Roger’s – just in time stories insight – was a huge resonate.
The app resonates with his work as well.. what does the person learn from the machine, in order to improve.
XTOL (Experiential Teaching Online) was founded by Cognitive Science visionary Professor Roger Schank, based on the beliefs that students learn best by doing – by performing authentic work in the context of realistic tasks — and that the best way to teach is via one-on-one mentorship. XTOL has developed a solution that makes mentored, “learn-by-doing” pedagogy both feasible and financially viable at all levels of instruction. XTOL’s mission is to provide universities with the capability to deploy experienced-based courses, certificates, and degree programs that are far superior to the current crop of online offerings.
Our education system was designed to create intellectuals. In the U.S., it was designed by the President of Harvard (in 1892). He wasn’t interested in the average person. He was interested in the elite who would attend Harvard.All this must stop. We need to focus on getting the general population to be able to think clearly. This does not mean teaching algebra and chemistry and pretending that such things teach clear thinking. It means having students practice making decisions and understanding the consequences of those decisions. It means having them come to a conclusion about something they care about by learning how to examine evidence. It means having them learn to create a plan that will help them get what they want and then executing that plan. The average person does not need to read Descartes no matter how much we rationalize to ourselves that Descartes said some things that might be of use to the average person.
Teaching Minds: How cognitive science can save our schools
The response to my last outrage has been enormous. But I see that people can’t get over the idea of teaching subjects let alone think that some particular subject we teach in high school matters.
We have all gone to school. We all know that school is organized around academic subjects like math, English, history and science. But why?
It is not easy to question something that everyone takes for granted. It is especially not easy when the very source of all our concerns in education can be easily traced to this one decision: to organize school around academic subjects. How else might school be organized? There is an easy answer to this: organize school around cognitive processes. In 1892, when the American high school was designed, we didn’t know much about cognition. Now we do. It is time to re-think school.
School, at every age, needs to be designed around these processes, since it is through these processes that everyone learns. Academic subjects are irrelevant to real learning. They are not irrelevant to the education of academics of course. But, how many people really want to need to become experts in the academic fields?
Here is a list of twelve critical thinking processes. These processes are as old as the human race itself. The better one is at doing them the better one survives:
Twelve cognitive processes that underlie all learning are:
1. Prediction: determining what will happen next
2. Modeling: figuring out how things work
3. Experimentation: coming to conclusions after trying things out
4. Values: deciding between things you care about
1. Diagnosis: determining what happened from the evidence
2. Planning: determining a course of action
3. Causation: understanding why something happened
4. Judgment: deciding between choices
1. Influence: figuring out how to get someone else to do something that you want them to do
2. Teamwork: getting along with others when working towards a common goal
3. Negotiation: trading with others and completing successful deals
4. Description: communicating one’s thoughts and what has just happened to others
All of these processes are part of a small child’s life as well as a high functioning adult’s life. Education should mean helping people get more sophisticated about doing these things through the acquisition of a case base of experience. Teaching should mean helping people think about their experiences and how to think more clearly about them. Unfortunately, education and teaching rarely means either of these things in today’s world.
Creating an exciting and enjoyable educational experience for students is important at all levels of schooling. Lecturing and learning by the accumulation of facts cannot possibly be of educational value.
via (2013) milo teaches mira
[click link to see video of the cannon ball lesson…]
we don’t need learning theories, testing, teacher evaluation, or help for kids who can’t learn
we also don’t need classrooms
we just need one on one attention to help kids do what they express an interest in doing
from Roger’s socratics arts site:
Introducing the Goal-Based Scenario Tool (GBS Tool)
Socratic Arts is pleased to announce the launch of our GBS Tool, which allows universities, companies and organizations to develop courses that, unlike other online courses, offer students an immersive, meaningful experience that gives them job-ready skills.
somehow when we do school, we don’t provide experiences.. instead we provide algebra, physics, etc, and very little affect memory.
he asked – how many learned the quad equation, how many can balance a chemical equation, nobody
that’s not learning, that’s schoolwe don’t forget our experiences. we forget info that is drilled into us.memory guides comprehension, the mind is an expectation device
learning occurs in the context of failed expectations
failure is critical to learning, Dewey, etc, which failures matter?
memory isn’t functioning the way school thinks it is.teaching is good advice delivered just in time, not lessonsPele – everything is practice
temporarily memorizing is not learningwhat should people be practicing at?
math – i don’t use it
listen to lectures – no, but it does take practice
what should you be practicing?
learn how to experiment ought to be what school is about
we all conduct experiments on a daily basis. we just don’t notice
talkingwe all have the same goals.. everyone has their set of plans to fulfill goalsonly reason teaching doesn’t work, teaching teaches the conscious
unconscious drives us
factual knowledge is totally unimportant
we have this idea that it matters
1990 encyclopedia britanica going to be dead, they thought i was a nutcuriosity drives learning, if you’re not curious, you’re not going to learn
very few people are curious about algebra, but some are, i was, but soon found out a lot of it wasn’t useful
we learn by watching
really good teachers are not so important, nice to havejust in time instruction,
we are really good at story telling, we remind each other of stories, we have been telling stories to each other in every culture, we are set up to remember storieshis dragon story… learning things that you don’t use, so that when they need skills, they don’t remember them, never learned them
why aren’t we teaching people how to think for themselves
story centered curriculum – live a fictional life – the one you are planning to dobarcelona – experiential mba program
what should they know: 7 courses, but also the cognitive processes that are going on during them
ie: diagnosis, something we do constantly all the time..
