Personalized Learning Panel Discussion, Educelerate Conference, Chicago Sept 24 2015
•Download as PPTX, PDF•
1 like•616 views
Exercise in defining some key terms for "personalized learning" including "competency based learning" and "adaptive learning."
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Similar to Personalized Learning Panel Discussion, Educelerate Conference, Chicago Sept 24 2015
Similar to Personalized Learning Panel Discussion, Educelerate Conference, Chicago Sept 24 2015 (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Personalized Learning Panel Discussion, Educelerate Conference, Chicago Sept 24 2015
- 1. Chicago IL September 24, 2015 EDUCELERATE 2015 PERSONALIZED LEARNING PANEL
- 2. OUR PANELISTS • Ray Henderson, Lessons Learned Ventures (Indianapolis) • David Vinca, CEO eSparkLearning (Chicago) • Manoj Kutty, CEO LoudCloud Systems (Dallas) • Manoj Kulkani, CEO Realizeit Learning (Chicago) • Eric Frank, CEO Acrobatiq (Pittsburgh)
- 3. US D.O.E. DEFINITIONS 1. Personalized: adjusts pace, approach, adds student agency. 2. Competency-based: you move when you show you can do. 3. Adaptive: technology assigns educational resources. Richard Culatta Dir. Ed Tech, USDOE
- 4. CHRONICLE COMMENTER DEF’S: 1. Competency based: Focusing teaching and learning on concrete skills. See ‘death of a liberal education.’ 2. Adaptive: Curiosity, imagination and critical understanding are reduced to rodent responses in an academic Skinner-box. 3. Personalized: Just another meaningless catchphrase for what good teachers have always done.
- 5. EDUCELERATE 2015 DEF’S: 1. Personalized Learning: products that modify path and progress conditionally, based on scoring rubric for learner performance. 2. Competency-based learning: a form of PL where a curricular authority designs fine-grained tests of topical mastery in a progression from introductory to complex assessment of understanding. 3. Adaptive learning: a form of PL where a curricular authority designs content and assessments, but with multiple potential paths, dynamically determined by algorithms informed by learner performance.
- 6. QUESTIONS 1. The role of educators as PL is adopted: Authorship? Teaching method? 2. The market for PL: How will the market develop? How large will it become? 3. ROI for PL: how should it be judged? Success stories?
Editor's Notes
- Have panelists intro themselves with 1 min what-my-company-does, tying in the link to Personalization in learning and also being part of the growing edu tech community in the Midwest.
- Storyline: Richard Calutta, under secty of education, director of edu tech…. Recently (august 2015) spoke at the National Education Initiative, Adaptive Learning Summit. Key issue: tons of attention to a set of ideas and technologies identified as “personalized learning” But a great lack of precision in the terminology. Dangers (and we know they are even more real than He claimed, don’t we?) that marketing mis-use and confusion can lead to mis-aligned expectations With educators. The downside for the communities we serve is too great to let this persist. So, let’s honor the challenge Calutta set out for us, roll up our sleeves, and actually begin this panel by getting some industry-work done….
- But first, to ensure that we all believe that educators have had their fill of our attempts to Define these terms --- let’s have a look ath what commentators on the Chronicle website Story covering Calutta’s talk had to say…. TODO – add the lebowsky avatar and ask P&M if they know who this is?
- @Readmeray’s attenpt to come up with definitions that are more focused for an ed tech product/market definition. (But I used Nyrens picture so when it’s tweeted HE can enjoy the fruits of controversy he asked us to sew…Johnny Appleseed of edu tech that he is) TODO – this without being too moralistic: We have a sacred obligation to be good actors, particulary at this time and given the benefits and very serious Risks of adopting these new approaches and techs….. and help refine the use of language that’s important In setting expecations that are appropriate. There have been examples of vision for the future being marketed As possible-today --- this breaks a trust with the market that none of us in it for the long term of creating true Value can afford to see happen. Make claims that can be defended. Clarify your use of terms, particularly so On the eggregiously over-burdened “adaptive” in ed tech marketing. {To self: if time permits find a way to unload on the claims around “big data” }
- Authorship: open with a statement about very appropriate and understandable educator angst at product companies Telling them they’ve saved the world. Reference the bashing at the end of the (all-time-hubris-driven-chest-thumper) In Austin at SXSW edu a few years ago, and how edu’s confronted us as an industry with something near outrage. We in the fly-over states of midwest have the business advantage of greater humility than those stewing in The pumped up juices nearer deep pools of VC…let’s get it right, and lead the way in having products that Speak for themselves, and demonstrate real value. Question 1: part of that humility is knowing that our products are never of themselves a solution. Only in the hands Of skilled educators, and their ability to add primer to our dents and dings, do our products work. IN the eyes of the Student, it’s the combo of us and educator that IS the product. So that relationship to educators is critical. As the market Morphs towards more personalized/adtaptive, what happens to that relationshiop? As investment rises, and necessarily Content creation becomes more complex (metadata, symmetry, tagging for common core, leveling schemes, elements That algorightms need to auto-suggest potential paths) what happens to authorshiop? How do teaching methods change As our products mature? What obligations do we have to create services offerings/ins-ervice etc to fully support the faculty That must adjust and modernize/and also to realize the real benefit in the field (lead them to a clear need for proving out Products in the field to get at these issues, and support them, before shipping-and-stomping with claims!) 2: market development: it could come from the LMS paltfomrs upwards. Or from the content providers (with embedded interactivey and PL schemes) from the top down. Or it could be crteated in the middle with unique platform elements that source from content providers and Plug in to the platforms. What will happen? Who will get it right? ROI: the market context is more demanding of return than ever before, both in educational outcomes and in some economic sense (typically as “scaling”). What are the ROI elements that are most imporatant as you see it/your clients? SUCCESS STORY – the market is hungry for something other than promises of success. What actual successes can you point to against your definition of what’s imporant in ROI with real clients?