LearningForward

Kent Chesnut's technology in education blog.

Second language acquisition seems to be a recurring theme on my blog!  A summary of the previous posts on learning a language (from oldest to newest):

• Scratch in the foreign language classroom (April,  2008)
  In this post I proposed allowing students to build their own language worlds in Scratch.  Still a very good activity (I think).
• Learning a Language like a 2 year old (January, 2009)
  In this post I compared how I am learning Spanish to how a 2 year old is learning her native language.  I discussed the differences and contemplated ways I could make my Spanish learning experience more like hers (and to hopefully improve the efficiency at which I can learn Spanish).  Major differences I listed were necessity, immersion, and authentic contexts.
• Speeding up the Spanish (January, 2009)
  In this post I proposed a procedure by which my high school age daughter could more effectively use the “intermediate” Spanish podcasts that were assigned in her Spanish III class.
• ¿Puedes hablar con su computadora? (March, 2009)
• Can you talk with your computer? (August, 2009)
• Can you talk with your computer? (Part 2) (September, 2009)
• Can you talk with your computer? (1st Spanish Version) (September, 2009)
  In this series of posts I discussed a program I created that tried to allow for a conversation between the computer and the learner.  The algorithm used a picture for context and compared users’ questions / comments to a list of keywords to try to make a reasonable response.

I believe all of these were worthwhile endeavors… and each presented information that is useful for learning a second language.  But I’m not satisfied that I understand what would constitute great 2nd language learning.

What should 2nd language education include?  I think the list will include:

• Vocabulary (nouns, verbs, adjectives… conjugation)
• Reading / writing in the new language
• Speaking / listening in the new language
• Conversations with other learners in the new language
• Listening / understanding of native or fluent speakers
• Use of the new language in authentic and intensive sessions

What does a very effective 2nd language class look like in the 21st century?  In the next few posts I’m going to try to discuss examples of 21st century language classes that I find on the internet.

Anyone have a link to 2nd language instruction that they consider great?  I’d sure like to see it.

It’s been years since I looked at - or even thought about - any of Apple’s Classrooms of Tomorrow (ACOT) information.  However, a guest post by Sherman Nicodemus on Wes Fryers Speed of Creativity blog (see blog roll) in March spurred both my memory and my interest.  Sherman noted that Apple no longer had the ACOT 10 year report online, but did provide a link where it could be found (here). 

The ACOT research was done from 1985 - 1995 with the primary goal of understanding how sufficient technology and good professional support can affect teaching learning in real classrooms.  I reread the report yesterday - and found it still very relevant.

Some highlights from the report:

•  Apple supplied 2 computers to each student and teacher to ensure that the technology was available at (almost) any time.  Wow!  Contrast that to many of today’s 1:1 programs that supply easily transported laptops - and then don’t allow the students to take them from the school!
• The table on page 13 describing the differences between the ACOT and traditional classrooms is extremely relevant in today’s discussions of what learning should be.  A snapshot is shown below. 

• The stages of teacher adoption table on page 16 should also prove instructive for moving classrooms to a more learner centered approach.  See the snapshot below.

• Without going into any specifics, I’ll spit out a few more terms / concepts that are at least mentioned in the paper.
  • Learner control
  • Constructivism
  • Peer teaching
  • Wireless technologies (in the 80’s and 90’s???)
  • Create / Communicate / Collaberate
  • Reduced lectures
  • Inquiry driven
  • PD in a real classroom
  • Use of communications to access remote experts
  • Use of professional tools
  • Authentic learning experiences
  • Authentic assessment

Many of us older folks who’ve been around educational technology for quite a while have probably heard about the ACOT project in the past… maybe even read the ACOT report years ago… I recommend a re-read.  Many of the younger folks in the ed tech field may never have heard of ACOT.  The paper is an easy read of 24 pages - I recommend it highly.

As usual, I’d appreciate any input readers may have.

Several events over the last few weeks have got me thinking about authenticity in eLearning.  The ODLA Conference for one; and I’ve started re-reading Michael Allen’s Guide to e-Learning (highly recommended).  Both have me thinking about the effectiveness of eLearning.  Is authenticity an important factor in eLearning effectiveness?  I think so!