modeling and judgment
online course all about production, not about memorizing anythingreading books is not the point, what’s most important is to try to do things and have experts available to help you1905 – stanford – school should be factories, make factory workers
1889 – commissioner of ed – in dark, airless places, power to withdraw from physical event
school and training were designed so that people would not think for themselves1) liberal arts ed
2) manual trainingsomeone will decide to provide global experiential learning that is neither academic nor mindless training that teaches people to think in the context of employable skills, there should be 100’s of them
software engineering program..film is huge – they are stories… we will always tell storiesdevelop the best stuff in a learn it by doing style.I have been named one of the world’s top ten movers and shakers in e-Learning. The nomination was in part due to my collaboration with La Salle’s Business Engineering School to build a learning-by-doing virtual MBA program.edge – scroll down to Roger’s suggested dangerous idea
kevin kelly on page 4
clay shirky on page 2
douglas rushkoff on page 6don’t worry – he will go to college – post
What would this high school produce? Happy, employable, kids who could choose further study or simply go to work.
perhaps. and certainly better than what we have. but we found that if part of the plan is that you must stick to something – even if you originally picked it – might not be the best scenario. year 1. the freedom/bravery of changing your mind seems to matter.
learning is conversation
2 convos ness
on reading.. july 2015
First, let’s ask why Wikipedia exists. In part, it exists because Encyclopedia Britannica couldn’t keep up. But also, it exists because we live a in a world where we don’t know whom to ask. I get asked nearly every day what certain words mean or what certain ideas are about. I am asked because the people I am interacting with know I might know and know that I am always happy to teach. But mostly I am asked because people know that I give quick short answers to their questions. When you have someone to ask, you ask. Reading is the alternative when there is no one to ask.
[..]..we have had a lot of practice at attempting to remember what we read. That practice is called school. We read. We study. We memorize. We take tests. And we are somehow all convinced that we have remembered what we read.Every year I would ask my students on the first day of class at Yale and Northwestern if they could pass the tests they took last year, right now. No one ever thought they could. They studied. They listened. They memorized. And then they forgot. We don’t learn by reading nor do we learn by listening.
I said that I had never actually read an instruction manual and that they haven’t actually been around for very long in human history. When a young boy wanted to learn to hunt lions he didn’t read the instruction manual, nor did he take a class. Throughout human history we have learned by watching someone older than ourselves, trying to copy that person, trying to be part of the team, and then trying things for yourself, and asking for help when we have failed. It is not that complicated. This is what learning has always looked like. And then, someone invented instruction manuals and we all forgot what we knew about learning. We replaced human mentors by Power Point lectures and asking by reading.[..]When you have someone to ask, you ask. Reading is the alternative when there is no one to ask.[..].. and plus – you can skim[..]“For this invention will produce forgetfulness in the minds of those who learn to use it, because they will not practice their memory. Their trust in writing, produced by external characters which are no part of themselves, will discourage the use of their own memory within them. You have invented an elixir not of memory, but of reminding; and you offer your pupils the appearance of wisdom, not true wisdom, for they will read many things without instruction and will therefore seem to know many things, when they are for the most part ignorant and hard to get along with, since they are not wise, but only appear wise.” (Phaedrus 274c-275b)
Roger Carl Schank (born 1946) is an American artificial intelligence theorist, cognitive psychologist, learning scientist, educational reformer, and entrepreneur.
gap year academy
Bob Dylan, IBM, Watson and the lies surrounding massive text processing http://t.co/ZaH1Ujt7ca
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/656062609620340736
processing massive amounts of text and discovering statistical patterns is not the same as understanding the text and Watson is certainly not learning anything more than what words show up together. IBM concocted one of those “conversations” between Dylan and Watson which sounds like someone might understand what the other is saying. It is all an attempt to find a use for Watson to help in processing massive amounts of text. But, as I said in an earlier column, people don’t really learn by reading and computers certainly don’t. Watson is not an AI machine no matter how often IBM says it is.
UTexas offers data analytics academy we designed ut.dataanalyticsacademy.com
Learning and Technology buzz words examined in order to enable massive peer to peer learning https://t.co/EY4W9VwyzB
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/662671261370351616Learning hasn’t changed. We all (including other mammals) learn in the same way, by trying things out, and hopefully getting one-on-one teaching from a parent or mentor when we are in trouble and need help. Learning has always been like that and always will be like that. It is school that needs to change, not learning. Learning needs technology to the extent that it can transform school- based ideas into the way we always learned before there was technology and school. But, silly me. I keep thinking all these people who work on learning would know better than to copy school and then think they can improve it by adding technology and cute buzz words. I was wrong.
He says we should get over the idea that schools are supposed to teach. The basic idea should be to make children think clearly and any good teacher can do that. “Do we teach kids planning? No, we don’t. But if you put them in a position where they need to plan something, they will end up doing it. What we need to teach them is reason from evidence.”
Schank says there should be alternative schools funded by governments, philanthropists and others — with a different curriculum including subjects like kitchen design, professional athlete, etc.
He says if a government can spend millions of dollars on building bridges and other infrastructure, why can’t it spend money on alternative schools that can effectively change the schools of the world.
perhaps .. we need to get over the idea of schools
“Learning is about experimentation. A six-year-old should do things he/she finds interesting, explore new things, figure out things. Schools need to help children learn how to experiment properly.”
