Blurts

DropBox has big ideas for the amount of space it can provide users (PCWorld). The new model would allow more external storage while limiting the amount of space that must be dedicated on the local computer.

What qualifies as a maker space? What hands-on experiences have educational value? It is a reasonable question and the answer likely depends on what is motivating to the individual learner. It seems that too often some ideas like maker spaces are defined by those who want to create them and have a personal view of what experiences might be productive.

This is a “fairy garden” created by a granddaughter. Would you consider it the product of a maker space. There are no computers or robots. There is no engineering scaled to the age of a young learner. What there is an impressive creative product generated by a young person with a long-standing interest in a topic and the willingness to learn about that topic on her own.

If you are “into” the maker space concept, I am just guessing that you do not have the resources for this kind of project in your space. This is what makes making a challenge for educators. Making is not defined by you, it is defined by the learners.

This EdSurge article provides an important service in analyzing EdTech business models. I have suggested in several of my own posts the serious challenges facing companies hoping to survive in the education “market” – educators want free, but there is a negative reaction to the way “free” services are funded – ads and information collection. The article seems to conclude that “premium” services are the most likely strategy we will see in the short run. This approaches provides some free services with the intent of building a user base and hopes that a reasonable percentage of these users will find value in a service and then spend money for the full range of services/content the company provides.

Grit – if you work harder, you do better

Professional development – teach the teachers too

This NPR piece on education jargon is funny and accurate. The author explains the “more understandable definitions” were generated using a word processor that limited word selection to the 1000 most common English words. I suppose I should write with this same tool.

Worried about the future of the open web? Will we be forced to offer content within the walled gardens of Facebook, Google, and Apple? This TechCrunch post (http://techcrunch.com/2016/04/10/1301496/) asks open web platform developers to comment. While optimistic, the big challenge facing the open web is the large difference in finances supporting platform development. The lack of contributors means the pace of development is slower and users might abandon these platforms in favor of more sophisticated options. Contributors relying on open platforms will lose their audiences.

Posted with Blogsy

The FCC has voted to allow low-income families to apply the $9.25 monthly subsidy for voice connectivity to include online data access. The 3-2 vote was along party lines (democrats for and republicans against). As I understand the objection to this plan, it involved the lack of a cap on how much the program would cost. I suppose this might be considered a partially unfunded mandate as there would be no way to know how many might want to take advantage of the program and thus how much it would cost. Funding issues are always critical, but with a cap how would the program work? Would those first in line be subsidized and late comers be out of luck?

Providers must be willing to provide at least 500mb of data or 500 minutes of voice service. If I understand this minimum correctly, the required data minimum would seem too low for providing access to video services (e.g., Kahn Academy). The Education Week article was unclear on the specifics, but I interpret the minimum to mean this is what a low income family would get if contributing nothing to the plan and also that providers could offer more to compete for customers.

Additional comments from the FCC