In the spirit of an iterative development process, we posted the Evidence Framework report for public comment. Please review submitted comments below.
-
National Education Technology Plan
This plan addresses the five essential components of learning powered by technology: Learning, Assessment, Teaching, Infrastructure, and Productivity.
Learn more about the NETP
What is the planned date of publication for this report? Is the draft dated 12/19/12?
I was very surprised that DBIR is presented in this report without making any reference to the wealth of studies on Design-Based Research (DBR) in the last two decades. It seems that DBIR is very similar to DBR in many respects. This report basically appears to ignore all the work on DBR and consequently paints a rather incomplete picture of how this type of research originated and evolved. The combination of DBR with instructional design models such as Rapid Prototyping is also an idea that has been around for quite a few years already. I combined DBR with Rapid Prototyping in my dissertation, which dates back to 2006, and it was probably not the first one to shed light on the potential for synergy between DBR and RP.
Major journals in the field have published special issues on DBR, such as the Educational Researcher, which devoted a whole issue to what was called an emerging paradigm back in 2003 (Vol. 32, No. 1, Jan. – Feb., 2003). Similarly, national competitions for funding for research, such as NSF’s Cyberlearning program, have originated a rich portfolio of projects directly related to DBR (http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2011/nsf11587/nsf11587.htm).
Congratulations on creating what I believe is the first comprehensive report that will serve as a guideline and standard — that is evidence-based — for digital learning. This field is in it’s infancy and despite funding initiatives like the DBR/NFS program outlined above, there are significant opportunities for learning from one another, testing and building effective programs that incorporate much about what we know about how we learn — both on and off line.
The ability to be able to track actual and individual behavior through a learning management system and report of skill changes through nuances feedback loops is a window that has not been opened to us as educators until now. This will enable us to be able to be very specific about strategies and techniques to enhance learning.
Further, the large amount of data that can be collected through large sets will enable us to understand a range of learning behaviors from students but also from influencers such as primary childcare providers and educations. Because these influencers are so critical to learning, I believe this will help us create systems, or cultures of learning — as well as help to create a common language among all stakeholders.
Perhaps most importantly, because learning is not measured on standardized tests as the only way to “prove” knowledge has been gained, we have the opportunity to be truly explore what learning looks like in real time and to actual LEARN how to LEARN.
I suspect we will learn as much about the myths we hold as truths through the digital learning revolution if we listen carefully — and that a good thing. I applaud the reports efforts to begin a robust and critical discussion about the vital role of evidence-based learning research in digital learning.
First, I would like to congratulate everyone who was involved in creating this report. As a doctoral student this report will assist me in many areas as I conduct research in the technology field. I think the five areas are vital and crucial in evidence based for digital learning. As we know, technology is ever changing at a fast pace rate. This report will not only guide my research but should set standards and guidelines for digital learning.
Thanks for a comprehensive report about the state of the field. I especially liked the inserted cases, resources, and research studies.
One topic I think needs to be better fleshed out is ethical standards for collecting, maintaining, and disseminating all this data that we’re collecting about kids’ learning. FERPA regulations have some bearing on confidentiality, but FERPA really hasn’t begun to address the realities that learning technologies are presenting now that we can aggregate/disaggregate so much data. As a researcher myself, I am constantly bouncing between FERPA regs, IRB requirements, and the realities of a digital world. I think this topic will best fit in Chapter 5 “”Appropriate resources and informed choices.”
I’d also like to see the committee address the economic realities of our current era of technological transformation. Although we often tout technologies as cost-reducing, in reality that is rarely the case. Nonetheless, we could realize greater productivity and improved learning–so I think the costs might be worthwhile. A document like this might be a useful means of addressing this issue. I haven’t seen it yet, but knowing how business models tend to take over in US education, I would hate to see the complexities of learning and learning technologies reduced to a cost-benefit analysis. Chapter 1 addresses the issue through a discussion of the sizable up-front costs of R&D. But I think the discussion needs to go further to address the long-term expenses associated with maintenance, ongoing professional learning, and keeping up with new tools.
Finally, this report does a great job of describing the status quo. It tells about current practices, current studies, and current thinking. I wondered (and this might not be the document for this) what all this means for reconceptualizing schooling and the future of (public?) education and learning. Where’s the place for theory and paradigm shifts in all of this?
Thanks again for creating this document. It confirms much of what I thought was going on. It codifies many of the somewhat “new” techniques for investigating the possibilities of learning technologies. And it provides a useful starting point for researchers and practitioners as we try to “make the road by walking it.”
Congratulations on an important and well-crafted report. The examples you provide about games as digital learning environment were very good, I wish there was more discussion about the nature of gaming environments as learning and research environments in the text itself. As the reports states, and illustrates with the examples, games offer unique affordances for assessments and scaffolded learning environments and game designers have a lot to teach us about natural forms of assessments and scaffolds.