I decided to try to put together a list of types of eLearning in order from least authentic to most authentic (IMHO).

1. Page turner application with quiz when complete.
   I consider this about the least authentic form of eLearning available.  Content is generated (possibly that old PowerPoint that was used in class) in the form of a linear application.  The user reads the information (analyzes the graphs, …) on the page and then advances to the next page.  When all of the material has been read, the student takes a quiz.  A variety of media (pictures, videos) can be added to this format - without really affecting the authenticity of the student’s experience.
   I would consider this type of eLearning pretty ineffective, in general.  I suspect it is usually boring.  However, I think it could be effective for highly motivated students.
2. Page turner application with embedded questions.
   Again, the learner proceeds through the content in a linear fashion.  Occasionally, the learner is provided a question to ensure that they are, indeed, attending to the content.  Such questions could be included rarely or on each page of information.  As before, a variety of media can be added to this format.  An example of instruction at this level would be my older Diabetes @ School (here) program.  Note that this module requires a one-time download of the Authorware player.
   I do believe this form of instruction would be more engaging to the students than the first level, but I don’t think it will be as effective as the forms described below.
3. Demonstration application.
   The learner watches a model perform some sort of procedure.  This could be video based or possibly a series of images.  The model should be elaborating on his thoughts as he performs the activity.  The learner may be required to answer questions embedded in the instruction or with a quiz when the instruction is complete.  An example of this level would be the use of Captivate (or similar program) to capture computer interactions to demonstrate for users.
   This is the first level to include any context for the activity to be learned.
   It is quite possible that this level is out of place!

4. Programmed Instruction.
   Programmed instruction is much like the page turner with embedded questions but with an important and powerful improvement.  The instruction can branch based on the student’s answers to the questions.  A struggling student can be provided extra instruction and practice.  A student who has mastered a concept already can be allowed to skip redundant instruction.  Still, the instruction is basically decontextualized and the student activity is not authentic to very many tasks.

5. Scenario based eLearning with authentic context and learner control.
   At this level, the instruction attempts to provide an authentic context for the activity to take place within.  A problem for the learner is posed within the context.  The user must perform an activity to resolve the problem.  The activity itself may still be rather contrived, but the more realistic the better.  Various supports (resources) for the learner are provided.  Usually, the learner determines which resources are to be accessed and in which order they should be accessed to try to solve the problem.  The newer version of the Diabetes @ School 2008, A (school) year in the life of a student with type 1 diabetes, program would be (I think) an example of instruction at this level (see link here). 
   I think this level of instruction can begin to reach into the area of constuctivism (but not necessarily so). 

6. Partial simulation of the task to be completed in somewhat realistic context (instructional interactivity).
   A simulation of the task environment complete enough to allow the student to do the task to be learned.  The task itself is similar to the task the learner would complete in the real world. 
   An example would be the use of branching capability built into Captivate to create eLearning where the learner is led through the procedure to be learned - having to press the correct buttons in the correct order to move through the proper screens to complete the procedure to be learned, for example. 
   This instruction could be constructivistic (inquiry or discovery based) or more instructivistic (didactic or instruction controlled).  

7. Full simulation of task to be complete in realistic context.
   The task environment is fully (or pretty fully) simulated.  Both the task and the context are very authentic.  The learner performs a very realistic representation of the task in a virtual environment very similar to the real environment.  Again, this could be constructivistic or didactic.
   An example would be a user interface of a fully simulated device.  The user could be asked to configure the device for a specific application - the program could evaluate if the configuration is correct.

8. Student generated simulations.
   Ouch!  The only constructionist option of the bunch.  The student could create simulations in Scratch or Netlogo to demonstrate their understanding of a concept or procedure.  This type of project would be very hard to evaluate automatically, likely requiring a person to evaluate the student simulations.

Ok, so aspects of these levels could be combined to form a bunch of different levels.  But I wanted to put something down to consider and reflect upon. 

