Month: June 2007

Some educators are becoming interested in the educational potential of Second Life. Part of the process of determining what one thinks probably includes spending some time experiencing the environment for yourself.

Getting started should be easier (or may be I am impatient or don’t understand the gamer mentality of learning from the environment). New participants are immediately entered into a “training setting” that results in familiarity with the basics. It was not obvious to me what to do next.

My strategy in such situations is predictably old school. I buy a book. I bought the official guide or something like that and did learn some general information, but not the practical knowledge I expected.

I came across an online (or downloadable) resource that is at least the equivalent of the resource I purchased – The Unofficial Complete Fool’s Guide to Second Life. Sounds like it was written for me, but you may find it useful as well.

I think it is important to place education within some kind of context. How else are educators to understand what might be important goals for what they are to accomplish with students? Some want to tell us that we educators are dealing with students who come into our classrooms different because of the context within which they live and we no longer understand. Some want to tell us that we must prepare students to function in a world very different from the world we may consciously experience and with which we have had little experience in our own training. One of the reasons I discuss topics within this blog that are not about education is that these topics concern issues I am learning about that are providing this new “context” for me.

One of the authors I have read extensively is NY Times columnist Thomas Friedman and I have made reference to some of his books on several occasions. Within the past couple of days, I have had several experiences in which Friedman’s perspective on the world and I would argue what implications for education might be have been challenged.

The first “experience” came to my email box in what appears to be an ad for a book. I have no idea how this kind of thing happens. Does someone out there know I read books by Friedman and think I would be interested in a book that takes a somewhat different (less optimistic from the ad) approach? Perhaps this was some kind of general mailing and you received the same email. Anyway, the email contained a link to a promotional video that is kind of interesting (New critical analysis (video promoting a book) of Friedman’s perspective in The World is Flat).

The second came to my awareness as I have been searching the educational blogs to find someone who might pick up on “The Cult of the Amateur” because of the stance this book takes in opposition to open source, blogs as information sources, wikipedia, etc. It took a week or so, but the reaction I expected has begun to surface (e.g., Weblogg-ed). It is the comments that are associated with this post that I found interesting:

I find it particularly ironic that you raise the issue of Keen’s lack of expertise visa vis education. What do Tom Friedman, Daniel Pink, Don Tapscott, Malcolm Gladwell or David Weinberger know abouteducation?

Yet, many educators slavishly hang on to every word they utter.It’s fine to integrate different perspectives into our work, but thereare much more powerful ideas available within the education community that should be guiding our thinking.

I think I have read every author in the list provided above. So, I am offering this post to give those with a different view some attention. For the record, I don’t think Friedman is too optimistic. I do think he makes it clear that there are many in the world who would relish the opportunity to do the jobs (both low and high end) that we take for granted and that corporations (and we as their customers) see this as a way to bring competitive products and practices to the market. Friedman scares me enough and so did what I was able to observe during my brief visit to China.

I do think that education is the way that this reality must be addressed and preparing students to compete at the high end is a necessity. No, schools (K-12 and higher ed) should not be run like businesses and no, business leaders may not understand what educators are trying to accomplish. I also understand that someone who writes about business, global competition, etc. is neither a businessman nor an educator. So, I read Friedman to suggest that the development of creativity, critical thinking, problem-solving must be merged with the mastery of basic skills and that schools, parents, and students must step it up a notch or so. I can agree with that. I guess I prefer Friedman’s perspective to that pushed by the present administration. Politicians are not educators either, but funding may depend on what politicians happen to think (or perhaps what the pollsters tell them to think). It is an interesting mix of ideas.

Blogged with Flock

I just noticed that I have reached the 1000 post mark. Time to do something special.

Here is a summer rerun. A reminder from post #1 – June, 2002.

The Beginning

iv. to teach them this techne, should they desire to learn [it], without fee and written covenant, and to give a share both of rules and of lectures, and of all the rest of learning, to my sons and to the [sons]of him who has taught me and to the pupils who have both make a written contract and sworn by a medical convention but by no other. (from the Hippocratic oath – translated)

http://www.indiana.edu/~ancmed/oath.htm

On to the second 1000.

I watch Twins baseball a lot and as a by product I have become interested in the on-air antics of broadcasters Dick Bremer and Bert Blyleven. One of the more entertaining multi-game stories from last year was the end of the year “call contest”. Making a “call” is a big deal. It is essentially confidently predicting a fairly low probability event and is usually done at a time when the home team needs a lift. A home run during any given at-bat is a low probability event. A double-play is a fairly low probability event. The mystique of being able to “make a call” supports the assumed special skills and the great “baseball minds” of the broadcasters.

Toward the end of the last season, the commentators decided to engage in a contest to compare their abilities to make a call. If I remember the details, the event was to run over 7 games and each broadcaster was to make one call a game (this also seems to be one of the unwritten rules of making a call – you make one call a game). The winner was to be the individual who make the most successful calls. Again, if I remember correctly, Burt got out to an early lead. Dick then began to make calls that pushed the boundaries. The nature of these calls and the use of this strategy after Burt had already made an unsuccessful call really seemed to create some hard feelings. Predicting that Johan Santana will strike someone out in the next two innings (I made this one up) is not exactly within the spirit of making a call. Towards the end, the broadcasters were appealing to boys in the truck to determine what constituted a valid call.

I have no idea why I thought of that story, but here is a call.

Within the next two weeks, those of you who follow educational blogs will confront and be bothered by the analysis contained in a book by Andrew Keen (The Cult of the Amateur).

The book laments the general decline brought on by Web 2.0:

“… democratization, despite its lofty idealization, is undermining truth, souring civic discourse, and belittling expertise, experience, and talent.” (p. 15).

The focus is on the evils of blogs, wikipedia, iTunes, Digg, etc. It is about our willingness to settle for what is free and mediocre. It is about how we are being duped by our idealism. It is about our failure to understand that our online selections and off-line buying habits are removing the financial support for expertise and careful production of information resources and redirecting these resources to “providers” (Google, etc., I guess).

I have to consider more carefully what I think of the arguments in this book. I promise more on this topic within a few days.

I just wanted to register my “call”.

The thing about monkey? It is a reference to Huxley’s comment about enough monkeys, enough typewriters, etc.

One final comment. I was curious enough to check whether Andrew Keen had a blog. It is just the way my mind works. Sure enough – The Great Seduction.

If you have a sense of history related to the personal computer or are interested in how some of the leaders of the field imagine the future, you will likely find an hour and one-half interview with Steve Jobs and Bill Gates of value (search iTunes podcasts for Steve Jobs and Bill Gates at D5). The participants work hard to dispel the common notion that they are constantly at odds. There is not a great deal of content concerning educational issues, but there is some.