David Vogt

Consider me a 522/523 poseur - I have no formal training in business, technology or education. I have a Ph.D. in astronomy and one of my first jobs was Director of the UBC Observatories. Along the way I've been a science museum director, dot.com CEO, research lab director, and founder of a high-tech incubator. One common thread is that every role was a venture - I created the position in each case. I'm happiest as an innovator and entrepreneur.

Toggle Comment Threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

  • David Vogt 8:36 am on December 7, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: final, grades, yippee!   

    Everyone should have their final grades now, so please let me know if you don’t, or if you have any questions. Now you can finish off 2011 in style! Cheers, David

    Continue reading Happy Holidays! Posted in: Announcements
     
  • David Vogt 8:14 pm on December 4, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: conclusion, , thanks   

    Thanks everyone for everything we’ve gained over the last 13 weeks. I’ll do my best to have all of the marking done by the middle of this week. Frankly, the reason I teach this course is that I learn so much. Every time. I respect MET because I can expect a cohort of energetic global […]

    Continue reading Nothing ventured … Posted in: Announcements
     
    • Everton Walker 8:42 pm on December 4, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      David,

      Thank you too. It’s a bitter-sweet feeling to be totally finished with MET but that’s just life. I just want to wish everyone all the best that life has to offer.

      one love,
      Everton

    • Jim 9:05 pm on December 4, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Thanks, David; it has been a very interesting course which took me, and I am sure many others, in some new directions and unfamiliar territory. Best of success to you and to my fellow 522ers!

    • khenry 9:21 pm on December 4, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Thank you David. It was a brilliant course on many levels with so much learnt. It almost felt like a little MBAesque as well. From the moment I signed on to do the MET programme this was one of my two must dos and it did not disappoint at all! It was even better than I expected!

      Thanks also to my fellow ETEC 522ers for making this course unforgettable, entertaining, educational and so rich in content, experience and discourse.

      All the best to everyone!!!

      Kerry-Ann

    • hall 9:28 pm on December 4, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David,

      Thank you . I have learnt a lot from this course. It is very good that my course in this programme ended with such great course.

      Thanks to all my fellow ETEC 522ers’ for their insightful and fair comments, informative, educational and practical postings. It was a pleasure meeting you. I have learnt a lot from you. All the best to you.

    • Deb Kim 2:46 am on December 5, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Thank you, David.
      Like many others, I’ve also learned a lot from this course. The combination of business and education has been very interesting.
      Have happy holidays!

      Deb

    • Angela Novoa 3:15 am on December 5, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Thank you David,

      As I mentioned before, this course was a huge challenge, because I did not have any previous knowledge about ventures and enterpreneurship. I have learnt a lot during this term, I expanded my knowledge not only about education, and I developed skills that I did not know I could have. Wish you all the best.

      Angela.

    • bcourey 5:00 pm on December 5, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      thanks David for a great experience! There is so much that I have learned that I will take with me when technology decisions are made at my board office…I have a new lens to use when vendors present their newest product..great discussions, debates, and insights from everyone. This was a very different direction for me in my MET journey. Thanks again!

      Brenda

    • mcquaid 6:00 pm on December 5, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Thanks to Mr. V and all of my classmates alike. This venture-based course sure was a bit of an academic adventure at times. I liked the freshness of topic every week, as well as the (sometimes lively) discussions – all respectful, I think, even though some posters were coming from points of view far apart. It would be very cool if, in the near future, one of the ventures pitched here ever made it to the “real” world – especially if it’s mine! 😉
      Have a happy break, everyone.
      Cheers,

      Steve

  • David Vogt 6:57 pm on December 1, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: , , , , voting   

    Wow!  One of our liveliest 522 interactions has been triggered by the most recent posts from David (Price) and Jeneca. The Venture Forum has happened for several years now but the pulsepress voting is a new experiment, so I’m (pleasantly) surprised by the culture clash I’m witnessing – because it offers a learning opportunity. First […]

    Continue reading Venture Forum Culture Clash – a learning opportunity Posted in: Blog Café
     
    • Doug Smith 12:22 am on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Vancouver is an interesting place for venture capitalists and investing because of some shady history and somewhat isolated location. I’m a bit out of touch these days, but a few years ago there was a lot of investment action in various industries (hi-tech, lo-tech, etc), where the originating capital was raised through the old VSE, mining and gold speculation. In these cases I think the investments were committed extensively through personal contacts and affiliations, and much less on actual venture analysis.

      Another example of how we can see the importance of personal connections and trust is through a very niche group of investors: former NHL players. These are men that are looking for investment vehicles while in many cases having very little understanding of the venture markets they are considering. They have advisers, but I think there is a lot of the old boys club that plays a significant role in their investment decisions.

