Devin,
I agree with your points. I also think that our online presence can rightfully “bridge academia” but as you also noted, it can be “a tool to create arguments.” In academia, it is a good tool for students and faculty to spotlight their research and academic interests and reach a wide variety of audiences. However, I sometimes that our online records can be used against us outside academia.

Ishi, you are spot on this issues, especially the time we spend online. I like to blogging but only to a certain extent. Other platforms are used to connect but there is a fine balance on what we can do online.

LikeLike

I agree with your point. Professionalism is key in certain situations and setting professional boundaries, respecting and accepting others regardless of their backgrounds and gender or sexuality is essential in maintaining harmonious relationships between the teacher and students. My motto is to always keep it simple, real and respectful.

LikeLike

Qishen – I agree that motivation may be the result of mindful thinking. We are always motivated for or against something based on a variety of factors. However, as you noted in your post, I believe that a strong culture of learning based on the self-consciousness of learners is important to both the teacher and the student for knowledge creation to occur.

LikeLike

Hi Medha, I totally agree that academic bullying is an unwelcome problem in some institutions of higher learning. Bullying should not be permitted or tolerated in any way, shape or form, on or off campus. I remember Dr. Nelson alluding to this in class. In fact, we need more safe spaces on campuses. I believe all universities should have a zero-tolerant anti-bullying policy.

Great blog post Khushboo! I like your point that “being a ‘good student’ does not mean not questioning your teacher or your peers but to question, commit mistakes, learn from the mistakes and make new mistakes”. You are absolutely on point.

LikeLike

Patrick, I really like your point on openness as a prerequisite to receiving “critical feedback [and in keeping the] curriculum alive and responsive to the students.” I also share your perspective on that “continual improvements” is fundamental for both students and teachers in pedagogy. Well said.

Thanks for the post. As you noted in your post, I agree that there is no such thing as multitasking in a true sense. In addition, I think that although our mental process, cognitive ability and manual physical routines allow that “[o]ne can do many tasks switching quickly from one to another..”. Because of our cognitive limitations, I do not think that multitasking is effective or efficient. Deep thinking and effective thought processing is time consuming, which may not happen when an individual is fully engaged in multitasking.

LikeLike

I like you post Ruixiang. I agree about the need to improve efficiency by using machines, and your example of using “compressed speech” to help in communications. Just as you noted, I think the challenge is one of intuition that machines lack. Sadly, machines do not have or cannot show emotion, compassion or do they have the ability to effectively judge situations based on certain life experiences, openness and situational awareness. As we have been talking about, critical conversations are needed as part of the learning and teaching processes. Rajiv Jhangiani also touched on this in his discussion on critical open pedagogy on episode 226 of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcast.

LikeLike

Helen, thanks for your comment. We are on the same page that. Critical thinking is a fundamental requirement in higher ed.