? experiment properly..?
from the ege 2016 question
We are in the keyword stage of advertising. We are being told that this is science; IBM’s Watson is doing deep learning. Don’t be fooled. It is all key word search and there is no science behind it. Directed advertising is all about keywords. Anything you type online is being tracked, by a machine that can count. No science going on.
So what is the good news?
Having someone (or something) track you might not such a bad thing. We like it when a map program knows where we are and we can figure out how to get where we are going. Many people like hook up sites that tell you who is near by whom you might like. But, here again, no science. There could be science. Hook up sites might figure out whom you might like who is near by and tell you what you have in common to discuss. Will this happen? We are not that far way from it. We would need computer that knew about you the way a friend does (as opposed to your web surfing habits).
or maybe better today… since most of us are not us..
Let’s move on to something more serious. My stomach hurts. I tell this to my wife and she suggests a medicine in the cabinet that she remembers I have used before and reminds me that it helped. Now, suppose that this was not my wife but a computer? Is it an ad? Does it matter? Can we do this. Yes. AI technology could easily employ models of people and there needs. (But, today, we are busy with key words.)
… It requires indexing stories the way people do to get reminded. We have programs that do this already. (But, sad to day, this is not on the agenda of commercial entities in AI just yet.)
Very soon AI programs will be good enough (not because they analyze key words or do “deep learning”) but because they can model situations and can match situations to what people have said about those situations. Imagine a video data base of hundreds of thousands of experts. Well “how would I search through all those stories?” is the natural question. We ask that question because searching is an everyday activity now and it has taught us to believe in search and every one selling AI espouses the usefulness of key words.
But it is not key words that will cause this breakthrough. There is too much information to search through and often what we need isn’t there in the first place. But this is not actually a search problem. It is a problem not unlike the getting the right ad to the right person at the right time problem. It is a question getting computers to have a model of what you are doing, what your goals are, and matching that to what help they might have to offer.
rev of everday life.. a story about people grokking what matters
… And, of course, they don’t have to actually be your friends. They can be the best and the brightest, pre-recorded and found with no effort just in time. We understand enough of the science to do this now, Maybe, soon we will get tired of ads and start working on important things in AI.
The concept of different “learning styles” is one of the greatest neuroscience myths https://t.co/9lc5M3AHNp
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/684016749927346176
The second most commonly believed myth was that left- or right-brain dominance affected learning
In December, Philip Newton, .., searched for “learning styles” articles freely available on research databases, to get a sense of the impression a teacher might get if they did a cursory search on the subject. He found that, though studies “do not really engage” with evidence showing that learning styles is a myth, 94% of current research papers start with a positive view of learning styles.
“Learning Styles do not work, yet the current research literature is full of papers which advocate their use.
Howard-Jones argues that it’s not a result of fraud, but of “uniformed interpretations of genuine scientific facts.” The assumption behind learning myths seems to be based on the scientific fact that different regions of the cortex have different roles in visual, auditory, and sensory processing, and so students should learn differently “according to which part of their brain works better.” However, writes Howard-Jones, “the brain’s interconnectivity makes such an assumption unsound.”
Neuromyths arise, Howard-Jones argues, partly due to the technical language barrier that makes understanding neuroscience papers difficult for non-experts, and due to oversimplification of complicated scientific ideas. These myths are then “promoted by victims of their own wishful thinking” who are sincere but deluded in their belief that some eccentric theory will “revolutionize science and society,” he writes.
over simplification of complicated ideas.. and/or over complication of simple ideas…
And these myths can flourish in cultures where beliefs about the brain are not subject to ongoing scientific scrutiny— it’s rare, after all, that a classroom’s teaching methods are rigorously and scientifically tested by an observer.
on marvin – i think i read somewhere roger saying marvin was perhaps his only hero.. can’t find it now.. but did find this..
A story to explain how I felt about Marvin Minsky. It was 1986. The Mets were playing the Red Sox. Me and my son Joshua had tickets and stayed at Marvin’s house since he didn’t live far from Fenway. Marvin didn’t like baseball. He made a snarky comment about Joshua Schank‘s “outfit.” (He was wearing a Met’s uniform.) When we returned from the game that night, Marvin was waiting for us. He had watched the entire game, so we could all discuss it.
feb 2016 – on obama saying everyone should learn to code:
What is it with people who decide what everyone should do?
Why is school so awful? Because people make statements like that and then enforce them. How would Mr Obama know what everyone should learn to do?
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/audreywatters/status/701078395610750976
Is IBM trying to kill off AI research by misusing the word “cognitive?” educationoutrage.blogspot.caLet’s start with a brief history of the word cognitive. The field of Cognitive Psychology began in the late 60’s. Until that time, oddly enough, “how the mind works” was not a subject studied in psychology. A journal with that name started about then and I published an article in that journal in 1972 in that journal’s 3rd volume.In 1977, I helped start the field ofCognitive Science in an attempt to join together people from disciplines other than psychology, all of whom cared about how the mind works. “Cognitive” meant:human thinking. When I started a company (1981) and called it Cognitive Systems. I was trying to say that the programs we built were modelled on human thinking.
I think that the human mind does many things and I want to know how it does them and I want to build computer programs that operate in the same way. I am interested more in people than in machines but I think that if we copied people on a computer we could have some machines that behave intelligently.
Do they think that Watson is imitating how people think in some way? I can’t believe that they think that either. No one has ever proposed that machines that can search millions of pages of text are smart. Matching key words, no matter how well you do it, is not even a human capability much less one that underlies the human ability to think.
