Category: News
Amazon Prime Day: Case Study in Overpromise, Underdeliver
Today, Wednesday July 15, 2015, is Amazon Prime Day. It was supposed to be a “Black Friday”-type special shopping day for those signed up for the Amazon Prime service.
Our household has been an Amazon Prime subscriber for a few years and so far it’s felt all right – mainly for the fast delivery. The excitement over Amazon Unlimited Prime Instant Video has long faded into irrelevance. My spouse and kids nibble on Netflix during the holidays and I have found all I care to consume at DramaFever. Then again, fast delivery was the Amazon standard before they introduced Amazon Prime, so service took a step back first before taking a step forward – and they basically are coming out $99 richer every year without doing anything extra. Well believe it or not, there are worse deals out there where people have figured out how to get your money by providing you the same or less service than before their fees.
Let me also say though that there are a number of things I do like about Amazon and it is #3 only to my shopping at Costco and factory outlets. I do really like their no-fuss return process as well as the customer reviews service. Pricing is also seriously competitive most of the time (wish it was all of the time).
Anyway, back to Amazon Prime Day. This was a seriously bad day for customer experience. Where the expectation was to find compelling shopping deals (like on Black Friday), there was more disappointment than satisfaction to be had. Up front, let me say that I think deals disappearing quickly is not entirely Amazon’s fault. There has to be some stock limit and it really depends on demand and the quick shall have it. The problem probably was that the quick were people looking to re-sell items later at regular prices and make a quick profit (and hence the positive PR about sales on this day) – it probably wasn’t as much to end users as to prospective profiteers.
I take issue more with the plethora of different third-party Sellers engaged in Amazon Prime Day and the inability to tell if there was any real discount because of Amazon Prime Day. We know from services such as CamelCamelCamel that Amazon prices fluctuate regularly, but we could not really tell how good the sale price was unless we checked something like CamelCamelCamel. This was just a jumbled presentation and the air quickly left the balloon. Our household did not buy anything on Amazon Prime Day.
With this in mind, I judge Amazon Prime Day to have been a case of overpromise and undeliver. A pretty nasty blunder in mismanaging expectations and presentation. They lost our attention within about 2 minutes.
In YCISL, we coach using a grab and monitoring “eye contact” to ensure that attention is not lost. Amazon.com, once the premier example of user persuasion, failed badly this day. Let’s move on. Accidents happen.
Related News Stories:
Amazon Prime Day Recap: Sold-Out Kindles, Wait Lists, Facebook ‘Fail’
Amazon Gets Defensive As Customers Criticize Prime Day
WSJ: Does Technology Belong in Classroom Instruction?
In today’s (Monday March 11, 2015) edition of the WSJ, there is a Technology section with an article addressing the question “Does Technology Belong in Classroom Instruction?” with the Yes argument provided by Lisa Nielsen and the No argument provided by José Antonio Bowen.
Let’s reflect on this question in the YCISL context especially our problem (that schools stifle creativity) and our program emphasis areas.
The prime question is whether technology, as it is applied in schools, enhances creativity and provides opportunities to develop personal skills. Let’s focus on five electronics-enabled technologies that are in current adoption in schools:
1. Computers. Out of the five selected (electronic) technologies, computers have had the longest run in schools so far. Computers are major investments in terms of initial capital as well as ongoing maintenance. Early on, computer companies often donated computers to schools and parents volunteered to maintain them. Their impact on creativity is mixed. On one hand, they are big-pipe sources of knowledge and viewpoints; on the other, they have become tools on which we lay and express our thoughts and ideas as well as analyze data.
2. Tablets. Lighter backpacks are the main benefit of tablets. With respect to creativity, I think they are at a disadvantage to computers because of their smaller screen and higher difficulty in user input (much easier to swipe and tap, than to draw or type). Obviously so, they are handier for searching/researching big-pipe sources of knowledge and viewpoints; although not a particularly good solution as an alternative to printed textbooks because of their limited screen size.
