User:John Bessa/ArtSci

"The art of science and the science of art."

ArtSci departs entirely from didactic education to a pure project-based education system that brings the little red schoolhouse in the 21st Century; naturally it is wiki-based, and it also approaches the Whole Systems Model that can be seen in wiki structure and the Agile information systems design. Much of the education model can be applied to existing academy-based education, though it is hoped that educators would finally depart the 2500 year old system for current thought that links the natural human with the current highly-effective information structure. Much of this integration is described in Middle School Science, as well as many ways of bringing in students' everyday reality into the school for scientific analysis and artistic application.

's wireless installation in Nova Scotia, Canada. These must have been exceedlingly aesthetic in real life, and the vacuum tube has proved to be the most effective way to reproduce sound, but has been deprecated by easier to use transistor-based circuitry]]

Key to current education is continuing education, which is applied in an attempt to reverse present American decline by converting factories abandoned by oligarchic capital (yet still owned and allowed to decay while jobs and products go for want) into democratic production environments.

Evaluation
I think in this type of new (or restored pre-classical) education, the sticky part is evaluation. It would be ideal to eliminate it, but that is impractical, does not assure that the learners are moving up to expert (which is something society wants to know). This model attempts to allow learners to reach and practice at their levels of potential (as in self-actualization), and avoids the unstandardized nature of narrative evaluations (which can be quite wordy and subjective).

Model
I think the goal has to be to keep it light, so that students feel attracted to the seminars. I did evaluation on a boat contruction / designing forum, and it worked great, I evaluated on how "human" responers where as "human 1.0." is totally human. People who gave reasonable suggestions, which were about angle of heel, got high-human ratings, others tell me I am stupid, for instance, got low human rating.

From my on-line counselling course, I realize that there need to be levels. As we will use Agile concepts of cyclic learning with milestones, then proficiency in commenting earns the marks to move. That is, if you have thought-out ideas, then you get + marks.


 *  ++  You really get the topic. If you can see effects of the topic to related issues, meaning contiguous or neighboring issues, then you are acheiving an important current-education goal, which is seeing the world as a Whole systems model:  +++ .
 *  +  You can move on to the next topic.
 *  0 (or even)  You can practice this topic in the real world.
 *  none yet  Keep at it, you will get there!

I think that, for evaluation, anybody can go back and update their material (keeping within word limits) to improve their evaluation, and hence the effect of their research and synthesis on WV policy. In other words, + 's mean effect on the environment.

Also, collaboration is a must here as with every wiki effort, so the effort to mutually improve writing with "co-synthesis" should also get ++ by virtue of being mutual.