This is your first participation activity for ETEC 522, which you should do once you’ve reviewed all of the preceding section materials. Do the activity
by sarah jones on July 21, 2019
by Danny on May 18, 2019
by Sydney on May 17, 2019
by tod on May 15, 2019
by Basia on May 14, 2019
In this second activity you will provide your professional opinion on emerging markets Do the poll
by tod on August 6, 2019
by Jamie Ashton on August 4, 2019
by Ryan on July 21, 2019
by sarah jones on
by Jiri Karas on June 27, 2019
by Abraham Kang on June 4, 2019
by natallia kuzmich on
by Karen on June 3, 2019
by daniel thomas on June 2, 2019
by Sarah Wong on
by tod on July 21, 2019
by mlavoie on July 14, 2019
by Ying Gu on July 7, 2019
by Jamie Ashton on June 25, 2019
by Abraham Kang on June 23, 2019
by sarah mclean on August 2, 2019
by Karen szu chun on July 30, 2019
by Scott Lillis on July 29, 2019
by Jason on July 28, 2019
by Vincent Dong on
by Jamie Ashton on August 4, 2019
by sarah jones on July 21, 2019
by Sydney Hamilton on July 19, 2019
by steve on June 24, 2019
by Jamie Ashton on June 5, 2019
by David Vogt on August 11, 2019
by tod on August 6, 2019
by tod on
by Jamie Ashton on August 4, 2019
by Jamie Ashton on
The following accordions provide a detailed description of the assignments of ETEC522. Please review them carefully.
Assignment #1 will be worth 25% of your final grade. It is due at the end of Week 6.
Author and publish an original competitive analysis of an existing real-world learning technologies product, service, venture or market of special interest to you. For example, your subject could be a new gadget or application you’re considering for use in your own work, or a company (large or small) you’ve heard about, or possibly a set of products competing in an area of learning you’re involved with. It could also be a pioneering non-profit learning program within a school district, campus, city, country, etc. It can be any relevant (to you) component or cross-section of the global learning technologies marketplace. Think of your work as an ‘opportunity audit’ – a critical review of your chosen topic designed to support an investment decision by a prospective investor (not customer). For example, an investor might be a venture capital firm doing due diligence on a new company, a ministry about to fund a new project, a superintendent trying to decide about a new district initiative, or a foundation considering support of a new non-profit program. They want your expert Educational Venture Analyst (EVA) recommendation about whether this is a good idea.
This is not an academic paper. Design a presentation format consistent with prospective investors making a sound decision based on your recommendation. Be credible, thorough and insightful. Employ a medium or media of your choice (2,000 words or 8 minutes maximum). Enhance your analysis with real-world data and original interviews if such are feasible. Consult your instructor if in doubt.
To publish your Assignment #1, post it in this blog using the Category “Analyst Reports (A1)”, then notify your instructor via email, with links and any self-reflections, when this is done. If your analysis needs to remain private for any reason, consult your instructor for an alternate submission path. Grades will be returned within one week of publication if at all possible.
- Rationale for Analysis (8/25): A compelling rationale for the choice of subject matter that clearly conveys its resonant value within the learning technologies marketplace and to the student’s professional stance as analyst.
- Critical EVA (8/25): An engagingly credible analysis that uses criteria and/or methods that are relevant, comprehensive, and incisive to the substance and conclusions.
- Resource Value (4/25): Creative and effective design together with excellent presentation for engaging and serving the target audience (primarily professional educators, scholars and researchers).
- Reflections (5/25): The proponent clearly outlines the relevance of their analysis and the EVA role in relation to their emerging thinking about their own upcoming opportunity pitch (Assignment #3).
Assignment #2 will be worth 25% of your final grade. It is due on a week that will be assigned by the end of Week 1.
The Opportunity Forecasts phase of 522 focuses on specific learning technology markets identified by the cohort in the first week of class. For Assignment 2, small groups of students will work together to: A) produce an Open Educational Resource (OER) that serves to explore and understand the dynamic nature and opportunities of one of these emerging markets; B) deliver an engaging, interactive week-long experience for the whole class featuring their OER; and C) publish a final OER enhanced by cohort response.
If you have a special interest in an emerging market, let your instructor know about this via email in the first week of the course. They will take your interest into consideration when forming the Emerging Market Teams (“EMTs”). You will be notified by the beginning of the second week which emerging market you have been assigned to, and which of your peers will be on your EMT.
