tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post6227865139693628911..comments2024-03-26T23:57:42.268-04:00Comments on SpeEdChange: "Invisible Technology"?irasocolhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01412837280249622430noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-82240106583156631342010-04-14T17:24:07.240-04:002010-04-14T17:24:07.240-04:00I think a place where we can draw the line is wher...I think a place where we can draw the line is where not being deeply familiar with technology causes daily anxiety and considerable inefficiency, because this will, in the long run, lead to a decrease in students' well-being. <br /><br />This doesn't just go for technology in the sense I'm sure you're thinking of now, but really every kind of tool necessary for life. Here's an example with cooking. I was trying to make my own Pad Thai last night with my neighbor. He cooks tremendous meals as a hobby, so I asked him to stop by not only for his delightful company, but also to help make sure I don't screw things up too badly. I think cooking is an important part of life, but to be honest, my fiancee usually does most of it and I've been taking her for granted (just like the clueless mother, I'm sure, will take advantage of her likely more tech-savvy children). So while cooking last night, I cut things really slowly and dangerously, had substantial problems with timing, and even burned my neighbor - all causing a lot of unnecessary stress. So my neighbor taught me a few tricks, like for cutting things more efficiently and safely, and told me more about the food I was cooking, warning me, for example, that my shallots would start turning golden-brown in the frying pan rather suddenly.<br /><br />When I asked my neighbor how he learned all of these tricks, he just said, "Well, I wanted to know, so I looked up some videos of professional chefs on YouTube." Cooking and other "tech" is pretty simple to learn - the only thing that stops us is anxiety and pride. So I'm going to try to learn more about cooking now and it will improve my life. Others may still always look for the convenient meal that can help them stay ignorant, but that's why these new generations are supposed to live shorter than their parents - poor diet.<br /><br />I agree one hundred percent with Ira - we don't need more convenient tech as much as we need more empowering and hackable tech.Chris Fritzhttp://powertothelearner.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-9547832080907621092010-04-13T23:32:14.522-04:002010-04-13T23:32:14.522-04:00Dean,
I'm working on this - you've challe...Dean,<br /><br />I'm working on this - you've challenged some key things. I think two things have happened with cars. They've gotten to be digital - which, of course, we don't understand, and schools have dropped auto shop, which, 30 years ago was something every 8th grade boy took.<br /><br />So now we pay $150 to replace spark plugs instead of spending 8 minutes on that task. This is only easier if you have the extra $150.<br /><br />But still, if we're smart, we pick our cars carefully, looking at our needs. We know how to adjust the seats, the steering wheel, the mirrors, we know when to change the oil, we understand how to apply the brakes in different situations. I'd argue that we still understand a great deal about how our automotive technology works.<br /><br />But then, learning systems seem far more important to me - in terms of personalization needs - than transportation systems - simply because of the complexity of the human brain. And perhaps "easiest" and "pre-packaged" is not always a good. <br /><br />I think we've had 500 years to observe what is wrong with an unchallenged, opaque, information delivery technology. The book was so simple, the technology so "invisible" in our hands, that we never noticed how much the technology controlled not just the delivery, but the forms of communication, and how it determined the kinds of thinking society prized (linear) and who was smart (good alphabetic decoders) and even how story-telling was formed (the novel).<br /><br />There's always a two-way push in our culture. We like easy, but millions watch the Food Network every day to see cooking being complex, controllable, and difficult. We have people who'll do our whole interiors for us but DIY big box stores do very well because lots of people want to know how so they have control and power. And we have the iPad for a certain 2 million people, and Linux for 10 million others.<br /><br />But school, in my mind, should be about curiosity, discovery, challenge. So I don't like pre-packaged history and I don't like pre-packaged technology.<br /><br />However, despite my love of shifting the gears in automobiles, I'm glad I have that automatic, and the ability to drive one-legged, these days.<br /><br />- Ira Socolirasocolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01412837280249622430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-70028523812791515412010-04-13T23:31:53.817-04:002010-04-13T23:31:53.817-04:00Since at least the 19th century, technology hasn&#...Since at least the 19th century, technology hasn't been about what everyday folks can "do", it's about what they can "use". Whether that's a car, book, iPhone. Sure, you can "do" stuff with all these things, but you have to "use" the device to "do" it.<br /><br />I argue that the only retort to this is intense customization, personalization, improvisation, and anti-Essentialism. And all that stuff is the stuff that's really going to direct and re-direct culture in the digital age.<br /><br />ShellyAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14091328599818819777noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-58278991542865718562010-04-13T22:07:14.098-04:002010-04-13T22:07:14.098-04:00In many ways the technology that has already moved...In many ways the technology that has already moved even more quickly towards "invisibility" is the automobile. Consider a car 30 years ago. Almost everyone knew how to tinker and had fairly basic understandings of the engine. Today, cars are made in such a way that only people with the very specialized equipment can tinker, even then it's not really possible. <br /><br />For most of us, that's fine. I only see a car as a place to transport me. I'm not one who would spend extra for design, I only want reliability. The choice is about design and performance. But no one "owns" their car like they did 30 years ago. Most of us aren't complaining. We want our cars to be invisible.