Presenter: Aaron Silver, ADL
We are stuck on metaphors older than millenials
The problem is the Internet - 30 years (active)
- Structure based on files and folders
As we become more into the digital / online environment - our interactions carry over offline.
- Affect how we interact with each other in the real world
- How we think about learning / social issues is changing
Our metaphors aren't cuddly
We are becoming less cuddly as a result
We should connect with each other online the way we WANT to connect with each other offline
- We don't think in file systems and folders or see each other as a folder
- We are in places, we participate in shared experiences
The challenges we face as augmented people in an as-yet crudely augmented world are great.
We are augmented with persistent access to information
- Cell phones near ubiquitous
- But our virtual information sources are good, not great
Google - good, but not great
- ERIC - quality of information curated / vetted
- At Google - mixed with everything
Automated, at-hand knowledge isn't always and/or exactly what we need.
Google is convenient, but not necessarily good for us (like McDonalds)
We have opportunities to do better because / in spite of technology
He uses his network to help others with people's biggest learning tech challenges
- The network took YEARS to build (as did mine)
- Enable reuse of learning objects
- Solving the problem of interoperability
- In 90s - problem of custom-portals to track learners. If 1 part of gov't had great course, another needed to use it - couldn't move it from one system to another.
+ Essentially had to rebuild the course.
- Took proprietary and open standards. Figure out how to work together. Create framework. Became a de-facto standard
- Drove adoption - US Government. Then adopted by others.
SCORM is a product of the 90s.
- Google was an upstart
- No facebook, My Space
- No smartphones
- GPS not ubuquitous
- No iphone, ipad, etc
- The world today is different.
What will be useful for the NEXT 10-20 years?
- Game theory
- Computational linguistics
- General semantics
- Modeling and Simulation
- Narrative Environments
- Knowledge Space
- Organizational change
These are things that will help with the bigger thing that is converging
- How do they all fit together?
- Unified Field Theory - your success/experience is dependent on other people's successes/experiences
- Before - viewed as scarcity
- Last several years - shift to abundance-thinking.
- How you interact with others or NPCs (non-player characters)
- Teach computers to communicate with people.
- Friendly software should listen and speak
- Mathematical side (the implementation and programming) and psychological side (cognitive process that constitutes human language)
- If it understands what I am saying, and get what I MEAN - then it can give me the information I want in the way I understand it.
General Semantics - "The map is not the field"
- Building an awareness of abstractions
- A map of something is an abstraction of the actual field.
- We become more focused on the language we are using over the actual thing we are describing
- The more we interact with each other and the more we focus on the method, words etc , the less we focus on the actual issue.
Modeling and Simulation
- Models are simplified representations of actual systems intended to promote understanding
- How things work
- Can be tricky - the model itself has to be understood first.
- Too many details - model becomes overwhelming and precludes understanding.
- Too few - may miss something important
- Simulations - how we test our assertions about the interactions
- Tell stories that engage all senses of an audience
- Use experience to build better narratives
- Use them to better improve their storytelling
+ The feedback from those working with the narrative helps the creators improve the environment for better engagement and understanding
- The possible states of what a learner knows
- Sub-discipline of mathematical psychology
- Asking SMEs how they solve a particular problem that they are expert in.
+ Ask many
+ Map out answers
+ Can later use the information to build an intelligent service to help OTHERS figure out how to solve a problem
+ Will both deliver AND ask questions to evaluate where the person is in that particular knowledge space
- Harness change to create, innovate and grow.
- Balance organizational strategy and social responsibility
- Cross-section between Business and Education
- Change is constant. Gotta learn how to roll.
- The challenge for change agents - if you are really going to do change, as you changing the environment, the sand under the environment is changing with you.
+ Gotta learn how to rapidly re-focus and re-assess
- Useful tools for inquiry and evaluation around knowledge, beliefs, are, morals, law, custom, habits
- Try to understand people within their own social context
- Way cultural anthropologists ask questions is a way to drive reflection
+ Great for raising awareness of your cultural context
- We form Heuristics
+ Things we do by rote - algorithms
+ Heuristics - how we figure out those algorithms
- We can't separate ourselves from the cultural context
- When we learn something new, we apply old things to help understand it.
Our tools for understanding the offline and online world have been different
- Files / folders - online
- places / context / experience - offline
- But we are now starting to change our understanding of the offline world with the same metaphors as the ONLINE world.