The intent of the OER learning experience you create will be to discover and refine opportunities within your emerging market specific to learning and teaching, with a special emphasis on the venture landscape, both existing and prospective. You will submit your final OER through the NMC Horizon Report’s Open Project Submission Channel. There is no guarantee that NMC will publish your OER, and it will take a very professional product from your EMT to make the cut.
We encourage EMTs to search out additional channels for their work. We also strongly encourage EMTs to seek out, and potentially involve in an active way, real-world protagonists of their emerging markets: any way that EMTs can ground their work in authentic reality is likely to be worthwhile.
In short, EMTs will create an experiential learning resource, test-drive it with the cohort, then publish it for global use.
Your detailed A2 instructions are:
- Definition: Gather your EMT and collectively establish a compelling opportunity focus related to your emerging market that leverages the strengths and interests of your team and creates unambiguous value (timeliness, insight, importance, etc.) for a global audience of learning technologies professionals. For example, while the NMC primarily serves higher education, you might more strategically select a focus on K-12, or corporate learning. As another example, if your general topic is “mobile learning”, you are welcome to focus more strategically on “mobile ESL” or “mobiles for pro-d”. The objective is not to provide a generalized overview of a big topic, it is to create a concentrated, highly-valuable opportunity forecast for a leading edge of that topic.
- Teamwork: You may use the UBC blogs to host your OER and discussion, but feel free to link to whatever online tools and spaces are most effective for your teamwork. Break out your overall A2 workload evenly across your team, making sure that everyone has a specific, tangible role to play that affords them a real and equal opportunity to shine.
- Design: Design and compose your OER. The basic idea is that you will author a brief launchpad post to the Opportunity Forecasts Forum of this blog that links to an interactive/participatory/immersive learning experience (your OER) that your EMT stages either in the blog or elsewhere on the web, with arising discussion for this cohort hosted in the blog. However, please propose to your instructor any variation on this basic design that achieves the objective in some better fashion. It is expected that all components of the OER will follow a Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike License.
- Launchpad: Analogous to an elevator pitch, your launchpad post should be brief, informative and highly engaging – communicating why your audience should be interested in your perspective on this emerging market, and what they should expect in terms of a worthwhile experience. Post your launchpad in the Opportunity Forecasts category of our blog at the beginning of your assigned week.
- Experience: While the entire learning experience may be hosted in the blog, EMTs are encouraged to apply other online learning/interaction/collaboration/discussion tools of their choice to host the most relevant and worthwhile experience. The experience is meant to remain reasonably available (persistent) and appropriate to future self-guided and formally-contexted learners wishing to access your OER. For example, the experience might focus on learning applications, solutions providers, stability, usability, total cost of ownership (TCO), future potential, and/or other issues and opportunities specific to your emerging market . The objective is for the interaction to be engaging and worthwhile to the cohort, and valuable to the final OER whether it is used by other cohorts or self-guided learners. Please respect the cohort’s time and attention: aim for a high quality of engagement rather than a high quantity of material to review or a large number of activities to complete.
- Moderation: Actively encourage and moderate the participation of the entire cohort in the experience and the questions/discussions arising from it.
- Assessment: Observe how your peers interact with your OER - what works, what doesn't, and how could it be improved? Employ these observations for any revisions that might be necessary (below) and to compile a peer participation report (create a list of all peers who successfully completed all of the activities you set out, along with a separate list of those specific peers who, in your team's estimation, contributed an exceptional level of thought leadership within those activities.
- Revision: Use the cohort experience to refine and finalize your OER for use by open audiences. Unless communicated otherwise to your instructor, it will be assumed that the final edition of your OER will be published in the blog and submitted for publication in the NMC Horizon Report’s Open Project Submission Channel, and will be ready for evaluation one (1) week following completion of your cohort experience.
- Emerging Markets Poll RePost: Now that you are the local experts on this topic, please compose and publish a new post into the Emerging Markets category that better 'pitches' this emerging market for future 522 cohorts. Use the same format as existing emerging markets posts, including an opportunity statement and essential resources (including your OER!).
- Completion: Signify your A2 completion by emailing your peer participation report to your instructor.
