Sorry for posting this late as well, but I am now finally caught up. This passage draws a difference between “crowdsourcing” and “credentialing”.
Credentialing is based on the education and expertise of the individual on a
given situation. However, crowdsourcing is markedly different, notably that no
one person is more of an expert than anyone else. Instead, the more of an
expert someone is, the less effective they are to the group, as they will have
a more narrow-minded approach to a situation because of their “formal education”.
The group collectively can problem solve together to accomplish a goal. While no
single individual may be more intelligent than an expert, the group mind will ultimately
always be better.
This passage applies to the essay as a whole as the juxtaposition
between credentialing and crowdsourcing is related to the juxtaposition between
classical teaching, such as the system created by Horace Mann almost two
centuries ago, and the new school of thinking, such as teaching stylings of
Inez Davidson. The collaborative effort of the groups’ competitions on Fridays
in Mrs. Davidson’s class is an example of crowdsourcing as every student has a
fair and even input on the outcome of the questions. The one-size-fits-all model
of education, however, is an example of credentialing. In this model, every
student is judged based on the same standards and are expected to fulfill the
same level of expertise. However, this is not how the digital age works
anymore. Instead, education “needs an emphasis on creative thinking, at all
levels. By this I mean the kind of thinking that cannot be computerized and
automated. This creative thinking requires attention to surprise, anomaly, difference,
and disruption” (Davidson 60). Crowdsourcing promotes this sort of education belief
as groups do not work in automation. Instead, they vary work wildly through
sharing novel ideals. This collective learning process is essential to finding
a new successful education system in this digital age.
No comments:
Post a Comment