Our next reading is _Rainbows End_, by Vernor Vinge

Over the past week I asked people to volunteer our book club‘s next reading.  The topic: science fiction.  The list: around 33 crowdsourced and curated titles collected over the past two years.

And the winner?  73 votes were cast, leading to….

Rainbows End on my bookshelf

Among friends.

Vernor Vinge, Rainbows End (2006) (Amazon) (Wikipedia).

This Hugo-award-winning science fiction novel is all about the future of education after the current digital revolution.  It’s probably the most important novel on that topic for a generation, and I’m very excited to read it with our book club.

Here’s the Wikipedia intro:

Thanks to advances in medical technology, Robert Gu is slowly recovering from Alzheimer’s disease. As his faculties return, Robert (who always has been technophobic) must adapt to a different world, where almost every object is networked and mediated-reality technology is commonplace. Robert, formerly a world-renowned poet but with a notoriously mean-spirited personality, must also learn how to change and how to rebuild relationships with his estranged family. At the same time, Robert and his granddaughter Miri are drawn into a complex plot involving a traitorous intelligence officer, an intellect of frightening (and possibly superhuman) competence hiding behind an avatar of an anthropomorphic rabbit, and ominous new mind control technology with profound implications.

(If you’re curious about poll results, Alfred Brooks’ 2030 tied for first with 9.59% (7 votes).  (I made an executive decision, and think maybe we should read this next.)

Right after it were:

William Gibson, The Peripheral 8.22% (6 votes)

Kim Stanley Robinson, New York 2140 6.85% (5 votes)

And then a big tie for fourth place:

Monica Byrne, The Girl in the Road 5.48% (4 votes)

Liu Cixin, The Three-Body Problem 5.48% (4 votes)

Ramez Naam, Nexus 5.48% (4 votes)

Neal Stephenson, The Diamond Age 5.48% (4 votes) )

Now, to get started with Rainbows End, here’s a rough timeline.  I’ll post about each chunk of the book on those days.  Readers can respond through comments here, or on their own sites, or via Twitter or G+.

July 6-16: grab yourself a copy.  Amazon, libraries, and book shops beckon.

July 17: chapters 1-9 (13-102 in my hardcover edition)

July 24: chapters 10-19 (103-216)

July 31: chapters 20-epilogue (217-364)

And here are some resources

Now, are you ready to put in your lenses and go back to school?

 

Posted in readings | Tagged , | 3 Comments

Gaming the future of education: a student project

Can we improve our thinking about the future by creating and playing games?

I think so.  The creative and imaginative potentials of gaming are well known, and I have have some history applying games to education’s future.  I first sought to explore that connection way back in 2008, when I launched an online prediction market game under the auspices of the National Institute for Technology in Liberal Education (NITLE) (here’s one article about it). I and other players enjoyed the game, and also appreciated the way it stretched our understanding of where ed tech, technology, and education could go next, along with the challenges of creating and managing the prediction market.

buy prednisone online buy prednisone no prescription generic

 (I wish the game site was still up. The Archive.org copies don’t really do it justice.)

Fast forward to 2016 and I, inspired by games like this, raised the idea of creating another one to help us grapple with the future of education.  Professor Leah MacVie of Canisius College responded to the call by asking her EDU122 (Technology in Education) students to create such a game.

And so they did.

sample card for Student Abilities and ApproachesThe Future of Education Card Game is, as you might guess from the title, a tabletop game based on cards.  Each card represents a specific development in education’s next years, and are divided into six categories:

  1. Socio-Economic Status (“of the school or the students”)
  2. Student Abilities and Approaches (sample to left)
  3. Prizes/Extra Cards.  These are random events, good and bad.
  4. Timing and Standardized Testing.  This is actually testing in general.
  5. Technology
  6. Subject Areas (Reading/Writing, Math, English, Geometry, etc.)

Players divide into groups, each representing a classroom.  The first phase of play involves drawing a random card from each of the decks, then collaboratively designing a future class based on those event and trends.

buy tadalafil online buy tadalafil no prescription generic

 During the second phase all groups combine to build a future school from their imagined classes.


sample card, Extra events
There is also a stack of cards called “Influences/Time” which either add a temporal frame to play (“It is 20 years in the future”), impose other challenges (“Class periods are becoming shorter. There is less time to teach the same content”), or offer discussion prompts (“Compare this scenario to the past. What were classrooms and teaching like 5 or 10 or 50 years ago?”).

TheEDU122 students built FECG from scratch, based on their studies, their individual experiences w/gaming, work with professor MacVie, a video conversation with me, and their own imagination.

They designed the cards collaboratively and in Photoshop, then had MOO.com print and ship them.  They playtested together.

I played the game with the class once, via phone, and was impressed at the results.

buy ventolin online buy ventolin no prescription generic

 In order to build a future classroom students, professor MacVie, and I really had to stretch our minds around the random set of constraints.  Discussion unfolded quickly, as participants drew on their personal experiences in schools, their reflections on college life, their aspirations, and their studies.

buy bactroban online buy bactroban no prescription generic

 Putting all the classes together into a future school was another level of imagination and challenge.

Let me thank professor MacVie for the opportunity to be involved with this project, and applaud the students for their work:

Jessica Carrier
Lauren Derwin
Stephanie Haller
Cassie Holic
RaiVen Jackson
Megan Maloney
Emilia Matacchiero
Brooke Murdoch
Rose Neville
Amanda Popovski
Nora Salemi
Lauren Semo
Carly Shifflet
Michaela Strobel
Rebecca Thrush
Lindsey Williams
Mary Williams

Posted in future of education, gaming | 3 Comments

An experiment in collective futuring, and you are invited

For the past year and a half the Future Trends Forum has been a kind of ongoing, public experiment.  It’s given us a chance to explore the possibility of using synchronous, videoconference-based discussion to probe the future of education and technology.

