No edit summary |
m (comment re last para) |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
*** http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_leadbeater_on_education.html | *** http://www.ted.com/talks/charles_leadbeater_on_education.html | ||
*** http://www.ted.com/search?q=ken+robinson&x=0&y=0 | *** http://www.ted.com/search?q=ken+robinson&x=0&y=0 | ||
Hi [[User:Gelada|Gelada]], like up to and including "So we can help activate people by challenging them,...", but don't really get the last bit. (it feels a bit too brief). Who is the "we"? Up to and including "So we can help activate people by challenging them,...", feels fairly inclusive and universal, but beyond is it "academics only beyond this point please"? or am I misunderstanding? [[User:Philralph|Philralph]] 09:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 09:26, 22 July 2010
I have put my views on criticism forward for everyone so I am an open target, what are the flaws? what have I missed? (and what do you find great? ;)
@lucasgonzalez here:
- About your piece:
- (Implied "Thanks".)
- I like the "creativity & discipline" slicing. There's formal creativity too.
- Networks are happening already. Gathering speed, I guess. Some disasters kill previous systems, like Haiti. Some challenges may make room for the new (pandemic & home-schooling).
- Further comments, written before reading your piece:
- pmi on khan academy
- "open space technology" for teaching/learning? (a good ost blogger wrote a pdf about this, can't find it)
- gupta's tv idea
- pc in wall between mit & slum (i can find reference for this, lazyweb)
- ted:
Hi Gelada, like up to and including "So we can help activate people by challenging them,...", but don't really get the last bit. (it feels a bit too brief). Who is the "we"? Up to and including "So we can help activate people by challenging them,...", feels fairly inclusive and universal, but beyond is it "academics only beyond this point please"? or am I misunderstanding? Philralph 09:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)