      • Allie 11:25 am on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Fascinating!!! I immediately thought of:
        – the short-lived McLean’s restaurant (in Gastown) that a friend and I were discussing last night – specifically its short-livedness. Non-Vancouverites/non-hockey followers: McLean refers to Kirk McLean, former Vancouver goalie from the early to mid 90s, famous/beloved in Vancouver for the Canucks’ 1994 stanley cup run.
        – I also think the Courtnalls (Also mid-90s Vancouver players – one (both?) of whom were part of that 1994 run as well) had a restaurant across from BC Place. I *don’t think* it lasted very long… but I definitely don’t know the details.
        – Former BC Lions’ player(s?) (Cantor?) who are very public part-owners of Vera’s Burger Shack.
        – Fitness World’s rebranding as the Steve Nash Fitness Club
        – I’ve noticed Trevor Linden is getting in on the act and lending his name at least to a new fitness club venture.

        Of course, these are all highly visible examples associated with high profile, well liked franchise players. The hipster in me would totally go to the bar fronted by the journeyman player 😉

        My boyfriend is good friends with a tech venture analyst – who also reports that much depends on contacts and intuition. When I was putting my app VP together for this class, my boyfriend asked him a few questions about smartphone usage in my demographic (18-34), and the response was essentially, well, yeah, obviously loads of people have smartphones/tablets and their use is only on the rise. Full stop.

        My boyfriend – a grad student in science – has been called upon a couple of times as a consultant evaluating prospective ventures, and it really comes down to his snap judgment on what is good science and what he happens to think – in that moment – the marketability of the science happens to be.

        And so my feeling is that part of what it means to be reeeeeeally convincing is about whether the particular variables in a venture project happen to click into place with what the analyst/investor already knows/thinks. Does the proposed science happen to correspond with what my boyfriend-as-consultant’s existing mental models on what good science looks like? Does this investor happen to think that mobile devices are where it’s at for education, or does he/she have a different mental model of what learning looks like?

    • khenry 5:48 am on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hello David,
      Thank you for adding to, and clarifying, the lively debate, which I also enjoyed. I agree with both you and David W-P that in your first venture, particularly in the absence of a face to face meeting that visuals and voice are important if investors do not know you. However, what I enjoyed most from the debate was hearing reasons why persons chose the media they did and the considerations influencing design, choice and use of such media in determining what was the most effective way of pitching their product, given themes, concepts, restraints et al. I would like to also think conceptually and say that pitches can be more innovative and relevant if a balance is made between choosing a media that also reflects your product; provide essential information and a look at the team. Have a look at NoteWagon’s elevator pitch http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ONC7O82YCs&feature=related . No video, very effective. Interestingly there is another 30sec clip of the CEO talking about it as well http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&feature=endscreen&v=Yo1nlEj1PII . Perhaps multiple access points or media in the forms of elevator pitches may be useful?
      They also appeared on Dragon’s Den http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MjnI0W2w4-k

      At the end of the day the question is….would I get an email, a call or a visit to my website? If Steve Jobs stayed within the status quo of business and design would we have the ipad or the iphone??

      Re voting:
      From those I have read so far I have not seen a bad idea and often, as you pointed out, the idea is not the problem. Therefore perhaps a way to follow up on why it was graded down (constructivist criticism 🙂 ) would perhaps be more helpful. For those who are uncomfortable with this perhaps provide a way from anonymous tips/reasons.

      Personally I do not mind voting and commenting and I have really appreciated the insightful and solutions oriented comments of my colleagues. But here it also allows you to vote after. So I think persons can choose either way and you can just say votes should be in by x.

      Kerry-Ann

    • Angela Novoa 10:19 am on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David,

      Thanks for clarifying and moderating some ideas that have been discussed during this week. About voting, as you say, maybe there are diferent cultural perspectives. Maybe, for futuro ETTEC 522 this explanation coludí be provided before the venture forum beggins. Personally, I was a little confused about the voting purpose, so that is why I preferred not voting negatively. But reading at David’s (Vogt) explanations and yours helps to clarify this issue.

      Now, speaking about a diffent issue, I think that the whole venture forum could be useful for us, a week before submitting the final venture, as peer evaluation activity. This feedback could be very useful for completing our projects. I have experienced effective peer evaluation in other MET curses, such as ETEC 531 and ETEC 532.

      Angela.

    • Angela Novoa 10:24 am on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      By the way, I meant David Price’s explanations and yours 🙂

    • Allie 1:44 pm on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Curiously, I’ve had a positive vote taken away. Not moved to negative, simply removed. My total votes (you can see this on the dashboard) have gone down

      I have to say, the idea of voting – and being voted on – at first had me quite alarmed. Now, having observed these voting patterns with great interest (I’m a elections nut! with a soft spot for stats), IMHO they have very little validity as an indicator of pitch quality or readiness. But, people have expressed that they either do not want to vote and are doing so only because they feel required to, or that the voting has made them feel badly. The risks far outweigh the negligible benefits.

