PROFESSIONAL LEARNING

1. How do you think the micro:bit used in the maker classroom fosters the maker mentality ?

• Encourages students to start exploring

• Low floor/ high ceiling/ big walls

• Quick learning curve - embrace iteration throughout - continuous trial and error

2. What are some potential barriers for including using the micro:bit?

• Cost of class/ school sets

• Having a class set of micro:bit and computer/ chromebooks/ etc.

• More potential in Jr. classes than in Sr. classes

• Incorporating into

3. What are some ethical considerations that need to be taken into account with being able to share and force code: How can this benefit learners? How can you hinder learners?

• Meeting where your student are at

• Not wanting to limit students abilities

• Does choice help solve some of these problems?

• Forcing code may decrease the opportunity for maker mentality - may be useful but knowing when to do it

• Maybe it is used as a starting point

4. How might you extend the lesson presented to you today with AI and using the micro:bit

• Having students extend their thinking about the EDIDA principles

5. What EDIDA considerations can be taken into consider when planning with AI using and affordances of micro:bits

• Looking at demographic in your classes (facial recognition and diversity); who is in the room and part of the process of programming AI

• AI is NOT biased; it depends on who is coding

• Socioeconomic status - in the class/ community

Land Acknowledgements

• • Feel ill-equipped embracing it when you didn't grow up with it; "wanting to do it correctly"

  • Doing something is better than not doing anything

  • Acknowledging the known and unknown; part of reconciliation is that cultures and peoples that have been erased - part of decolonization is recognizing that

  • Land acknowledgement is a pledge to action; acknowledge the land the materials and space - honouring the stewardship - “since time and memorial”; in “perpetuity”

  • We tend to divorce technology and land - how do we move away from that

  • KIM: "Metis Mentality - the first time you make something, you gift it to someone else in your life (the gift doesn't have to happen immediately; you may hold onto it until you find the right person to gift that thing to)"

• EDIDA framework

  • Things that were done very well in the MakerLabs space:

    • Creating the woman leadership - was originally 20% woman but is now 50:50

    • Great hands on learning

    • Embrace the maker mentality

    • Leisure makers and professional makers sharing the same space, tools, mentality

    • Our actual experience - the labs offered and "welcomed" feel

  • Things that were acknowledge for change in the MakerLabs space:

    • Accessibility (for example, no elevators)

    • A lot of stimulation (might be overwhelming for some)

    • Safety considerations No exit signs

    • Inclusivity: Adult learning (not a space for youth)

    • Accessibility with the pay scale along ($180 as an entry level is very high to “try out” for the first time)

• 21st Century Skills

  • Why do we not have 21st century skills like these maker course as core curriculum?

  • Makerspaces in schools could build a bridge to students wanting to use makerspaces in the community - teaching students to be failure positive and feel comfortable with risk

  • Professionals need more cross collaborations - whether it is making or not making - interdisciplinary

    • Creating opportunity for collaborations so that staff can see what others are doing - the strength of a group to share and learn from others; - it’s sharing and getting feedback that can be a mindset

    • Seeing other people making in the space can be very inspiring in itself

  • Makerspace education (maker mindset) - taking an assignment and then thinking what you can do beyond that

• Robotics

  • Sustainability - can re-use the materials over and over

  • Can be intentional about the materials you are using

  • Take inspiration from nature - using features

• Puzzle Making

  • Similar experiences with different materials

  • The content and spirit can remain the same but the materials can be adopted to your pace

  • Order materials and show them the “how it’s made” process through youtube videos

Speaker: Paul Milaire

Technical & Innovation Producer & MET Student

UBC: Faculty of Medicine (Educational Technology)

Notes from Pauls Session

• WHY: thinking about reality - going from nature to augmented; the way we change ourselves or the things we interact with changes our reality; the principles that have always been around about reality - just using a different tool to experience reality. *Technology and narrative was still unexplored in Med Ed

• HOW: a flaw it that the body and mind are not doing the same thing so that can be very hard for some people - tactics vs non tactile, multimodal, lack of haptic feedback; Human Authentic - voice recognition and a volumetric capture - so it feels like a real conversation; Prototype → Pilot → Feedback → Iterate (Maker Mentality)

• WHAT: Contextual, Interactive, Narrative → wanting to build empathy, respect for the patients - not just another toy to play with to learn. Address the gap from classroom → clinical (provide a low stakes environment that still gives the experience)

• PRODUCT: ICE-VR - Med Student Feedback, "Highlight Session for must student; curriculum integration - adding more cases, bringing it to more institutes; Learner-Driven - keen students help develop the actual cases to make it more authentic (interact and get feedback from learners at all stages)

ICE-VR MET STUDENT FEEDBACK:

• choice of patient - their background, their clothing and personality affecting the peoples experiences, voices (could you include accents) conscious bias towards these characters, diverse group of characters; environment - provide choice to the environment, adding another person to the hospital room (an observing medical student; bring “levels into the experience” - start simple (sterile simple space with no interactions) → build up to more complex rooms, more characters, etc); equipment - oculus VR; learning curve for using equipment, glasses wearer, ease of use, motion sickness, claustrophobia; location - one facility, distributed learners across the provinces (leaves out a lot of people)

• VR General Advantages: teach empathy, put them in other’s shoes - experience someone else’s role, take them places you otherwise couldn’t go/experience

• VR General Disadvantages: have to think of EDIDA principles - motion sickness, hardware itself (physical issues)