Second Life

I have finally delved into the world of Second Life. I've signed up a couple of times only to forget or lose the login information and had never installed the client program. Finally, the other night I had some time and I loaded it up, created a new account and went for a journey. Of course, I rushed through all the introductory stuff and I am now wandering aimlessly through the environment. Since I barged through the beginning, I'm half-lost most of the time. I think someone saw me doing the hula tonight as I was messing around with the gestures and didn't think anyone was around! Oh well, I guess that's the beauty of an online environment - the loss of your normal inhibitions (which could get some people in trouble). (*think: act professional!*)

I absolutely love the presence of the many different edutech organizations. I haven't been much of an early adopter with this technology - but it's definitely interesting to watch its development.

If you're ever in SL and see Bishop Menges walking around looking lost - stop and say hi - and see if I need directions.

Is Skype on its way out?

Skype has enjoyed several years as the godfather of voice-over-internet-protocol (VoIP), but maybe its time on top is coming to an end. Yes, it is still very widely used (I have an account myself), but imagine a world were VoIP calls could be placed without having to download a client software? This idea is closer than someone might think!

Skype has two basic weaknesses:
#1. It requires a user to download and install client software as well as register for an account.
#2. It is typically not well received by network administrators for a variety of reasons. Gerry Blackwell over at VoIP Planet wrote

Because Skype is not standards based, [it] can easily penetrate firewalls and is often undetectable, it could expose corporate networks to viruses, worms and other kinds of hacker attacks.
Skype's encryption is closed source and possibly not well managed. If it were compromised at some point, outsiders could intercept and decrypt calls resulting in damaging information leaks.
Because Skype communications are unauditable, employees using it could make it more difficult for their companies to meet compliance requirements.

So what if someone could place a VoIP call without installing a local client? The people over at Dimdim have begun to develop just such a tool. While Dimdim 1.6 is still in Alpha release, the features offered so far are nearly seamless in implementation. We have tested it extensively at my school district hoping that we could utilize it for student learning opportunities. It allows for VoIP between multiple parties, video transmitted by the presenter, and the presenter can share files and his/her desktop.

What are some drawbacks to Dimdim? First, and perhaps the biggest: you must have a server to run it. This presents the largest problem for most people. Another problem is that right now, a Dimdim server operator cannot limit who can use the server (which could cause severe bandwidth issues). Finally, there are several portions of the program that are not yet fully developed (ok, I know...it's still in Alpha release). Plans are being made for video transmission by all conference attendees (not just the presenter) and for a fully interactive white board area.

Why is this exciting and interesting? Alan November suggests using programs like Skype to connect classrooms around the globe - but what if you could just send the person a link to a webpage - they click on it and WHAM! You are conducting a full-blown videoconference. WOW!

And to put the icing on the cake - there are developers working to create a Dimdim plugin for Moodle. As soon as I see it released, I'll try it out on my test Moodle install (so I'm a little gun shy of plugging in Alpha and Beta releases into my full blown production Moodle).

This is definitely an open source community to watch!

RE: Missed Opporunity

Brian over at Bump on the Blog posted a topic that drew some pretty heated discussion from those tied directly to the situation. I have been in several school districts in my teaching career and have witnessed firsthand the closed-mindedness of the "typical" technology department. In my experience, technology departments possess a focus of power from controlling the users on "their" network. This climate is usually attributable to the Network Administrator. I have worked with network administrators that willingly shared power with "site techs" in order to streamline work flow (and decrease trouble ticket response time). I have also worked with network administrators that kept their power close and shared it with no one.

My current school district is using a different model than what I have experienced in the past. They have hired a former teacher and certified administrator to run the technology department. The technology department is under the umbrella of the curriculum department. Therefore, a former teacher works with other former teachers (curriculum coordinators) to make sure our classroom teachers have the technology tools they need (even the ones they don't know they need yet too!). This model is a far cry from the Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer dictating what is or is not appropriate for curriculum in the classroom.

I feel for the people in Brian G's posting, because I have been there. If something similar happened in my sphere of influence, I would work to find a solution to the problem instead of uttering the all-to-typical technology "NO".

Educational Software Doesn't Work?