      As we saw with the emerging market forum, where we used the pulsepress feature, and the EP evaluations we did early in term, we can be a tough crowd. We have no problem voting ideas down. I seem to recall our prof putting up a comment sagely reminding us that those pitches were for real ventures, and real people are behind them, and can read what we’re saying. Critique, he wrote elsewhere, is easy. Being an analyst – and I’m still paraphrasing Prof Vogt – is like being a great teacher – identifying nuggets of brilliance, diamonds in the rough. In response, we collectively chilled out.

      But, this is a social forum. And our own butts are on the line. We have investments in our colleagues; we have worked closely with some; others have become friends. We cheer when they rock it.

      As an anthropologist, it’s clear to me that something interesting is going on culturally when we feel deeply uneasy about hitting a yes or no button attached to a colleague – when the same group has no reservations about critiquing strangers, or voting down broad ideas, as in the emerging market forum (maybe it’s not interesting; it’s a bit predictable). The comments *about* voting indicate that we’re generally only voting on each other under some feeling of duress (‘I thought I had to’). Our voting patterns indicate that we’re more inclined to say yes with conditions, than to say no. We prefer to refrain from voting than to say no.

      As an overall group, we are not wanting to – and perhaps cannot? – separate our actual intellectual and emotional investments in our fellow students with our virtual investment $. Things would look different if were actually asked or required to part with actual dollars. But most, if not all, of us aren’t actually venture capitalists or start-up investors. We just play them on the internet. (! what a case study to expose the potentials and flaws of serious games !)

      But the voting is flawed in other ways. As David V suspects, the anonymity is totally in question. I know who voted me down, though I don’t hold it against them.

      The correlation between votes and comments is very weak. Some pitches have many positive comments, but many negative votes. More troublingly, the pitches with the most negative votes are those authored by people who have been vocal in ‘the debates’ referred to in this post.

      Bracing for negative votes!! (i’m joking)
      Allie

      • David Vogt 4:36 pm on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Anthropology, indeed! Thanks for these constructive thoughts.

        One of the reasons I like the Venture Forum in 522, and want to find a way to keep it, and make it as authentic as possible without damaging psyches or communities, is that the real world of launching ventures is so anthropological (rather than scientific).

        For example, it is more like a lottery than an election. In real life perhaps 1% of ventures get any kind of “yes” vote, and decisions don’t happen by consensus. Yet it is hardly random. There are intense interpersonal factors that bring investors and entrepreneurs together, making a Venture Forum more like a speed dating event, and an investment more like a marriage. It is, after all, a deeply important commitment (more than financial) by both parties.

        So perhaps I could have simulated this better by allowing everybody just one (1) “yes” vote. I thought I was being generous to the cohort by allowing multiple “yes” votes, but this perhaps accentuates the hurt feelings generated by a negative or null vote (which are essentially identical). However, pursuing the dating-marriage metaphor further, I don’t know if we’ve found a way to make that process move that forward without hurt feelings either.

        For another example, it is not like education where constructivism builds toward the right answer, because there is no known “right” answer. In most cases, absolutely nobody can know whether a venture will eventually succeed. Investors are barely more knowledgeable than the average citizen – their success rates tend to be incredibly low overall (just marginally above what you might consider “common sense”). “Winning” for most investors means hitting a home run once in every ten to one hundred times at bat. So investors are just people who like to take risks, and generally have some management ability to optimize the potential success of their investments by working closely with the entrepreneur (which is why the interpersonal sense of being able to work together is so critical) to get the basic mechanics of the venture in order.

        What I’m saying is that good entrepreneurs still believe “yes” after hearing a hundred expert “no”s, because there’s a reasonable chance that they’re right. Their belief, and their perseverance in finding a way to listen to the message inside a “no”, then change their own perspectives slightly, and then find a way to communicate their vision in a slightly new way, over and over again, is intensely human. It is like crowd-sourcing in reverse. We’d all still be living in caves without that pioneering, indomitable, change-the-status-quo spirit.

        Thanks again,

        David

        • David William Price 10:54 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

          For those of of who’ve invested a lot of time and money in real pitches, gone to bat, and had things not work out, we develop the perspective that it’s “the nature of business” and it’s “nothing personal”. I was excited to take this course because it involved an all-public forum, pitches, reviews, etc.

          Those of us who’ve done pitches get used to shifting our disappointment into a post-mortem analysis and a revision to our concepts for another kick at the can, and perhaps that’s the part that’s missing from this process… the chance for another kick at the can that keeps entrepreneurs rolling and persevering as you put it.

          When I took a teaching seminar in the summer, I had to do a live teaching segment in front of the class then get reviewed. What was most challenging was not the fact that I appeared to “bomb” during the somnambulant 330pm presentation slot, but that there was no chance to do it again and see how I could address issues raised in the class.

