Category Archives: Education

TWIEtR: SXSWedu, Platforms, News & Kids

I don’t want to bury the lead (as I used to critique journalism and executive memos): This Week in Edtech Reports (TWIEtR) includes my observations on SXSWedu 2017. But first we get through the latest on K-12 market stats and how kids view online news.

As always, you can subscribe to these summaries by email by looking for the SUBSCRIBE box in the left navigation. Or get updates in real time by following @FrankCatalano on Twitter.

Futuresource continues its parade of new data by walking out its latest, the Digital Platforms in the K-12 Education Market report. Among the tidbits revealed are that the mobile device management category in K-12, “is high growth, especially in the US, where the penetration of student devices is over 45%.”

That leads Futuresource to forecast that the “digital management and platform tools” market (which includes student information systems, communications and data analytics platforms, learning management systems, classroom management and collaboration tools, and more — basically, edtech not used for student instruction and testing or teacher professional development) will grow a lot. Futuresource estimates a compound annual growth rate of 4.5%, for a US K-12 total of $1.83 billion by 2020.

One other fascinating observation has to do with differences in the student information system markets in the US and the UK. Essentially, the trend to consolidation is flip-flopping in each country. The UK is seeing its one dominant provider challenged by cloud-based startups. At the same time, the fragmented US market, with more than 120 providers, is consolidating: PowerSchool alone has purchased several competitors.

Kids these days … and news. The non-profit Common Sense has released a new report, “News and America’s Kids,”  that surveyed 853 children age 10–18 on how they feel about the news and where they get it — including online and social media sources.

Kids (and I use that word hesitantly for older teens) still value news, or so say 48% of them. But their primary source is family, teachers, and friends (63%) followed by the tech source of online and social media (49%). Perhaps surprising to some, traditional media is pretty high up there, too (46%).

For social media, the top two sources? Facebook and … YouTube.

And one more thing:

SXSWedu, in its seventh year in Austin, continued its somewhat-under-the-radar role as the start of the entire annual SXSW  festival series that runs through interactive and music to film and comedy. The focus is education technology, broadly writ, and the mutual impacts tech and human education have on each other.

Not only will you hear edtech cheer-leading, but there is also a balancing chorus of voices with provocative and thoughtful concerns about digital equity, student data privacy, and the role of government. Much of this willingness to deal with hard issues is a byproduct of the organizers’ conscious mix of K-12 and college educators, policy wonks, and industry execs.

But SXSWedu has evolved from its mainly conference start to incorporate many of the festival elements of the other South-by-Southwest events. There are films, a hands-on Playground, an open-to-the-public exhibitor Expo, and always, of course, parties.

I don’t have final figures, but attendance for the conference part of this year’s SXSWedu, held March 6-9, seemed flat or smaller than last year’s 7,500 or so. (One conference official felt international attendance was down and that would hurt totals.) That’s after years of explosive growth. The free Expo itself draws in the thousands, and isn’t included in the conference numbers.

I’ve attended SXSWedu for six of its seven years, and was on the Advisory Board for five of the six. So, if you’ll humor me, a few observations.

We are at peak coding startup. From the Expo to the Playground to various sessions, K-12 coding startups were everywhere. To quote nearly every Star Wars lead in every non-Jar Jar movie, I have a bad feeling about this.

The new bright/shiny is VR/AR. Several virtual reality or augmented reality sessions and startups were touting the wonderfulness of three-dimensional edtech hardware and educational content. While some of this is legit (I liked LlamaZoo’s veterinary simulations in the Launch competition), it’s still expensive and awkward for much of education and it will be a slow, long climb to viability.

The bloom is off the K-12 investment rose. We’ve seen it in declining funding for K-12 edtech startups, shifting editorial focus to higher education and adult learning in edtech news sites, and now in startup competitions — it’s a bad time to begin a me-too, indefinitely unprofitable K-12 edtech startup. Grant funding and unpaid pilots are not business models. Perhaps the final confirmation needed was when, in SXSWedu’s Launch competition, the top three startups were not for K-12 students.

Speaking of Launch, it was an odd-yet-refreshing mix of ten startups that made the finalist cut. The breakdown illustrated the shift from K-12 student-facing edtech: Eight of the ten had zero to do with tech for K-12 students.