We believe this joint OER publication should be worthy of placement in your CV, so be sure that your authorship is apparent.
Grading of Assignment #2 will be finalized once a majority of EMT groups have presented, and will be returned at the end of the last week of the course.
Assignment #2 will be worth 25% of your final grade and is due one (1) week following your assigned presentation week.
- OER Design (6/25): Compelling, coherent, grounded research and analysis with highly effective pathways for active learning, understanding, and further development. Teamwork is clearly evident.
- Experience Design (7/25): Professionally organized material and activities designed for an engaging and effective learning experience. Teamwork is clearly evident with individual efforts defined and noted.
- Engagement Hosting (6/25): Graciously and expertly hosted materials and activities for effective cohort exploration and examination of the topic and OER. Teamwork is clearly evident.
- Published OER (6/25): Professional-quality OER enhanced via cohort interactions, published and ready to serve the target audience. Teamwork is clearly evident.
Assignment #3 will be worth 25% of your final grade.
It is due at the end of Week 12.
Employing your start-up skills and research savvy, create a compelling pitch that champions the future of an original real-world venture. Your venture can be a dramatically new direction for an existing enterprise where you role-play what you would do differently if you were in charge, or it can be an imagined initiative or possibly a start-up or true-life enterprise that you’d like to launch. Remember those prospective investors in Assignment #1? Your sole purpose is still to help them make a smart decision, except now that smart decision is to invest in you.
Create a short, media-rich “elevator pitch” (1 minute maximum, using any medium or tools that most persuasively conveys the essence of your venture) together with a longer “venture pitch” (2,000 words or 8 minutes maximum, in any medium that most persuasively conveys the substance of your venture). Your objective is to be credible, well researched, and very convincing to your instructor and peers. The intention is that your venture concept will be reviewed by the entire class within the Venture Forum (the “Launch” phase of ETEC522) – who can be imagined as a great test market or a group of sophisticated investors. Such sharing fits with the “open innovation” context of ETEC522, but if you would like to keep your venture private for any reason, it can alternatively be reviewed confidentially by your instructor.
Another variation for your Assignment #3, if you are serious about a specific venture, is to prepare your pitch(es) for actual posting in a crowdfunding site such as Kickstarter. In this case you may submit the final draft of what you’d like to post, or a link to the actual posting. Please remember that we’re looking for a pitch that focuses on persuading investors to invest in your venture, not a pitch that convinces customers to buy your product or service.
When complete, and before the deadline, post Assignment #3 in this blog with the Category “Venture Forum”. Send a copy to your instructor via email. They will acknowledge receipt, and will aim to return grades within one week of the end of class. The Reflection component of A3 may optionally be submitted to your instructor at the end of the Venture Forum, as no doubt you will have further thoughts arising from cohort feedback.
- Elevator Pitch (5/25): Highly engaging elevator pitch would capture attention of potentialinvestors or decision makers. The student’s passion and ability to carry out the venture are easily evident.
- Venture Pitch (10/25): High-impact, comprehensive and compelling proposition that would engage investment interest and cogently demonstrates the student’s ability to lead the venture.
- Critical EVA (5/25): The pitches use arguments that are relevant, comprehensive, and incisive to the substance and the proposition.
- Reflection (5/25): The proponent clearly and accurately outlines the strengths and weaknesses of their pitch and their entrepreneurship inclinations.
Assignment #4 will be worth 25% of your final grade. It is due at the end of Week 13.
Interaction with your fellow students & instructor is essential to the 522 experience. This final part of your grade for the course will be based on a self-assessed portfolio that demonstrates the consistency and quality of your participation in the course weblog. There are four parts to your Participation Portfolio submission:
- Keep track of the most important postings and reviews you contribute during the course so that you can submit a list of between 5 (min) and 10 (max). It will be prudent for your list to evidence insightful participation during every stage of the course.
- On or before the last day of the course, send the grading instructor an email entitled “A4 Submission” with an attached MS Word document with a 500 word (max) statement describing your active involvement in the course, cogently linked to the identified postings. Use your statement to objectively rate your overall contribution relative to the cohort (e.g. “top 25%”). The format for the submission should include an introduction, examples of posts with explanatory narrative, a summary statement of your involvement with peers, along with a final statement of your overall experience and/or contribution to 522 through your participation in the course.