          Allie presents an interesting anthropological perspective, and you yourself mentioned culture clash. Perhaps having that culture clash happen earlier in the semester with chances to revise as we go along might help people adjust not only to the culture, but also help scaffold the challenges of managing the anxiety that rolls with public performance reviews and channel the anxiety into analysis, revisions, and another try.

      • David William Price 10:39 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Allie, brilliant comment. Nicely put.

    • Tamara Wong 8:03 pm on December 2, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      David,
      Thanks for the clarification and additions to this debate! I am intrigued by the idea of using your face for an elevator pitch. I really like the idea and agree that it garners a degree of trust that is important to enticing investors. However, I have some points I’d like to make on why I didn’t include my face on my elevator pitch. My first and most important reason was this assignment terrified me!! I was way out of my comfort zone and was anxious about putting my ideas out there for weeks. I have little to no experience with ventures or pitches. I felt that seeing my face would be a detriment to my pitch as I would have communicated this fear even further. Also I am 26 years old and I look like I’m no more than 18, in addition to that I look shy and unsure of myself much of the time. While it garners trust to put your face on your pitch I wasn’t sure if mine would do more harm than good. I used my voice, which many said lacked passion, but even that was difficult as I don’t feel comfortable with my voice. I think that in some situations a face can garner trust but it is important to be self aware to assist you in understanding what your face will do for your company.

      I also want to make some points on voting. First is how can you tell if someone votes positively or negatively for you? Second, personally, I wanted to give each venture pitch a positive vote because each one I looked at was a great idea! For each pitch I thought “Now why didn’t I think of that?” I had some questions about how it would work but none of the questions were so big that I felt strongly enough to give a negative vote on the venture. I felt like I was baring my soul with my pitch and understood that these pitches could be intensely personal ideas and it was important to be constructive.

      I like the voting but as I voted I was also keenly aware of the importance of constructive criticism. I have been thinking about this issue for weeks as earlier on I received a comment that essentially said I wasn’t a good teacher, something that bothered me although I didn’t want it to. I think that the voting has a great place in this class and is helpful but maybe a reminder of internet etiquette and a professional code of conduct may be helpful at the beginning of the class. I have had this reminder in a another class and found it a useful guideline for what constructive criticism is.
      Tamara

    • David Berljawsky 8:44 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      I was surprised though at the comments that I read this week. I agree with aspects of both sides of the debate. Yes it is an elevator pitch, and providing face to face interaction is certainly the norm, but aren’t we asked to think outside the norm? I have read comments referring to Steve Jobs making a pitch, he was perceived as thinking outside the norm. So using that logic, why should we be making only video pitches when we promote our projects? Aren’t we trying as educators and as venture capitalists to create new and exciting initiatives? To quote Steve Jobs, “Think Different.” Of course, (and I’m guilty of this as well) PowerPoint may not be the most exciting medium, but that is not the point. It is still a valid form of expression.
      I personally do believe that some internet etiquette was breached this week. I can understand that if you are not comfortable with your work being analysed in public that this was very uncomfortable, and perhaps some of the criticisms could be seen as un creative criticism, ie: your project isn’t good, period. We had the option to have our work looked at privately. I thought long and hard about taking this route, but in the end decided to publish my project online, to help to contribute to the online community. I received some negative comments, and am near the bottom of the voting scale. I am fine with this as long as the responses that I received are valid and not mean spirited. Although I have read comments in other projects that could be perceived as the later under the guise of being honest. This is wrong and not in the spirit of the MET program, at least in the 7 other classes that I have taken.
      I don’t personally believe that the voting system is that flawed as it is. I do believe that by providing people with one vote it would be more accurate though, but that system could be flawed as well. It’s hard to know until it is being put into practice. As someone whose product is near the bottom of the voting scale I am personally not insulted or offended by the results I have been getting. This class is a learning opportunity and we are learning about what sells and what doesn’t sell. As someone with a lack of business knowledge this has been very useful to me. If we don’t learn from our perceived weaknesses and mistakes, what is the point?

      • schiong 9:28 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Hi David B.

        You have an excellent point.
        Honestly, I am new to giving pitches to people I do not know.
        For some reason, I get nervous. But, if you asked me to pitch the idea to people
        I know (like our school administrators or peers), I will be more “comfortable”.
        I guess that is the reality of life that we pitch to investors we have not met.

        I like the comments given because they are constructive… Well, I am assuming they are constructive or I am looking at it in a constructive perspective. hahaha 🙂
        “Think, hear, and speak of no evil?”

        I think words/ideas/statements can be viewed in a constructive or negative perspective. I am not sure if emotions or disposition got anything to do with it. hahaha. 🙂

        What I found really difficult are the following —
        a) I believe almost all of the projects presented are great. Sure, it lacks this and that… But, I love them. And choosing the top 3 was a headache.
        b) I am not good with words. So, I do not know if my questions or clarifications were conveyed in a positive way. I guess I need the rePhrase app here. hahaha 🙂 or porto to give me the right vocabulary or BreakOut to illustrate my point clearly. hahaha.
        c) I could not write a lot of comments because some of the people assigned in the same product already mentioned or highlighted the important ones. I do not like to repeat what was already been said.

