By Stephen Downes
April 8, 2005
Sony Patents Imaginary Brainwave
Broadcasting
According to this item, Sony has
patented "the concept of beaming ultrasonic signals into a
person’s brain to transmit recorded images or sounds." Now
of course, "no experiments had been conducted, and that the
patent “was based on an inspiration that this may someday
be the direction that technology will take us." Given that
you don't actually have to invent anything to get a
patent, the author wonders (as do I) "Why aren’t science
fiction writers loaded, then?" By Joel Johnson, Gizmodo,
April 8, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Education as Toaster
Well, it's
an interesting analogy. "We put bread in, and toast comes
out. Teachers are the toaster operators. The field of
educational technology is responsible for the engineering
and marketing of the toasters." Taken to a certain point,
the analogy - intending to contrast the division of labour
in other industries with the artisan nature of learning -
works. But on the other hand - who wants mere toast? Via Trey Martindale.
By Nathan Lowell, Cognitive Dissonance, April 8, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Shock of the Old 2005
Good
presentation by Derek Morrison (and read the slides
(2.62 Mb PDF); the notes by themselves don't really do the
job). Morrison writes, "there are now so many opportunities
and services arising 'out there' that it's perfectly
feasible that if institutions are found wanting in their
future IT/e-learning infrastructure and services provision
that the teachers and students will migrate to systems and
services about which institutions have no knowledge and
over which they certainly will not be able to establish any
control." By Derek Morrison, Auricle, April 8, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
How to Let Educational Systems
Talk
Good background on the new IMS General
Web Services spec describing the three major scenarios
described and what they mean in general terms. Despite the
heroic effort to make arcane topics accessible I think
average readers will still find it too technical. But
that's OK because average readers won't care - the
differences between the models described are like the
differences between the how your computer connects to a web
server as opposed to an instant messaging server. But if
you are writing software intended to be accessed by a
learning management system, then you need to follow this
item. By Wilbert Kraan, CETIS, April 6, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
ADL Plugfest 9 Proceedings Available, Some
Notable Presentations
Scott Leslie links to
presentations from the ADL Plugfest held in February and
now available online. There is a lot of content here, too
much to summarize (because it's too much to read before
today's newsletter deadline). But hey, if you want to fill
your week-end with SCORM, this is the place. By Scott
Leslie, EdTechPost, April 7, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
ID and SCORM
Some good points in
this presentation, but author David Wiley takes a stance
that is more to the middle of the road for my liking (Scott
Leslie calls him a "a lone voice in the wilderness," and he
probably is in the ADL crowd, but from my perspective he is
more establishment - it's all point of view, I guess).
Anyhow, Wiley sets up a nice distinction between the
"Centralized / Top-down Camp" (which favours intelligent
tutoring systems, automated LO assembly systems, advanced
visualization techniques and the like) and the
"Decentralized / Bottom-up Camp" (which favours large scale
self-organizing social systems, content creation, and
more). But his main point is that design consists of
"making instructional choices under a set of constraints"
and that the right design is a little of each camp,
depending on the constraint. Viewed from this perspective,
SCORM, as a set of constraints, is "not about people
learning more, better, or faster," but instead, enabling
interoperability and distance learning - and design,
therefore, is "getting the job done" within the
constraints of SCORM. By David Wiley, ADL Plugfest,
February 23, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Is
Phoenix the Future?
Interview with Gary A.
Berg, dean of extended education at California State
University Channel Islands, who, according to this article,
"eceived extensive access to University of Phoenix
administrators and faculty members." Observes Berg, "what a
tenured faculty member from a traditional university would
notice most is their lessened influence... here is nothing
like a faculty senate. Faculty members at the University of
Phoenix are completely and very intentionally left out of
operational decisions." The future represented by the
University of Phoenix - "increased use of part-time
faculty, intensive formats, standardization, distributed
and distance learning formats, an emphasis on assessment" -
is also being seen at traditional institutions. By Scott
Jaschik, Inside Higher Ed, March 28, 2005
[Refer][Research][Reflect]
Remember...
[Refer] - send an item to your friends
[Research] - find related items
[Reflect] - post a comment about this item
Know a friend who might enjoy this newsletter?
Feel free to forward OLDaily to your colleagues. If you received this issue from a friend and would like a free subscription of your own, you can join our mailing list at http://www.downes.ca/cgi-bin/website/subscribe.cgi
[About This NewsLetter] [OLDaily Archives] [Send me your comments]
Copyright © 2005 Stephen Downes
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons License.