Recently I have been thinking a great deal about connecting and sharing. I have been following some of the blog posts about identity, identification and privacy in relation to Facebook. The Scholarly Kitchen and Stephen Downes have been rich sources of information for me. This post pulls together some items from the past couple of weeks. Some of them are mulling around in my thoughts about semantic web discussions and the appearance of tools like Diaspora to add to our connection behaviour choices.
During this time Google Wave was used at a Facebook press conference as a live blogging tool (26 May).
Facebook Addresses Several Privacy Issues (Chris Conley, ACLU) “over 80,000 people to sign ACLU petitions demanding that Facebook give users control over all of the information they share via Facebook and ensure that user information is not shared with any third party without our own opt-in consent.”
Monkeys vs Robots: The Mysteries of Identity in the Age of Facebook (Kent Anderson, The Scholarly Kitchen) This post has some interesting points to make and links to posts by Jeff Jarvis (Confusing *a* public with *the* public) and Danah Boyd (Facebook and “radical transparency” (a rant)). There were 107 responses to Jeff’s post and ninety comments on Danah’s post when I last looked.
I know we have made a bunch of mistakes (see Robert Scoble).
22 May (archived from February 2010)
You Are Not a Gadget (Kent Anderson, Scholarly Kitchen) raised some fascinating ideas about “participation in social media and electronic commerce, especially the centrality advertising is gaining in the culture developing around online identity” prompted by Jaron Lanier’s You Are Not a Gadget.
Your guide to the Facebook revolt of 2010 (Jon Ippolito, UMaine NMDNet)
There’s More to Social Media than Facebook (Lana Brindley, On Writing, Tech and Other Loquacities)
More than a Hundred People
Andreas Schleicher (Head of the Indicators and Analysis Division of OECD’s Directorate for Education) visited Australia earlier this month (May 2010). One of his presentations whilst in Australia, Seeing Your Education System in the Mirror of Other OECD Systems, can be found on SlideShare.
His presentation included data from the OECD report The High Cost of Low Educational Performance. This YouTube video outlines some of the key points of the report (please excuse the music!).
I think both OECD resources have fascinating implications for decision-makers in the governance of sport and for coaches as they contemplate long-term development. The report “uses recent economic modelling to relate cognitive skills … to economic growth, demonstrating that relatively small improvements to labour force skills can largely impact the future well-being of a nation. The report also shows that it is the quality of learning outcomes, not the length of schooling, which makes the difference.”
I am keen to promote high challenge/high support learning environments and liked Andreas’s slide (27) from his presentation:
Andreas explores how continuous professional development can transform education. Within his data there is an important message about innovation and insight. His case study of Finland should resonate with any sport or coach seeking to bring about cost effective change.
I liked too his juxtaposition of integration and personalised learning (slide 35):
After looking at the report and the Slideshare presentation I wondered how a sport system at the macro level (a national sport system) and at the micro level (the club) might support an innovative investment in learning that might take a decade to develop.
Andreas’s slide on skill development (slide 15) raises the question of lead and lag investments in a sport system.
His final slide (slide 41) encouraged me to think how a system can be changed and what role intrapreneurial vision might play in change. Do sport systems evolve despite or because of inherent conservatism? How does any macro or micro system move from the left to the right of the slide below?
Andreas’s presentation and the report share how Finland did it in education!
Bouw houten huis in Finland
I listened to a delightful Radio National Book Show program on Tuesday. Ramona Koval was in conversation with Michelle Kerns and Laura Miller about cliches in book reviews. I am conscious that I need to monitor my own writing in this post (I note that I have used ‘delightful’ in my first sentence) but am relieved that both Michelle and Laura are self-confessed serial cliche users!
Their conversation was vibrant and I was hoping it might go on longer. By the end of their twenty-two minutes together I was thinking about how their insights and advice might be applied to other forms of writing. The podcast of their conversation can be found at this link. Ramona, Michelle and Laura lamented the use of ‘unputdownable’ in book reviews. I wondered whilst they were doing so what their views might be of ‘unturnoffable‘ as an observation about a radio discussion.
Michelle’s mention of E.B. White amplified my attention to their conversation:
The world of criticism has a modest pouch of special words (luminous, taut), whose only virtue is that they are exceptionally nimble and can escape from the garden of meaning over the wall. Of these critical words, Wolcott Gibbs once wrote: ‘…they are detached from the language and inflated like little balloons.’ The young writer should learn to spot them — words that at first glance seem freighted with delicious meaning but that soon burst in air, leaving nothing but a memory of bright sound.
I spent the rest of the discussion (and the day) dealing with the thought of words escaping from a garden or as balloons rich with meaning.
I liked the ideas explored in Book Review Bingo (more book review cliche fun than you can shake a riveting, unputdownable stick at).
I enjoyed those twenty-two minutes very much. I thought Ramona, Michelle and Laura’s experiences and their humour made for an excellent feature. Their ideas have encouraged me to think about how other reviews might be crafted. I hope ‘treasure trove‘ is not too much of a cliche to describe the Book Show. I have been away from the program for over six weeks and realise that when I do hear it there are wonderful treasures there.
I am off to read:
Engrossing, vivid, unstoppable: The Reviewerspeak Award results for April 2010
Bad writing: What is it good for?
… and to revisit this post about Mark McGinnis and this post about Jonathon Gold.
On the platform, reading
Engrossed in her reading
she waited until the train stopped
and at the “ding”
without taking eyes of her book
she jumped on
before it swooshed again…
The girl’s a pro!
Fifteen accounts of life, death, and everything that interferes