        Actually, some of the products can be integrated to create a new service.
        Just quick one … possible integration on Looking at the Cloud + CityConneX + Connect LMS.
        Some of the learning applications can also be integrated. I noticed that what the other apps lack (features).. exists in another product presented. 🙂

        Of course, it needs tweaking. But, the possibility is there and it could be fun.
        I guess I just love to see the beauty in each product and find ways it could complement the other.

        cheers,
        Steve

    • Allie 9:40 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David et al,
      I wonder if in lieu of yes or no, there might be a scale? I mention this because I think you said earlier on in term that investors/analysts might see a good idea, but want to also work with the entrepreneur to tweak it, or refine it considerably before it is market ready – hence this is more than a financial commitment. I’m thinking of something like:
      4) yes this pitch is ready – little need for changes
      3) yes this idea is original and really interesting – let’s do some work to it (elaborated in comments)
      2) there’s a kernel of something really good here, but the pitch could be revised and resubmitted (elaborated in comments)
      1) I’m afraid I don’t think we’re a match/it’s not you, it’s me

      • David William Price 11:01 am on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        I think using a rubric is a brilliant idea. I tried using Vogt’s criteria from the week we reviewed real pitches because I thought it would be objective and fair to everyone (because that’s the criteria they used to evaluate others). While I felt those criteria were great for taking on the analyst role (which, quite honestly, was my focus) I think your suggestion is a brilliant one for handling the pedagogical side.

        I think it’s important not to take away from the effort people took to evaluate pitches. I spent hours viewing and reviewing and trying to answer questions from Vogt’s criteria. I also found that the world limits severely impacted my reviews… they became pretty telegraphic due to my efforts to squeeze down to the required limits while still touching not the criteria.

        A rubric with some more nuances would certainly help scaffold feedback.

    • Deb Giesbrecht 4:35 pm on December 3, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      I, respectfully, disagree.
      I feel, like Allie, that ETEC 522 did not provide a *safe* and collaborative environment in which to trial (and error) student work. Unfortunately I already handed in my class evaluation before this week, and therefore missed the opportunity to add my ‘constructive’ criticism. Fortunately though, I will have forgotten this course and its contents by this time next week.

      Have a great break everyone!

  • David Vogt 7:16 am on November 30, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: A4, ,   

    Some of you are ready for your A4 (Participation Portfolio) submissions, so here are a few details. The first part is simple – select your example set of 5-10 postings, capture their links, wrap them together with a short overview of your participation, and email that directly to me. The second part is also simple, […]

    Continue reading A4 Submissions Posted in: Announcements, Questions & Answers
     
    • Deb Giesbrecht 5:33 pm on November 30, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      yes – thank-you – the workload was plenty.

    • schiong 9:01 pm on November 30, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi

      I agree.
      I think the challenging part is going through the 10 assigned A3.
      The A3s I am currently reviewing are all good. Unfortunately, we can only choose 3.

    • kstooshnov 10:50 pm on November 30, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David,

      Thanks for advice on how to keep the discussion going, and I hope that more students are willing to take you up on the challenge of reviewing past choices in this course, and determining what may have got them to change their mind on certain educational innovations.

      In most MET courses, the final week of class is a bit sombre, with most classmates finishing off their assignments and not very interested in starting up new discussions. Usually a few will post their farewells to classmates they enjoyed chatting with, and then in a few weeks the discussion board disappears into the ether, as WebCT will only stay open about a month after the term has ended. Here we have a unique opportunity to keep the discussion going indefinitely, as past examples of ETEC 522’s blog are still active and easily found on-line. It is comforting to know that mine and others’ thoughts and reflections will be accessible in the months and years to come, and I fully intend to keep my Virtual Globe 3.0 post active, with some updating of video content, as a permanent location for future stages of this venture. It would be great to see how many other wonderful ideas in the field of learning technologies can be traced back to this group’s postings.

      I really don’t know how much I will be able to post on my original “Emerging Market Poll” as it seems like another lifetime that I made those choices. I would rather like to see where classmates think their ventures will be in five years time, keeping with the forward-thinking push seen in many of the posts so far.

      All the best,
      Kyle

  • David Vogt 9:12 am on November 28, 2011
    0 votes
    |
     

    I’ve now emailed each of you with your venture-review portfolio for the Venture Forum this week.  Please let me know immediately if you haven’t received your list. Good luck! David

    Continue reading Let the Venture Forum Begin!… Posted in: Announcements
     
    • jarvise 10:27 am on November 29, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Just to clarify on the voting: do we ‘vote’ for the 3 ventures that we have selected? Can we vote for other ventures that we think are good investments? Was there specific direction for the pulsepress voting?

