that the user must match with clicks in order to win the game.
Success
Success & Restart Interface
When the user is able to click on the orbs in the correct order in which the orbs signaled, the user is moved forward to the success/restart interface & prompted to begin again with the "Once Again?" button.
Conclusion The developer's intuition & coaching (Udacity.com) on developing this simple game app served to produce an app that, after user testing, required only minor adjustments. While this app certainly does not show the scope & potential of VR, it can give new VR users a rudimentary idea of what is possible within Google Cardboard virtual worlds in regards to interfaces, motion mechanics, ambient & feedback sound, & overall VR presence. The reader may now have some idea of the developer's skills at creating a VR game using Unity & Android's deployment tools.
What's next?
After user testing & ad nauseam (pun intended) review of the product, it is clear that the app could be beautified to increase aesthetic appeal. Foliage will be added surrounding the dungeon room to create a better sense of immersed presence. Also, the developer will take advantage of the assets available to dress up the interior of the game room. Custom sounds will also be added to differentiate the app from the undoubted hundreds of other very similar apps.
Link to additional work
The developer is also at work building a VR EdTech startup. Current offerings & future developments will be available at: www.VReedomVentures.com
I believe that the most markedly brilliant insight of their guidelines is:
"Instructional Explanations Should Be Adapted to the Learner's Knowledge Prerequisites" (Wittwer & Renkl, 2008, p. 51)
While this recognition comes to thoughtful teachers, I believe, after a few years in the field, not all teachers are aware of the true force that "adaptive teaching for learning" has in the classroom (Wittwer & Renkl, 2008, p. 51). With that said, it must be acknowledged that with an average teacher's time and resources, the possibility of adapting to each child - in the way that current algorithms applied by companies such as Amazon and Netflix, not to mention Google Search, predict what the customer is looking for - is hampered by class size and traditionally organized subjects, i.e. 45 minutes for science, 45 minutes for math, 45 minutes for English, among other constraints.
Therefore, as the good doctors shrewdly point out, this is where "computer-based learning environments, so-called intelligent tutoring systems" come in (Wittwer & Renkl, 2008, p. 52). This is much more eminent to the average consumer today than it was in 2008, and so, bravo to our two German researchers for their incredible foresight.
Individualization, through e-learning modules (with their cool "choose-your-own-adventure" pathways!) and services such as Khan Academy (Links to an external site.), is the way all will learn in the very near future. The ability to design virtual "cognitive apprenticeship[s]" is imminent - and, indeed, one of the great objectives of my own company (Wittwer & Renkl, 2008, p. 52). Further down the page, the paper provide the evidence. When researchers provided tutors with "explicit information regarding the tutee's understanding prior to tutoring," outcomes where much better than the traditional alternative (Wittwer & Renkl, 2008, p. 52). This has been an important method employed by Montessori schools for a hundred years, where learners stay with the same teacher for three years and get to pass on portfolios to the coming teacher.
Again, with that said, I'm not certain our current established public school system is capable of the same feats that Google and Amazon (and even Montessori Academies) seem to master effortlessly. Of course, the analogy breaks down as these companies are only using prior knowledge to predict possible needs, wants, and desires of individual customers. I believe, though, that an innovative platform could be created to facilitated this kind of learning (perhaps it is already in existence at very high-end learning academies!).
And, though these concepts have become an intuitive part of my classroom organization, curriculum and instructional design, I greatly appreciate the reminder!
Developing Online Tutorials: The Methodology and the Reality
Eugenia Fernandez and Elizabeth Rubens
This article is well-written and perfectly timed. And what's cooler, it's still relevant, even though it was written in 2005 for the IEEE.
With that said, it does put a lot of responsibility on instructional designers, "[d]esign methodologies which focus on the pedagogical aspects of the tutorial content are less available to content experts, unless one is fortunate enough to work with an instructional designer" - my italics - (Fernandez, et al, 2005, p. 14). That is an exciting prospect, however, it is a bit daunting (yikes!), as well.
It is an extremely empirical paper. The layout of the framework (below), as well as the illustrative Figure 1, make it very clear the process to follow, even if one is not an instructional designer - which is us, though we are candidates.
Objective: I think that in the past, I have, as the text mentions of other faculty, "written down a list of topics or vague statements" in an effort to curate a learning model. I like the emphasis this article places on objective (indeed, as does our entire IDET curriculum - thanks ;)).
Specific Activities: This is quite useful for our group as we are in the process of this right now with a task analysis and breaking down the teaching/intro of VR into its incremental steps.
