In her presentation (video streaming) this morning on self-regulation for novice adult musicians, Laura Ritchie referenced Barry Zimmerman's definition of self-regulated learning. The primary citation is Zimmerman's 1990 overview paper referenced here (15 page PDF). Zimmerman distinguishes between self-regulation processes and strategies designed to optimize those processes, identifies a "self-oriented feedback loop", and examines the reasons student shave for pursuing one strategy or another. The definition is also stated in his 1989 paper 'A Social Cognitive View of Self-Regulated Academic Learning' (probably paywalled where you are, though there's a copy on ResearchGate). This paper also has a detailed table of self-regulated learning strategies. The triadic analysis (pictured) makes me thing of Archer-Anderson-Garrison's account of teaching and learning presence, which shows how teachers and instructors can have a non-regulatory influence through a person's awareness of self, environment and behaviour. For a lighter introduction readers may want to look at Janice Jansol's slide presentation on Zimmerman.
I think there's a difference between 'getting things wrong' and 'mindless', and while the former is certainly a problem with Google's AI, and others, as argued in this post, I don't think that the latter is an issue at all. The article focuses on Google's Perspective software, which you can try for yourself. It has some easily verified flaws; one is that negative statements, however accurate, are viewed as "toxic", while nice statements, however abhorrent, are viewed as non-toxic. "The problem is that the algorithm doesn’t know any human history. It’s mainly looking for hot-button terms like 'evil' and 'scumbag.'" Quite so. It's too simplistic to be useful. But that is very different from "mindless". As the author admits, "smart algorithms are indeed helping medical doctors diagnose, they report, and they are also trouncing humans at the most challenging games humans have ever devised." They are literally 'mindless' but they are better at some things. If the anti-troll software starts working properly, it won't matter one whit that it's mindless.
This article reports on a Google press release describing ARCore, an augmented reality development kit. Basically it delivers three features: motion tracking, environmental awareness (to detect flat surfaces), and light estimation, to get shadows right. Here's the developer preview, with kits for the Android Studio, Unity and Unreal development environment. "You can see some examples already on Google's AR Experiments showcase, and it looks like Epic Games, Niantic (the maker of Pokemon Go) and Wayfair are already on board."
This is a detailed analysis and c riticism of the 'information ecosystem' metaphor. The authors argue that human societies are not ecosystems and that the use of the metaphor obscures important elements of communities and human interaction. For one thiing, quoting Richard Stallman, "“It is inadvisable to describe the free software community, or any human community, as an ‘ecosystem,’ because that word implies the absence of ethical judgment.” Additionally, the use of the 'ecosystem' metaphore does not capture the idea that data and markets are human constructions and are based in judgements and theories. "An ecosystem is not purposefully made by organisms for material exchange." Moreover, "To reduce an ecosystem to the human-made, such as an information ecosystem, denies possibilities of spiritualism and non-quantifiable relationships that are found in nature." Good article. Set aside some significant time for it.
The answer to the question in the headline is 'because you're going to have to continue to upgrade your skills and development after graduation.' As the article says, "It's not just the fact that you need the extra training after school, but the shelf life of your knowledge is also significantly shorter" (this is the same poll as reported here yesterday, but with a newer press release (5 page PDF) and as usual the newspaper does not link to the original source). But rather than question the need for such high fees, the article is essentially an advertisement for Registered Education Savings Plans (RESP). "Two in five Canadian students entering PSE say that they have no savings and two-thirds do not have an RESP." The reason for that isn't that they're careless, despite what the article suggests. The reason is that you can't save tens of thousands on minimum wage employment. You cannot save your way to prosperity if you're poor.
This newsletter is sent only at the request of subscribers. If you would like to unsubscribe, Click here.
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter? Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list. Click here to subscribe.
Copyright 2017 Stephen Downes Contact: email@example.comThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.