agregador de noticias

Facebook’s Identity Authentication Is Broken

OLDaily - 13 Octubre, 2014 - 02:16

Alec Couros, Open Thinking, Oct 12, 2014

Centralized systems eventually break down. In the current case, it's Facebook's identity service. As Alec Couross has described in the past (here’ s the original post  which outlines the problem and here is the followup) he has been beset with an endless series of people faking his account. "These profiles have shown up on sites such as Twitter,,, Christian Mingle, and most prominently, Facebook." And now, to add insult to injury, he writes, "while I have successfully had Facebook take down hundreds of profiles, apparently they no longer believe that I am Alec Couros."

[Link] [Comment]
Categorías: General

Is It Ever Okay to Make Teachers Read Scripted Lessons?

OLDaily - 13 Octubre, 2014 - 02:16

Terrance F. Ross, The Atlantic, Oct 12, 2014

I guess that if the teachers were completely unqualified, and the students unable to read, then there might be a benefit to reading scripted lessons. But I think the benefits would be pretty minimal, and as critic Kate Redman says, “ Such an education is unlikely to spur the imaginations of the students or encourage critical thinking or social mobility. It is more likely to lead to rote-learning, and would likely leave little flexibility. There is no evidence it can serve as a permanent approach.” Nonetheless, such an approach has been taken by Bridge International Academies, a for-profit company that has has more than 350 locations and 100,000 students in Kenya. And if it's true that "at the only schools available to these families there was very little education being delivered," then this is better than nothing. But I still think (from a very distant first-world perspective) that they money they take from the system could be better spent. Via Doug Belshaw / Audrey Watters.

[Link] [Comment]
Categorías: General

What is a MOOC?

Tony Bates - 13 Octubre, 2014 - 01:03

© Giulia Forsythe, 2012 and JISC, 2012

MOOCs as a design model

I have already covered seven different design models for teaching and learning in Chapter 6 of my open textbook, Teaching in a Digital Age. I have dithered a bit over whether MOOCs are a unique design model, because they contain a mix of familiar and somewhat unfamiliar approaches to teaching and learning – and also because there are different forms of MOOCs. I also don’t want to give too much attention to a form of teaching and learning that is already grossly overhyped. However I have decided to bite the bullet. I have to deal with MOOCs somewhere in the book, so a chapter on models of design for teaching and learning seems as good a place as any.

Because this topic is too big for one blog post, I plan a series of three or four posts. I could do a whole book on this topic , but this section of Chapter 6 has to be concise and accurate, while also dealing with the strengths and weaknesses of MOOCs, particularly with regard to meeting the needs of learners in a digital age, which for me means asking the question: can or do MOOCs provide the learning and skills that students will need in the future? Also please remember this book is aimed at teachers and instructors who are NOT specialists or even experienced in online learning, so the content of this blog post in particular will not come as a surprise to any of my regular readers.

This is the outline I am proposing for my section on MOOCs in Chapter 6:

  • Introduction
  • Brief history
  • Key characteristics of MOOCs
  • the xMOOC design model
  • the cMOOC design model
  • Strengths and weaknesses of MOOCs
  • Personal conclusions, including the political-economic context that has driven the MOOC phenomenon
  • References

I will cover the first three bullets in this post, the design models in one or two more posts, followed by my analysis of MOOCs in my last (couple of) post(s) on this topic.


Probably no development in teaching in recent years has been as controversial as the development of Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs). In 2013, the author Thomas Friedland wrote in the New York Times:

...nothing has more potential to enable us to reimagine higher education than the massive open online course ….For relatively little money, the U.S. could rent space in an Egyptian village, install two dozen computers and high-speed satellite Internet access, hire a local teacher as a facilitator, and invite in any Egyptian who wanted to take online courses with the best professors in the world, subtitled in Arabic…I can see a day soon where you’ll create your own college degree by taking the best online courses from the best professors from around the world ….paying only the nominal fee for the certificates of completion. It will change teaching, learning and the pathway to employment.

