<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: LTGR Ep. #53 &#8211; &#8220;Ideological Amplification&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67</link>
	<description>The LT Green Room is a podcast for Renewal, Retooling and Conversations about Learning. It is co-hosted by Susan Manning and Dan Balzer and its show topics are often drawn from members of LearningTimes.org, a free online community of education and training professionals from across the globe.  The LT Green Room gives listeners (and ourselves) an opportunity to reflect on what they're doing behind the scene that results in an effective learning experience.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:06:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scott Johson</title>
		<link>http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-63910</link>
		<dc:creator>Scott Johson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:30:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-63910</guid>
		<description>Sue and Dan seem to have taken on &quot;eating an elephant&quot; with this topic. I&#039;ve been following Don Norman&#039;s work (In defense of cheating) for decades and find that his skill in identifying core issues is invaluable.  Having struggled intellectually with the notion of &quot;mastery learning&quot; within the context of a fixed semester length, this is a far reaching problem that seems to have no eager solution in sight. Thanks &quot;Green Room&quot;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sue and Dan seem to have taken on &#8220;eating an elephant&#8221; with this topic. I&#8217;ve been following Don Norman&#8217;s work (In defense of cheating) for decades and find that his skill in identifying core issues is invaluable.  Having struggled intellectually with the notion of &#8220;mastery learning&#8221; within the context of a fixed semester length, this is a far reaching problem that seems to have no eager solution in sight. Thanks &#8220;Green Room&#8221;!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Matt Fuller</title>
		<link>http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-60761</link>
		<dc:creator>Matt Fuller</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 30 Nov 2008 09:10:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-60761</guid>
		<description>The concepts of ideological amplification really resonated with me.  When I moved from Texas to Illinois I noticed very different information coming in to me during internet searches.  I always find it intriguing and a little concerning that my web history is maintained and says so much about me.  I teach a class which is augmented by a standard course support system.  In response to your question about how I go about diversifying the thinking in work, I have the benefit of seeing students in the classroom once a week.  Therefore, I can make some judgments about the personalities and thoughts to mix it up a little.  I suppose I good do a little more background analysis to learn this kind of information even in a completely virtual environment.  In the face-to-face environment I am very concerned about amplification of my own ideas into students’ heads.  I don’t try to inculcate or replicate little versions of me.  With well and engaged virtual communities, I suppose the engagement would ward off the amplification and dampening you reference.  Of course if all else fails, I set up virtual debates online asking students to select a point of view they are not familiar with.  With this year being an election year this was really easy…students who told me they knew a lot about the Democratic platform were challenged to argue Republican stances.

I was also intrigued by the In Defense of Cheating link…if for nothing more than the title.  Of course this conjures up Freirian notions of the student/teacher dichotomy.  However, the title certainly doesn’t condone cheating; it refutes bad pedagogy that stimulates cheating.  So, we punish collaborative work in schools that would normally be rewarded in the work place…perhaps even in the teachers’ lounge or the curriculum committee.  The anything to get ahead mentality really deepens this problem.

So, thank you for this blog.  I found it to be very rewarding and entertaining to read on this snowy Thanksgiving Day Weekend.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The concepts of ideological amplification really resonated with me.  When I moved from Texas to Illinois I noticed very different information coming in to me during internet searches.  I always find it intriguing and a little concerning that my web history is maintained and says so much about me.  I teach a class which is augmented by a standard course support system.  In response to your question about how I go about diversifying the thinking in work, I have the benefit of seeing students in the classroom once a week.  Therefore, I can make some judgments about the personalities and thoughts to mix it up a little.  I suppose I good do a little more background analysis to learn this kind of information even in a completely virtual environment.  In the face-to-face environment I am very concerned about amplification of my own ideas into students’ heads.  I don’t try to inculcate or replicate little versions of me.  With well and engaged virtual communities, I suppose the engagement would ward off the amplification and dampening you reference.  Of course if all else fails, I set up virtual debates online asking students to select a point of view they are not familiar with.  With this year being an election year this was really easy…students who told me they knew a lot about the Democratic platform were challenged to argue Republican stances.</p>
<p>I was also intrigued by the In Defense of Cheating link…if for nothing more than the title.  Of course this conjures up Freirian notions of the student/teacher dichotomy.  However, the title certainly doesn’t condone cheating; it refutes bad pedagogy that stimulates cheating.  So, we punish collaborative work in schools that would normally be rewarded in the work place…perhaps even in the teachers’ lounge or the curriculum committee.  The anything to get ahead mentality really deepens this problem.</p>
<p>So, thank you for this blog.  I found it to be very rewarding and entertaining to read on this snowy Thanksgiving Day Weekend.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Home Educators &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Twitter Updates for 2008-11-07</title>
		<link>http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-59305</link>
		<dc:creator>Home Educators &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Twitter Updates for 2008-11-07</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 08 Nov 2008 11:13:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67#comment-59305</guid>
		<description>[...] #So.Me Twatic: Susan and Dan picked up on my Ideological Amplification post: http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67 listen to it. WOW. # [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] #So.Me Twatic: Susan and Dan picked up on my Ideological Amplification post: <a href="http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67" rel="nofollow">http://www.ltgreenroom.org/episodes/67</a> listen to it. WOW. # [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

