Optimus Studio Blog

How can a system run when the one thing that it focuses on isn’t implemented? Put it another way, how can you teach if you don’t practice what you preach — and what you preach is how to teach!?! Besides being a cyclical conundrum, I have yet to figure out how this flaw is accepted, reinforced and supported in educational settings.

I present to you — Manhattan Protege. An experimental online socialized learning environment where graduate students of education become teachers and they learn how to traverse the online landscape, support learning for deeper thinking and analysis, and improve their teaching skills. Where are the courses that teach traditional teachers how to teach online? The transition is NOT transparent, and, while most online learning exists in a vacuum (that is, the institution offers the course, the student interacts with the professor and fellow students, and the material is covered and completed — all without the opportunity of conversing with those in the field or outside the institution. Hence a vacuum.), it’s not safe to assume that ‘just teaching’ covers the bases. Students in this environment work harder and create more substantive artifacts (papers, discussion posts, projects) than their f2f (face-to-face) peers. It’s unfortunate that the learning in this environment is seen as easier, but, as the old adage goes, ‘you cannot fully comprehend what you don’t understand’. I don’t think that most people understand how much and how far online learning has come over the past couple of decades and that distance learning (online, blended, virtual) is in it’s infancy and will only grow as technology diffuses into different socio-economic environments.

That being said, go to my web-site (http://www.manhattanprotege.com) and sign up to join the revolution (or atleast the insurgency).

Humbly, Cameron

Do accelerated release cycles positively or negatively impact the pace of innovation? I will answer this question when I have more time — also known as after Christmas.

-Cameron

Seems like every day brings with it more obligations and responsibilities. My coursework has been intense lately, but I’m glad it’s that way and not the other way around (otherwise I’d say I’m throwing away valuable dollars). At any rate, I find myself constantly reading and absorbing information. At the same time, however, I find that managing my content in an easy way seems to have evaded me. The solution? An onine-based application that requests the course ID, session number, session topic, article titles with corresponding areas for both key terms and summaries, and an overall summary of the session. This collection of data could then be formatted to be printed and used as a physical reference to my already substantial printed article repository (also known as my filing cabinet FULL of print media).

That’s it! I’m not going to posit any additional features. This idea is well on its way to becoming part of my teacher tools (tbd).

“Patent pending, patent pending, patent pending… hey, who is this guy?” - Homer Simpson

No, really, patent pending!
-Cameron

There is a principle in interface design that goes something like “the fewer clicks to get to a point, the better”. So why is it, after so many years of development on online learning systems, that I have to click on the ‘Reply’ button when I want to make a comment on a peer’s work? This one little, tiny detail stifles participation because the user has to ‘change states’ in order to go from ‘reader’ to ‘participant’. Yet this system is made ONLY for participants. So why should I have to modify how the screen is organized in order to easily, quickly and readily comment on a posting? This is not how an intelligent techology should function. The system should be built to encourage my participation from the start and simply allow the user to make the determination as to whether he/she wishes to contribute to a particular post or not.

Now some blogging systems have it right (unfortunately, not WordPress). Don’t get me wrong… I like this system. In fact, this system has made it possible for me to ‘jump on board’ without extensive training and get right into this new publication medium. However, the systems that are properly laid out let the reader, after skimming through the profound posting by the author, immediately post his/her statements directly below the posting. This lets the user (1) see the information previously written as direct reference for the posting and (2) encourages participation on that particular blog. A single click takes the user one step further away from the material and, consequently, sends a subliminal message to the user that he/she must be a part of a ‘unique club’ in order to contribute words to this blog. Web 2.0 (or the moniker associated with social networking) is built upon the principles of “empowering citizen media…, democratiz[ing] culture, buid[ing] authentic communit[ies] (and) creat[ing] citizen media” (Keen, 2006, The second generation of the Internet has arrived. It’s worse than you think.). In order to properly address the issue of ‘building authentic communities’, the system must allow for the user to make his/her thoughts readily known without the need to take an additional step. Conversations, in the traditional sense of two people talking, are not likely to have deliberate breaks interwoven within the stream on dialogue to denote entry and exit points. You wouldn’t say to somebody “say ‘reply’ in order to respond to my statement”, so why should you have to do the same in an environment which is meant to encourage continuous dialogues?

-Cameron

Where is the de-facto standard? Is it Blackboard? Moodle? WebCT (absorbed by Blackboard)? Why is it so difficult to develop a standard that is universally applicable yet scalable to accomodate the needs of a wider audience. Certainly Moodle has this capability, but the user base is limited initially by the stigma associated with ‘open source’ and ‘unsupported’. Blackboard has some great features but the mention of cost and academia in the same sentence send the majority running to their plan books.

Basically, I think there are some developments that need attention. In the coming year I will make the best darned effort that I can to develop some modules that will reinforce the extensibility of Moodle to the degree that what the user needs is available without a steep learning curve. I’d like a ticket-based assignment management system that is synchronized with a calendar (patent-pending). That’s what I think is severely limited. That’s the point of entry for my foray into the development of Moodle modules.

-Cameron

The MIT Media Lab and Nicholas Negroponte have created a low-cost laptop that (ideally) will change the face of global computing trends in markets that would otherwise not benefit from such an innovation (namely, ‘third world’ countries). The device has been developed and crafted to support ‘mesh networks’ (the antennae are raised and, when there are multiple machines in one location, the systems multiply the signal thus making it possible to build a no-configure wireless sharing network), low power drainage (2 watts versus the typical 45 to 65 watts) and a 2 mil plastic casing (versus the typical .7 mil). All of these innovations aside, the real beauty in this device is not the numerous technological marvels crammed inside this lime green powerhouse but, rather, the social implications that could be derived from this device.

This diatribe reminds me of an episode of the West Wing where Josh and Tobey are hammering out an affordable AIDS treatment drug for Africa. The pharmaceutical companies spend hours discussing how they are being fiscally responsive to the need for medicine in that part of the world. Conversely, Josh and Tobey argue that their pricing structure is far outside the rates imposed on other nations and feel that the pharm companies are simply not doing enough to facilitate a feasible solution. Ultimately, the conversation veers towards one undeniable, irrefutable fact… that regardless of the AIDS treatment package they offer the Africans the drugs will never be fully effective. This ineffectiveness is not due to any reason other than that those living in tribal locations do not own precision time pieces (at least the majority would not). The drugs require that each recipient take them at measured intervals. Regardless of the fiscal solution hammered out in Washington those infected with HIV and AIDS will not be able to effectively treat themselves due to a logical limitation in cultural resources.

In regards to the Laptop for developing nations, it’s my belief that regardless of the tool being distributed and available there must be an infrastructure in place to support this development. Building an infrastructure without resources is like asking a builder to make the outside of the house and you’ll worry about filling in the foundation later. This ‘building’ scenario requires that foundations be developed, tested and implemented prior to the deployment of an effective technology. Building a house without proper research is typically not done and is generally a bad idea. The same principle applies to developing educational solutions in a country with atypical educational structures and even more unpredicatble standards and precedents.

On that note I will sign off for the evening. Do I think that the $100 ($150?) laptop is a great idea? I certainly do. Just as others have voiced their concerns on the NYTimes Reader’s Opinions section, I am certain that with the proper guidance and initiative the One Laptop Per Child initiative will leave no child behind.