At the Realizeit users conference, we interviewed company executives as they focus more on faculty enablement rather than the “adaptive learning” silver bullet, despite popular labels.
We interviewed real, live learning scientists from Carnegie Mellon University to get a better sense of what’s real and how the research can impact classroom teaching. And you know what? They weren’t scary at all!
Phil and I were recently interviewed by KQED’s Sarah Tan for a story about the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative’s Summit platform. As often happens when our comments are just one bit of a larger story—particularly when we are asked to provide a more critical external perspective as a check on the enthusiastic reports of a project’s participants—some interesting parts of the interview conversation inevitably ended up on the cutting room floor. Ms. Tan was kind enough to grant us permission to repurpose some of the source material from the interview for this blog post.
In my last post, I talked about the need for educators in general and faculty in particular to develop literacy around data and analytics. But it’s really broader than that. Back when college was intended for a relatively small percentage of the population, the idea of “weeding out” students who couldn’t make it without help was not obviously out of alignment with its mission.
The entire six-part interview series with McGraw-Hill Education’s adaptive learning experts is now up on YouTube. (Full disclosure: In the months between the filming and the publication of these videos, McGraw-Hill became a client of MindWires.) Here’s a good segment on teaching: (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSqoc6Y_4No) The first example Matt Haldeman gives is a math class, which is where we […]