- We probably need to reverse that so that our online metaphors match our OFFLINE metaphors.
People are not organizational structures.
"Architecture of Actualization"
- The list of fields is a nudge.
- The journey doesn't have a destination yet
Architecture - discipline. Structures and environments with consideration for aesthetic effect
Actualization - full realization of one's potential
"He...possesses the ability to ...judge people correctly"
- embrace reality and facts
- solve problems
- accept and evaluate others, lacking prejudice
Doing stuff? Or getting stuff done?
- We all work with people who do stuff.
- But a few people get things done.
- the people who get things done are actualized / actualizing
Plentiful research on self-actualization.
(I won't link to it)
No one will talk about group actualization
- Hasn't found sources yet.
For all the talk about social networking and learning - why are we talking about THAT?
- Why are we not talking about developing people? We are at the supplying info level. Supplying info does not equal development
- Army - "Be all you can be". Very singular. Me. No talk about "Be all you ALL can be"
Social learning - learning evidenced from vicarious activity shared through near-peer relationships
There are dynamic groupings. Not sure we are becoming and individual collective.
- Still connecting dots
(Jay Allen: some buzz about distributed cognition - sum of the individual collectiveness. All must act in a concerted manner. The group level of cognition that makes things happen in that environment. Not one person can do it.)
- Still trying to identify the changes.
(Jay: OUr knowledge melding...)
- Not trying to build the hive mind
(Audience: cognitive synergy - if throw into facebook, becomes a reality which becomes a fact. Literature is out there)
As classroom teacher - goal was to earn a paycheck
- Mentor teacher - too ambitious to be in the classroom
- Hard to hear, took advice.
- Degree in Educational Technology - changed perspective.
+ Who's REALLY writing the text?
+ What are the questions behind the question?
- Listening to things to try, experiences, failures to have
The realization that the metaphors are WRONG - things started to make sense
People who are at rest stay at rest until acted on by others.
GPS for learning (an idea)
- Push vs. Pull
- You could research every direction with a map.
- But we use the tool to figure out where we are, where want to go. Computer figures out how to get there.
- Why can't we learn that way
Metadata - breaks like peanut brittle, not as tasty and a lot harder
- Find stuff on Google / LMS etc
+ Get list - you decide
- Just because everyone is linking to it doesn't mean that it is right for you (or even correct!)
- Metadata works in the time you are capturing
- Hard to capture
- When do capture - if look at later, your takeaway / perspective has changed
- Hard to modify
Paradata - how something is experienced by you
- ex. Like button, Digg
- ex. Twitter geolocation - where you were when you read it
- What was your feeling etc.
- When you have all of these different pieces of paradata - you have context
Context = aggregation of paradata
- We can mine contextual information
- link between you and what you are looking for
- You look for something. Decide what is right and choose it. The link between the 2 is metaparadata
Facebook / Google "Privacy"
- They don't necessarily want to know everything about you.
- They want to aggregate who you are, what you look for, what you decide is correct / what you want
- More they can figure out metaparadata about you - better they can rank and result the search / information
- What you think you are looking for may not be what you ultimately decide is correct
Next 10-20 years is full of this stuff.
"Context" is broad term.
GPS for learning
- Without direction, we learn without purpose
- If you are not going to APPLY what you learn - what is the purpose?
- People and tools will help nudge us
Live tweeting is feedback that makes one pervasively aware of their performance
- Presenter could adjust the perfomance to give you more or less
- To do that - must trust what you are reading
- It needs to be in a context he can work with (no trolls not even here)
Trusted Brokers - in order to have this pervasive awareness / feedback, may need to be fed through trusted brokers.
- Connect the connectors
- The trusted broker can connect the anonymous to the other
- Brokering the information exchange
- Like peer evaluations / 360 feedback. It all goes to 1 person. That person is brokering the information
Near-peers - folks who know a little more or a little less in a given Knowledge Space.
- If everyone the same - you have an echo changes
- More advanced - get advice, you learn.
- Experts don't want to exchange with those just learning.
- Less advanced - you give advice, they learn, you may learn too.
To do this - everyone has to own their own data
- Not by google, gov't, facebook
- The interfaces for systems that will work like this are protocols. Not platforms or applications
To do this - needs to be distributed by everyone
- Could be VW, mobile, things we haven't even designed yet.