I’d especially like to thank my students in Video Games & Education, who were observed playing World of Warcraft as part of our discussion of MMOGs.

The session was called, Not Knowing and the Politics of Powerlessness in Empire. The two other papers were good. I especially liked Mike Hayes‘ idea of “generation” (via Hardt & Negri) as opposed to participation in his talk, “The Deschooled citizen: Educating the Citizen of Empire.” While he wasn’t talking about the internet and “participatory culture.” I think it is relevant.

Overall, the Illich SIG attracts an interesting group of scholars, and the round table, with about 16 people, included snacks, inspired a spontaneous poem, and had cupcake artwork.

I was very happy that friends Liz de Freitas, Robbie McClintock, and Devayani Tirthali came to hear the paper. Without further ado, here’s the title abstract and link to full paper:

To Know Is Not Important: an exploration of knowledge and equality

This paper questions the idea that knowledge is central to our understanding of learning and education. In particular it investigates the “knowledge is power” paradigm that underlies both neoliberal education reform and critical pedagogy. Ivan Illich and Jacques Rancière offer a counter narrative, where ignorance, not knowledge is power. Power, from this view, cannot be packaged as knowledge, but is evident in horizontal, convivial, democratic relationships.

Read the full paper at http://matt.curinga.com/static/papers/knowledge-equality.html

More generally, I don’t think of our (the university, the program) mission as only to offer courses, degrees, and research. I think that we need to find a variety of formal and informal ways to engage with the local communities. I hope that we can offer ongoing low-cost or free workshops, on a regular basis. Ideally, these will be student led, in areas where students are passionate. This is a trial for what those might look like.

As a trial, we’re targeting areas that I think will garner the most immediate interest amongst classroom teachers, of various levels. This time around we’re going to offer workshops on SMARTBoards, iPads & Android tablets, shooting/editing video, building websites with WordPress, and teaching with Wikipedia. I’m doing the iPad and Wikipedia sessions. Gus Andrews of the Media Show is doing the video and WordPress sessions, and Vania Duarte, a very experienced Math teacher and adjunct faculty member is leading SMARTboards.

Special thanks to Mitch and Tom from FCPE for the excellent and quick work in getting this online.

3.21.2012, 5:30pm | Adelphi Manhattan Center 75 Varick Street, 2cnd Floor

Schools are rushing to get iPads while banning cell phones. Mobile computing offers always-connected, just-in-time learning at the students finger tips; but remains difficult to integrate into schools.
Join us to discuss these and other concerns. Hear from a panel of mobile technologists, teachers, and researchers.

Panelists:

Dominic Mentor is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at Teachers College, Columbia University. He initiated and co-teaches the nation’s first mobile phone learning class and a course on cognition and handheld devices. His research interests include the social impact and pedagogical potential of mobile communication, social media and mLearning. Dominic has consulted with various groups and organizations on utilizing the power of social media, designing and implementing multimedia rich e-learning initiatives, knowledge management, and converting departmental silos into collaborative cognitive sharing spaces. Dominic’s recent publications look at texting as it supports student connectedness as well as social media in adult education. Dominic holds a doctorate in Instructional Technology from Teachers College, Columbia University.

Leslie Kerner is Vice President and General Manager of Professional Services at Wireless Generation — one of the first and a leading developer of mobile technology to support K-12 education. Leslie is responsible for the division that builds and manages the training, professional development, and consulting services Wireless Generation offers to schools. She manages a team of instructional designers and consultants to develop and deliver face-to-face and online services that help teachers use data from mCLASS® and other assessments to differentiate instruction in their classrooms. Leslie was selected as a 2010 Fellow for the Aspen Institute-NewSchools Fellowship: Entrepreneurial Leaders in Public Education. Leslie holds a B.A. from Northwestern University and an M.B.A from Duke University.

Laura Martin holds a doctorate in Educational and Instructional Technology and serves currently as an adjunct professor in the Department of Communications Studies at Long Island University, and in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction and the Levermore Global Scholars program at Adelphi University. She teaches an array of courses in educational technology, media communications, global studies and writing. In each course she integrates cutting-edge technologies including graphic media, social media, mobile technologies, virtual worlds, and a wide array of Web 2.0 tools. She has collaborated with the Mineola USFD on iPad technology integration, and is currently implementing a character education program, at the Elmont USFD, along with Dr. Devin Thornburg. This program blends education, iPad technology, and The Arts. Dr. Martin is also the president of Tech-ology, Inc., an education and media consulting company, and is the editor of a children’s book series and author of a corresponding curriculum/activity book.

