While we were talking, one of her students walked into the room. The teacher enthusiastically told her that the class would be playing Urban Science again this spring. The student looked at us and wordlessly unzipped her coat to reveal the Epistemic Games t-shirt that all of the players got the previous year.

While I don’t want to go too far in interpreting the synchronicity of this encounter, I couldn’t help but think that 5th graders do not make sartorial choices lightly. It can sometimes be hard to know the inner transformations that happen as kids are learning and growing. But every once in a while, if you are lucky, you can get an unzipped glimpse of what kids take with them.

I was suddenly caught without my external memory field, without reliable communications, and without any way to reliably deal with the information that was coming into my life. I had come to depend on this technology, and then it failed.

A lot of things fell through the cracks: phone calls, doctor’s appointments, email exchanges.

[For those of you wondering, I did manage to recover the data. But if you sent me email last week and didn't hear back, it might be a good idea to resend it!]

The result, though, was an opportunity to ponder, first hand, one of the darker sides of technology…

My first reaction, honestly, was to feel a deeper sympathy for the Cassandras of the digital age who say that we will become dependent on our technologies, and if, heaven forbid, we ever lose them we will become helpless.

Well, OK. My first reaction was actually a long stream of obscenities. But my first rational reaction was  to think about the Cassandra argument.

And, yes, it was an awful week, and some important things got lost. But I also realized (once again) that the Cassandra argument has a fatal flaw in it:

The Cassandras of the digital age don’t weigh the conditional probabilities in their calculation.

What I realized is that, yes, this week was awful because of a failure of technology and my dependence on it. But that was one week of one year.

The other 51 weeks of this year–and the 52 weeks of the year before that, and the year before that, and the year before that–were much better because of the technology. Much much better.

To be sure, the Cassandras are right that we have to take steps to protect ourselves from the most catastrophic failures of technology. Backing up my hard drive and iPhone regularly, for example, made this much less of a fatal meltdown than it could have been.

But you have to weigh the likelihood and frequency of failure into the cost/benefit calculation of becoming “dependent” on technology.

I was once at a meeting where Alan Kay argued that science was more important than literature by asking:

If you were stranded on a tropical island, would you rather have a topological map of the island, or a map of Tolkein’s Middle Earth?

To which my friend and colleague Rick Borovoy answered:

Most of the time when I am on a tropical island, I am at a beach resort, and there I’d rather have the Lord of the Rings than a science textbook.

[Added Jan 30] For the record, Alan doesn’t remember it quite that way, and I am not trying to put words in his mouth! See the comments below….

But, yes, when my Microsoft Exchange server fails, I would rather have my datebook on paper. Most of the time, though, I am much better off trying to manage information electronically.

Similarly, when people argue that kids need to learn basic math facts so they can give the right change if the cash register breaks down, you have to ask what they are giving up so they can be prepared for the relatively few times they might face that particular kind of emergency….

Wii and Physical Therapy
by Sarah Ross

http://epistemicgames.org/eg/wp-content/uploads/svarovsky-dissertation-revision-v26.pdf

Today’s global economy requires our nation to continue developing highly trained engineering professionals. Recently, K-12 engineering education has received increased attention as a pathway to building stronger foundations in math and science and introducing young people to the profession. However, the National Academy of Engineering found that most K-12 engineering programs focus heavily engineering design and science and math learning while minimizing the development of engineering habits of mind. This narrowly focused engineering activity can leave young people – and in particular, girls – with a limited view of the profession.

This study describes Digital Zoo, an engineering learning environment that engaged girls in authentic engineering activity in order to link the development of engineering skills and knowledge to engineering ways of thinking. Digital Zoo was an educational design experiment based on a particular theory of learning, the Epistemic Frame Hypothesis. Specific activities from an engineering practicum were recreated in the learning environment, where ten middle school girls from diverse backgrounds role played as engineers designing solutions to a client-based project. Responses on pre, post, and follow up interviews suggest the participants were able to develop each of the five epistemic frame elements –engineering skills, knowledge, identity, values, and epistemology – as a result of Digital Zoo. In situ data from the intervention was analyzed with a sophisticated mixed methods approach that integrated qualitative methods with a new quantification technique, Epistemic Network Analysis. These techniques allowed for the exploration of complex thinking and learning throughout the different activities of Digital Zoo. The results of this analysis identified client-focused activity and notebook-based reflection as two activities within Digital Zoo that evoked girls’ reflection on engineering values and epistemology. These qualitative claims were further warranted by intra-sample statistical analysis that utilized fixed-effects logistic regression.

Thus, this work has potential implications for the engineering education community by highlighting specific activities that may possibly develop engineering ways of thinking within young people, and girls in particular. Moreover, this study has implications for the learning sciences community by presenting an example of an integrated mixed methods approach to exploring complex thinking and learning within a naturalistic setting.

I was reminded of this is a very concrete way last week when I took my daughter and one of her friends to a synchronized swimming meet for their team, which is the first synchro meet I had ever been to. I did it because this is something that my daughter cares about. Something that she wants to spend time on. An interest that I want to share with her, even if I don’t hold it as an interest of my own.

Now, please don’t get me wrong: I have nothing against synchro as a sport. But driving an hour and a half and sitting for over two hours to…

Oh, well, rather than trying to explain, I’ll just copy my liveblog of the event below, which I imagine is not that different from how many parents experience watching their first videogame. It was really confusing, and a lot of it seemed pretty trivial to me as an outsider. But it was fun for my daughter, and in the end brings us closer together and lets me help shape her experience of that part of her life.

For those who don’t want to read below the jump, the point is: as a parent we do all kinds of things that our kids love but we don’t. And just like the decision to go see the latest Disney movie, whether you as a parent like to play computer games is not the last word on whether your could or should play them with your kids.

