will richardson – do it
One of the first things Will got us practicing/prototyping..
We believe that was key to what followed the next few years.
We’ve been experimenting with and prototyping everything.
And perhaps it helped that we
So now.. we’re thinking, we have a doable, not ridiculous, missing layer.
Like Bill Strickland (et al) encourages, ..be the solution.
ap on opting out – written sept 2013
Find Will everywhere. Perhaps start here:
and/or here (with Audrey et al):
from eml 2014 ebook:
Feb 3, 2014
17 min – the potential we have now for self-organizing…. so (earlier) best thing to do is to do it ourselves first…
30 min – the 4 c’s aren’t new – but 2 that are – connections and computing
33 – haven’t come up with the right filters yet (shirky)
35 – talking imaginary cosmopolitanism..ness
45 – talks on pisa – problem – results are manipulated
isn’t this pisa convo just like the bantering/retweeting on twitter referenced earlier?
where does it measure how you connect, find/share info.. measures are irrelevant..
cool.. but what if the measuring itself is the problem…
56 mi – moocs as experimentation with self-organizing – when badges (or whatever) finds a way to do accreditation/assessment.. can’t be any longer – that the only learning that counts is the learning we do inside institution
can we also say – can no longer say – only learning that counts is learning we can measure.. credential… sacred economy ness in ed..
interview via Blake Boles mar 2015
on why school..
We also got our aup/et al guidelines from Will:
just changed his 3rd – effective – to awesome – via Gus et al
At This Danish School, LARPing Is the Future of Education http://t.co/otzTGhRggz Anyone in the US doing this??? #edchat #satchat #education
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/willrich45/status/652893892673699840
doc: here’s where i feel most at peace – aspbergers.. helps me focusmakes people feel as if the world is actually a world and not a story..felt like i belong.. vs suicidal tendency from not belonging ness in school et al
The Surprising Truth About Learning in Schools | TEDxWestVancouverED
1 min – on how to learn where it’s sticky… and then.. if i could get into your brain..
Jerry‘s nov interview.. – augment for stickiness.. and for getting into other’s brains..
6 min – on ways for more productive learning..
8 min – this contrast between what we believe and what we do… is putting our kids (all of us) at risk
9 min – on 44% of kids saying engaged… college profs 14% ready for work
10 min – on prep for traditional idea of work
11 min – on ed fundamentally broken
need for systemic change
realize a human life/practice absolutely outside determinations of the law -Giorgio Agamben, highest poverty – eudaimonia
15 min – giving ie’s of schools: mosaic in co, sla, … why can’t we bring our cale to school… our challenge… is how to make school’s amazing places for kids.. only question now.. is do we have commitment and courage to make that happen
or/and … do we have courage to call out irrelevant s… for (blank)’s sake..
dec 2015 – build own device
indeed.. personal fab.. et al
so www ness..imagining something like blockchain (only because vinay is *saying it’s the means to get databases and networks to dance) used as a facilitator/scraper of data (from self-talk as data) to pool on some…. type… platform ish.. app/chip ness
dec 2015 – co schooling – diversity at home
jan 2016 – ability to be taught
“The one really competitive skill is the skill of being able to learn.” ~Seymour Papert
why does it/anything have to be competitive..?
it’s not just the skills needed to learn, but it’s the dispositions as well. I’m not saying humans aren’t learners by their very nature, but there’s no question some end up being much more voracious than others when it comes to learning more about the world around them and their place in it
perhaps it’s more about the displacement of our innate ness (via school et al – see next two paragraphs) – than some acquiring more skills than others. ie: if we were truly free… to follow our whimsy/eudaimonia.. perhaps we would also be in a space/realm where competition was irrelevant/ungrokked..