Matt Deluca is a 5th grade teacher in the Mineola School District where he has taught for 16 years. Matt holds a B.A. from the College of William and Mary and an M.Ed. from Bank Street College of Education. He has also pursued his Administrative license, but has decided that his place is in the classroom in the company of kids. As a teacher leader, Matt has presented workshops on teacher-led classroom walk-throughs at the National Association of Elementary School Principals convention and at the National Staff Development Council annual convention. After school Matt directs three shows each year, working with high school, middle school and elementary school actors.

Andrew Cohen is founder & CEO of educational technology start-up, Brainscape — a leading developer of educational software for the iphone and ipad. Andrew developed the first version of Brainscape to help him study French after having become frustrated with other language software. While completing his Masters in Education Technology at Columbia University, he coined the term “Confidence-Based Repetition” and dedicated his degree toward researching how and why the method was effective. Before starting Brainscape, Andrew spent nearly a decade developing eLearning solutions for large corporations, U.S. government offices, the United Nations Development Programme, and the World Bank, across four continents.

Facilitator:

Matthew X. Curinga organized and will facilitate this discussion about mobile learning and schools. He is an Assistant Professor and Director of Adelphi University’s Program in Educational Technology. His recent research is concerned with politics, social media, and society. Matt is the former CTO and co-founder of the mobile software developer Crisp Wireless and former lead developer at IAG Research, now part of Nielsen Media. The inspiration for this panel grew out of the Mobile Learning course he teaches at Adelphi. He holds a doctorate in Instructional Technology & Media from Teachers College, Columbia University.

This event is free and open to the public, but an RSVP is required. Contact Dia Bacon at dtbacon@adelphi.edu or call 212-965-8340 x8350 to reserve your seat.

Sponsored by the Adelphi University Ruth S. Ammon School of Education Program in Educational Technology

A 19 year old woman posts on "We are the 99%"

I’m moderating a panel on “The Occupy Movement” as part of Adelphi’s 7th Annual United Nations Peace Conference, where the theme this year is Youth, Social Media, and Global Change. The panel will consist of scholars, activists, and scholar-activists.

As the moderator, it’s my job to have some interesting questions in mind. Here’s what I’m thinking:

1. Why do some kids, high school or college get involved in activist projects while others do not? With the intermingling of social media and political activism, has the ‘typical’ youth activist changed or broadened?
2. There is a concern in our society that our youth are being corrupted in some ways by Facebook, texting, etc. For example, a recent talk here at Adelphi fears that we are raising the “Dumbest generation”. To what degree do you agree with this sentiment, that new modes of communication privilege shallow relationships and understanding over more thoughtful and meaningful actions? Do the roles young people play in Occupy suggest we should rethink or refine how we frame problem?
3. How does Occupy try to engage the mainstream media? Do you consider mainstream media a primary or secondary concern for activists? Can you talk about some of your experiences where social media crossed over to mainstream media?
4. In many ways, Occupy is a movement to counter corporate power. The second line of theSep. 29 OWS Declaration reads, “We write so that all people who feel wronged by the corporate forces of the world can know that we are your allies.” When it comes to Occupy’s onw use of media, though, big corporate/venture capital brands like Google/YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter dominate. Is there a danger here? Should we try to move away from these systems, or work within them to subvert them?
5. Can you talk about ways that you have used, or seen social media used, to bridge local movements nationally and globally? For example, interaction between the different Occupy camps and advice and interaction with activists in North Africa/Mideast or other parts of the world?
6. Occupy’s media campaigns have some clear successes. For example the language of the 99%/1% is now part of our shared political discourse. Are there other successes that you can point to? Messages that you hope to get out there which haven’t landed yet?
7. The openness of social media is a double edged sword. The same affordances that let messages spread quickly and widely, can make it easy for police and political enemies to track and infiltrate activist groups. Has this been a concern in your use of social media? Do you have any advice on how to use social media in a secure way, where it does not put activists at risk?

The event is open, but you need to RSVP.

What would you like to ask?

This guy killed me at least 50 times.

Over break I was preparing to teach Learning with Video Games and decided to check out Deus Ex: Human Revolution. It’s the kind of game I like…mostly a FPS, but with a good narrative, multiple ways to tackle problems, … I decided to use it for one of the play assignments for the course, when we talk about narrative in games. But, this isn’t a game review, just a friendly tip.

