So here is my senior picture side by side with a current picture:

I’m glad the giant eyeglasses went out of style

Of course, it’s hard to be nostalgic about a time you don’t miss. But I made some good friends, some of whom I still keep in touch with thanks to Facebook. I also was fortunate to have some truly excellent teachers, and they are who I miss not seeing at a reunion since I haven’t been in contact with them for many years now. In the event they read this or otherwise have the word passed on to them, I would like to thank all of my teachers, but especially: Roger Ahern, Brian Manske, Michael Shanley, Mark Weissman, and Clay Wollney. Those five all had a huge impact on my life in one way or another, so they deserve a special mention.

I think it is important to remember the past, but to be perfectly honest I am much happier with the present.

Do I miss doing theatre? Yes, but I am fortunate to speak, teach, and give presentations, which are like lots of mini-performances.

Do I miss singing with a group? Yes, but I sing and play guitar at my church.

Speaking of guitar, this is my favorite picture from high school, taken in my Junior year if I had to guess by my hair length.

So I guess I’m not really waxing nostalgic, am I? Why should I be? I’m happy in the now. I have a wonderful wife and three fantastic daughters. I have a great career and am involved in a church that suits my beliefs. Does that mean I don’t care about my high school or friends from then? No, not at all. I just don’t feel all, “I wish I could go back there” or anything.

I think I’ll close with three songs that in some way or another remind me of 1992/1993 senior year. I hope that my old teachers and classmates have found happiness and joy in their lives and I wish them all the best! If we haven’t already connected via social media, please feel free to contact me.

My first thought on reading this was one of destroyed work/life balance and worker exploitation. Here are my thoughts on each of the points raised in the original article:

1. Hours as productivity killers – This argument fails for me. Everyone needs down time along with up time. Without hours there is the potential for neglecting non-work things like family in favor of the false productivity of working through the night.
2. Hours don’t build trust – What? Trust within a team or organization is built through working with people. If no one is working at the same time how can trust be built? As for employees passionately wanting to meet their goals, I don’t see how having hours defeats this. Letting an employee complete the job in the way they see fit has nothing to do with hours.
3. It’s distracting – Again, what? What kind of employee is distracted from a task because it is 10 AM? Or what kind of employee is distracted from their task thinking “gee I wish I could do this at night instead of spending time with my kids”?
4. It works against teamwork – This is just laughable. Several employees working at different hours on the same project is not a team. Could you imagine a game of football if the quarterback decided he didn’t want to work at the same time as the rest of the team?

Now, I will say that an inflexible employer or a severe micromanager  could easily fulfill all four points on the list. So perhaps the author is mistaking a poor work environment for “hours”?

What about my clarifying “with flexibility”? I mean that an employee shouldn’t be chained to their desk, they should have freedom to work on achieving their goals as they see fit, and certainly work from home should be a limited option. Also having sufficient vacation/sick/personal time to take care of non work business during business hours.

I think there is still a big disconnect with Gen Y and the workplace and that a good compromise can be made. We are certainly in a post-industrial economy, but that doesn’t mean that throwing everything out is the way to go either.

In watching these videos I am struck with the mostly Utopian view of the future they project. The technology is integrated seamlessly into people’s lives for their benefit. The technology is used in learning, work, and home environments in a positive way. It’s one of those futures that looks bright and promising.

One of the issues with a future like this is that the access for the less privileged is not mentioned. Is there an even greater stratification of the haves and have-nots brought upon by the pervasive use of technology? Will this make it even harder for lower income people to gain entry into the middle class?

One other point in the second video, how come the only black guy cast in this video is a bellhop? He couldn’t be an office worker or the dad?

I view this film from a utopian angle. I see this film as showing how technology, even the seemingly magical red bag, can bring people together. It is obvious that the main female character has no real intention of attempting to interact with other males in the film. While her reasons may be sound, is she hurting herself in the long run by living a life of solitude? The main male character obviously longs for a connection with another person but for whatever reason is unable to achieve this.

Through a fortunate accident they both are connected through the magic red bags and are able to “chat” with each other. For the female character, perhaps the anonymity of this communication medium allows her to make a connection with a person whom she would ordinarily shun. Likewise, the male character is able to communicate with another person, something that seems to be difficult for him to do. They both are happy with the arrangement and have fun together, eventually agreeing to meet. Even with the loss of the technology they are able to meet at the end of the film.

To me, this is an example of a utpoian outcome brought about by the “technology” of the red bag. The technology allowed two people who normally wouldn’t have interacted to come together and become friends. In the end, that is the utopian purpose of technology, to bring people and ideas together in ways that might not ordinarily occur.

Looking at the announcement that California was looking towards MOOCs I noticed there were a few things wrong with that statement.

First let’s look at the first letter of MOOC, it stands for Massive. If the university is capping enrollment at 100 students how is that Massive? Secondly, Open usually implies free, so is charging a $150 fee really Open?

Not to say that this initiative isn’t a good idea, or that it won’t be successful, it just isn’t a MOOC.  As universities look towards the MOOC-model for their online offerings I believe we have reached a point where a new term will need to be coined. It probably won’t be as buzzworthy as MOOC, but maybe that’s not  such a bad thing….

The transcript and other resources are available at: https://www.suny.edu/chancellor/sou.cfm

So, first off, MOOC MOOC was excellent! I went in with pretty low expectations based on my prior MOOC experience, and I was pleasantly surprised with how much I enjoyed this one.

Engagement is the key! Using Twitter as the primary means of discussions worked surprisingly well. I have trouble keeping up with discussion boards, and once they scale to MOOC size they are impossible for me to deal with at all. I was really impressed with how well Twitter worked for this.

Having a variety of tasks, along with a variety of ways to do the task, was also great. The first task assignment was a collaborative Google Doc, which I skipped since it didn’t intrigue me. The other tasks were more interesting to me, make a video, do blog posts, use Storify. I had never used Storify before (and I don’t know if I will use it again), but it was interesting to use a new tool to tell a story.

The length of MOOC MOOC was much better than other MOOCs I have participated in (and dropped out of). One week was great to remain engaged and keep the energy up without going so long that you lose interest and energy levels plummet.

If a MOOC is going to operate as a 12 week course, perhaps it would be better to split it into many (6-12?) MOOCs that way it would be easier for people to stay excited about the subject and jump in and out without feeling like they were missing out.

I think that is the main thing MOOC MOOC has shown me. What is a MOOC and what can MOOCs be? Should they be basically a porting of a traditional classroom or online course? Or should they be something different entirely? I think the latter is the better choice. Traditional classroom or online courses are not intended to scale into the (tens of?) thousands. In traditional courses smaller class size is better.

So let’s do something different, let’s look at MOOCs differently. Not as really big versions of traditional courses, but as something new and exciting. Let’s leverage what we know, take risks on what we don’t, and build something great and meaningful. MOOCs can enable us all to expand our knowledge, connect in new ways to different points of view and new ways of thinking, and to sustain ourselves as lifelong learners.