General – Page 65 – Learning Aloud

Google Doc Table of Contents

The Google Doc adds-on offer some new capabilities and a great way of expanding the power of apps in general.

I am putting together content that will eventually be divided between a textbook and related online resources. My work flow results in one giant integrated file and I eventually decide what I will end up putting where.

In the image that appears above, you see the Table of Contents as a second window to the right of the open doc. The one technique I had to add to my normal approach is to identify my headings as headings (I usually just bold my headings). If you are familiar with HTML headings, you are ready to go.

Content or platform – assumptions about free

I spent time driving by myself yesterday and enjoy the time to listen to podcasts and think. The audio consisted of a serious of education interviews with app/tool developers and authors. I guess these folks are now described as edupreneurs. All talked about the need to generate at least enough funds to sustain their visions. The discussions of business models got me thinking about what different folks think should be free and what is worth a payment.

The division that seems obvious to me is content vs. platform. As a writer (not an edupreneur at this point – I am employed), it seems the platform people assume the content people should donate their work. No doubt, platforms in the education sector or those available for any group require a considerable outlay of time and resources to create. However, without participants to offer content, the platforms serve no purpose. Of course, the opposite situation occurs for those hoping to make revenue from content. Getting material to consumers is far easier than was the case 10 years ago and to offer content requires a platform.

There are some barriers to what should be a collaborative effort. Some platforms do not allow ads and encourage “repurposing” as a form of authoring. I object to systems that strip ads or use content (with overlays or not) without serving from the original source. I understand the financial limitations of education as an educator, but the solution is not to take the work of others using lack of funds as a personal or public excuse. I also object to personal use of means to avoid ads. Paying for content is a way to avoid ads and avoiding ads through other means is selfish. Perhaps this is just me.

Why share what you have not read

A recent article from Time presented several myths about online activity. I found the second myth of greatest interest.

The second myth is exposed by data that cross references social activity by the read time devoted to a primary information source. The data are expressed as a graph with hits organized in a 2 x 2 format. So you have articles with high and low read times by articles with high and low social activity. If one assumes that greater read time indicates greater personal interest, it is surprising that low interest articles generate the most social activity. Hence, you cannot assume that those suggestions you receive as tweets resulted from a thorough review by the tweeter. Perhaps the title alone was enough to encourage sharing.

Why? Not sure, but these data seem similar to a paper we just discussed in my grad class. The paper concerned a number of effective study techniques and then noted that college students seem not likely to use these techniques even though the strategies require no more time. One commonality of the methods is that they generated more errors and were likely perceived as more difficult. Perhaps, individuals are satisfied with a passive approach that offers the impression of doing something productive.

I wonder if a similar explanation fits here. Are many tweets that reference resources a way of feeling or offering the impression to others that something meaningful has been accomplished? I propose that tweets associated with blog entries are a better approach. Blog posts typically offer more personal commentary and I would think require a little more information from a primary source. If you cannot summarize what about a source was interesting or valuable, you likely did not get much from the resource yourself. Why offer the source to others?

Getty is a stock image provider. Typically, you pay for use of the images. Getty is now offering images to bloggers and web page authors at no cost – 35 million images are available.

It is important to understand the implications of image embeds. When you embed an image (see below), you are serving the image from the provider and not from the server you use to offer your blog or web page. The Getty approach does not offer you possession of the image.

What could be a limitation of this approach. I guess it depends on how paranoid you care to be. I heard one podcaster contend that the terms of service allow Getty to change its mind. For example, it could decide to terminate the service or possible monetize the service with ads. You can see that Getty identifies that it is the source of the image (see below). If you blog, the image would eventually disappear from your front page and might change without your awareness. I must say this would not concern me – few of those who visit my site use the search feature to locate old posts. Even if they did, what would be the harm in seeing an ad?

Generation Like

Frontline did a program ed tech types should make certain they view and share. The program features Douglas Rushkopf (Program or Be Programmed) and his analysis of the “social currency” of social media. He proposes that teens are competing for “Likes”. My first thought as a bloggers was that this is not limited to teens because I do pay some attention to the hits my blogs generate.

What does it take to generate “likes”? Association with popular “pop culture” is a way to generate “likes”? I see it as the opposite of using famous people in your ads. Instead of the image of famous people rubbing off on a product, you have the popularity of a product rubbing off on unknown people. It works out will for all parties – free advertising and a way to attract attention.

The process of generating attention has lessons you can see played out elsewhere. Check out the process by which “liked” individuals begin to collaborate in order to magnify their popularity. You see a similar phenomenon with what I like describe as the “I used to be a teacher, administrator, librarian” types who now move from ed conference to conference as paid presenters. Check them on Twitter or whatever social platform you choose and note the frequency with which they mention each other. There seems to be no content value in these mentions (kind of like a “like”) in that there is no information to be considered, but such mentions give followers clues as to who the cool people think are cool.

Another step to the rear – problems for the open net

I wish my ed tech colleagues would expand their scope of awareness. Attempts to determine the 10 most useful tools for teachers or which of 10 spelling apps is the best needs to be expanded to include an awareness of Internet and political issues. The opportunity to engage students at school and at home will depend on cost effective access. First it was the legal decision exempting Verizon from net neutrality and now the proposed merger of Comcast and Time Warner again with net neutrality implications.

Because we cannot rely on competition to identify which company is most responsive to users (how many options do you have for decent Internet access), this is one of those situations in which we must depend on government oversight to guard against monopolistic practices.

Sen. Franken is one voice raising concerns with the FCC over Internet issues. I sent $4 to Sen. Franken last year when he was addressing a net neutrality issue. I now continue to receive requests for money. I am not from MN and the notion that issues are decided based on the amount of money various representatives can generate is disturbing. I know this is a bit naive. Om Malik argues that these issues are being determined by the money available from lobbyists. A very disturbing situation and exactly the problem Lawrence Lessig describes in his book – Republic Lost

TWiT-TV discussion of Comcast/Time Warner merger

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
1	2	3	4	5	6	7
8	9	10	11	12	13	14
15	16	17	18	19	20	21
22	23	24	25	26	27	28
29	30