5 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2016
    1. who will (and will not) control and define the learning process, who will (and will not) profit from the ways that learning processes are enacted, who will (and will not) have access to science and scholarship and the infrastructure necessary for creating it, who will (and will not) participate in the design of curriculum and assessment and learning spaces, who will (and will not) profit from the benefits of science and artistry, and who will (and will not) have opportunities to attend schools and colleges.

      Several (though not all) of these questions relate to the core sociological one: Who Decides? The list sounds, in part, like a call for deeper and more nuanced “stakeholders” thinking than the typical case study. The apparent focus (at least with parenthetical mentions of those excluded) is on the limits of inclusion. From this, we could already be thinking about community-building, especially in view of a strong Community of Practice.

  2. Jul 2016
    1. shift agency for learning to the learner

      We share this goal. Maybe we focus too much on it. Maybe it’s just a new spin on an old idea. But it’s nice to have a group of pedagogues who want the same thing in this world.

  3. Jun 2016
    1. instructional technologist

      So far, the thrust of the post was about the teacher acting as instructional technologist.

  4. Mar 2016
    1. latent capacity for agency

      Another case for what my friend Kristian Gareau so cogently calls “Spheres of Agency”.