When I read Questions for technology - Austin Kleon my brain immediately applied my interests, which includes creating accessible, useful technology (and also building web forms!), so that is what I intend to do.
As in, first we’ll discuss the questions and surrounding media around each set of questions, and then see how these questions work as a practical exercise of sense-making.
There are three lists of questions/standards I want to explore here, curated by three people, and I’ll go through them in ascending number of items:
- Neil Postman, Questions for New Technology, 7 points
- Wendell Berry, Why I am NOT going to buy a computer, 9 points
- L.M. Sacasas, 41 questions concerning technology, 41 points
Stashing this here for now:
berry-computer.pdf (298.4 KB)
The history of that article is it was published in a couple of places, had some replies sent in, and then Berry replied to the responses together in a Harper’s Magazine piece. The PDF I found is part of college course materials, but it’s a very interesting read, especially as it gives a snapshot of how people talk to each via magazine letters, which I find is honestly not too different from now or antiquity, which is to say it’s both amazing and embarrassing how consistent humans are…
Reading up on Neil Postman - Wikipedia, I was looking up a book they co-wrote, the article of which redirects to Inquiry education - Wikipedia, which is very interesting:
Inquiry education (sometimes known as the inquiry method) is a student-centered method of education focused on asking questions. Students are encouraged to ask questions which are meaningful to them, and which do not necessarily have easy answers; teachers are encouraged to avoid giving answers when this is possible, and in any case to avoid giving direct answers in favor of asking more questions. In this way it is similar in some respects to the Socratic method. The method was advocated by Neil Postman and Charles Weingartner in their book Teaching as a Subversive Activity.
The inquiry method is motivated by Postman and Weingartner’s recognition that good learners and sound reasoners center their attention and activity on the dynamic process of inquiry itself, not merely on the end product of static knowledge. They write that certain characteristics are common to all good learners (Postman and Weingartner, pp. 31–33), saying that all good learners have:
- Self-confidence in their learning ability
- Pleasure in problem solving
- A keen sense of relevance
- Reliance on their own judgment over other people’s or society’s
- No fear of being wrong
- No haste in answering
- Flexibility in point of view
- Respect for facts, and the ability to distinguish between fact and opinion
- No need for final answers to all questions, and comfort in not knowing an answer to difficult questions rather than settling for a simplistic answer
In an attempt to instill students with these qualities and behaviors, a teacher adhering to the inquiry method in pedagogy must behave very differently from a traditional teacher. Postman and Weingartner suggest that inquiry teachers have the following characteristics (pp. 34–37):
- They avoid telling students what they “ought to know”.
- They talk to students mostly by questioning, and especially by asking divergent questions.
- They do not accept short, simple answers to questions.
- They encourage students to interact directly with one another, and avoid judging what is said in student interactions.
- They do not summarize students’ discussion.
- They do not plan the exact direction of their lessons in advance, and allow it to develop in response to students’ interests.
- Their lessons pose problems to students.
- They gauge their success by change in students’ inquiry behaviors (with the above characteristics of “good learners” as a goal).
Postman, Neil, and Weingartner, Charles (1969), Teaching as a Subversive Activity, Dell, New York, NY.
I do love me a concise list, and here we have two of them!
Of course I’m like super-biased, because according to that first list, I am a good learner!