After VITTA 2007 (critique) I stopped going to computer conferences because the keynotes had become dominated by web2.0. Web2.0 of course is good but when you divorce it from history, philosophy, epistemology and add in some evangelicalism then it's not healthy.
It's good to see this shallowness being vigorously challenged by ceolaf in the comment thread of Wil Richardson's Digital Inclusion post
As part of the discussion ceolaf linked to The Partnership for 19th Century Skills by Diane Ravitch, which once again drives a front end loader through the gaping holes of the 21st Century skills rhetoric
I left a comment at Wil's site but couldn't put it where I wanted due to the nesting levels feature. At any rate, what I wanted to say was that the best broad brush attempt I have seen yet of identifying the fundamentals that ought to be taught in school was made by alan kay in his outline of the non universals. I have made a beginning attempt to put this in one place: non universals
I did go to the CEGSA (Computer Education Group of South Australia) conference this year (cegsa09) and once again was disappointed with the keynotes, with the notable exception of David Loader, who does have a real sense of history (in part because he has made it), the wisdom of our elders, learning theory and human psychology. I don't want to offend the hard working organisers of this conference. The workshops were good. I do think, however, that there is an ongoing issue with keynote speakers at computer education conferences owing to the narrowing influence of the web2.0 movement.
From April last year: web2.0 introspection
Do we need to rethink Social Accountability? Thoughts from Myanmar - The main reason for my recent visit to Myanmar (apart from general nosiness) was to take part in a discussion on the role of social accountability (SA) in ...
2 hours ago