Here are three articles I found in my inbox this week (via my handy dandy ipads in education google alert).
- Will iTunes U Change the Way We Buy Books for School, or Is it Just Another Bookshelf App? (via Tapscape)
K-12 school districts, universities, and colleges in 26 countries can create and distribute courses on iTunes U. And whenever you upload a new assignment or a message about homework, your students get a push notification.
Just follow the iTunes U Course Manager instructions, and if you’re well-organized, you can build a course from a browser in an hour or two.
- 18 Enlightening iPad Experiments in Education (via OnlineUniversities.com)
5-Pepperdine University: Although the study won’t conclude until the end of 2011, preliminary findings of experimental iPad programs at Pepperdine have echoed the findings of increased student engagement, as the college kids with iPads became more involved with the material and with each other. But they have also found students will not make use of apps unless they are required to by an instructor.18-Stanford School of Medicine: Hoping to curb the need for printed materials, Stanford’s School of Medicine lent an iPad to every student in August 2010. The experiment here was a failure; students did not like to use them in class, and half the student body stopped using them altogether just weeks into the year. The school had no choice but to resume printing hard-copy notes.
- iPad 3: Predictions and Challenges from iFixit (via PCworld)
Most interesting prediction:
What about performance improvements?
Wiens: My guess is that improvements will be incremental, not insane-unless Apple decides to go to a quad-core. Will the next iPad have an A6 with a quad-core? I haven’t seen enough data to know. I would expect Apple to go to a quad-core within two years, but I don’t know if it’ll happen this year.
Sounds like the next iPad will be a very incremental upgrade.
Wiens: I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple calls it the iPad 2 HD, instead of the iPad 3. I think Apple needs to be more aggressive on price than on features. This means maintaining the $500 price point.