Ouroboros and triskelion
The ouroboros symbolizes unity, limitless potential and regeneration, "destruction brings regeneration." The triskelion is a Celtic symbol for personal growth, human development and spiritual expansion. These are NOT "satanic" symbols, nor do I espouse extremist religions.
Tuesday 12 February 2013
Reflections on Week 2 Readings - EDMOOC
Johnston, R (2009) Salvation or destruction: metaphors of the internet. First Monday, 14(4).
From a linguistic perspective, this article makes a lot of sense.
Also thinking about showing it to my G8's for their formatting of analysis (poem essay) as it uses a clear system for quotes and examples. Thinking an online essay might be a good way to go.
Metaphors do seem to shape our perceptions and show our thinking/beliefs. There is a dichotomy of how people consider the internet - salvation/destruction of society. There is also some middle ground - and this is probably where the educational uses live. Dependent on how things are taught, therefore perceived and used.
Newitz, A. (2011): Social media is science fiction. Google I/O conference, 10-11 May 2011, San Francisco. (video)
Questions:
What do these stories indicate about our future options and relations with technology?
Probably that a lot will depend on the amount of power and persuasion we continue to allow big business. If money continues to be a driving force and major factor in who has control, then corporations controlling the money will likely be most in control of social media.
()And what do they tell us about our preoccupations and assumptions now (or in the recent past)?
Same thing as pop culture and various media forms have always told us: they represent and manifest our fears and concerns either in utopian or dystopian form. Where we are going to end up, based on what we perceive our current situation to be.
We definitely fear loss of privacy and "self" - that separation between the media and our own thoughts. Advertising already shows us how carefully we are manipulated, and this will undoubtedly not stop unless we create some kind of safety measures (unlikely) or better education (somewhat likely) so people will cope.
We also fear the government's ability to enforce - the Judge Dredd kind of future, or totalitarian culture as shown by 1984 and other similar novels. Being oppressed is always a fear, whether we are giving our government the means to achieve oppression or not.
There is also a strong undercurrent of "the meaning of life" and what our true purpose is. The Matrix and The Island give us a possible 'unknown' of a 'reality' of which we are unaware until something pulls the blinders off our eyes - we are just batteries; we are just spare parts; we are just tiny
()To what extent are they structured by the utopia-dystopia oppostion?
As said above - people seem to fall onto one side or the other, thus the metaphors used to construct their concept of the abstract notion of "internet" will either reflect a constructivist/positive or destructivist/negative perspective. I was particularly intrigued by the water connection of the destructivist metaphors - never really thought of that, but it makes sense.
Bleecker, J. (2006). A manifesto for networked objects — Cohabiting with pigeons, arphids and Aibos in the Internet of Things.
Blogjects exist! Wow ... the whole pigeon-bloggers really got to me. We are putting animals and things into the internet space, and having them report on their whereabouts and submit relevant data for various purposes. I can only see this going further ... and again, huge implications for privacy and AI abilities. "If only these walls could talk..." may become a reality in the future. Is that a scary or comforting thought?
Semantics: we live "in" the network, not "on" the Internet. Returns to the metaphor reading on how we define, construct our concept in turn defines, constructs what we do with it and how we approach/perceive it. The idea of "everything is connected" from pantheism, that "everything has a spirit" is seemingly becoming embodied in the Internet ... but the spirit is existence without sensibility, awareness, consideration - therefore, it is unthinking, unknowing and consequently dis-connected in a way that is profoundly disturbing. More like a constantly bleeping ticker-tape of data ... but, what to do with it, as it accumulates in the corner and eventually fills the room pushing living things out? There is that overwhelmingness of too much information/data ... the filtration relegated to we humans, and I think we are not yet able to adequately cope.
()Can you find some more recent examples of developments that fit into Bleecker’s vision of ‘cohabiting with pigeons’? Well, IFTT will generate actions based on functions automatically. Also, being subscribed to a newsfeed or emailing list then generates non-stop bits that accrue. I can monitor my child's online activities - so, certain trackers exist to inform me of what Dylan's looked at and played with on the computer. I'm not quite cohabiting with pigeons, but these are things which send data to me of their own accord - I no longer have to initiate a process, but I do have to deal with the data returned to me.
From a linguistic perspective, this article makes a lot of sense.
Also thinking about showing it to my G8's for their formatting of analysis (poem essay) as it uses a clear system for quotes and examples. Thinking an online essay might be a good way to go.
Metaphors do seem to shape our perceptions and show our thinking/beliefs. There is a dichotomy of how people consider the internet - salvation/destruction of society. There is also some middle ground - and this is probably where the educational uses live. Dependent on how things are taught, therefore perceived and used.
