- Nov 2022
not really about the content of the sessions. Or anything you take from it. The most important thing are the relationships, the connections you gain from sharing the things you're passionate about with the people who are interested in it, the momentum you build from working on your project in preparation for a session
I somewhat disagree - I think this community building is successful precisely because there is a shared interest or goal. It goes hand in hand. If there is no connecting theme or goal, the groups fall apart.
- Apr 2022
A 2019 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy ofSciences supports Wieman’s hunch. Tracking the intellectual advancement ofseveral hundred graduate students in the sciences over the course of four years,its authors found that the development of crucial skills such as generatinghypotheses, designing experiments, and analyzing data was closely related to thestudents’ engagement with their peers in the lab, and not to the guidance theyreceived from their faculty mentors.
Learning has been shown to be linked to engagement with peers in social situations over guidance from faculty mentors.
Cross reference: David F. Feldon et al., “Postdocs’ Lab Engagement Predicts Trajectories of PhD Students’ Skill Development,” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 116 (October 2019): 20910–16
Are there areas where this is not the case? Are there areas where this is more the case than not?
Is it our evolution as social animals that has heightened this effect? How could this be shown? (Link this to prior note about social evolution.)
Is it the ability to scaffold out questions and answers and find their way by slowly building up experience with each other that facilitates this effect?
Could this effect be seen in annotating texts as well? If one's annotations become a conversation with the author, is there a learning benefit even when the author can't respond? By trying out writing about one's understanding of a text and seeing where the gaps are and then revisiting the text to fill them in, do we gain this same sort of peer engagement? How can we encourage students to ask questions to the author and/or themselves in the margins? How can we encourage them to further think about and explore these questions? Answer these questions over time?
A key part of the solution is not just writing the annotations down in the first place, but keeping them, reviewing over them, linking them together, revisiting them and slowly providing answers and building solutions for both themselves and, by writing them down, hopefully for others as well.
- Mar 2021
Machine learning models for diagnosing COVID-19 are not yet suitable for clinical use. (2021, March 15). University of Cambridge. https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/machine-learning-models-for-diagnosing-covid-19-are-not-yet-suitable-for-clinical-use
- scientific method
- medical image
- peer review
- machine learning
- artificial intelligence
- systematic review
- Apr 2020
Kerzendorf, W. E., Patat, F., Bordelon, D., van de Ven, G., & Pritchard, T. A. (2020). Distributed peer review enhanced with natural language processing and machine learning. Nature Astronomy. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41550-020-1038-y
- Nov 2017
- Oct 2017
review and critique each other’s work.
This is the process of replying to annotations. But annotation can also be leveraged for peer review of student writing.
listen well—to be a good “critical friend.”
Read classmate's annotations, respond appropriately: respectful, challenging...
- Jan 2016