My personal favorites in this competition that didn’t win — for concept and/or potential — included TeacherConnects (an app and service to help teacher candidates and new teachers succeed), Cell-Ed (using mobile audio and text messaging to teach job skills), and Quizling (interactive app and kiosk quizzes for museum and library education, institutions for which I admittedly have a soft spot). Tellingly, each of these has customers and revenue.

The ultimate winner was The Whether, an app to help college grads get internships and jobs.

The upshot for 2017’s SXSWedu? It still provides a pleasantly challenging meeting place for educators, wonks, and industry to mix and discuss the big issues of education and technology. Or — as I suspect many do — just network and party.

TWIEtR: Chromebooks vs Windows, TV, & texting

This week in edtech reports (yes, TWIEtR) the epic battle between Chromebooks and Windows has a decidedly geographic twist, plus studies on texting and television.

As always, you can subscribe to these summaries by choosing “SUBSCRIBE” in the left navigation.  And/or get these updates in real-time by following @FrankCatalano on Twitter.

Market research firm Futuresource has released its full-year 2016 analysis of which mobile device operating systems (“mobile” includes laptops) are selling into K-12 schools. No surprise for those following trends: In the US, Google’s Chrome OS on Chromebooks made up more than half of the market in 2016, going from 38% in 2014 to 50% in 2015 and then 58% in 2016.

Less intuitively obvious may be what’s happening in the rest of the world: Microsoft’s Windows rules, increasing from 47% in 2014 to 56% in 2015 and 65% in 2016. Chromebooks are a mere 6% of the total non-US market. (Google does point out Chromebooks are #1 in Sweden.)

There’s some good commentary by Futuresource’s Mike Fisher in the news release.

But it’s safe to say the big loser is Apple. Apple’s iPad burst onto the scene in 2010 to rapturous response by everyone, including educators. However, it became clear after several implementations (including a disastrous one in LA Unified School District) that its high cost and lack of included keyboard made it a lesser option.

Conversely Chromebooks, many at under $200, were so cheap and easy to manage that I heard school district tech directors say they were able to afford more than they needed, just to have spares.

Apple’s iOS now has dropped from 26% share in 2014 to 14% in 2016 in the US, and has held steady for the last three years at about 9% in other countries.

An academic study about television (which, at its introduction, was considered a stunning form of “educational technology”) has sobering news for parents who park kindergarten-age kids in front of the tube. Children who spend more than two hours a day passively watching TV show decreases in math skills and “executive functioning” (a collection of cognitive skills). That’s bad for school readiness.

What is even more sobering is that this decrease is most pronounced in children in low-income households, less so in middle-income households, and isn’t measurable in high-income households.

Another academic study touts the benefits of texting. Not between students. From the school to parents. And these are automated texts.

The draft paper finds parents who get automated text messages are both more involved with their child’s school, and more informed about how the student is actually doing — even if parents don’t log into a school’s online parent portal to find out more. The kids, too, do better with fewer absences and course failures.

(Full disclosure: In my day job, I’m an exec at a company that makes school-to-home communications tools. But we weren’t involved in the study; I only found out about it due to my addiction to NPR.)

And one more thing:

Lego appears to have captured the zeitgeist of the nerd class with its latest mini-figure set, “Women of NASA.”

Now this particular nerd has played with Lego since he was five, and even still has the wooden-boxed set his grandfather, who lived in Berlin, gave him (er, me).

But that was when you could have any color Lego block you wanted, as long as it was red or white, and years before Lego introduced mini-figures of any kind. Especially this inspirational group, featuring (among others) Katherine Johnson, profiled in the warm and tensely accurate historical drama, Hidden Figures.

When Lego releases these mini-figures, there will be nothing hidden about them.

TWIEtR: IWBs, higher ed landscape

Interactive flat panel displays and edtech categories ripe for consolidation topped a relatively short pile this week in edtech reports (abbreviated: TWIEtR).

As always, this expands upon what I tweet, so you can also follow @FrankCatalano in real time, or get these updates by email by filling out the “Subscribe” field in the left margin.

To most parents, “educational technology” in the classroom has meant the near-ubiquitous interactive white board (IWB) at its front. Now Futuresource has released a report that implies interactive flat panels are well on their way to challenging that perception.

A key stat is that now more than two-thirds of US classrooms have an interactive display, yet in Q4 of last year, 68% of all display sales to education and corporate markets were interactive flat panels.

