This morning’s newspaper (1/28/2014) had a “tech quote” from Knightscope CEO William Li, whose company sells robotic security guards:

There are 7 billion people on the planet, and we’ll soon have a few billion more, and law enforcement is not going to scale at the same rate; we literally can’t afford it.

Li wants people to (1) imagine how to live more safely on a crowded planet, and (2) invest in his company.

Modeling and teaching what it means to be educated is another way to live more safely on a crowded planet. For those of us who are educators, the choice is ours. We can continue to ignore the six virtues, or we can make them the foundation for graduating a more educated citizenry.

If we ignore them, Li will be wealthy and his robotic security guards will be happy (if properly programmed). The rest of us will live in fear. I love irony.

Technology Crap

This morning’s newspaper has an advertisement that shows bored business people in a conference room. The man on the left is looking down; the man in the center has his head on the table; and the woman on the right looks disgusted.

Beneath the picture the text reads:

Don’t let an outdated conference room limit the impact your organization can have on all of its audiences.

Cut the Crap

Nobody in a boring meeting says, “This meeting needs modern technology to have a greater impact on me and our audiences.” But that is the “pitch” in the ad.

And that is the same “pitch” educators make when they argue that disinterested students become interested, when teachers use smart boards instead of chalkboards, when students read ipads instead of books, or when computer-based simulations replace role plays.

Just like business people who want a shared purpose for their meeting, students want a shared purpose for their learning. Purpose makes learning relevant and important, not the tools that are used.

When educators say schools need modern technology to generate student interest, they really mean students who are interested in the purpose of a lesson benefit from using modern technology. Those who are not interested won’t care what tools are used — just like the people in the newspaper ad.

If modern technology improves the interest of those who are already interested in learning, what educational problem does it solve?

Recently, NPR hostess Diane Rehm discussed “Wait: The Art and Science of Delay,” with author Frank Partnoy.  At the end of the show the discussion turned to the technologies that demand our attention:

Rehm

And here’s a final posting on Facebook from Donna who says, “Personally, I’m no longer a multitasker. I’m tired of rushing and being rushed. I value my quality of life more at this point than, quote, ‘getting stuff done for the sake of being productive.’ I think I’m finding a good balance between productivity and procrastination. Thank you to Frank Partnoy for addressing the social mania for getting things done.”

Partnoy

Well, that’s beautifully expressed. And I think it’s a hard lesson for all of us to learn, but I learned a bunch about it researching “Wait.” And I hope that it will help other people to achieve the balance that she just mentioned.

The NPR announcer then said, “Visit drshow.org for audio archives, transcripts, podcasts and CD sales.”

I love irony.

This week’s TIME magazine reported on the Khan Academy.  Irony drips from Salman Khan’s claim to being an education outsider (page 41):

I think there’s an advantage to being an outsider–I am not colored by the dogma of the Establishment.

Really?

Cut the Crap

Dear Salman:

You ARE the Establishment. Continue reading →

With Facebook going public we have been inundated with reports about how social media (Facebook, Twitter, Tumbler, Linked In, etc.) are revolutionizing how we communicate. Two recent NPR programs featured guests making the following claims. (I can’t remember the programs. I was in the car.)

1. “Social media are revolutionizing how we communicate”  — Really?

Cut the Crap

They are not. We have communicated via text since the invention of writing, through music since the playing of musical instruments, and through images since the invention of photography.  Those were revolutionary inventions. Facebook and Twitter allow us to share in these formats WITHOUT being social.

2.  “Social media (Facebook) are changing teenage life”  — Really?

A Stanford professor found that teenagers are lonely, even though they spend a lot of time “presenting themselves” on Facebook — posting pictures and stories, constantly changing their order and their “presentation.”

Cut the Crap

No change here. Teens have always been self-absorbed and lonely.  By the way, teens have always bullied, too. (I am not excusing it.) We now call it cyber-bullying, but it is what teens have always done, just with another tool.

3.  “Social media are ubiquitous; but, we are not more social”  — Really?

Cut the Crap

Calling something “social” does not make it so. Technology writers had to find an appealing name for a new technology. They called it “social media” because nobody would use it, if they called it “narcissistic media.” There is nothing “social” about social media. Facebook, Twitter, and the others make life better in some ways; but “social” life is not one of them.