Blurts

I think Leo Laporte does great interviews. If tech-related issues are your thing, it is worth checking out the podcast “Triangulation” which is his series of interviews.

To get started consider the discussion with Tim Wu author of “The Attention Merchants”. The discussion is wide ranging but the book focused mainly on the history of how we have been willing to trade our attention for free or inexpensive content.

This is a political post. I seldom write about politics on this blog because I try to focus here on education issues. I do write about politics elsewhere. Those of us who are or were educators are pressured to make this distinction. I understand this rationale at some level because we are in a position of power when it comes to influencing others. This is regarded unfair when it seems we can express our opinions in order to influence students who it is argued are in a bad position to disagree. I guess I do not necessarily see this as accurate. The undergraduate and graduate students I work with seldom have trouble expressing their disagreement with me when they believe the issue in question is important enough. I suppose what is unfair is that I get to broach topics and I say more on topics than do my students.

The problem here is that core issues get ignored. I understand the importance of avoiding issues such as religion in most classroom settings. I don’t see religious and political beliefs as equivalent. The argumentation surrounding political positions should be based in reasons and justification. I see argumentation as crucial to the higher order cognitive skills we need to be teaching. Argumentation is at the core of science. While certain conclusions of the processes of the sciences may be inconvenient, it is seldom overly controversion to address the findings of science and examine even the inconvenient consequences. Issues of race, inequality, biases of all types can be understood from psychological, sociological, historical and I am certain many other perspectives. Positions taken and explanations offered within any of the disciplines may be inconvenient or contrary to the positions students encounter elsewhere. Being educated involves developing insights into positions on topics influencing behavior in society and if existing beliefs are shown to be flawed in the process the process of education has been successful.

Present awareness and uneasiness brought on by recent events in Charlottesville have again brought political issues into daily discussions. This seems to be happening a lot lately. The core issues involved need to be addressed and carefully considered. This is a very serious and uncertain time that reminds me of the level of concern during the 1960s. I am not of the opinion that educators should keep their heads down and do their work as usual. I regard this as a kind of Maslow’s hierarchy kind of issue – if basic problems are being ignored there is little hope of being successful focusing on other things.

I just came across this post from the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTM) titled “There is no apolitical classroom”. Their post offers an opinion similar to my own and includes a list of instructional resources for “teaching in these times”. I hope other professional organizations will come forward in a similar manner.

This is a short tech history lesson. Thirty years ago Bill Atkinson gave us Hypercard and the opportunities for personal participation in technology changed. Hypercard is difficult to explain to folks who have never had the opportunity, but the closest I can come is to suggest that Hypercard is what  PowerPoint could have been. It was a product perfectly created and scaffolded for educational settings – the perfect embodiment of the low threshold, high ceiling product. On this anniversary I encountered a post that explains Hypercard far better than I could. I still miss the opportunities this software provided and cannot understand why Apple did not continue to upgrade this product.

The cost and risk of committing 8 or more years in pursuit of a PhD is more stressful and demanding than many realize. This study indicates that PhD candidates are twice as vulnerable to mental health problems as other well-educated individuals. My last PhD student just left for his first tenure-track job and after watching many students go through the process, I understand the stress that is involved. I suppose academic institutions allow more students to take on the process than is wise. Some would argue we do this to support our own needs for research colleagues and this would be one way to spin the logic. I suppose this can happen, but not in my personal experience. If there is a negative here, it is probably most often not asking potential students to consider the odds that exist. PhD students bet big on a job being there and they being able to compete.