So what’s the purpose of these levels?  What can I do with them?  As I consider any eLearning, I plan to

• Evaluate any strategy I’m considering to see which of these levels it fits into.
• Consider the costs and benefits to moving the instructional strategy to a higher level. 

Any comments?  Have I omitted levels?  Are my levels out of order (in terms of authenticity)?  I’m always happy to hear what any reader may think.

Thanks to Wesley Fryer’s Moving at the Speed of Creativity blog, I learned about the Oklahoma Distance Learning Association’s (ODLA) Spring conference in time to go.  I’d like to post my major take-aways from the conference.

1. Motivating people to embrace change is very hard!  (this should have been obvious to me for years - but it really sank in during the conference).
   • Dr. Gramoll, the keynote speaker, has spent years putting together a very complete online system for engineering education (link here - can’t get to a lot without a login).  It is now being used by the engineering faculty at OU (University of Oklahoma) and is starting to be used at some other institutions.  Dr. Gramoll discussed the effort needed to get people to adopt a system which was clearly better than what they were using.  A better system was not enough!  Good results were not enough!  The system had to save people time and effort.
   • One of Dr. Gramoll’s comments concerned use of material copyrighted by others.  He explained that to avoid having to worry about such concerns, he just created whatever materials, simulations (in Flash), etc, that he needed.  Some chatter among conference attendees indicated that this is not a normal attitude.  The need for simplicity in use and quick implementation seemed to override the idea of recreating any wheels.
   • What I started to realize is that there are lots of players in distance learning (or any other innovative product).
     • People intrinsically motivated by using the technology to provide better learning.  These early adopters are ready and willing to put in extra effort to try to improve their learning system.
     • People motivated by coercion.  They will move to the new system but only in a minimalist way.  Coercion often generates products that give the whole field of eLearning / Distance Learning a bad name.
     • People motivated by a desire to save themselves time and effort.  These people have to be sold on the ideas.
     • The blog-o-sphere is full of the intrinsically motivated people.  I must remember that getting the OTHER GROUPS on-board is the KEY to successfully implementing a new innovation (IMHO).
   • These things add up (in my feeble mind, anyway) to explain lots of phenomenon I’ve seen in my profession (as a systems engineer in product development), in education (as a parent involved with my kids at school), …
     • Improved outcomes due to the Innovation must be advertised to get individuals who are intrinsically motivated enthusiastically on-board.  These folks will push the product to its limit and provide feedback to make the product even better.  However, there are probably not enough of these folks to make the innovation a success on their own.
     • Innovations must be EXTREMELY simple to apply (at least at some entry level).  The perceived advantages (saving time, effort, money) must be sufficient to offset the percieved entry cost of using the innovation IN THE SHORT TERM.  It may be advisable to tailor information about the innovation based on the audience.  Intrinsically motivated folks may need to see the full featured version in all of its glory (complexity?).  Others may need to see the base system in its simplest form.
     • By the way - in case my boss is reading this - these observations apply directly to new products we are putting out (so paying to send me to the conference was a good idea).
2. Live video is a big deal in distance learning.  (This obviously only applies to synchronous classes.)  I got the feeling that many of the participants considered live video an important element of any online class for any objective.  This is very different than my view going in - I would have thought that live video would be useful for some types of objectives - but not really so much for others.  I need to do some thinking on this.
3. Technology that verbally tells you its state everytime it changes is obnoxious (my opinion, of course).
4. Wes Fryer mentioned Pecha Kucha presentations in his blended learning lecture.  These short presentations are also called 20 x 20 lectures because the presenter is limited to 20 slides with each slide showing for 20 seconds.  I can think of several instances in which I wish a speaker had such limits!

All in all, I enjoyed the conference. 

In my 2008 post “Hypercard Lives!” (link here), I expressed my admiration for Hypercard.  In the post I discussed Runtime Revolution, a cross platform development tool that appears to have decended from Hypercard and has far exceeded Hypercard’s capabilities.

At the time of the original post, Runtime Revolution 2.9 was available for $50 for the less capable Media edition or $399 for the Studio edition.

Runtime Revolution Studio in revision 3.5 dropped to $250, with the Media edition still at $50 (if I remember correctly). 

