I would pee on Pea.
[Aside: I think one of the most difficult barriers for me to overcome in writing a blog for a class is: How do I make it academic? Answer: I can't. For me, a blog is written diarrhea. Its contents consist of ideas that pop into my head in whatever order they so please. I write what I hear in my head; I don't hear voices, but I hear my own voice speaking to me, and that's exactly what I write. So, if anything I write offends anyone, just let me know and I will try to edit my thoughts.]
The Pea chapter really annoyed me. It brought up a lot of interesting ideas, and though I tried as hard as I could to disagree with all of them, I couldn't. I understand but resent the utilitarian notion of education (that everything students learn must be in preparation for their future careers, or practical in everyday life), which seems to be Pea's point of view. This must be the theorist in me: I enjoy education for education's sake, just as I enjoy research for research's sake. (This is why I resent the new NASA administration's focus on "Big Events" like landing on the moon and on Mars at the expense of less-publicized research projects.) I'm all about depth over breadth. I know Pea argues that this is not the intention of distributed intelligence, and that such technology can actually enable further, more in-depth study, but it's dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket (technology). What happens the day your calculator's batteries die or you forget it at home? You'll need the basic skills to do simple arithmetic. Or, as often happens with new technologies, what happens if there are bugs in its system? What if your calculator tells you 2+2=5? Will you just accept it as truth, lacking the ability to do that arithmetic yourself? Admittedly, that's a pretty extreme example, but I don't think it's too far off the mark.
The Pea chapter really annoyed me. It brought up a lot of interesting ideas, and though I tried as hard as I could to disagree with all of them, I couldn't. I understand but resent the utilitarian notion of education (that everything students learn must be in preparation for their future careers, or practical in everyday life), which seems to be Pea's point of view. This must be the theorist in me: I enjoy education for education's sake, just as I enjoy research for research's sake. (This is why I resent the new NASA administration's focus on "Big Events" like landing on the moon and on Mars at the expense of less-publicized research projects.) I'm all about depth over breadth. I know Pea argues that this is not the intention of distributed intelligence, and that such technology can actually enable further, more in-depth study, but it's dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket (technology). What happens the day your calculator's batteries die or you forget it at home? You'll need the basic skills to do simple arithmetic. Or, as often happens with new technologies, what happens if there are bugs in its system? What if your calculator tells you 2+2=5? Will you just accept it as truth, lacking the ability to do that arithmetic yourself? Admittedly, that's a pretty extreme example, but I don't think it's too far off the mark.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: I would pee on Pea..
TrackBack URL for this entry: https://blogs.psu.edu/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/2593
Leave a comment