Forum screenshot: Taskeen and a crowdAnd by “us” I mean over 1,500 participants, plus more than 60 brilliant guests.  This is definitely a collective or collaborative initiative.

buy zoloft online buy zoloft no prescription generic

*

I’m delighted with what we’ve achieved so far on so many levels, from learning multiple seminars’ worth of information to making new friends to seeing some people leverage their participation into career benefits.

Let’s take things a little further.  I’d like to try another experiment, next week, and want to invite you to partake.

Instead of having a guest, or me presenting on trends, let’s reflect – as a group – on the future of education and technology.

buy suhagra online buy suhagra no prescription generic

I propose that we structure that hour of reflection by collaboratively reacting to recent developments in education and technology.  By “recent” I mean the past two weeks.  By “developments” I mean anything you deem capable of having an impact on the future of education, preferably described in a news story (on the web, in print, podcast, video, etc).

So before next Thursday, try to pick a story that you find significant.

buy neurontin online buy neurontin no prescription generic

 It could be about learning management systems, or college enrollment, or gender and tenure, VR content, the Trump administration, college athletics – you name it, and you choose.  If you can’t find such a story, don’t worry; just get ready to respond to the stories other people bring.  As usual, Forum participants can respond through a variety of mechanisms, depending on your technology setup and comfort level (chat box, text question, video, or Twitter).

Forum participants mingling

For my part, I’ll have plenty of such stories to get the ball rolling.  After all, the July Future Trends in Technology and Education report should appear just about Wednesday or so.  Loyal FTTE readers will have a ton to choose from – 54, as of this morning, in fact.  And almost a dozen Forum participants and guests have agreed to show up with stories in (videoconferenced) hand.

What do you think?  I hope you’ll join us for what we might call an experiment in collective intelligence.

*I’ve been talking about the importance of discussion and collaboration for getting at the future of education for a while, along with the crucial nature of these practices for us all in an age of political polarization and crisis.  This has also become a major part of my work.

buy furosemide online buy furosemide no prescription generic

 I’ll have more to say later.

Posted in Future Trends Forum | 3 Comments

What next with the LMS? A conversation with Phill Hill, continued

What will the learning management system (LMS) become?  Yesterday the Future Trends Forum met with Phil Hill of E-literate and Mindwires to explore this question, based on Phil’s extensive expertise.

Discussion began at an energetic clip and built rapidly from there.  You can check out our Twitter discussion, Storified , or listen to an audio recording of the whole session, thanks to Roxanne Riskin:

Yet maybe the conversation won’t stop there, at 3:05 pm EDT on June 29th.  Because when we broke we had more than thirty (!) unanswered questions remaining from the Forum community.  I’d like to share those now, so that Phil can respond, but also so that anyone can dive in, whether or not you participated yesterday.

As you can see, the questions are rich and diverse.

buy amitriptyline online buy amitriptyline no prescription generic

 I’ve retained questioner names when possible.  They appear as follows, with only a trace of editing:

Did you say Blackboard is 2nd in North America ?

What drove such wide adoption in Europe and other regions for Moodle over the years?

Competitiveness – Is the lack of competitiveness due to a lack of innovation or because IT decision makers are looking for consistency/ease of support?  (Julie Uranis)

What are your thoughts about competency-based education (CBE)?  In particular, with Elliucian leaving the space, do you see a market for a CBE-targeted LMS?  And, which products do you see as leaders?  or potential leaders?  (Bob Tousignant)

CBE – You’ve brought up CBE a few times.  Do you feel there is slower than expected growth for colleges/univ for CBE.

buy orlistat online buy orlistat no prescription generic

Hence, the sun setting of Ellucian’s platform.  Or, perhaps,  are they force fitting the current LMS to be their CBE LMS? 

from Twitter:

Do you think BlackBoard will keep on eye out to purchase more smaller LMS’s? (Roxann)

Usage – Do you have data on LMS by usage such as for-credit vs not for credit?  What LMS is popular for not for credit?

buy singulair online buy singulair no prescription generic

(by 4 year public) (Tom)

The OPEN education movement is gaining ground. How do you see this affecting the LMS market?  Do you feel that the LMS and OPEN can exist together or even work together? (michael)

Is the US military still a primary customer for Blackboard?

Forum: Phil Hill and Keesa

Which LMS has the most flexibility to adopt LTI, etc. to allow an insitution to organize a custom menu of features? (Gloria Doherty) 

Do you have thoughts about the most under-appreciated LMS? Or one that folks should be looking at more closely? (Trisha Dionne)

open edx – how do you see the current position of this lms? perspectives? (Sergiy)

Student Success – Does the LMS improve learning? (Gisele Larose)

Does Microsoft have an LMS? (Roxann) 

Forum screenshot: Phil Hill plus Mike Berman Q

K-12 – following up on Schoology and google classroom, what force is K-12 going to be in the future of higher ed LMS? can the teaching energy and innovation of K-12 energize higher ed teaching…? 