The purpose of this short post is to let readers know that Runtime Revolution 4.0 has been available for some time now… but I just realized that the Media Edition price has dropped.  The Media edition is now FREE!

As in previous versions of Runtime Revolution, the Media edition has a number of limitations, some of which are:

• Will not compile to a standalone executable
  Stacks (programs) require the Runtime Revolution Player (either standalone on web based) to execute. 
• Does not support databases

I would say that neither of these should be a problem for beginning programmers.  A pretty cool demo of creating a game like app is here.  Note that this demo requires you to have installed the revWeb plugin (in the downloads menu on the RunRev.com site).

One more note about Runtime Revolution; an alpha version of their new product revMobile is shipping.  This will allow users to create apps for iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad, Windows Mobile, and Maemo (smartphone operating system based on Linux).  It’s pretty expensive - $799 if you buy now in the alpha stage or $999 when complete.  If you’re interested at all, check out the video of an iPhone app being created here.

Wow!  It’s been almost exactly a year 2 years since I posted on my adventures with Scratch on Linux (see post here). 

Well, the Scratch team at MIT has made the use of Scratch 1.4 (the latest version) on Ubuntu Linux (versions 9.04 and 9.10) much less of an adventure.  I’ve successfully followed the installation procedure on 5 Ubuntu 9.04 computers.  I have not done extensive testing on Ubuntu, but everything I’ve tried works fine.

Installer notes:

• The instructions for installing Scratch on Ubuntu are posted here.
• I did NOT use the link https://launchpad.net/+help/soyuz/ppa-sources-list.html (this is a link in the intructions).
• Open the Software Sources panel via System -> Administration -> Software Sources to access the “3rd party software sources” list.
• Although instructed to do so by the instructions, I was not able to “paste” the line
  sudo apt-key adv –keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com –recv-keys 4EA7974E
  into the console.  I had to type the line in.
• When you go to the System -> Administration -> Symantec list to find Scratch to select it for install, you’ll find a formidable list to look through.  If you look through there and really can’t find Scratch or scratch (I’m sure that happened to me a couple of times), reboot the computer and then look through the list again.  Either Scratch miraculously showed up or resting for a couple of minutes while the computer rebooted improved my search capability.

Comparing Scratch on Ubuntu to my original post:

• An installer for Scratch 1.4 is available for Ubuntu 9.04 and 9.10.  This alleviates the need to install Squeak and then the WinScratch.zip file… just follow the instructions!
• A launch icon is automatically added to the Applications menu under Programming.  No need to open the terminal to start the program.
• Presentation mode works.
• Sound works (although I didn’t explicitly try the midi, so I’m not sure about that).
• The Scratch website works fine with Java installed.

Other notes:

• Edubuntu is no longer published with Ubuntu as part of the same image.  First install the standard Ubuntu package, the install the Edubuntu add-on.  Link to Ubuntu is here.  Link to Edubuntu is here.

Have a great week!

Notetaking - then and now 

When I was in school (many years ago), I would read the textbook and make notes in a notebook.  My oldest son is in graduate school now; he reads the textbook and takes notes directly onto his laptop.  Can the process of notetaking move to a completely electronic format? 

Textbooks are large, heavy, and expensive.  Computer technology is small, light, and surprisingly cheap.  Imagine the heavy, bulging backpack (and associated sore back and neck) replaced by a small computer / ebook reader and electronic texts.

 Notetaking - with electronic texts 

I am interested in seeing electronic textbooks accepted and used in education.  Liberally licensed texts such as Creative Commons would ease a financial burden on many students (and possibly whole school systems).  Even if the etexts had a cost associated with them, they could still be much less expensive than traditional textbooks (I wonder how much authors of textbooks receive per copy… I bet it’s a small amount of the student’s cost when buying the text).  The cost of ebook reader hardware (either a specialized ebook reader or a small computer) would be easily covered by switching just a few college textbooks from traditional texts to ebooks. 

An impediment to this transition is the lack of an ebook reader that provides capabilities to help the student read / study / take notes.  I was thinking about such a reader this week and put together a list of requirements that could make studying an etext as efficient as (or more efficient than) a standard textbook.

