To me, the most interesting about this program is that it sounds like it’s targeting post-secondary institutions. There are multiple programs to “teach kids to code”. Compulsory education (primary and secondary) can provide a great context for these, in part because the type of learning involved is so broad and pedagogical skills are so recognized. In post-secondary contexts, however, there’s a strong tendency to limit coding to very specific contexts, including Computer Science or individual programs. We probably take for granted that people who need broad coding skills can develop them outside of their college and university programs. In a way, this isn’t that surprising if we’re to compare coding to very basic skills, like typing. Though there are probably many universities and colleges where students can get trained in typing, it’s very separate from the curriculum. It might be “college prep”, but it’s not really a college prerequisite. And there isn’t that much support in post-secondary education. Of course, there are many programs, in any discipline, giving a lot of weight to coding skills. For instance, learners in Digital Humanities probably hone in their ability to code, at some point in their career. And it’s probably hard for most digital arts programs to avoid at least some training in programming languages. It’s just that these “general” programs in coding tend to focus almost exclusively on so-called “K–12 Education”. That this program focuses on diversity is also interesting. Not surprising, as many such initiatives have to do with inequalities, real or perceived. But it might be where something so general can have an impact in Higher Education. It’s also interesting to notice that there isn’t much in terms of branding or otherwise which explicitly connects this initiative with colleges and universities. Pictures on the site show (diverse) adults, presumably registered students at universities and colleges where “education partners” are to be found. But it sounds like the idea of a “school” is purposefully left quite broad or even ambiguous. Of course, these programs might also benefit adult learners who aren’t registered at a formal institution of higher learning. Which would make it closer to “para-educational” programs. In fact, there might something of a lesson for the future of universities and colleges.

Sign of the times? One part is about economics as the discipline of decision-making. Economists often claim that their work is about any risk/benefit analysis and isn’t purely about money. But the whole thing is still about “resources” or “exchange value”, in one way or another. So, it could be undue influence from this way of thinking. A second part is that, as this piece made clear at the onset, “education is big business”. In some ways, “education” is mostly a term for a sector or market. Schooling, Higher Education, Teaching, and Learning are all related. Corporate training may not belong to the same sector even though many of the aforementioned EdTech players bet big on this. So there’s a logic to focus on the money involved in “education”. Has little to do with learning experiences, but it’s an entrenched system.

Finally, there’s something about efficiency, regardless of effectiveness. It’s somewhat related to economics, but it’s often at a much shallower level. The kind of “your tax dollars at work” thinking which is so common in the United States. “It’s the economy, silly!”

Sounds fairly damning for a business based on helping diverse students with the labour market…

Page 63

Publication indicators as proxies for quality. Despite the many problems with peer review, publication indicators are used to evaluate Scholars for hiring promotion, finding, and other Rewards. Weather appropriate or not, outputs of the system in the form of data, documents, and Publications are easier to measure than are the inputs such as Scholars time, education, reading of scholarly literature, and research activities in their Laboratories and libraries. More time in the laboratory or in the library does not necessarily translate into more or better research, for example. While it is understandable that the recognition of Scholars should be based heavily on quality assessments of their scholarly contributions to their fields, it is essential to distinguish clearly between quality of scholarship and the use of indicators such as the publication form and citation counts as proxies for quality.

For example, the type of bulb and reflector greatly impact how much light reaches your cannabis plants

this matters because your cannabis=plants need good light

this connect to me because i have had a bulb that is good to grow weed.

The Others.

At the risk of sounding cynical (which is a very real thing with annotations), reaching a global market can be very imperialistic a move, regardless of who makes it.

Much hiding in this passing comment. As adjuncts, our contributions to the system are perceived through the exploitation lens.

Though that may not really be the core argument of the piece, it’s more than a passing point. Watters’s raising awareness of this other type of “military-industrial complex” could have a deep impact on many a discussion, including the whole hype about VR (and AR). It’s not just Carnegie-Mellon and Paris’s Polytechnique («l’X») which have strong ties to the military. Or (D)ARPANET. Reminds me of IU’s Dorson getting money for the Folklore Institute during the Cold War by arguing that the Soviets were funding folklore. Even the head of the NEH in 2000 talked about Sputnik and used the language of “beating Europe at culture” when discussing plans for the agency. Not that it means the funding or “innovation” would come directly from the military but it’s all part of the Cold War-era “ideology”. In education, it’s about competing with India or Finland. In other words, the military is part of a much larger plan for “world domination”.

Don’t know what the stats are for “non-profit universities and colleges” but it does feel like an increasing portion of their budgets go to marketing, advertising, PR, and strategic positioning (at least in the United States and Canada).

Somewhat surprising, in the current context.

In education as in health, things get really complex when people have an incentive for people not to improve.

Though it’s not exactly the same thing, you could call this “instrumental” or “pragmatic”. Of course, you could have something very practical to amplify learning, and #EdTech is predicated on that idea. But when you do, you make learning so goal-oriented that it shifts its meaning. Very hard to have a “solution” for open-ended learning, though it’s very easy to have tools which can enhance open approaches to learning. Teachers have a tough time and it doesn’t feel so strange to make teachers’ lives easier. Teachers typically don’t make big purchasing decisions but there’s a level of influence from teachers when a “solution” imposes itself. At least, based on the insistence of #BigEdTech on trying to influence teachers (who then pressure administrators to make purchases), one might think that teachers have a say in the matter. If something makes a teaching-related task easier, administrators are likely to perceive the value. Comes down to figures, dollars, expense, expenditures, supplies, HR, budgets… Pedagogy may not even come into play.

Valuing the teaching profession.