      Thanks,
      Emily

      • David Vogt 11:14 am on November 29, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Hi Emily –

        I detailed voting instructions in an earlier post.

        Briefly, you may vote positively or negatively on the investment worthiness of any venture in the Venture Forum, but I’ve only requested that you vote on the ten (10) ventures assigned to you. All, some or none of your ten may be investment worthy – that is up to your acumen as an EVA.

        David

  • David Vogt 4:19 pm on November 26, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: , ,   

    Hi everyone – I’ve started to get questions about A3 submissions and how the Venture Forum next week will work, so I’ll try to summarize a few points here, and answer any further questions as replies to your replies. As described more fully in section 4A (Venture Forum) our next week should be thrilling!  You […]

    Continue reading A3 Postings and the Venture Forum Posted in: Announcements, Questions & Answers
     
  • David Vogt 11:44 am on November 20, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: , FMN, ,   

    I was tentatively planning to post my own A3 relative to one of my emerging ventures, but I’m not sure I’ll have time to create a pitch worthy of our upcoming Venture Forum (!). However, as one on my ventures fits comfortably into the Mobiles discussion I thought I’d introduce it here, possibly for good […]

    Continue reading A Venture for Accountable M-Learning Posted in: Week 11: Mobiles
     
    • verenanz 1:13 pm on November 20, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David….

      This looks really neat. Would I be able to use these kinds of Apps/services with my ESL students in China? Part of our focus, is to offer BC Brand teaching and the BC curriculum. I’m assuming that your partners would be in BC? Would this mean that students from all over might be able to experience BC field trips through m-learning?

      I would love to learn more….if my assumptions are correct….
      Verena 🙂

      • David Vogt 2:16 pm on November 20, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Hi Verena –

        The Internet is essentially the same everywhere, yet one of the unique features of m-learning in this context is that it couples intimately with specific real-world contexts. In other words, these apps will be very place-specific: they will be available from anywhere but essentially meaningless and inoperable except in the place(s) in which they are staged. So this approach to learning will work anywhere, but these specific apps will only work here. While this might sound ‘limiting’, the learning benefits of coupling directly with everyday experience are enormous…

    • David William Price 7:19 pm on November 20, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      “think in terms of field trips staged on mobile devices where each portion of the lesson plan requires some action by the learner at some place in the real world, and each step of the learning journey is validated and ‘scored’ in real time”

      Very cool! This is the kind of m-learning creativity I’ve been pushing for this week… leveraging the affordances of mobile to support and encourage going out into the real world to learn (rather than doing a lot of reading on a tiny screen).

      Thanks very much for sharing!

    • khenry 9:16 pm on November 20, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Really great David V. I am very interested. And yes David W-P I think it is a great example that frames your questioning this week. I particularly like the aspect of situated cognition and contextual learning while being interactive, engaged and empowered through technology in real world, real time activities.

      Kerry-Ann

    • hall 11:31 pm on November 20, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David

      I absolutely like your network. I think it is a wonderful network in Jamaicans and other people from the Caribbean could definitely benefit from this project.

  • David Vogt 12:17 pm on November 11, 2011
    0 votes
    |
     

    I’ve really enjoyed the PBA discussion so far. One question investors always want to know about new ventures is where “recurring revenue” will come from.   In short, if you do some work and get paid for it, that’s a ‘service business’, which means you have to perform the service again and again to get […]

    Continue reading Product-based PBA Posted in: Week 10: Product-Based Assessments
     
    • kstooshnov 8:01 pm on November 11, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David Vogt,

      Thank you for making clear the distinction between ‘service business’ and ‘product business’ and I was thinking about an example I came across during research for assignment one. The woman who had designed the Globe Theatre on “Shakespeare Island” in the virtual world of Second Life probably intended her design to have recurring revenue. Supposedly, users would log in and pay to see live versions of the play acted out by Resident actors. It must have been a lot of work to get scenes (not even an entire act, let alone the play from beginning to end) ready for audiences each performance. Her last-ditch effort to make the island an educational resource failed, and by now all of her work has been deleted from Second Life.

      In her final message as the Resident Ina Centaur, she blogs a story that could have been her way into a ‘service business’ for her virtual Globe: an anonymous benefactor mails her an iPhone 3G, suggesting that her Second Life project would have been more marketable through the iTunes store, as Steve Jobs (the supposed benefactor revealed) had “created iTunes so that independent creators could share their creations and even turn it into a viable business.” (Centaur, 2011 Oct, para. 5) App as product-based PBA may be the most lucrative way into the educational market.