“Distributed ledger technologies,” it claims, “have the potential to help governments to collect taxes, deliver benefits, issue passports, record land registries, assure the supply chain of goods and generally ensure the integrity of government records and services. In the NHS, the technology offers the potential to improve health care by improving and authenticating the delivery of services and by sharing records securely according to exact rules. For the consumer of all of these services, the technology offers the potential, according to the circumstances, for individual consumers to control access to personal records and to know who has accessed them.”
depends on how chained/blocked we keep our thinking…
blockchain et al
But as Rick Shenkman points out in this piece at the Bill Moyers’ blog, it’s not about being stupid. “Voters aren’t dumb. They are ignorant.”
Why is that? I think it’s arguable that the ignorant masses are the result of a less than effective education system that is cranking out kids with relatively useless knowledge about calculus and the Louisiana Purchase at the expense of the skills and dispositions needed to not become ignorant.
Count among those things curiosity, which kids bring with them to school in truckloads when they are young but which quickly fades when forced to hew to the scripted curriculum.
indeed to curiosity. via Ta-Nehisi – it’s not about ignorance .. there’s no way we can expect people to know the things we – at that moment – are expecting them to know (Weinberger – too big to know – et al) .. it’s about incuriosity. that’s it.
also – the whole misnomer of the way we’re authoritatively using ignorant… who’s deciding what that word means.. no?
We’ve stripped them of the agency over learning that is required to avoid the *ignorance we now find ourselves confronted with. Is anyone shocked that Shenkman comes to this conclusion about the American populace:
**Ignorant voters lack knowledge, but their problem is not that they have trouble learning. The problem is that on their own they don’t try, relying instead on biases of one sort or another to guide their thinking.
*ignorance – the ignorance we are not confronted with – ? – does this mean all the B and b that goes into our political system..? might we ask why we’re still buying into – the manufactured consent ness.. i.. as i’m sure you do.. have first hand experience with the people (globally – ie: not just so called students, but so called homeless, so called refugee, so called 3rd world.. ) we spend our time pity ing.. that we should be spending our time listening to.. they have much to teach us.
**ignorant voters – oy – in my mind – my ignorant – but not incurious – mind – voting is the problem. and if we’re still buying into it.. i’d boldly say .. we’re being incurious.. about our how life could be. ie: redefine decision making et al.. disengaging from consensus ness.. et al..
But I would still argue, as John Taylor Gatto did over two decades ago, that we are dumbing down our kids. This may not be new; people have argued forever that the goal of education was to create an ignorant society so that those in charge could get away with whatever their self-serving interests demanded. But regardless of when it started, it’s untenable for this democracy today. (Did anyone else turn that debate last night off in embarrassment?)
perhaps.. the dumbing down comes in turning the debate/tv on..
that seems to me what’s ridiculous.
The Internet can no doubt make us smarter and more educated.
perhaps that’s not the point – ie: not about knowledge.. but about imagination..
We can’t be ok with what this system has to some extent wrought. We should be *working hard to rethink that system to eliminate the “undereducated” as a lovable constituency for those hoping to ascend to the most powerful leadership position in the world.
*and/or.. working hard to rethink the ‘undereducated’ to eliminate that system..
We may find, in fifty or a hundred years, that all of what we think of as our most up-to-date notions about schools, teaching, and learning are either completely inadequate or outright mistaken. But we will make a big step forward if, by understanding children better, we can undo some of the harm we are now doing (xii).
(Written 49 years ago…) – by John
if you have the time while your in co.. you might like how i would bend your ear.
from oct 19 2016 newsletter (on trump and tech):
“May you live in interesting times.”
That, apparently, is an English translation of an old Chinese curse. Go figure.
These are no doubt “interesting” times, and I think we’re all trying to figure out how to best deal with them. What is education’s role in creating and ameliorating the “interesting” we’re swimming in? That’s the question of the day.
Your ideas welcomed, btw.
perhaps education’s role – as we now know it – is to let go of control\ling people.. and let the people dance..