- (Optional) If you have specific constructive suggestions for what might be changed in future iterations of the course to improve everyone’s participation, including your own, post these in the “522Feedback” category.
- (Optional) Review, Rate and Recommend any student suggestions for course improvement you can find in “522 Feedback” under “Forums” in the main menu.
Your instructor will acknowledge receipt, and will endeavour to return grades within one week of submission.
- Presence (7/25): Establishes and maintains a consistent and valuable presence in the conversational flow of the materials covered in the course.
- Original Voice (6/25): Consistently raises the discussion to new levels with creative and original interventions, and starts new discussions that carry the discourse.
- Constructive Response (6/25): Actively follows discussion threads to provide constructive responses that celebrate, elaborate, and encourage the contributions of peers.
- Demonstrated Knowledge (6/25): Always on topic, well-researched & well-reflected concerning immediate questions under consideration and the broader objectives of the course.
Please note that no assignment will be accepted late without prior consent, and that normally 10%/day will be deducted even when such consent is given.
A set of Activities will be provided at various times. Most of these will be graded indirectly as elements of the badges you earn. The goal of Activities is to support your investigation of concepts surrounding success on the Assignments.
Expectations and evaluative rubrics surrounding your success in ETEC522 are summarized above. Additional instructions and requirements for each assignment, discussion forum and activity may be announced as the course progresses. Students in the MET program will be graded according to the following standards:
- Fail: Students are given a failing grade if they do not participate and/or do not complete one or more major assignments.
- 75 – 79%: A mark in this range would be issued to a student who completed all assignments but at a level considered inadequate for graduate level work.
- 80 – 84%: Adequate work for a graduate student, meets requirements.
- 85 – 89%: Good work, what we expect of our best graduate students.
- 90 – 95%: Excellent work, better than average and better than expected, what we hope for.
A mark over 95% would be given in rare circumstances where a student produced work of such outstanding quality that it merits special recognition. This work would be well outside the range of what was reasonably expected.
ETEC522 is designed as a “professional network” – a place where social networking techniques are applied to foster individual & collective professional advancement. Read more:
The intent of Recommending any element of Discussion is to collectively identify the most worthwhile contributions, as a benefit for yourself and peers.
When someone responds with great intelligence to any Post please signify this by clicking the Recommendation tool (thumbs up symbol) on that response. This is analogous in a live social conversation to a smile or a quiet 'bravo', and it is somewhat the same as a 'like' in Facebook, but the intent here is for you to use it more deliberately and professionally to identify exceptional contributions by others. The big difference here is that Recommendations are entirely anonymous, so you can be entirely professional (there is no social pressure). However, your Recommendations are remembered by the system so that you can change your mind later if need be (which also means that your Ratings can be audited by an administrator, so that unprofessional use is unwise). Three Recommendation guidelines are offered:
- Click: when a contribution is particularly excellent and when you are recommending it highly to your peers.
- Don't Click: when you have not read the contribution, or it is just good, OK, or even poor.
- Maintain a High Standard: even though they are anonymous, your Recommendation clicks build your credibility, somewhat like a credit rating. So if you click too often, or randomly, or never, you will have less impact. As a 'rule of thumb' if you are Recommending more than 1/10 responses, or less than 1/week, or click your own work, or click within a clique, or otherwise 'game' the process, your Recommendations will have less value. Try to establish a behaviour that works best for you, perhaps akin to having a highlighter in hand while reviewing an important book or manuscript.
For Curated Content:
The intent of a Review is to add distinct value to existing content as a benefit for yourself & peers.
Content may be Rated (see below) immediately and/or Reviewed to offer in-depth value. A great review deliberately elaborates upon the original content to add substantial new value - this is the only Reviewing guideline.
Please note that while Ratings are anonymous, Reviews are not, so Reviews build direct reputation value for their author, and can be part of your graded Participation Portfolio. Reviews can also be separately Recommended (see below). So please Review content when you have something of substance to add, and when you can do so succinctly (if a Review is less than 10 words, or more than 200, perhaps reconsider whether it is really a Review).
Also, as in a threaded discussion, in 522 it is possible to Review a Review (reply to a Review). Please try to keep in mind the peer review intent, so don't allow reviews to devolve into a discussion: only Review a Review when you can elaborate upon it to add substantial new value.
