We are working toward interoperability that can preserve pedagogical intent in learning designs.
This category covers learning analytics products, the larger markets for them, and the science (or lack thereof) behind them.
This is a version of my recent IMS talk on why the educational software interoperability challenges of the next decade will be different from the ones of the past.
Content is infrastructure. David Wiley I opened my first post in this series with a statement about courseware and content design: An unbelievable number of words have been written about the technology affordances of courseware—progress indicators, nudges, analytics, adaptive algorithms, and so on. But what seems to have gone completely unnoticed in all this analysis […]
In all the many discussions about the technological advancements in courseware, from learning analytics to adaptive learning, we are missing the invisible yet critical and ubiquitous revolution in content design that makes all the technological advances possible.
PIRG’s SPARC group filed a brief with the Department of Justice opposing the merger between Cengage and McGraw-Hill Education. The section on data danger is worth a close read.
What is a retention early warning system? What is it good for? What are its limitations? And how are its failings representative of the unfulfilled potential of so many ed tech products? You’ve got questions, we’ve got answers.
And now for something completely different.