Question – What are the next gen features that customers are looking for from an LMS. The market and customer needs have evolved and so have expectation so what are the new things schools look for? (John Francis) 

What’s happening with Sakai? If it’s losing market share, why? (Nate Angell)

interoperability – with LTI and other standards for interoperability, does which LMS you use matter? (Joe)

Have you seen any trends in terms of schools with more than one LMS – are places consolidating or fracturing? (always surprised by number of institutions that have more than one) (Tony Sindelar) 

hosted vs. not hosted – For those LMSs that aren’t open source, do you have any thoughts on how institutions are managing systems – are they choosing to host themselves or are they choosing to use vendor hosting (or other options)? (Heidi Olson) 

Forum screenshot: Phil Hill and a question from Fred Beshears

Efficacy – What is the point of an LMS from a pedagogical perspective? I understand the logistical and time-displacement advantages but how does it actually augment teaching?

buy stromectol online buy stromectol no prescription generic

And how does this question impact the longterm future of the concept?

Adaptive learning and analytics – Who is the market leader in Adaptive learning and analytics driven learning (sriram) 

K12 – What is the best LMS that  K12 content provider should use for each of use by K12 school districts ? (Shari Pobjecky)

are shindig sessions recorded? So disappointed i need to leave this session but would love to review it when i have time. – (ross)

(Answer: yes.  All recordings are on YouTube.  I’ll upload this one shortly, bandwidth permitting. -Bryan)

There were also some comments and requests other than questions:

Comment not question – I very much appreciate Phil’s approaches and totally support everything on his soapbox.  Thank you, Phil. (Gary Bartanus)

Please have a part 2 (Roxann)

part 2 could include Michael 😉 – (Nate Angell)

Have at it, friends!

EDITED TO ADD: Edumio has a rich post addressing some of these questions.

PS: two more reflections.

First, despite its status as ed tech’s minivan, the LMS clearly nestles at the heart of so, so many questions and issues in technology and education.  This may prove a very useful avenue for futures discussion.

Second, speaking of discussion, I’m fascinated to see this kind of collective or collaborative exploration of the future of education continue to grow.  It’s one thing for some of us to share our own, individual thoughts through books, articles, podcasts, interviews, blog posts, etc.  It’s a very different thing to see a sprawling, diverse, and growing network do futures work.  This is a vital distinction to make, and an important development to witness.  I’ll return to the topic shortly.

Posted in education and technology, Future Trends Forum | Tagged | 17 Comments

Which science fiction novel should our online book club read next?

Now that we’ve finished with Tressie Cottom’s Lower Ed (here are all of my notes and your comments), we can consider our next reading.  And it’s time our book club returned to near future science fiction.  Yes, it’s time to vote.

A little background: we’ve been reading science fiction to help imagine the next few decades, both for the world as a whole and for education’s future.  Sf traditionally has helped that kind of imagination.  Plus it’s fiction, a fun ride and change of pace from nonfiction.  (Scroll to the bottom of this post for links to the books we’ve read so far)

Over the past few years I’ve built up a big list of candidates, helped enormously by fellow readers and commentators.  There’s literary and very genre-ish science fiction, award winners and titles flying under the radar.  Authors are diverse by gender and race, including literary titans, first-time novelists, genre greats, and people you haven’t heard of.  In these stories future worlds are reshaped by nanotechnology, plagues, conspiracies, economics, wars, and satire.

Here’s the big poll.  Scroll past it to see the full, annotated, alphabetical-by-author list of every title.  The poll itself is randomized to keep things interesting.  You can vote for up to three titles.  I’ll run this for a few days, then announce the results.

And here’s the mega-list:

  • Margaret Atwood, Oryx and Crake (2003) (Wikipedia).  One of the most famous books on our list, and an example of the literacy-genre fiction hybrid  The novel begins as a dystopia, and then things get worse.  It focuses on biology, consumerism, and the digital world.  It’s the first of a trilogy, but the book stands alone very well.
  • Paolo Bacigalupi, The Windup Girl (2009) (Wikipedia). A vision of a future southeast Asia after the collapse of petroleum, featuring global warming, advanced robotics, new energy forms, and new politics. (thanks to Phil Long)
  • Ryan Boudinot, Blueprints of the Afterlife (2012) (Goodreads).  A look at a very strange post-apocalyptic world.  (thanks to Andri Magnason)
  • James Bradley, Clade (2015) (publisher).  A look into the rest of the 21st century as climate change reconfigures humanity and the Earth. (thanks to Tom Fullerton)
  • Albert Brooks, 2030 (Wikipedia).  A dark and satirical vision of the world just 13 years away, from a comedian.  (thanks to Mike Richichi)
  • Girl in the Road coverMonica Byrne, The Girl in the Road  (2014) (author’s page) (Amazon). A voyage across a technologically advanced Middle East, as heroines travel from India to Africa.  (thanks to Jenny Colvin)
  • Cory Doctorow, For the Win (2010) (author’s page) (Wikipedia). A young adult novel concerned with massively multiplayer online games, economic issues, and migration.  The whole book is available for free, online.  (thanks to Janet Whelan)
  • David Eggers, The Circle (2013) (Wikipedia). A look into a giant technology company and its impact on human life, from one of America’s most famous novelists.  Very critical of social media and big data. Turned into a movie. (Thanks to Larry Johnson for the recommendation)
  • William Gibson, The Peripheral (2014) (author’s page). Gibson is one of the great science fiction authors of our era, one of the first cyberpunk leaders from the 1980s. Part of this novel takes place in the near future, where poor folks and military veterans eke out an existence on the fringes of society.  Another part occurs two generations later, after civilization has been shocked and redesigned.  The two worlds come into contact.  (My review)
  • William Hertling, Kill Process (2016) (author’s page) (Amazon).  A near-future technology and espionage thriller.  It concerns revenge through hacking, social media, and abuse.  (thanks to Joshua Kim)
  • Liu Cixin, The Three-Body Problem (2006) (Wikipedia) (translator’s page).  A story about virtual reality, global politics, gaming, and first contact, with a strong historical component. Very popular in China, and also the first Chinese novel to become a major presence in the US market (Hugo Award winner 2015).  The first in a trilogy, but really stands alone as a single story.  My review. (thanks to Mike Sellers)
  • Ian McDonald, River of Gods (2004) (Wikipedia). This imagines a future India, explored through multiple and eventually intersecting plot lines.  (one review) (thanks to tom lombardo)
  • Will McIntosh, Soft Apocalypse (2011) (Amazon) (Goodreads).  The world is gradually falling apart, thanks to several bad things, including epidemic and economic decline.  (thanks to dmweade)
  • Emily St. John Mandel, Station Eleven (2014) (Wikipedia).  The world after a devastating plague, where people struggle to find meaning through stories.  The plot loops back and forth between the moment the disease breaks forth and a period twenty years later. (my review) (thanks to Gardner Campbell)
  • Ramez Naam, Nexus (2012) (Wikipedia) (author’s page) (Amazon). Science fiction about a world restructured by nanotechnology, which enables new politics and a thriller plot.  The author is friendly on Twitter.
  • Linda Nagata, The Red (2015) (author’s page). Near-future military and technology thriller, within a grim political framework.
  • Too Like the Lightning coverAda Palmer, Too Like the Lightning (2016) (author’s page).   Science fiction extrapolating from all kinds of ideas we’re thinking about today.  Lots of world-building with science, technology, and culture.  NPR rave review.
  • Nathan Rich, The Odds Against Tomorrow (2013) (Goodreads). About a statistician tasked with predicting near-term futures, with an eye towards disaster.  Then real disaster happens.
  • Kim Stanley Robinson, New York 2140 (Amazon) (2017).  The latest from one of the major sf writers of our time. Here’s Joshua Kim’s recommendation:

