It's is a wonderful feeling when someone echoes your own thoughts so articulately. The title of Aaron Falbel's essay does just this. It's a short essay. You should read it. But I'll go ahead and summarize his suggestions for creating an social environment of learning.
(1) Don't discriminate against the formally uneducated
(2) Resist teaching when not asked - let children decide what they want to learn
(3) Don't discriminate against the uncertified when hiring - assess competence directly
(4) Create an open learning society - don't lock up knowledge in institutions, offer to share it with anyone who's committed to learn
(5) Outlaw exploitative labor NOT child labor - children learn from the world by participating in it
(6) Support libraries, museums, theatres, and other voluntary, non-coercive community institutions with activities for old and young alike
(7) "Finally, think up more ideas of your own! As a society that has been addicted to education for several generations, we have lost the ability to imagine what it might be like to grow up and live in a world free of pedagogical manipulation."
The one that happened to strike me the most was (4). Falbel says "Take on an apprentice. Hang a shingle outside your home describing what you do. Let your friends and neighbors know that you are making such an offer [ to share our skills (not impose) with others] to any serious and committed person." I rather like this notion. I get the feeling that Falbel isn't the biggest fan of the Internet and Information Technology, but hanging a "digital shingle" offering skills and cooperative pursuits of learning seems a powerful way of connecting people. While the current connections facilitated by the Internet today seem rather shallow and self-centered, there is a great potential for facilitating meaningful connections amongst people in the context of learning. There may be no one is my city that's interested in the obscure shit I want to learn or do, but there is likely to be someone on this planet who shares my particular interest at this moment in time.
Also Read:
Edutainment? No Thanks. I Prefer Playful Learning by Mitch Resnick
Growing Without Education by Aaron Falbel
Hard Fun by Seymour Papert
Sunday, March 4, 2007
Thursday, March 1, 2007
Human Power
Ivan Illich notes that "personal energy under personal control " is "the one resource that is almost equally distributed among all people."
Here's an interview with Myriel Milicevic, the head of workshop that explores the potential of using the human body itself as a renewable power source. Some interesting ideas from the article:
+ It's not part of our logic anymore to power our own stuff ; sweating for making things work always had a rather undistinguished connotation
+ At the same time, there are those comforting imaginations about being completely self-sustaining, such as in case of disasters
+ And, human powered energy doesn't necessarily mean lifestyle changes (e.g. computer mouses powered by moving them around, floor panels that capture energy produced by walking)
+ Human powered objects themselves have a fascinating simplicity, it is easy to understand how to use them, which is a quality that often is lost in contemporary high-tech devices.
Is human-power a step backwards into the olden days?
On one hand, we can "passively" harness human energy, allowing to still be lazy and have things work for us. This can be viewed as a means to sustain a lifestyle which involves machines doing work for humans (consuming lots of energy in the process). This would include things like a watch that winds itself by harnessing the movements of our arm that we are going to do anyway.
On the other hand, we can actively engage human power as an end in itself.
Using Human-Powered Things: There is something desirable about self-sustaining artifacts, about intimately engaging with our things. We go to the gym or the park and exert ourselves physically, yet we drive 2 blocks to mail a letter. Surely, there many opportunities to merge human power as both a means and an end.
Designing Human-Powered Things: Myriel Milicevic, who headed the workshop, reminds us that "People can come up with very powerful and creative solutions even with very limited resources." In fact, people come up with very powerful and creative solutions because of limited resources; resources like personal energy under personal control, one of the few resources that is almost equally distributed among all people. I think they is great potential in a renewed enjoyment, as well as equity and sustainability, in designing personal things that we work with rather than things that simply work for us. Engaging human-power is, I think, an important aspect of engaging with our things as both means and ends.
I wonder also to what extent the pleasures and enjoyment of actively engaging human-power are dependent on it being a voluntary choice, an alternative choice to relying on machines and exterior energy sources. Do we need to have things available that work for us, so that can enjoy it when we instead choose to work with things?
Here's an interview with Myriel Milicevic, the head of workshop that explores the potential of using the human body itself as a renewable power source. Some interesting ideas from the article:
+ It's not part of our logic anymore to power our own stuff ; sweating for making things work always had a rather undistinguished connotation
+ At the same time, there are those comforting imaginations about being completely self-sustaining, such as in case of disasters
+ And, human powered energy doesn't necessarily mean lifestyle changes (e.g. computer mouses powered by moving them around, floor panels that capture energy produced by walking)
+ Human powered objects themselves have a fascinating simplicity, it is easy to understand how to use them, which is a quality that often is lost in contemporary high-tech devices.
Is human-power a step backwards into the olden days?
On one hand, we can "passively" harness human energy, allowing to still be lazy and have things work for us. This can be viewed as a means to sustain a lifestyle which involves machines doing work for humans (consuming lots of energy in the process). This would include things like a watch that winds itself by harnessing the movements of our arm that we are going to do anyway.
On the other hand, we can actively engage human power as an end in itself.
Using Human-Powered Things: There is something desirable about self-sustaining artifacts, about intimately engaging with our things. We go to the gym or the park and exert ourselves physically, yet we drive 2 blocks to mail a letter. Surely, there many opportunities to merge human power as both a means and an end.
Designing Human-Powered Things: Myriel Milicevic, who headed the workshop, reminds us that "People can come up with very powerful and creative solutions even with very limited resources." In fact, people come up with very powerful and creative solutions because of limited resources; resources like personal energy under personal control, one of the few resources that is almost equally distributed among all people. I think they is great potential in a renewed enjoyment, as well as equity and sustainability, in designing personal things that we work with rather than things that simply work for us. Engaging human-power is, I think, an important aspect of engaging with our things as both means and ends.
I wonder also to what extent the pleasures and enjoyment of actively engaging human-power are dependent on it being a voluntary choice, an alternative choice to relying on machines and exterior energy sources. Do we need to have things available that work for us, so that can enjoy it when we instead choose to work with things?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)