AIS IT Integration Conf 1

"Only Connect"

Relates the changes we're facing now compared to the printing press. But is now any different? I know change is afoot, but it was last century as well. They had two world wars, a depression the rise of communism, films, new nation states, through to the rise of the neocon.

What is different?

Maybe the pace of change, but we've been facing an increasing rate of change since I can remember.

His story about Indian fishermen using GPRS to manage their catches is interesting, but no different to the rise of the telegraph in the late 19th century and how it connected us and changed the way we did things.

It takes time: initially, filmmakers used one rostrum camera to film the "stage" before people like Eisenstein introduced the concept of montage and others showed that you could move the camera to produce a more lifelike experience.

Need to look at the history of the distribution of printed material more closely. Wasn't desktop publishing supposed to democratise publishing?

He talks about wikipedia and asks how many schools won't allow students to quote it as a primary source, stating that it is as accurate or more accurate than Britannica.

This is still consumption: not production, and wastes the opportunity to do real history by asking students to find out if the history is true. It's the Alan Kay's "air guitar" idea. Is it more important to know what caused the second world war or understand that there were many causes and each of these were reported with bias?

More: WoW as a learning experience with players contributing, participating, cooperation: nice opportunity to show the Onion's report on skills kids need.

Collins' sister doesn't send emails or browse the web, so is deprecated as not being able to contribute to society. This is a bit rough isn't it?

He says we shouldn't disconnect kids as this is a disincentive to engagement .

He quotes Pesce's"Computer as bling" argument, which is good, but it doesn't really support his engagement thesis above (I suspect it's out of context). Kids can be engaged without technology. It's not the imperative that he claims, it is not a sufficient condition.

I still maintain that not turning the computer off is a mistake. In a changing technology world, the opportunities are likewise changing, with a new thing available every day, so if we go to technology first, we are letting it become determinant: our knowledge of what it can do limits whereas a blank sheet of paper doesn't. We shouldn't ignore either.

If we ban the technology - sure - this is silly, but his seeming "we gotta use it" is scary and will therefore not be adopted by teahers.

If high school content is available as a commodity, then we need "amazing teachers" (similar to my artistic teacher thing)

Great - he's got there, (but by a circumlocuitous route)

Now we're doing "not just the facts"

But, his question of "why do we teach calculus when statistics and probability are more useful as the kids can ask 'where should I put my money' can be answered"

Isn't this just teaching for the workforce? Hasn't his dismissal of calculus shown his lack of understanding of what Maths is?

He wants class to look like TED. OK - like this. Lots of time to discuss, to chase ideas, to experiment and asks for digital literacy (hmmm... see September Australian Macworld education column)

His daughter, Hannah, is "interested in the why, not the what" (nice correlation with Arthur Dent's daughter, Random, here - must follow up)