*In the USA, a “trapezium” is a quadrilateral with NO parallel sides unlike a UK trapezoid.
Interactivity Trapezium model
What activities are interactive? After a recent discussion over the relative interactivity of books, websites and reality TV, I wanted to model the components that enable interactivity in more detail. What I wanted to draw was a model in which these four components could interconnect in the form of four micrographs – in the manner of a malt whiskey taste star but less complicated! There are other components of interactivity I could also have included (such as productivity, creativity etc) but I wanted a simple model to test the idea on. So I settled on:
Communication (level that information is produced)
Adaptability (level that information can be adapted for other uses)
Control (level that the information can be controlled)
Feedback (level that the information can reward communication with more content).
Each quadrant represents a component of interactivity level from low to high (horizontal axis) and passivity (vertical axis). Interactive products are placed within each quadrant and a trapezium connects all four together. For example: a book (red X and trapezium) has a high level of passivity and low level of interactivity in terms of the participator’s control of information. A (successful) meeting (grey X/trapezium) scores highly in terms of interactivity and low in terms of passivity in terms of the control level. Comparing the completed red and grey trapezium shows a different conceptual model for each product and therefore a relative scale of interactivity. With more detail this could be adapted for describing interactivity in AI based computer/video games or the multimedia enhanced web interfaces of the future. Try doing a trapezium for a football match – where would it appear in the quadrants?
I’m an Apple fan (ok, I admit it) and I really like 90% of the designs and products put out in recent years. BUT, I really hope they don’t release a hybrid iPod/Slate/tablet thingy at the event on 27th January.
It’s not that I don’t think they’ll make sense of the form factor (look at all the fake designs that have sprung up and the professional mock-ups) or that it will create a versatile gadget with a gazillion un-dreamt uses. What I really don’t like is the sheer manipulation of the market and it’s users. In much the same way Cameron’s movies have redirected the money tree back towards the monopolisers, this ‘new newton’ will do the same thing. I’ll expand on the metaphor; independent cinema gets it’s best ever plaudits in 1996 (The English Patient, OSCARS galore) next year it’s uber-budgetted, mainstream, Hollywoodland, studio factory based Titanic. Lately, we’ve seen an amazing expansion of creative, international films (Slumdog Millionaire) vs. parts 5 and 6 of franchises or even reworked comic book heroes. Then, cameron does it again with style over content, studio life-force enhancing Avatar. Course it will win all the OSCARS this year! See what I mean? No… well look at this:
This shows falling prices of laptops and desktops in the US, one of the cheapest places in the world to buy hardware (only Hong Kong has cheaper Macs than USA). Netbooks, although limited in use and capacity have stolen the buyers! And there’s less profit margin in a netbook.
“Tight credit and economic concerns have certainly taken a toll on PC shipments in the last couple quarters, but the move to portables, fueled by mininotebooks and falling prices, has mitigated the impact,” Loren Loverde, IDC’s program director for Worldwide Quarterly PC Tracker, said in a statement. The netbook surge this holiday season, limits Apple’s options. The company could slash prices to compete, but that would sap margins without guarantees of market share regains. Apple has no netbook to sell, so it’s cut out of the margin-sapping market segment. An analysis of it’s policy:
“Survivors of the recession will adapt to the new economy. No matter where or when the recession ends, it won’t be where it started. The old economy is gone, massive spending with it. Apple already does this. Years ago, the company reduced the number of products it sells and simplified its remaining product lines. Product refreshes are fairly infrequent compared with other technology companies. Apple maximizes the production/development cost-to-margin ratio for as long as possible. The process reduces manufacturing and distribution costs. Product A releases with got-to-have features or design for which early buyers are willing to pay a premium. Typically, the big desirable feature is unique, meaning not common from competitor products. Over time, Apple upgrades select components, either offering more for less or reducing prices. Eighteen to 24 months, or more, later, Apple releases a fresh, redesigned new model and restarts the process. For the iPhone and iPod, the new models come about once a year.”
So when the current markets are exhausted, you have to create a new market! Roll on Apple’s Avatar… people will rave and adore it even if it is all just style over substance.
The BETT Show this year was as hotly anticipated as last years, not for the appearance of fabulous new technology but the whole social experience of mixing it with the uber-geeks. There is always to much to see in a day (my usual length of visit) and usually you have to plan for the exact itinerary you want to check out – yes, that means research. Since I started my current job the whole field is enormous (I work at a City Learning Centre) and there is the shmoozing and mixing it side with clients and customers too. Needless to say, I went out to look at specific TV broadcasting kit, furniture ideas and… the top ten gizmos from the press!