      Kyle

      Centaur, I. (2011, Oct.) Our magic and our passing – Goodbye from the SL Shakespeare Company, Primtings, and sLiterary [blog] SL Shakespeare Company Blog 2009-2010. Retrieved on Nov 11, 2011 from http://twelfthnight.mshakespeare.com/blog/2011/10/22/our-magic-and-our-passing-–-goodbye-from-the-sl-shakespeare-company-primtings-and-sliterary

    • jarvise 5:55 am on November 12, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi Kyle,

      Your observations here reflect what I have noticed as well. When ‘products’ emerge that are targeted specifically to educators (or students via educators), they often have big start-up work commitments for the developers, and are often then behind the times of what is emerging out of non-education specific social (peripheral) development. In other words: a lot of educational products require a lot of investment, and quickly become dated and duplicated. It seems that any emerging product – in order to be profitable -needs to emerge quickly, be very targeted to a specific element of the ‘need’ in the market, and be usable on the devices that are already in hand. It seems that App-based products would be lucrative right now.

      Emily

    • verenanz 7:04 am on November 12, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      “Hello David! I appreciated your distinction between product and service…..Having a “theory” as the foundation for an emerging market left our group really questioning what the “products” and “services” would be…..I can see how some of our PBA examples which we may have seen as “products” are actually services…..The few PBA Emerging products would probably be m-portfolios, books (as long as it was just updated), e-portfolio software like Mahara and possibly employee assessment software. All four offer possibilities……
      Thanks again for your help with product/serviceclarification….
      Verena:)

    • Doug Smith 9:00 am on November 12, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      It’s an interesting idea David. Clearly some people are marketing PBA products as tools for accountability, and it makes sense that they would do this. It seems like most of the policy frameworks published these days are about accountability. Sadly, I feel that in many ways it is a thin veil that says we would like to track learning, when in reality if you look behind the veil it is about tracking spending and tax payer’s money. But I believe there is a huge market for products that want to do good, not evil. One thing we really looked for was PBA ventures that were tying themselves to SIS. There isn’t much (any?) out there right now, but this is an area where there is huge upside for both recurring and non-recurring sales along with easy accessible buyers.

      cheers
      Doug

    • khenry 8:54 pm on November 12, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David and all,

      David, I echo appreciation for the clarification.

      Great example Kyle. I agree with Kyle and Emily that apps are the way to go to have that recurring revenue. However, the app must fill a need and as such will not become ‘outdated’. As more insights on learning and systems become available, or when changes are made to systems, then buyers/consumers can purchase upgrades. There can also be tiers and levels associated with different costing packages. For example, a progress tracking app would be a viable venture.

      Kerry-Ann

    • David William Price 7:25 am on November 13, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Re product vs. service business…

      The issue of scability is interesting when it comes to services, but it’s also an issue with products (consider how Amazon or Apple ran out of manufacturing capacity with initially popular products).

      Perhaps you’re focusing on IP-related products… theoretically they can be distributed widely and cheaply after production. The problem is that ignores the required services of maintaining them, providing customer support, marketing to attract and maintain attention, etc.

      While scalability is interesting, so is the issue of margins and value. IBM shifting to services from products, for instance, and HP’s desire to do the same, to pursue higher value transactions. As a lawyer, I can hand out precedents but the true value is in asking you questions to determine your goals and fashion a custom solution. Do I want to be a McDonald’s drive-thru lawyer who hands out pre-fab precedents, or do I want to be considered a valued member of the team who helps you see beyond your preconceptions?

      In a way, this discussion highlights some of my problems with “product-based assessment” and constructivist learning practices. Sometimes the focus is too much on production of something, and the actual critical thinking and accountability for results to a client are completely lost. Consider group presentation seminars in grad school… if we’re relying on the groups to educate us and those groups spend all their time at the bottom of Bloom’s taxonomy and bore us to tears, how are we getting value for the thousands we’ve spent on our education?

  • David Vogt 11:10 am on October 30, 2011
    0 votes
    |

    Tags: ,   

    Responding to a few offline questions I’ve received about our upcoming A3 assignment I offer the following few focusing tips: – remember that the topic of A3 should be an ‘original’ venture, either an entirely new venture or an entirely new direction for an existing venture; – your role is to act as the visionary […]

    Continue reading A Few A3 Tips Posted in: Announcements
     
  • David Vogt 2:05 pm on October 27, 2011
    0 votes
    |
     

    Most of my recent innovation work has been in the area of mobile cultural media and professional networking, so I’ve had my head in the clouds for a while. I’m particularly enthusiastic about cloud learning, not so much for many of the reasons already put forward, but mostly for the inevitably changed and enhanced relationship […]

    Continue reading Children of the Cloud Posted in: Week 08: Files in the Cloud
     
    • David William Price 2:21 pm on October 27, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David

      Thanks for posting this. I’m thinking there is way too much IT focus in the cloud discussions thus far. I’d have to take issue with the concept that our brains have been self-contained thus far. Have you had the chance to read Don Normans, “The Design of Everyday Things”? It addresses the concept of memory that is internal and external, with external memory incorporating not only memos and job aids but even good design — a well-designed thing incorporates enough knowledge to allow you to operate it automatically to accomplish a task. I think this is further developed in literature about cognitive tools which include things as simple as spreadsheets and concept-mapping.

