I also really like your point about little beginnings leading to greater things. I have found that the more deliberate approach of using my blog for more, rather than social media, has led to more connections. Reminds me of Amy Burvall’s point about ‘gathering dust for stars.’
As teachers are asked to increasingly use data, be aware of research, collaborate, and engage in ongoing professional learning, workload remains an issue. Collaboration and professional learning take time. Professional learning, in particular, often happens in teachers’ own time, and using their own funds. Time and resourcing are important considerations influencing to what extent teachers are able to collaborate and participate in effective professional learning.
I am not against the ‘future of things’, AI and changes in work, but I think that we need to do more work to understand and appreciate such changes. For me, this involves:
- Asking questions as a part of critical reflection
- Learning from and through others (as you touch on elsewhere)
- Continually engaging in new challenges to disrupt habits
1. Writing and publishing are not the same thing.
2. All publishing is self-publishing.
3. Be a fan.
To the River is an immensely beautiful read in its entirety. Complement it with Laing’s subsequent existential experiment in the art of being alone, then revisit Virginia Woolf on the shock-receiving capacity necessary for being an artist.
As always, this not intended to be an exhaustive list, but rather a series of reminders, starting points or check-ins. The continual pursuit of connecting learning and the real world will only get more vital and intense. These various paths to authenticity can help solidify that connection.
The efficiency of teaching and learning – that means we need to talk about labor, in this illustration, in our imagined futures, in our stories. Because it’s not just the machine (or it’s not the machine alone) – in this depiction or in our practices – that is doing “the work.” There is invisible labor here. Not depicted. Not imagined. Not theorized or commented upon by Asimov.
When students choose what universities to go to, two key trends can be seen in Howard Gardner’s latest research, revealed at the International Conference on Thinking. Some go for transactional purposes — to get a good degree and pack their CV full of things so that they can head into ‘real life’ in the best possible way. Others go for transformational reasons — they see university as a chance to evolve from being a high schooler into something new, to reinvent themselves.
Harald D. Lasswell wrote that the function of propaganda is to reduce the material cost of power. On a social-media platform, that cost-reduction comes in many forms. By their very existence, the platforms already reduce both the labor and the capital required to access both information and an audience. Automated accounts further reduce the cost of power, for those who know how to game the algorithm and evade detection long enough to carry out a campaign.
But when artificial amplification becomes itself artificially amplified through the presence of spammers and opportunists, the cost to power for those who game the system in just the right way can be incredibly small. For those of us studying the digital information landscape, whether we seek to understand it or to effect positive change in it, it is essential that we understand all of the ways in which messages can be amplified — and the effects those methods can have on each other when they overlap.
The secret to fostering creativity lies in our approach to teaching. We have to stop trying to control the outcome.
If Facebook was a tool for confirmation bias, that would kind of suck. It would. But that is not the claim. The claim is that Facebook is quite literally training us to be conspiracy theorists. And given the history of what happens when conspiracy theory and white supremacy mix, that should scare the hell out of you. I’m petrified. Mark Zuckerberg should be too.
People exposed themselves to Facebook multiple times a day, every single day, seeing headlines making all sorts of crazy claims, and filed them in their famil-o-meter for future reference.
In dog classes, the dog owner cannot simply send their misbehaving dog to the trainer to be ‘fixed.’ There are a few reasons for this, including: 1) the problem is likely to exist between the owner and the dog and possibly centres around the lack of respect in their relationship- therefore sending the dog to the trainer will not address the heart of the problem and 2) it is not long term sustainable to offload the problem to another person -when the dog and the owner go home, the trainer will not be there to rescue them.
In it, Leung reflects upon the experience of going to dog training school. She then compares this with ‘training’ in the classroom. She explains that no-one, dogs or humans, learns when under stress. What is important then is creating the environment and investing in an ’emotional bank’s.
Just as I try (and sometimes fail) to de-center myself when addressing student misbehavior, I try to de-center myself when I write. The vast majority of the students that I teach won’t be racially profiled in a behavior policy or by the police and that’s why I think it is especially important for me to seek out literature that reflects on those systemic injustices.
BlackBoard will leverage their relative omnipresence to gouge schools everywhere into using their tools because they can, and they’ll sell them up with all the administrative, vending machine, and surveillance cameras one could dream of. This is what we are missing. BlackBoard makes an inferior product and charges a ton for it, but if we reduce the conversation to technology, and not really think hard about technology as an instantiation of capital’s will to power, than anything resembling an EdTech movement towards a vision of liberation and relevance is lost. For within those ideas is not a technology, but a group of people, who argue, disagree, and bicker, but also believe that education is fundamentally about the exchange of ideas and possibilities of thinking the world anew again and again, it is not about a corporate mandate to compete—however inanely or nefariously—for market share and/or power. I don’t believe in technology, I believe in people. And that’s why I don’t think our struggle is over the future of technology, it is over the struggle for the future of our culture that is assailed from all corners by the vultures of capital. Corporations are selling us back our ideas, innovations, and visions for an exorbitant price. I want them all back, and I want them now!
As I say — it’s the internet — you’re not stuck with that one story that comes to you. By going out and actively choosing a better story you will not only filter out false stories but also see the variety of ways an event is being covered.
Going forward we need to be aware of all the inherent limitations of what AI is and the very human challenges using algorithms and big data. They are human inventions and are embedded in political, economic and social contexts that come with the biases and ideologies. AI can definitely augment our profession and help us become better teachers, but as teachers and students we need to be aware of the context in which this change is playing out. We need to understand it and use it where it will be to the benefit of us all.
By messing about and getting messy, teachers learn the value of messy play. They see the potential of open-ended exploration with loose parts indoors and outdoors. Perhaps a belief in the Theory of Messing About will support the reconsideration of “Pinterest Pretty” and “Instagram Beautiful”.
One of the interesting things that I observed through the activity was the storytelling that naturally came out of the activity.