7 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2016
    1. I maintain a great deal of excitement about the potential of the Internet of Things.
    2. Even if I find the experiment itself icky, Milgram offers useful reflections on the bizarre techno theater that made his experiment go.
    3. I’ll be candid. I am quite often an unabashed fan of the Internet of Things.

      Candour may bring us to a new level of dialogue. Sometimes sounds like enthusiasm isn’t allowed, in this scene. Which is a lot of what’s behind the “teaching, not tools” rallying cry. We may be deeply aware of many of the thick, tricky, problematic, thorny issues having to do with tools in our lives. We sure don’t assume that any thing or person or situation is value-free. But we really want to talk about learning. We care about learning. We’re big fans of learning. Cyclical debates about tools are playing in the EdTech court, even when they’re “critical”. Or cynical. Sharing about learning experiences can restore our faith in humanity. Which might be needed after delving so much into the experimental side of social psychology.

    4. I find something ominous about the capital-I and capital-T of the acronym IoT
    5. I sense glee in the language Milgram uses
  2. Apr 2016
  3. Jan 2016
    1. When Brenda starts working with a teacher for the first time, she begins by sharing much more about herself with others than she would have done back in 2008 when she began as an Education Advisor. She finds that it helps to forge a stronger connection.  She remembers hearing someone say that we are constantly asking our students to take risks and share information about themselves with the class and with the teacher, so as teachers we should model this and do the same with our students. This person convinced Brenda that it strengthens bonds, makes us more engaged with each other and makes the teaching and learning much more meaningful and fun.

      Sounds like a key lesson in any type of dialogue.