I’ve never really thought about Pingbacks on blog posts; they just appear. On my own blogs, most of the pingbacks are in fact internal referencing as I link from one post to another. But maybe they’re not as mundane as they might at first appear and in fact they work much harder than I first thought? When someone reads a blog post and is subsequently minded to write their own post, either referencing or extending the ideas in the original, they are extending knowledge. Were it not for the pingback, the link between the two posts would be one way only, from the body of the new post back to the original. The pingback is initiated automatically from within the original post platform and consequently makes this a two-way exchange by providing that link to the new post. This extending of the knowledge web offers opportunities, but I wonder to what extent people use it? I know that if I write a post which attracts a pingback, I usually follow it up to check out the post and the author. The outcome might be that I learn something new about what I originally thought, or that I find a new blog to follow, or a new person with whom to connect. The interesting part is that it’s an algorithm or script that’s doing that. A nonhuman. My learning is once more being affected and enabled by a nonhuman actor.
Kevin McGrath and Penny Van Bergen provides a summary of their paper into gender equity in schools. They predict that by 2067 there will be no more male teachers in primary schools. Other than being an improvement on the argument that robots will take over education, I wonder what the percentage of males and females in leadership would be during this period? I have a hunch that the numbers would still be relatively high.
Thank you Chris for the reply. I did read your post, that is what spurred me to try once again to investigate ‘sending replies’.
Interesting post Kevin. I am particularly intrigued by the question of data. You look at something like Draftback, which plays back a Doc’s revision history. It can be easy to be enamoured by such functionality. What is intriguing is that Google keeps all this data, that is just accessed via API’s to produce the playback. Why?
Another interesting example of the potential is the Classroom Extension. Not only does it allow you to easily set assignments, but when installed by staff and students, it provides the means to send a sight to students. This though is taken to a whole new level by Hapara, which allows teachers to lock a student’s screen. It can be easy to view Hapara poorly, but it only builds on what Google makes possible. This is taken to its zenith with Hapara Analytics.
I will not deny, I have drank the KoolAid (and probably still do). I think though that like with all technology, I am somewhat in awe of the affordances, but also critical of the consequences. I wonder about Martin Weller’s call to ‘rewild edtech’. For me one thing that needs to change is data, as Caulfield suggests, at the least that would be a start.
This is a great post Bob. Engaging with parents is such a wicked educational problem. I remember developing a focus a few years ago as a part of my Google Certified Educator experience:
How Might We ENGAGE PARENTS in a CULTURAL SHIFT to make RELATIONSHIPS and CONNECTIONS the focus of learning?
What I learnt from the experience is that it is not as simple as just inviting parents in. I developed the eBox blog as a way of engaging, however it never really took. Since then applications like Seesaw have really opened up this space.
This is such an interesting post Bernard. In regards to the ‘commercialisation of educators’, I am a Google Certified Innovator and enjoyed my experience at Google. However, it was the opportunity to work with other passionate educators which was the boon, not the focus on tools.
I was a Google Educator before they changed the program, but my credentials have since lapsed. I could justify completing the credentials as it is a core part of my current work. However, I have concerns about ticking a box. I prefer to use my time to develop my own capacity myself, documented in my monthly newsletter. I think that Rafranz Davis captures some of the issues too.
In regards to the influence of Google, I am more concerned about the influence of GAFA, FANGS or whatever acronym you choose to use. I am happy to support teachers where they are at. I have written about Apple, Adobe and Microsoft. I have also written about open software and managing my own domain. In regards to disclosure, I would like to think that I am transparent, but I guess I could always do better.
I love this comment Alan:
What I think is worth writing about are things in your day that nibble at your attention. That make you pause, ever so briefly.
I think sometimes I forget this. Interestingly, Kin Lane shared something similar lately to:
It would KILL ME to not be able to tell stories. I need storytelling to do what I do. To work through ideas. It is how I learn from others.
You have both reinvigorated me to stop worrying and just get back to sharing and storytelling.
Thanks for the great post Melissa. I could not agree more about homework. I feel like so many elements in education the high ground is so often held by those more conservative. Personally, I would love to scrap homework, however it is not always the overall consensus. Also, there are many parents out there who seem to believe that homework is somehow essential to success. In the end, I feel that homework underwrites the relationships that we as teachers continually try and build with students. There is nothing more depressing than the awkward conversation with parents seeming whinging about the failure to submit homework.