"Why does this short video agitate me?"
http://googleblog.blogspot.
Ron: "the Knowledge Graph appears to be some version of semantic web processing using map mapping techniques. I like it"
I do too, and for that reason. Mind-mapping is such an important tool for conceptualizing and connecting information. Frankly, it's underutilized in our kids' instruction. And, when it is used, it is used to manage narrow bits of information. The beauty of a mind map is the beautiful balance and synergy of organization and creativity. I see maps used more for organization of pre-determined info way more than a tool to manage the creative process. Google is doing what they do best by using search results to drive subsequent searches - but this time, it's in a graphic format. The universe is not linear, nor is info. I love that Google has found a way to make this intuitive for people.
Anthony: "Agitate in a good way or a bad way?"
It's both. I am excited about this very human way of cognition driving Google searches. This is how our brains work when we are free to be creative and curious and driven by a purpose.
I wanted to throw my chair out the window when I saw this. It, once again, shows that what we have kids do in the classroom when it comes to managing info is largely cut and paste. I've toyed with this idea in the past (Alan November makes this point as well in his TED video):
In particular, watch from 11:00 to the end.
Essentially, he is making the point that kids are motivated to work hard on the things that matter.
What matters?
Authentic audiences matter. Legacy of their work matters.
What audiences do kids have now?
Mostly the teachers eyes and then Power School.
This is not 21st Century Learning.
Heather: "Relying too much on google to make connections for us when we should be cultivating our own minds to make connections?
Yes. But I don't have a problem with Google writing the code for this product. What I really take issue with this is the fact that tech is eating up the rudimentary thinking and processing that seems to make up the majority of the work kids do in school.
And, yet, we continue to give kids multiple choice exams!!
In a way, this is very much like Mike's example of the water meter readers becoming obsolete in Toronto. Technology has made this work a low-human enterprise.
Robots and technology (no, I am not against either) are going to do this more and more in the future. For example, Khan Academy is challenging a linear math curriculum. Here's my point:
Without application and audience, our kids are doing work that is mundane and un-motivating. It's dead end work and the only reason they do it is for a grade. If we stand by and let Google, et al continue to automate the kind of thinking done in schools then we are on our way to obsolescence as teachers.
I am NOT demonizing technology. After all, their work has an authentic audience. Kids don't need to be building apps for there to be an authentic audience. They need to be in communication with people about the work they are doing. It's exciting, challenging and relevant.
They need to collaborate with peers and adults to gain new understandings as they work through a problem or challenge. This doesn't, necessarily, need tech to accomplish. It does, however, take a teacher with a clear vision of how to create an "ecosystem (November).
In this "knowledge" paradigm:
* kids are working for a purpose
* the purpose drives the research
* the purpose drives the collaboration
* the purpose and collaboration drive and facilitate problem-solving, etc.
* the initial audiences provide clear and timely feedback
* teachers know the "why" of what the kids are doing (content, etc.) and the "how do you know they're achieving 'why' (assessment)?"
* final audiences will see the culmination of all the work (inception, research, revision, etc.)
I know this works. I have seen it and I have done it. And, I miss it terribly. It is a powerful thing to be a part of. It needs guidance and expertise. It also needs a lot of patience. But, mostly, it needs to be done in order for it to be understood.
It's messy and can be disappointing - temporarily. But it's a fair trade-off to the boredom and captivity kids endure in most classes now. Moreover, the messiness and the disappointments are cues for improvement. The resulting tweaks make the process stronger.
Bottom line:
When kids ask us, "When are we ever going to use this?" I want the answer to be, "Today!"
Technology is making some of our practices obsolete. That is a good thing because it's making us better teachers.
No comments:
Post a Comment