<br /><br />I think computers are moving in the same direction. I don't know if that's good or bad but as I think about vehicles, I'm okay with it. <br /><br />I get what you're saying but increased automation of these technologies are, for the most part good. I don't want to go back to a standard transmission.Dean Shareskihttp://ideasandthoughts.orgnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-39612817851967757212010-04-13T15:59:51.425-04:002010-04-13T15:59:51.425-04:00These are all great comments, and I'm wonderin...These are all great comments, and I'm wondering if Nina's somehow goes with Clint's: There is a time for magic.<br /><br />But let me bring a couple of things up. We all know that "current" classroom technology is only "invisible" to those who are good at it. Which is like Windows feeling somewhat invisible to me, or xhtml feeling invisible to my son who is a programmer. For all the kids who struggle with reading, or holding a pen correctly, or sitting "still" in a classroom chair, or tolerating an hour long class session, these are incredibly obvious technologies - and one of the reasons I feel teachers don't know how to deal with any of this is that they have been taught to pretend that those aren't really technologies - in other words - that those technologies are invisible.<br /><br />So, yes, Clint has a point, after teaching kids the technologies of math communication for five years, we can focus on that technology in the classroom instead of the display technology, and that is a good thing in some ways. But to never discuss the display technologies seems absurd. And when schools say, iPads will replace laptops, that's what they are suggesting.<br /><br />And WmChamberlain is right too. There is nothing wrong with easy, but as I said to him on Twitter, I've seen too many destroyed screw heads created by terrible driver choice, to really believe that "even a bad tool gets the job done."<br /><br />So here's the thing - and maybe <i>especially</i> in Clint's math class. I want students to use the technologies but also know enough about them to choose well, and enough about them to adapt these technologies and future technologies to their needs if they want to express their math knowledge down the road. And if you can't figure out how to bring the IWB technology itself into a math class - or the technology of the book into a history or English class - you're not really trying, are you?<br /><br />- Ira Socolirasocolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01412837280249622430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-35291144704469066242010-04-13T15:38:42.077-04:002010-04-13T15:38:42.077-04:00My previous example wasn't ideal. Let me sugge...My previous example wasn't ideal. Let me suggest this one instead: I've seen interactive whiteboards in use by talented math teachers. They bring to life concepts and approaches to learning that I couldn't have imagined in my schooling. There's no doubt in my mind that they enhance learning of the subject at hand. <br /><br />However, in the math classroom, during a math lesson, the IWB shouldn't be noticed. It should be invisible in order for the math lesson to be as effective as possible. <br /><br />Rather than thinking of technology as a "thing in schools", it should be considered in isolated scenarios, with the prime learning objective of the moment in front of our minds. Of course there should be opportunities for students to learn the details of IWB design, manufacture, and function, but not in that math class at that moment.Clint Buhshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14404749566577463942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-9511908857176571532010-04-13T15:29:01.296-04:002010-04-13T15:29:01.296-04:00There's a point in this debate that I think is...There's a point in this debate that I think is overlooked: For every learning scenario,there will be a limit to what technology can (or should) currently be understood. It would create an infinite comprehension loop if we were to try and evaluate every learning tool we use. <br /><br />For example, say a teacher uses a device to pass media to her students. Should the student automatically be expected to understand the device's operation? What about the components with the device? Microchips would require a microscope and chemistry lab to examine. Should we then research the making of the glass elements of the microscope and its other workings? <br /><br />There's always a cap where technology becomes invisible. It's not a choice, but a function of limited time and resources. At some point, we use a tool to understand another tool one level below it. The top-level tool is often transparent in its functionality out of pure necessity. <br /><br />I'm not sure anyone has made the argument that no attempt should be made to understand technology, but that some tools must remain invisible within a given learning environment in order for the primary teaching objective to be achieved.Clint Buhshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14404749566577463942noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-64733597005948515992010-04-13T15:06:39.522-04:002010-04-13T15:06:39.522-04:00I think most people, especially non-educators, don...I think most people, especially non-educators, don't think or want to think about the issues you bring up. They simply want a tool that does the job they want it to do. I know Doctorow means what he writes, but I don't think it matters when someone wants to use the iPad to watch a video or surf the net. What is wrong with easy?<br /><br />Often educators look at issues, ideas, things through the eyes of learning or teaching. Maybe we need to expand our outlook.Wm Chamberlainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06692221214846665588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19457872.post-66918076175321716132010-04-13T14:53:02.976-04:002010-04-13T14:53:02.976-04:00This post makes me think of my friend who is an en...This post makes me think of my friend who is an engineer who designs large scale magic tricks. As an exhibit designer, I always aspired to make exhibits that were like the most beautiful magic tricks--a wow with completely hidden technology.<br /><br />But of course, magic tricks are meant to deceive and impress. Making them is an incredible learning experience; consuming them is not. For many people, magic tricks are frustrating and unpleasant because they dictate a controlling power relationship. <br /><br />I think we need a combination in this world--some magic artworks and experiences that blow us away, and then lots of tools so we can make our own stuff.Nina Simonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11723930679606298550noreply@blogger.com