I can't really resist posting this: the Canada School of Public Service has issued a call for proposals for "a Next Generation Digital Learning Environment (NGDLE)... delivered via the Software as a Service (SaaS) model, hosted as a Protected B, Medium Integrity, Medium Availability (PBMM) cloud-based solution." I am not involved in this in any way, neither as a bidder or an evaluator. But it is still with interest, given my previous work with CSPS, that I observe the results.
This is a video from the recent Creative Commons summit in Portugal. The two speakers talk about their fathers and about their family history from the perspective of colonialism and the slave trade. It takes a while to get to the point, but be patient, because the background puts it into context. One question they ask us to ask is, "whose knowledge is missing?" and "what knowledge do we not have, or choose not to know?" about the past. And they directly question whether the colonizer's mentality continues to exist in places like Wikipedia, where in order to be included a Brazilian author must consent to licensing terms that allow her image to be used to sell breakfast cereal without her knowledge or consent. And what are you doing to help those without a voice to be heard (without being exploited in the process)?
I still think my old Nine Rules for Good Technology is the best guide for making technology decisions. The contrast to that approach, though, is this guide. What's the difference? This guide is thoroughly entrenched in existing practice - your selection of technology will be directly based on what you already do and what you already know (or think you know). Anything else - like, say, science - is merely "the lens" through which you make your decision. My Nine Rules, by contrast, focus on selecting technologies according to their affordances, and will result in a certain amount of serendipity and new discovery. As new technologies should.
Good well-reasoned article interpreting PISA testing results in the light of differences in socio-economic status. The reasoning, and the conclusions, are in line with my own thinking. Lien Pham writes, "Resources are important, but just because a school has a wide variety of resources doesn’t mean all of its students will benefit from those equally... policy attention to improve educational inequality should place student agency and diversity at the forefront, rather than focussing on resources with the assumption that all students will be able to access them in similar ways with similar outcomes."
The original purpose of higher education was to equip the ruling class to continue being the ruling class. This requires promulgating a set of beliefs and institutions that are anathema to an open and democratic society. Today, those beliefs and institutions are being called into question, and rightly so. This may cause higher education to become less popular in some quarters. If so, too bad.
This is a review of Joseph LeDoux's The Deep History of Ourselves: The Four-Billion-Year Story of How We Got Conscious Brains. I haven't read this, but his Synaptic Self is high on my recommended list. This review isn't as kind as it could be, suggesting that LeDoux is going beyond his area of expertise. The book offers "a natural history of brains as they developed the capacity to create the elements of the human mind, focusing mainly on the emergence of emotions, memory and consciousness." If LeDoux isn't qualified to offer such an account, I don't know who is.
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 2019 Stephen Downes Contact: email@example.comThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.