I recently discovered this behavioural management system called classdojo . I was quite fascinated by the concept. Most elearning applications concentrate on managing learning rather than managing behaviour. So I went on youtube to check out some videos about it. I’ve embedded one video below for your viewing pleasure.

As you can see from the video, it’s pretty easy to use and the ability to customise behaviours has huge potential for at least sending a signal to the class about what kind of behaviours are desired in the classroom.

My objective of using classdojo was more to encourage participation and recognise positive behaviours like “great insight” than to highlight negative behaviours. That being said, at the start of a class, a student was not paying attention and I half-jokingly awarded him a “disruptive” negative dojo point rather than verbally admonish him to keep quiet like I usually do. It had an immediate effect and he kept quiet and jokingly gestured that “hey he was quiet so why did I award him a negative point”. Subsequently, I did not have to use any more negative points.

There were a couple of considerations I had before I trialled this in the classroom. Firstly, it seems a tad childish and more suited for the primary school classroom than a junior college classroom. Well, to somewhat alleviate this concern, I decided that the dojo points will still be awarded to individuals but awards/rewards and forfeits will be given at a group level. This gives students a team to strategize a gameplan with, making it somewhat more “teenagish”. This also allows more variations like banning students with more than 5 dojo points from participating, “forcing” the others in the team to participate. So far, the team concept has been working well. I believe it’s less personal than ranking people individually by dojo points. For one class (let’s call it class A), I’m using a straight up “who has the most points” model, while for another class (class B) I’m trying to use RPG elements like individual Levels and group levels (it seems very daunting though and I think I might revert to a straight up competitive model soon. ) There was one class (class C) in which I trialled classdojo but dropped it within minutes. It was my form class and the rapport was already good, hence I was awarding participation points like crazy and the time it took for me to award the points actually slowed the flow of the discussion. This really emphasised to me the need to keep objectives in mind and not be too carried away with a new tool. I may or may not use classdojo again with class C but I’ll really have to modify the behaviours according to my objectives. Even for class A and B, as time goes by I should tweak my usage of classdojo, as my objectives are met/unmet and/or new objectives arise.

Even if you’re not  basketball fan like me, that photo above of Blake Griffin tomahawking over a hapless Channing Frye surely rouses some emotion in you. Be it awe at the power or amazement at the athleticism, you feel something.

The just concluded 2012 ICTLT conference left quite a deep impression in me. Different presentations touched on various ideas, ICT tools and organisational systems in support of innovation but the main theme I discern is that we’re all interested in authentic deep learning. Learning for its own sake, learning that takes root and leaves a deep impression in the student. I feel like this deep learning is analogous to the slam dunk in basketball.

In basketball as in education, which team wins depends on the score, the end result. A slam dunk, no matter how graceful, how powerful, is just worth 2 points on the scoreboard. Deep learning of a topic or concept, no matter how spine-tingling, how inspiring, often just shows up as maybe 5 marks on the scoresheet. And if your topic of deep learning was unfortunately not asked in the exam questions, it may be worth nothing on the scoresheet.

A true basketball aficionado will of course tell you that a slam dunk is worth way more than 2 points. It rallies the crowd, transmits energy to the rest of the team and satisfies that psychological need for creativity (a dunk is often the result of creative play rather than just raw power). A true educator will of course tell you that deep learning is worth more than what might be displayed on a results slip. Many an educator has experienced that indescribable feeling when a student points out something he/she discovered on their own that you did not even consider in your mental schema.

So teachers, educators, when you feel like giving up on deep learning and just succumbing to society’s penchant for only focusing on academic results, remember that nobody will watch basketball without slam dunks and similarly nobody is truly educated without deep learning.

In the previous post , we ended by saying we will post a rebuttal to detractors. So here it is, although I would say it’s more an analysis than a rebuttal. I would like to add that I am aware that iBooks 2 is just the app and that the key contribution to education comes from the partnering with textbook companies to offer multi-touch rich-media infused textbooks on iBooks. Another contribution to education comes from the iBooks Author app which gives educators the tools to write their own multi-touch books. But for simplicity’s sake, I’ll just use iBooks 2 to represent the Apple educational initiative. Ok, throat clearing done, the criticisms of iBooks 2 can be divided into 2 broad categories as given below.