Newitz, A. (2011): Social media is science fiction. Google I/O conference, 10-11 May 2011, San Francisco. (video)
Questions:
What do these stories indicate about our future options and relations with technology?
Probably that a lot will depend on the amount of power and persuasion we continue to allow big business. If money continues to be a driving force and major factor in who has control, then corporations controlling the money will likely be most in control of social media.
()And what do they tell us about our preoccupations and assumptions now (or in the recent past)?
Same thing as pop culture and various media forms have always told us: they represent and manifest our fears and concerns either in utopian or dystopian form. Where we are going to end up, based on what we perceive our current situation to be.
We definitely fear loss of privacy and "self" - that separation between the media and our own thoughts. Advertising already shows us how carefully we are manipulated, and this will undoubtedly not stop unless we create some kind of safety measures (unlikely) or better education (somewhat likely) so people will cope.
We also fear the government's ability to enforce - the Judge Dredd kind of future, or totalitarian culture as shown by 1984 and other similar novels. Being oppressed is always a fear, whether we are giving our government the means to achieve oppression or not.
There is also a strong undercurrent of "the meaning of life" and what our true purpose is. The Matrix and The Island give us a possible 'unknown' of a 'reality' of which we are unaware until something pulls the blinders off our eyes - we are just batteries; we are just spare parts; we are just tiny
()To what extent are they structured by the utopia-dystopia oppostion?
As said above - people seem to fall onto one side or the other, thus the metaphors used to construct their concept of the abstract notion of "internet" will either reflect a constructivist/positive or destructivist/negative perspective. I was particularly intrigued by the water connection of the destructivist metaphors - never really thought of that, but it makes sense.
Bleecker, J. (2006). A manifesto for networked objects — Cohabiting with pigeons, arphids and Aibos in the Internet of Things.
Blogjects exist! Wow ... the whole pigeon-bloggers really got to me. We are putting animals and things into the internet space, and having them report on their whereabouts and submit relevant data for various purposes. I can only see this going further ... and again, huge implications for privacy and AI abilities. "If only these walls could talk..." may become a reality in the future. Is that a scary or comforting thought?
"This isn’t the Terminator fantasy of machines with guns that run amok, acting against humanity. The Blogject capacity for producing effects is far more powerful because it has always been pervasively, ubiquitously, everywhere tethered to the far reaching, speedy, robust network of social exchange and dis-course that humanity has every constructed. In the Internet of Things, that kind of agency happens within the ecology of networked publics — streams, feeds, track- backs, permalinks, Wiki inscriptions and blog posts."
Semantics: we live "in" the network, not "on" the Internet. Returns to the metaphor reading on how we define, construct our concept in turn defines, constructs what we do with it and how we approach/perceive it. The idea of "everything is connected" from pantheism, that "everything has a spirit" is seemingly becoming embodied in the Internet ... but the spirit is existence without sensibility, awareness, consideration - therefore, it is unthinking, unknowing and consequently dis-connected in a way that is profoundly disturbing. More like a constantly bleeping ticker-tape of data ... but, what to do with it, as it accumulates in the corner and eventually fills the room pushing living things out? There is that overwhelmingness of too much information/data ... the filtration relegated to we humans, and I think we are not yet able to adequately cope.
()Can you find some more recent examples of developments that fit into Bleecker’s vision of ‘cohabiting with pigeons’? Well, IFTT will generate actions based on functions automatically. Also, being subscribed to a newsfeed or emailing list then generates non-stop bits that accrue. I can monitor my child's online activities - so, certain trackers exist to inform me of what Dylan's looked at and played with on the computer. I'm not quite cohabiting with pigeons, but these are things which send data to me of their own accord - I no longer have to initiate a process, but I do have to deal with the data returned to me.
Perspectives on Education
Shirky, C. (2012). Napster, Udacity and the academy
Bady, A. (2012). Questioning Clay Shirky.
Is it possible for MOOCs to be ‘education of the very best sort’? Is this their mission? If not, what is?
I would have to agree with Bady's perspective on for-profit driving over a pure educational mission to provide GOOD, solid courses. I also agree with Shirky's points on how existing institutions may not necessarily be providing education on a par with their price tag, and that the scrutiny of open-source platforms does lead to some increases in quality ... but as Bady points out, sometimes that quality starts rock-bottom so a little increase doesn't exactly bring things up to "good".