3. Interactive Whiteboards. In concept, this technology certainly belongs in classrooms. However, their performance and ROI is so below potential. Remember “Under-promise and Over-deliver”? Compared to modern whiteboards which can be as long as the length of walls in a room, the limited screen size of interactive whiteboards is a disadvantage when it comes to promoting creative exploration in a classroom. Sure, interactive whiteboards are useful when putting up PowerPoint presentations and annotating them, but can they replace the analog alternative altogether? No, they can’t. So the result is an additional expense rather than an alternative expense, and a significantly higher maintenance cost – all with a limited lifetime and shorter replacement cycle. And there are the health issues.
4. Class Web Portals. As a parent of school children, I have used a few Class Web Portals before. I think they have gotten better in terms of learning curve. The early problem was that schools and teachers only half-committed to these portals so information was split and not replicated between paper and web. So students and parents had to check two sources of classroom information and collate on their own with no way of being certain of full-picture accuracy. So assignments were missed or students needed twice the time to get homework done. My guess is that the learning curve has gotten easier as more HCI technique is incorporated as well as teachers, parents and students becoming more accustomed to interacting with classroom web portals. I have also experienced Stanford’s Coursework portal which is quite good and useful; I especially like that students can upload assignments and the server clocks the time that an assignment was submitted. However, with regards to creativity, I have not yet detected any features that help educators or students interact creatively. Maybe in the future.
5. eBooks. There are eBook devices whose clarity and readability are great advantages. But these devices are not making headway into schools. Instead, tablets with eBook apps are common. eBooks as data downloads are also growing. eBooks tied to publisher web portals are also an interesting concept and have potential to enhance creative and critical thinking. The barrier is the monetization: eBooks (especially textbooks) are not cost-effective and do not possess the advantages of printed books. Like tablets, their main advantage is lighter backpacks (and fixed space requirement) but they are not fully-competent replacements for printed textbooks. That is why I purchase the printed textbook (use at home) in addition to eBooks (use at school) for some school subjects such as history and biology.
In my view, technology will “belong” in the classroom – one day in the future when it is more mature. Presently, it has too many kinks and disadvantages and the expense is unjustifiable because product developers are in the early stages still. Remember when a 20 MB hard disk cost $1,000+? We can get a more reliable 120 GB solid state drive now for around $100.
Let’s gather educators to brainstorm ways to leverage creativity from classroom technology first then develop and reveal a true solution with the promise of replacing paper and pen, chalk and chalkboard, printed books and handouts. Let’s innovate.
WSJ: It’s Really Here: TV for 6 Month-Olds
The WSJ article “It’s Really Here: TV for 6 Month-Olds” by Joe Flint (published in the Business & Tech. section of the March 30, 2015 issue) describes television programming for infants. The article describes the programming, technology, the business prospects and viewpoints.
It saddens me. For someone to provide a cheap, low-quality substitute for personal parental attention wreaks of negligence. And to the idea that “Education Stifles Creativity,” this exacerbates the problem. It is another form of knowledge pollution brought about by technology that sets back a person’s personal story.
“BabyFirstTV…is aiming its programming at children as young as six months.” “It launched in 2006…and now reaches more than 50 million U.S. households.” Got that, parents? Better get your shields up because we all know that much of television programming is a weapon of mass (mind) destruction. Short attention spans, addictive behavior, myopia, obesity, and an overall lack of interpersonal skills.
“What is important is what we put our kids in front of and we think we are offering the cleanest, safest alternative.” After the spin slows down a bit, look through your list again just a little harder. The cleanest, safest alternative is parent attention. And “In 2014, advertisers spent $1.2 billion on kids channels.” Hmmm, who exactly is the winner here? And is there any trace of intrinsic motivation?
“I know there is a lot of criticism about babies and and young kids watching TV, but I think in moderation and with parent supervision it can be a great benefit.” You might compare the benefits list to the detriments list. And which effects are more long-lasting and influence future behavior? I would mostly recommend physical interactive activity but in those depleted energy settings when we want to rest and relax, can we not make a better choice and fill the time with mindfulness activity (which involves closing the eyes) and perhaps even enhance it with music?
All in all, I view such developments as presenting greater challenge to the YCISL mission. Let’s hope enough parents recognize it as negative innovation – that is, one that promises undesirable influence and impact.