Many others have referred to MOOCs as a prime example of the kind of disruptive technology that Clayton Christensen (2010) has argued will change the world of education. Others have argued that MOOCs are not a big deal, just a more modern version of educational broadcasting, and do not really affect the basic fundamentals of education, and in particular do not address the type of learning needed in the 21st century.

MOOCs can be seen then as either a major revolution in education or just another example of the overblown hyperbole often surrounding technology, particularly in the USA. I shall be arguing that MOOCs are a significant development, but they have severe limitations for developing the knowledge and skills needed in a digital age.

Brief history

Elements of MOOCs have been around for some time. The British Open University, funded by the U.K. government, started offering open degree programs by distance in 1971, although sadly its degree programs are no longer free. Nevertheless, much of its teaching material is still open through its OpenLearn portal. Some of the British OU’s courses are also quite large (around 5,000 students).

In 2003 Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) began offering digital video recordings of many of its lectures and accompanying materials such as slides for free downloading through its OpenCourseWare (OCW) project. Apple opened iTunes U in its iTunes store in 2007. I TunesU enables educational audio and video files from universities to be downloaded for free. It currently has over 50,000 entries. OpenLearn, OCW, and iTunesU are just some examples of open educational resources, free for students (and also instructors) to use in their learning and teaching. However, they are not courses.

Fully online credit courses have been offered by school boards, colleges and universities since 1995, usually in parallel with the on-campus version of the same course. Credit-based online learning has been gaining ground steadily, with increases in annual enrollment for fully online courses averaging between 10-20% per annum per year across the higher education system in the USA, resulting in somewhere between 25 to 30 per cent of all credit enrollments by 2012 (Allen and Seaman, 2014; US Department of Education, 2014). However, access to online credit courses requires admission to university and the payment of tuition fees, so although online, they are neither open nor massive.

The term MOOC was used for the first time in 2008 for a course offered by the Extension Division of the University of Manitoba in Canada. This non-credit course, Connectivism and Connective Knowledge (CK08) was designed by George Siemens, Stephen Downes and Dave Cormier. It enrolled 25 on-campus students who paid a tuition fee but was also offered online for free as an experiment. Much to the surprise of the instructors, 2,200 students enrolled in the free online version. Downes classified this course and others like it that followed as connectivist or cMOOCs, because of their design.

In the fall of 2011, two computer science professors from Stanford University, Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig, launched a MOOC on The Introduction to AI (artificial intelligence) that attracted over 160,000 enrollments, followed quickly by two other MOOCs, also in computer sciences, from Stanford instructors Andrew Ng and Daphne Koller. Thrun went on to found Udacity, and Ng and Koller established Coursera. These are for-profit companies using their own specially developed software that enable massive numbers of registrations and a platform for the teaching. Udacity and Coursera formed partnerships with other leading universities where the universities pay a fee to offer their own MOOCs through these platforms. Udacity more recently has changed direction and is now focusing more on the vocational and corporate training market.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and Harvard University in March 2012 developed an open source platform for MOOCs called edX, which also acts as a platform for online registration and teaching. edX has also developed partnerships with leading universities to offer MOOCs without direct charge for hosting their courses, although some may pay to become partners in edX. Other platforms for MOOCs, such as the U.K. Open University’s FutureLearn, have also been developed. Because the majority of MOOCs offered through these various platforms are based mainly on video lectures and computer-marked tests, Downes has classified these as xMOOCs, to distinguish them from the more connectivist cMOOCs.

In 2014 there are approximately 1,000 MOOCs available from universities in the USA, and 800 from European institutions. Also there are MOOCs now in several languages besides English, but mainly in Spanish and French.

Key characteristics of MOOCs

All MOOCs have some common features, although we shall see that the term MOOC covers an increasingly wide range of designs.


In the three years following its launch in 2011, Coursera claims over 7.5 million sign-ups with its largest course claiming 240,000 participants. The huge numbers (in the hundreds of thousands) enrolling in the earliest MOOCs are not always replicated in later MOOCs, but the numbers are still substantial. For instance, in 2013, the University of British Columbia offered several MOOCs through Coursera, with the numbers initially signing up ranging from 25,000 to 190,000 per course (Engle, 2014).