Types of Interaction: This is critical, and made me think a lot about how we will give feedback to our learners. I'm thinking some sort of VR social media - potential High Fidelity (Links to an external site.) or Altspace (Links to an external site.), in order for teachers to offer input and our tutors to provide feedback, all the while familiarizing the user with the medium of VR.
Assessment: This is a curious one for us, as our clients and learners are one and the same - innovative educators. How do we gently assess them in a way that is seen progress (not didactic) and will provide beneficial feedback to further their VR development skills? Perhaps the e-learning module, again, will be linked to VR social media.
Multimedia: This is the super exciting part and my favorite - really the whole reason I joined this program. My VR developer skills are advancing rapidly, and I believe, by the Spring semester I will be able to program and sculpt a virtual environment in which the educator-users will be able to learn how to introduce VR while inside VR. Sweet, huh?!
Identify Associated Documents: This is, of course, huge for our client-learners. The literature out there on VR is plentiful but probably a bit mysterious and, even, esoteric to a novice entering the field. We will have to be particularly careful while coding our website. Remember the old saw, "If you want to teach a man nothing, tell him everything"? I have a tendency to do this to my victims, er, clients when I am discussing the potential of VR. It is very important for our topic to be crystal clear and easily navigable at our supporting website.
Extensions: Extension links are the logical followers of the previous step. Again, I have a wealth of these, yet they need to be distilled and refined into tidy consumable digital meals for our users. I'm on it!
Time Estimate: Finally, and perhaps the most problematic because of the novelty of our endeavor - time to complete. Honestly, we are not aware. This will take some trial and error. And, it was one of the questions that we asked of our participants during our interviews. Estimates from participants and observers ranged from several hour-long workshops to six months of repeated exposure. This will be our experiment. I believe the time is shorter than most think, and necessarily depends on the educators pre-existing knowledge, values, and, most importantly, motivation.
Good, good stuff! Thanks for the module manual, my Friend. It shall earn its salt.
Responding to the Learner: Instructional Design of Custom-Built E-Learning - Neil Carrick
I'm not sure our group can actually do a needs analysis - especially as the technology we are researching is not mainstream, or even well-know, yet. I feel very much like Steve Jobs when he said that "people don't know what they want until you show it to them." Now, that, of course, seems quite arrogant. However, before anyone showed anyone a laptop, they didn't know they "needed" one. I would argue the a laptop is needed, according modern classroom standards.
Needs, the term "needs," seems to be a serious presumption, to me. And I'm genuinely not just trying to be argumentative, here. On page twelve, Carrick says, "[c]ustom-built learning is instruction with specific learners and a specific learning environment in mind." Well, if we all kept believing that, we'd never have moved beyond slates and church-house classrooms. This idea that we, as designers, must stay within the box is really counter-intuitive to innovation.
There is no specific environment. When Socrates was having his discussions & "designing" the way to instruct his students, they were not in a classroom.
Ah, I rant.
My point is that designers must be innovators. They must think beyond needs. Needs - in Maslow's terms simply means sustenance, shelter, and clothing - needs. We are not building to "needs." We are building to enhance information exchange.
One very important question to our own research on Virtual Reality (VR) occurred to me as I read Dr. Chi's abstract. Dr. Chi, describing her methods writes, "[s]tudies from the literature are cited to provide evidence in support of this hypothesis." Given the paucity of research in the domain of VR, and especially the scarcity of research on VR used by teachers in the classroom, could our group not do something similar?
The majority of the sources that we have found are secondary - literature reviews of literature reviews, meta-analyses, and conference reports. There is very little in the way of actual experimentation with VR in classrooms. Certainly, we will use and cite these sources to bolster our argument that VR may be useful to educators and learners who are well trained in its implementation. A thought - I'd love to hear your opinions on this.
Also, a very decent question comes up - which category does VR fall under, according to Dr. Chi's taxonomy?
I would argue, that depending on the virtual environment accessed, VR may be active, constructive, or interactive.
Chi suggests that students "steering and peddling a stationary bike while they travel through a virtual environment" are involved in an "active activity" (Chi, 2009, p. 76). I agree. Students have this option with many Cardboard VR apps. For example, students may explore a prehistoric jungle and discover names and simulated behavior of dinosaurs in the mobile app "Dinoland VR."Dinoland VR (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. Activating the device's accelerometer, gyroscope, and compass, the student can walk around the room, with three degrees of freedom, walk towards the approaching dinosaurs, pausing to view them, and, of course, backing up (walking backwards) if they are a bit frightened.