Internet and education seems to currently be about access ... providing access, accessing information, better access to materials and ideas and other people to collaborate/discuss with. I think we're starting in on the shift from just access-thinking to quality-service thinking. But this will take time and a lot of innovation. Currently, existing paradigms of "teaching" and "learning" are still focusing on the traditional system of delivery of content - reception of content. What is starting, slowly, to take more shape is the collaborative creation of content and its growth and development in a public sphere ... this is something from education of the past - the Socratic ideal, somewhat, of marketplace group discussions giving rise to a collective awareness or discovery of a shared concept - but now it is happening in the newer space of the Internet. The pitfalls of this are manifold, what with anonymity, lack of credentialling, etc ... but again, aren't these somewhat relics of a system we are outgrowing?
Concerning authenticity of original work ... given what we are seeing now in so many forms of media - TV shows, movies, writing - of derivative work rather than new work - we also seem to be in a state of recycling of ideas, concepts, basic knowledge ... how far is the concept of "original" going to go? We are seeing the shift from "innovation of new" to "innovative use of existing" as a goal ... why reinvent the wheel when you can improve upon it? ... So I am uncertain of the future of authenticity as we currently understand and expect it.
MOOCs can provide a valuable learning environment and creation potential, but they need to be shifted from the current, more traditionally conceptualized, framework in order to achieve that potential. As "replacements" for courses and uni experience, they cannot provide the full spectrum experience of university learning. As something new, different and apart from the university paradigm they could indeed provide something valuable and of quality, regardless of profit motivations.
Is it possible for MOOCs to be ‘education of the very best sort’? Is this their mission? If not, what is?
I would have to agree with Bady's perspective on for-profit driving over a pure educational mission to provide GOOD, solid courses. I also agree with Shirky's points on how existing institutions may not necessarily be providing education on a par with their price tag, and that the scrutiny of open-source platforms does lead to some increases in quality ... but as Bady points out, sometimes that quality starts rock-bottom so a little increase doesn't exactly bring things up to "good".
Internet and education seems to currently be about access ... providing access, accessing information, better access to materials and ideas and other people to collaborate/discuss with. I think we're starting in on the shift from just access-thinking to quality-service thinking. But this will take time and a lot of innovation. Currently, existing paradigms of "teaching" and "learning" are still focusing on the traditional system of delivery of content - reception of content. What is starting, slowly, to take more shape is the collaborative creation of content and its growth and development in a public sphere ... this is something from education of the past - the Socratic ideal, somewhat, of marketplace group discussions giving rise to a collective awareness or discovery of a shared concept - but now it is happening in the newer space of the Internet. The pitfalls of this are manifold, what with anonymity, lack of credentialling, etc ... but again, aren't these somewhat relics of a system we are outgrowing?
Concerning authenticity of original work ... given what we are seeing now in so many forms of media - TV shows, movies, writing - of derivative work rather than new work - we also seem to be in a state of recycling of ideas, concepts, basic knowledge ... how far is the concept of "original" going to go? We are seeing the shift from "innovation of new" to "innovative use of existing" as a goal ... why reinvent the wheel when you can improve upon it? ... So I am uncertain of the future of authenticity as we currently understand and expect it.
MOOCs can provide a valuable learning environment and creation potential, but they need to be shifted from the current, more traditionally conceptualized, framework in order to achieve that potential. As "replacements" for courses and uni experience, they cannot provide the full spectrum experience of university learning. As something new, different and apart from the university paradigm they could indeed provide something valuable and of quality, regardless of profit motivations.
Monday 11 February 2013
Reflections on Week 2 Videos - EDCMOOC
Looking into the Future ...
* Videos/ A Day Made of Glass (Corning) / Productivity Future Vision (Microsoft / Sight / Charlie 13 / Plurality
>>Corning - Actually watched the "Unpacked" video as well. Interesting - a lot of things are already in the works. The classroom scenario was mundane for me - yes, enhanced media platforms and personal computing, but I'd think that in the future we'd actually move beyond the traditional-style segregated, room & row seating kinds of setups. I know that Sweden already has some innovative schools breaking out of the industrial-era model. As for Corning's advancement ideas - love the rooftop photovoltaic glass, and the all-glass tablets which can multitask as viewers, personal organizers, PCs and interactive camera/viewers. Having all that powerful computing on hand would be quite amazing - the iPad has revolutionized how I access and track my own personal information and learning, so having something even lighter and more multifunctional would open up larger realms of accessibility. The sharing idea of "flicking" something over to a nearby tablet looks plausible.