When AI started, they were some major people associated with it, whom, of course I knew well. Marvin Minsky as interested in people first, machines second. Allan Newell was interested in people first and machines second, Herb Simon wanted to copy chess grand masters, rather than build chess playing machines that won by being fast at search. Even John McCarthy, with whom I never agreed about anything, was trying to copy how the mind worked. I once asked him “how can you believe that the mind happens to work using a logic system invented in the 19th century?” (McCarthy thought all knowledge representation could be done using Predicate Calculus.)
That phrase, knowledge representation, is the right thing to think about. It is the cornerstone of what AI was always all about.
We always wanted to get computers to be really helpful using everyday English backed by a great deal of knowledge of a given domain.
IBM is not trying to solve the problem I care about, which is getting access to knowledge that is easily comprehensible about problems everyday people actually have. A lot of that knowledge isn’t in any computer in the first place or is in academic journals, so all the key word search in the world really will not help the average person much.
“The Education Platform I wrote for Mr. Trump” https://t.co/ebphh6tcFl on @LinkedIn
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/7992240745474621441 -Common Core is a bad idea. It *reinforces the 19th century curriculum and **over emphasizes testing. It needs to be eliminated.
2 -One size fits all curricula are a bad idea. Students have different interests and should be allowed to pursue what interest them (*after the 3Rs are learned.)
3. We have the technological capability to *build **100’s of new ***curricula that would be delivered online with mentoring, to help kids get excited about going to school to learn skills they really want to learn.
ie: *facil (not build) ..**approaching the limit of ginorm small – 7 bn people just in time ness (not 100s)..***daily curiosity (not curricula.. rather help people find their people.. in the city. as the day..
perhaps we be brave enough to disengage from what’s irrelevant (ie: going to school to learn) from all the manufactured consent and voluntary compliance ness ness. perhaps we reimagine our broken feedback loop.
4. *Federal control over education policy is a bad idea. **Each state is different in many ways. Kids might want to study Oceanography in Florida, or Casino Management in New Mexico, or Aerospace Engineering in Kansas. The role of the federal government should be to ***fund the creation of such curricula and ****help find people who can build them after being requested to do so by a State.
me vs Mr PISA at OEB Dec1
Andreas Schleicher – OECD – France – (@schleicheroecd): pisa
roger: quit to be ed revolutionary
Andreas: the race between tech and skills and what creates value in econ.. need to get people to think for own and develop own skills..
13 min – A: if we talk about *owning the learning.. you have to have right strategies.. that’s why we have such low success rates in moocs.. because people haven’t mastered the fundamental learning strategies..
so .. don’t really *own learning.. own someone else’s mandate/concept/basics of learning…
15 min – A: today ..not about teaching you skills.. today the key is about you having the compass and the navigation skills.. how well do we do..ie: math.. we know how we all hate math in some form.. but we know that *numeracy skills are a very powerful predictor for many aspects of success in people..
so.. *success as defined by others.. those same people mandating basics..
very next words..
look at this data (with bar graph of numeracy skills)
even in a country like us you have almost 30%… 1/3 of young people who just don’t even know the most basic concepts.. *to think mathematically.. huge number of people being left out of this
oh my.. would love to know how that chart reflects *thinking mathematically..? or how andreas would define that.. or how much school et al has sucked that out of us.. ie: key to thinking mathematically is curiosity.. which an unharmed/un-vol-complianced 5 year old masters..
16 min – a: *why do i talk about it.. because those are the kinds of people who end up precisely in the kind of routine jobs that we are going to see to disappear
*because you (like most of world) are assuming/accepting money as os.. earning a living as natural/given
imagine if our why.. of talking/doing things.. was.. toward eudaimoniative surplus
A: there’s a direct relationship between the level of skills you have on those foundations and the type of work that you’re likely to end up with
perpetuating broken feedback loop
a: lifelong skills learning instead of stacking up qualifications
i don’t think you mean what you are saying..
a: link between skills and qualifications.. amazingly week.. here’s what we did.. we counted degrees people got and we directly looked at the *skills that they have
*according to what you are looking for.. and again.. 1\ you are looking at people who aren’t themselves and then 2\ judging their success by your earn a living ness success
17 min – a: this is the most depressing chart.. (shows literacy going down as age goes up)
does he realize the fake ness of charts..? silly question.. we’re all missing the fake ness of people.. making all stats ness.. so irrelevant.. and most of a’s talk including referencing a chart/stat of some sort
20 min – a: last point: high skill match.. when get job that pays lots
25 min – r: i was asked to answer the question.. who own’s the learning.. not you baby.. everybody but you..
