Digital Fluency: Preparing Learners for 21st Century Digital Citizenship Eighty-five percent of the jobs available in 2030 do not yet exist. How does higher education prepare our learners for careers that don’t yet exist? One opportunity is to provide our students with opportunities to grow their skills in creative problem solving, critical thinking, resiliency, novel thinking, social intelligence, and excellent communication skills. Instructional designers and faculty can leverage the framework of digital fluency to create opportunities for learners to practice and hone the skills that will prepare them to be 21st-century digital citizens. In this session, join a discussion about several fluencies that comprise the overarching framework for digital fluency and help to define some of your own.
Dr. Jennifer Sparrow, Senior Director for Teaching and Learning with Technology and Affiliate Assistant Professor of Learning, Design, and Technology at Penn State. The webinar will take place on Friday, November 9th at 11am EST/4pm UTC (login details below)
how DF is different from DLiteracy? enable students define how new knowledge can be created through technology. Not only read and write, but create poems, stories, if analogous w learning a language. slide 4 in https://www.slideshare.net/aidemoreto/vr-library
communication fluency. be able to choose the correct media. curiosity/failure fluency; creation fluency (makerspace: create without soldering, programming, 3Dprinting. PLA filament-corn-based plastic; Makers-in-residence)
immersive fluency: video 360, VR and AR. enable student to create new knowledge through environments beyond reality. Immersive Experiences Lab (IMEX). Design: physical vs virtual spaces.
Data fluency: b.book. how to create my own textbook
rubrics and sample projects to assess digital fluency.
What is Instructional Design 2.0 or 3.0? deep knowledge and understanding of faculty development. second, once faculty understands the new technology, how does this translate into rework of curriculum? third, the research piece; how to improve to be ready for the next cycle. a partnership between ID and faculty.
“Trump effect” on bullying in schools, citing a study that found higher bullying rates in GOP districts after the 2016 presidential election.
The scientific evidence on what works is complicated.
For example, this 2007 review of anti-bullying programs found “little discernible effect on youth participants.”
twenty-some years of empirical research that shows punishing kids is unhelpful
Instead, he argues that schools should combine consequences for bullies with mediation, counseling or a learning experience.
School shootings and violence have prompted schools to take an even more punitive stance against student misbehavior, experts I talked to said.
the higher a school’s climate rating — that is, the more that students, parents and teachers think their school is a safe place where people are respected — the lower the bullying rates. Similarly, the higher the social-emotional skills, such as the ability to wait and not react impulsively, the lower the bullying rates. But what hasn’t been clearly proven is that improvements in school climate or social-emotional skills will necessarily lead to a reduction in bullying.
“Shifts in students’ learning style will prompt a shift to active construction of knowledge through mediated immersion.”-Chris Dede
The theory of constructivist-based learning, according to Dr. Seymour Papert, “is grounded in the idea that people learn by actively constructing new knowledge, rather than having information ‘poured’ into their heads.”
Moreover, constructionism asserts that people learn with particular effectiveness when they are engaged in constructing personally meaningful artifacts (such as computer programs, animations, 3D modeling, creating spatial environments in virtual reality or building robots).”
Technologies like virtual reality, especially for Gen Z students’, provides avenues that allow them to engage in a social, collaborative, and active learning environment.
Virtual reality, especially when combined with powerful storytelling, allows the student to participate in the story, develop empathy to experiences outside their current realm of understanding and allows them to be fully immersed in their own exploration and learning.
the standard set of middle-class Democratic Party values: Public safety nets were a force for good, corporate greed was a real threat, civil and reproductive rights were paramount.
I remember how good it felt to stand with my friends in our matching college sweatshirts shouting “never again!” and “my body, my choice!”
We would all go to the mat for women’s rights, gay rights, or pretty much any rights other than gun rights. We lived, for the most part, in big cities in blue states.
When Barack Obama came into the picture, we loved him with the delirium of crushed-out teenagers, perhaps less for his policies than for being the kind of person who also listens to NPR. We loved Hillary Clinton with the fraught resignation of a daughter’s love for her mother. We loved her even if we didn’t like her. We were liberals, after all. We were family.
Words like “mansplaining” and “gaslighting” were suddenly in heavy rotation, often invoked with such elasticity as to render them nearly meaningless. Similarly, the term “woke,” which originated in black activism, was being now used to draw a bright line between those on the right side of things and those on the wrong side of things.