 Requirements for an Educational eBook Reader

• Support typical ebook formats (pdf, txt, html, epub)
• Allow user to hilite text and search for hilites
• Allow user to attach notes to hilites and to search for those notes
  (Notes should be added and viewed without moving away for the page being read)
• Allow user to print (or export) hilites and attached notes with references to the book / page number
• Keep info (hilites, notes) for lots of books
• Allow >1 book open at a time
• Allow user to adjust font and text size to accommodate reading
• Allow hyperlinks in notes
• Allow audio notes
• Mark current location
• Auto open to current location
• Support > 1 user
• Allow user to see notes together
• Automatically show notes on the current page connected with the text they refer
• Allow user to jump to next note location
• Allow user to attach notes to graphics

Does such an educational ebook reader exist? 
What’s your favorite ebook reader? 
What other capabilities would need to be available in an ebook reader to make it an improvement over traditional textbook studying? (I’d love to add them to my list)

I’ll be looking around at ebook reader software… but I’d love to hear what any readers have to say about this.

Next week I’ll try to get back to the Scratch Balance board.  But as readers know (if any readers actually exist), I’m easily distracted.

In this second post about the Scratch Balance Board, I’ll be looking at an extremely simple project - and the process of creating projects for use with the balance board.  Earlier posts that referenced the purpose of the balance board are here and here.

One of the first ideas about a project using the balance board was a virtual segway.  The first step was to build a simple project that uses the 4 arrow keys to control a virtual segway.  Run the project here.  Download the project here.  The key is to control the project by polling the keyboard (instead of looking at keypresses) and using “broadcast” to communicate the state of the keys to the segway sprite. 

The segway sprite uses “When I receive” to act upon the keypresses.  A screenshot of the Segway sprite scripts is shown.

• sorry
• I’ll
• use
• these
• bullets
• to
• spread
• stuff
• out
• again
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

 The next step is to use the board control script to send those same messages.

Scratch will not let you save off a script by itself.  So I created a sprite that contains the board control script.  I then exported that sprite.  When I want to add balance board control to a program, I simply drag the sprite file into the Scratch window.

Here’s a screenshot of the board control script.  There’s a short explanation of this script in last weeks post.

• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

 So how does it work?  I’ve linked in a short narrated video of me trying to drive the segway around the track here .  I used RenderSoft’s CamStudio OpenSource version 2.00 to capture the video and compress it to a .swf file. 

Results from this first simple project:

• Sometimes I have a little trouble getting the PicoBoard to communicate.  I think it may have to do with plugging other stuff into the USB when it is plugged in - or possibly loading other software.  I’m not sure.  I did have to reload the PicoBoard driver to get the board operational again.
• The Balance Board is usable - but I found it very useful to have a chair to hold onto when I was trying to drive the segway. 

For the next post, I’ll try to make a little more complex project.  Any comments would be appreciated.

In my last post, I discussed building input devices for Scratch (see here).  My goal was to create a peripheral that could help get more kids interested in Scratch, programming, and educational endeavors in general (by providing more intrinsic motivation).

My first peripheral - a Scratch Balance Board.  The idea was to allow some neat activities like the Wii balance board.

 Remember that you will NEED the PicoBoard interface discussed in the previous post.  The cost is $50 plus $10 shipping to Oklahoma.

Background

I started this project wanting to build a practical Wii clone.  The tough part of the balance board is pressure sensing.  Load cells are very expensive!  And Force Sensing Resistors are only good for very small loads.  So I changed my goal - to build a very simple balance board using parts that can be easily and cheaply acquired (or hopefully scrounged).

Design

Note that I’m a software engineer and am a real klutz when it comes to mechanical things.  This design is not meant for production - it’s meant so that an adult and kid can put this together and play with writing Scratch programs using the balance board as an input device.

Here’s a picture of the outside.