WSJ: Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s Founding Father, Dies at 91
Because the “L” in YCISL stands for Leadership, I will make a note of the passing of Lee Kuan Yew, the first Prime Minister of Singapore. Although the YCISL program does not look to adults as leadership role models, there are quite a few valuable leadership life lessons that can be identified from Mr. Lee’s career. Although there are many news articles being published on this, I will use the WSJ article “Lee Kuan Yew, Singapore’s Founding Father, Dies at 91” published March 22, 2015 as a reference point in order to highlight the YCISL topics.
The greatest leaders are those who reach back to their youth life experience to make their marks as adults. Their success is undoubtedly connected to the influence that youthful optimism and imagination had on their thinking and motivation. Their soft skills strength likely began development in their youth and they sustained growth of these skills.
But more than that (and as pointed out in this WSJ article), Mr. Lee succeeded despite criticism – the type of scathing adult criticism we discuss in YCISL that deters people from being expressively creative and optimistically motivated. He demonstrated high emotional intelligence, and understood how to balance and shift priorities in order to repeatedly attain visionary results.
No other political figure that I can think of has ever exhibited the same high level of commitment and enthusiasm. “Father Figure” comes to mind and that is also a core element of YCISL which is based largely on parental skills, emotions and thinking. A belief in intrinsic motivation (let’s call this in-mot from now on) was strong in particular because of the attention paid to mastery, autonomy and purpose – fostering it in himself and sharing it with his people; this is evident in the economic, social and educational accomplishments and gains experienced during his presence. And all this was achieved in the model of a start-up – few resources, little capital and a team of people who believed and shared a vision.
Well done, Mr. Lee.
Chosun Ilbo: High-Schoolers Say Money Key to Happiness
I have recently been developing an interest in South Korean culture especially how it might relate to the YCISL principles. Thinking back, there was a Time magazine article (“Teacher, Leave Those Kids Alone” by Amanda Ripley) from 2011 that first pulled my attention to the life a South Korean student might have; it was about the influence of hagwons (after-school tutoring programs). Around the same time, I was in discussion with an organizer to bring a group of South Korean high school students for a YCISL workshop. More recently, I entered some thoughts on the mindset of Ku Hye-sun (구혜선) and how it relates to the YCISL model.
The article discussed here is “High-Schoolers Say Money Key to Happiness” (no author attributed) published on The Chosun Ilbo website on June 6, 2014 (http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2014/06/06/2014060600493.html). The title ties in well with YCISL’s focus on high school and happiness, but the article also cites data for elementary and middle school students. The article describes the results of a poll of 6,946 students on the most important factor for happiness (let’s assume this question was posed as pertaining to personal happiness):
Elementary School Students: Harmony in the family 43.6%, Good health 20.6%, Freedom 13%
Middle School Students: Harmony at home 23.5%, Good grades 15.4%
High School Students: Money 19.2%, Good grades 18.7%, Harmony in the family 17.5%, Freedom 13%
I feel that these results are a reflection of the strong shared family values in Korea and perhaps also the result of the practical “fear” mindset that takes hold as youth get older. The encouraging side is that the younger students held “harmony” highest which sets up the challenge as one of preservation as opposed to substitution (similar to how we wish to preserve creativity in youth in YCISL). It would be interesting to also know whether “Money” stays a top factor (or even stands out more) to happiness into tertiary education ages and beyond. Then again, the idea of money leading to happiness is not unique to South Korea. It is also a major perception problem in the US and other countries; the family or societal pressure might be different, but the message is still the same.
