The hashtag to follow on this is #openwrapping. We had another announcement today of a publisher taking OER and wrapping commercial software and services around them, thus effectively enclosing the open resources. "Intellus, acquired by Macmillan last year, provides access to the first and only easily curated collection of open educational resources (OER) and academic library materials, enabling educators to easily select and deliver free and low-cost course materials to their students, all through the school’s LMS."
Mostly I think this is a really bad guide, but it's bad in some interesting ways. One is the distinction between achievement and accomplishment Marc Prensky talked about last week. The suggestions here recognize achievement - "get 50 headshots" or "play the game for 10 hours" - which are simple accumulation measures, rather than actions that produce tangible good outside the learning environment. Another is the emoloyment of competition in recognizing learning, which may work in some cultures but will make people uncomfortable in many others (including probably my own). Finally, the suggestion of rewards can be a good idea (and can backfire) but I liked the idea of "a sit-down with your CEO." Again, though, maybe not for everyone.
This is an interesting look at artificial intelligence in education (at least, a very traditional classroom-based education) but you have to read the article very closely to distinguish between what the systems will do and what the systems currently do. This is important because there is some distance between them. For example, "The algorithms driving AI can be trained to detect when a learner is struggling and what caused them to struggle, or when they are bored and what caused their boredom" is something that can be done, but isn't yet. So is this: "More advanced use of AI can involve the employment of complicated computer-vision algorithms to analyze facial expressions, such as boredom and distractedness." What exists now? "AI can currently relieve pain points by helping with record-keeping and with the selection and recommendation of resources for learners to use."
I haven't read the book (and probably won't unless there's an open access version) but this assertion is interesting. "This book is about how educational data are produced and for what purposes, and about the technologies and companies that generate and process it. And it’s about fantasy. A ‘big data imaginary’ of education is not just hype dreamt up in Silicon Valley, but a normative vision of education for the future shared by many." Se also Audrey Watters, The Weaponization of Education Data.
Copyright meets artificial intelligence. Who owns the product when one part is responsible for the digital input or data used by an AI, while another cerated the AI? For example, "Alex Reben developed and posted to YouTube, "Deeply Artificial Trees", an art piece powered by machine learning, that leveraged old Joy of Painting videos." The Bob Ross estate issued a take-down order. But "If a human can learn from a copyrighted book, can a machine learn from [it] as well?" Good question. We need to be careful, lest these things we learn in our education become the property of content publishers.
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.