3 Matching Annotations
  1. Jun 2022
    1. essentially all neuroscientists agree that our understanding of the brain is nowhere near the level that it could be used to guide curriculum development.

      This looks like an interesting question...

  2. Nov 2021
    1. Courses should prioritize flexibility and experimentation.A course should be designed as a living structure, and be constantly tuned to the ongoing experience, adjusted based on what each participant brings and needs.

      Similar ideas discussed here: Ellis, B., & Rowe, M. (n.d.). Guided choice-based learning (No. 4). Retrieved November 29, 2021, from https://inbeta.uwc.ac.za/2018/02/09/4-guided-choice-based-learning/

  3. Dec 2020
    1. Academic research and teaching often necessitate manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding, etc. This “manipulation, re-creation, breaking, rebuilding” — in other words, hacking

      It's not self-evident to me that these activities are the same as those associated with hacking (and I'm not talking about the malevolent/negative connotations of hacking).

      I also think of a hacker as a tinkerer, which can include "manipulation, re-creation, breaking, building, etc." but need not. It feels like there's something fundamental missing here but I can't put my finger on it.

      I don't really have a conclusion here, other than to suggest that the hacker/scholar relationship might need a lot more development than I see here.