Jan 302012
 

Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place. Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are, by definition, not smart enough to debug it.

Brian Kernighan

Jan 302012
 

Having been in and out of academy for the last, scary number, 16 years, both as a student and lecturer, I have a long list of convictions on what constitutes good learning practice. These have formed, without exception, as a result of frontal clashes with the common-sense notions of good learning practice in higher education. Sitting in class and listening to a lecturer, working in groups, taking notes and /or memorizing lecture notes, passing exams (my favorite) – the list is familiar to everyone with a degree or the aspirations to get one. Bottom line is that the pernicious notions that learning happens in organized time-blocks, and that the best learning practices manifest themselves through instant-recall have contributed tremendously towards the boxed-content assembly line we call higher education. What we produce is students capable of remembering the answer to a question, who excel at obediently taking exams.

There is an alternative to learning though, to my knowledge first charted by Vygotsky, who used the metaphor of scaffolding to describe it. I try and shape my subjects in accordance with this, constructivist, approach whereby the learning process happens dynamically, in an open location (that is, the students decides where), and is assessed through the regular, dynamic production of content, with the separate assessments integrated into a higher-order whole. For example, students produce weekly content consisting of research, reflection, and mini fact-finding missions; they read and comment on each-other’s content; they may use the annotated sources from their fact-finding missions as building blocks towards a group project, or a longer research and reflection piece; they may use that piece to look back and reflect on the issues they identified, etc. The intention is to create a modular, scaffolding-like platform of content production and assessment which can be tailored towards particular topics, problems, and end-tasks.

I have been looking for a new metaphor to describe this approach, and today found it in the work of Robert Bjork from the UCLA Learning and Forgetting Lab, who coins the term ‘interleaving’ to describe the effect of engaging with a topic or a problem on several different levels of intensity simultaneously. The problem is how to design subject materials relying on constant feedback and reflection, so as to maximize the recall function of memory and the relaitonality of knowledge.

Jan 192012
 

The other day I discovered  Space Teriyaki – wonderful collection of Japanese retro-futurism from the 70s and early 80s. This is not the future that never was (as in early soviet futurism or soc-realism). This is Japanese surrealism meeting space opera, with tiny raw morsels of Philip K. Dick for flavor.

Ichiro Tsuruta, ca. 1985

The proto-hacker. Neuromancer came out the same year this was drawn by Shiro-san:

Shiro Nishiguchi, magazine illus., 1983-84

Jan 182012
 

linocut/woodcut, Drew Christie

Everyone knows that in the course of ordinary, normal years, whimsical time will  occasionally bring forth from its womb other years – odd years, degenerate years, somewhere in which, like a little sixth finger upon a hand, a spurious thirteenth month sprouts up.

Bruno Schulz, The Cinnamon Shops

Jan 122012
 

After a month of project marking and overall data saturation, followed by a month of travelling and staying away from screens, I am back on the intertubes.

 

 Posted by at 8:44 PM