(maybe ai can help)
r: singers know who owns learning.. (shows clip of – don’t stay in school – by Dave
oy.. to singers/musicians/artists.. (which i believe are all of us if free).. as brave ones we batter/slaverize.. et al.. ie: the juxta of patti as dylans prize.. the juxta of
or everything you learned in school is utterly useless to real life.. math hatred is big
so who owns learning.. harvard.. pick fav country/uni same thing.. how do they own it.. you’ll take 4 yrs of foreign language.. you’ll take …. you mean i can just take what i feel like learning..? no.. or you’re not getting into harvard.. does it matter about harvard.. ? yes.. because all 3000 colleges in us have same req’s.. harvard is leading the pack
i’m an advisor to a pakistani school system.. only question parents had was.. will you get our kids into oxford/cambridge.. as long as that’s the game.. the system is about something that doesn’t even exist anymore.. the intellectual who doesn’t need a job
harvard 1892 – president wrote down curriculum.. (same as today)
27 min – and we have so much testing.. that a kid is taught to get excited by a test … eliminating all testing would be a good place to start.. because when you test things.. you’re testing meaningless facts that you won’t remember ever again
28 min – i walked up to the director of the college board.. act.. and asked him the quad formula.. said i don’t know it.. i said.. but you’re requiring every child to know it
who owns learning: 1\ politicians 2\ testing co’s 3\ the state
30 min – not the first to say this.. immanuel kant.. saying experience over words blah blah.. and yet here i am lecturing to you.. which i don’t believe in. .. but reason i do it is same as reason you do it.. *very difficult to have the one on one convo with each of you that i would like to have..
convo w al on the web/tech .. allowing this.. disclosing pluralistic ignorance.. ness…
the only part of school system that isn’t broken.. where one on one convos happen.. the rest is just about money..
make sure we can save a lot of money by having 1000 people in the room and one person talking.. then moocs
public consensus always oppresses someone (s)
31 min – what is role of tech: *to enable us to build simulated experiences..
and/or *to facil curiosity/whimsy of 7bn.. by connecting us into those one-on-ones or at least tribe/affinity ish gatherings.. everyday..
not the first to come up with this..military.. air flight simulator.. in 50s… want simulations available..and mentors available..
i’ll be back when i need you again.. his daughter..
33 min – role of tech: build online learning – with mentor – that doesn’t suck… this is the role of ai in learning..
ai .. what i did until ai winter.. ie: no more money.. from over promising.. lies lies about ai.. ie: we can do this/that.. now i’m going back into it.. because now there’s money.. so maybe i can do something useful
just watched ben goertzel
34 min – on ibm commercial about watson learning about bob dylan.. missing that he was a protestor.. et al.. because just using words from lyrics… and then on watson on jeapordy.. missing because as he scanned google.. (which others couldn’t do) missed obvious meaning of an entry.. again.. by just capturing single words.. don’t have to be worried about ai.. just stupid ai
36 min – real ai: models human intelligence: humans can: get reminded of what they want to say (ie: when hear another story); tell stories that illustrate their point; decide to be funny (emotional); get annoyed/argumentative; convince somebody of something; help someone figure something out
37 min – real humans: real mentoring..
38 min – role of ai in online ed: just in time reminding; automated mentoring; critiques from observation; (starting) the conversation; direct memory access parsing;…. *this all depends on having built a project based learn by doing course in the first place..
40 min – can have online jit learning mentor if know exactly what you’re learning and exactly what you need to know now..
how about simply.. what are you curious about today..this minute..
41 min – *anticipate question that might be asked..
why.. why can’t we *just listen to the questions.. just in time listening..
42 min – came to roger to create cyber attack
43 min – the reason we’re doing the ai mentoring is because the pentagon wants to create 10 000 mentors all at once
44 min – my summary: teach people to do things (*we can build thousands of these) and give kids choices..
*why not build 7 bn plus.. as the day.. everyday.. share/host as lifebits..
asking.. what do you want to do/be.. # 1 answer in uk.. a fireman.. ok.. so let’s build a fireman curriculum..
same results when polled kids in ny.. so *why can’t we have kids do what they feel like doing..
because today.. *we have no idea what kids (by time school age) feel like doing.. we can’t not get out of the student/teacher mindset..
*we need to start building meaningful impactful learning experiences..
why..? why can’t we just listen/facilitate them.. assume they will happen/are happening
the.. we need to build ness.. goes into the realm of (what i know you’re against) someone else deciding what is meaningful/impactful/experiential/learning.. who’s owning it then
showed ed plan trumps people asked for (before they got fired)
can you learn a lot in casino management curric..? yes.. it’s a business.. about managing people
47 min – amount of money spent grading st tests in florida.. 300 mn a year
pisa is like the dept of ed.. saying that every country (rather than every state) has to teach same stuff..
49 min – q&a – no value in memorizing.. unless lyrics to song.. that’s not because of google.. what happens in life.. changes with every interaction..
creativida (@creativida111) tweeted at 7:00 AM – 14 Dec 2016 :
The change that I’m looking for is not going to happen overnight, but there is hope. – Roger Schank https://t.co/hS3Jbp0Whs @rogerschank (http://twitter.com/creativida111/status/809035303382122496?s=17)If the computer knew a semi-colon was missing, why didn’t it just put it in? This started the beginning of my hatred of computers.
trying to figure out how computers would understand typewritten sentences. It was only a matter of time until I inevitability discovered human memory.
People can actually understand sentences easily enough, but they can’t understand them without an experiential memory that enables them to relate what they are hearing to what they already know. I was trying to get the computer to hear a sentence and say what it meant without actually knowing anything about the world. This made no sense I soon realized. So I began to work on finding out what people know about the world, how they represent what they know in their memory, and how they change their memories in response to new experiences. This led me into a career in Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science.
I became less interested in making computers better, although I am still very interested in that. But, I became more interested in figuring out what makes people intelligent, and how people learn, than I am in getting computers to learn. So, that’s how I got to be somebody who is focused on human learning.
it’s my anger about the system that is in place that causes me to run around the world and trying to talk to people about the kind of changes we need to make.
