Month: March 2016

Students Have More To Say

The parties of assessment are Students v Academics (a direct relationship) and Students v Education (a sustained relationship) – and I’m talking about Education as a bureaucracy here. I’m studying this social phenomenon through the lens of Cyberculture (Manovich) or better yet, what occurs to the social phenomenon when Students have agency and EduTech assists in “trust”. Trust for me is accountability – that students won’t be let down by what they’re offered (outcomes) and how it’s delivered. This can established with the application of a reputation system built from rating markers (lists, scores) to firstly, compensate for a student’s disempowerment, and secondly) create an environment for authentic expression (Hearn 2010). My proposal is a rating platform that provides agency to students in a shared online environment, in hopes to support an ideological shift within the Student v Education relationship. Much the same way that the cyberpunk genre is aimed at challenging authority, a rating product disestablishes the status quo set at University. A) Students are not privileged to be where they are because B) …

Rating the Rating w/ Strangers

(featured image source unknown) A change has occurred between users and organisations: the rating system.  Essentially, technology is bridging a communication gap between the two misunderstood strangers with a rating (score). Whether it’s a like, a star, or a score, ratings are making strangers accountable for their actions, and therefore allowing economic exchanges to be conducted with less stress (apparently). I rate you – you rate me, everyone’s happy. This is the advent of the “sharing economy”. Whether you like it or not, strangers could be rating you out-of-10 on Peeple to help others decide whether to accept your friend request. In the case of Uber, a Driver’s credibility is reliant on the trust formed between the Rider and the Driver. For the Rider, the rating is an assurance that their experience will be ideal.  But for the Driver, the rating could be the decider of their employment. An Uber driver score can not fall below 4.7 or their employment is terminated. Feedback is often anonymous, and even if it’s not, the user rating the …