home


 * Sharing New Technologies ** **it takes an iVillage**

**Ongoing: @LALA - Resources and Notes**

__**Assignment #3 -Hey team, post your notes here! **__


 * @Parent Group**


 * @Review Group**

__**Assignment #2 - Due October 20 **__

**1. Decide on your learning objective: What will your design accomplish. Answer who, what, where, when How and who? (Amanda)**

__**Who:**__ Administration, Teachers, Parents, and Students of various schools. __**What:**__ A review resource that Students, Parents, Teachers and Administration alike can access to write reviews or read authentic feedback of the wide variety of Educational resources available, in order for everyone to find the most fitting resources for their Educational needs. __**Where:**__ Available online to reach a wider audience. __**When:**__ Ongoing once up and running. __**How:**__ Individuals have the ability to go on the site, search for the educational resource they are looking for and either write an honest view of their experience with the resource (including their [i.e. student, teacher, administrator, parent]) or read the reviews to help learn more about the tools available.

__**Learning Objective: **__ Creating an online Educational resource review site readily avaliable for teachers, adminstration, students, and parents to give authentic feedback about the tools they use in order to help anyone online looking for a compatible educational resource.

**2. Identify your users: Be aware of human learning needs. Watch people in various situations. Identify and report on all issues/learning needs that interest you. Think about why they interest you and be aware of your teams interests. (Lucy)** In our team all of us are somehow associated with educational software and technology. Some of us use these software and technology on a daily basis. A couple of us in the group are teachers, so we observe our students using technology in our classrooms. We are representing groups of users who use and observe the use of educational software and technology and can provide valuable insights on these products to help everyone else who is in any level or capacity interested in educational software and technology to make more informed decisions. Currently we've identified the following groups, who will be the users and contributors to our Educational resource review site:

**Administrators ** at schools make decisions on purchasing software and technology for schools and they are also users of these products. Not all administrators have an IT background or are technologically savvy and may make a decision to purchase software based on a sales presentation or a Professional Development that they have attended. Having well-organized and rated information contributed by different user groups (teachers, students, other administrators, parents) on educational software will allow them to choose products that are more cost efficient and have better instructional design. <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 13px;">**<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Teachers **make decisions on using different technology resources for themselves or for their students. The process of choosing such resources can be more efficient if they know more about the product and can compare similar products, before making a decision. Also teachers can contribute by informing others if the software met their needs and the needs of their students. Teacher can suggest ways of improving current software to make it more efficient and suitable for current education environments <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 13px;">**<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Parents **will have access to valuable information about educational software programs that their children are using in schools or that they want to use at home. Many educational software resources are currently used in schools, but most parents are not informed about the advantages and disadvantages of these resources. Parents' desire to be involved in their children's education, makes them seek information that will help them to be more effective parents and meet their children's learning and developmental needs. <span style="color: black; font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif'; font-size: 13px;">**<span style="font-family: 'Arial','sans-serif';">Students - **Students are active users of many educational software, but their opinions about it are neglected often time. Students can contribute valuable information about educational software that could help teachers administrators choose technology for the classrooms that is more engaging for students. Also, software designers can use students' evaluations to make their products better.

<span style="color: #234823; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">**3. Analyze the learning problem. Look at the learning need from many perspectives (personal, social, institutional) and consider consequences of not meeting need. Will the needs be best met by __information__? interaction? motivation? (Lily-Annie)**

With respect to our learning problem, the need seems to be best met by __information__. In a market of seemingly endless "educational" software and gadgets, it is impossible to conduct exhaustive research into every available product on an individual basis. Allowing interested individuals to collaborate and share invdivdual bits of information allows for a far more consolidated bank of knowledge, upon which the individuals can make informaed decisions about what they purchase.

