The article I propose as an essential addition to the course is “Supporting Self-Determined Indigenous Innovations: Rethinking the Digital Divide in Canada” by Winter & Boudreau (2018). In this article, Winter & Boudreau critique traditional western notions of the digital divide, arguing that most policies and opinions “focus far too heavily on what technology can do for Indigenous peoples – not what Indigenous peoples have and can do with technology” (2018, p.40). The colonial imaginary, which is still very much alive today, positions indigenous peoples and communities as reliant on the progress of other nations and communities. However, innovation and technology are and have always been part of indigenous systems of knowledge and culture.

To illustrate indigenous innovation, Winter & Boudreau present several case studies: Digital Storytelling, Virtual Landscapes, and Makerspaces. Each of the case studies demonstrates the diverse ways indigenous people and communities are utilizing digital technologies and media to articulate and redefine identity and indigenous representation in media, sustain cultural knowledge and practices, and rewrite indigenous history away from the colonial gaze. Instead of using technologies in typical ways, Winter & Boudreau argue that indigenous people and communities not only recreate technology uses to fit indigenous ways and knowledge but are also helping shape technology (2018).  For example, virtual technologies are being utilized to create real and imagined virtual indigenous spaces representative of indigenous knowledge systems (Winter & Boudreau, 2018). Similarly, digital and virtual spaces are interwoven with indigenous traditions and practices through storytelling and eldership. Video games as a medium, with its use of story, design, and sound, provides a rich platform that compliments oral traditions of storytelling and creates a pathway to cultural preservation and revitalization (Winter & Boudreau, 2018). Through Makerspaces, technology and mentorship with elders meet, as youth learn to make traditional goods and jewellery with new technologies, such as 3D printing (Winter & Boudreau, 2018).

Winter & Boudreau (2018) conclude by rejecting need-based and solution-oriented programs to solve the digital divide, as such solutions reaffirm colonial myths of technology and innovation. Instead, they argue that indigenous innovations often “lie at the intersection of art and innovation, promoting a STEAM (science, technology, engineering, art, and math)” (Winter & Boudreau, 2018, p. 45). Indigenous cultural knowledge has always been evolving through “a living embodied practice” (as cited in Winter & Boudreau, 2018, pg. 45). As this article challenges traditional western views of technology, innovation, and indigeneity in Canada, I recommend it as an addition to the course.

References

Winter, J., & Boudreau, J. (2018). Supporting self-determined indigenous innovations: Rethinking the digital divide in Canada. Technology Innovation Management Review, 8(2), 38-48.

In my teaching context, blockchain is a technology that is starting to remediate technologies and business practices. At its core, blockchain is a technology that permanently records verifiable transactional information in an encrypted decentralized network that cannot be manipulated by third parties (Turkanovic et al., 2018). As the information is contained in a decentralized network, it makes unauthorized access or ‘hacking’ almost impossible. In my organization, we have recently started using Org Book, a blockchain project led by the Government of BC that provides users with a searchable general ledger of verified BC business information. Prior to Org Book, verifying BC business information required opening accounts, filling out forms, and visiting brick and mortar offices. Org book has streamlined how we obtain business information and our ability to discern a business’s legitimacy and compliance with the Province of BC.

Org Book and other blockchain technologies are remediating local records and databases used to store business and personal information. Prior to Org Book, one often needed to request information from several different government and affiliate offices to obtain the same information, as the information was stored on a local database specific to individual offices. As Bolter and Grusin (2000) argue, remediation has economic, cultural, and social aspects. The reduction in sources and interactions inherent in blockchain’s general ledger reduces administrative time and costs, which increases Org Book’s economic viability as remediation for local databases. As government and educational institutions are often targets for hackers, the decentralized network reduces costs, social risks, and cultural fear associated with fraud and identity theft, solidifying blockchain’s economic, social and cultural place in the remediation of local databases and record keeping. Turkanovic et al. (2018) note a similar dynamic in educational record-keeping and credential verification in the blockchain pilot EduCTX.

While blockchain offers increased security and access to information, it is not without risks. Loss of information due to lost keys or passwords is a drawback, as evidenced by the recent $190 million cryptocurrency lost due to lost password (Cuthbertson, 2019). On one extreme, fear of fraud and identity theft have led to the unalterable decentralized network of blockchain for protection, while on the other extreme, the unalterable decentralized network may lead to losing access to information with no recourse. The changing dynamic of blockchain is reminiscent of McLuhan’s tetrad, as the technology for record-keeping seems to flip to its opposite when under pressure. However, it is the social and economic pressures that flip record-keeping technology aligning with Bolter and Grusin’s (2000) remediation.

References:

Bolter, J.& Grusin, R. (2000). Networks of remediation. In Remediation: Understanding New Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Cuthbertson, A. (2019, February 5). Millions of dollars of cryptocurrency lost after man dies with only password. Independent. Retrieved from https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/bitcoin-exchange-quadrigacx-password-cryptocurrency-scam-a8763676.html.

Turkanovic, M., Holbl, M., Kosic, K., Hericko, M., & Kamisalic, A. (2018). Eductx: a blockchain-based higher education credit platform. IEEE Access, 6, 5112-5127.

Jean Jacques Rousseau was a radical educational theorist for his time. In the 18^th century Europe, if you were lucky enough to receive an education, as de Castell & Luke (1983) point out, the focus was on religion and the Bible (p. 373). Recitation and repetition were central to pedagogy, while comprehension was not emphasized (de Castell & Luke, 1983). Rousseau deviated from popular educational thinking by introducing the idea of student-centred pedagogy (van Kleeck & Schuele, 2010). To Rousseau, education should focus on the unique development and interests of each child to promote and protect their natural goodness (Betram, C, 2018). The goal of education was to cultivate freethinking citizens who would pursue their interests. While only controversial to a modern-day reader, Rousseau’s theory argued for a different type of education for women, one that focused on domestic servitude (Lewis, 2019).

Below is a paradigm chart outlining the main features of Rousseau’s educational theory. To develop this chart, I used de Castell & Luke (1983) as a model. While many of the elements are similar, some were removed, as they were not relevant to Rousseau’s theory. For example, the “curriculum” section was removed, as the curriculum would be highly subjective and dependent on the child, development stage, and interests. In lieu of some of these elements, I added one for “place of learning”, as Rousseau’s position on the place of education is a unique feature for the 18^th century. Finally, the elements are separated by gender, as Rousseau’s theory also made distinctions based on gender (Lewis, 2019).

Click the arrow icon to see chart in full screen.

https://www.canva.com/design/DADnRLGGpAE/view

As Rousseau’s educational theory is student-centred and subjective, so too are the educational tools and technologies. Games, exercising the senses, and informal learning experiences are tools and technologies that Rousseau introduces (van Kleeck & Schuele, 2010), replacing the Bible, repetition, and recitation.

While Rousseau’s ideas were controversial, his impact on educational theory can still be felt today through student-centred philosophy, gamification, and age/interest appropriate activities.

References:

Betram, C. (2018). Jean Jacques Rousseau. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/.

de Castell, S., & Luke, A. (1983). Defining literacy in North American schools: Socio historical conditions and consequences. In in de Castell, Luke and Egan (Eds) Literacy, Society, and Schooling. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Lewis, J. (2019, July 14). Rousseau’s take on women and education. ThoughtCo. Retrieved from https://www.thoughtco.com/rousseau-on-women-and-education-3528799.

van Kleeck, A., & Schuele, C. (2010). Historical perspectives on literacy in early childhood. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, 19, 341-355.