However, even more important than the actual numbers is that in principle MOOCs have infinite scalability. There is technically no limit to their final size, because the marginal cost of adding each extra participant is nil for the institutions offering MOOCs. (In practice this is not quite true, as central technology, backup and bandwidth costs increase, and as we shall see, there can be some knock-on costs for an institution offering MOOCs as numbers increase. However, the cost of each additional participant is so small, given the very large numbers, that it can be more or less ignored). The scalability of MOOCs is probably the characteristic that has attracted the most attention, especially from governments, but it should be noted that this is also a characteristic of broadcast television and radio, so it is not unique to MOOCs.


There are no pre-requisites for participants other than access to a computer/mobile device and the Internet. However, broadband access is essential for xMOOCs that use video streaming, and probably desirable even for cMOOCs. Furthermore, at least for the initial MOOCs, access is free for participants, although an increasing number of MOOCs are charging a fee for assessment leading to a badge or certificate.

However, there is one significant way in which MOOCs through Coursera are not fully open. Coursera owns the rights to the materials, so they cannot be repurposed or reused without permission, and the material may be removed from the Coursera site when the course ends. Also, Coursera decides which institutions can host MOOCs on its platform - this is not an open access for institutions. On the other hand, edX is an open source platform, so any institution that joins edX can develop their own MOOCs with their own rules regarding rights to the material. cMOOCs are generally completely open, but since individual participants of cMOOCs create a lot if not all of the material it is not always clear whether they own the rights and how long the MOOC materials will remain available.

It should also be noted that many other kinds of online material are also open and free over the Internet, often in ways that are more accessible for reuse than MOOC material.


MOOCs are offered at least initially wholly online, but increasingly institutions are negotiating with the rights holders to use MOOC materials in a blended format for use on campus. In other words, the institution provides learner support for the MOOC materials through the use of campus-based instructors. For instance at San Jose State University, on-campus students used MOOC materials from Udacity courses, including lectures, readings and quizzes, and then instructors spent classroom time on small-group activities, projects and quizzes to check progress.

Again though it should be noted that MOOCs are not unique in offering courses online. There are over 7 million students in the USA alone taking for-credit online courses.


One characteristic that distinguishes MOOCs from most other open educational resources is that they are organized into a whole course.

However, what this actually means for participants is not exactly clear. Although many MOOCs offer certificates or badges for successful completion of a course, to date these have not been accepted for admission or for credit, even (or especially) by the institutions offering the MOOCs.


It can be seen that all the key characteristics of MOOCs exist in some form or other outside MOOCs. What makes MOOCs unique though is the combination of the four key characteristics, and in particular the fact that they scale massively and are open and free for participants.

To come
  • the xMOOC design model
  • the cMOOC design model
  • Strengths and weaknesses of MOOCs
  • Personal conclusions, including the political-economic context that has driven the MOOC phenomenon
Over to you

1. Is this an accurate description of MOOCs and their history?

2. Is there something I have left out that needs to be included in this basic description (remembering I will be going into more detail about completion rates, assessment, etc., in describing the strengths and weaknesses)?

Coming next

In a day or two: the design models of xMOOCs and cMOOCs


Allen, I. and Seaman, J. (2014) Grade Change: Tracking Online Learning in the United States Wellesley MA: Babson College/Sloan Foundation

Christensen, C. (2010) Disrupting Class, Expanded Edition: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns New York: McGraw-Hill

Engle, W. (2104) UBC MOOC Pilot: Design and Delivery Vancouver BC: University of British Columbia

Friedland, T. (2013) Revolution hits the universities, New York Times, January 26

U.S.Department of Education (2014) Web Tables: Enrollment in Distance Education Courses, by State: Fall 2012 Washington DC: U.S.Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics



Para una tecnología educativa crítica

Jordi Adell - 12 Octubre, 2014 - 11:37

Hace unos días, leyendo el libro de Selwyn y Facer (2013), que recomiendo vivamente a toda persona que se dedique a la tecnología educativa o que la utilice en su práctica docente (no tengo comisión), encontré una cita que no me resisto a copiar aquí. Es de un artículo de Amin y Trift de 2005 y explica qué es, según Selwyn y Facer,  “adoptar un punto de vista políticamente consciente” de la tecnología educativa