17.15 getting here was no problem, although it did take a few circuits in the parking lot to figure out which entrance to use.

17.20 as soon as we got inside the girls joined a group of their teammates an disappeared into the locker. My daughter had been saying she was nervous, but there wasn’t even really a moment to wish her luck. Little more than a chauffeur I am.

17.23 I looked at the signup sheets outside the pool, but they were singularly uninformative. Looks like there are maybe 30 kids in the meet? Or only 30 younger kids? Really, who can tell?

17.35 another dad in the bleachers suggests not losing sight of your kid, since they are all in the same outfit: black bathing suit and white cap. To my credit I can recognize my daughter’s stroke in the water during warm ups.

17.43 there is clearly no hope of finding another Madison parent here. So much for building community.

17.46 there is the usual concession stand with the usual junk. So it is like a swim meet, only more confusing since I have no idea what is going to happen, and clearly the kids will never be coming to the bleachers. I do have a new appreciation for what parents who haven’t been to swim meets before go through.

17.51 I asked a neighbor in the stands a question about the meet and she had no idea. Kind of feels like the blind leasing the blind.

17.57 still looks mostly like a bunch of white caps bobbing in the water.

18.04 fewer heads bobbing now. Kids moving to the side of the pool to chat with friends.

18.06 heads bobbing again.

18.07 I can’t help but think how interesting this would all be to an anthropologist. Perhaps that is why I’m not am anthropologist.

18.11 another more experienced parent says there are 2 sections to the meet. These are the little kids, and they finish up and can leave before the older kids start. 

18.12 all he bobbing head out of the pool now. The meet was supposed to start at 6pm.

18.13 someone just said “girls, line up”. But nothing is actually happening. How will they know where to line up, anyway?

18.14 just heard a kid saying “I don’t know where to go”

18.16 I’ve seen physics simulations of the random motion of particles in an ideal gas that seem less chaotic than this.

18.17 someone is trying to direct traffic, but it is hard to believe any kid could hear her over the commotion.

18.18 a more experienced parent just said to me: “I told you they all look the same”. But I’d recognize my daughter’s stance anywhere. Besides, she’s the only one chewing her fingers.

18.20 a judge just asked for quiet, but nothing happened.

18.22 a judge bellows for quiet and the first swimmer starts her routine.

18.23 my daughter is second in her group.

18.24 she gets about a 3.4. Snapped her leg up too quickly, I think. But then what do I know>

18.25 now she moves to the back of a very long line.

18.26 looks like my daughter’s score was actually pretty good for her group. But again, I can’t really tell.

18.31 talking with a dad who is on his second year of synchro and he isn’t really sure why is going on either.

18.33 just stripped down to my t-shirt because the pool is so hot. My informant says this is one of the less overheated pools.

18.35 my daughter has moved on to licking her thumb.

18.36 kind of odd that here is no cheering at all. It is almost surreal.

18.38 my daughter just saw me and waved.

18.43 my daughter does a baracuda (whatever that is). Gets 3.4 again.

18.46 last figure. It is a “walkover”. 3.2.

18.49 almost all the kids heading to the shower. So now I guess we wait for awards?

18.51 everyone just sitting around, sort of chatting.

18.53 the older kids are starting their warm ups. I think this may be a bad sign.

18.54 they just announced that the little kids awards will come after the next age group. There was a collective groan from the spectators.

18.55 lots of muttering complaints from the stands.

18.58 still no sign of my daughter from the showers.

19.00 my theory is that they are postponing awards to sell more hotdogs.

19.01 my land but it’s hot in here.

19.04 no change. I mean literally, no change.

19.08 one of the coaches said that the next age group will go much faster.

19.17 older kids done bobbing heads. Lined up and ready to go.

19.19 still lined up.

19.21 it is actually pretty amazing what these kids can do–even just that they can hold their breath so long.

19.26 well I wouldn’t use the word “quick” to describe this part of the meet.

19.53 my daughter won a first place in her division! Although the fact that she was the only person in her division does take some of the shine off the ribbon.

20.05 heading back to the parking lot….

Gina’s dissertation is one of the first studies to use Epistemic Network Analysis to look at the impact of specific parts of a game on the development of professional thinking. Her study of Digital Zoo found that interactions with clients and reflections in an engineering notebook play a key role in making the values and epistemology of engineering explicit for players.

As the first graduate student in the Epistemic Games Group, Gina was instrumental in helping to establish the research directions and practices of the group. We will miss her very much, wish her well in in future ventures, and hope that from time to time she will drop in with a post on news epistemic!

]]> http://epistemicgames.org/eg/learning-from-urban-science-without-playing-it/feed/ 0 http://epistemicgames.org/eg/andre-rupp-visits-madison/ http://epistemicgames.org/eg/andre-rupp-visits-madison/#comments Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:45:03 +0000 Avery Davis http://epistemicgames.org/eg/?p=2796 Last month André Rupp, professor at the University of Maryland, visited the Epistemic Games Group at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Dr. Rupp, the Co-PI on the EAGER grant, participated in several discussions regarding the ideas and issues underlying Epistemic Network Analysis, while he was here. One meeting, with David Shaffer and Mike Gleicher, centered on a proposed method for converting adjacency matrices into coordinates in n-dimensional space and comparing them by calculating the distance between them. In effect, this method controls for the number of speech act occurrences by comparing frame shapes, rather than frame sizes. Another benefit of this method is the afforded ability to visualize learning trajectories.

Andre also experienced the joys of several of Wisconsin’s customs and culinary treasures during his stay, including–but not limited to–cheese curds and Old Fashioneds.

]]> http://epistemicgames.org/eg/andre-rupp-visits-madison/feed/ 0