elearnspace: World Almanac of Educational Technologies

elearnspace: World Almanac of Educational Technologies: "World Almanac of Educational Technologies"

... that'd be 'world' in the sense of a handful of countries and no mention of the UK then...

Ah, the world is a small place... and growing dramatically smaller all the time... :o)

Why do we have to die in games?

Why do we have to die in games? | Technology | Guardian Unlimited Technology: "Dying in real life is - religious beliefs aside - the end, the last event you'll take part in. Not so in computer games, where it's never worse than briefly infuriating. In World of Warcraft, the massively multiplayer online roleplaying game (MMORPG) that 8.5 million people play every day, your death just means you have to spend several minutes trekking back to the point at which you died. And your avatar is temporarily weakened. It's an inconvenience.

But why is in-game 'dying' necessary at all? Alternatively, why isn't dying in a game as final as it is in real life? In MMORPGs, the latter is in part at least simply answered: it's economics. From Blizzard's point of view, if in-game death were final, people would stop coughing up their monthly subscription. And the vibrant in-game economy depends to a certain extent on death and regeneration: when your avatar comes back to life, your weapons are damaged and need repairing - for which you pay a fee."

Interesting little article about 'dying' in games. It strikes me that death in games is the equivalent of a toddler's interpretation of what death is all about. Gone today, here tomorrow. Death is just a word to a little one and fairly meaningless at that. But it also occurs to me that there's nothing really new as far as computer games are concerned. What about traditional games. Chess? Don't you 'kill' the other player's pieces? Or hangman. The poor guy dies if you're not successful! Maybe the answer isn't too deep at all? We die in a game because it's easier to make a symbolic clean break so we can start afresh? We die in a game because it's make believe and games are about invention and imagination.

By the way... can you die in Second Life? Or is a 'real' computer game death too unpalatable?

Chris Jordan's photos of disturbing consumer stats: interview

Boing Boing: Chris Jordan's photos of disturbing consumer stats: interview: "Chris Jordan renders American consumer statistics as art. For instance: above, 426,000 cell phones, equal to the number of cell phones retired in the US every day."

I find this figure absolutely shocking for so many reasons. Multiply it out a bit and you have...

12,780,000 per month (for an average 30 day month)
155,490,000 per year

Isn't that just the slightest bit depressing?? 155.5 million phones thrown away every year... just in the US. Not even worldwide. What on earth is happening to the world when a simple communication device becomes as disposable as scribbling a note on a piece of scrap paper? I sometimes wonder whether the world has gone mad. Some days a statistic pops up which confirms that it actually has.

Long Tail antidote

If you've read 'The Cult of the Amateur' by Andrew Keen and need a bit of balance... 'The Long Tail' by Chris Anderson gives a much more balanced and thought-provoking view of the current state of the internet.  It probably appeals to the inner Economist in me as well, but it's a good consideration of what's happening to a supply and demand world where the potential for both is becoming unlimited.  I question whether it is in fact unlimited right now since there will always be physical or financial constraints which present fairly immovable barriers (the world will never be 100% digital nor will it be 100% free), but it's a fascinating concept and a gentle meander through what can at times feel like a bewildering fast set of changes in the online world.

Definitely recommended. 

Sticky wikis?

A quick thought about wikis and whether or not they're ever going to be successful in education in the same way that they are in the sense of Wikipedia.  I have a feeling that it's more about the drive to make content than the nature of the format.  In other words, wikis may be easy to use, easy to publish, easy to edit etc... but if there's no passion from the people making content then they'll remain as static as any other more traditional written exercise.  It strikes me that asking people to compile resources just because it's a useful thing to do in a readily collaborative environment is an idea which works on paper, but if you're asking people to eat into their limited free time to do so or asking them to keep on nibbling at an activity you've set up in order to make it dynamic... it's unlikely to happen if they really don't care that much about it.  In some ways, that doesn't make sense.  Why wouldn't a student be passionate about the subject they've chosen to study?  Well the reality is that there are lots and lots and lots of reasons!  Life intervenes.  It's a means to an end.  It's dull.  It's 'just' a course.  The list could go on and on.