I was playing the game on standard difficulty, and moving through without much trouble, except for the (much maligned) boss fights. The boss fights were a bit of a challenge. I had decided to play using minimal force, mostly using non-lethal force on opponents and using my praxis upgrades for hacking. But, after a few tries and a good fight, the first two bosses went down.

Not so for Jaron Namir, boss number three. You see, I got the bad chip upgrade (in part to see what the game would do). But, I kept getting my ass kicked.

After some (a ton) of frustration, I went on line for some help. I found some hints, but nothing that I hadn’t tried and nothing that worked. If you happen to be in the same position, this post is for you.

What I had

• heavy machine gun
• plasma rifle
• stun gun
• 3 EMP mines
• 1 EMP grenade
• 2 frag mines
• 1 gas mine
• lots of ammo

What I tried (in order, more or less)

1. hit and run: basically, I would take my best shot, throw a grenade, and run away. From the starting position, I would get a good head shot with various weapons, throw grenades, etc. Running, I was able to stay alive for a while, but couldn’t seem to score much damage. Eventually I’d run into Jaron and die (by typhoon, mostly)
2. Search for bigger guns. Without going nuts, I looked around upstairs for bigger guns. The inventory above is what I found. It didn’t do me much good.
3. But, I did find a turret that I had hacked earlier. I had the arm augment for heavy items, so I brought it down with me. I went back to plan 1, but with the help of the turret. Didn’t do me much good.
4. Went online for hints. Turret seemed most credible, but it wasn’t helping me.
5. Front loading mines. From the elevator, before stepping out into the cut scene, I would toss out all my mines. I tried various placements, including throwing to Jaron’s initial position. No go.
6. Throwing the turret in various places before exiting the elevator. Mostly just tossed my best weapon on its head, facing a wall.

What worked

1. Get the turret (turn it to “enemies”).
2. Before you leave the elevator, throw an EMP mine into the center ring, in front of the elevator.
3. Pick up the turret.
4. Leave the elevator for the cut scene.
5. Stay alive, when the fight starts, in the outer ring.
6. When you hear your EMP go off, it will stun Jaron.
7. Run over and hit him with another EMP.
8. Your turret should take care of him while he’s stuck there.

If you don’t have the strong augmentation (and I think at least level 2 hacking), you cannot carry the turret down. This technique might work with your own fire power, but I wasn’t able to keep him still long enough to finish him off. You are better off looking for a praxis kit somewhere upstairs.

Good luck.

Artist's concept of possible colonies on future mars missions. NASA

Graeber argues, humorously, that in a very postmodern way, we have simulation of the science fiction vision, instead of a material realization. He pointed to the special effects of Hollywoord movies, which have made fantastic gains in the last 50 years. His main thesis, though, was that one of visions of the 50s and 60s was the disappearance (or at least reduction) of manual labor. For me, he successfully argued that, along with space exploration, there was a sincere belief that manual tasks would be mechanized and automated to a large degree. Instead, we have the simulation of mechanization by outsourcing labor tasks to China and Mexico (for example). The same tasks (e.g. building cars) are then carried out in a more labor intensive process than in the U.S., but the labor itself is hidden.

Looking especially at the work of Alvin Toffler (Future Shock) and George Gilder, Graeber notes a reactionary political fear that the current direction (in the 60s and 70s) of technology development would lead to a loss of control. In part, this movement led technology research away from technologies of material production toward immaterial, cognitive, and information technology. Graeber does not attribute the failure of our technological gains solely, or even mostly, to the political class. He argues that corporatism and bureaucracy played an equally important role. With good humor, he raised the three different forms that he needed to sign as an indication of the bureaucracy that has insinuated itself into all aspects of (Western) life today. He asked how many hours (days, week?) of our life are spent filling out paperwork.

Graeber claims that the greatest achievement of the capitalism today, is that it prioritizes politics over rational economics. The current capitalist class will sacrifice economic gain in order to maintain political hegemony. Effectively, this limits our possible horizons: capitalism does not offer a “progressive narrative” of a “redemptive future” — a future society which offers a better life for all. It has, though, dampened “poetic technologies.” Graeber contrasts the (failed) grand visions of the Soviet Union (beaming alternate energy sources from satellites in space, seeding the seas to end world hunger), to the grudging pessimism of capitalist societies that our current system, despite limitations and inequity, is the best system that can work in the “modern world.” According to Graeber, poetic technologies are not inherently good or incompatible with capitalism. Coast-to-coast railways were a capitalist, poetic technology realized under a less corporate capitalist structure.

