May 19, 2014, 12:25 pm
Right now I’m preparing for a talk I’m giving next month, in which I’ll be speaking on using technology to connect students, faculty and institutions to the fundamentally human activities of learning and growth. Of those three groups – students, faculty, and institutions – I’m finding it to be a lot easier to talk about students and faculty and their relationship to technology than it is to talk about institutions. I’m wondering: Why is that?
After all, people are messy – we are a combination of social backgrounds, economic statuses, geography, past learning experiences, attitudes, preconceptions and more. When we advocate for the “use of technology” in learning, this phrase has to take all of these aspects of each person involved into account. That’s what makes the “use of technology” hard – and it explains why simplistic applications of technology in…
August 6, 2013, 3:02 pm
This will be my last post for a couple of weeks, since my family is headed out of town on vacation to Tennessee and I am determined to unplug for a few days. On the way back, I’ll be stopping in Columbia, Kentucky to give a day-long workshop on the inverted/flipped classroom for the faculty at Lindsey Wilson College. True to the form of the inverted classroom, I’ve given the faculty a homework assignment to finish before the workshop that includes watching two videos (here and here) and reading two documents (here and here) and then answering some questions. I plan on using their responses to the questions to fill in the details of the framework for the workshop that I am putting into place.
I’m happy to say that the faculty are doing their homework. One of the themes from their responses is something I’ve seen quite often before and it’s something that I want to address, an…
December 31, 2012, 9:01 am
Here’s a piece of a conversation I just had with my 8-year old daughter, who is interested in becoming a teacher when she grows up.
Daughter: Dad, if you want to become a teacher, do you have to take classes?
Me: Yes. You have to take a lot of classes about how to teach and a lot of classes in the subjects you want to teach. You need to be really good at math to teach math, for example.
D: Then do you have to go out and teach in the schools, like Mr. D___ [the young man who student-taught in my daughter's elementary school this year]?
Me: That’s right. You have to take classes and you have to go into the schools and practice.
D: Do you have to practice with the little kids?
Me: That depends on who you want to teach. If you want to become an elementary school teacher you work with elementary school kids. If you want to teach in a middle school, then you work with middle …
August 8, 2012, 3:33 pm
The panel discussion on Issues for Early-Career Mathematicians in Academia went very well at MathFest last week. We had a small crowd with good questions, and I enjoyed getting to know and hear from Rick Cleary and Jennifer Quinn, who spoke on how to get tenure (from the department chair’s point of view) and how to get involved in the mathematical community. This blog series, which was an incubator for my part of the panel, has a couple more posts left in it, both having to do with what might happen at the end of a search for the next job.
On the one hand, absolutely nothing might happen at the end. You may go through the soul-searching of understanding your motivations and balancing your stakeholders’ needs, spend hours research schools and putting together your materials, and spend days going to interviews — and nothing may come of it. You get no offers. If that’s the case, …
August 1, 2012, 7:19 am
Thanks for sticking with this series on Finding Your Next Job. I’ll probably have one or two more posts after this one before I’m done. If you’re heading to MathFest this week, this series ties in to a panel discussion on Issues for Early-Career Mathematicians in Academia that takes place on Friday at 2:30, where I’ll be speaking and leading a breakout discussion on this topic. If you’re interested and available, please stop by. Also, in case you want a one-stop shop for all the posts in this series, I have one for you: http://bit.ly/FindingYourNextJob. I’ll be adding posts to this bundle as they go up.
Last time, we talked about the importance of being creative when looking for work and exploring all options, including nontraditional ones. There’s another point to consider at this initial stage having to do with how you choose to conduct yourself during the long slog…
July 31, 2012, 8:00 am
The first two parts of this series (part 1, part 2) on Finding Your Next Job were about coming to terms with the motivations and parameters behind looking for a next job in the first place. These aren’t stressed enough in most discourses on job searching. The last thing you want is to blunder into a job search without a good idea of why you’re doing it, what you hope to accomplish, and who (besides yourself) needs to be involved.
But once you’re done with this kind of soul-searching, you have to begin. This part of the process can be just as varied as the first two parts, so rather than lay down a “how to” list, let me just share some experiences and what’s worked for me and people I know. Here I’m going to focus on one important and often-overlooked point about what sort of job you consider when you search.
For people looking for a second or subsequent job coming out…
June 2, 2012, 10:27 am
Online educational startup Udacity, with whom I had a very positive experience while taking their CS 101 course, is taking things a bit further by partnering with Pearson. They’ll be using Pearson VUE testing centers worldwide to provide proctored final exams for some of their courses (presumably all of their courses will be included eventually), leading to an official credential and participation in a job placement service.
Before, students watched the videos and did homework assignments online and then took a final exam at the end of the semester. In the first offering of CS 101, the “grade” for the course (the kind of certificate you got from Udacity) depended on either an average of homework scores and the final exam or on the final exam alone. Most Udacity courses these days just use the final exam. But the exam is untimed and unproctored, and there’s absolutely nothing…
April 9, 2012, 8:00 am
What I was trying to get across in Friday’s post, Gary Stager did much more clearly in this article. In it, he recalls the time thirty years ago when Logo and BASIC were being taught in schools and kids were programming. But:
Things sped downhill when we removed “computing” from our lexicon and replaced it with “technology” (like a Pez dispenser or Thermos). We quickly degraded that meaningless term, technology, further by modifying it with IT and ICT. Once computing was officially erased from the education of young people, teachers could focus on keyboarding, chatting, looking stuff up, labeling the parts of the computer and making PowerPoint presentations about topics you don’t care about for an audience you will never meet. [...]
What kids do get to do with computers tends to be trivial and inservice of the educational status quo. Gone are the days when educational…
March 21, 2012, 6:38 am
It’s been a couple of weeks since my first post about the Udacity CS101 course, so here’s an update. Before that, let me mention this nice article in Wired about Udacity and its origins. That article sheds a little light on the questions I had earlier about Udacity’s business model.
So, Units 3 and 4 are now done with the CS101 course. The focus of Unit 3 was mostly on the concept of the list in Python, along with FOR loops and an emphasis on computer memory. Unit 4 was a bit of a left turn into a discussion of computer networks, with an emphasis on the basics of the Internet and the concepts of latency and bandwidth. So, just from this description, you can see one of the things I particularly like about CS101: It’s not just about Python. This is a class that is actually about computer science in general with Python as a tool for understanding it. Maybe that’s one of the reasons I…
March 6, 2012, 8:10 am
One of my professional plans for this semester was to take two of Stanford University’s massively-open online courses (“MOOC” for short), one on Introduction to Computer Science and the other on Cryptography. I had planned on taking these, that is, until the courses started suffering repeated delays. The last email I received from Stanford cited “legal and administrative issues” that have pushed the Cryptography course — which was originally slated to start in January — back into March, and the CS course that was originally scheduled for late February has also failed to materialize. I think I’ll be writing a separate blog post regarding what I think about these delays and what it might mean for Stanford. Let’s just say it doesn’t make Stanford look good. In the meantime, I decided I was ready to learn and didn’t want to wait around anymore, so I signed up for the CS101 class offered…