We’re so Busy, Measuring Academic Time in #Rhizo15

We spend so much time as teachers, learners, academics, instructional designers saying how busy, really really busy we are. Technology was supposed to make things easier right? Along with the flying cars, correct?

What technology has done is connect scholars and ideas like never before. It has also been able to connect people to other people and ideas that one had never heard of. For example @ColinHynson mentioned the Trade School in a #rhizo15 discussion and the philosophy and premise is one that I can really support pedagogically and ethically. The challenge is to find these ideas and engage with that information and not be overwhelmed (woot curation) . The challenge is to measure and dole out our time efficiently. A lovely GDoc was created by @Autumm about the introvert/extrovert spectrum. The last questions speak to this interactivity and who one feels when in a collaborative space (you should really check it out here). Our time is valuable, our time is being measured, in coffee spoons, in exams that one has to grade (I’m looking at you pile o’ exams on my desk that I am going to get to—I just need to finish this blog first)

So for week 2 @DaveCormier (still without a “U” no matter how hard Europe tries to add to his name) asked us to measure, to grade. He even used the lovely Lisa Simpson gif from that amazing episode where the school is on strike and over-achiever Lisa is drowning in her lack of structure, the structure produced by being constantly and consistently graded and measured.

Dave mentioned that the one way to negotiate #rhizo15 is to “find someone who sounds like you.” I have to disagree with him here. Not everyone benefits by negotiating an environment by finding someone who parrots our thoughts. The best insight, the best engagement is where ideas are challenged and new ideas formed (pushing right, or nudging? : ) )

The main concept around week 2 is that learning is a non-count noun, which is true as someone pointed out because learning is also a verb and not only a noun. Like that horribly unmeasurable verb that we see creeping up in learning outcomes so often, “understand,” learning isn’t an absolute, and when you quantify learning in such a minute way you lose the point of learning in the first place. It is the same as the discussions I get into with people about rubrics vs grade descriptors. Rubrics work like an accountant doing taxes, ticking boxes, all numbers, no substance (PS I love accountants, accountants don’t hate me). Grade descriptors speak to the spirit of the work; there is no how many commas do you have? are they Oxford? How many adjectives do you have per sentence? And so on.

So how and what can/should we measure in learning? I have a sneaking suspicion that this really centres around ethics. I am yet to round out what this means exactly; let’s just say in my equation I am at C=π but I don’t have the diameter nor radius yet. But I will get there…it will just take time….