It is important to note at this point that adopting a politically aware “critical” approach toward educational technology does not necessarily entail a dogmatic adherence to any particular theoretical stance, school-of-thought or “-ism.” Rather the critical perspective is rooted in a broader recognition of technology and education as a set of profoundly political processes and practices that are usefully described in terms of issues of power, control, conflict, and resistance. As such, much of the underlying impetus for a critical approach toward educational technology stems from a desire to foster and support issues of empowerment, equality, social justice, and participatory democracy (see Gunter, 2009). These ambitions are perhaps best summarized by Amin and Thrift (2005, p. 221) in their four-point agenda for critical scholarship as follows:

First, a powerful sense of engagement with politics and the political. Second, and following on, a consistent belief that there must be better ways of doing things than are currently found in the world. Third, a necessary orientation to a critique of power and exploitation that both blight people’s current lives and stop better ways of doing things from coming into existence. Fourth, a constant and unremitting critical reflexivity towards our own practices: no one is allowed to claim that they have the one and only answer or the one and only privileged vantage point. Indeed, to make such a claim is to become a part of the problem.

 Pues eso.



Amin, A. & Thrift, N. (2005). What’s left? Just the future. Antipode, 37, 220–238.

Facer, K. & Selwyn, N. (2013). The Politics of Education and Technology: Conflicts, Controversies, and Connections. New York: Palgrave MacMillan. (el primer capítulo, del que he tomado la cita,  se puede bajar gratuitamente).

Categorías: General

The Battle for Beauty

OLDaily - 12 Octubre, 2014 - 02:10

Peter Vanderauwera, Petervan, Oct 11, 2014

I don't agree with all of this, but I do agree with the core sentiment, especially as it regards my work and my reserach. "It was about architecture that had been taken over by businessmen, and artists not being allowed to carry out their rich hunger for beauty. A bit like Evgeny Morosov’ s fight against “ solutionism” , where the world is taken over by VCs and commerce in stead of asking the real big questions related to ethos and quality of life." Sadly, however, beauty has already been acquired by businesses and VCs. Books like  Lovemarks make it clear how they draw on human emotion to connect people to brands. So to me this article has the flaavour of wanting from humans what VCs and commerce already (promise to) deliver. There is a space, though, beyond even this, perhaps captured most evocatively by the phrase in Moulin rouge and reflected in my Moulin Ching.

[Link] [Comment]
Categorías: General

Nueva guía didáctica para las aulas 1x1

Cuando hacia 2008 empezamos a hablar de las aulas 2.0 (en algunos lugares se llamaban aulas 1x1), las asociábamos a que los estudiantes pudieran disponer de un pequeño ordenador portátil (netbook) para realizar diversos trabajos (cada alumno un ordenador, 1x1).
Además, se contaba con que las aulas tendrían conexión a Internet, de manera que los estudiantes con su netbook podrían utilizar las prometedoras aplicaciones de la llamada web 2.0, que permitían que todos pudiéramos interaccionar y compartir nuestros materiales y comentarios con todos.
Han pasado 6 años, ahora las cosas ya no son exactamente así.

En esta nueva guía de las aulas 1x1 se abordan  tres cuestiones:

  • ¿Qué son? ¿Qué recursos tecnológicos integran? ¿Qué aporta cada uno?
  • Orientaciones para su utilización
  • 29 modelos didácticos de uso de las aulas 1x1

Como siempre, agradeceré comentarios y sugerencias para mejorar esta guía.

Hack Education Weekly News: Malala Yousafzai Wins the Nobel Peace Prize

Hack Education - 11 Octubre, 2014 - 01:08

I think it’s fair to say it’s been a particularly difficult week for women in technology. The Grace Hopper Celebration decided to invite a panel of “male allies” to talk about fixing sexism in tech. (Panel members included the CEO of GoDaddy, known best perhaps for its sexist advertising campaigns). Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella said that women shouldn’t ask for raises; they should trust “karma.” And tech educator Kathy Sierra deleted her Twitter account (@seriouspony), leaving behind a really chilling blog post (Wired version) about her ongoing experiences with harassment and trolling. In response, Adria Richards shared some of her experiences with violent threats and harassment as well.

