My reason for posting this image requires an explanation. Over the years in which I have attended NECC, I have become interested in the vendors who populate the outside aisle. Vendors purchase different areas of the arena floor for different prices and the small and lower price spots are around the outside. The vendors who purchase the smaller and less central locations often seem to have a single product and are not well established. I admire these folks. Gaining attention must not be easy, but where do we expect new ideas to come from? So here is to those small companies with big dreams.
I attended a session entitled “Beyond the Textbook” because I am interested in the future of books as educational resources in a digital era. It was a panel presentation and as panel presentations go a few interesting things were said, but it was difficult to pick up themes within so many perspectives.
I did pick up on an interesting resource – a special issue of Threshold (Cable in the Classroom) on this topic. I read parts of some of the articles while listening (multitasking) and bookmarked for future review.
A conference is a kind of competitive environment. I tend to be drawn to sessions that I have found beneficial in the past. Because I assume many folks operate in this fashion you have sessions that draw hundreds of people and some that draw much less. The organizers know this and schedule some sessions in very large rooms and others in smaller rooms. I wonder who makes such decisions and if presenters are aware of relative room size.
Bernie Dodge is one of those large room people and an individual I have followed over the years. I have listened to Bernie present on several themes, but the topic that made his reputation (in my opinion) and continues to be a major focus of his work is the WebQuest. Bernie has a sense of humor regarding his “claim to fame” and has titled his personal blog One Trick Pony.
I think I can trace the evolution of the WebQuest phenomenon – first there was the concept, then there was the online WebQuest directory, then there was the attempt to promote design patterns, and finally QuestGarden.
Today’s presentation was a one-year review of the QuestGarden project. I would describe QuestGarden as an example of a more socially-based site – users have accounts, WebQuests are built with the aid of specialized design tools and design guidelines, and participants have the opportunity to repurpose/extend WebQuests developed by others.
Turning an idea free and seeing it grow must be very gratifying. It also seems to lead to some frustration – a kind of “that is not what I meant” feeling. The issue that seems to generate the frustration involves the type of thinking activities promoted through WebQuests. The goal is to encourage analysis and above (Bloom’s taxonomy). Bernie would prefer other tasks based on the general model to be called web exercises.
QuestGarden will require a subscription fee as of Sept. 1. The fee ($20 for two years) is low and intended to defray server and bandwidth costs. Access to WebQuests will continue at no cost and a brief no cost experience will be available to support college courses intended to introduce future teachers to WebQuests.
Details! Details! We made it to San Diego for NECC without problems. I paid my ISTE dues. I reserved a hotel room. I even made it to the plane on time. I forgot one small thing. I forget to register. It turns out that early bird registration for ISTE members is $140. On-site registration is $298.
It is really OK. I do not mind supporting the financial needs of the organization. It is just that I now have provided Cindy another example of my organizational skills and I am likely to hear about this again.
Happy Independence Day (before attending digital photography session)
The topic of evaluating blog entries has surfaced. If you are an educator and intend to involve your students in “blogging to learn”, the suggestions that have emerged in this strand are interesting.
However, I would probably not hold myself to these standards. Some expectations, for example, involve cross-checking multiple sources to create a well reasoned post. This is great expectation if one is blogging to learn or if one wants to position his/her blog as a source of perspective for others. What if one “blogs to remember” (a personal goal) or “blogs to stimulate” (a social goal)? Perhaps we need to tag our entries by purpose rather than by topic.
“We’ve been sitting on the top of the pile for so long that we’ve grown complacent. The attitude is we’ll never be knocked off the top of the perch. People are dangerously naïve and uninformed about what’s going on in other parts of the globe.”
The article appears to call for a tighter integration of business and education. Not sure I agree – the mantra used to be “prepare students to be learners and thinkers – preparing students for the jobs of today results in outdated workers”. While I agree that educational institutions need to change, moving occupational training into the K-12 environment, not matter what the focus, is not going to prepare a generation capable of the type of innovation needed for a competitive world. I do agree with the concern that our education system exists within an environment of conformity – too few options to develop local strengths and take advantage of local opportunities.
The Senate Commerce Committee moves on with a proposal that would offer providers new opportunities without the assurance of net neutrality (eSchool News source).
The attempt to assure net neutrality was an attempt to address the following issue (quote from linked article):
Supporters of the amendment argued that service providers could give preferential treatment to business partners or use pricing and access limits to discriminate between web sites and other internet users. Phone companies have talked about creating a “two-tiered” system in which users of their networks–including schools and other web site operators–desiring faster service for the delivery of broadband or voice-over-IP applications would have to pay more. Those who couldn’t pay would be relegated to the internet “slow lane.”
The neutrality issue is not about setting a price point for connection, it is about providers ability to alter download speed of categories of data in support of provider self interest. For example, a telephone company may degrate VOIP speeds to encourage traditional phone use. A cable company might degrade video downloads to encourage pay per view or the purchase of additional channels. The provider would not be “neutral” with respect to the content one could effectively download from the Internet. The potential problem would seem to be most dangerous in locations where real competition does not exist (perhaps less populated areas without alternative providers) and users could not switch to a different provider offering more competitive services.