In analyzing the learning problem, here are some likely problems (consequences) of not meeting the need: The users are not informed, not exposed to un-suspected dangers, less information means uninformed decisions, things could fall through the cracks, not being able to compete, unaware of available options, can't make informed decisions, little reinforcement, frustration and not benefiting due to limitations. As stated, a number of things may happen if this need is not met. Possibly speculation, one begins to build up ideas, which may lead to something unpleasant. Not having knowledge about a software program could easily hamper the ability to contribute to the advancement of the program. Insufficient information creates lack of trust because the uses are unaware of its provisions and who is behind the program. Usually if a program works well, many people are not bothered about the manufacturer, the designers or marketer of the technology. Once there is a problem with the software, that's when it becomes important to have information to aid uses to help them determine who to run to for necessary assistance.

Most online resources that allow you to purchase, download or browse educational software, or any software, for that matter, usually include a "user review" component, such as amazon or iTunes, in which users of the product may contribute their opinons. The quality and validity of these reviews varies greatly, some are helpful, some are not, and one product can have multiple reviews that fundamentally conflict with one another. A more consolidated resource of reviews, contributed from a reliable community of interested parties, could provide a consumer with more security in making decisions. Less money wasted, less time wasted, more educational benefits for learners.

Concerns, however...this need is partially met. Though an individual could not realistically do //exhaustive// research on any given product, an even slightly tech-resourceful individual could peruse the "user reviews" of current websites, or employ the use of "hive-mind" social media to poll trusted acquaintances for their opinions about a product, or even just "google it." And that individual could probably make a fairly appropriate decision about purchasing the product. On the other hand, an individual in the market for new technology who is //not// tech savvy, will not be affected by the existence of a new, albeit more valuable, resource for evaluating the quality of educational software, and will be convinced in spite of it's existence, by the slick sales pitch.

<span style="color: #234823; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">**4. Research existing solutions: What programs or resources already exist that impact the need? How have others approached the issue? (Kevin)**

Most schools purchase software either directly from the developer (as in the case of Microsoft Windows or Easy Grade Pro) or from officially authorized vendors (as with Arey Jones or Scholastic, Inc.). While some schools actively research software that might be suitable for a perceived need, many others simply choose software based on impressions gained during presentations offered by developer or vendor representatives. We will not attempt to examine the latter here, as the considerable financial incentives held by developers' or vendors' representatives is obvious and therefore such self-promotional reviews cannot be considered as solutions due to a lack of objectivity.

Currently, we have identified three major educational software review sources:

[] ESD does not provide any reviews of it products - only a brief abstract of what each piece of software seeks to accomplish for its users. While the network is comprehensive in terms of scope and claims a certain amount of respectability due to its having been in existence since at least 2008, the lack of any insight into the efficacy of any given pieces of software means that ESD cannot be presented as a full solution to the problem we perceive.
 * 1. Educational Software Directory.Net **

Educational Software Directory.net is the only search engine and directory devoted exclusively to educational software. Our mission is to connect parents, educators, students, and self-learners with providers of educational software and related information. If you know of any resources that you feel should be added or have any other suggestions, feel free to [|contact us] about them. And if you have a commercial site and would like to see it added to our directory, you can find out more [|here].

[|www.edu-soft.org] Edu-Soft, like ESD, does not provide site-produced reviews of software. Rather, it seems to provide a cooperative meeting-place for both educators and developers, and a forum (both newsgroup and web forum) for both to communicate their experiences as well as desires. Its goal is not so much to help educators choose or download (Edu-Soft maintains a modest library of free or trial educational software) software, but rather to promote communication so that products might be created to meet educators' needs. As with ESD, Edu-Soft therefore cannot be considered a solution to the problem we perceive.
 * 2. Edu-Soft, NPO **