I don't know what I'm really trying to say.  I suppose in focusing on the benefits of using technologies such as wikis, people are often taken aback that they don't seem to fly in the manner of the most successful implementations.  If web 2.0 technologies are about user generated content, then we need to understand what motivates, interests and enthuses learners.  Just because a technology can do something doesn't mean that learners will want to do it.  The killer app is ultimately people.

NZ may offer courses in prostitution

NZ may offer courses in prostitution | The Australian: "FUNDING for tertiary courses in prostitution could be considered under changes aimed at boosting quality and relevance in the sector, New Zealand education officials say.
But MPs on parliament's education and science select committee were told today that although courses in the world's oldest profession might be considered if providers put them forward, they would still have to meet tight criteria to get funding."

A course that definitely couldn't be studied via elearning?! Or is this where SecondLife might come in?? That aside, the overwhelming mental image is that of a scene from 'The Meaning of Life' where John Cleese is teaching a group of boys sex ed...

It's a Facebook Life

Just idly browsing round Facebook while I had a mo and a thought occurred to me... the vast majority of people who've posted a picture on their profile have put online a smiley one.  If you walk round the streets of most large towns and cities, you won't see those same smiley faces.  Why is it that the image we want to project is the smiley one... but the image we really project is far more complex and smiley is only a small part of it.  If you were to believe in the Facebook person, you'd think everyone was laughing, chatting, happy and contented, wouldn't you?  Almost everyone wants to present their best self, rather than their real self. 

Your Facebook identity is a strange old mix, really.  Are you a different person when speaking to your colleagues?  Do you project a work image?  A social life image?  A family image?  Do they blend together seamlessly, or do certain networks feel more 'you'?  When you put online your status - who are you talking to?  Would it matter if you said 'Sarah is... hating her dog' if your dog (miraculously!) were able to read it too?  How honest can we really be if by putting online our thoughts we don't take on board how much we're compromising our expressive privacy?

Is it a smiley world... or is it just the homogenized, safe one we need it to be to protect ourselves and our futures?

Trial by Facebook

Students' trial by Facebook | higher news | EducationGuardian.co.uk: "Oxford University staff are logging on to Facebook and using evidence they find on student profiles to discipline students."

I guess it was always going to happen and that it's a lesson in the fact that you should never put online what you wouldn't be happy to defend at some form of tribunal(!), but things like this just remind me what a funny old world we live in. We encourage students to become ICT literate as part of the skill set they should have... then, when they use their own initiative to take part, voluntarily, in a social network... employing those skills creatively, uploading images, connecting with others... WHOOMPH! Down on them like a ton of bricks. I imagine this is a headline grabber and a reminder that there is no such thing as privacy if your thoughts have left the space between your ears... but it would be interesting to hear how this situation worked out for these students in the end. Although if it is worked out in a common sense way, then it's not going to be 'shock horror' enough for the news, is it?

Simplified spelling glossary

BBC NEWS | Magazine | Simplified spelling glossary: "Simplified spelling glossary
Here are a selection of reformed spellings as envisaged by the Simplified Spelling Society.

Addicted - adicted

Anyone - ennywun

Are - ar

Beautiful - butiful

Becoming - becumming

Benefit - bennefit

Couple - cupl"...

One word for this idea... NO!

9 year old as 'writer'?!

I know I should be more open-minded... but a 9 year old blogger being featured on CNN etc and describing herself as a 'writer'? Don't know what it is or why, but I'm getting a touch of the 'Cult of the Amateur's' about it all and I can hear my mind shutting down. I may have to force myself into reading her stuff just to see if my instinct will be proved wrong, but... ermmmm, I don't know if I can be bothered. I just feel uncomfortable about it which I realise is daft, but at least I'm being honest I guess!

Infinite Thinking Machine

We are pleased to have a new correspondent join the ITM - 9 year-old Adora Svitak! Adora is a published author who's written hundreds of short stories, maintains her own blog, and has been featured on CNN and Good Morning America.