That the justice system is unfavor and, it doesn't look into evidence

Good to know. Somewhat surprising.

Wish they said more. No-cost solutions are neat for one-offs, but pedagogues should be wary of building their practice on services which may start requiring payment.

Time-sensitive, mission-critical, just-in-time, realtime, 24/7…

No.

While this may be true, it sure is sad. Especially as the emphasis on cost is likely to have negative impacts in the long run.

You mean it’s not just about the price of textbooks??

Few types? It's like other applications such crocodoc or docs?

We visited this project in the scope of our Travel for Transition project.

Please feel free to reach out to us if you want to know more about the project: hi@travelfortranstion.com

Meeeoow!!!

Key word here, I imagine, is "can." It probably all depends on how the time on Minecraft is structured, and I worry that I haven't done this well enough for my students.

I agree that this is a false promise, at least an exaggeration.

This idea of magic recipes to success or greatness is not new though. A couple of examples [The Toyota Way] The GE way

hmm I wonder if he knows where the expression "For the Win" comes from. I didn't until I took the Gamification course and then started noticing it in Warcraft.

But, but… Eric said it wasn’t marketing!

One sure does.

How many units of learning per dollar?

In direct opposition with the model for most universities, these days. So that may be the fork in the road. But there are more than two paths.

Who came up with such a scheme? A mad scientist? We’re far from Bologna.

There might be something about the connection between learning and “health & wellness”.

And the shift away from “access to content” is still going on, a decade and a half after Napster. If education is a “content industry” and “content industries” are being disrupted, then education will be disrupted… by becoming even more “industrial”.

The battle is raging on, but the issue is predetermined.

One linear model, represented in something of a spiral… Agreed that the transformative experience is tough to “disrupt”, but the whole “content delivery” emphasis shows that the disruption isn’t so quick.

There are a few key cases, here. a) Public Education (much of the planet) b) Parent-Funded Higher Education (US-centric model) c) Corporate Training (emphasis for most learning platforms, these days) d) For-Profit Universities (Apollo Group and such) e) xMOOCs (learning as a startup idea, with freemium models) f) Ad-Supported Apps & Games (Hey! Some of them are “educational”!)

The idea that there’s a “Great Unbundling of (Higher) Education” needs not be restricted to the business side of things, but it’s partly driven by those who perceive education as an “industry”. Producing… graduates?

More consolidation in the LMS market?

In all the platform news, we can talk about “learning management” in view of instructional and course design. But maybe it even goes further than design into a variety of practices which aren´t through-designed.

Important claim, probably coming from the need for reports which answer the “But does it scale?” question.

The reverse of the typical “goal displacement”. Instead of focusing on ensuring our continued employment as “instructors”, we want to make sure learning happens. Deep down, we know we’ll find ways to work, no matter what happens. The comparison with health can be interesting. If doctors had an incentive to keep people sick, society wouldn’t benefit much. Allegedly, Chinese healthcare provides incentives for doctors to help people stay healthy. Sounds like it’d make sense, somehow. Yet education and health are both treated like industries. We produce graduates, future employees, etc. Doctors produce people who fit a pattern of what it means to be healthy in a given social context. There’s even a factory-chain metaphor used when some people apply “lean management” to hospitals or colleges. Not that the problem is with the management philosophy itself. But focusing so much on resource allocation blinds us from a deep reality: as we are getting healthier and more “learned”, roles are shifting.

Education, she sure is changing.

Is this really a just request?

Is it significant that Helen has no lines? Is she even real, or just an idealized (and thus silent) version of femininity?

Probably, it would be helpful to know why one would like to analyse fragments of phrases. Fragments are not utterances, they don't have a truth value, they only appear as parts of bigger phrases and their grammaticality can not be judged. Furthermore fragments are highly ambiguous. "und auf die" e.g. could be a part of "Er wartet auf Maria ["und auf die" Kinder"], or "Er trinkt wieder ["und auf die" Kinder hat er wieder nicht aufgepasst]." In these 2 structures, what is coordinated are completely different things (PPs or CPs). It is the complete structure which reveals the function and the combinatorial potential of its parts.

Coindexation of "he" with "cousin" in (7a) and "she" with "cousin" in (7b) could make it more clear that it is not an interpretation like (6b) which is intended. The same conindexation could be used in (6) to make the marking consistent.

italics for emphasis? since you have talk very much about sexus.

To make the point of syncretism (and not of "portmanteau morphemes") clear, it would be better to give the example pairs that coincide "as (43a) and (43d) and (43c) and (43e) show".

italics for emphasis

italics for emphasis

Singular

The number of the example would be helpful

Italics would help to understand that "optimal" is used here as an example.

adjectives have positive, comparative and superlative wordforms

It would be good to make this point clearer with an example.

Peoplelokbacktotheirtimeasdualisticthinkers,andto theirfaiththatiftheyjustputenoughefortintoproblem solvingsolutionswouldalwaysapear,asagoldeneraof certainty.Anintelectualapreciationoftheimportanceof contextuality and ambiguity comes to exist alongside an emotional craving for revealed truth.

an objective set for the Sprint that can be met through the implementation of Product Backlog. It provides guidance to the Development Team on why it is building the Increment. It is created during the Sprint Planning meeting. The Sprint Goal gives the Development Team some flexibility regarding the functionality implemented within the Sprint. The selected Product Backlog items deliver one coherent function, which can be the Sprint Goal. The Sprint Goal can be any other coherence that causes the Development Team to work together rather than on separate initiatives.

http://www.pythonlearn.com/ | A great resource for starting programmers looking to build knowledge and gain skills. Open Source Course

Annotations might be a better way of doing footnotes because you are not taken to a completely different place thus losing your place in the text.