Can Learning Be as Fun as Playing Video Games?

-->01:59/02:2300:00

This post is in partnership with University of Phoenix

Why can't learning algebra and chemistry be as fun and addictive as playing a video game? Ntiedo Etuk, founder and CEO of Tabula Digita, is developing tools to merge teaching with dynamic engagement. Click above to see how Etuk is using technology to design lessons that are as motivating as winning games.

This video is part two in our Future Learning video series about technology in classrooms. Check out our first video about Khan Academy's lessons on demand here.

Yes, learning can be as fun as playing game.

In fact, no, not "can be" but MUST be!

Google "Jane McGonigal" and watch her TED conference or read her book. You will then agree too.

You Don't Have to Like This by SAY Media

Friday, October 7, 2011

You Don't Have to Like This

give-take

The next five years is going to be defined by the apps and depth of engagement ... now that everyone has their connections in place.

Mark Zuckerberg, F8 keynote

Media is fundamentally about focusing attention. What makes TV, print and radio such powerful media environments is that they're very efficient mechanisms to focus consumer attention, dividing it neatly between content and advertising. As linear mediums, it's possible for them to create a delivery pattern of entertain, advertise, entertain, advertise.

On the Web, it's not so simple. The non-linear nature of hypertext, combined with a set of lowest common denominator advertising standards has led to a confusing user experience, and an economic model for publishers that rewards clutter. It's hard to deliver a great content experience or compelling brand advertising if the consumer's attention is fragmented into a thousand pieces. We think this is wrong, and it's why we've kicked off our Clean Campaign.

But the challenge for media brands isn't just about reducing visual noise and focusing attention. If they were operating in a wide open Web, they'd only have to worry about their own sites. But they're not - they're part of an ecosystem that's increasingly dominated by one large player: Facebook.

Facebook is fundamentally a communications platform, letting friends and family connect with one another. The recent announcements at F8 - the ticker, the timeline and the Open Graph API - are all designed to make sharing bite sized announcements of what you're doing frictionless. The automated ticker-based status update "Michael is listening to Feist" is the new unit of content on Facebook. With dozens of those flashing by every minute, it's hard to imagine Facebook as a place where consumers focus on anything for very long.

It's fascinating that traditional media companies, the ones that are routinely criticized for not moving quickly enough to save their core businesses, jump so quickly to "innovate" inside Facebook. Desperate for attention, they subjugate their brands to Facebook, in return for access to audience. The problem is that when the platform and the brand compete for attention, the platform always wins.

Take a look at this screenshot of The Guardian's new Facebook application.

Guardian App


 
There are at two layers of branding, two layers of navigation, two tickers of friend activity (one for the Guardian, one globally) ... and let's not even talk about the advertising. The consumer's attention here is not focused on The Guardian's content or The Guardian's advertisers. It's being diverted to serve Facebook's needs: their nav, their ads, their apps.

If media companies believe that the only way to survive is to plant their experience inside Facebook's garden, then it will be a step backwards for the industry. The beauty of the Web is its openness. And the underlying technology (devices, bandwidth, browsers) have evolved to the point where it's possible to create beautiful, compelling experiences that are worthy of focused attention. On the Web ... not inside Facebook.

Posted in: The Week in Venn

Friday is Venn-day. Get it every week.

I have to agree with this post.

Even if i like most of the recent add-ons and modifications on Facebook, experiences provided by media apps such as the Guardian and WSJ are totally annoying and only add to an already way to crowdy and noisy interface.

I like the idea of enjoying some of my media consumption on FB. But at this price ? No, sorry.

We Can All Become Job Creators. And this will come from innovation. Starbucks got it.

When last we left the chairman and chief executive of Starbucks, in mid-August, he had written a widely publicized e-mail lamenting the poisonous state of our nation’s politics. That led him to his first big idea: a call for a boycott of political contributions until Democrats and Republicans began to act in a nonpartisan way for the good of the country.

The idea had undeniable appeal. But it was also — let’s face it — pretty quixotic, fun to dream about but impossible to turn into reality.

Here we are two months later, and Schultz is back with Big Idea No. 2. It is every bit as idealistic as his first big idea, but far more practical. Starbucks is going to create a mechanism that will allow us citizens to do what the government and the banks won’t: lend money to small businesses. This mechanism is scheduled to be rolled out on Nov. 1. This time, Schultz is not tilting at windmills.

From the start, Schultz’s crusade has been focused on the need for jobs, or, as he likes to say, “the jobs emergency.” Should the government finance a sustained infrastructure program to create jobs? Of course. Should it give tax breaks to companies that hire the unemployed? Yes again. But with an election coming up, nothing of the sort is likely.

With the government a nonfactor, Schultz began mulling other ideas. He knew that small businesses created most new jobs, but that many small businesspeople couldn’t hire because they had lost access to credit after the financial crisis. He thought about Starbucks’s involvement in microlending programs in some of the countries where it bought coffee. He wondered if there was some way that that could be applied to small business lending in this country. Finally, he thought about the nearly 7,000 Starbucks stores in the United States, and its tens of millions of customers. Surely, he mused, there must be some way to take advantage of Starbucks’s sheer size.

In late August, Schultz invited a handful of employees to his home. He told them that they were not there to discuss Starbucks business. “Let’s try to take a big swing at job creation that will be unprecedented and unorthodox,” he said. The meeting went well into the evening. Schultz served pizza.

Here’s the idea they came up with: Americans themselves would start lending to small businesses, with Starbucks serving as the middleman. Starbucks would find financial institutions willing to loan to small businesses. Starbucks customers would be able to donate money to the effort when they bought their coffee. Those who gave $5 or more would get a red-white-and-blue wristband, which Schultz labeled “Indivisible.” “We are hoping it will bring back pride in the American dream,” he says. The tag line will read: “Americans Helping Americans.”

It didn’t take long for Starbucks to find the perfect financial partner: Community Development Financial Institutions, or CDFIs. These are lenders, mostly under the radar, that specialize in underserved communities. Most, but not all, CDFIs are nonprofit, and their loan default rates are extremely low. “We specialize in expending credit, getting paid back, and paying back our investors,” says Mark Pinsky, whose organization, Opportunity Finance Network, acts as an umbrella group to the best of them.

Pinsky served on a board with a Starbucks executive. Schultz didn’t know that — indeed, he said he had never heard of a CDFI. But the young Starbucks executives charged with turning the idea into a reality soon found Pinsky — and realized that his organization was tailor-made for their project. Within a matter of days, he had met Schultz, and they had struck a deal.

Starbucks and the Starbucks Foundation will pay for the marketing costs, the wristbands and every other cost associated with the new program — which will be called Create Jobs for USA — out of its own coffers.

Here is the most beautiful part about the whole arrangement. The donations to Create Jobs for USA will not be loaned to the CDFIs. They will be turned into capital — equity that can be leveraged. Pinsky and others told me that that equity can be leveraged 7 to 1, meaning that if 10 million Starbucks customers donate $5, that will support $350 million worth of lending. That’s real money.

The Starbucks Foundation is starting things off with a $5 million donation. Schultz is hoping to convince other national retail chains to participate as well — so that Starbucks isn’t the only place people can join in the effort. And, of course, he is hoping that Starbucks customers will flock to it in droves.

So am I. With the government and banks unwilling or unable, it’s time we took matters into our own hands. At this point, who else can we count on?

Starbucks' CEO has so many things to think about.

But he decided to make thinks happen due to its government inaction.

And this may lead to jobs creation, yes, but first and foremost, as he says, "it will bring back pride in the American dream," and this is priceless.

Kudos Starbucks. Really.