teachers will soon be celebrities
That technology is changing the way we think of education is a fact that few can deny, especially in 2012. As we look ahead 10 years from now, one potential implication of the use of technology and the break-down of traditional institutions of learning, such as universities, could be the emergence of the superstar teacher.
What do I mean by the superstar (or celebrity) teacher?
Imagine for a moment, that everyone student in the world who is interested in learning about a particular topic is able to access content created by the best teacher for that subject. Students in Vietnam tuning into Physics lectures by Einstein; or taking philosophy classes from Daniel Kahneman. Daniel Kahneman instantly goes from being able to teach 500 students over 10 years, to teaching 50000 students every year !
Hard to imagine? Dr Sebastian Thrun of Stanford University delivered an AI class to 160,000 students in the Fall of 2011.
The best teachers of any, and every subject in the world have a massive opportunity to reach each and every student interested in learning from them, through the use of simple broadcasting tools. This will give rise to a new class of celebrities, teachers !
Teachers are no longer required to restrict themselves to teaching primarily at elite institutions to have a great impact on society, but rather aim to reach a global audience with their product. This also changes the fundamental economics of education and the opportunity for outstanding compensation for outstanding educators !
To wrap, I want to add that Dr Sebastian Thrun recently resigned from Stanford to launch his own platform to deliver his courses - complete with lectures, grading, and classrooms. Salman Khan of the Khan Academy is another prominent example !
The celebrity teacher will enjoy the same kind of following, fame, and fortune as leading Hollywood artists. Sebastian is one of the first celebrity teachers !
Mark Pagel on collective cultural evolution, and how we may be becoming infinitely stupid
This is a very interesting talk by an evolutionary biologist, where he starts from the beginning of life itself and weaves a story through to our current state of culture and how ideas flow.
There are several pieces of the talk that are worth taking a moment to appreciate. Here are a couple excerpts.
here he explains humans versus chimpanzees:
One way to put this in perspective is to say that you can bring a chimpanzee home to your house, and you can teach it to wash dishes, but it will just as happily wash a clean dish as a dirty dish, because it’s washing dishes to be rewarded with a banana. Whereas, with humans, we understand why we’re washing dishes, and we would never wash a clean one. And that seems to be the difference. It unleashes this cumulative cultural adaptation in us.
here he explains how ideas are accelerating, and in many ways the term “building on the shoulders of giants” comes from:
If I’m living in a population of people, and I can observe those people, and see what they’re doing, seeing what innovations they’re coming up with, I can choose among the best of those ideas, without having to go through the process of innovation myself. So, for example, if I’m trying to make a better spear, I really have no idea how to make that better spear. But if I notice that somebody else in my society has made a very good spear, I can simply copy him without having to understand why.
As our societies get larger and larger, there’s no need, in fact, there’s even less of a need for any one of us to be an innovator, whereas there is a great advantage for most of us to be copiers, or followers. And so, a real worry is that our capacity for social learning, which is responsible for all of our cumulative cultural adaptation, all of the things we see around us in our everyday lives, has actually promoted a species that isn’t so good at innovation. It allows us to reflect on ourselves a little bit and say, maybe we’re not as creative and as imaginative and as innovative as we thought we were, but extraordinarily good at copying and following. If we apply this to our everyday lives and we ask ourselves, do we know the answers to the most important questions in our lives? Should you buy a particular house? What mortgage product should you have? Should you buy a particular car? Who should you marry? What sort of job should you take? What kind of activities should you do? What kind of holidays should you take? We don’t know the answers to most of those things. And if we really were the deeply intelligent and imaginative and innovative species that we thought we were, we might know the answers to those things. And if we ask ourselves how it is we come across the answers, or acquire the answers to many of those questions, most of us realize that we do what everybody else is doing. This herd instinct, I think, might be an extremely fundamental part of our psychology that was perhaps an unexpected and unintended, you might say, byproduct of our capacity for social learning, that we’re very, very good at being followers rather than leaders. A small number of leaders or innovators or creative people is enough for our societies to get by. And this next insight is where he predicts where we might be headed: Putting these two things together has lots of implications for where we’re going as societies. As I say, as our societies get bigger, and rely more and more on the Internet, fewer and fewer of us have to be very good at these creative and imaginative processes. And so, humanity might be moving towards becoming more docile, more oriented towards following, copying others, prone to fads, prone to going down blind alleys, because part of our evolutionary history that we could have never anticipated was leading us towards making use of the small number of other innovations that people come up with, rather than having to produce them ourselves. And how are Facebook, Google, and Twitter contributing towards making us collective stupider ? The interesting thing with Facebook is that, with 500 to 800 million of us connected around the world, it sort of devalues information and devalues knowledge. And this isn’t the comment of some reactionary who doesn’t like Facebook, but it’s rather the comment of someone who realizes that knowledge and new ideas are extraordinarily hard to come by. And as we’re more and more connected to each other, there’s more and more to copy. We realize the value in copying, and so that’s what we do. And we seek out that information in cheaper and cheaper ways. We go up on Google, we go up on Facebook, see who’s doing what to whom. We go up on Google and find out the answers to things. And what that’s telling us is that knowledge and new ideas are cheap. And it’s playing into a set of predispositions that we have been selected to have anyway, to be copiers and to be followers. But at no time in history has it been easier to do that than now. And Facebook is encouraging that. Lastly, what might this mean from an evolutionary biology perspective, and what are we becoming? Now, the evolutionary argument is that our populations have always supported a small number of truly innovative people, and they’re somehow different from the rest of us. But it might even be the case that that small number of innovators just got lucky. And this is something that I think very few people will accept. They’ll receive it with incredulity. But I like to think of it as what I call social learning and, maybe, the possibility that we are infinitely stupid. Hope you enjoyed reading this, as much as I did.