A recent study, as reported by MSNBC and The Washington Post, suggests that educational software is not living up to the hype as presented by the companies that represent and sell this stuff to schools. Each one of these programs is shown, by company produced research, to increase test scores, as if we should be solely focused on test scores. No Child Left Behind has forced schools to abandon educating children and instead has forced teachers and administrators to prepare students to pass standardized tests (don't most educational researchers already agree that the portfolio system, be it traditional or digital, are far superior methods of assessing learning? - please correct me if I'm wrong). These tests are actually endorsed by many people, educator and noneducator alike, in the name of accountability. Accountability is good, right? Of course!?!

The failure of these software programs has been attributed to their implementation. These companies have the audacity to first sell a product that may or may not improve student learning (even though we are told it does from the get-go by their "research") and then to now blame us for not correctly implementing their product. Of course, their may be some truth to that statement. There is plenty of research that shows that school have enough money to buy a product, but not enough to do proper follow up. With Web 2.0, some of the best learning tools available don't cost money at all! (Think about all the free online collaboration tools!).

Teachers and administrators are required by NCLB to use research-based methods for working to increase test scores. While the federal Department of Education has created a research-based "What Works Clearinghouse" the overall commitment to the program appears to be pretty dismal. An answer has been given birth in a small town in Oklahoma by two public school administrators: Educational Underwriters (EdU). Their web page declares:

Educational Underwriters is a non-profit organization committed to serving educators seeking to meet No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirements and to establishing best practices in education. EdU reviews the research behind educational programs and products to verify that they meet NCLB requirements and high educational standards. The core mission: researchers verifying research.

EdU is the first organization created to certify educational research as NCLB compliant.

Founded by school administrators, EdU operates to ensure that the educational community meets the intent of NCLB in three ways:

• EdU serves educators by ensuring that the educational products you purchase are NCLB compliant.
• EdU serves researchers by guarding the integrity of educational research.
• EdU serves vendors by providing your customers assurance that your products meet NCLB standards.

This organization is just getting off the ground and while it's unfortunate that it must exist, let's spread the word that Educational Underwriters is striving to be a unbiased voice among the vendors pushing their untested products on education. How do they seek to achieve this goal? By using nonpartisan researchers to evaluate the research provided by the vendors seeking EdU approval.

Perhaps this organization can help schools save the precious resources for programs and products that truly have a positive impact on teaching and learning.


Full Disclosure: I personally know the founders of this organization and have heard about it many times over even reading and editing research documents produced detailing the creation and continued growth of the organization. Bill and Tom (or should I call you Grizzly and Denzel?), you guys are doing great!

Open Source?

I have seen a lot of bloggings on the case for open source software in the classroom. From people saying that we ought to remove Windows OS because of the extreme cost to others saying the Linux-based (like Edubunto) systems will not prepare students for the workplace. This debate is not likely to die down at any time soon. Both sides hold valid points, but the open source programs continue to gain ground on the Windows dominated computer environment. Maybe a better thing for Microsoft would be to give schools (common education) desktop software for free?? (I'm sure Bill Gates would pass out from that idea).

Aside from operating systems, it is hard to beat the "free-ness" of programs like Audacity nor the complexity of course management systems like Moodle. The open source movement benefits education by providing low-cost (hey, it's free!), quality programs that students, teachers, and administrators can use to their advantage.

Lately I've been seeing a lot of talk in the blogosphere about DrupalEd as a course management system (CMS). I have not seen as much about Moodle or Sakai. From what I have seen, Sakai is primarily based for universities and I have not seen an common ed application of it yet. Moodle on the other hand is used by both common and higher education and has a nice online community pushing for developments specifically for K-12 environments. My school district chose Moodle and it potentially saved us thousands of dollars in subscription fees to other fee-based course management systems (who shall remain nameless). Just the cost of a web server, which we wanted to purchase anyways and a quick installation later and we are up and running (for privacy's sake, Guests can't log in - sorry!). I am interested in seeing where the DrupalEd community goes since it seems to be based entirely in the K-12 segment of the world. Maybe FERPA will be a leading design factor there.

So which CMS do you like best? Which are are you using? Let me know...