scholarship in public

Emerging Resonance?

This really thoughtful piece from Aeon is all about how we/our bodies respond to rhythms and other events without actually seeming to perceive them.

This passage really caught my attention:

But the experience of time involves more than just the perception of events occurring at a distance from us. We also experience time by instigating events through our actions, as well as encountering the actions of others. To relish the flow of a chat with a friend, or to feel the groove of a beat, is to have a distinctive kind of temporal experience where the observation of time becomes entwined with how one inhabits it – but in each case, the experience is less a matter of representing temporal structure than of entraining to it, resonating with it.

It makes me wonder how much of learning, in both formal and informal settings works like this. How do we respond to rhythms and patterns in the content and context about which we are not aware?And how much of  this potential “noise” really shapes what we learn and who we are?

Advertisements
scholarship in public

Learning as a social activity

This really interesting video of UK neuroscientist Sophie Scott has her discussing some really interesting research into conversation. It is pretty short (about 6 minutes) and very compelling. I need to check out the research she mentions. What I took away was that conversation is an act that goes beyond distinctions of signal and noise, of conveying information, and is more about establishing and maintaining social connections.

This made me think of how learning and education are also not solely (or even primarily) about signal and noise and conveying information. And, if that is the case, then the way we assess learning is too thin and one-dimensional and needs to be radically rethought.

For more, see Dr. Scott’s TED Talk on why we laugh.

Image from Aeon.

scholarship in public

How is this not an #edtech allegory?

Cory Doctorow posted this story the other day about librarians (always the heroes) gaming automatic book culling software.

It turns out these librarians were not entirely entranced with the sheer power and makingourliveseasier qualities of this recommendation software. They had the gall (and wisdom) to recognize that popularity might not be the only judge of quality.

All hail the librarians (again)!

As I was reading this piece, I could not help to think of the lack of similar stories about teachers taking the same kinds of action to ward off the unintended (?) consequences of #edtech robots teaching our children, all in the name of “personalized learning.”