I realized that most students weren’t interested in whatever I had thought up that morning. They were there to get good grades and graduate and move on. Nothing I was teaching them was relevant (except to the odd student).
School has become about credentials, about getting letters after your name.
like your talk vs mr pisa.. when you said.. we’ve never had a good president.. has school ever not been about credentials.. et al..? ordering a chaotic society..? because alive people are not orderly..?
it think both/all: presidency/school/et al.. not relevant to humanity.. so let’s not spend our energies on trying to fix them..
I didn’t want to be part of this system that failed to treat students as individuals. We can do better, so I quit being a professor and became a revolutionary. (Being a professor pays better.)
let’s truly be revolutionary then.. make even money irrelevant..
*The major impediment to the change we need is money. The change that I’m looking for is **not going to happen overnight, but there is hope. The hope is that the frustration of the people will eventually be heard. ***People tend to win when they complain enough to the government.
*but only money as temp placebo.. measuring transactions et al.. can’t be a part of a nother way to live.. where ie: people are free to learn/do/be whatever they want..
**i believe it could..
***what have we ever won..? (that our souls were craving)
They just try doing things and they ask for help. We need to implement that model of education: do it and get help
let’s do that.. just that.. let’s try a short plan for that..
There is only one answer about how to make the changes we seek: money. *We need to get money to build the alternative. I’ve gone to Congress in the United States to ask for that money and it made them laugh. I’ve gone to rich people to ask for the money we need and they usually say that they don’t really care about education.
**With enough money we can build individualized, learn by doing, mentored, education that allows anybody anywhere to learn what interests them…..**We have to build that aerospace engineering curriculum (and hundreds of others) and make sure some school system somewhere allows kids to take those curricula.
agree.. but only as temp placebo.. let’s get together on *this.. because.. i don’t believe we need **this..
I will be successful are the countries in say Latin America, or maybe Africa. Those kids are not going to Harvard (or its equivalent) anyway and they really would like to get a job, and develop businesses, and learn how to live in a healthy way, or raise their children well, or learn new skills. *We need to go where learning really is more the issue than credentials. As long as credentials are the first thing people think about with respect to education I can’t have an effect because I’m not a credentialing authority. So, first, *we need to find a country that really cares about its people and really cares about improving the welfare of its citizens.
i don’t these *that space/place exists.. 100% anywhere.. ie: kampala.. street children.. told they have to learn math to be educated..
we can’t keep looking/waiting for a place that isn’t looking for credentialing ness.. we need to model a nother way.. where credentials et al.. are irrelevant.. so people can see.. that thinking flies. . we need to simulate.. facilitating the chaos of free people..
*The first step is simply providing courses that lead to jobs.
that’s perpetuating a broken feedback loop.. eventually.. you will still have to ie: wait till the computer asks you to change the position of the semicolon..
To find the ideal learning environment look at any good home.
But, school exists for two simple reasons. First, *parents want to be rid of the kids for a good part of the day while they go to work or just to do something other than deal with their kid. Second, **not all parents would know how to do this well.
*parents want to be rid of earning a living… findings from be you house.. gershenfeld sel.. none of us are free if one of us is changed.. we have no idea what parents want.. if not free themselves..
**not true.. but it is true for parents/any-people who are not yet/truly free
What’s really going on in school is memorization and trying to not look like a fool by acting like an intellectual. It’s never been about jobs. *It should be about jobs.
hmm.. this might be it.. where we differ hugely.. would love to have a convo about this ..
The problem with all this advice is that it assumes that they know who he is and what he wants. *I have been listening to him all his life and I know that his real question is which of these jobs is on the path to running a subway system. This is not the question that his advisers are answering because they don’t understand him or his real goals.
*unless he changes his mind.. we need a system that gives us a do-over everyday at minimum.. where we are the ones listening deeply to our hearts/souls.. one based on a curriculum (if you must) of 2 convos a day.. 3 and 30.. that’s it.. the rest is up to you
Understanding your real desires is the most important step in making decisions in your life. The real question, for a teenage student, is what they want in life. Nobody can tell them that. But, we can help them seek answers.
eudaimoniative surplus.. not jobs.. we have to trust 100% .. that alive people is what we need
As an exercise, they could write down five things they want in life.
what about they just practice self-talk .. 3 min minimum.. everyday.. answering.. what are you curious about today.. and we listen to that.. we facilitate that.. as the day…[aka: not part\ial.. for (blank)’s sake…..this part is h u g e.. and what we’re missing.. because we can’t let go enough..]
Now ask if they know about those things really. You can’t say you’d like to be a lawyer if you don’t know what lawyers do on a daily basis.
these labels are killing us.. science of people.. ongoing stats/stories about fake people.. how many titles.. ie: lawyers.. are actually irrelevant to humanity.. ie: we have inspectors of inspectors and people making tools to inspect inspectors.. this is why we need to go deeper.. just.. what are you curious about today.. not lead.. with any ie: job titles/assumptions/expectations..
Start having conversations and stop teaching.
agreed.. two convos.. everyday.. no need for building currics.. just host stuff people learn on wikipedia style .. hosted life bits..
getting rid of the misplaced semi colon ness
convos/insight.. walking as wired (R).. so only need to model a nother way because we’re so intoxicated.. with how not to walk/be-us.. thinking..like someone learning to walk after an accident..
on talking as wired.. i’m thinking as a communal wiring.. (r) as wired by need others.. so in my mind.. either way.. gets to the a and a ness.. the 2 convos.. self and others.. ni ness
“Ten Questions for (and about AI)” https://t.co/jdwEw0s6GD on @LinkedIn
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/818863740108079106
Cognitive computing is not cognitive at all » Banking Technology bankingtech.com/829352/cogniti…
I explained about concepts underlying sentences and explained that sentences used words but that people really didn’t use words in their minds except to get to the underlying ideas and that computers were having a hard time with that.