Something that has surfaced on the VR ocean only recently is collaborative VR. Using Altspace (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site., students may enter self-constructed (or mutually-constructed) virtual spaces where other learners from around globe may share ideas, "[d]ialoguing substantively" (Chi, 2009, p. 77). Google Expeditions (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.immerses both educator and learner in virtual fieldtrips. Content of the Great Pyramid of Giza and the Sphinx, for example, may be explored, the teacher selecting certain foci and directing students' attention to them (a large virtual arrow appears in the students' headsets). The educator may then read from the lead-in questions (provided by content creators) about the chosen content to get students' feedback and emergent ideas on their immersive exploration.
Thank you for this article - we will no doubt use it as one of our primary sources to cite in our research.
Unit 11 Wearables, Printables, and Internet of Things
88 unread replies.3333 replies.
Answer ONE or more of my questions and respond to ONE or more of your colleagues:
Q1. What impact do you think wearable and printable technologies will have on education?
Q2. What impact do you think wearable and printable technologies will have on instructional design?
Q3. Select one example from the materials provided for this unit, brainstorm how it would be used for instruction, then describe your vision.
Q4. Write one question you wondered about while exploring this week's materials, then write your own answer to the question.
Q1. What impact do you think wearable and printable technologies will have on education?
I love this question because I was asking it to my Saudi students back in 2013 when I bought my first Sony smart watch - and recommended that all students get one, as well.
This quote from Wired sums up one way in which it will effect education: "The heart of the Glass experience is Google Now, the company’s attempt to divine and deliver needed information based on context." (my italics). Information based on context.
So, if you were wearing an augmented reality diviner (whether it's a headset or earphones or sub-dermal implant), you'd be fed information based on your environment - your classroom, the books, resources, etc. - around you. Early adopters will jump ahead of their fellow students - as I suggested to my gents. They will have access to far more learning domain-based information, say, than even someone who's a quick Googler. The information will be served on-demand/need.
For example, say you are wearing (unbeknownst to your professor or fellow students) a Babel Fish (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. in French class. You don't need to the think of the French-to-English translation and then think of the French response that would correspond when orally quizzed in French. You hear English. So, you skip the first step, and only have to think of the French response - which makes you at least 50% more "fluent" than your fellow linguists.
I think that, at early adoption, users will be labeled as cheaters - they have advanced access to information that education says they are not allowed to have. But, if you have a device that puts Google at your eye-tips, why wouldn't you use the information. Seems silly.
I recommended, within the Saudi context, that the students all get smart watches, because regardless of how many proctors we had in a room, students could miraculously share information. It was amazing. There was nothing we could do about it accept put one teacher to every student - for which, of course, we didn't have the resources. So, I just thought that with smartwatches , the sharing process could be a bit stream-lined for these "sharers".
Stiggins (2004) explains that assessment falls into four basic categories or methods (see page 90-93). Select one of the learning activities below, then describe which assessment method you would recommend and why.
Ability to write clearly and coherently
Group discussion proficiency
Reading comprehension
Proficiency using specified mathematical procedures
Proficiency conducting investigations in science
Group discussion proficiency
As a disclaimer to my response, given latitude and therefore complete responsibility for my learners - as I have been for many of my teaching experiences abroad over the last decade - I have fallen prey to one of Stiggins' "Misconceptions About Assessment Methods" (p. 94). I believe that we learn best by doing - and was very excited to find that Edgar Dale's Cone of Experience (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site. rather confirms this. Specifically, I always ask my administrators, "Shouldn't we only be using 'authentic' assessments - performance assessments - to judge student progress?"
Now, I am definitely biased - in formal classroom environments, I have only taught language acquisition and the use of technology, both vocational and information. To assess whether one of my learners has progressed, I feel I must ask them to perform a procedure or speak a language; ergo, performance assessment.
Back to the task. To assess a learner's ability to discuss in a group, I would devise a rubric based on "several dimensions, such as ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency[,]" et cetera (Stiggins, p. 92). Actually, I've done this many times and found it to be a very accurate assessment of how a learner will transfer their knowledge into a real world setting.
I find the first two methods, selected and extended written response, a little irrelevant in an era where knowledge is at your finger tips and the ability to memorize for regurgitation - and give points based on what has been regurgitated. I love the personal communication method, though, as it involves - when done correctly - much self-assessment for the learner.