From the Black Guys on Bloggingheads, YouTube’s algorithms bounced me along a path of similarly unapologetic thought criminals: the neuroscientist Sam Harris and his Waking Up podcast; Christina Hoff Sommers, aka “The Factual Feminist”; the comedian turned YouTube interviewer Dave Rubin; the counter-extremist activist Maajid Nawaz; and a cantankerous and then little-known Canadian psychology professor named Jordan Peterson, who railed against authoritarianism on both the left and right but reserved special disdain for postmodernism, which he believed was eroding rational thought on campuses and elsewhere.
the sudden national obsession with female endangerment on college campuses struck me much the same way it had in the early 1990s: well-intended but ultimately infantilizing to women and essentially unfeminist.
Weinstein and his wife, the evolutionary biologist Heather Heying, who also taught at Evergreen, would eventually leave the school and go on to become core members of the “intellectual dark web.”
Weinstein talked about intellectual “feebleness” in academia and in the media, about the demise of nuance, about still considering himself a progressive despite his feeling that the far left was no better at offering practical solutions to the world’s problems than the far right.
an American Enterprise Institute video of Sommers, the Factual Feminist, in conversation with the scholar and social critic Camille Paglia — “My generation fought for the freedom for women to risk getting raped!” I watched yet another video in which Paglia sat by herself and expounded volcanically about the patriarchal history of art (she was all for it).
James Baldwin’s line, “I love America more than any other country in the world, and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually
Jordan Peterson Twelve Rules for Life: An Antidote for Chaos, is a sort of New and Improved Testament for the purpose-lacking young person (often but not always male) for whom tough-love directives like “clean up your room!” go down a lot easier when dispensed with a Jungian, evo-psych panache.
Quillette, a new online magazine that billed itself as “a platform for free thought”
the more honest we are about what we think, the more we’re alone with our thoughts. Just as you can’t fight Trumpism with tribalism, you can’t fight tribalism with a tribe.
For the most part, twentieth-century politics was defined by economic issues. On the left, politics centered on workers, trade unions, social welfare programs, and redistributive policies. The right, by contrast, was primarily interested in reducing the size of government and promoting the private sector. Politics today, however, is defined less by economic or ideological concerns than by questions of identity. Now, in many democracies, the left focuses less on creating broad economic equality and more on promoting the interests of a wide variety of marginalized groups, such as ethnic minorities, immigrants and refugees, women, and lgbt people. The right, meanwhile, has redefined its core mission as the patriotic protection of traditional national identity, which is often explicitly connected to race, ethnicity,
or religion.
Again and again, groups have come to believe that their identities—whether national, religious, ethnic, sexual, gender, or otherwise—are not receiving adequate recognition. Identity politics is no longer a minor phenomenon, playing out only in the rarified confines of university campuses or providing a backdrop to low-stakes skirmishes in “culture wars” promoted by the mass media. Instead, identity politics has become a master concept that explains much of what is going on in global affairs.
Democratic societies are fracturing into segments based on ever-narrower identities,
threatening the possibility of deliberation and collective action by society as a whole. This is a road that leads only to state breakdown and, ultimately, failure. Unless such liberal democracies can work their way back to more universal understandings of human dignity,
they will doom themselves—and the world—to continuing conflict.
But in liberal democracies, equality under the law does not result in economic or social equality. Discrimination continues to exist against a wide variety of groups, and market economies produce large inequalities of outcome.
And the proportion of white working-class children growing up in single-parent families rose from 22 percent in 2000 to 36 percent in 2017.
Nationalists tell the disaffected that they have always been core members of a great
nation and that foreigners, immigrants, and elites have been conspiring to hold them down.
When: Friday, September 28, 8:30am-3:00pm Where: Wilson Research Collaboration Studio, Wilson Library Cost: Free; advanced registration is required
1968 was one of the most turbulent years of the 20th century. 2018 marks the 50th anniversary of that year’s landmark political, social and cultural events–events that continue to influence our world today.
Focusing on the importance of this 50 year anniversary we are calling out to all faculty, staff, students, and community partners to participate the workshop ‘Mapping 1968, Conflict and Change’. This all-day event is designed to bring people together into working groups based on common themes. Bring your talent and curiosity to apply an interdisciplinary approach to further explore the spatial context of these historic and/or current events. Learn new skills on mapping techniques that can be applied to any time in history. To compliment the expertise that you bring to the workshop, working groups will also have the support of library, mapping, and data science experts to help gather, create, and organize the spatial components of a given topic.
Workshop sponsors: Institute for Advanced Studies (IAS), U-Spatial, Liberal Arts Technologies & Innovation Services (LATIS), Digital Arts, Science & Humanities (DASH), and UMN Libraries.