Fifty years later, key words are still dominating the thoughts of people who try to get computers to deal with language
But still people promote key words because Google and others use it to do “search”. Search is all well and good when we are counting words, which is what data analytics and machine learning are really all about. Of course, once you count words you can do all kinds of correlations and users can learn about what words often connect to each other and make use of that information. But, users have learned to accommodate to Google not the other way around. We know what kinds of things we can type into Google and what we can’t and we keep our searches to things that Google is likely to help with. We know we are looking for texts and not answers to start a conversation with an entity that knows what we really need to talk about.
People learn from conversation and Google can’t have one.
It can pretend to have one using Siri but really those conversations tend to get tiresome when you are past asking about where to eat.
Rubin said Watson’s abilities “outthink” human brains in areas where finding insights and connections can be difficult due to the abundance of data.
“You can outthink cancer, outthink risk, outthink doubt, outthink competitors if you embrace this idea of cognitive computing,” she said.
Really? I am a child of the 60s and I remember Dylan’s songs well enough. Ask anyone from that era about Bob Dylan and no one will tell you his main theme was “love fades”. He was a protest singer, and a singer about the hard knocks of life. He was part of the anti-war movement. Love fades? That would be a dumb computer counting words. How would Watson see that many of Dylan’s songs were part of the anti-war movement? Does he say anti-war a lot? He probably never said it in a song.
he doesn’t mention Vietnam or Civil Rights. So Watson wouldn’t know that he had anything to do with those issues. It is possible to talk about something and have the words themselves not be very telling.
You can’t understand words if you don’t know their context.
Watson can’t draw real conclusions by counting words in 800 million pages of text.
I wrote a book called The Cognitive Computer in 1984.
I started a company called Cognitive Systems in 1981. The things I was talking about then clearly have not been read by IBM (although they seem to like the words I used.) Watson is not reasoning. You can only reason if you have goals, plans, ways of attaining them, a comprehension of the beliefs that others may have, and a knowledge of past experiences to reason from. A point of view helps too. What is Watson’s view on ISIS for example?
Dumb question? Actual thinking entities have a point of view about ISIS. Dog’s don’t but Watson isn’t as smart as a dog either. (The dog knows how to get my attention for example.)
I invented a field called Case Based Reasoning in the 1980s, which was meant to enable computers to compare new situations to old ones and then modify what the computer knew as a result. We were able to build some useful systems. And we learned a lot about human learning. Did I think we had created computers that were now going to outthink people or soon become conscious? Of course not. I thought we had begun to create computers that would be more useful to people.
Roger Schank (@rogerschank) tweeted at 6:46 AM – 15 Feb 2018 :
and he was sent over the edge by school obviously; not all bullied kids shoot people but they are all angry; time to get rid of school https://t.co/04qa44XazI(http://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/964133863940415489?s=17)
Roger Schank (@rogerschank) tweeted at 6:53 AM – 1 Mar 2018 :
“You are dying of kidney failure” a lesson about the current hype about AI and medicine https://t.co/Du2EPtQeb6 (http://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/969208906164637698?s=17)
One consistent problem with reporting on AI is that they say AI when they mean “a statistical algorithm.” ..t
Modern medicine is full of doctors who are already robotic. But good medicine is like any other subject that requires one to make judgements based on prior cases. You can follow rules, or you can think..t
simulated thinking ness
Years ago, in the last AI BS movement of the 1980’s, rule-based systems were all the rage
I responded to this expert system nonsense with the idea of case-based reasoning. I said that people reason from past experience, and they do not use rules. (A doctor can glibly give you a rule when asked, but that doesn’t mean that they use that rule in decision making. People are notoriously bad at understanding how their own minds work.).
The rule-based systems that caused the AI winter of the 1980’s and early 1990’s were promising to do something that people don’t do: to reason from rules..t.. Now, modern day “AI” is proposing that it can reason from massive amounts of data that the computer really doesn’t understand (just like my NYC Top Doctor did).
Dr. Radhakrishnan did something very weird. He asked and he listened carefully to my answers. Until computers can do that they will not replace human doctors (or anyone else who needs to think actually.)
what if they just listened to curiosities.. and used that data to facil/connect us.. maybe dr’s would even become irrelevant
The algorithms need to be seen as data analytics not as “AI.” In other words, current AI is only worthwhile if it can help people make better decisions.
what’s wrong with ed series.. this is part 3 – how to fix it.. 4 min video
the only think i did for him was let him do it..
so answer to ed .. is a thousand.. a hundred thousand choices
let’s try an unlimited.. ginorm small amount
deep dives into something you want.. you don’t have to do anything
eliminate all required curriculum.. offer choices..
we can do better today.. offering choices is just nicer.. but it’s still managing their days.. ie: it’s not letting them do whatever they want.. huge diff in energy.. ongoing ness.. et al..
it’s not about instruction. the model is the parental model.. which is.. i’m doing this and now i need some help
so we need to create things they can do and helpers who can help
why create things they can do..? is that how your son got hooked on subways..? did you create that experience for him..?
i’d say.. i’d say.. it was there.. and you set him free..
so let’s do that.. for 7 bn people.. (which created your helpers who can help.. even better.. tribsters doing it with)
get rid of the classroom.. i’d say get rid of the school.. except the primary purpose of the school.. we all know.. is daycare.. so no parent wants the school to be eliminated.. but you can create a school that doesn’t have classes/instruction.. it’s just a safe place to drop your kid off while he learns about subways
i don’t buy that.. i think parents want free as well..
