So my friend Andre Malan asked me to fill out a survey about the role of technology in my education. You should too (and if you’re going to you should do so before reading my response below).

It should be noted that my response, though written in a comical tone, is deadly serious:

What you think about Educational Technology

Survey to help me generate ideas and bring data to a talk that I am giving in Victoria. It will be live-streamed so you can see what I do with the data in the end.

On submission of this form you will receive a lot of gratitude and IOU for 2 hugs.

Basic Information

Name: Nicholas FitzGerald

Faculty: Science

Program: Cognitive Systems (Computational Intelligence)

Please Tick the educational technologies that you have used for class (either with or without being asked) at university. *

* paper
* WebCT/Vista/Blackboard
* Course Website
* Google Docs
* Facebook
* Wikis
* Blogs
* Twitter
* School Email
* calculator

Other Please list any others that you have used.

SVN <—- wooooooooo!
Python
Clickers
CS Handin
VPN
Ballpoint Pen
Fountain Pen

Disliked technology

Please list the 3 technologies from above that you disliked the most (including ones from “others”) and explain why you did not like them.

1. WebCT Vista

I COULD answer this question, but to do so thoroughly would far exceed the “approximately 4 minutes” you suggested for filling out this survey. WebCT Vista is by far the worst bit of technology I have even been forced to interact with. I say that as someone who’s used it both as a student and as a TA. Seriously. It. Sucks.
Terrible Stability. Incomprehensible UI. Way too many unnecessary features. No obvious integration with other technologies (would it be too much to ask to get an email reminding me I have an assessment due or that an assignment has been posted?). Seriously. WTF?

2. Clickers

Clickers are the worst example of the kind of crap which has come out of this new movement to make classes more “interactive”. Seriously, I go to class to be taught things, not to sit through a one-hour pop-quiz day after day after day. Here’s an idea: Instead of treating me like an elementary school kid who needs constant supervision and hand-holding to get my HW done, why don’t you give a good lecture, teach me some interesting material, and then give me an exam at the end of the term to make sure I actually took some personal responsibility for my education. Seriously. Kids these days…

3. Ballpoint Pen

These things are crap. You have to press so hard it makes your hand all tired, and by the time you’ve written a paragraph you’ve got a crippling case of carpal tunnel. Everyone thinks they’re so great because they can write under water – but can the write upside down?! No. Seriously. Ballpoint? More like FAILpoint, mirite?

Liked Technology

Please list the 3 technologies from above that you liked the most (including ones from “others”) and explain why you did not like them.

1. SVN / CS handin / ssh / pretty much anything involving commandline

Setting up an SVN server was the best thing I ever did. Makes it so much easier to coordinate my files between the 3 or 4 computers I use. No more messing around with emails etc. Plus, I feel like a bad-ass hacker every time I open a terminal and type “cd ~/school; svn update”. Same with CS handin. LOVE seeing how many tape blocks my homework used. Plus ssh tunneling is like some serious “Matrix” shit. Seriously. Chicks go wild for that kinda thing.

2. HTML + SMTP

Best use of technology for a course I have experienced: Philosophy 441 (Philosophy of Mind) with Dr. Murat Aydede. Simple HTML page with links to necessary PDF readings. Email address to contact for clarifications. Perfection. Doesn’t need to be more complicated than that. KEEP IT SIMPLE, STUPID! Seriously. CSS is for chumps.

3. Fountain Pen

Once you go fountain pen you’ll never return to crappy ballpoints. This thing glides so smooth it’s like writing with melted butter (like the kind you get in that little candle-heated dish when you order crab). Plus I feel like I’m some sort of bad-ass Victorian gentleman every time I whip this thing out. Seriously. Like some serious Mr. Darcy shit up in here.

Your Dream Technology

(most important part of this whole survey…)

So if your professor could use some technology in class that would make school much better what would it be? * this can be something you know of or something made up. Sky is the limit, think outside the box, all that jazz. All I ask is that it is something that you would really, really want to use.

I really can’t think of much. The vast majority of times I’ve had some sort of opinion regarding use of technology in education, it’s usually along the lines of “I really wish this prof would stop messing around with this new-fangled edumacational gizmo and just give a good lecture”. There are a few really good examples of pedagogical tools (AISpace is great), but those are really only useful in “algorithm” type courses. Most of the time they’re just annoying and a poor substitute for a good lecture and a good textbook.

That said, my one wish is for E-readers to reach a stage where they are satisfactory substitutes for hard-copy textbooks in terms of ease-of-use, portability, durability etc.

Since I can find no previous mention on Terry, I thought I’d share one of my favourite webcomics. Hark, A Vagrant!, by Canadian Kate Beaton is in many ways to the Humanities what XKCD is to science and engineering (with suitably better illustrations).

In fact, one improvement is that Beaton, a History and Anthropology graduate from Mount Allison University, often accompanies her comics with a blog post explaining the obscure historical references sent up, so while laughing at her witty and hilarious illustrations, you can often learn something, too. Also, in true Terry spirit, she often pens works which deal with the history of science:

So if you’ve got some time after (or while) studying for midterms, why not start from the beginning? Also, post your favourite, if you have one. Here’s one of mine:

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past few weeks (or buried in textbooks, as the case might more likely be), you’ve probably heard about a the case of a group of hackers stealing and releasing emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. This has kicked off a ludicrous knee-jerk reaction from climate-change deniers who want so badly for there to be a conspiracy that, apparently, they neglected to actually read the emails. YouTuber potholer54 convincingly demolishes the only “examples of fraud” which have thus far emerged (linked here via Pharangula):

(incidentally, potholer54, who’s channels stated goal is to “explain in simple terms the conclusions of scientific research and correct some of the unsourced crap you get fed on the Internet” has a great series of videos on cosmology, biology, and climate change)

There is a larger question here, which is about the constant assertions of a “scientific conspiracy” which is so often levelled by anti-scientific types of many stripes: be it Climate Change deniers, Intelligent Design, or Anti-Vacciners. I’ve always wondered how these “conspiracies” are supposed to work. As the above video puts it, are we really supposed to believe that thousands of independent researchers are collaborating to fake results, hide counter-evidence, and tie all their “fake” data together in such a way as to tell a convincing story and beguile the unwitting populace? Add to this the fact that for a scientist, one of the best career moves you could make, to ensure your name would forever be entered in the annals of history, would be to convincingly overturn the dominant theory of your day. If there were really good scientific grounds by which to doubt these “conspiracies” we should expect researchers to be clambering over one-another to be the first to prove it, and the evidence to be pouring in. E pur si muove!

Also, I’ve always thought that if I were going to go to the trouble of orchestrating a giant conspiracy involving thousands of researchers and a monumental (impossible?) effort to suppress dissent and fake the evidence, I’d choose something a bit more… sexy than Climate Change, or Vaccines. Maybe I’d have my evil Ph.D-wielding minions brainwash the hoi polloi into believing that first-contact had been made with an extra-terrestrial civilization and we must begin colonizing our solar system – that would be a great way to kick-start the space program again. Or maybe I’d convince people that a new “super-caste” of humans had evolved, with superior capabilities in telepathy, empathy, and responsible fiscal policy, and that I was one. That would be a good way to ensure the continued dominance of my Evil, Science-Wielding Liberal Empire of Doom.

So I ask you, Terry readers, if you had control of a massive, complex conspirational network of thousands of researchers, what would YOU have them trick the unwitting populace into believing?