Originality in arts vs. sciences: I disagree with Neil deGrasse Tyson.

Edit: Title changed – See comments below.

Starry Night by Vincent Van Gogh

Maria Popova at Brainpickings posted a video recently of Neil deGrasse Tyson commenting on how creativity and originality work differently in the sciences and arts. I think Tyson is wrong. There are a lot more similarities between the sciences and arts than Tyson suggests and I think the perceived differences have more to do with an idealization of the arts and a fundamental misunderstanding of what the arts are and how artists work.
Continue reading

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

The iPhone is 5 years old! So, what’s up?

It has been 5 years today since the first iPhone appeared. Although not the first smartphone, the iPhone undeniably launched the smartphone market as we know it today, and it’s been an astounding 5 years, to say the least. So, what’s going on now? Pew’s Kathryn Zickuhr has pulled together some recent data (slides 25-31 below) that provides food for thought.

Some of the more interesting stuff:

  • Smartphone ownership is just slightly higher for minority adults than white adults.
  • These devices are also more likely to be minority adults’ main source of Internet access. Same goes for all youth.
  • Interestingly, the data presented suggests that smartphone ownership amongst teens is only about one third that of young adults. However, the data on teens is one year older than the other data. Given how quickly technology is changing today and prices going down, I wonder what that looks like today?

What could all of this mean?

  • Smartphones seem to be narrowing some of the digital divides that have been prevailent in the US. Do smartphone users use the Internet differently than broadband and dial-up users? If so, is our thinking about what an “Internet user” is reflecting the reality?
  • Young adults seem to not see a need for traditional broadband Internet access, making do with their smartphone access. How relevant is it to teach technology to tomorrow’s young adults by seating them in front of a desktop or laptop computer?
  • The smartphone digital divide is age-based. Why are older people skipping smartphones? What kind of services are/will they miss out on? Is their late adoption hindering development?
Posted in ICTs, Information Society, Internet, Leapfrogging development, Technology foresight | Leave a comment

Institutions do change in response to technology. Just not the right change…

Richard Noss, professor at the Institute of Education, University of London, has an article up on the “Centre for Education Research and Policy’s” website where he puts forth two claims:

  1. We lack technology constructed specifically to support learning.
  2. Educational institutions have not changed in response to technological development.

I disagree with both of these claims. I also find it frustrating that both of these claims are likely to be met with widespread agreement because they are indicative of some of the real problems regarding technology and education. The first is that there is, and has been for a long time, an abundance of technology specifically intended to support learning. The second is that education has changed in response to technological development, but those changes are not of the type that Noss (and I) would like to see. Continue reading

Posted in Education, ICTs, Information Society, Internet, Knowledge development, Technology foresight | Leave a comment

Microsoft (finally) joins the tablet party! Initial reaction: So what?

Mighty Microsoft (MS) has finally jumped into the fray with their Surface “tablet” computer. It’s a somewhat unusual gesture – MS has tended to leave the hardware side of things to other manufacturers. Some commentators have suggested that the Surface is indicative of an inkling of frustration on MS’s part towards its hardware partners who have left MS coughing in the clouds of Apple & Google’s mobile dust. So what does MS do? It invents… Wait for it… A KICKSTAND! Color me underwhelmed.

Here’s what I see when I look at the Surface: A notebook computer that you can pretend is a tablet by manipulating some amazingly engineered hinges. Softwarewise, we can expect it to have all of the goodies that are worthy of a dinosaur of yesteryear: MS Office, Exchange, Outlook. This will be an attractive option for those who have still not figured out the Cloud and who complain about the lack of MS Word and the quirkiness of getting contacts to sync with Outlook on the iPad. In a nutshell, it offers the illusion of change for those who don’t want too much change.

I’m not seeing how the Surface meets Seth Godin’s criteria of remarkability. Looks like the population in Zuneville might be increasing sometime in the near future.

Posted in Education, ICTs, Leapfrogging development, Technology foresight | 5 Comments

Are cell phones really distractive? Labeling for avoidance in dynamically conservative educational systems

I think that there’s no doubt that the increasingly rapid development of information and communication technologies (ICT) is one of the most significant factors driving change in education today. This is evident, not only in the many attempts to find ways to integrate technology in education, but also in the many ways that educational systems battle against technology, ex. banning students’ cell phones and other personal devices. Donald Schön coined a term to describe how systems resist change that I think aptly describes how technology is viewed in educational systems – educational systems are “dynamically conservative” when it comes to technology. Dynamic conservatism describes the way that a system resists change. Schön’s point is that systems do not passively resist change; they don’t just sit back and pretend that the change isn’t happening. They actively resist change, or to use Schön’s words, they “fight like mad to remain the same”. One of the ways they do this is by creating contexts and meanings that minimize the apparent significance of the forces driving change or, in extreme cases, render them absurd. I think that this is exactly what educational systems have done in regards to personal ICT devices, such as cell phones, iPods, etc. Educational systems have singled them out and labeled them “distractive” to avoid having to change to accommodate them. This becomes apparent when we consider how technologies in general are viewed in educational systems compared to how personal ICT devices are viewed. Continue reading

Posted in Education, ICTs, Information Society, Internet, Leapfrogging development, Technology foresight | 3 Comments

You call that a history of Open Educational Resources?!?

An infographic on the history of open educational resources (OER) recently published by Course Hero has been making rounds on the intertubes. It’s an interesting overview of some key developments and milestones regarding OER but misses many major points. Want to help compile a real history of OER? Add your missing milestones in the comments!

To start us off, here are two glaring omissions:
1. The defining of “learning objects” and related standardization efforts in the mid- to late 1990s. These efforts promoted, and raised considerable interest in, sharing of educational materials, both digital and non-digital. Around the turn of the century, I was aware of several efforts to construct databases around the standardization of learning objects (ex. IMS, LOM, SCORM) that were intended to make educational materials freely available to broad audiences. There is no doubt that, although the term “open educational resources” was not used, these were major steps in proving the concept of openly shared educational resources and raising awareness and interest in the possibilities of such endeavors.

2. The creation of the Creative Commons licensing schemes in the early 2000s. Many of the efforts to openly share educational resources using the standards formulated in the late 1990s were not the raging success that had been envisioned, i.e. vast amounts of high-quality educational material easily and freely accessible online. In many cases, this was largely due to disagreements and confusion about authors’ rights. In some projects that I was closely affiliated with or knew very well, teachers rightly questioned why they should make the products of their hard work freely available with no assurances about how they would be used and no assurances that they would even receive minimal credit for creating them. Creative Commons changed all of that by providing licensing schemes that are, simple, recognizable, well-known, well understood, and enforceable.

Course Hero’s infographic is interesting in that it might get people to think about significant milestones in the development of OER, but as a useful history, it falls short. If it’s useful at all, it is perhaps as a starting point for constructing a real history of OER. I suspect that the point of the infographic is more to advertise Course Hero’s recently launched online courses (the last “milestone”) than providing a concise history of OER.

Posted in Education, ICTs, Internet, Knowledge development | 4 Comments