What would happen if school wasn’t compulsory? .. We would have to invent hundreds of new curricula that students could choose between.
why couldn’t we just trust life..?
thinking we have to create/invent curricula is a big part of the problem..
Roger Schank (@rogerschank) tweeted at 5:49 AM on Mon, Jun 25, 2018:
coding teaches you to think; uh huh https://t.co/LMiQyiYU7z
coding teaches you to think; oops I meant algebra; no no, the humanities time to stop this nonsense; raccoons can think pretty well, I learned yesterday, when they scaled the fence, untied the string on the door to the coop, opened he lock, and ate the chickens after they had worked their way around the traps we learn to think by thinking and fixing our mistakes when things go wrong (or maybe the raccoons have learned to code) here is my old friend Alan Kay saying it best:
1 min video of alan
steve jobs quote: everyone should learn how to code it teaches you how to think 1984
well.. teaches you how to think badly.. steve didn’t even code.. he had no idea what he was talking about.. this was bs
thinking is not actually logic.. that was the major mistake of middle ages and post modernism.. that isn’t what it is..t
Roger Schank (@rogerschank) tweeted at 9:11 AM on Tue, Jul 24, 2018:
All there is to know about learning and AI (via a brief story) https://t.co/QgTf9Kxbxn
pulling out the pieces that resonate and responding to that (so not necessarily roger’s thinking..i hope it could be..)
- learning starts with a conversation/curiosity..t
Listening can only work if the listener is curious too. A listener may not be curious about what the speaker is curious about but the speaker is trying to make the listener curious about something.
but the listener (after the mech listens in order to match).. would (potentially) be curious about the same thing as the speaker.. imagine that energy
2\ If they succeed the listener will attempt to find in their memory something that they have experienced so the listener can respond to the speaker with a story of their own, satisfying the goals of each. How might we do that? Modern AI doesn’t even ask this kind of question oddly.)
maybe we don’t need it to.. and maybe at that point we no longer call it ai..? i don’t know.. i just think that what we need most is for the mech (ai or not) to listen to 7bn curiosities .. everyday.. and then match them up locally.. and that’s where the convo .. the deeper listening .. can take place.. 2 or more locals w very similar if not the same curiosities.. that day
3\ Matching underlying goals and plans is a kind of pattern matching but pattern matching in AI these days tends to be about words or pixels and not about ideas. It is hard for a computer to pattern match ideas, so when we talk about how computers can learn we must be very sceptical about the kinds of things they are matching.
so imagine all we need the mech/ai to do is match curiosities.. close to ideas.. but not totally.. if we iterate often enough (everyday anew).. and it takes little energy (3 min self-talk) .. seems that a word match would be plenty for a revolution of everyday life..
4\ Explanations are the basis of understanding. Bob was searching for an explanation.
first a match.. then an explanation..
He unconsciously constructed an explanation: maybe the actors didn’t want to accede to the request because they thought that the request was too extreme.
maybe ai (less judgmental/assuming/constructing) would be better at that first swatch of matching..?
6\ But what do we match on? Certainly not words or pixels. We match on high level abstractions like goals, plans, and intentionality. My goal was to eat the way I like. Bob’s goal was to look the way he wanted. But at a higher level of abstraction my goal was to get someone to do something for me and so was his. So any explanation would have had to have been about convincing other people to do what we wanted. That kind of goal (how to convince someone) was never actually discussed but that is what we were both curious about and such goals drive learning.
we could assume everyone’s goal is just to find someone local with a similar curiosity that day.. so thinking word(s) may be enough
you will never make computers intelligent by focussing on words, no matter how well you can count them or match them. Everything starts with goals and the ideas that underlie them. Dogs have goals but they don’t have words. Amazingly, dogs can think intelligently about getting what they want. When modern AI can do what dogs do every day in order to achieve the real goals that they have, please let me know.
see.. i don’t think we need that (and i don’t think a machine can ever do that).. i think all we need is a non judgmental listening ear and a word matcher.. aka: augmenting interconnectedness
@hjarche of course its possible; but modern AI wants to do that by counting and pattern matching; to do it requires understanding how knowledge is acquired; we aren’t there yet
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/1034181779106791424
Roger Schank (@rogerschank) tweeted at 7:56 AM on Mon, Sep 03, 2018:
Your kids going back to HS? have them read my message about why they are right to hate it: https://t.co/Cn5Wy37106
Mary Ann Reilly (@MaryAnnReilly) tweeted at 6:35 AM – 25 Aug 2018 :
Incremental changes can alter schooling from within. But that simply isn’t good enough. Bored bored bored young people ought to weigh on our conscience & motivate us to redesign learning alongside them in idiosyncratic ways. Replication needs to give way to imagination. https://t.co/PRzXcmf3EJ (http://twitter.com/MaryAnnReilly/status/1033332151276777472?s=17)
let’s talk about AI because its non-existence poses so many nonsense questions https://t.co/j4ewP10MZl
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/rogerschank/status/1052207120337244161