Clearly, Graeber is underwhelmed by the Internet as a means to radically transform or re-envision society. While I enjoyed the scifi framework for the talk, I’m not sure that it will hold up to close scrutiny. Graeber ignores some important technological realizations. He specifically downplays military technology, where I would argue we very much have the killer robots we feared in the 1950s. For me, the final message was that we ignore the material base of society at our own peril. While this may seem obvious, it is easy to be submerged by arguments about immaterial production or cognitive capitalism; and lulled (or trolled) into the minutia of internet freedom, software patents, and copyright licenses.

Surely Facebook, Apple, and Google do not offer a vision of a redemptive future. Graeber suggested that 3D printers may be a poetic technology, but I think he invites us (the people, the “Left”) to recapture the optimism and vision that we have lost.

Girls using XO Laptop in South America

Although the readings probably won’t change much, the assignments and flavor of the class should meet the needs of the students. Here are some of the different ideas that I have in mind.

Scholarship

This is the first idea that I had in mind. We would engage with the scholarly literature on mobile learning and work, as a class, to produce our own published work. I’m thinking something like an open content e-book released on Wikibooks or a similar site.

We would all write a chapter of The Educator’s Guide to Social Media. Potential chapters would, more or less, follow the course topics:

1. a brief history of mobile computing
2. mobile technology infrastructure for teaching and learning
3. mobile interfaces, usability, and affordances
4. laptops, netbooks, tablets and 1:1 computing
5. GIS and location-based services
6. mobile media production
7. mobile games for learning
8. understanding and evaluating “apps”
9. mobile science and math
10. mobile arts and humanities
11. mobile social sciences
12. conclusions and a look ahead

Seminar

While the scholarship model would focus on scholarly writing and synthesis, a related format would focus on reading. The reading seminar is the most straightforward, different students would lead the seminar each week, including creating the reading list for their sessions. We would shoot to read about 80-100 pages a week, and to build both depth and breadth in the primary research literature on m-learning.

Design

The design model would focus on designing interactive media for mobile learning. The readings would focus more on the social and cognitive affordances of mobile media, as well as the specific technical capabilities of mobile computing devices. The final project would be a complete design (not implementation) of either an “app” or mobile website, or other (e.g. SMS) mobile learning system.

Research

My research paradigm could actually be split into two different ideas, or combined into two research projects. First, I would like to, as a class, conduct new research into the types of “apps” for learning that are available for ipad and Android tablets. There has been a rush to get these devices into schools, and into the hands of kids. Quite often, people tell me that the kids are learning “critical thinking” or something equally abstract by using an edutainment style app. I propose that we conduct a study of Effective mlearning designs for tablet computers. To conduct this research, we would: a) identify what we consider good designs for mlearning (by reviewing the literature in mobile and other learning sciences), and then reviewing apps that are available through Android markets and the Apple app store. We could gear our study more towards case studies of a few apps, or we might come up with a framework to do some quantitative analysis on the various types of apps for learning that are out there.

The other research idea would ask students to design their own study and to conduct field research with either adult or young users. They could test anything from how kids use touch screens, to how college students use text messaging to collaborate on homework and other school assignments. For their final paper, they would write up their findings in a journal style paper (and/or do a conference style poster).

Curriculum & teaching

Last, but not least, we could focus the course on how to integrate mobile into teaching and curriculum. Each student would have to create a lesson for the other students in the class that deeply integrates mobile technology. They would specify any readings, deliverables, grading, etc. Then, they would teach a class for their peers and evaluate the lesson.

As a final project, each student would create a unit plan (for an age and subject of their choice). Mobile would have to be central—assignments that could not be completed without a mobile device. Also, though, the lessons would have to be good curricula: tied to valuable learning goals, encourage critical thinking, differentiated for different learners, etc.

Those are the ideas. I’m open to feedback, comments, and suggestions for other models, so, let me know!

Why the NYC Panel for Educational Policy (PEP) Must Go

The Occupy Wall Street movement has ignited our social imagination and helped form a coalition of the 99%. Some of the enemies of the 99% are easy to spot: housing foreclosures, bank bailouts, Citizens United. While not as well known, the New York City Department of Education’s Panel for Educational Policy (the PEP) is just as emblematic of the class warfare the 1% wages. The PEP is meeting tonight, December 14, 2011, to decide on school closings and charter school co-locations in New York City. A group of concerned parents, students, and public school teachers have gathered around the idea of #OccupyTheDOE. They will attend tonight’s meeting to demand that the PEP be disbanded. I want to explain why I agree with them and why I think you should too.

