In this post Jenny Machness shares "notes from watching Sally Wiggins’ video introducing Discourse Analysis." there's not a lot of detail, but just enought to be useful, as she distinguishes between five types of discourse analysis: conversation analysis, discursive psychology, critical discursive psychology, Foucauldian discourse analysis, and critical discourse analysis. She also links to a number of other course participants' blog postgs about this unit. Image: Rudy Banuta.
Three part series (part one, part two, part three) that ought to be called "What are success and failure in learning?" The first part looks at different definitoons of success and failure in business and the military. You can skip this part. The second part talks about "success" in hospitals (about which I don't think Americans are in a position to judge) and begins the discussion of schools. It comes together in the third part. "If only policymakers, practitioners, and parents agreed upon what 'success' and 'failure' mean for schooling," he writes. This is in my view the single reason why most education reserach is futile. There are different points of division: what counts as success accordubg to left or right; measures of success applied to all or some (usually lower-class) schools; and the changing mission of tax-supported schools.
There are two parts to this post. The first is the statement of the problem: "Social media platforms may extend global participation and can be a force for better understanding but often emotions trump reason in an online world of constant outrage..., as these tribal forces are extended by the internet, we see a reversal of democracy into tyranny under populist demagogues." The second is the proposed solution: "open democratic structures enable transparent design which yields humanity-centred progress which continues to serve democracy." I see something like this as possibly necessary, but certainly not sufficient. Openness is only one attribute of a successful society. When we describe "democratic structures" we need to be clear that we mean more than just voting.
I think that when the author writes "“Now we think it’s an individual purchase” and "anyone can afford it" they're living in a different economic reality than 99% of the world. But it is nonetheless true that the 2500 CAD device is a lot cheaper and more portable than any alternative, even if it will only appeal to the gold-plated iPhone X set. And it points the ay to devices that help you manage your own health (and by implication, your own education) on an ongoing and convenient basis. Now, what would be really great would be a cure for whatever the device detects.
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: firstname.lastname@example.orgThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.