There’s a bit more detail in Futuresource’s news release.

Higher education edtech is getting more attention than it has since K-12 edtech seemed to suck all the hype out of the market after the iPad was introduced to ecstatic industry hopes in 2010.  That K-12 hype has diminished, in part, due to long customer sales cycles and reduced venture funding rounds in the past year. But to fill the gap, never fear: higher ed is here.

Not that Eduventure’s latest report is about hype. But its free infographic (behind a form, ‘natch) and news release on its 2017 Higher Education Technology Landscape Report at least outline the players and categories to watch.

Its take is that mainstream tech moving into higher ed includes social media, cloud-based student information systems, and software-as-a-service providers.  More interesting are its takes on five markets with the largest numbers of new entrants (e.g., student success and retention solutions) and five markets facing consolidation (e.g., learning management systems).

And one more thing:

My first essay for GeekWire (or anyone, for that matter) in nearly a year takes on bad tech’s personal impact, but — spoiler alert — there’s a positive outcome.

Yes, I was one of the many who purchased a VW diesel car based on promises of fuel-efficient, relatively clean performance. And I was one of the first to sell my Golf TDI back to Volkswagen after long months of following the emissions software cheating scandal.

I kept a journal of the first 60 days since the buyback and how it changed how I, and my wife, think about transportation in an era of new (Lyft, Uber, Wingz) and old (bus) alternatives.

Read “A Post-Diesel Journal: How the VW emissions software scandal sent one family down a new road” at GeekWire.

TWIEtR: Horizons, Gartner,

The week in edtech reports (or, abbreviated, “TWIEtR”) brought new analysis and research on the future of higher education, the effectiveness of Hours of Code, and the death of smartphone operating systems.

All summarized here from my Twitter feed, @FrankCatalano. (See the “Subscribe” box in the left column nav to get these by email.)

Top of the stack of reports was the New Media Consortium’s Horizon Report: 2017 Higher Education Edition.

NMC’s work has always simultaneously fascinated and frustrated me. It’s fascinating, because it uses a modified Delphi method to get experts to take a look at various time horizons, going out as far as five years, and estimate which technologies will gain widespread adoption in education.

It frustrates because the contents of the reports are released in dribs and drabs before the final is issued, and NMC provides no official scorecard of how their expert panels’ past predictions turned out. At least the 2017 higher ed report has a nifty chart showing which technologies have appeared as topics since 2012.

There have been lots of anecdotes (and hype) about the Hour of Code. But does it really change students’ perceptions about computer science?

Now an actual scientific study says yes. The report, issued by (the nonprofit behind the Hour of Code), has the daunting title of, “The Hour of Code: Impact on Attitudes Towards and Self-Efficacy with Computer Science.”

But its clear conclusion is that students gain more positive attitudes about compsci: “In other words, after just one Hour of Code activity, students report liking computer science more and report feeling that they are better able to learn computer science and are better at computer science than their peers.”

Strikingly, the increase is greatest among middle- and high-school girls with no earlier experience with computer science.

More implications for edtech developers in a mobile-first world (and districts thinking through student and teacher devices on their networks): If you’re working on apps for new smartphones, only Android and iOS really matter.

While this news from Gartner sort of confirms the obvious from a US-centric perspective, it’s eye-opening from a global perspective. Sorry, Windows Mobile and Blackberry.

And one more thing:

Geez, Intel. I realize the Maker movement is the hot, sexy trend in project-based K-12 education, and kudos to you for getting behind it. But no more high-school science fair sponsorships, after two decades?

This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy when it comes to STEM education (yeah, I’ve written about it). You don’t get the technology part without the science part. There’s a reason Thomas Dolby and Bill Nye exclaim: “Science!”


This Week in Edtech Reports (yes, that’s where “TWIEtR” comes from), some hardware info, an online evaluation guide, and an all-encompassing report on algorithms that goes way beyond education technology.

For those new to this exercise, including me, TWIEtR is where I coalesce my recent tweets about edtech analysis and reports so they don’t scroll away. You can also automatically get these posts by email by filling out the brief ‘Subscribe’ form on the left.

Every year this decade, MDR has issued an EdNET Insight “State of the K-12 Market” report — for a subscription fee. The 2016-17 report is a bit different. This year, it’s a series of individual reports, but each still requires payment to view: the new, 124-page K-12 Market: Educational Technology Trends is roughly $1,500.

