Tag Archives: engaging with online learning

What specifically affects our decision to learn or, when we’ve already made a commitment, that we persist with learning online?

E
Introducing the mesofact

There are facts that don’t change, like the height of Mount Ever­est, and facts that change a lot, like the weather. Then there are meso­facts, facts that are nei­ther fast nor momen­tus, and so don’t receive the same scrutiny, but are still wor­thy of your atten­tion. For exam­ple, the Peri­odic table has added 12 ele­ments since 1970. 400 new extra­so­lar plan­ets have been dis­cov­ered since the first one in 1995. The world’s pop­u­la­tion stands at 6.8 mil­lion. Many dinosaurs were swift and warm-blooded. “Updat­ing your meso­facts,” says Samuel Arbesman, “can change how you think about the world.” (And, I’m always drawn to insights that change how I think about the world):

Do you know the per­cent­age of peo­ple in the world who use mobile phones? In 1997, the answer was 4 per­cent. By 2007, it was nearly 50 per­cent. The frac­tion of peo­ple who are mobile phone users is the kind of fact you might read in a mag­a­zine and quote at a cock­tail party. But years later the num­ber you would be quot­ing would not just be inac­cu­rate, it would be seri­ously wrong. The dif­fer­ence between a tiny frac­tion of the world and half the globe is star­tling, and com­pletely changes our view on global interconnectivity.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Atoms to bits

Tuned in as I am to A His­tory of the World in 100 Objects and the notion that humans make tools and tools remake humans, I couldn’t help but notice Chris Ander­son claim that every­one now has the power to make com­plex things. In the DIY cul­ture of the inter­net, man­u­fac­tur­ing will be rad­i­cally democ­ra­tized; in the next indus­trial rev­o­lu­tions, “atoms are the new bits.” What was once mass pro­duced will become mass per­son­al­ized. Think on the ways in which we man­age our daily lives, through our edu­ca­tion sys­tems, work prac­tices, com­mu­nity ser­vices and gov­er­nance, all of which are designed and coor­di­nated with tools we have had at our dis­posal. What will these tools look like in the DIY model when col­lab­o­ra­tion, crowd­sourc­ing and great ideas attract­ing like-minded indi­vid­u­als? The garage/basement exam­ples Chris Ander­son pro­vides remind us that the man­u­fac­tur­ing rev­o­lu­tion is very much con­fined to hob­by­ist and bou­tique mar­kets, not main­stream indus­try. But the whole notion of mov­ing from mass pro­duc­tion to mass per­son­al­iza­tion is rather intoxicating.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Tech Law Crystal Ball

What’s in store for Canada in 2009 in the area of tech­nol­ogy law and pol­icy? Michael Geist’s month-by-month blow pre­dicts entrenched posi­tions, slow, com­prised progress on issues like copy­right reform and net neu­tral­ity, only to be inter­rupted and dis­placed off the agenda by a Novem­ber elec­tion (the fourth in six years). Funny in a laugh-instead-of-cry kind of way.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Set in Our Ways: Why Change Is So Hard

Even though we yearn for what is new, most of us are unable or will­ing to make fun­da­men­tal changes in our lives. <a href=“http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=set-in-our-ways” title=“Set in Our Ways” Why Change is so Hard”>Change is rarely as easy as we think it will be. Our open­ness to new expe­ri­ences typ­i­cally increases dur­ing our 20s and then grad­u­ally declines until about age 60. After that, some of us become more open again, per­haps because our respon­si­bil­i­ties for rais­ing a fam­ily and earn­ing a liv­ing have been lifted.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Skeletal Remains

Dinosaur mounts have become so fun­da­men­tal to our idea of what makes a nat­ural his­tory museum that it can be dif­fi­cult to imag­ine the insti­tu­tions ever exist­ing with­out them. So does it mat­ter that 140 years after the first Hadrosaurus foulkii mount, today’s pale­on­tol­o­gists have rein­ter­preted its reliance on four rather than two legs? Yes, says Jesse Smith:

… it’s not so much that, say, Hadrosaurus walked on four legs, but more that this new knowl­edge reflects a bet­ter under­stand­ing of the world as it was before we appeared in it. We’re com­pelled by improved under­stand­ings of those envi­ron­ments that have yet to open them­selves to human occu­pa­tion — Mars, the deep sea, the past. Under­stand­ing life in a way that either spa­tially or tem­po­rally tran­scends the pres­ence of humans builds a con­text that helps us under­stand that pres­ence. The fact that we have a bet­ter idea of what the Hadrosaurus’ skull looked like, that we can replace some of the bones Hawkins used to fill in the blanks, so to speak, sug­gests that an image of the past is fully con­structible if only we’re given the right parts.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
EEGs Show Brain Differences Between Poor and Rich Kids

Kids from lower socioe­co­nomic lev­els show brain phys­i­ol­ogy pat­terns sim­i­lar to some­one who actu­ally had dam­age in the frontal lobe as an adult, said Robert Knight, a UC Berke­ley pro­fes­sor of psy­chol­ogy and direc­tor of their Neu­ro­science Insti­tute. This is a wake-up call. It’s not just that these kids are poor and more likely to have health prob­lems, but they might actu­ally not be get­ting full brain devel­op­ment from the stress­ful and rel­a­tively impov­er­ished envi­ron­ment asso­ci­ated with low socioe­co­nomic sta­tus: fewer books, less read­ing, fewer games, fewer vis­its to muse­ums. This study has been repeated many times in the last thirty years, with anal­o­gous results; this one is unique in that is sorts out the vari­ables that peo­ple have used to dis­count pre­vi­ous stud­ies and yet ends by ask­ing “Can this be repli­cated?” For heaven’s sake. What more proof do we need?

