Roaming autodidacts/techbro rationalists who’ve acquired some evopsych are insufferable and waste the time of your DEI team.
I’m going to let this analysis calm my election nerves a bit so as to stay below heart explosion threshold:
My musical hope buoy for election day:
I’m leaning heavily on playlist making as a coping mechanism right now. Here’s my “Chronic Neurodivergent Depressed Queer Punk” playlist of mental health related punk and punk-adjacent songs.
Themes/CW: suicidal ideation, addiction, mania, depression, dysphoria, chronic illness, anxiety, overwhelm, panic, meltdown, masking, burnout, OCD, ADHD, ADD, SPD, bipolar, autism
When bigots have got me down and I need to scream it out, I often turn to Marissa Paternoster and her band Screaming Females, my favorite power trio of all time and space. Here she is singing about gender non-conformity and homophobia, screaming “While you sit on the fence I will burn in hell” over and over from the depths of her soul.
To all you fence sitting family members with conscience compromised by your bigoted religion: fuck you. You fail at moral autonomy, and you fail to #EmptyThePews of toxic Christianity.
“For a minute there, I lost myself, I lost myself.”
Putting this on repeat and swimming in it.
My YouTube play list of favorite cover songs from 2020 is helping me cope with 2020. Plenty of goosebumps and chills moments.
Thorndike won, and Dewey lost. You can’t understand the history of education unless you realize this. I don’t think you can understand the history of education technology without realizing this either. And I’d go one step further: you cannot understand the history of education technology in the United States during the twentieth century – and on into the twenty-first – unless you realize that Seymour Papert lost and B. F. Skinner won.
Skinner won; Papert lost. Thorndike won; Dewey lost. Behaviorism won.
It seems to really bother folks when I say this. It’s not aspirational enough or something. Or it implies maybe that we’ve surrendered. Folks will point to things like maker-spaces to argue that progressive education is thriving. But I maintain, even in the face of all the learn-to-code brouhaha, that multiple choice tests have triumphed over democratically-oriented inquiry. Indeed, when we hear technologists champion “personalized learning,” it’s far more likely that what they envision draws on Skinner’s ideas, not Dewey’s.
Source: Behaviorism Won
Opposition to behaviorism is common ground in neurodiversity, disability, education, ed-tech, and tech ethics advocacy.
Human cognitive diversity exists for a reason; our differences are the genius – and the conscience – of our species.
Dyslexic children often have better imaginations than non-dyslexics, after all, but nobody labels the “normal” children as having an “imagination disability.”
These children’s brains are organizing themselves differently, and it should go without saying that their developmental arc may therefore be different. When we interfere in the process of this organization, when we stigmatize it and test it and remediate it prematurely — when we try to teach dyslexics to think like other children by aggressively drilling them in phonics — Cooper says we are robbing these children of the opportunity to build organically on their many strengths rather than being treated as something broken that needs fixing.
Some simply have a different learning strategy; one that absorbs, considers, consolidates, integrates, and then suddenly blossoms fully formed.
If your learning style doesn’t fit this year’s theory, you will be humiliated, remediated, scrutinized, stigmatized, tested, and ultimately diagnosed and labelled as having a mild defect in your brain.
People all over the world know these things about children and learning, and interestingly, they are as workable for learning how to design software or conduct a scientific experiment or write an elegant essay as they are for learning to hunt caribou or identify medicinal plants in a rainforest.
But we don’t know them any more.