Serendipity and curiosity are such important elements in learning. Why would we engineer those out of our systems and schools? (And which systems and which schools?)
The Algorithmic Future of Education
Audrey Watters
926

I’m sure that sometime soon we’ll be able to engineer serendipity and a way to encourage curiosity into our systems. The limitations that remove these two important aspects are historic and current, but that’s not to say they can’t go away as we figure out how to make educational processes (how schools and the educators they employ work) and augmentation/automation (the technology educational systems use) that cares. However, the fear of technology changing us is quite valid. It happens all the time. There are plenty of people who can point you in that direction: Clifford Stoll, Jaron Lanier, and even David Byrne. I’m on the fence with this. Some days I side with Clifford Stoll and think computers have no place in front of kids until they know how to do everything — especially be creative and curious — that’s rudimentary. Only then can kids use the tool that the computer is. Other days I think I might be wrong about that. Then I realize how much computers and the constant stream of textual communication is changing us and realize we’re forgetting how to be human.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.