However, it does have a wealth of useful information based on detailed surveys of school district technology and curriculum leaders. (Personal disclaimer: I helped analyze the data and write those reports for several years, so can attest to their depth.)

You can get an interesting view, though, by simply checking out the announcements about the content, including a news release and earlier article.  Most telling is the fact that school districts don’t seem to be relying on one kind of computing device for students, splitting purchases between laptops, Chromebooks (arguably a kind of laptop without local storage), and tablets. Plus, budgets for hardware and software seem to be recovering.

Still, the most widely used edtech in districts? Regular projectors (73%) and the oft-maligned interactive whiteboards (64%).

Not strictly a report, but SETDA’s new From Print to Digital: Guide to Quality Instructional Materials is a useful resource. The State Educational Technology Directors Association has come up with this online toolkit to help districts and states with a process to review and choose digital (and analog) curriculum materials.

Pew Research Center takes a very broad view of our tech-centric lives with its new report, Code-Dependent: Pros and Cons of the Algorithm Age.  While this fascinating report isn’t strictly about education technology (and only mentions “education” in passing, though it does quote edtech luminary Justin Reich of the MIT Teaching Systems Lab), it’s directly applicable because one of the darlings of edtech is computer- and algorithm-based “personalized learning.”

Pew has developed a thought-provoking report that’s worth a scan, or careful read, depending on your interest.

And one more thing:

I love art, both fine and pop. When I used to commute to Manhattan from Seattle for work, I’d take time at least once a month to wander the massive Metropolitan Museum of Art to see new exhibitions or just visit old art friends.

Now the Met has released 375,000 artwork images with an open license for use and re-use, a boon for educators and art lovers everywhere. It’s done so in partnership with Creative Commons for the open licensing, and is encouraging easier distribution through Wikimedia Commons, Wikipedia, Pinterest, and more.

Art is good for the soul, and the Met’s move is good for art.

TWIEtR: inBloom, BETT, M&As

Let’s start by getting the TWIEtR acronym in the headline out of the way. It stands for, “This Week in Edtech Reports.”

Every day I scour the web for interesting reports and fact-based analysis about what’s happening in education technology. And, on Twitter, I’ve tended to tweet reports that provide a larger perspective or highlight a sweep of trends.

It’s not that I don’t appreciate anecdotes or pure opinion. Both have their place (and I’ve written lots of columns and commentary). But neither are as useful for reference.

Yet my tweets have the lifespan of a fruit fly. So I’m hoping these weekly round-ups will coalesce what I found interesting, with the caveat that what I find interesting also tends to include industry-focused reports, and may stray to where edtech intersects consumer and other kinds of technology.

As a one-time and long-time journalist and industry analyst, I’m hoping you’ll find these pointers useful, too. I’ll provide brief commentary from time to time.

This is an experiment and I hope to replicate it weekly. If you’d like to not have to check back to see if I have, go ahead and use the “Subscribe” box on the left. I promise you’ll only get blog posts.

It’s rare that an edtech startup gets a detailed post-mortem. But inBloom, which began life as the Shared Learning Collaborative (and which I explained early in its life on MindShift nearly five years ago), gets a useful and thoughtful deep-dive from Data & Society in a report called “The Legacy of inBloom.”

Adding further perspective are four accompanying essays from long-time data privacy experts and observers, such as Bill Fitzgerald, Olga Garcia-Kaplan, and Brenda Leong.

The abrupt implosion of the well-intentioned initiative deserves this kind of analysis, especially as proper handling of, and communication about, student data has become an even larger topic since inBloom died in 2014. Cautionary tales have value.

There have been a number of good analyses and reports about how investor interest in edtech startups flagged in 2016. Now Berkery Noyes Investment Bankers weighs in with a slim “Education Mergers and Acquisitions Trends Report” sporting some stunning statistics about last years’ education merger and acquisition activity.

From K-12 to adult, the news was not great, especially if you compare slightly down deal volume to nose-diving dollar value. As many except the biggest cheerleaders in the industry have said, if you’re an edu startup looking to cash out, better focus on building a profitable business first … or instead (always my preference).

One of the best industry analyst firms in edtech (if not the best) is Futuresource.  And one of the biggest edtech trade shows (okay, the biggest) is BETT in London.