The intent of Ratings is to collectively identify the most worthwhile content as a benefit for yourself & peers.
Immediately below each Post in the Knowledge Mill you should see a 5-star rating function, which you can easily activate just by clicking on the appropriate number of stars. Ratings are fast and anonymous (your peers won't know how you rated something) but they are remembered by the system so that you can change your mind later if need be (which also means that your Ratings can be audited by an administrator, so that unprofessional use is unwise).
Two basic Rating guidelines are offered:
- Don’t be populist: don't dumbly support an existing rating if you don't agree with it - independent thought is the hallmark of every respected professional; and
- Don’t be altruistic: you add better value for everyone when you rate selfishly, as follows:
- 5 Stars: Essential – This is a core resource for me: 5 stars is about helping me find it again quickly.
- 4 Stars: Good – Solid value for me; I'll look for it again when I browse this topic.
- 3 Stars: Spotty – Some good stuff, but harder to find. I’m unlikely to recommend it to a colleague.
- 2 Stars: Marginal – Not quite dumpster material, but something I’ll probably rarely use.
- 1 Star: Avoid It! - I won't use this again. It is outdated, biased, or otherwise forgettable.
- Unrated: Unknown – I haven’t looked at this (in some professional networks, when content is ignored, like email you trash without reading, it is automatically given the lowest-possible rating, but in 522 the assumption will be that you haven’t had the opportunity to consider it).
There is professional risk, without any prospective benefit, in rating content indiscriminately, so as your grandmother might have said, “if you have nothing worthwhile to say, say nothing”.
The intent of Recommending a Review is to collectively identify the most worthwhile Reviews as a benefit for yourself and peers.
A Review Recommendation (thumbs up) is like an instant positive rating. As above, the same three Recommendation guidelines are offered:
- Click: when a Review is particularly excellent and when you are recommending it highly to your peers.
- Don't Click: when you have not read the Review, or it is just good, OK, or even poor.
- Maintain a High Standard: even though they are anonymous, your Recommendation clicks build your credibility, somewhat like a credit rating. So if you click too often, or randomly, or never, you will have less impact.
Review Recommendations are anonymous once again, but are tracked by the system so that you can change them later if need be. And as with Ratings there is no benefit and some risk to a pattern of indiscriminate Recommendations.
522 is structured in four Stages, each of one or more weeks duration. An outline for the whole course, including the major assignments is provided here. Please note that the "end of a week" in this course, in terms of assignment deadlines, etc, refers to Sunday at midnight.
|Stage 1: Startup - Welcome to "Ventures in Learning Technologies"|
|W01: May 6-12||Startup||Introduce Yourself! Emerging Markets Poll|
|Stage 2: Bootcamp - Exploring the global learning technologies marketplace and ramping up your roles as a venture analyst and entrepreneur.|
|W02: May 13-19||Global Marketplace||Opportunity Horizon|
|W03: May 20-26||Analyst Bootcamp||Pitch Critique|
|W04: May 27-Jun 2||Entrepreneur Bootcamp||Founders Parade|
|Stage 3: Analysis - Small Groups of peers conduct deep dives into specific emerging markets in order to package their findings as shared learning resources.|
|W05: Jun 3-9||Opportunity Forecasts #1||Forecast Review||Assignment #2: Starting in W5, student groups will present their Emerging Market Analysis.|
|W06: Jun 10-16||Opportunity Forecasts #2||Forecast Review||Assignment #1: Analyst Report Due end of W6|
|W07: Jun 17-23||Opportunity Forecasts #3||Forecast Review|
|W08: Jun 24-30||Opportunity Forecasts #4||Forecast Review|
|W09: Jul 1-7||Opportunity Forecasts #5||Forecast Review|
|W10: Jul 8-14||Opportunity Forecasts #6||Forecast Review|
|W11: Jul 15-21||Opportunity Forecasts #7||Forecast Review|
|W12: Jul 22-28||Opportunity Forecasts #8||Forecast Review||Assignment #3: Venture Pitch Due end of W12|
|Stage 4: Launch - A culminating experience with you in the driver's seat of a venture of your choice and design, presented in an 'open market' of similar pitches from your peers.|
|W13: Jul 29-Aug 4||Venture Forum||Venture Forum||Assignment #4: Participation Portfolio due end of Week 13.|