This week, Weller moves into the areas that often ignite passions in academics (and others!) Is Digital ultimately going to destroy society, or to save it.
Weller aims to present a balance – like all things, few are inherently “good” or “bad”. He acknowledges that his views have changed over the years (as indeed, have mine). While some of the points that are seen as “bad” (such as Carr’s views on the increasing superficiality of learning), Weller points out they can also been can be looked in terms of “does it matter”? I was reading an article shared on Storify today, that makes a similar point about new content (see myth 2)- it’s hard to concentrate on unfamiliar stuff – and that’s not a new phenomena – it’s a human trait!
Some of the points Weller raises are much more complex – such as whether or not our brains are altered (in a greater way than they normally are as we learn to adapt to new things).
I can see lots of debate arising from this week! I look forward to reading others’ ideas.
It’s the last week of the Digital Scholar – in which Weller looks at the changes that moving to a digital scholarship model can bring to the individual or institution – and how we can plan for the implementation. One aspect they look at is digital resilience – which is very similar to other aspects of resilience. It would be interesting to look at Walker’s 4 aspects of resilience, and see where we feel that Dundee would sit – would it be nearer the 35 [very comfortable with change], or nearer the 15 [a considerable threat from such changes]. He notes that these scores are subjective – this is something that it’s not possible to measure.
At the end of the section is the final quiz – this is one that is counts towards your final score – and, a digital badge!