Let’s also consider information from OECD PISA on student happiness. Referring to Figure III.1.2 on page 32 of “PISA 2012 Results: Ready to Learn (Volume III): Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs” (DOI:10.1787/9789264201170-5-en), we find that Korea (let’s assume South Korea) ranks lowest out of 65 participating countries at just below 60% on this chart of “Percentage of students who report being happy at school.” [For context, note that PISA participants are between the ages of 15 years 3 months and 16 years 2 months, and the chart totals the students who answered “Agree” or “Strongly Agree” to the statement “I feel happy at school.”] Is this surprising? Not really because I think Koreans are very honest with their familial emotions and are not “happy” because they have less time to be in “harmony” with the family – and so the data should not be construed as showing that the students are un-happy with the school, just un-happy when they are at school which deprives them of time with the family to fulfill filial needs. We can speculatively contrast this with the US which ranked just 16 spots higher at about 80% and in the below average section along with Korea. What reasons do US students have to be un-happy about school? There is likely to be a wider assortment of reasons as compared to Korea because there is less purpose emphasized about secondary school education in the US, and so the reasoning and reference standards behind answering this question is likely different. More significant to consider is whether a lack of happiness at school correlates with motivation.
Malaysia is ranked 6th and Singapore 12th on this chart – relatively high. Using my Malaysia and Singapore background, I can see how these two countries ranked relatively high. In Malaysia, pressure on school grades to get into university is only moderate (low compared to Korea, Taiwan, China, India, US, etc); so a student has opportunity to think about life and their expectations. In Singapore, anxiety about school performance is intense but there is less anxiety about life, tertiary education and career opportunities as compared to other countries.
So the lesson for me to learn here is that youth need to be coached to better understand happiness (and positivity) and to develop exercises towards this aim. This should be tied in to intrinsic motivation practices which de-emphasize the growth of money-related fears.
“Turn that frown upside down.” Let me start by thinking about the song “Happy (행복했을까)” by my latest favorite artiste Ku Hye-sun. Except for the “사랑” which I have learned from Korean dramas, I repeatedly listen to this song not for its lyrics but because of its soothing and hopeful feel. You could contrast this to the so popular “Happy” by Pharrell Williams or “Koi Suru Fortune Cookie” by AKB48. I’m not sure presently where to start on developing the practical exercise, but I have ideas on what the ingredients should be so that it has lasting flavor and healthy benefit. Let the experimental design begin!
Related Articles:
“Korean Children Unhappiest in OECD Despite Material Wealth” (no author attributed) published on The Chosun Ilbo web site on May 7, 2012 (http://english.chosun.com/site/data/html_dir/2012/05/07/2012050700775.html)
“An Assault Upon Our Children: South Korea’s Education System Hurts Students” by Se-Woong Koo published on The New York Times web site on August 1, 2014http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/02/opinion/sunday/south-koreas-education-system-hurts-students.html?_r=0)
“Korean students least happy in OECD” by Lee-Hyo-sik published on The Korea Times web site on May 4, 2011 (http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/nation/2011/05/113_86432.html)
“Poll: Are Singaporeans least happy?” by Alexandra Hoegberg published on the CNN web site on December 21, 2012 (http://edition.cnn.com/2012/12/21/world/asia/singapore-least-happy/).
Straits Times: Prolonged use of mobile phones bad for school test scores: Japan study
Saving this article as a potential discussion point for problem identification. May be particularly appropriate for our students from Japan, but there may be a problem-adaptation opportunity for students from another country.
http://www.straitstimes.com/news/asia/east-asia/story/mobile-use-bad-school-test-scores-japan-study-20140826
This would be an opportunity in YCISL workshops to practice:
– empathy
– turning a problem into an opportunity
– agreeing or disagreeing with an adult view
– brainstorming
– prototyping
– developing an elevator pitch (e.g., to encourage youth to use smartphone more smartly)
– using youth as an advantage (smaller age gap)
WSJ: Fighting the Internet Invasion of Childhood
This entry refers to the article “Fighting the Internet Invasion of Childhood” by Martin Kutnowski in the WSJ on Wednesday September 10, 2014 on page A13 (Opinion section).
Reading about the efforts that Kutnowski has made to ameliorate the negative impacts of accessing the Internet is interesting and sparks my empathy as a parent. From my perspective, the Internet, especially in its early adopter days, was a research and academic tool with its main feature being communication innovation. These were its best days which are now faded because of the extensive pollution that it now carries – like river basins overcome by industrial waste. The Internet poses relatively minuscule benefit today thanks partly to the push to monetize its access and use. That is a major reason why the Internet is a negative factor in childhood development – in academics, family and social ways.