You may have seen some mixed reviews about New York 2140 (too long, too much, etc.).  Don’t believe the reviews.  The book is fantastic.  Robinson pulls off a completely believable world of rising oceans, coastal flooding, and economic cataclysm brought on by un-checked unchecked carbon emissions and the resultant global warming.  New York 2140 is so much more than a climate change fable.  The book is a NYC history lesson, a treatise on comparative economic systems, and an entertaining adventure story.  What would man made climate change skeptics make of this fabulous book?

His books get the tech right because Suarez is first and foremost a techie.  Change Agent is Suarez’s most ambitious and polished work to date.  He extends his curiosity into the world gene editing and genetic engineering.  The world of 2045 in Change Agent is one where gene tech has supplanted silicon, and the center of gravity of the startup / knowledge economy world has moved away from the U.S. (too many pesky laws) to the unregulated frontiers of East Asia.  Suarez is reliably imaginative and detailed about the technology.  Change Agent also demonstrates his improving craft as a writer of can’t put down thrillers.

  • _____,  Daemon and Freedom™.  Older (2006 and 2010) but fresh and exciting, this two-book series begins with the death of a famous computer programmer, and the unusual developments that follow (he said, avoiding spoilers).  A fine combination of thriller plot with plenty of ideas. (thanks to Chad Bergeron, Ton Zijlstra, and haymest)
  • Genevieve Valentine, Persona. (2015) (Amazon) (author’s page). Imagines a near future where international diplomacy has taken on attributes of today’s celebrity culture.  NPR review.  (thanks to Steven Kaye)
  • Vernor Vinge, Rainbows End (2006) (Amazon) (Wikipedia). Hugo-award-winning science fiction novel about the future of education.
  • Weinstein, Children of the New World: Stories (publisher; Amazon) (2016).  Short stories examining near-future challenges to the world, from virtuality to climate change. Enthusiastically recommended by Joshu Kim.
  • Andy Weir, The Martian (2011) (Wikipedia). Perhaps the most commercially successful of these titles, and “the ultimate Maker book”, the story of an astronaut stranded on another planet, his struggle to survive, and the effort to rescue him.  A movie version came out in 2015. (thanks to haymest and Tom Elliott)

As a bonus, here’s the science fiction that we’ve already read.  Each title links to the book’s blog discussion:

Ashby Company TownMadeline Ashby, Company Town.  Ashby’s a professional futurist, and uses this book to imagine what could happen with biology, technology, and society.

Paolo Bacigalupi, The Water Knife.  A thriller about corporate espionage, set in the American southwest after climate change has caused aridification and social dislocation. (thanks to Steve Burnett)

Ernest  Cline, Ready Player One.  Something of a modern classic, this involves an epically elaborate computer game based on 1980s pop culture.  It’s played by people in a near-future dystopia, who use it to escape.

Malka Older, Informocracy.  A political adventure, taking place in a world driven by information and polling.

On a community and historical note, I’d like to remember that these titles were drawn from a big list of near future sf we built together over several years, across multiple social media platforms.

Posted in readings | Tagged | 9 Comments

Somehow I emitted 40,000 Tweets and I just won't stop

I just passed a strange digital milestone.  This morning I reached 40,000 tweets.

That’s a lot of Twitter.  It’s a prodigious amount of writing.  Let’s say that’s roughly a little over four million letters.  Some of those are retweets, hashtags, and URLs.   So my actual writing is maybe 200,000 words, or several books.  That also represents a lot of reading in the form of other people’s tweets, and interacting with them.