That would be none other than Barack Obama, giving his take in a fascinating Wired interview that includes MIT Media Lab Director Joi Ito. Read the whole thing.
this mindset was/is disappointing to me.. (from Joi page) via Obama’s tweet after:
Now this was fun. Artificial intelligence, space travel—hope you enjoy exploring new frontiers as much as I did.https://t.co/WWBUm5eJ08(http://twitter.com/POTUS/status/786254141182074880?s=17)
now this was fun…?
via Joi during convo:
ITO: What’s important is to find the people who want to use AI for good—communities and leaders—and figure out how to help them use it.
seems Obama keeps brining up moneys/wars.. as signs of whatever..
back to newsletter – good on Alison:
why learning in schools doesn’t look anything like the apprentice-master model that serves us so well in most other areas of our lives:
But this moment suggests to me, at least, that what we must now ask of schools is much more difficult and much more complex than anything we’ve asked before.
yeah.. what we must ask.. is .. please let go..
And despite all of our good intentions, all of our love and care for kids, all of our efforts to improve, we may be, finally, at a reckoning.
“He felt that institutions such as schools, churches, governments, and political organizations of every sort all tended to direct thought for ends other than truth, for the perpetuation of their own functions, and for control of individuals in the service of those functions.”
That we don’t learn when we are oppressed.
public consensus always oppresses someone.. so .. any directed learning..
The narrative would have to be completely rewritten.
we ignore what we know is true because if we didn’t, we would have to seriously change what we do.
as much as we as individuals may want to change, the institution we’re stuck with is *built not to. It works to “**perpetuate it’s own functions,” which is why real, high-bar change ***in schools is so hard to effect.
***assuming in schools is a thing.. part of the broken loop.. no..?
curiosity is the cat
I mean really, when it comes to learning, what comes before curiosity?
and we master it from the get go
Kids are curious as hell when they’re 3, 4, 5 years old.
is fixing school our best bet (use of energy)..
So, what are we doing in schools to develop curious, connected, learners – http://willrichardson.com/10-principles-schools-modern-learning/
We have to be brave enough now to push a different story of learning in schools. That assumes of course, you have a different story to tell.
and/or.. diff story of learning than schools
story to model
Will Richardson (@willrich45) tweeted at 5:37 AM – 22 May 2017 :
If schools did not exist and you were asked to design them, what is the ONE question you would seek to answer first? https://t.co/59amDp0VTN (http://twitter.com/willrich45/status/866619020824506368?s=17)
is designing schools deep enough
Will Richardson (@willrich45) tweeted at 6:33 AM – 12 Sep 2017 :
And just another reminder: Students already have COMPLETE control over their learning. Our hubris is to think they don’t. (http://twitter.com/willrich45/status/907583052456583168?s=17)
perhaps control over learning our offerings (compulsions/coercions/mandates..) .. but not complete control over their learning
ie: if i’m curious about something.. it takes time to travel down that and other adjacent/random rabbit holes.. kids/all-of-us.. don’t have our time free for that..
Right, but in the end, we choose what to learn with the limited time that we have. My curiosities are where I spend my free time.
if (law/parents/norms/debt/etc) force me to spend my day at school/work .. i’m not in complete control of my learning.. i can have a kind of spinach or rock choice/control.. but i’m not free .. not in complete control.. of following my whimsy
I always wonder when we say we can “empower” kids to learn…who took that power away from them in the first place? And if we “give” them power, doesn’t that mean we can take it back? That word is fraught. ###
ie: we did take it/curiosity away.. (in school, et al).. we can give it back (imagine a turtle).. in a way that we can’t then take it again.. (we’ve not done this before.. that’s why krishnamurti free will law is so resonant)
If most of us learned most of what we’ve learned that truly matters during the course of our daily lives, interests, and occupations, what does that say about situating learning apart from kids’ daily lives, interests, and occupations? #justaskin
Original Tweet: https://twitter.com/willrich45/status/1300750758435061760
ie: cure ios city