Blurts

The digital vs. paper debate is an interesting recent issue that addresses the relative benefits of each when it comes to academic reading and note-taking. There are real consequences of this research as educators with cursory exposure to the research are making decisions about whether to assign ebooks or allow students to use laptops/tablets in classrooms. Educational research is complicated in that getting from what might seem straightforward laboratory studies to the realities of the classroom can be misleading. Applied situations add variables that may not be considered in the basic research. For example, what is the experience with each method of providing the text when comparing learning from textbooks or e-readers. Or, how long after the presentation from which notes are taken does note review occur when comparing paper and laptop notetaking?

I recently encountered this Digitrends “feature” on notetaking on paper and on a laptop. My bias is to take notes on a device and I recommend that the notes be taken with software such as Soundnote which stores both notes and the audio from a lecture allowing the learner to easily refer back to the audio should the notes seem incomplete or confusing at a later date. At one level, using this study or that study to explain why a prof would not allow students to take notes in class seems inappropriate. If you are worried that students are doing something else rather than listen to you, just say so. One might suggest the use of a notebook if you think the research points in that direction, but using a selected study to deny choice is an overreach.

The Digitrends provides an impressive review of this research issue and identifies issues I was originally concerned about (how were the notes used as review). The review identifies the “external storage” function of notes rather than assuming notetaking is only about the “generative” effect of taking notes. However, as I mention above external storage a month after a lecture (the applied reality) is different from research studies in which you can review the notes you have taken before an assessment immediately after the presentation phase of a research student. The opportunity to record sketches is a legitimate issue for many (including me). I simply take a photo of the display with my phone so while sketching something out on paper might seem a significant issue for some, there are easy workarounds.

When researchers end their papers with “more research is required” this is not a cop-out. Applied topics are nuanced and simple solutions are unlikely. If you are interested in this issue, I strongly suggest you take a look at this nontechnical review.

Apple has released security updates for all Apple devices to address a no-click malware. Update all OSs immediately.

These results probably don’t surprise educators, but student achievement in Minnesota as assessed using the Minnesota Comprehensive Assessments were down. The number taking the exam were also down as many students opted out.

student proficiency rates fell 11 percentage points in math, to 44%. The state Department of Education reported that reading proficiency is down 7 points, to 53%, since the tests were last given in 2019.

This article from the Minneapolis Star Tribune offers analysis and efforts to address the achievement data will hopefully be covered by CARES Act and the American Rescue Plan.

What is appropriate in teaching history has become controversial and now that I have spent some time listening to politicians discuss the matter confusing. This resource from FutureEd addresses the controversy regarding the teaching of concepts such as racism and sexism as part of the history of the U.S.. The FutureEd resource is helpful in framing the issue, but I think for those interested it is of great value to examine the laws proposed in different states.

I spend my formative years in Iowa and because the bills on these matters from Iowa appear on the FutureEd list I spent some time with one of the Iowa bills.

Iowa legislation – the following wording is taken from the bill, but based on the video of the discussion is vague. You should watch the video (linked from the presentation of the bill) because the back and forth between Democrats and Republicans appear to say you can teach these things, but not in a way according to the Republican speaker that involves scapegoating. The concept of scapegoating is really the key to understanding exactly what is being demanded.

f. Prohibit the use of curriculum that teaches the topics of sexism, slavery, racial oppression, racial segregation, or racial discrimination, including topics relating to the enactment and enforcement of laws resulting in sexism, racial oppression, segregation, and discrimination.

Scapegoating is defined in the following way

^Race or sex scapegoating” means assigning fault, blame,
or bias to a race or sex, or to members of a race or sex
because of their race or sex, or claiming that, consciously or
unconsciously, and by virtue of persons’ race or sex, members
of any race are inherently racist or are inherently inclined to
oppress others, or that members of a sex are inherently sexist
or inclined to oppress others.

So you are a history teacher, what does it mean that you can teach that racism and sexism are historical facts, but you cannot assign fault or blame? The reality of these practices should argue that the practices are evil and happened (or happen) and were the result of human behavior. As a consequence, I would find it difficult not to attribute blame or fault to the individuals perpetrating such behavior. For example, slavery was primarily a practice of white citizens of the United States. At the time slavery was widely practiced in this country there clearly was a racial dimension to the practice. It is true that this does not imply that whites at a different time in history practice slavery.

The Iowa bill clearly is less demanding at least according to the FutureEd description of bills considered in other states.

How Google prioritizes search results has always been a mystery with the lack of clarity defended as necessary corporate secrecy. I liked the original notion of page rank because as an academic I understand the logic of citation frequency as a metric of importance. Here is a recent effort by Google to explain the signals it uses to rank search results. What is missing and of great importance is how these signals are weighted.