So let me pause in the midst of tweet-torrenting to reflect on what this means, based on my experience.  I’m thinking of readers who aren’t Twitter users, as well as Twitter mavens.  You know who you are.

How do I do this?

My main Twitter use occurs through Tweetdeck.  This is a web app that lets users corral and shape their Twitter experience.  I use it to carve out distinct sub-feeds or domains, organized into columns.  That’s fifteen columns now, each for a separate purpose, set up either by a list of people, or by a search term.  One is for educators.  Another contains futurists.  One searches for #FTTE, covering both my monthly report and also Future Trends Forum discussions.  One is for whichever event I’m currently involved in (see below).

Mostly this is through a laptop computer.  I don’t use a desktop any longer.  Since I live in Vermont, cell phone coverage is awful – none within 30 minutes of our house, for instance – so I don’t tweet much from my Samsung except when traveling.  Even then I prefer having the full Tweetdeck dashboard.

I don’t schedule tweeting.  It can occur at any time of the day, as part of my workflow.

Tweetdeck, some columns

Some of my Tweetdeck columns, Click the link to embiggen.

Why do I do this?

A major reason is researching.  I learn a great deal from bright folks on Twitter.  In my immediate domain, the future of higher education, I track education scholars, journalists, college presidents, professors, librarians, instructional designers, investors, and other knowledgeable and interesting people.

Because this is social media, I contribute to the flow.  I share my research every day.  This can mean putting out a URL or idea and asking for feedback, for example.  Sometimes I use Twitter to point to my research hosted elsewhere: my blog, an article, an interview, or a book.  My goal is to elicit feedback, so I can improve my intelligence and knowledge on these topics.  Put another way, this is professional development.

Since one of my topics is educational use of social media, there’s the extra benefit of studying one social media platform through active immersion in it.  This becomes useful in presentations and consultations, as I can explain Twitter not just through studies, but from my own experience.

There are limitations here, of course.  Most online people aren’t on Twitter.  Tweetdeck lacks the organizational chops of most RSS readers.

There are also Twitter developments to track.  One of my tabs is for “entertainment”, and that includes humor accounts, from the very great Florida Man to WernerTwertzog, Medieval Death Bot, and a most powerful corrective to Internet of Things hype.

I follow a number of clients on Twitter.  This is only a slight window into their activities, as I’m usually hired by senior administrators from universities, governments, or nonprofits, and they don’t tend to tweet much.  But some do, as do more of their staff, so I can keep up with organizations I’ve helped.

I also use Twitter to expand events.  Sometimes I track developments at a meeting or conference I can’t physically attend.  More often I add Twitter to events I’m participating in.  As with research, I can share my observations about the event.  This lets me connect with fellow participants whom I might otherwise not interact with, as well as opening up the event to the world.  Similarly, I can learn about other parts of an event, or even the one I’m partaking in, by reading fellow attendees’ comments.

Each Future Trends Forum session has a Twitter stream.  I Storify them afterwards.

Bubble bursting: for years I’ve used Twitter to read across divides.  My politics column, for example, contains people from the left and right.  In that narrow space jostle centrist Democrats, Marxists, libertarians, cultural conservatives, and climate change activists, not to mention some senators, representatives, and national leaders.  My educators column includes people who cordially despite each other.  And because for years I wasn’t following Latino issues closely (partly because I live in a region light on that population), I added a #latism tag to give me one small window into that world.

My Twitter followers, mapped

My Twitter followers around the world, by Tweepsmap

Beyond these uses, I also tweet on non-professional topics.  I’ve been slowly increasing the number of political posts, hoping to trigger conversations (not much luck yet, as opposed to on Facebook).  I started sharing my photos, which people tend to respond well to.

Along those lines, I follow my family on Twitter.  That might sound weird, since I live in the same house with them.  But Owain, my son, is heading off to college in a couple of months.  And both he and my wife tweet about topics they don’t always talk about with me.  Mostly politics – the same topics we discuss in person, but sometimes other sources or stories.  So I get to hear more from my family.

What doesn’t work out on Twitter?  What am I missing?

I don’t share many personal details via tweet.  They tend not to win much attention when I do.  I’m not sure if this is the nature of my profile – i.e., I look I’m doing research, and that’s why people follow me – or if I don’t do enough.

Political discussions rarely occur in my stream.  I sometimes join others.

I haven’t been abused.  No death threats, no hostile Photoshops.  Not even much criticism.  When people do slam me, they use other venues.  Partly this is due to my identity, as I don’t present in any marginalized domains (race, gender, sexual orientation, religion).  It may also be because I don’t usually post on topics that tend to elicit troll wrath.

Although I’m a lifelong and serious genre fiction fan (science fiction and horror), I’ve largely missed those communities’ Twitter affairs.  It might be a question of time and priorities.  Or I would just need to carve out time and engage.

Many anti-Twitter folks complain about people self-promoting too much through tweets.  Honestly, I have yet to encounter this as a significant deal.  I see more of it in people’s bios, unsurprisingly, than appear in actual tweets.

Since I abhor celebrity culture, I don’t pay attention to that aspect of Twitter.

What’s next?

I’ll keep on.  The benefits are just solid at this point.

I’m not sure if I’ll have the time to expand my use to include following other topics or participating in new communities.  I’m happy with what I’m doing now.

The variety of Twitter analytics and visualization tools have fallen off my radar, so I should probably dig back into them.

I hope Twitter survives.  Its investors are pressuring it, sometimes badly.  A user-owned co-op would be better.  If Twitter goes away, there aren’t many alternatives.  I used Ello for a while, but it never took off.  Mastodon appeals, but the user base is still too small.  Facebook has some similar affordances, and a much bigger audience, but has so many other problems that it’s not a viable alternative.

