|
0 members (),
133
guests, and
13
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480
Member
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480 |
Just got an email from them. They're planning to upgrade their interface and adaptability 'over the next few months'. Thought that might be useful for anyone trying to decide what to do.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1 |
I got the same email. They say a new version will "[offer] a variety of approaches to a lesson based on the student’s learning style". The research I've seen by Daniel Willingham has found that tailoring lessons based on students' "learning styles" is ineffective. We now have a touch screen Windows 8.1 PC, and the children sometimes like to use EPGY by touching the screen instead of using the keyboard and mouse. However, after carefully reviewing the feedback [from a parent survey], we reached an important conclusion: while EPGY excels at fulfilling the needs of your child by providing accelerated content at a pace attuned to him or her, its technology needs an upgrade.
When EPGY was created, it reflected an education philosophy built on many years of research, but it was based on technology available at the time. Learning was conceived as a path that took a child from concept to explanation to application. Today, we know that the key to advanced learning is a more flexible approach that takes cues from the student, offers a variety of approaches to a lesson based on the student’s learning style, and engages students in a more tailored and personal way. Today, the technology is available to do that.
At the same time, we know that the foundational elements of the EPGY program remain true – the theories that support the program are as solid as ever.
As we look forward, we want to preserve the fundamental theories that underpin the EPGY program while improving the offering in several ways:
To utilize evolved education technology through a transition to a modern platform that allows compatibility with mobile devices, including tablet computers.
To incorporate additional effective instructional strategies that continue to adapt to students’ needs and to improve their engagement in order to motivate and activate their fullest learning potential.
To open the lines of communication with both you and your child to ensure you are getting the most out of your EPGY experience in all of your interactions with our team.
Over the coming months, we will be conducting additional research and employing the expertise of partners at the intersection of education and technology. Our goal is to upgrade the EPGY technology and resources while continuing to provide the rigorous educational experience you value. We plan to share an update on our vision and progress this February. In the meantime, please don’t hesitate to reply to this email address with further feedback, questions or concerns.
Best,
The EPGY Team, Stanford University
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 45
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 45 |
This is good news, but it may be a while before the enhancements are available. The email is a little vague, bit I think they are going to be doing additional research and develop a plan by February. I am assuming the implementation of that plan would take many months longer.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1 |
I am assuming the implementation of that plan would take many months longer. EPGY-like software by Suppes and collaborators was being used in the 1960s. In a 1966 paper "The uses of computers in education" there is a picture of a student using the software on a terminal http://suppes-corpus.stanford.edu/article.html?id=67 . The set theory problem on the screen looks like ones my children have done. So EPGY may evolve slowly  .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480 |
I assume that many other people responded to their survey as I did, telling them that Khan is 100x better - better interface, more fun, WAY more adaptable. So they panicked and wanted to tell people they heard them and will change.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,432
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,432 |
That makes sense. It is my understanding that EPGY is the same as CTY-online for some of the math sequences (i.e., pre-algebra and algebra) and frankly my DS wasn't interested in the CTY-online pre-algebra course when it was under consideration. There are just so much competition out there with fancier technology and more flexibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 2,640 Likes: 1 |
There are just so much competition out there with fancier technology and more flexibility. My children like both EPGY and Khan Academy. I like EPGY's minimalism, since fancy graphics can be a distraction. Textbooks bought by schools tend to be fancier, loaded with color pictures, than the ones homeschoolers buy for themselves. My children have used a text-only arithmetic program I wrote that runs from the Windows command line (looks like MS-DOS). The middle one likes it and has gone on 500-question binges. Maybe aesthetic preferences are also heritable . I'd really like EPGY to allow Open Enrollment for courses beyond beginning algebra. The $495 price point for 3 months http://epgy.stanford.edu/for-parents/epgy-courses/courses will be hard to defend.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 113
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 113 |
I like EPGY's minimalism, since fancy graphics can be a distraction. Textbooks bought by schools tend to be fancier, loaded with color pictures, than the ones homeschoolers buy for themselves. +1. +1.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,478
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,478 |
The research I've seen by Daniel Willingham has found that tailoring lessons based on students' "learning styles" is ineffective. The confounding bit with Willingham's point of view is he delineates ability and style: "Ability is that you can do something. Style is how you do it." Which is a fine sort of thing for a high school debate, but isn't super-helpful when other professionals aren't following the same definitions. Ability is even trickier, because what you see is that most of the discussion in education is focused on direct topical ability rather than metacognitive ability. So, one question with EPGY's change is whether it means they have pacing, presentation, or explanation/content changes depending on what defintion of style they are using. If it means they have video, audio, and interactives available, then that can still be useful because variations can cover weaknesses in an explanation in a different mode, and even without a sensory mode effect, preference for a mode can still empower motivation.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480
Member
|
|
OP
Member
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 480 |
Bostonian, minimalism was the problem with all resources for us. My kids were typical five year olds. They wanted pictures and animations and fun. And before Beast academy, nothing offered that past second grade.
|
|
|
|
|
