Articles

I think you guys nailed the top application for this technique/technology other than student-facing uses: Pro-D. I was crafting a post about it and then there it was in the next section! (I'll share it anyway as I have a link to a cool study I think everyone would really dig) I think there’s a fantastic opportunity here in the realm of teacher professional development. According to this recent study https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2020-04482-001, when teachers were given evidence based literature to counter misconceptions they were found to accept the evidence only to revert to their old ways a short time later. >>>The evidence of this study points to a need for ongoing supportive interventions rather than one-and-done PD day workshops as is common here in Canada and elsewhere. Microlearning modules seem like an excellent platform to facilitate this for the reasons you’ve highlighted.<<< Some side notes: (1) “According to an ATD report, the average amount of time for an ideal microlearning module is 10 minutes.” - this was based on a poll where they asked people what they thought was best. This is not scientific in any sense and gives no indication of systematically finding the optimum of an efficacy curve, which I think deserves further study if it hasn't had already. (2) On "What makes “micro” micro? " Perhaps there is no time limit or minimum. The nature of microlearning might mean that the length of a module suits the content, context, or both. (3) Microlearning was initially introduced as stepwise, each step with goals toward a larger goal. But the science supposedly supporting microlearning was actually in support of REPETITION specifically. Not to say that the definition was wrong, per se, but this is a specific detail that should be emphasized and should inform microlearning module design >> Steps are not enough. Learners need iteration, which is one of the ideas behind the “spiral” model of learning. (This notion is conspicuously absent from the “4 defining characteristics”)<<

1) Hummm… OpenAI’s “primary fiduciary duty is to humanity.” The company wants humans continue to live meaningful live and it plans on “distributing the benefits” of AGI to “all of humanity,” Who is saying that? Who wrote OpenAI’s charter? Greg Brockman, who had run technology for the payments company Stripe. What strikes me is that the leadership of the organization does not match my expectation of who should be leading a social enterprise with such a noble vision. I just know that Brockman grew up on a hobby farm, went to Harvard and MIT. But were are the artefacts from his life showing a deep commitment to social justice? I remember reading the biography of Leila Jana, CEO of Samasource, another social enterprise. She explained that she grew up poor, saw her parents constantly struggle, had a transformative experience while teaching blind students in Uganda, she studied African development etc…overall there was a clear sense that this person was genuinely committed to work for social justice. But with OpenAi, I think some kind of credible leadership might be missing. 2) From my perspective, their mission is flawed from the outset: “Researchers will be strongly encouraged to publish their work, whether as papers, blog posts, or code, and our patents (if any) will be shared with the world.” The thing is, if they share everything, the “bad guys” (those with somber motives) can build upon OpenAi work to accelerate their own dark agenda.

Ying, great job on an informative and concise report on Codecademy. I want to learn to code for similar reasons. I am not a teacher, but a mother, and it's important to me to start encouraging my son to learn to code when he is around 5 years because, like you said in your presentation, coding is becoming as important as learning to read and write. Coding and digital literacy are essential to becoming equal participants in digital societies. I agree that this is a growing market and one worth investing in. It is essential for educators and other edtech professionals to stay relevant in their fields and for all those who want to have a real impact and participate in shaping and transforming the changing digital landscape.

I've noticed children are often the inspiration behind learning technology start ups. My son is what inspired my vision for an innovative learning technology. A problem is just a problem until it affects your personal life, then it becomes a problem that needs fixed. It can be a strong motivator. I also think it is significant that he piloted his app to demonstrate its potential value and scalability before asking for a larger investment. In other words, a Minimal Viable Product is a quick and effective way to find out just how promising your vision is.

Yes, I would invest in this venture. The company’s hook that it “develops toys to help kids learn about the world through technology and play” makes it clear what the venture is about, its vision, and the potential for future products. The pitch focuses on the importance of skills development such as problem solving at an early age, while the product itself is a tool for developing those skills. This means several viable products can be developed with that overall goal in mind, as opposed to be limited by the success of a single product. The pitch also addresses a large potential market for the venture's products by mentioning that kids as creators of technology, and not just consumers, is “the new normal.” The ask in the pitch video is $110.00 or more to “help kids find their innate ability as digital creators,” which gives investors a Complete Dough Universe kit and their name in the app’s credits. Daniel and Bethany, the founders who are pitching in the video, are engaging and appear genuinely passionate about helping children develop their creative and scientific skills.

YES, I would invest in this venture as CO.LAB is promoting a mission that is long-lasting with far-reaching effects. Rather than a single product, the money invested will go towards maintaining a space that breaks down entry-barriers for marginalized groups. This pitch successfully taps into our empathy (“Making is the great equalizer because we are all intrinsically curious…but not everyone has access to this table”). By backing this project, investors are aligning themselves with these ideas. Examining the overall design of the video, it is very well done, from the narration, to the video clips of children and adults—“innovators of colour”—utilizing this space.

+ Pain Point: Due to systemic inequality, marginalized and underrepresented groups get limited opportunities to explore STEM topics and express their ideas, and as such, less opportunities to pursue entrepreneurial endeavors.
+ Solution: CO.LAB aims to break barriers with their makerspace where “women, people of color, the LGBTQIA+ community, and the economically disadvantaged” can have access to STEM equipment and materials for free.
+ Differentiation: What sets this kickstarter apart is that the focus is not on TOOLS for makerspaces, but rather on the SPACE itself. The space will remain free for its end-users.
+ The Ask: CO.LAB already has the building, the equipment, and the people to run the programs; CO.LAB is asking for $25,000 to help cover one year’s worth of rent.