Closed vs Open

As reported in Fastcompany, critics like Steve Hargadon and Tom Vander Ark basically argue that the whole concept of a textbook, which is a closed system of accessing information, is outdated. They criticise the lack of access to peers and lack of active learning opportunities that sites like Khan academy offers. They cite Khan academy as the kind of learning which brings the educational landscape forward while characterising iBooks 2 as a jog to the side. It is no surprise that educational technologists think like that. Most are stepped deep into web 2.0 and eLearning 2.o and think that web 1.0 and elearning 1.0 is of a bygone era. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the terms, the following is a helpful graphic.

I will focus on the ownership aspect. iBooks 2 is still a top down, one way, “reader consumes content from book” model of learning while Khan academy is sort of elearning 1.3-1.5. In Khan academy, via comments on the youtube video, students can engage with peers and the instructor while you do not get that with iBooks 2. As such, in the mind of an educational technologist, because iBook 2 does not move you forward from elearning 1.0 to elearning 2.0, it is a “jog to the side”. However, this assumes everyone is as forward looking as an educational technologist. The fact of the matter is, despite much advances in educational technology and models of learning, many are still pretty much having an educational experience akin to an elearning 1.0 model. If that is the reality, what is wrong with having a “jog to the side” where the scenery is nicer and my jog feels more fun instead of increasing speed when I am not ready to increase speed?

Here’s another way of looking at the issue. Charles Leadbeater, in his TedTalk on educational innovation mapped innovation in education into the following 4 quadrants. Needless to say, the typical forward looking educational technologist is at quadrant 4, seeking to transform learning. Hence the statement by Steve Hargadon saying that “That’s not disruptive, it’s myopic. iBooks 2 may be smack in quadrant 1, a sustaining, formal type of educational innovation, but it’s still innovation and may prove to be more useful than those who relentlessly seek to be in quadrant 4. After all, most people are laggards or late adopters when it comes to educational innovation, so to have a piece of innovation which is an extension of something people are familiar with, i.e. textbooks, surely would be more readily adopted than innovations at quadrant 4. At the end of the day, educational innovations in all 4 quadrants would be good.

Perpetuating the digital divide

Alli flowers in an iMore article mentioned a simple problem. iPads are still an expensive item and as such will only serve to deepen the digital divide between the “haves and have-nots”. Also both Alli and Keith Newman in the same iMore article pointed out that the cost is not just at the purchasing phase, replacing stolen iPads, maintenance etc all add up to a hefty bill. This is a legitimate concern because Apple has always marketed itself as a premium product. However, as said earlier, Apple is a trendsetter. The fact that they have pointed their guns at the educational market serves as a signal to other tech companies to do the same. Once there is increased competition, cost will go down and the situation will improve.

iBooks Author

iBooks author has however received good reviews from most educational technologists, mainly because it puts the reins of content creation back into the hands of students and teachers in a simple manner. The drawback is again, the fact that you need to have a mac and an iPad to be able to work with iBooks author. Here’s hoping the other tech giants like google and microsoft are taking their cues from Apple and developing etextbook authoring programs of their own, increasing the platform offerings and driving down prices.

That’s all folks and Happy Chinese New Year!!

p.s. Kudos to Jude again for giving me some ideas for this post. Cheers, mate.

Did the above video give you a tingle down your spine? It certainly gave me one! The iBooks 2 and Apple textbooks initiative is getting me very excited. It is not just about a new Apple product, it is the fact that Apple has set its trend-setting might on the fossilized creature known as formal Education. With this force on our side, we can guide this creature into greener pastures. It is no secret that Steve Jobs had his eye on the educational market for some time, revealing in his biography that he thought the Educational market was ripe for “digital destruction” (this is now one of my favourite phrases). I think iBooks 2 has a lot of potential and I leave you to read the passionate words of my UWA classmate Jude Liew, who’s an ESL teacher in Australia and a father of a toddler. His excitement no doubts stems from the fact that with this new iBooks 2 initiative, he expects his toddler to have an educational experience far superior to ours.

