9 Matching Annotations
  1. Mar 2021
    1. A great little outline for how to do class retrospectives. While there's a lot of subtlety and a huge gradient between individual learners many of the methods and pro/con lists help to show the differences between them. I'd be curious to see one try all (or as many as possibly) to cover as many of the eventualities as possible.

      Too often teachers don't bother with these, but they can be incredibly useful, particularly for helping to attempt to improve future incarnations, as well as to guard against the curse of knowledge.

      I like that hyperlink.academy is doing some of the necessary work to expose their teachers to this sort of material. Too often it is only done in the academy in perfunctory ways which aren't designed to improve anything. Additionally the academy provides little, if any, training in the areas of pedagogy. Hyperlink.academy is making strides to provide some of this material and doing a reasonable job of exposing their teachers to it.

    2. We encourage course creators to dedicate time in their courses for a retro. Every cohort of a course is an experiment shaped by all participants, and what you learn can improve the course in important ways. Getting good feedback from learners is a key part of making sure that the course is always evolving in the right direction.

      This really should be done each class and even down to the atomic level as just once at the end is not going to pull out enough to be as beneficial as one might hope to help to overcome the curse of knowledge.

    1. In the Camerer, Loewenstein and Weber's article, it is mentioned that the setting closest in structure to the market experiments done would be underwriting, a task in which well-informed experts price goods that are sold to a less-informed public. Investment bankers value securities, experts taste cheese, store buyers observe jewelry being modeled, and theater owners see movies before they are released. They then sell those goods to a less-informed public. If they suffer from the curse of knowledge, high-quality goods will be overpriced and low-quality goods underpriced relative to optimal, profit-maximizing prices; prices will reflect characteristics (e.g., quality) that are unobservable to uninformed buyers ("you get what you pay for").[5] The curse of knowledge has a paradoxical effect in these settings. By making better-informed agents think that their knowledge is shared by others, the curse helps alleviate the inefficiencies that result from information asymmetries (a better informed party having an advantage in a bargaining situation), bringing outcomes closer to complete information. In such settings, the curse on individuals may actually improve social welfare.

      How might one exploit this effect to more proactively improve and promote social welfare?

    2. Such research drew from Baruch Fischhoff's work in 1975 surrounding hindsight bias, a cognitive bias that knowing the outcome of a certain event makes it seem more predictable than may actually be true.[5] Research conducted by Fischhoff revealed that participants did not know that their outcome knowledge affected their responses, and, if they did know, they could still not ignore or defeat the effects of the bias.
    3. This curse of knowledge also explains the danger behind thinking about student learning based on what appears best to faculty members, as opposed to what has been verified with students.

      Are there other axes or criteria that might be used other than these two? One seems better than the other, but what appears best to teachers is potentially better than nothing. (Though in cases it could be so bad that nothing may be preferable to a teacher's viewpoint.)

  2. Feb 2021
  3. Dec 2020
    1. Put yourself in the reader’s position and see if you can get a grip on how they might respond to your writing.

      It seems like good advice but it's actually quite hard to divorce yourself from what you know. See the curse of knowledge.

      This is why I think that having this list of questions is a good idea; you don't have to rely solely on putting yourself in the reader's shoes.