A short film (following) is a visual notation for the TV and furniture stuff as for the gizmos – where were they? I expected to see a great big Google presence (missed a trick there although every advertising hoarding in a 10 mile radius advertised Chrome browser), Apple or rival tablet/slate PCs or super iPods (none… NONE; even CES had MS slates) and touch screen walls (minority report style). Yes there were some great big tellys (some touch sensitive) and an awful lot of IWBs and smart-alike tables.
Aren’t we over IWBs yet?! Some of the new 3d content is exciting to me as is the idea of the single lens projector (cheaper=more) – didn’t think that much of 3d TV though. Thought there may be something of a gap in the market for 3d production and will pursue this further.
The really exciting thing this year was the TeachMeet and TMTakeovers on some of the vendor’s stands. I’m quite new to the whole idea of TM – I heard about it last year and thought it was another boring seminar! Having since followed the goings-on of the EdTech RoundUp online community and (!) took part in the Teach Meet session (see earlier post) I was really excited about the prospect of these taking place during the show. I had no intention of making them all; I hoped to happen across them as I went! No way! From @dughall’s bettig onwards I found myself tracking TM takeovers via twitter! I had to arrange my day by what area of the building I needed to be in to catch a TM takeover…
@largerama 'taking over' Scholastic from @chrisrat
I did manage 3 and a bit during Thursday (they were continued through to saturday and they were absolutely the highlight of my visit. Bucket loads of enthusiasm and a real application of technology in the classroom; nothing like the seminars ‘officially’ offered.
I like this kind of taking back from the users of technology – the ‘vendors’ from the stands were on the whole amazed and enthusiastic about the experience – giving up their seats and applauding louder than the teachers! Well done all those who took part and the response of the lurkers must also be recognised for without an audience it wouldn’t quite have been the same.
Maybe next year, a little integration of technology and tools from the actual stand might be beneficial to both parties? A bit more like the OSS Cafe upstairs where @eyebeams was integrated – no, part of the procedures he captured and streamed.
The important thing was the zeitgeist – reminded me of Glastonbury many years ago when the impromptu raves started after the bands had finished… but that’s another story for a different blog.
Back home by Friday night, I followed the proper Teach Meet in all it’s streamed glory while simultaneously following a twitterfall of commentary – really exciting times for educationalists and a challenge to everyone with a concept of prefessional development.
There’s been a lot of twitter-chatter amongst the edu-twitterers about specific application of the Google Apps or Google Doc suite. There is even a Google Wave regarding the finer points of a Google Apps only TeachMeet like event or even an unofficial Google Teacher Academy. For my part, I want to see the best use of the free stuff and specifically the Google Docs as that is what I have been using since I don’t have direct access to a VLE and many of my learners come from across different schools.
Google Apps can be used as a perfectly good learning platform (can’t recall where I got this diagram from – sorry). Pedagogically, there is lots of educational theory to structure distance style learning in the contexts of HE. What about schools? What’s the best way for schools to add structures that work and REALLY use Google Apps as a teaching tool?
After giving this a bit of thought, I have looked at Gilly Salmon’s Five Stage Model for e-activities. This is supposed to be for HE of course but recognises the stages needed to get into the process and input required from staff. It’s not an instant thing being able to transpose how you relate teacher-student and student-teacher! Salmon says there are five stages that end with collaboration (stage 4) and peer supported networking (stage 5).
Although widely used and tested in HE, theres not enough teacher input for this model alone to be the structure for schools’ use of Google Apps. I would propose integrating this model with the framework for communicative media developed by Diana Laurillard. The Conversational Framework model emphasises the necessity to have dialogue at the centre of learning. This diagram shows the process as a cycle or flow:
The benefit of the Google Apps suite is that gmail or the IM feature can be used to support the dialogue process, whilst the collaborative toolset (Docs, Presentation etc) help the learner to progress through the stages of interactive collaboration and peer support. Ideally, a social and ‘fun’ learning aspect could also be part of this – although not yet part of the suite. Any recommendations? Bejewelled/tetris?!
I spent a couple of hours learning to use Prezi to make a more visually exciting presentation a few months ago. I found it hard to get right, but once mastered not too bad. Ok, the main idea was to avoid a PowerPoint style bullet listed pages and inspire the audience with more creative structures of presentation. When done well, as the example above, Prezi adds more than just style to a presentation. After all, it isn’t as labour intensive as Flash!
Issues I did experience were that even when familiar with the content, during a presentation it was easy to get lost and have to back track to another part of the ’show’. I ended up printing out slides using PowerPoint (!!!) through screen shots of Prezi. When other people had to present the same show they had no idea how to navigate around and again needed the slide print outs!