The introduction of iBooks 2 and multi-touch textbooks bring about a change so significant, textbooks will never look or feel the same again. For hundreds of years, since the introduction of the printing press, books have always been a static product. Sure, there was the introduction of images and color but books have stayed relatively unchanged for centuries. With Apple textbooks, books no longer need to be static. Rich, multimedia content can now be included in any textbook and displayed on the iPad. I believe that teachers can now engage students with the textbook material in ways that were unachievable before. What’s more, teachers can now dictate what they want in the textbook if they are so inclined since iBooks Author makes the creation of textbooks so effortless. Best of all, iBooks Author can be used for more than just textbooks. Imagine books, newsletters and magazines… all created with the most richest of content. Not only will teachers benefit from iBooks Author, students will as well. Teachers can use it as a teaching and creativity tool for students to engage in projects of their own. In the end, the possibilities are endless with this new Apple product. Like the iPhone before, Apple’s introduction of iBooks 2 and iBooks author will be a game changer and will change the education landscape forever.

I second his impassioned sentiments and concur that iBooks 2 and multi-touch textbooks are indeed a game-changer. Of course there are the cynics and detractors. A Fastcompany article  wrote that many educational technologists are sceptical about the “game-changing” nature of iBooks 2. Jude and myself, however, think that the arguments do not hold water and we will post our rebuttal in this blog soon. Thanks for reading and don’t forget to subscribe or leave a comment below!

I’ve set up a mock coursekit site to have a feel of the features. Here’re my first impressions.

Setup

It was very easy to setup. Just click the very bold and accessible “Create a Coursekit” icon on the home page and follow the procedures. What I liked about the process was that it was only after I finished setting up my coursekit then did they prompt me to sign up for an account. So you already get a taste of the setting up process (setting up something new is always exciting) before you have to engage in the very mundane process of signing up for an account. Furthermore this signing up process was made easier by the fact that one can sign in with their facebook account. Everything looks good so far =)

User Interface

As spoken before, coursekit uses a social media style interface. Thus there’s a “stream” where the main “action” of your course takes place. There a couple of differences between the coursekit and facebook.

1. Facebook automatically recognises if your link is a textual or video link and shows it accordingly. In coursekit however, you will have to select the nature of your link for the desired effect. Coursekit has 5 buttons, Note, Link, Media, Files, Questions and Blog. As such, if you select a Youtube link and post it while in Note mode, only the URL will be shown. If you post it in link mode, a picture of the video will be shown but the video will not be embedded. So if you want your video to be embedded, you will have to click “media” and then click “link to a video”.
2. The addition of the “Blog” button. In facebook, you just have notes and it’s basically a word document. However, the Blog function allows basic hyperlinking function. This may be useful if you intend your initial blog post to be a window to other sources of information.
3. When you click on a post in the coursekit stream, it will pop up on a small column to the right and have all the comments laid out (as seen in the above photo). It feels a lot cleaner as it covers the browse and chat columns. It’s almost as if it’s telling you, ignore the clutter and concentrate on the item you clicked!

LMS functions

I have only dabbled a bit into the other LMS functions like resources, submissions and so far I am not impressed. Under the resource function, when I posted a video link, it just appeared as a url link. I would much rather have it pop out as an embedded video similar to the stream. And when I posted a book title, there seems to be no function for me to include a jpg file of the book cover. In short, the resource function seems to lack both function and aesthetics.

Inviting people into the course was easy enough. Either you send an email invitation or publicise the course code to your students and they can use it to invite themselves into your course.

Other first impressions

Joshua Kim from Inside Higher Ed has some issue with the calendar function but I have not had much issue with it. Perhaps because I have not really gone full-force into building a course. One insight I picked up from him is that, coursekit is also a game changer in terms of business model. The success or non-success of coursekit will determine how much of future LMS market share will belong to the direct-to-faculty model. As someone biased towards bottom-up models, I hope coursekit will do well and change the LMS landscape.

My follow-up blog post, Coursekit Impressions Part 2 is up.