Month: December 2007

Total 33 Posts

Thanks.

Shortly after the results were announced on some SecondLife island, a writer with The Guardian, Steve O’Hear, e-mailed all the winners (presumably) with the questions:

  1. Why did you start blogging?
  2. What does the award mean to you?

My answers, as well as the reasons why I’ve carpet-bombed this blog with “for your consideration” ads, have very little to do with egotism or self-validation. Since it’s as good a statement of purpose as anything I’ve written, here is my response:

I blog to make the long road shorter for new teachers. My four years teaching have been marked by a lot of failure and, only recently, some success. By writing about successful classroom management, lesson design, and general practice I hope others will find success sooner. Perhaps I’m trying to redeem my early failures in the process.

But these pieces I write are rather useless if no one reads them. Some find the award process and its politicking and lobbying irritating but for me it all serves one end โ€“ I can help more people if more people read. I care little for egotism and self-validation. I care about gathering a readership and building a richer conversation.

Thanks again.

“We are the salt on the slugs of innovation.”

TMAO is the Alfred Hitchcock of the Edublog Awards. Whatever your take on his pedagogy or policy, dude’s undeniably the best writer on the edubloc. ¶ His post, The Ledge, surfaced the merit pay issue (as someone must every two or three months) and now he’s written Rules for the Voyage: Merit Pay to contend with criticism. ¶ Pull quote: “In education circles, especially those composed of teachers, we routinely murder the Good in the name of the Perfect. Whether in terms of classroom practices, school structure and function, or large scale systematic improvements and alterations, if an idea or proposal fails to repel any hypothetical hurled its way, said proposal is immediately dismissed and chests are thumped accordingly.” ¶ TMAO, man, I’m taking your book on vacation. Gonna see if you do to the Florida punk scene what your blog does to inner-city education. Respect.

Are you hot or not?

Back in college I lived in a townhouse with seven other guys. We had a house website with bio pages for the eight of us, head shots, etcWhich I can’t believe is still alive on the Internet.. We feuded with another house of guys across town, driving over at any idle hour just to turn off their power, toss a few hundred uncooked tortillas on their lawn, etc, the usual. You probably heard about us.

One day we threw all our headshots into some morphing software and got a snapshot of what our composite roommate would look like. We threw him onto a website called Hot Or Not where vanity- and charity-cases alike upload photos for others to rank on a ten-point scale. “We” pulled an eight and partied continuously for several weeks.

Until last week, I had no idea Hot Or Not was still around. It is and has drawn the attention of researchers from Columbia, Carnegie Mellon, and M.I.T. All these people feeding quantifiable preferences into Hot or Not’s servers, millions on the month, constitutes an ideal data set. Another apparent data set is Hot Or Not’s “Meet Me” service where you can meet someone but only if he or she wants to meet you also.

All that data and analysis, recently released, fascinated me for a 72-hour stretch last week. My job description, as I try to frame it these days, is to make some fraction of what excites me about life (and math, in particular) exciting to my kids. This one was difficult.

Mostly, it’s tough striking up a good conversation over questions which have already been answered. You’ve gotta tease them with clues without frustrating them, drifting just enough information past ’em without giving it all away.

Here’s how we built from nothing to something:

  • Discuss the question: “why do we date?” In my classes, answers ranged from the expected (someone’s fun to be around, cute, makes you feel happy) to the really expected (someone’s hot, horny, fertile, has money).
  • Focus for a bit on the “fertile” answer and how making babies is a biological imperative for every species.
  • Introduce hotornot.com. These people upload photos of themselves, you rank one, another photo appears, and then it’s three hours later.
  • Ask: “Who do you think hands out more ‘hot’ ratings? Guys or girls?” In my classes, both genders selected themselves. (Which confounds me still. Anyone know why?) Turns out it’s guys by 240%. (Which seems like a lay-up to me, but there ya go.)
  • Introduce the MeetMe service. If you want to meet this guy here, you click “meet,” at which point your photo is sent to him and then if he wants to meet you, your e-mail addresses are exchanged, love is found, babies are made.
  • Ask: “Who do you think clicks the ‘meet’ button more? Guys or girls?” Guys again.
  • Ask: “Who do you think clicks the ‘meet’ button more? People with low ratings or high ratings?” Low. Turns out, for each ranking you slip (from a 6 to a 5, for example) you become 25% more likely to accept a date.
  • You assign the class a hotornot ranking. You arbitrarily assign ’em a 7, setting them up for what happens next.
  • You say, “How do you decide which invitations to accept? Do you accept a 3?” Everyone says no. “Do you accept a 6?” Some would only date their level and above. Others recognized that the rankings came from a community that didn’t, e.g., share their affinity for baldness, and would consider a 6.
  • And finally, you show this chart-gem.
  • You talk about it. The x-axis is tricky. It’s the difference between you and the person asking you out. You point to the extreme left edge and say, “-5. How hot is that person?” Some will say “-5.” Others see that she’s a 2.
  • You gesture at the y-axis and say, “Is your probability of going out with this person low or high? Low. Obviously.
  • Ask: “What about this graph is expected?” You talk about how the graph rises, as you’d expect.
  • Ask: “What about this is unexpected?” And this is, of course, the kicker. Why does the graph take a dip at the end? Why would you decline to meet someone who was five ranks hotter than you? (Your thoughts are welcome in the comments.)

Total cost: ten minutes. In all, a really good way to kick off a period. If you’re feeling brave and you’ve got their trust, you can discuss the question, “how do 2’s find and maintain love?”

Show and Tell: Decomposing Chocolate Hyenas

  • Footprint,” a time-lapse illustrating the decomposition of an aluminum soda can over fifty years. Great CGI. Kind of horrifying.
  • How to kill a chocolate bunny,” literally horrifying. There’s a shot halfway through with the chocolate bunny backlit by the heat lamp which blows my mind. Pink cacti, also.
  • The Hyena and Other Men,” a photoset by Pieter Hugo out of Nigeria which can’t help evoking some conflicted emotions. There is power here which still photography rarely captures, the sort that left me keyed up and shaking a little. Nick and I agreed that if we maintained any kind of alpha-male bachelor sanctuary, you’d see an enormous Hugo print as you walked through the door. My pick:

Fake or Legit

Recognizing how proud Kids These Days are of their digital discernment, of their immunity to audio/visual forgeries, I’ve pulled together a large set of photosMostly from Snopes but let me state for the record I didn’t take any of these photos. Except one., some of which are legitimately bizarre, some of which are artificially bizarre.

You ever have a few minutes free, you fire up the slidedeck and ask them to vote, fake or legit, on each photo. It’s fun. I’ll plug extraneous gaps with three or four photos and it’ll last the semester. Whenever possible, I’ve included unaltered versions of the forgeries.

Attachments

Related

Digital Tampering in the Media, Politics, and Law

For Your Consideration

Real plans for real bloggers. Vote dy/dan best new edublog and best individual edublog.