>>Microsoft - I don't know about the future of computing, but wow I do like that Greenwall project ;-) I also liked her translating glasses frames and the folding, wood "tablet" computer. Credit-card sized phones ? I think maybe too small. The display of the "Benefit Concert" with phone-powered payment for donation opens up a whole new realm of positive & negative. It looks like Microsoft is pushing smaller, thinner, lighter - and again, ubiquitous - computer displays. I do miss cozy, warm, indoor setting - books, objets. Both Corning and Microsoft seem to push for a future interior that is stark, white, pristing, and beyond-Zen-uncluttered. Not seeing this happening for most people ....
So - the questions:
how is education being visualised here? what is being learned and taught?
Both show very visual-based, interactive learning activities. These we have - but oftentimes teachers don't have the technological know-how, support or time to create & develop tailored activities for their students. A lot of what exists that is good is for-pay, which means a long process of getting budget approval (and often an all-or-nothing kind of adoption).
()what is the nature of communication in these future worlds?
Still mobile-phone based, but more visual. Also, a lot of drawn or handwritten images sent. Connection to community or family spaces (kitchen wall, eg)
()are these utopian or a dystopian visions to you? In what way(s)?
Utopian in the ease of access, interest factor for education spaces, and awareness of others/environment (benefit concert, green wall, wooden touches, personal bellhop prepped for specific guest).
Dystopian in that I imagine a lot of this will still be economically biased towards those with money. What does the other side of the coin look like in these images? In the Corning ad, is that a public or private school? Dystopian also - for me - in the school setup, and that people are far too accessible by work (I think there should be downtime, disconnected downtime, where you deal with your family and yourself without distractions from anything with a screen).
>>SightSystems - This was definitely dystopian and scary. Having half-completed a Coursera in gamification, I could see a lot of that at play. Plus, the idea of something permanently embedded in one's eye is just disturbing for me. Having something that could analyse the shelf life of your fridge food would be useful (Just had a clean out of my own, and would appreciate something which could take the guesswork out of "how long have I had this jam again?")
Questions:
()What is going on here, and how do you interpret the ending? Patrick is a master manipulator, and lives in his own augmented, near-virtual reality. He can't really carry on a conversation - it's very stilted, limited to bites of info - and needs cues in order to figure out how to interact with the girl. Is she an android (really desperate there, Patrick, and can't land an android) or is she real (then Patrick is a potential rapist with the ability to control people through their eyewear ... which was hinted at in the dialogue between the two at the restaurant).
()How does this vision align and contrast with the ones in the first two films? Definitely views the ubiquity as a negative - more of an escape from reality - and there aren't a lot of people in this film, so it feels stark and deserted in contrast to the Microsoft ad. The fact that there is ubiquity of computing/displays and a heavy reliance on it for daily life is aligned with Corning/Microsoft.
>>Charlie13 - I think the ending line resonates with me ("You won't have to be afraid ever again" ... "I'm not afraid of anything!") as the culture of fear in my "mother" country (USA) would push people towards this kind of ID-tagging option.
Question:
()To what extent does Charlie 13 represent a hopeful or a bleak future? A bit of both - hopeful, in that there seems to be some respite from an onslaught of technology bleeping everywhere. Bleak, in that we are taggable, trackable and therefore "on the grid" 24/7. In terms of crime, that might be a good thing - in terms of the ease for paying, etc, as well - but there seems to be some loss of identity/free will. If "everyone is watching" it gets a bit like Big Brother ... I could imagine some creativity being stifled, anyone stepping outside the box - what happens to them?
>>Plurality - Cool concept for a movie ... I'd like to see this as a full-length film. Having had a laptop with fingerprint recognition, I can see that DNA sampling and ID verification might become viable and prevalent in the future. This film again presents the ubiquity of data-based technology and the ease with which it will be integrated - for better or worse - into daily life.
Questions:
()To what extent do you think Plurality’s depictions of the impact of surveillance technologies are relevant to social and educational practices today? In terms of security and verification, the implications both pro and con are big. Like "Charlie 13" the constant awareness of being watched may deter crime and negative behaviors, but at what cost? I think the pressure of never having privacy, of always being potentially scrutinized would cause more neuroses in the long run. While having the convenience of DNA identity verification would be a bonus for security purposes, I am sure there would be ways to get around it through some kind of computer hacking (not just hacking off fingers, etc).
()Which society (Charlie’s or Alana’s) would you rather find yourself in, and why? If I had to choose, I suppose Alana's, only because I don't like the idea of an implant. Either scenario presents a loss of personal privacy and too many options for something to go wrong.
Sunday 10 February 2013
Reflections on Week 1 Resources, EDCMOOC
Reflections on Week 1 Resources, EDCMOOC
Definitely on the theme of dystopias (Bendito, New Media) and utopias (Inbox, Thursday).
But seems most focused on the ideas of breaking down society or bringing people together.