I’ll have to check back with this post at the next milestone.

 

Posted in technology | Tagged | Leave a comment

Updated American demographics: becoming an older, more diverse nation

Demographics are a key tool in the futurist’s toolbox.  They represents trends that tend to be more durable than most others.  For education, demographic trends have a powerful influence, shaping the populations we serve in many ways.

For instance, consider some new research.  The American people continue to get older and more racially diverse, according to the latest US Census data.  This isn’t shocking news, especially for those of us tracking demographics, but it remains useful – more so, as these trends deepen.

About age and aging: “[r]esidents age 65 and over grew from 35.0 million in 2000, to 49.2 million in 2016, accounting for 12.4 percent and 15.2 percent of the total population, respectively.”

Two-thirds (66.7 percent) of the nation’s counties experienced an increase in median age last year…

Between 2000 and 2016, 95.2 percent of all counties experienced increases in median age…

This is happening for a variety of reasons, many of which we should celebrate.  Medical science has been expanding its powers to preserve and prolong life.  Public health has had many successes.  And increasing educational attainment tends to correlate with women having fewer children.  We can easily see these as signs of civilizational progress.

It’s always useful to see how differential aging plays out across the 50 states:

Median age by counties.

Median age by counties.

Think about the different cities represented, for example.  Consider how K-12 populations change, and how colleges serving traditional-age undergraduates have to change their outreach strategies.

Race and ethnicity: American continues to become more diverse – i.e., the white/caucasian proportion continues to shrink, while others grow.

To show this, I’ll take the report’s bullet points, then rearrange them by population size in descending order:

The white population grew by 0.5 percent to 256.0 million.

The non-Hispanic white alone population grew by 5,000 people, remaining at 198.0 million.

The Hispanic population (including all races) grew by 2.

buy zenegra online buy zenegra no prescription generic

0 percent to 57.5 million.

The black or African-American population grew by 1.2 percent to 46.8 million.

The Asian population grew by 3.0 percent to 21.4 million.

The American Indian and Alaska Native population grew by 1.4 percent to 6.7 million.

The Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population grew by 2.

buy fildena online buy fildena no prescription generic

1 percent to 1.5 million.  [emphases added for clarity]

The white population (depending on how you measure it) continues to be the largest group.  Hispanics are the second-largest, followed by black and Asian demographics.

Growth patterns are also fascinating.  Now I’ll use the report’s text, but re-order it from fastest to slowest growing populations, adding different emphases:

The Asian population grew by 3.0 percent to 21.4 million.

The Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander population grew by 2.1 percent to 1.5 million.

The Hispanic population (including all races) grew by 2.0 percent to 57.5 million.]

The American Indian and Alaska Native population grew by 1.4 percent to 6.7 million.

The black or African-American population grew by 1.2 percent to 46.8 million.

The white population grew by 0.5 percent to 256.0 million…. [and] [d]eaths continued to exceed births for the non-Hispanic white alone group.

Here the Asian population takes the demographic lead, followed by the relatively tiny Hawaiian and Pacific Islander groups, then the Hispanic population.

buy bactroban online buy bactroban no prescription generic

Did you catch this further instance of contemporary interest in problematizing traditional identity categories?  “Those who identified as being of two or more races grew by 3.0 percent to 8.5 million.”

What do these trends suggest about the future of education?  As I and others have said before, they mean schools need to adjust to serving a racially more diverse population.

buy ivermectin online buy ivermectin no prescription generic

 This has many implications, including professional development for faculty, the addition or expansion of supportive staff positions (and hence more “administrative bloat”), changes to recruiting and development, and, for public institutions, recalibrating relationships with state governments.

As for age, institutions serving traditional age undergraduates will find recruitment and retention more challenging, and inter-campus collaboration more difficult.  They will keep trying strategies to outflank this problem, from building up a larger online presence (attracting 18-21-year-olds from anywhere on Earth) to more aggressively marketing internationally to growing programs for adult learners.  This changes the 20th-century model of, say, a liberal arts college, or regional state school.

One caveat: these trends can vary regionally a great deal, of course.  Ethnic mixes differ by state and county, as do age patterns.

How are you seeing these demographics playing out in your work and environment?

Posted in demographics, trends | 2 Comments

Concluding _Lower Ed_: the epilogue

With this post we conclude our reading of Tressie McMillan Cottom‘s Lower Ed: The Troubling Rise of For-Profit Colleges in the New Economy (publisher; Amazon). Here we’ll discuss the book’s epilogue.

As usual I’ll begin with a short summary, followed by questions.

buy tadacip online buy tadacip no prescription generic

 As a quick reminder, you can find all posts in this reading right here.

One note: humor site Cracked actually addressed for-profits.

Epilogue

Here professor Cottom summarizes and synthesizes the book’s argument.  She situates her points in the historical context of privatization and employers outsourcing training (180).  With financialization added to the mix we end up with “high debt, loan defaults, regret, broken public trust, low wages, and little to no mobility from Lower Ed to Higher Ed.” (181)

epilogue

Lower ed participates in and contributes to the modern economy.  Their rapid growth is “an indicator of social and economic inequalities and, at the same time, are perpetuators of those inequalities.”  They form a negative insurance program.  (181) . “They are profiting from inequality.

buy vidalista online buy vidalista no prescription generic

” (187) . Lower ed also focuses on lower income black women, treating them differently than other demographics (186-7).

