Group items tagged

“21st Century Literacies” compiled by Cathy N. Davidson Media theorist and practitioner Howard Rheingold has talked about four “Twenty-first Century Literacies”—attention, participation, collaboration, and network awareness—that must to be addressed, understood and cultivated in the digital age. (see, http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/rheingold/category?blogid=108&cat=2538). Futurist Alvin Toffler argues that, in the 21st century, we need to know not only the three R’s, but also how to learn, unlearn, and relearn.  Expanding on these, here are ten “literacies” that seem crucial for our discussion of “This Is Your Brain on the Internet.” •  Attention:  What are the new ways that we pay attention in a digital era?  How do we need to change our concepts and practices of attention for a new era?  How do we learn and practice new forms of attention in a digital age? •  Participation:  Only a small percentage of those who use new “participatory” media really contribute.  How do we encourage meaningful interaction and participation?  What is its purpose on a cultural, social, or civic level? •  Collaboration:  How do we encourage meaningful and innovative forms of collaboration?  Studies show that collaboration can simply reconfirm consensus, acting more as peer pressure than a lever to truly original thinking.  HASTAC has cultivated the methodology of “collaboration by difference” to address the most meaningful and effective way that disparate groups can contribute. •  Network awareness:  What can we do to understand how we both thrive as creative individuals and understand our contribution within a network of others?  How do you gain a sense of what that extended network is and what it can do? •  Design:  How is information conveyed differently in diverse digital forms?  How do we understand and practice the elements of good design as part of our communication and interactive practices? •  Narrative, Storytelling:  How do narrative elements shape the information we wish to convey, helping it to have force in a world of competing information? •  Critical consumption of information:  Without a filter (such as editors, experts, and professionals), much information on the Internet can be inaccurate, deceptive, or inadequate.  Old media, of course, share these faults that are exacerbated by digital dissemination.  How do we learn to be critical?  What are the standards of credibility? •  Digital Divides, Digital Participation:  What divisions still remain in digital culture?  Who is included and who is excluded and how do basic aspects of economics, culture, and literacy levels dictate not only who participates in the digital age but how we participate? •  Ethics and Advocacy:  What responsibilities and possibilities exist to move from participation, interchange, collaboration, and communication to actually working towards the greater good of society by digital means in an ethical and responsible manner? •  Learning, Unlearning, and Relearning:  Alvin Toffler has said that, in the rapidly changing world of the twenty-first century, the most important skill anyone can have is the ability to stop in one’s tracks, see what isn’t working, and then find ways to unlearn old patterns and relearn how to learn.  This requires all of the other skills in this program but is perhaps the most important single skill we will teach.  It means that, whenever one thinks nostalgically, wondering if the “good old days” will ever return, that one’s “unlearning” reflex kicks in to force us to think about what we really mean with such a comparison, what good it does us, and what good it does to reverse it.  What can the “good new days” bring?  Even as a thought experiment—gedanken experiment—trying to unlearn one’s reflexive responses to change situation is the only way to become reflective about one’s habits of resistance.

In short, it seems worthwhile to avoid argument with (other) enthusiasts for artificial intelligence by conceding dominance in the distant future of cerebration to machines alone.

There will nevertheless be a fairly long interim during which the main intellectual advances will be made by men and computers working together in intimate association. A multidisciplinary study group, examining future research and development problems of the Air Force, estimated that it would be 1980 before developments in artificial intelligence make it possible for machines alone to do much thinking or problem solving of military significance. That would leave, say, five years to develop man-computer symbiosis and 15 years to use it. The 15 may be 10 or 500, but those years should be intellectually the most creative and exciting in the history of mankind.

It is often said that programming for a computing machine forces one to think clearly, that it disciplines the thought process. If the user can think his problem through in advance, symbiotic association with a computing machine is not necessary.

Orban's dream is that thousands of years of human subservience to machines will end because we will teach our machines how to not only take care of themselves, but how to take care of us as well.

Though faculty may attempt to utilize the same teaching methods in a distance environment that they would employ in an equivalent on-campus class, the data from the current study suggest that faculty will encounter significantly different learning preferences as well as other different student characteristics.

I think he would protest the extent to which schooling — assisted by computers or not — continues to be largely dominated by a mindset presupposing young people will not learn unless they are taught, and how few freedoms are offered students to self-direct their own learning.

I am convinced that the best learning takes place when the learner takes charge.