Cl2-18 - Revision history

Idoroll: Removing all content from page

2008-02-18T18:32:50Z

Removing all content from page

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:32, 18 February 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~'''Ido'''~~

	~~1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?~~

	~~# Technological infrastructure for course implementation and evaluation~~
	~~# Framework for comparison and meta-analysis of studies~~
	~~# Surviving 4 years of NSF big-brotherhood without anyone loosing their minds permanently~~


	2. What are 1-3 best of PSLC accomplishments that results, at least in part, because of having a center (these could be the same as #1)? For each, why was this accomplishment less likely to have happened without the center (i.e., why couldn’t a regular grant have resulted in the same outcome)?

	~~# Individual technological projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.~~
	# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up processes, and was possible due to having more researchers than the critical math.



	~~3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?~~

	1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done by integrating results from different studies and looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	* This analysis should be informative in two ways:
	** Generating better science
	** Generating better instructional principles.
	* Integration is the keyword here. Just like it required a center to turn the technological islands of affordability (e.g., CTAT) into a complete infrastructure, the next task of the center should be to bridge between the local islands of knowledge and principles to a more complete picture, or sheet.
	* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

	2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative, compared with individuals. I would vote for a Google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

	~~3. stronger connections with educational practice~~
	* More teacher involvement
	* Doing more teaching in the PPS
	* Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll: Undo revision 7154 by Idoroll (Talk)

2008-02-18T18:30:46Z

Undo revision 7154 by Idoroll (Talk)

← Older revision	Revision as of 18:30, 18 February 2008
Line 1:	Line 1:
		'''Ido'''

		1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?

		# Technological infrastructure for course implementation and evaluation
		# Framework for comparison and meta-analysis of studies
		# Surviving 4 years of NSF big-brotherhood without anyone loosing their minds permanently


		2. What are 1-3 best of PSLC accomplishments that results, at least in part, because of having a center (these could be the same as #1)? For each, why was this accomplishment less likely to have happened without the center (i.e., why couldn’t a regular grant have resulted in the same outcome)?

		# Individual technological projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.
		# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up processes, and was possible due to having more researchers than the critical math.



		3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?

		1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done by integrating results from different studies and looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
		* This analysis should be informative in two ways:
		** Generating better science
		** Generating better instructional principles.
		* Integration is the keyword here. Just like it required a center to turn the technological islands of affordability (e.g., CTAT) into a complete infrastructure, the next task of the center should be to bridge between the local islands of knowledge and principles to a more complete picture, or sheet.
		* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

		2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative, compared with individuals. I would vote for a Google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

		3. stronger connections with educational practice
		* More teacher involvement
		* Doing more teaching in the PPS
		* Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll: Removing all content from page

2008-02-18T18:28:05Z

Removing all content from page

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:28, 18 February 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	~~'''Ido'''~~

	~~1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?~~

	~~# Technological infrastructure for course implementation and evaluation~~
	~~# Framework for comparison and meta-analysis of studies~~
	~~# Surviving 4 years of NSF big-brotherhood without anyone loosing their minds permanently~~


	2. What are 1-3 best of PSLC accomplishments that results, at least in part, because of having a center (these could be the same as #1)? For each, why was this accomplishment less likely to have happened without the center (i.e., why couldn’t a regular grant have resulted in the same outcome)?

	~~# Individual technological projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.~~
	# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up processes, and was possible due to having more researchers than the critical math.



	~~3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?~~

	1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done by integrating results from different studies and looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	* This analysis should be informative in two ways:
	** Generating better science
	** Generating better instructional principles.
	* Integration is the keyword here. Just like it required a center to turn the technological islands of affordability (e.g., CTAT) into a complete infrastructure, the next task of the center should be to bridge between the local islands of knowledge and principles to a more complete picture, or sheet.
	* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

	2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative, compared with individuals. I would vote for a Google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

	~~3. stronger connections with educational practice~~
	* More teacher involvement
	* Doing more teaching in the PPS
	* Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll at 18:02, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T18:02:48Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 18:02, 18 February 2008
Line 27:		Line 27:

	3. stronger connections with educational practice		3. stronger connections with educational practice
	** More teacher involvement		* More teacher involvement
	** Doing more teaching in the PPS		* Doing more teaching in the PPS
	** Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh		* Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll at 17:42, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:42:45Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:42, 18 February 2008
Line 17:		Line 17:
	3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?		3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?