Some people in education technology continue to dismiss this rampant misogyny as something that the tech sector suffers from but that education is somehow immune to. Education and ed-tech are not immune.

Malala Yousafzai won the Nobel Peace Prize today (sharing the prize with Kailash Satyarthi) for her work campaigning for girls’ right to an education. She is the youngest person to win the award. Yesterday marked the two year anniversary of her being shot by a Taliban gunman as she boarded her school bus.

“I think of it often and imagine the scene clearly. Even if they come to kill me, I will tell them what they are trying to do is wrong, that education is our basic right.” – Malala Yousafzai, in 2011 foreseeing the assassination attempt

Education Law and Politics

The Philadelphia School Reform Commission canceled its teachers’ contract this week, prompting students in Philadelphia to go “on strike” in support of their teachers.

The Easton Area School District in Pennsylvania “has agreed to pay $385,000 to attorneys who successfully challenged the district’s policy banning breast cancer awareness bracelets with the slogan ‘I ♥ Boobies!’”

The US Supreme Court has rejected the appeal of Ohio public school teacher John Freshwater, who was fired for promoting creationism and refusing to remove religious items from his classroom.

“The Los Angeles school district’s bond-oversight panel has rejected a move by officials to spend an additional $42 million on new computers, including purchases under a controversial—and recently suspended—technology contract.” LOL LOL LOL.

GigaOm reports that Amazon is fighting the FTC, refusing to settle over allegations about in-app purchases aimed at kids. (Apple and Google have both settled with the government.)

From Vanity Fair: “If Kentucky Senator and Republican presidential hopeful Rand Paul has his way, classroom sizes will someday rise well beyond their existing ratios of 15-to–1 or 30-to–1. ‘I think we should go to a million to one,’” said Paul. I think he'd be a perfect keynote speaker for SXSWedu.

Protests in Mexico over the disappearance of 43 student-teachers. “The students vanished after police and alleged gang members opened fire on their buses in the southern city of Iguala, located in the violence-plagued state of Guerrero. Six students were killed, while dozens of others were taken away in patrol cars to undisclosed locations.”

How School Lunch Became the Latest Political Battleground.” (Bonus points if you guessed “Benghazi.")


A MOOC about abortion. A MOOC on Ebola health care advice.

For-profit giant Kaplan University launchesOpen College,” which “will include free online services and personalized mentoring to help people identify and organize prior experience and skills that could count toward a degree or move them closer to a new career. It will also provide fee-based services, under a subscription model, that will offer ways for students to satisfy the remaining requirements for a bachelor of science degree in professional studies from Kaplan University.” And it will also serve as the latest example of “openwashing” in education.

Meanwhile on Campus

A stinging investigation by the San Jose Mercury News into San Jose State University’s dealings with Cisco: “Pushed by its ambitious president, San Jose State is spending $28 million on high-tech communications systems worthy of a campus of the future – but an investigation by this newspaper shows the project was crafted largely in secret, purchased without competitive bids and adorned with pricey gadgets that many professors may not even use.”

The University of Southern Maine will cut 50 faculty positions and eliminate two academic programs as it tries to deal with budget deficit issues.

“Beginning next year, Indiana University’s Center for Postsecondary Research will produce the Carnegie Classifications,” reports Inside Higher Ed. (The Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education includes “doctorate-granting universities,” “Master’s Colleges and Universities,” “Baccalaureate Colleges,” “Associates Colleges,” and “NFL Training Campuses.” OK. I made that last one up. Maybe the new classification system should include it though.)

Via The Chronicle: “The University of Maryland University College, fearing that it has lost its mojo as a dominant player in online education and suffering from recent enrollment declines, is considering converting itself into a private nonprofit institution.”

From The New York Times, “Community College Students Face a Very Long Road to Graduation

Education-Degree Programs, Once Popular, Take a Nosedive,” reports The Chronicle. (Note: “Enrollment in for-profit graduate education programs decreased more than 21 percent but was still more than 50 percent higher than in 2004.”)

Here’s how not to teach students about “online safety.”

