I’ve been blogging & thinking about software in education for a while. One of the biggest changes in what I read has been the increase in out of the box solutions & a decrease in bending things in unexpected ways. I am more interested in the latter. See Folk Interfaces
• The FastScripts menu can now be presented by keyboard shortcut even if the menu bar icon is not visible
This is nice, I can keyboard the menu then see the shortcuts I’ve forgotten.
Another trio of fascinating links. podviaznikov.com took me to montaigne.io which the site is made with. Montaigne is a simple tool that allows you to publish any type of website from Apple Notes , the docs are not yet complete but I certainly want to keep an eye on.
Embarrassing word swaps, grammatical errors and other typos?
And the main one that influences how I use it is HyperCard.
I prefer keynote’s simpler interface, but this is a great description of using open ended software in the classroom.
Always worth thinking about what “free” means. I think there is something in the idea of teachers exploring software, finding possibilities, testing & playing with pupils and evaluating. As opposed to using software designed for education by big tech.
End of an era approaches?
Some thoughts about making choices about the software and systems you use, they may have hidden positives or negatives.
- Ian Guest (@IaninSheffield)
- Aaron Davis (@mrkrndvs)
- My Secret Art of Blogging – Read Write Respond
- Banning Ads Is Nice, but the Problem Is Facebook’s Underlying Model | Hapgood
- Sal Soghoian
Featured image, iPhone screenshot, edited in snapseed
Yesterday I tweeted a link to a great post, the transcript of a talk about some social aspects of technology and how allowing technologist to lead our progress might have negative impacts on our privacy and lives, here is a quote.
Those who benefit from the death of privacy attempt to frame our subjugation in terms of freedom, just like early factory owners talked about the sanctity of contract law. They insisted that a worker should have the right to agree to anything, from sixteen-hour days to unsafe working conditions, as if factory owners and workers were on an equal footing.
Companies that perform surveillance are attempting the same mental trick. They assert that we freely share our data in return for valuable services. But opting out of surveillance capitalism is like opting out of electricity, or cooked foods—you are free to do it in theory. In practice, it will upend your life.
This spoke very much to some thoughts I’ve been having about our relationship to technology companies. Some of these were sparked by Dean Groom, Why not to buy Minecraft Education Edition. Some more idaea were discussed at the Always on (them) event at the University of the West of Scotland and I am in the midst of exploring those in a few microcasts, tagged DigitalUWS & microcast (one down a few more to go).
I’ve not come to any great conclusions but I do think it is something we should be thinking a lot harder about.
More grist arrived today from Stephen Downes:
I can see how the presentation would engage school leaders looking for a way to address current trends in learning, but they need to look beyond the single-vendor approach proposed here, and they should be clear that technology companies are service providers who are held accountable for delivery, not partners taking a hand in pedagogical and educational decisions.
I know myself enough to recognise that I am somewhat enthralled by technology and software. I certainly need to think about my relationship, on so many levels, with the technology I use. Should we be addressing this in the classroom with our pupils?
featured image is probably walking a copyright tightrope, but seems appropriate