	1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done ~~in two levels:~~		1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done by integrating results from different studies and looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	** Integrating results from different studies
	** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	* This analysis should be informative in two ways:		* This analysis should be informative in two ways:
	** Generating better science		** Generating better science

Idoroll at 17:42, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:42:05Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:42, 18 February 2008
Line 20:		Line 20:
	** Integrating results from different studies		** Integrating results from different studies
	** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets		** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	* This analysis should be ~~contribute~~ in two ways:		* This analysis should be informative in two ways:
	** Generating better science		** Generating better science
	** Generating better instructional principles.		** Generating better instructional principles.
Line 26:		Line 26:
	* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.		* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

	2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative. I would vote for a ~~google~~-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).		2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative, compared with individuals. I would vote for a Google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

	3. stronger connections with educational practice		3. stronger connections with educational practice

Idoroll at 17:40, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:40:30Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:40, 18 February 2008
Line 17:		Line 17:
	3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?		3. Building off what we have accomplished, what are 1-3 ideas for where PSLC research should go in the future and how would these ideas be “transformative” for learning science or education?

	# More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done in two levels:		1. More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done in two levels:
	** Integrating results from different studies		** Integrating results from different studies
	** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets		** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
Line 26:		Line 26:
	* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.		* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

	# We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative. I would vote for a google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).		2. We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative. I would vote for a google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

	# stronger connections with educational practice		3. stronger connections with educational practice
	** More teacher involvement		** More teacher involvement
	** Doing more teaching in the PPS		** Doing more teaching in the PPS
	** Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh		** Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll at 17:40, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:40:04Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:40, 18 February 2008
Line 10:		Line 10:
	2. What are 1-3 best of PSLC accomplishments that results, at least in part, because of having a center (these could be the same as #1)? For each, why was this accomplishment less likely to have happened without the center (i.e., why couldn’t a regular grant have resulted in the same outcome)?		2. What are 1-3 best of PSLC accomplishments that results, at least in part, because of having a center (these could be the same as #1)? For each, why was this accomplishment less likely to have happened without the center (i.e., why couldn’t a regular grant have resulted in the same outcome)?

	# Individual projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.		# Individual technological projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.
	# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up ~~process~~, ~~that included~~ researchers ~~above~~ the critical math.		# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up processes, and was possible due to having more researchers than the critical math.


Line 18:		Line 18:

	# More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done in two levels:		# More meta-analysis should be conducted on existing results using the existing framework. This meta-analysis should be done in two levels:
	## Integrating results from different studies		** Integrating results from different studies
	## Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets		** Looking at learning phenomenas across existing data-sets
	# This analysis should be contribute in two ways:		* This analysis should be contribute in two ways:
	## Generating better science		** Generating better science
	## Generating better instructional principles.		** Generating better instructional principles.
	# Integration is the keyword here. Just like it required a center to turn the technological islands of affordability (e.g., CTAT) into a complete infrastructure, the next task of the center should be to bridge between the local islands of knowledge and principles to a more complete picture, or sheet.		* Integration is the keyword here. Just like it required a center to turn the technological islands of affordability (e.g., CTAT) into a complete infrastructure, the next task of the center should be to bridge between the local islands of knowledge and principles to a more complete picture, or sheet.
	From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.		* From a collection of 0-D local principles to a sheet of 2-D knowledge.

			# We talk about new Pittsburgh but take relatively few risks. A center can allow itself to be more innovative. I would vote for a google-type of center rather than a Microsoft one. I would push harder on ill-defined domains, novel technologies, beyond cognition (emotion, motivation), methodologies (fMRI, etnography).

			# stronger connections with educational practice
			** More teacher involvement
			** Doing more teaching in the PPS
			** Doing much more outreach in inner-city Pittsburgh

Idoroll at 17:30, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:30:12Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:30, 18 February 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
	'''Ido'''		'''Ido'''

	1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?		1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?

Line 11:		Line 12:
	# Individual projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.		# Individual projects are islands of afordability - it is the center that bridges between them to create an infrastructure.
	# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up process, that included researchers above the critical math.		# It is through the on-going discussion and the breadth of projects that the framework was created. The framework emerged from this combination of top-down and bottom up process, that included researchers above the critical math.
	#

Idoroll at 17:29, 18 February 2008

2008-02-18T17:29:50Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 17:29, 18 February 2008
Line 1:		Line 1:
			'''Ido'''
	1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?		1. What are 1-3 best examples of PSLC accomplishments? How have these been “transformative” (NSF buzzword) for the learning sciences or education?

	~~Ido:~~
	# Technological infrastructure for course implementation and evaluation		# Technological infrastructure for course implementation and evaluation
	# Framework for comparison and meta-analysis of studies		# Framework for comparison and meta-analysis of studies
	#		# Surviving 4 years of NSF big-brotherhood without anyone loosing their minds permanently