2. Subjects
Regarding what is learned, I proposed that this should be federated — i.e. that we have an open and expanding boundary of the course; and that we at the same time have a common core.
- I propose to have people propose modules (alternatively that we commission them from people), and that there is a curation function etc, putting resources on the map (we or the Program Committee acting as the National Geographic Institute, organizing the Domain Map(s) based on what everyone has brought)… I am imagining already among us a variety of truly exciting themes emerging. I tend to like teaching that is sharply pointed, rather than descriptive (trying to cover a large terrain, but in a more boring way)
- I can imagine offering for example a module that begins with the Information Age Paradox — what V. Bush observed, for ex., that information production has been extended beyond our ability to organize and comprehend it… and some quite fascinating instances where basic insights of great people have not been communicated to the public, or incorporated into conventional systemic practice… adding the basic proposals how to go about solving this problem, by for ex. Doug Engelbart , Erich Jantsch and others… telling how we go about this in Knowledge Federation (it’s a methodology based on the ideas of the mentioned greats). And then invite the students to creatively contribute to this potentially most impactful evolution. It might be nice to notice that what they are experiencing as a course, i.e. the course design, already embodies quite a few solution patterns for this most timely challenge.