OLDaily

The Future of Web Software Is HTML-over-WebSockets
Matt E. Patterson, A List Apart, 2021/03/01

I understand the criticism of frameworks and Single page Applications (SPA). But I think there are many questions unanswered, but the core of  argument is right here: "Finalized in 2011, support for WebSockets in modern browsers ramped up throughout the 2010s and is now fully supported in all modern browsers. With the help of a small bit of client-side JavaScript, you get a full-duplex socket connection between browser and server. Data can pass both ways, and can be pushed from either side at any time, no user-initiated request needed." I remember Wired coming out with a huge banner headline PUSH in 1997. That's what this is. Maybe it is the time for push. But I have my doubts.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]

Starlink changes everything. It may be the most important form of learning technology of the century
Donald Clark, Donald Clark Plan B, 2021/03/01

One thing we hear every time we talk about online learning outside developed urban areas is the problem of access to the internet. The concern is so pervasive, and basically stops all other discussion, that I just want to wave my hands and say "I know, I know" and keep talking about videoconferencing. But of course I can't. That's why Starlink is so important. It provides internet access - proper broadband internet access - to rural and remote regions worldwide. And that makes it vitally important to online learning. Donald Clark has the details, so I won't repeat them all here. But after all the false starts (for example: WiMax) this may be the real deal.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]

The Concept of "Learning Loss" is Complete BS
Tom Hobson, Teacher Tom, 2021/03/01

"The poor children. Think of the children!" They are, says Tom Hobson, the unfortunate victims of 'learning loss', and have fallen badly behind. "But breathe easy. Fortunately, there are heroes here to save the day: for-profit corporations who just happen to sell exactly the lifesavers we need in the form of curricula, text books, and, most importantly, standardized tests." I think both sides of this are exaggerated a bit, but only a bit. To a large degree, I think, 'learning loss' is a manufactured phenomenon. And it's not like learning hasn't been happening all year. Hobson writes, "we can begin to build something new from what we have actually been learning about ourselves and our world. But first we have to throw the 'learning loss' crowd overboard." Via Aaron Davis.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]

Three traps the edtech strategy must avoid at all costs
Mark Anderson, Schools Week, 2021/03/01

Schools Week is mostly a commercial publication, but I don't know why people would pay for advice like this. Mark Anderson's first bit of advice is "Do not throw technology at schools as a panacea." No. Really? And who is doing this, exactly? I don't think anyone is. His second bit: "Do not keep edtech infrastructure fragmented." This is ridiculous in the opposite direction. Sometimes it makes sense to have a single unified infrastructure, especially in smaller jurisdictions. But often the needs are too diverse to lump everything under one umbrella. Finally, third, "Do not ignore teachers when making policy." Again, I don't think any education system anywhere is ignoring teachers. Not agreeing with them is not the same as ignoring. Pundits, instead of writing gross overgeneralizations their readers want to hear should take on the more difficult issues and challenging ideas.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]

Open Education Week: Share An Inspiring OpenETC Site
Alan Levine, OpenETC, 2021/03/01

I was just going to pass by this item as a contest that, like so many contests, is focused on users of a specific product. But then I saw this bit near the end: "we have a mega list of over 2100 OpenETC WordPress sites." Now a lot of them aren't very good. That's OK. Some are private. That's also OK. There's still plenty to browse through and you may run into something quite interesting. Like this.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]

The Future Includes Human Teachers
W. Ian O'Byrne, 2021/03/01

My first thought on reading the title was to ask, "why would you think this?" The answer pretty much everyone in the field will offer, of course, is that "some things just can’t be automated." But where is the evidence for this? This sentiment is based on an outdated view of artificial intelligencem and automation, one that is based on rules and symbolic processing. But modern deep AI systems are much more nuanced and perceptive. When people like Andre Perry say "computers aren’t capable of the higher-order thinking that teachers can provide," the evidence seems to run counter to that. And when Ian O'Byrne appeals to empathy, saying "a true teacher does not just impart facts; she or he creates a thirst for knowledge and teaches students how to quench that thirst," why would he assume that (say) mirror neurons won't activate just as readily for machines as for people, imprinting on them? There may be many reasons to desire human teachers, but the argument that "machines can't replace teachers" is not one of them.

Web: [Direct Link] [This Post]