It’s basically a simple box comprised of the following:

• 2 1″x12″ boards cut 22″ long for the top and bottom.
• A frame around the boards made of 1″x4″ boards.
• The bottom 1×12 is screwed in place.
• The top 1×12 sits on top of an elaborate force management system (more on that later).
• Note that the top 1×12 must slide easily within the frame.
• k
• Sorry about the extra lines
• but needed to keep pics from
• getting screwed up.
• If the pics aren’t lined up on
• the right side, try making your
• window narrower or wider.
• k

Here’s a picture of the inside with the “elaborate force management system”.  This elaborate system is composed of 4 tennis balls which are just placed at the 4 corners of the box.

Switches are placed at the center of each side to detect where the user is standing / leaning.

Note that the switches are mounted to scraps of 2″x4″ boards.   The 2×4’s are glued in place with standard school glue.

• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

As you can see from the closeup, each switch is comprised of 2 small screws.  These screws are parallel to the side of the box frame and 3/4″ away from the frame.  The screws are 1/2″ apart.

The wires are held in place by the screw being tightly screwed into the board.

• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k
• k

The switch is activated when the top is pressed down.  This picture shows the other half of a switch mounted to the upper 1×12.

The washer is about 1″ in diameter and held in place with scotch tape.

Note that the objects under the washer are rubber tubing (about 1/4″).  These tubes serve 2 very important purposes:

• Allow washer to flex when contacting the screws.  This flexibility is needed to allow the switches to work even if the screws are not exactly the same height.  This also allows the switches to stay made even when the board is tilted on the perpendicular axis (i.e. you can lean forward and make the up contact even while leaning left and right.
•  Using the tennis balls as the suspension system is easy, but leaves no adjustment.  Adjusting the height of the washer off of the top 1×12 changes the force needed to activate the switch.
• k
• k
• k
• k

The screenshot at right shows a script I have attached to the background.  Notice that the script will work in either of the following 2 conditions:

• The force required to activate the switch is high compared to the weight of the user.  The user must lean toward a switch to activate it.
• The force required to activate the switch is low compared to the weight of the user.  When the user stands on the board without leaning, all the switches (or at least a pair of them - right/left or up/down) are activated.  When the user leans toward a switch, the opposite switch opens.

Note that no message is sent if opposite switches are both met.

The biggest shortcoming in the design is the force adjustment described above.  A system that allows the washer to be flexible but also allows for adjustment toward and away from the top 1×12 would be very helpful.

 I’ll look at 2 or 3 simple programs to use with the board in my next post.  I’d love to hear any comments or suggestions.

I’ve been thinking about some input devices for Scratch that might make the program more interesting to kids who aren’t particularly interested in programming - but are interested in video games.  Several input devices come to mind; a gun (for games like Duck Hunt), a balance board (like the wii balance board), and a direction sensor (so the program could know which way you are looking).  Now I’m not trying to recreate a Wii, just provide some interesting input devices to capture the imagination of a few more kids (especially my youngest).

Scratch can support these sensors because of its internal interface to the PicoBoard.  The board supports:

• 4 x 10-bit A/D converters (configured to read resistance)
• 1 x switch
• 1 x Sound Sensor
• 1 x Light Sensor
• 1 x Slider (another A/D input on-board)

What kinds of components would such input devices require?  Not quite sure, but I’ll take a shot at it. 

Balance board:

This was discussed on the Scratch forums (here) but I didn’t see any indication that anyone was actually trying to build one.

• 4 x Force Sensing Resistors or Load Cells
• Conditioning circuit to adapt sensor output to the Pico Board
• Wood for the balance board and base

Gun: 

I would try to make the gun operate like the old Nintendo Entertainment System Zapper (see here).  I’m not sure it would work, but it’d be worth a try.

• Gun looking device
• Sensitive light sensor mounted fairly deep in the barrel
• Trigger activated switch
• Circuitry to detect if the target had been hit (to detect the dark / light transition shortly after the trigger is pressed)

Direction input - I’m not sure how to do this, but the ultimate output would be a resistance based on the direction the user is pointing.

I’ll do some research to see if such sensors are economically feasible over the next week or 2.  If they look do-able, I may try to prototype one or more of them.

Any comments?  Would such input devices increase Scratch’s appeal?