For-profits offer credentials, but those “are riskier than most traditional degrees.”  That’s because traditional higher ed generally doesn’t welcome lower ed’s transfer credits, “trap[ping] those with for-profit credits or credentials in an educational ghetto.” (181-2) . “Credentialing in the new economy has to date taken from the have-nots to give to the haves.” (186)

The epilogue concludes with recommendations for ways to respond to the for-profit sector, primarily policy changes driven by social movements.  Cottom cites Black Lives Matter as an example of a movement addressing education, along with the more narrowly focused Strike Debt and the Rolling Jubilee.  Fight for 15, a movement aimed at boosting minimum wages to $15 US, addresses the job insecurity that leads many people to for-profits (183-5).  Free public college tuition would help, but leaves the economic underpinnings untouched (186).

Questions

  1. Do you see political traction for these suggested movements to address the for-profit education sector?
  2. For-profits declined sharply under the Obama administration.  Do you think they’ll regroup under Trump?
  3. Looking back on the whole book, how has this added to your understanding of for-profit higher education?

With this we have finished our reading of Lower Ed.  Thank you for reading with us!

buy ivermectin online buy ivermectin no prescription generic

Later this week will be a blog post asking about the next reading.

buy cymbalta online buy cymbalta no prescription generic

Our reading so far: the plan; introduction; chapter 1; chapter 2; chapter 3; chapter 4; chapter 5; chapter 6.

(thanks to Ceredwyn for the Cracked link; photo by WDjoPhotography)

Posted in readings | Tagged , | 4 Comments

Maybe social media is good for us after all

During last year’s American election many people became convinced that using social media warped users’ understanding.  Getting news from Twitter or Facebook helped slide us into comfortable bubbles, or heightened hateful rhetoric, or opened us wide to fake news, or maybe a mixture of all of these.

But perhaps the conventional wisdom is wrong.  Harvard’s Nieman Journalism Lab just released a new study looking at news consumers’ habits, and found the opposite: that the more social media one consumes, the greater the number and diversity of news sources one follows.  “[S]ocial media use is consistently associated with more, and more diverse, news diets“.

How did Richard Fletcher and Rasmus Kleis come to this unpopular conclusion?  They analyzed data from a Reuters/Oxford YouGov survey of users from several nations (Britain, the United States, Germany) looking for connections between users’ descriptions of their sources and social media usage.  “Social media” here seems to mean “Facebook, YouTube, or Twitter”.  The study then built a quick and unremarkable model of the political leanings generally expressed by professional journalism outlets – i.e., Fox News and Sky News tends to the right, while NPR and the Guardian lean to the left.

The authors checked for the number of sources users, well, used.  Fletcher and Nielsen found the more people touched social media, deliberately or accidentally, the greater the number of sources they encountered.

Sources used by different populations

“Incidentally exposed” are people who use social media for non-news purposes, but come across news that way.

News diversity: the study argues that people normally love their bubbles.  “Few people, when left to their own devices, opt for a politically diverse news diet.”  Yet using certain new devices changes that habit:

In the U.S., just 20 percent of those who do not use social media consume news from online brands with left-leaning and right-leaning audiences… However, the figure rises to 37 percent for those incidentally exposed to news on social media, as they see news links posted by people with different views and different patterns of news consumption. 44 percent of those who use social media for news end up using sources from both the left and the right — more than double the number for non-users.

“more than double” the number of people exposed themselves to politically diverse news.  That’s a huge claim for the beneficial results of social media exposure.

The study concludes on an uncomfortable (for many) final note, concerning and gingerly praising social media giants.  Harold Jarche draws our attention to it:

These findings underline that the services offered by powerful platform companies like Facebook and Google, despite what critics fear, may in fact currently contribute to more diverse news diets, rather than narrow filter bubbles. Whether they will still do so after the next algorithm update only they know.

Facebook and Google are helping us become better news consumers?

Obviously there is plenty to challenge in this study.  The YouGov survey may have selected out for social media partisans, who sought to portray their practice in a positive light, and the “accidentally exposed” may have wanted to make themselves look better.  Self-reporting always poses risks.  Being an online survey, it underrepresents the offline population.  Politics is more complex than a two-dimensional line.  There can be large differences between how different social media platforms present news and politics – think of Twitter versus Pinterest, or YouTube versus Instagram.  I’m curious about the difference between usage of rich media (video and audio) versus less computationally and cognitively intensive media (text).  Moreover, the authors don’t address online abuse.

And yet what they describe makes sense to anyone who’s spent time in social media.  Setting aside their source data for the moment, it’s clear that it’s quite easy to follow, read, or subscribe to diverse news and commentary sources through Twitter, Facebook, the blogosphere, YouTube, etc.  Some of us do this deliberately, including myself, or Librarian Angie:

https://twitter.com/LibrarianAngie/status/878460306506252288

Most readers should also be able to confirm to accidental exposure experience.  How many of you have followed someone on Facebook because of shared interest in folk music, say, and then were surprised to see them share a pro-Trump or anti-Stein meme?  I’m no longer surprised to read political content from people I track for professional reasons: librarians, technologists, university presidents, organization leaders, faculty members, scientists, etc. sharing their political thoughts or online discoveries.  In a different domain, people I follow because they live near me in Vermont will sometimes emit political opinions which I don’t always anticipate – very much like offline daily life for politically minded extroverts like myself.