Futuresource’s analysts scoured BETT and developed a free 43-page  “BETT 2017 Show Report” for download, in which each “page” has a text-heavy PowerPoint slide’s worth of content. Annoyingly, there’s a form in front of it (and no summary). But hey, it’s free. And a nice piece if you can’t afford to go across the pond every year to attend.

Trivia: BETT, originally an acronym for the British Educational Technology and Trade show, actually prefers to be called “Bett” now and has booted the meaning behind the acronym. But when it comes to calling it that, I bet few do.

And one more thing:

It looks like EdSurge, once my column home, has completed its transition to being more about edtech resources and information than news. It’s actually been a gradual shift, but the new home page suddenly puts paid services front-and-center. News is clearly secondary.

I’m not surprised. Journalism these days is a hard business and the bills need to be paid, especially if investors are involved. Something’s gotta underwrite the coverage if there are no subscriptions and few ads.

But if you, like me, want to avoid the sea of promotion the EdSurge home page has become, you can get right to the stories at this link. I’ve been promised by those in the know that news coverage will still continue, even if it’s not quite as immediately visible.

One year ago today, I silenced myself

FrankBWSXSWeduOne year ago today, I was preparing my final presentation for an education technology conference, a practical session at ISTE on students’ digital footprints and privacy.

One year ago today, I had finished dealing with comments and tweets on my last education technology analysis, a snarkfest for GeekWire on edtech trends, fads, and WTFs.

GeekWirecolumnsOne year ago today, I walked away from formally writing or speaking about edtech. I did so after two decades of writing and speaking about edtech, in locations as varied as New Zealand and DC, and for vehicles as varied as EdSurge and MindShift.

It was a departure I had planned for months, after many well-received keynotes and columns as an independent observer.

ETIN2As 365 days passed, a few began to notice my absence as a speaker or attendee at industry-focused conferences (this month, I shed my Advisory Board member role for SXSWedu, one that I’d held since 2012). A very fewer have asked: Why?

I usually coyly respond that it was time, that I was pruning extraneous activity. Now it seems worth unpacking that further into three reasons:

  • The influence of stupid money. Venture capital has an important role to play in accelerating startups and good ideas. But cash can equally and aggressively propel bad ideas. It was becoming increasingly clear that, as with consumer tech in the late 1990s, too much money was chasing too few good ideas in edtech by the middle of this decade. That gold-rush mentality was influencing what people wanted to write about, read about, hear about, and even which conferences waned and waxed.
  • The binary religious war. More and more of the conversation about edtech — inflamed by limited attention spans and limited social media character counts — devolved into an “edtech is education’s savior” or “edtech is de-humanizingly evil” binary argument. (There also were hidden financial or social agendas in which edtech was purely used as a stalking horse.) The truth is far more nuanced. Edtech is a tool that can be used both badly and well under human direction. And “edtech” is no longer just one thing, like a network connection, or a device, or software: It takes so many forms, that loving or hating “edtech” generically is meaningless. But nuance is not currently in vogue in popular dialogue, and I deal in nuance and its antecedent, thoughtfulness.
  • The lack of anything new to say. I still have plenty I’m observing and noting about education technology. I’m just no longer saying it publicly, because so much of what I have to say would repeat what I’ve said before about appropriate use, workable business models, realistic speed of change and all that. The only thing worse than a voice crying in the wilderness is the cranky old guy repeatedly yelling, “Get off my lawn!” Sometimes, the best approach when you have nothing significantly new to add is to simply shut up.

I still work in edtech. I still believe it has promise. I still occasionally write and speak about other types of technology (most recently, on subjects from Amazon to digital public media for GeekWire).

But as for edtech? Others can own the microphone and keyboard. I’ll let my previous work speak for itself. Unless or until, that is, I get so worked up that I can’t stand being silent anymore.


P.S. Still reading? Even though I’m not formally writing or speaking about edtech right now, I do tweet. And an ad hoc comment might occasionally leave my lips. As it appropriately did at ISTE this week, a year after my last formal presentation. Kevin Hogan pulled me in front of a camera to ask me about trends I saw on the exhibit floor for his Tech & Learning Live broadcast. Enjoy. But please don’t get used to it.

Old columnists never die, nor fade

It’s been nearly a year since I made the conscious decision to not pursue new speaking or writing opportunities about education technology.  Think of it as a pruning of extraneous activity. But previous columns — and comments — about edtech and even tech persist to spur new observations.