      I think I’ve mentioned before my concern with hyper-personalization – that we get trapped in our niches and stop stumbling into different points of view that challenge our existing paradigms. I would be very interested in a cloud paradigm that integrates a heuristic for enhancing my critical thinking rather than something that cocoons me and my limited experience set.

      But maybe I completely misunderstood your point?

      • David Vogt 2:43 pm on October 27, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        And thanks for these thoughts. Yes, Norman’s sense of design is deeply resonant with self-referential nature of the brain. What I mean by ‘contained’ is that the dynamic tools of identity re-generation are entirely local rather than distributed. And so much of who we are was already ‘hyper-personalized’ before anything digital came along; the whole point of self-reference is to simultaneously challenge and reinforce, based on new information, different aspects of the models we build about ourselves. Enhancing your critical thinking – I bet you could build an app for that!

        • David William Price 3:05 pm on October 27, 2011 | Log in to Reply

          Sounds interesting if I could grasp it better. I like the concept of the challenging but I guess I need more hand holding to understand how this works.

          At an Australian university teaching nurses, they built a web-based app that pushed nurses through a critical-thinking algorithm as they were writing literature reviews (it’s called WRAP). Basically a series of prompts to push students through a model of thinking. They want to abstract this into a heuristic. Sounds very cool.

    • Jim 7:15 pm on October 27, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      I agree that as people become more and more digitally mobile, cloud computing will become the primary method for accomplishing tasks. The new mobile culture and explosion of devices reminds me a little of the thin client idea… Most of the data storage and computing horsepower is going to reside server side… but the devices we slip into our pockets or bags are far more powerful than those thin clients ever were. I have also thought that the agent or genie or PDA idea would have been here by now. I remember reading about personal digital agents over ten years ago and then, there was nothing… Siri is rather like that but ‘she’ doesn’t act independently, anticipating your wants or needs based on past interactions (does it? I haven’t used it, only seen it in use).

    • jarvise 7:09 am on October 28, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Your thoughts on the changed relationships between people with themselves and with the web make sense in terms of distributed cognition. I read an article a few years back about brain plasticity and spacial sense and reasoning. Basically, the argument being made was that increased reliance on GPS navigation units actually changed our brains at a structural level (hippocampus, maybe?). Because we don’t need to know how to get somewhere, it becomes a waste of space. If we are rewiring in response to technology, then anywhere/anytime access becomes imperative. Cloud-based delivery of services becomes essential. Its interesting to think of the environment as extending into the digital realm. The ideas that purport to reveal and clarify our thinking (and even enhance collaboration) such as mind mapping don’t seem to be growing in any big collaborative way. The places seeing enhanced collaboration of minds right now (from what I can see) are places like blogs, youtube, and consumer comments on products. Its hard to envision where we will be in a couple of years.

      Emily

      • kstooshnov 1:54 pm on October 28, 2011 | Log in to Reply

        Hi Emily,

        I agree with your point about the rewiring of the human brain but wonder about the “wasted space,” do you mean such mental functions as locating places, remembering phone numbers or sustaining our attention span (to sit through a Wagnerian opera, for instance) are being lost, or just relegated to the figurative “back of our mind,” the 90% of the brain we supposedly don’t use? When gathering information for the eBook EMA, I heard a lecture on how reading has changed with the latest technology, similar to how Gutenberg’s press changed reading several centuries ago. Since then, reading and writing have taken on new shape, and it seems more important for students to learn how to navigate through a webpage and post comments than it does for how to use the Dewey-decimal system or cursive handwriting.

        While it seems spooky to suggest that we should allow parts of our brain and their related skills to waste away, technology such as cloud computing, or even the PDA-in-place-of-memory, may be part of the human species’ evolution – we are the ones designing this stuff after all. One only hopes that we learned enough lessons from the 20th century, such as the damages to the planet from our dependency on oil, or to our bodies from microwave ovens and processed foods, that we don’t mess things up with our minds too much. But even if we do, someone will probably create some psychoanalyst app to fix it :-l

        Kyle

    • khenry 7:10 am on October 29, 2011 | Log in to Reply

      Hi David,
      As a follow up to my comments to Doug and in response to your post, I believe that technology itself is evolving to what is a more ‘natural response’. Students and processes are driving the media used/media design in education, the needs of society are also driving the media in order to get out their message hence now the message is driving the media/technology use/design. We are finding out more about ourselves and trying to tap into or harness even greater power. Our ability to harness/ facilitate the ‘natural response’ as well as to develop/extrapolate potential are going to be central to future successful ventures.

      Kerry-Ann

c
compose new post
j
next post/next comment
k
previous post/previous comment
r
reply
o
show/hide comments
t
go to top
l
go to login
h
show/hide help
esc
cancel

Spam prevention powered by Akismet