I pair this study with a March publication from Stanford and Brown researchers.  Levi Boxell, Matthew Gentzkow, and Jesse M. Shapiro looked into connections between demographics and political polarization (pdf).  They found that the oldest populations, the ones least likely to use social media, and the most reliant on older media (especially television), were the most polarized demographic of all.  “We find that the increase in polarization is largest among the groups least likely to use the internet and social media”.

Polarization for those aged 75+ grows by 0.38 index points between 1996 and 2012, and polarization for those aged 65+ grows by 0.32 index points over the same period. Polarization among those aged 18–39 increased by 0.05 index points between 1996 and 2012.

So it’s not social media that’s to blame for our political divides.  I interpret this as making room for tv “news” driving polarization – hardly a surprising idea for anyone who spends five minutes watching either MSNBC or Fox News.  Even if I’m wrong, Boxell et al provide more evidence for social media being neutral, if not benign.

I’m also reminded of Jesse Walker’s 2011 criticism of Eli Pariser’s filter bubble model.  People online like to argue with each other, of course, which means engaging with opposing points of view.  We read the enemy to defy them, and seek out opponents to wrestle.  “Republican and Democratic blogs scour one another for posts they can link and mock; rumbles break out in the comment threads.”  And our political identities are just one segment of our broader identities, which are complex, and can lead us through cyberspace to a variety of sources and communities which might oppose one another.  While we can bubble up (Jesse prefers the verb “cocoon”), we can also make connections beyond the borders of a single meniscus.

This obviously has major implications for digital, information, and media literacy.  To pick one example, our evolving notions of when we support information authorities versus individual judgement shift drastically depending on our view of social media.  If social media makes us obnoxious, less well informed, and cocooned away from important segments of the world, then perhaps we should advocate for a return to 20th-century-style information authorities to improve the situation.  On the other hand, if we use social media in ways that expand our knowledge and improve our political engagement, it’s time to focus efforts on helping individual users use the tools more effectively.

In short, in mid-2017 there seem to be two mutually opposed interpretations of social media’s role in news consumption and society.  Either social media degrades and worsens democratic participation, or it improves our civic life.   Deciding between them seems crucial for anyone interested in digital literacy – or, for that matter, with public life in general.

You may now react to this post through social media via your fiercely guarded bubbles or cocoon-crossing information paths.

(thanks to Jesse Walker)

Posted in digital literacy | 2 Comments

American health care reform under the Republicans: three scenarios

Once again I detour into politics.  It’s for a good reason, I assure you.

piggy bank_401kcalculator dot orgToday the United States Senate Republicans have issued their own health care reform proposal, the ‘‘Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017’’.  Finally shared in public after weeks of secrecy, it undoes chunks of the Affordable Care Act, allowing senior medical charges to rise more sharply, removing the insurance purchase mandate, ending the employer mandate, eventually reducing support for Medicaid, ending the tax increases on the wealthy, etc.  It’s pretty similar to the House bill.

If it or some closely related version becomes law, as seems likely, a good number of Americans will be furious.  Some number will see their health care coverage reduced, leading to a potential humanitarian disaster.

For my business, for my family, this is bad news.

But I’m going to hold back on outrage in this post.  I’ll also refrain from Congressional analysis.  Instead I’d like to contemplate the unfolding legislation while wearing my futurist hat.  How might this Republican move to rewrite health care funding play out over the next one to five years?

Much depends on how Americans as a whole respond.  Each scenario that follows is based on a different type of aggregate attitude, from resignation to creativity to rebellion.  I’m drawing on recent American politics, along with insights from other countries.

I: Kleptocracy? Meh.

We could resign ourselves to a worsened state of affairs.

Outrage could sputter.  The Republicans control the House, Senate, and White House, not to mention a majority of state governorships,  after all, and are capable of solid party discipline.  They could simply see the law into implementation without major obstacles.  Media coverage might put a lid on things – after all, this is complex, non-sexy stuff that tv “news” struggles to understand, much less represent.  The Republicans could do a good job of selling the new health care law, possibly using their established playbook: “BetterCare” won’t interfere with the patient-doctor relationship; deserving and good people will be spared problems; this is just a technical tweak; Obamacare was terrible; etc.

Maybe Democrats split over those wanting to protect Obamacare (call it the Clinton wing) versus others seeking single payer or Medicare for all (the Warren/Sanders faction).  That schism prevents them from organizing effectively.

Plutocracy signThere’s an awful lot of money involved, too, from Big Pharma to medical insurance to the AMA.  That money historically has the capability to get things done, including influencing not only legislators but media coverage.

Americans have come to terms with this state of affairs, accepting a kind of plutocracy or oligarchy.  It took decades for the old Gilded Age to fall under new management.  We could easily be in an earlier state of that developmental arc now.

Outside the US, the Panama Papers revealed a widespread pattern of corruption by government officials and other leaders.  This revelation powered many political responses, but a good number of the politicians survived or returned to power.  Humans, in turns out, can live under the rule of big money quite easily, or without effective demur.  Americans could follow suit.

What might this look like in five years?  By 2022 fewer Americans have health care than did in 2017.  A good number have some coverage, but at lower quality.  Most just got on with their lives, working hard, getting by.  Only wonks and history nerds talk about Obamacare.

In 2022 a large number of us think the medically un(der)covered deserve their status, because those people aren’t willing to work hard, or are stupid, or of a lesser race, or are probably immigrants, or criminals.  When Medicare fundings declines, there are few protests in the media or government.

Abortions will be less available (legally), and family planning is what wealthier people do, as a sign of character.

II: Medical System D

Instead of going along, we could build a parallel health care funding and provision system. Continue reading

Posted in politics, scenarios | Tagged | 11 Comments