And in other “shaming women news,” George Will has been uninvited to speak at Scripps College because of an op-ed he wrote about campus sexual assault.

From the HR Department

Chicago Teachers Union president Karen Lewis has stepped aside from her role due to a “serious illness,” handing over leadership of the union to its vice president, Jesse Sharkey. No details on the illness, and no word how this might affect a bid for mayor. Although she hasn’t declared her candidacy, she had been exploring the idea and polls suggest she could beat current mayor Rahm Emanuel. (Get well soon, Karen.)

The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, one of the two Common Core assessment initiatives, says that its executive director Joe Willhoft is stepping down and will be replaced by Chief Operating Officer Tony Alpert.

Ellucian has a new CEO: Jeff Ray.

Jim Blew will replace Michelle Rhee as the head of Students First.

Education data company Knewton says that teachers should be treated like software engineers. Or like movie stars. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Upgrades and Downgrades

The Digital Reader’s Nate Hoffelder broke the story this week that Adobe Digital Editions has been collecting users’ reading data and sending it back to company servers in unencrypted text. It’s this week’s “What You Should Know…” over on EML, and The Digital Shift has a good summary too about the privacy implications for readers and for libraries.

The Academy of Art University used to grant students permanent licenses for the Adobe CS6 Master Collection as part of their tuition. But apparently Adobe has deactivated these licenses, without any warning, demanding students now pay a $60/month subscription fee to continue access.

Hackers have released a cache of 13GB of Snapchat users’ photos. Although users believe Snapchats disappear after viewing, a third-party app has apparently been collecting these images for several years. About half of Snapchats’ users are between age 13 and 17. “4chan users say the collection of photos has a large amount of child pornography, including many videos sent between teenagers who believed the files would be immediately deleted after viewing.”

Will Curriculet’s Rentals Mark the End of Physical Libraries?” asks Edsurge. Investors have their fingers crossed, I guess.

Also from Edsurge: an app you can auth via your Twitter account that will tell you which educators to follow and what to read (on Edsurge).

GitHub has launched a “Student Developer Pack,” offering a free Micro account along with discounts on a number of other developer tools.

Tripod Education Partners, “best known for its work on a well-publicized study of teacher effectiveness by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation,” is launching a survey tool for teachers. (It must have some hurt feelings that The New York Times tech section gushed about survey startups and didn’t mention it or something.)

Clever has partnered with the AFT to offer its single-sign-on service to the latter’s ShareMyLesson platform – something that’s oddly described in EdWeek as OER. It’s not. In fact, ShareMyLesson’s terms of service are pretty terrible. Funnymonkey’s Bill Fitzgerald has a number of questions about the deal including “What are the financial details of this arrangement? Is AFT getting paid by Clever, is Clever getting paid by AFT, and/or is there any outside funding helping to subsidize this work?”

Bill is on a roll, with a look too at Remind’s privacy policies. On the heels of a $40 million investment in the messaging app last week, it’s definitely worth looking more closely at what happens to student, family, and teacher data.

Meanwhile, a group of tech and textbook companies pinky-swear they’re not going to do bad things with students’ data. Amplify (News Corp) is on the list, so um yeah. I totally believe them. Neither Apple nor Google nor Pearson nor Khan Academy signed. (Pearson did issue a press release “applauding” the idea. But I can’t get it’s website to load. Go figure.)

Microsoft has launched OneNote Class Notebook Creator, which PC World describes as “a classroom assistance application for OneNote and SharePoint Online in Office 365” and Microsoft describes as “a flexible digital framework for teaching and learning.” Right.

Blackboard’s Boss Wants You To Hate His Company Less.” Good luck, Jay.

ScienceOnline is shutting its doors.

“Is It Ever Okay to Make Teachers Read Scripted Lessons?” asks The Atlantic. Its answer: Yes, in Africa. So there you go.

Funding, Acquisitions, and IPOs

TurnItIn, plagiarism detector and cavalier appropriator of students’ IP, has acquired the automated essay grading software LightSideLabs, and John Warner’s write-up of the “embargoed press release” is just perfect.