Is Prezi any good? Yes, for making easy multimedia in the style of Flash and not so linear as PowerPoint. No, if you have to present (or someone else does) to 120 people once a day for a week. Instead, post online and send them a link! Prezi – time to add a voiceover and video capture feature – maybe people would pay a premium for these features?
A fairly recent DfES Report (2003) concluded that the benefits of e-leaning tools were to enable experimental pedagogy in the classroom. Is that really why edtech teachers want to try new Web 2.0 type tools? Is there a myriad of reasons for using emerging technologies – beneficial to the teacher and learner and most of all to the teaching and learning that takes place. Secondly, I wanted to know how e-learning tools improve the way that teachers teach. So I set a little poll for the 500 or so teachers in my PLN on Twitter.
I picked out the top benefits to teaching I could think of and included a space for teachers to add their own reasons. Crucially, I included a more than one answer too as something requested from a previous poll I tried.
The ‘Other’ answer box yielded the following:
This accounted for just 5% of the vote and actually includes one of the main responses. Interestingly, 24/7 availability was important to one of the respondents. The overall result after 5 days was:
More or less an even split between engaging and inspiring and including more than one of the other answers. There are many benefits of e-learning tools; not just to try new methods of teaching but also to inspire our learners showing that we can also push ourselves out of our comfort zones as they do daily. Some great debate started too:
Fascinating reading! Thanks to everyone who took part.
Collage of screen caps from TMETRU09 (@dajbelshaw)
Last Sunday night saw the first airing of a joint Teach Meet and Edtech Roundup ‘un’-conference. I have been following TM for a while, although never in attendance and only after the fact. I wanted to tag along to the Edtech Roundup as I know that quite a few CLC technologists attend and take part. So here was my chance – I’m no performer, more of a facilitator for others! In our TV studio I like to be behind the camera – definately not in front. But how could I encourage others if I woulldn’t have a go myself?
So I signed up here and made a 2 minute webcast about our CLC wiki. I linked to it on Diigo (this site) as required by joining instructions set up by Doug Belshaw and Dai Barnes. The rest of the organisation is outlined here - it’s a great model and I thoroughly enjoyed being involved.
If you want to see the archive of the broadcast (as opposed to my 2 minute contribution) it can be found on Justin.tv here.
This a nano presentation for TMETRU09. At the CLC, we use a wiki site to blend online with face-to-face learning. The example given is for eCPD; visiting Primary and Secondary teachers have a one to one session where they are given a laminated card with TV Studio job instructions and briefly shown how to do the job. Additionally, a wiki site is used to store step by step instructions, web videos and photos so that learning can be reinforced, revisited later or as a reminder for next time they’re due.
It’s worked well so far and there is of course the opportunity for them to add corrective text or contribute to the clarity of the instructions. They could even add their own photos and videos!
Check out my Posterous blog web site – this has got to be the easiest method to read/write the web ever – EVER. No kidding; all you have to do is make sure you have an online email client (gmail preferred) and send emails plus attachments. That’s it – the web site is written by ever email posting you make.
I have now taken 3 sessions of science, maths and GTP teachers through the basics of Posterous and added a bit of value in terms of additional web 2.0 tools like Wallwisher and Voicethread. Ok, it’s note everyone’s taste – I accept that but I can certainly vouch for student responses. Try setting a read and discover homework on a topic of your choosing. Will you expect 3 or 5 bullets of info back? Maybe half a page with an illustration? Then try showing your students a Posterous blog and tell them you want a weekly posting with an image or Powerpoint embedded and ok try Voicethread or Wallwisher too. Guaranteed engagement!
The key to using tools like these is the emphasis on the learning rather than just the teaching – ok, not Masters level writing but certainly enthusiasm beyond that for the topic you love.
This presentation is a collaborative effort using resources from the web – feel free to reuse but please respect CC-NC-SA creative commons copyright.
Principally maths teachers from across Doncaster’s 16 high schools attended a half day workshop (The Maths User Group or MUG). Web 2.0 technologies were explored and discussed and will now proceed as part of group practice.
To follow the group on Twitter: @mugdoncaster and tag #mugdsclc.
Although widely used and tested in HE, theres not enough teacher input for this model alone to be the structure for schools’ use of Google Apps. I would propose integrating this model with the framework for communicative media developed by Diana Laurillard. The Conversational Framework model emphasises the necessity to have dialogue at the centre of learning. This diagram shows the process as a cycle or flow:
The benefit of the Google Apps suite is that gmail or the IM feature can be used to support the dialogue process, whilst the collaborative toolset (Docs, Presentation etc) help the learner to progress through the stages of interactive collaboration and peer support. Ideally, a social and ‘fun’ learning aspect could also be part of this – although not yet part of the suite. Any recommendations? Bejewelled/tetris?!
Fascinating reading! Thanks to everyone who took part.