Henneping County scanned the deeds, OCR, Python script to search. Data in an open source. covenant data. Local historian found microfishes, the language from the initial data. e.g. eugenics flavor: arian, truncate.
storymaps.arcgis.com/en/gallery https://storymaps.arcgis.com/en/gallery/#s=0 cloud-based mapping software. ArcGIS Online. organizational account for the U, 600 users. over 700 storymaps creates within the U, some of them are not active, share all kind of data: archive data on spreadsheet, but also a whole set of data within the software; so add the data or use the ArcGIS data and use templates. web maps into the storymap app, Living Atlas: curated set of data: hunderd sets of data, from sat images, to different contents. 846 layers of data, imagery, besides org account, one can create maps within the free account with limited access. data browser to use my own data – Data Enrichment to characterized my data. census data from 2018 and before,
make plan, create a storyboard, writing for the web, short and precise (not as writing for a journal), cartographic style, copyright, citing the materials, choosing the right map scale for each page. online learning materials, some only thru org account ESRI academy has course catalogue. Mapping 101, Dekstop GIS 101, Collector 101, Imagery 101, SQL 101, Story Maps 101,
The “Mapping 1968, Conflict and Change” planning committee is very pleased with the amount of interest and the wonderful attendance at Friday’s gathering. Thank you for attending and actively participating in this interdisciplinary workshop!
To re-cap and learn more on your thoughts and expectations of the workshop we would be grateful if you can take a few moments to complete the workshop evaluation. Please complete the evaluation even if you were unable to attend last Friday, there are questions regarding continued communication and the possibility for future events of this kind.
Künstliche Intelligenzen und Roboter werden in unserem Leben immer selbstverständlicher. Was erwarten wir von den intelligenten Maschinen, wie verändert ihre Präsenz in unserem Alltag und die Interaktion mit ihnen unser Selbstverständnis und unseren Umgang mit anderen Menschen? Müssen wir Roboter als eine Art menschliches Gegenüber anerkennen? Und welche Freiheiten wollen wir den Maschinen einräumen? Es ist dringend an der Zeit, die ethischen und rechtlichen Fragen zu klären.
1954 wurdeUnimate, der erste Industrieroboter , von George Devol entwickelt [1]. Insbesondere in den 1970er Jahren haben viele produzierende Gewerbe eine Roboterisierung ihrer Arbeit erfahren (beispielsweise die Automobil- und Druckindustrie).
Definition eines Industrieroboters in der ISO 8373 (2012) vergegenwärtigt: »Ein Roboter ist ein frei und wieder programmierbarer, multifunktionaler Manipulator mit mindestens drei unabhängigen Achsen, um Materialien, Teile, Werkzeuge oder spezielle Geräte auf programmierten, variablen Bahnen zu bewegen zur Erfüllung der verschiedensten Aufgaben«.
Ethische Überlegungen zu Robotik und Künstlicher Intelligenz
Versucht man sich einen Überblick über die verschiedenen ethischen Probleme zu verschaffen, die mit dem Aufkommen von ›intelligenten‹ und in jeder Hinsicht (Präzision, Geschwindigkeit, Kraft, Kombinatorik und Vernetzung) immer mächtigeren Robotern verbunden sind, so ist es hilfreich, diese Probleme danach zu unterscheiden, ob sie
1. das Vorfeld der Ethik,
2. das bisherige Selbstverständnis menschlicher Subjekte (Anthropologie) oder
3. normative Fragen im Sinne von: »Was sollen wir tun?« betreffen.
Die folgenden Überlegungen geben einen kurzen Aufriss, mit welchen Fragen wir uns jeweils beschäftigen sollten, wie die verschiedenen Fragenkreise zusammenhängen, und woran wir uns in unseren Antworten orientieren können.
Aufgabe der Ethik ist es, solche moralischen Meinungen auf ihre Begründung und Geltung hin zu befragen und so zu einem geschärften ethischen Urteil zu kommen, das idealiter vor der Allgemeinheit moralischer Subjekte verantwortet werden kann und in seiner Umsetzung ein »gelungenes Leben mit und für die Anderen, in gerechten Institutionen« [8] ermöglicht. Das ist eine erste vage Richtungsangabe.
Normative Fragen lassen sich am Ende nur ganz konkret anhand einer bestimmten Situation bearbeiten. Entsprechend liefert die Ethik hier keine pauschalen Urteile wie: »Roboter sind gut/schlecht«, »Künstliche Intelligenz dient dem guten Leben/ist dem guten Leben abträglich«.