CL Educate has filed the paperwork for an IPO, Edukwest reports. The company operates test prep centers in Dubai, Abu Dhabi, and Northern India.

Fedora, an e-commerce startup that lets teachers sell their classes online, has raised $1 million from Kamal Ravikant, Naval Ravikant, Matt Brezina, Aaron Batalion, Billy Draper,, Winklevoss Capital, Maiden Lane Ventures, AngelList Syndicate Fund, and Adam Foroughi. You know if the Winklevoss twins are in on it, it’s gotta be grand.

Adventure to Fitness, which makes online fitness videos for kids, has raised $1.5 million from undisclosed investors.

10 Minutes With, a career matching service for college graduates, has raised $4 million from undisclosed investors. This brings to $4.4 million the total raised by the startup.

Nepris, which also offers career matching but for lower grade-levels, has raised $550,000 from NewSchools Venture Fund, David Better, David Matthews, Kent Novak, and Pradeep Sethi.

SkillPixels, which makes educational games “backed by academic research.” has raised $2.1 million in funding “from private investors and the Finnish government’s Tekes ‘Young Innovative Companies’ program.”

Tuva Labs, which wants to bring “data science” into the K–12 classroom, has raised $430,000 from NewSchools Venture Fund and the Ben Franklin Technology Partners of Southeastern Pennsylvania.

Primo, which makes a toy to teach kids programming, has raised $750,000 from Ibis Capital, MTS, and Emerge Education. The startup had previously raised £56,666 via Kickstarter.

For $150 a quarter, you can get Edsurge’s Ka’Ching report, detailing all these funding announcements.


SAT scores are stagnant.

Via Mark Guzdial, “Where AP CS is taught in Georgia and California, and where there is none at all.” (Note the correlation between household income and AP CS. Or as Microsoft's CEO might call it, "karma.")

In South Korea, “an average of one elementary, middle, or high school-age student committed suicide every three days over the past five years, education office data show.”

I feel like this headline circulates every year or so. Once again, someone’s claiming “Teens are officially over Facebook.”

The World Needs 4 Million More Teachers To Get Every Child In A Classroom,” says UNESCO.

“The National Science Foundation earlier this month awarded a $4.8 million grant to a coalition of prominent research universities aiming to build a massive repository for storing, sharing, and analyzing the information students generate when using digital learning tools,” reports EdWeek. The project, called LearnSphere, will gather “clickstream” data, chat dialogues, and “affect” and biometric data. Ya know, for science.

Does your university require you use an LMS? Colorado State University history professor Jonathan Rees wants to know.

The week in education maps and charts: college football fans, college majors.

Image credits: Statsministerns Kontor

A FOTE opportunity

Learning with 'e's - 10 Octubre, 2014 - 16:05

I greatly enjoyed attending the Future of Technology in Education (FOTE) conference at London University's Senate Building last week. It was an exciting and thought provoking, well attended event which somehow resembled a TED talk, with its large stage, bright studio lighting, music and arena style seating. It was also great to catch up with so many old friends and to meet some new ones. By the time I presented my closing keynote, I think just about everyone was a little 'conferenced out' but the audience was receptive and polite, and apart from one heckle (which I dealt with brutally), I wasn't booed off the stage. If you would like to know the essence of my talk entitled 'Digital Learning Futures: Mind the Gap', then look no further than the official review by FOTE which can be found right here. My thanks to Frank Steiner and the organising team of FOTE for giving me the opportunity to present.

Photos by FOTE 

A FOTE opportunity by Steve Wheeler is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.Posted by Steve Wheeler from Learning with e's

Code Week EU 2014

Open Education Europa RSS - 10 Octubre, 2014 - 10:32
Area of interest:  Schools Higher Education Training & Work Learning & Society Summary: 

Code Week returns to Europe from 11-17 October 2014. It is a week of learning events across the continent to encourage learners to develop their programming skills. 

Code Week EU 2014

Open Education Europa RSS - 10 Octubre, 2014 - 10:32
Area of interest:  Schools Higher Education Training & Work Learning & Society Summary: 

Code Week returns to Europe from 11-17 October 2014. It is a week of learning events across the continent to encourage learners to develop their programming skills.