What is the PEP anyway?

The PEP is actually the New York City Board of Education. According to its bylaws, “it shall be known as the Panel for Educational Policy.” The bylaws don’t explain why, but it’s probably because “board of education” implies elected board members. Instead, the 13 voting members of the board are all appointed — 8 by the mayor and 5 by the borough presidents. Since the mayor appoints a majority of members, and proposals require a simple majority to pass, the mayor’s appointees can (and do) make policy by fiat.

Every month the PEP meets and votes on proposals regarding contracts, DOE budgets, grade truncations, and, especially, school closings and charter school co-locations. A co-location occurs when a public school is forced to house a charter school in its building and share resources such as playground, gym, cafeteria, library, classroom space, etc.

Reviewing the minutes for the six meetings for school year 2011-12 (to date), we find that there is not a single proposal where the Mayor’s appointee’s did not vote as a bloc, including in a meeting with 22 school utilization (co-location) proposals. The typical pattern is that the Mayor’s Bloc approves the proposal, the Manhattan and Bronx appointees oppose it, and the other BP appointees swing or abstain. This holds, except, for example, when Manhattan appointee Patrick Sullivan proposed at the August 2011 meeting that they add $29M dollars to the school budget: the Mayor’s Bloc used their 8 “nays” to promptly squash the idea.

In short the Mayor’s Bloc has never met a public school they wouldn’t close or a charter school they didn’t like.

Why it matters

Having such a mockery of democracy sitting at the head of the nation’s largest school district is an abomination. The PEP wields both material and symbolic power, and, as I mentioned at the start, are a clear enemy of the 99%.

Bad policy

They are the main instrument for implementing policy which affects the 1.1 million students in the NYC system. Their main purpose is to shroud policies conceived by the zeroeth percent (Bill Gates, richest man in America for many years) and pushed by our billionaire mayor (the 0.000001%) in the barest trappings of democracy. Without autonomy, diversity of ideas and opinions — and without engaging with the public they serve — the PEP is doomed to make poor decisions.

Hidden curriculum

When education theorists talk about the “hidden curriculum” in schools they mean the ways that schools instill ideas and values in students that are not found in the content of the official curriculum (i.e. textbooks, lessons, exams, etc). Researchers concerned with how poor and working class students are treated in schools, like Jean Anyon and Michael Apple, argue that the schools of the 1% expect their students to become creative leaders and teach accordingly. The main focus for the 99%, though, is to get the right answer and to not disrupt school. To look at it another way, compare the back-to-basic and zero tolerance discipline approach championed by our charters with the creative, loose style found in New York’s elite private schools like Dalton or Trinity. If the the 1% want Trinity for their own kids, why do they want KIPP for everyone else?

Sorry, I got side-tracked. That’s not the hidden curriculum that I wanted to talk about in regards to the PEP. The PEP encodes a different message: parents and communities have no role in the education of their children. The DOE makes its decisions behind closed doors. Parents, teachers, even principals are rarely consulted. This was clear last year, when staff from Uncommon Schools started coming to PS 9, my son’s elementary school, to check out the space before any public hearings on co-locations were announced. The same back room dealing is evident today, where Success Academy is announcing its new Brooklyn charter school before it’s been voted on. Like everyone else, Success Academy knows that there is no chance the PEP will not approve its co-location.

Alienating parents and children from their own learning is the surest way to deprive them of a powerful education. Schools do not have a monopoly on education and cannot succeed if they are not connected to society and communities.

Democracy and education

Almost 100 years ago New York’s own John Dewey reflected on the the role schools and education in a democracy. He eschewed the shallow link between schools and democracy which argues that electoral democracies need an educated population to make informed decisions at the polls. Dewey understood, rather that true democracy greatly transcends voting for elected officials. He writes:

A society which makes provision for participation in its good of all its members on equal terms and which secures flexible readjustment of its institutions through interaction of the different forms of associated life is in so far democratic. Such a society must have a type of education which gives individuals a personal interest in social relationships and control, and the habits of mind which secure social changes without introducing disorder. Democracy and Education, ch 7, 1916

For Dewey, the measure of a democracy is found in the interdependencies linking different segments of society, the ability of members of society to participate as equals, and the possibility that society can change in the public interest. I agree with Dewey that such a robust democracy can only be supported if society’s members experience it in their own education.

We are failing that ideal in many ways in this country. Nowhere is the failure more acute than in the Panel for Educational Policy.