♦ ♦ ♦

E
Procrastinating Again?

Pro­cras­ti­na­tion is not a time-management prob­lem. It’s a com­plex prob­lem involv­ing per­son­al­ity, sit­u­a­tions and moti­va­tion. Every­one occa­sion­ally pro­cras­ti­nates, 15 to 20 per­cent of adults rou­tinely put off activ­i­ties that would be bet­ter accom­plished right away, and a whop­ping 80 to 95 per­cent of col­lege stu­dents have a pen­chant for post­pone­ment. Trisha Guru cov­ers con­tem­po­rary views on and advice for kick­ing the pro­cras­ti­na­tion habit.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
How do you find what you want and how do you know it is true?

Judy Breck quotes Howard Rhein­gold on the infor­ma­tion morass that is seek­ing what you want and know­ing if it is true:

All of the world’s knowl­edge is in the air to be plucked down by our tele­phone. Of course it’s also all the world’s dis­in­for­ma­tion, mis­in­for­ma­tion, spam, porn, Niger­ian frauds, urban leg­ends, hoaxes. So how do you find what you want and how do you know that it’s true? Those seem like to me both extremely impor­tant ques­tions today .…

The answer, says Judy Breck, is noth­ing less than to change both where we look and the way we ascer­tain truthfulness.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
No Heaven on Earth

Why are so many of us so skep­ti­cal when con­fronted with the over­whelm­ing evi­dence for envi­ron­men­tal con­se­quences of destroy­ing every­thing we come in con­tact with? In her review of Amer­i­can Earth, an anthol­ogy of Amer­i­can envi­ron­men­tal­ist views, Ver­lyn Klinkenborg has this reac­tion to the bar­rage of evi­dence and entreaties to recon­nect with nature:

After a day or two, I found myself read­ing this anthol­ogy as if it were a series of reports from a dis­tant planet in a dis­tant time — as an appen­dix, per­haps, to Doris Lessing’s Cano­pus in Argos nov­els. Read­ing Amer­i­can Earth in that light helped make sev­eral things clear. First, each doc­u­ment in the vol­ume is a minor­ity report — some­times a minor­ity of one. The assump­tions, the hopes, the argu­ments in nearly every one of these pieces, no mat­ter when they were writ­ten, are con­tra­dicted by the way the vast major­ity of Amer­i­cans live and by the polit­i­cal and eco­nomic struc­tures that deter­mine that lifestyle. Sec­ond, the fun­da­men­tal envi­ron­men­tal­ist argu­ments — the fun­da­men­tal per­cep­tions — are unchang­ing over time; only the details vary. We are still catch­ing up to Thoreau, still com­ing to terms with the out­rage George Perkins Marsh expressed in 1864, his wor­ries about “cli­matic excess” and our “rest­less love of change.” Third, writ­ers in every gen­er­a­tion take a crack at find­ing the crys­talline argu­ment that will induce an epiphany in skep­ti­cal read­ers — for noth­ing less than an epiphany will do to per­suade them to change the way they go about liv­ing. Yet every gen­er­a­tion fails, in part because skep­ti­cal read­ers so sel­dom pick up this kind of writ­ing or sub­mit to its evidence.

Her con­clu­sion is also worth not­ing. She reaches for Kafka (There is infi­nite hope, but not for us.) and writes regret­fully: I would say some­thing dif­fer­ent if I could. I have every faith in nature’s recu­per­a­tive powers.…What I doubt is our abil­ity, as a species, to see and, hav­ing seen, to con­tinue to pay attention.

♦ ♦ ♦

E
The Next Renaissance

In his keynote address at the Per­sonal Democ­racy Forum 2008, Dou­glas Rushkoff points out that there is in fact noth­ing per­sonal about democ­racy. Rather, it is about tran­scend­ing the self and act­ing col­lec­tively. Sadly, even though the social media tools we use cede cen­tral author­ity to decen­tral­ized groups and give us a way to par­tic­i­pate in small ways, we tend to miss the real oppor­tu­nity to recon­fig­ure how democ­racy oper­ates (cf. the first Renais­sance). The oppor­tu­nity is not to blog about pol­i­tics, but rather to reclaim our role as cit­i­zens who par­tic­i­pate in the cre­ation of the soci­ety in which we want to live:

If Obama is indeed elected the first truly Internet-enabled can­di­date, we should take him at his word. He does not offer him­self as the agent of change, but as an advo­cate of the change that could be enacted by peo­ple. It is not for gov­ern­ment to cre­ate solar power, for exam­ple, but to get out of the way of all those peo­ple who are ready to imple­ment solar power, them­selves. Respond­ing to the will­ing­ness of peo­ple to act, he can remove reg­u­la­tions devel­oped on behalf of the oil indus­try to restrict its proliferation.

♦ ♦ ♦