I've read reports describing all four of these causes, so it's not true that Stanford researchers have "identified" them, only that they've "listed" them. That said, I do appreciate their efforts to create a standard method of measuring the phenomenon, which they call the the Zoom Exhaustion & Fatigue Scale (ZEF Scale). The survey, however, measures only online videoconferences (not just Zoom), and does not compare the responses with how fatiguing in-person meetings are for different people. This is important, because people respond to in-person meetings differently, and my own experience is that desktop videoconferencing is a lot less fatiguing than in-person meetings. (Other researchers should take note of the importance of institutional marketing for their work, and the use of open access publications and tools to help push their research forward).
I remember ever-so-clearly that when the IMS Learning Design specification was introduced at a conference in Vancouver in 2003, complete with the actor-role metaphor it employed, I asked, "what about improv?" In this sort of theatre, made famous by companies such as Loose Moose, there are no predefined scripts or roles. People create these on the fly, according to their own interests and needs. This, it seemed to me then (and still does today) leads to more authentic learning. There hasn't been much written about the ideas over the years, but this article contributes with a selection of improvisational games. There's an almost unlimited supply of ideas out there - everything from exercises in overcoming obstacles to simple scenarios like visiting the dentist to improv warm-up games. And if you're thinking about improve, it's useful to follow these four rules: say yes, say yes and, make statements, and, there are no mistakes. I would add a fifth: it's about fun and being funny.
"I began to see the words and ideas of far-right extremists being repeated back to me as truth," says Stephanie Wescott, and this should be worrisome for educators of all stripes. How to respond? Wescott attempts to equip students "with the skills and knowledge to not only understand how persuasive language positions them as an audience, but also the deeper, more complex layers of bias and political leanings that underpin the media." One way to get at this, says Peter Greste in a review of Kid Reporter is to take "a deep dive into the kind of approach that experienced journalists would be expected to bring to their craft... to not only question and confirm basic facts, but also to think about things like the motives of the people presenting information; its context and purpose; the difference between opinion, fact and analysis." As its authors write, "“One of the best ways to learn about the media is to become a media creator yourself. If you know how to find accurate information for your own news story, you are far more likely to know if another person’s work is based on facts."
This is really just a product placement in Michael Feldstein's blog plugging a service developed by friends of his, in an ad for an upcoming webcast, which I would normally just ignore, but the beta demonstration page for CourseGateway illustrates an interesting and important point about ed tech. And it's this: if you look at the website, there are two types of product: courseware, or instructional tools. And for many people, this is what counts as ed tech. Maybe, if we stretch the definition a bit, we might allow content presentation environments like the 'LMS integration' category CourseGateway provides. But now (and think about the post on TikTok I just presented), where are the creativity tools? The picture of ed tech we are presented by CourseGateway is of technology that offers a passive engagement, on the part of both instructors and students. But we should think of ed tech as so much more.
This is a very short post highlighting the purpose of the Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which is to "eliminate the use of journal-based metrics, such as Journal Impact Factors, in funding, appointment, and promotion considerations" and to "assess research on its own merits rather than on the basis of the journal in which the research is published." I am, needless to say, in favour.
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 2021 Stephen Downes Contact: firstname.lastname@example.orgThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.