Educational Software Cooperative was incorporated in 1994. We celebrated our 10th anniversary party at the annual [|Shareware Industry Conference] in RochesterNY in 2004. Rosemary West has written an informal history of the ESC, entitled "ESC: In the Beginning". This project has been posted in the ESC's newsgroup. Some of these posts have been collected and archived here on the website. ESC is a nonprofit organization whose purposes are to advance the mutual benefit of authors, publishers, dealers and distributors of educational software; to voluntarily cooperate formally and informally with each other to better develop, advertise, distribute and sell educational software; and to provide the public with information regarding the benefits, uses, and availability of educational software. Software users, educators, developers, publishers, distributors, and others work together to promote these goals. All officers are unpaid and elected by the membership. As with any organization, there are costs involved. Basic annual membership dues are $35, ($40 outside North America) and include a newsletter subscription and current benefits. Contributing ($50), Supporting ($100), and Lifetime ($1000) members receive special recognition for their important contributions to our ongoing efforts, as well as free [|banner] advertising on the ESC web site. [|Membership] is renewable each April.

[|www.amazon.com] Unlike both Edu-Soft and Educational Software Directory, Amazon does not exist solely to publish reviews of educational software. Furthermore, it does not even produce any reviews on its own - all of its reviews are member-generated. However, it does sell software directly to customers.
 * 3. Amazon, LLC **

While Amazon is very much removed from any aspect of reviewing the software it sells, its member population is vast enough products often end up being reviewed by a substantial number of users. Although Amazon cannot be considered an formal review solution, the sheer size of its member population, and the currency of both its products and reviews, makes for a useful source of user experience data.

<span style="color: #234823; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">**5. Apply learning theory: What theories might apply in your situation? (Paul)**

COMMUNITY OF PRACTICE

At the core of this idea is the assumption that there is a large community of practitioners who are using the same software, but who lack the venue to discuss it. Similarly, decisionmakers at the district level and above are facing similar dillemmas all the time, but lack the tools to make informed decisions. Research suggests that these communities should exist, and can be accessed.


 * Brown, J. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 40.
 * Wenger, E. (2000). Communities of practice: The organizational frontier. Harvard Business Review, 78(1), 139.

SHARED TERMINOLOGY

Because school software competes often behind closed doors, most of the involved companies are able to define their own terms of engagement; that is, because similar softwares in this field are rarely compared side-by-side, there is an absence of shared vocabulary to define the varying featuresets and qualities. It will be the responsibility of this project site to follow best practices in developming new terms or standardizing existing ones to accomodate the new knowledge sharing.


 * Gruber, T. R. (1995). Toward principles for the design of ontologies used for knowledge sharing. International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 43(5), 907-928.

MOTIVATION FOR PARTICIPATION

It will also be important to evaluate the incentives for the individuals contributing to such a site. It should be rewarding to consume data from the site, but also to voluntarily contribute back to it.


 * Hendriks, P. (1999). Why share knowledge? The influence of ICT on the motivation for knowledge sharing. Knowledge and Process Management: The Journal of Corporate Transformation, 6(2), 91.
 * Ardichvili, A. (2003). Motivation and barriers to participation in virtual knowledge-sharing communities of practice. Journal of Knowledge Management, 7(1), 64.
 * Brazelton, J. (2003). Creating a knowledge-sharing community: if you build it, will they come? Communications of the ACM, 46(2), 23.
 * Hall, H. (2001). Input-friendliness: motivating knowledge sharing across intranets. Journal of Information Science, 27(3), 139.
 * de Waal, F. (1993). Preliminary data on voluntary food sharing in brown capuchin monkeys. American Journal of Primatology, 29(1), 73.

A MEANINGUL RATINGS SYSTEM

Because people may not be accustomed to rating software of this type, "star" ratings systems may be unreliable. A system in which teachers can indicate preferences between two similar pieces of software will help keep the qualitative data on the site more meaningful.


 * Hüllermeier, E. (2003). Pairwise preference learning and ranking. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2837, 145.
 * Hüllermeier, E. (2008). Label ranking by learning pairwise preferences. Journal of Artificial Intelligence, 172(16-17), 1897.

<span style="color: #234823; font-family: Verdana,Geneva,sans-serif;">**Meeting:** **October 13th**