Danny

Thanks for sharing. I think you've definitely identified a strong innovator-entrepreneur. Besides the innovations he introduced, I think one of the most impressive measures of his entrepreneurship is his dedicated and detailed pitch strategy. As we learned in a previous module, an entrepreneur's pitch needs not only to be concise and communicate clearly the innovation and the value it adds, it also is a learning opportunity for the entrepreneur to hone his proposal according to the responses (or lack of responses) of the potential investors. The fact that Greg Porter would scope out competitor pitches, identify their shortcomings, and capitalize on them by addressing such concerns in his own pitch to the same group shows the forethought, planning, and innovative flexibility needed to successfully bring an innovation to market.

Thanks for sharing. 4.0 Schools seems like a novel way to add original value to the education field by nurturing and supporting emerging ventures. As you mention, change in schools is often slow and met with multiple layers of resistance from teachers, administrators, parents, and students. As such, 4.0 Schools seems to have a well-intentioned mission of supporting new ventures intensively in order to bring them into existence and implement them. I would be interested to learn more about the process and how the 'mentors' assist the emerging enterprises. Likewise, it would be interesting to know the level of support 4.0 Schools offers when a pilot program is completed and shows promise. Do they help identify paths by which these ventures can be shared with a wider education market?

I am also an educator who uses SeeSaw daily in my class, so this entrepreneur was of particular interest to me. As you've highlighted, Carl Sjogreen seems to be well-suited to both innovate and bring these innovations to market. His prior work on projects such as Google Calendar and Google Maps suggests experience with developing and implementing innovations that are incredibly useful and intuitive in design which would also be an asset for an entrepreneur.

As an EVA, I would not invest in this product as there is a very similar product on the market called Makey Makey (https://makeymakey.com/) which is already widely implemented in schools, including my own. As I mentioned in a separate review, the STEAM/STEM market is highly competitive and becoming saturated with creative and innovative products. I do not see anything that differentiates this product enough to disrupt other competing companies who already offer such products. While this venture certainly may have some innovative ideas that set them apart from other established products, they did not communicate what differentiates them clearly and powerfully. The kickstarter site mentions that they will develop a new controller that seemingly integrates blocks such as legos into the process. As an EVA, I would prefer that their pitch demonstrates how this controller would work by showcasing a prototype and a couple of applications for using it. Until their pitch more directly addresses issues of competition and differentiation, I would not invest in this venture.

While I would certainly use this kit in my class, I would NOT invest in this venture as an EVA. While I think it’s an admirable venture with honourable aims, the main concerns that would keep me from investing involve competition and differentiation. As a teacher in a highly competitive international school market, I am aware that the market is saturated with STEM and STEAM products, materials, and resources. The integration of STEM/STEAM is a growing trend not only at schools (with new extracurricular clubs and STEAM hour initiatives catching steam), but it is also spreading outside the classroom with STEAM kits being sold at nearly every bookstore or toy store in my city. This growing trend suggests to me that major market players have already identified STEAM as an area of growth and are quickly capitalizing on it by cornering the market. In the face of powerful competition from established educational companies, a new venture like this would need to demonstrate something significantly innovative in order to differentiate itself from the major (well-funded) players. While I appreciate that this venture is geared toward solving real-world 21st century problems, the actual kit does not seem to differentiate itself from other STEAM kits in a meaningful way. The kickstarter page suggests that they are the only ones to offer a kit that provides practical utility, however I am personally aware of STEAM kits that allow students to create circuitry, build small robots, create and program musical instruments and video game controllers, all of which have some practical utility. Perhaps the battery constructed using this kit is indeed more practical in its application than other kits; the major players cannot be far behind that either. Finally, in relation to the issues of competition detailed above, I also am hesitant about investing in this particular CEO and production team. The kickstarter page states that their team of nine people have over 35 years of collective experience, however that works out to less than 4 years experience each. As an EVA, I would worry about a lack of experience and perhaps a lack of professional contacts who are experienced enough to bring this to market effectively and through the right avenues. This lack of experience might be devastating in a highly competitive sector.

I upvoted this technology (or pedagogy) because I have used it in my classroom and have seen firsthand its success. I have heard this referred to as the "Feynman technique" and have found it extremely useful, especially with populations of English language learners (ELLs). Learning a topic well enough to teach it in simple, understandable terms (essential for ELLs) demonstrates an authentic understanding of the content. The process of planning to teachback also provides an immediate form of self-assessment as the learner will stumble or struggle when trying to explain something he/she does not fully understand. This provides both the learner and the teacher with valuable feedback on what concepts have not been fully absorbed and allows them both to work on understanding and explaining it using vocabulary and schema that is within the learner's ZPD. Finally, the learner emerges with a lasting understanding and a sense of pride and confidence as she/he masters the content well enough to teach others. I think that available technologies allow for this format to be extended to a global scale with learners receiving feedback from an audience that extends well beyond their immediate surroundings.

As an educator, I think it's important to have an understanding of the cognitive processes that underlie learning and, whenever possible, to apply this understanding to the development of new technologies or instructional methods. Considering the developments in understanding how our brains work and change as we learn, I agree with other reviews that foresee a positive working relationship between the fields of education and neuroscience. I think that an integration of both fields will be essential in the future of education. I also appreciate the point above that too often one extraordinary result of neuroscientific research may be overblown, taken out of context, or exploited to generate hype.

As my school has recently adopted the use of "SeeSaw", a social media platform designed for primary school students, I am particularly interested in the use of social media in the classroom, especially in the primary years. The use of social media in grade 2 has allowed students to create and share media with parents, teachers, and classmates. They are provided various means of demonstrating their learning (through text, audio, video, images, animations) and are given a chance to engage in constructive feedback and dialogue with peers, teachers, and classmates. They are also provided a platform that acts as a running portfolio of their learning progress over time. In addition to providing a means of sharing, interacting, and peer- and self-assessing, they are also exposed to the familiar pitfalls of social media use. In particular, they are vulnerable to cyberbullying and online predation (despite SeeSaw being a 'safe', closed platform). Additionally, students are sometimes faced with social anxiety as they are forced to engage in inorganic dialogue with peers as a mandatory condition of "collaboration". Likewise, students may inevitably suffer from the mental well-being issues that commonly arise from comparisons with peers online and the potential lack of self-confidence that may develop. Considering the ubiquitousness of social media today, I think this is a valuable topic to explore.