To all the nay-sayers (sibling to this comment here), I just want to say: I thought the talk (er, slide show) was very, very interesting. I didn't even notice anything special about the slide-show.
It worked for me. ("worked" as in: made me intrigued about an interesting topic.)
I don't mean to pick on you, but this is the problem traditional learners have with internet-generation learners: You were successfully "intrigued." Hurray. Much dopamine was produced. Emotional energy is valuable in learning. However, since there's no back button you can't go back and analyze the data your own way to create your own meanings or find errors and nuances. It's a sugar hit with an opinion tied to it.
An employee or friend who is able to intrigue me but not show me deeper information such as nuances and contradictions is not useful to me. I don't want to be merely intrigued all day and I don't want to facilitate experiences of "intrigue" in others all day. There's got be some protein along with those carbs.
Comments
To all the nay-sayers (sibling to this comment here), I just want to say: I thought the talk (er, slide show) was very, very interesting. I didn't even notice anything special about the slide-show.
It worked for me. ("worked" as in: made me intrigued about an interesting topic.)
I don't mean to pick on you, but this is the problem traditional learners have with internet-generation learners: You were successfully "intrigued." Hurray. Much dopamine was produced. Emotional energy is valuable in learning. However, since there's no back button you can't go back and analyze the data your own way to create your own meanings or find errors and nuances. It's a sugar hit with an opinion tied to it.
An employee or friend who is able to intrigue me but not show me deeper information such as nuances and contradictions is not useful to me. I don't want to be merely intrigued all day and I don't want to facilitate experiences of "intrigue" in others all day. There's got be some protein along with those carbs.