I guess it opens the discussion on what technologies, particularly computer-based technologies, are either taking away or bringing to us.
>>The notion of separating vs bringing together people is somewhat moot, as it does both. Consider how Skype, email and YouTube provide access to people we might not otherwise see or communicate with. Flipside: obsession online means decrease in local-level personal connection.
>>In terms of education, there is often less nervousness or shyness when not confronted with the physicality of others. Thus, people may be more open to sharing and expressing in virtual settings vs physical settings.
>>Bedito Machine III made me laugh, in that it reminds me of folks here in Singapore when a new Apple product comes out. Suddenly, the previous model is considered passe and you cannot find anything for it anymore. Impermanence. Buying a new laptop, the clerk was extremely shocked to discover that my current laptop has lasted nearly 10 years with minimal maintenance. It seems more throwaway - technology will continue to carry on forward, so no need to recycle or reuse. Most people don't see the underpinnings of how programs build on each other - how earlier models are the foundation of later things. Thus, "old" is just "outdated" is just "garbage."
>>I found Inbox charming - not sure if there is a dystopian side to it, except why haven't these two found significant others in their lives prior? I think there is a connection in here for cyberbullying - what you put into that "inbox" can profoundly affect the receiver. (Think: crumpled paper project) I guess the dystopia could be if Priya hadn't thought to go to the store, when Karthi's bag had ripped and no longer worked its magic. Without that bag, they had no way to communicate. If communication is limited thus, then I can see there would be implications.
>>Chandler has a section on resistentialism, with excerpt from Paul Jennings' story. I found this very amusing ... it is true that we anthropomorphise our "things." There is a strong emotional reaction - one way or another - to technology and its advances. Few people are sitting the fence on tech use - most people are pro or con, full users or wary users.
>>Implications for education: there is still a strong need for human interaction, for education. It's the sharing of ideas face to face that really generates some sort of spark. I can read a lot of material but more often than not it is in talking it over with someone else that I both achieve greater understanding and a better handle on my position vis-a-vis the ideas presented. While internet provides a huge leap in terms of sharing and collaborating, there still needs to be a live person at each end of the connection, I think. There also needs to be some real-time interaction.
>>Higher Education: I am pondering the limitations of, expenses of, and elitism of "higher education." Self-paced learning, particularly online and MOOC variety, offer affordable and timely opportunities - but still limited. Given my location, I can't always participate easily in online chats, webinars, etc. Also, I have to split focus when studying from home given my children and household needs (not to mention my work needs, when not studying on holidays). Academia doesn't suit everybody - this is clear in middle school, and also the fact that different learning styles are needed as not all students can adjust to suit one type or another. Do our personalities, talents and interests at our younger ages profoundly influence or affect our careers and abilities later on? Do people pursuing their career and wanting to push their knowledge further still need "insitutions of learning" or not? Can online learning truly take place of onsite learning? How will this divide our societies further - or will it even things up for the less advantaged so they are able to achieve learning and ply trades? Which areas are learnable online ... and will this cause an imbalance in our labor forces globally (if I can only access XYZ courses on ABC subjects, given my location and economic situation, then I will be competing with all the others in similar scenarios ... thus, if computer programming is something readily learnt online will there not then be a glut of this particular worker? How will this shift things?)
CONNECTION: Writing in the 21st Century
This video prompted me to think about the need to redefine "writing" and how it is taught - how it is, in fact, handed in or presented.
CNY 2013 and online learning
My Chinese New Year ... "E-Learning and Digital Cultures" via Coursera
Just catching up, since the course started on Jan 28.
First stop: dystopias and utopias. I already have a lot to catch up on, since I am starting in Week 3, so have 2 modules to get through. I am a bit worried, since the end of week 1 chat has a lot of reference to participants feeling "overwhelmed."
Ahem.
Since I am already overwhelmed, I guess I will fit in fine!
Getting to know acronyms is also fun, like learning a new language. First up: MOOC. Have fun.
Opening Sally
If you've come across this blog, then you should be aware that it is something of an ongoing journal of my learning and teaching life.
I will be keeping track of my various thoughts and reflections here, so it will be somewhat personal.
Enter at your own risk.
I will be keeping track of my various thoughts and reflections here, so it will be somewhat personal.
Enter at your own risk.
 |
| Ouroboros and triskelion, a fitting symbol for my life's journey into learning. The ouroboros symbolizes unity, limitless potential and regeneration, "destruction brings regeneration." The triskelion is a Celtic symbol for personal growth, human development and spiritual expansion. These are NOT "satanic" symbols, nor do I espouse extremist religions. |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)