I like how Kutnowski describes his strategy to program his wireless modem (router actually, I would presume) to set access enabled times. Hopefully, he has learned how to program restricted web sites and read router logs too. I’m not sure why he uses “hacking” to describe what he did with the modem; perhaps its because he was not aware this was necessary in the parenting skill set.
I like too that he shares his experiences upon returning home, at dinner, and play time. This is really good insight into the parent experience and can help youth appreciate the experimental nature of parenting. As we read about the experimental trials in this story, we learn that the parent needs to build and maintain intrinsic motivation. But what’s important to remember is that intrinsic motivation comes from advancement in mastery, autonomy and purpose. An empathetic positive and growth mindset also helps with sustaining this motivation between the parent-child pair.
What is concerning though in this story is the fear (as suggested by words such as “parasitic”, “zombies” and “shudder”) that is cast over the condition of internet addiction, and it would be far more beneficial if the parent could, using intrinsic motivation, make childhood far more resilient by enhancing the positive mindset in his children so that the internet is supportive rather than invasive.
WSJ: The Best Language for Math
This entry refers to the article “The Best Language for Math” by Sue Shellenbarger in the WSJ on Wednesday September 10, 2014 on page D1-D2 (Personal Journal section).
Misguided “glass half empty” mindset comes to mind when I read this article. Building “numeracy in small children” is not to be admired – it is another one of those despicable pressures that deprives children of their creative opportunities and development. Think about it: who is concerned? It’s adults. Do children care? Not one bit.
People who cite rankings in international achievement tests are similar to those who care about and cite university rankings. Both types of rankings are trivial and lack meaning. They are multivariate sets of functions with inconsistent variable sets. As if the education paradigm is the sole predictor of academic achievement. As if a top-ranked university is suitable for everyone.
Researchers should be looking at the needs for customization in education – especially in cores subjects such as math and language – rather than choking creativity out of early childhood education. Such customization should promote finding learning PREFERENCES, and after that, it’s PRACTICE that makes the difference (this is greatly affected by the availability of tutoring and after-school programs in the countries compared in the article).
How much does it matter that 27 is written as twenty-seven in English? How do YOU add two numbers? “32+17=49” or “thirty-two plus seventeen equals forty-nine”? The difference between these two approaches reminds me of the consequences of the shift from numerical math lessons to verbalized math lessons.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
WSJ: “Teens Need Later Start to School Day, Doctors Group Says”
This entry is about the article titled “Teens Need Later Start to School Day, Doctors Group Says” by Sumathi Reddy. http://online.wsj.com/articles/teens-need-later-start-to-school-day-doctors-group-says-1408939263
The article starts with this main idea… “High schools and middle schools should begin the day no earlier than 8:30 a.m. to help teenagers get more sleep, the American Academy of Pediatrics said Monday in its first policy statement on the issue.”
The article continues by providing support for this idea. However, the correlation-causation case seems like it needs more consideration. Here are some of my thoughts on this issue:
– A fixed time such as 8:30 am seems unnecessary. We know that the circadian rhythms are biologically connected to sunrise and sunset times. Perhaps a more sound idea is that school should start at least 60 minutes after sunrise; and homework should be completable preferably by sunset (understandably impractical in general, and teachers should account for differing performance expectations after sunset – i.e., the amount of work that can be done in one hour during daylight time is less than that after dusk). So the solution – for optimization purposes – will differ based on latitude as well as daylight savings shifts, if applicable.
– A way to expand the timing benefit may be to not allow any college prep class in the first period (i.e., schedule PE, library, electives and other special courses). An alternative is to bring back a 20-30 minute home room period instead (Asian schools still have this, by the way).
– The article mentions the effect of blue light from electronics. There are also just routine home-based neurological stimulation factors – not just visual but with all other senses. A correlation-causation question arises around the influence of household evening settling time (sleep preparation) and bedtime on the lateness to which teens will go to sleep. Are parents sensitively aware that any noise during the desired sleep time could disrupt sleep? Laundry noise, television noise, working on computers, talking on the phone, etc. What about households which have pre-teens as well as teens?
