Yes, Ed, a recipe has to be created for each classmate’s blog, but it only needs to be done once and the only thing you need change for each is the username in the comment feed URL. Hope that clarifies it.
from Comments for Mihael’s EDC blog http://edc15.education.ed.ac.uk/mkiseloski/2015/01/28/how-to-add-your-comments-on-other-peoples-blog-posts-to-your-lifestream/#comment-21
via IFTTT
I created a little guide on how to automatically add your comments to your lifestream. Hope it helps
#mscedc http://t.co/9ru5NVP2dx
— M. Kiseloski (@mkmscde) January 28, 2015
We might one day get nanobots that implant memories in our brains, similar to the Matrix! Fascinating stuff! http://t.co/B57lJH0hyE #mscedc
— M. Kiseloski (@mkmscde) January 28, 2015
While surfing through my colleagues’ excellent EDC blogs I noticed that some where manually pasting the comments they’ve posted on other people’s blogs onto their own lifestream (to have them count towards the assessment).
Instead of copy/pasting or making a collection of screenshots of your comments there is a way to automate this task using IFTTT.
I created a recipe you can use as a template. All that is left to do is to set it up for each blog’s address you are commenting on.
I changed my displayed name from Mihael to my blog’s username mkiseloski, so that if people were to respond to my comment with a comment of their own, mentioning my name, it would not set off another trigger and post their comment on my lifestream as well. You can change your displayed name to your username in the blog’s dashboard by clicking on “Edit My Profile” in the upper right corner. In my case it now says “Howdy, mkiseloski”, with mkiseloski being the displayed name on all my posts.
Under Feed URL you simply use the username from your colleague’s blog address. For example, in case you want to comment on my blog you’d put mkiseloski instead of USERNAME into the address. The final result would then look like
http://edc15.education.ed.ac.uk/mkiseloski/comments/feed/
I hope this makes life a bit easier in the weeks going forward. If you have any questions, let me know and I’ll be happy to help you out!
Happy commenting everyone
#mscedc The problem of too much data @AnonyOps pic.twitter.com/eK2O4ZbPJu #mscdcls
— Katherine Firth (@katrinafee) January 26, 2015
Very interesting read, Nick!
I agree that whenever a critical research is undertaken we need to stay aware of the underlying and often implicit ideological values of the author doing the critique (and critically engage with those as well). I too got the sense that Sian was favouring an anti-consumerist view of education in her critique – a view that I personally share.
However, as the critique does not put forward an explicit counter proposal, we have to try and focus on the critique at hand and not its implicit assumptions for we might fall into the trap of thinking within false dichotomies. Being against something does not automatically equate to favouring its opposite, even if it is likely. In politics, for example, criticising the Obama administration does not necessarily make one a Republican.
You are right that we need to think of the implications of alternative models, but such a discussion should in my opinion be made explicit. The value I see in Sian’s paper is that it simply draws to attention the problematic fact that the term TEL is implicitly promoting a certain ideology. Whether said ideology is problematic in itself can (and should) be debated in a more explicit form. What I am wondering is whether there can be such a thing as a neutral expression devoid of ideology or whether the terms we use will always be (ab-)used by ideologues pushing for a certain narrative.
from Comments for Nick’s EDC blog http://ift.tt/15xb1iV
via IFTTT
Nice post, Martyn!
In my opinion the algorithms used by Google, Amazon or Netflix – most of which are based on machine learning – are ushering in a new era of personalisation. I see two main problems with this – on the one hand, as you mention, one gets easily creeped out by the feeling that the machines are able to know an awful lot about your preferences by analysing and connecting different datasets. It can become a scary thought, but then again in the end I don’t necessarily have a problem with that (as long as I am aware of what it is I am sharing). Netflix just wants to make money and by better knowing my viewing habits, I am getting to view things I like and they keep me as a customer – a fair tradeoff. The more problematic issue I believe is when my environment on the net is personalised in a way that I remain in my own bubble of preferences. Google already skews search results based on your views. The problem with this is that what you think is the objective reality out there is actually a representation of reality Google thinks you would like. Differing political views might get pushed into the background potentially prohibiting debate and broadening one’s horizon.
The biggest advantages I see in this increasing personalisation, however, is in the field of education. The more we know about a student’s learning progress and mental state the better we can tailor education to their specific learning needs. Perhaps one day every person will have their own personal digital tutor optimising the learning experience in a way that might even surpass the pedagogic ability of even the best personal human tutors out there giving you their undivided attention.
from Comments for Martyn’s EDC blog http://ift.tt/1B473Hd
via IFTTT
I can empathise with your frustration Jin. My suspicion is that in instances like the one you described some of the involved people (in your case the Quality Manager) have to somehow justify the investment in the VLE regardless of their educational outcomes.
from Comments for Jin’s EDC blog http://ift.tt/1CAgsLl
via IFTTT
The second week of our EDC 15 course has ended and we further delved into cyberculture and how it relates to education.
A very interesting video I found this week was “This Will Revolutionize Education” by Veritasium, a popular educational channel on YouTube. It explores reasons for why despite the hype surrounding Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) the revolution in education simply has not happened yet. Thinking about Sian Bayne’s article on the problematic nature of the term TEL I proposed a term I find more appropriate – Digitally Facilitated Education.
The theme of transhumanism and cyborgs continued to follow me this week. If things turn out to be as they are envisioned in Dr Michio Kaku’s interview humans will be able to telepathically communicate with each other on the brainnet – the successor to the internet. I cannot even begin to fathom the drastic implications such technologies might have for human education.
Continuing to explore last week’s theme of biohacking I found incredibly fascinating documentaries about the current state of biohacking, both within the DIY movement as well as in the corporate world. If we are all cyborgs now, as the article suggests, what is the distinction between cyborgs and humans? Perhaps cyborgs are simply the next step in human evolution and drawing a line would be an arbitrary act, the same way as someone cannot pinpoint exactly when the early hominids became humans.
The future is definitely exciting, however, as demonstrated this week by Microsoft’s HoloLens technology. Augmenting reality with holograms will allow us to learn and teach in much more immersive ways. Their promotional video shows someone getting instructions on where to tighten a new trap under a sink by seeing a virtual pair of arrows projected onto the real trap. I am curious about the many innovative use cases for education that will surely be developed for this technology.