data is the glue for digital advertising
Architecture should speak of its time and place, but yearn for timelessness.
awesome
Source: newsweek
Mentors
I often find myself deeply confused and unclear about navigating life and career decisions. These may range from simple things such as whether to take on a project at work?, or broader questions such as what geography do I want to be in 10 years from now?
No matter what the question, it is quite challenging to step outside of one’s own bubble and see the forest from the trees. What makes navigating these crossroads even harder is that the consequences of most such decisions may only be evaluated over long periods of time. All of us face these questions regularly, and am sure each of us has devised unique ways to find answers.
I constantly turn to my Mentors for guidance and direction when faced with multifaceted decisions. They (my Mentors) are the only way I am able to understand what is going on beyond my own life stage, industry, financial circumstances, geography, career track, and ideologies.
Surround yourself with mentors who not only share their life experiences but also challenge you to think about dimensions you may not have contemplated. Having an insight into what lies ahead, or how people in a different industry think about the same decision is invaluable.
As you think about Mentors, here are my thoughts on who to surround yourself with:
- a peer in your industry
- someone whose life/achievements you admire
- a family member
- someone in a different geography than your own
- someone much younger than yourself
Keep in mind that cultivating a Mentor/Mentee relationship takes time and diligence. You have to pay it forward and share as much as (and perhaps more) you wish to learn.
Think of a person without mentors as a sailor relying on astrology to cross the seas, and a person with mentors as a sniper with the support of a spotter and sophisticated GPS satellite navigation to assist him. The sniper has a much better lay of the land and the many pitfalls and traps on the path to his goal. Be the sniper.
I hope you find Mentors that help make your life more interesting, and at the same time be sure to share your own perspectives with others who could benefit from your experiences.
this is an amazingly underestimated aspect of building a company/product
(via morganmissen)
Source: startupquote
Ganesha by Mona (Taken with picplz.)
We try to solve very complicated problems without letting people know how complicated the problem was.
- Jonathan Ive
Source: startupquote
Congratulations on the new library, because it isn’t just a library. It is a space ship that will take you to the farthest reaches of the Universe, a time machine that will take you to the far past and the far future, a teacher that knows more than any human being, a friend that will amuse you and console you —- and most of all, a gateway, to a better and happier and more useful life
Isaac Asimov to future patrons of a library in Troy, Michigan on 16 March 1971
(I came across it on a BoingBoing post by Cory Doctorow on June 3, 2011)
College costs twice as much as it did 10 years ago
Earlier today, I started to wonder how expense it has become to go to college these days. As Mona and I were chatting, we conjectured that the increases were tiny if we were to consider cumulative inflation over the same period.
Best way to find out was to dig into the data, so here we go:
Chart 1: Tuition fees data from Virginia Tech & UC Berkeley
Well, it is pretty interesting to see that VT increased its In-state tuition from $2537 in 2003 to $5254 in 2011; an increase of 107%.
During the same period UC Berkeley went from $2928 in 2003 to $6696 in 2011; clocking a whopping increase of 128%.
everything local is going digital (Taken with picplz at Books Inc. in Mountain View, CA.)
GeoCoding IP Address data using Hadoop + Python + Dumbo « on various things …: http://disq.us/21bjga
cool story of how @everyblock helped neighbors catch a flasher http://t.co/2gRTsPM #local #content #engagement cc @quova
dating apps with location awareness are a recipe for disaster #privacy #nightmare (thoughts leading up to #pii2011)
RT @jeremycrane: I am baffled by startups targeting other startups as a primary customer, people they don’t have any money yet either!