– What recommendation can be made for weekends? Did the study follow the sleep patterns of the students on weekends? What about sleep patterns during holidays (both long and short)? Did sleeping in on weekends affect performance during the week?
– What is the effect of school-impacted sleep patterns on growth and body repair? Sub-optimal sleep is a chronic as well as acute health issue.
– This is not just a health problem, it is also an education problem (the article does suggest it). Educators need to be at the forefront as well. Educators control the settings and can have first-hand observations; health practitioners observe the after-effects and have little to no control over the settings. Parents should collaborate with both educators and health practitioners. Government should stay out of it.
– Are school hours set for adult convenience as opposed to educational optimization? If so, which is the priority? It’s not clear to me.
– There should be a no-caffeine rule prior to the start of school – and that includes educators as well as the students. I have observed teachers getting to school and starting the day with coffee. This is artificial stimulation and prevents teachers from being empathetic and sensing the appropriate pace to teach. Students (those not similarly caffeinated) cannot be expected to “connect” with the caffeinated teachers – and follow the teacher as they swing between caffeine hits. If caffeine is so necessary for teachers to get going, then it is quite apparent that school start times are inappropriate. [As an extension of this, perhaps teachers should not be allowed to intake any caffeine within 30 minutes of starting a class].
– I would suggest exploring the idea of inserting mindfulness or meditation times into the school schedule so that lack of focus due to disrupted sleep can be managed at school. You know the “power nap” idea, right? What are the heart rates of the students throughout the day? Is the pattern influenced by the amount of restful sleep?
So how does this relate to YCISL? It relates to some of the core ideas including:
– Use “youth” as an empathy advantage. Can our students incorporate sleep-related issues into their problem statement or solution? Can they be creative enough to develop a solution that would work for youth? Can youth see a solution that adults cannot otherwise see? Would students be able to persuade other students to adopt solutions that adults would otherwise not do so well?
– Mindset. Students need to understand the impact that sleep is having on their mindsets as well as performance. Without good sleep, can the mindset be positive? Without good sleep, can the mindset be attending to growth?
– Leadership. This is an opportunity for youth to speak up and be heard. Adults like to prescribe solutions that affect others but not necessarily themselves. Youth need to take a leadership role in ensuring a youth-centered and youth-accepted solution.
– Sustainability. What is needed is a sustainable solution that has a long-term beneficial influence and causes minimum inconvenience. Schools are forever experimenting with digressive and disruptive changes. This is unsustainable and confusing.
WSJ: “Test Shows U.S. 12th Graders Aren’t Improving in Reading or Math”
There is a WSJ article (“Test Shows U.S. 12th Graders Aren’t Improving in Reading or Math” by Carolyn Porter in the WSJ, May 8, 2014) describing how there isn’t much progress towards boosting test scores. The news is about a widespread muddle in education and illustrates the continuing confusion surrounding what to do. This article and others like it are indicative of an experimental design that no one wants to shut down and shift resources to a better experiment. Stagnation.
Let’s apply some lessons from YCISL…
– Apply innovation thinking. Education needs to re-designed from start to finish. Apply an innovation process so that all parts are optimized. Put everything in the current scheme up on the chopping block. Assemble an innovation A-team and go for quantity-not-quality brainstorming.
– “Fail early, fail fast.” Look for better models and not just band-aids. Rapid prototype to uncover showstoppers.
– Start from scratch applying “game storming.” Set new rules that are customized for your users (i.e., the students), allow opportunity for exploration and experience, and conclude with a point that motivates. No judgement allowed during the exploration phase.
– Adopt Dan Pink’s Intrinsic Motivation (Mastery, Autonomy, Purpose) into the educational process. Make the purpose clear and accessible. Tune autonomy for maximum performance. Define mastery in meaningful ways. Remove the money factor. And do this for all stakeholders.
– Adults fear failure more than kids. Adopt a fear-less culture.
– Adults need to listen to kids. As Adora Svitak says, “Learning should be reciprocal.”
– Engage in a growth mindset. In a growth mindset, we develop a love of learning. We should analyze academic growth as much as academic attainment. Together, you will get a measure of academic achievement – a more complete sense of accomplishment.