IMG_20150617_132617(For those wondering, my self-imposed exile date was last June 30, shortly after my EdTech for Export keynote in Wellington, New Zealand. That was a wonderful swan song in terms of content and setting. And yes, I want to go back and see more.)DSCN1326

At the same time as I ended my edtech speaking and writing, I took a hiatus from my non-edtech analysis and commentary for GeekWire, which I’ve since resumed as circumstances and snark allow.

Yet I wasn’t invisible in that near-year, even without the recent GeekWire byline re-appearance.

  • EdSurge picked my brain when the Software and Information Industry Association acquired the members of the Education Industry Association in April, because I’d been an SIIA Education division board member and once keynoted events for both organizations;
  • KIRO-FM Seattle interviewed me about what Microsoft’s launch of its Minecraft Education Edition meant for its “ed cred” in January, as I’d analyzed Microsoft + Minecraft for GeekWire in the past (which GeekWire itself noted at the time);
  • USA Today, in a January article on Apple’s brand in education and elsewhere, cited my observation that Apple’s “brand is being nibbled to death by many ducks” (yeah, I love analogy and metaphor); and,
  • GeekWire’s Generation App podcast trotted me out as a long-time tech industry dinosaur observer in March when it examined video cord cutters and why they did or didn’t do it.

Of course, I continue to have a full-time role in education technology. I’m still learning. Just a bit less distracted as I absorb more.

The bottom line of the continuing coverage? In a digital world, when you have a reputation, you can run. But it appears you can’t hide. No matter what that reputation is. Or how much fun you’re avoiding.

Edtech fads, trends — and extra-credit myths

Education technology is a hotbed of activity. And some developments will stay warm, while others, now overheated, will rapidly cool.

It’s helpful not just to companies, but non-profit organizations in education and educational institutions themselves, to have an idea of which is which.

At the EdTech for Export conference in New Zealand last week, I flipped the questions I’d been asking other industry execs (“Fad, trend, or it’s complicated?“) into advice for the industry itself. It’s mostly U.S.-centric, and has only a three-to-five year time frame.  Both are key caveats.

Below is my presentation — with screen-by-screen notes — on nine developments (from Open Educational Resources to the rise of iPads and Chromebooks). Plus I highlight five bonus myths about education technology, corrected. The last has turned out to be one of the most popular parts of my presentation on Twitter.

Or, if you’d prefer, the full 30-minute video has also been posted by my New Zealand hosts, which may be more entertaining that clicking through slides and reading text.

(Et4e15 – Keynote 3| Frank Catalano, Intrinsic Strategy from Grow Wellington on Vimeo.)

As with any free advice, it may largely be worth what you paid for it.

Continue reading Edtech fads, trends — and extra-credit myths

Edtech cheat sheet: 10 trends, fads, and WTFs

I think the phrases that have gotten the most attention are “Burning-Man-for-investors” and “they called it ‘assigned reading.'”

Why the freemium trend is better than "free" for the "customer"
Why the freemium trend is better than “free” for the customer

Over at GeekWire, I end the spring 2015 education technology conference season (which itself is almost at an end: I’m still speaking at two more in the second half of June, one in New Zealand, one in Philadelphia) with my humble summation of the state of ten hotly discussed education technology developments.

I also conveniently define them in a sentence for normal human beings who don’t speak edtech jargon. (I’m not one of those “normal human beings,” I’m afraid. Never been accused of that, nor had it proven in a court of law.)

My summary judgement of each — whether it’s currently a fad, trend, or a WTF — comes with a small bit of trepidation. Not because of the conclusion. But the wording. In my public speaking, I’d often label the triumvirate instead as “fad, trend, or it’s complicated.”  But honestly, the two WTFs I identify truly are more than simply complicated — they’re mystifying in either their failure (so far) to take off in education, or in the overblown claims of supporters that ignored hundreds of years of human-to-human interaction. WTF, indeed.

The fact both have the word “open” associated with them is pure coincidence, since something “open” is also one of my trends.

Oh, and those two phrases getting attention? One has to do with the ASU+GSV Summit. The other with flipped classrooms. You can figure out which is which.

Read, “Education technology: Your cheat sheet to 10 fads, trends, and WTFs,” at GeekWire.