WEEK FOUR: 18 & 19 Feb:
•T 4-6:30 (WDS 2101C)
•W 2:30-3:30 (WDS 2101C) SHORTER TIME!
•W 4-5:30 (19 FEB at THE COMMON, UMUC; week five at the fireplace area instead)
RETURN HERE FOR WEEK FIVE SCHEDULES @ UMD! Click HERE for Davidson's MetaMOOC around which this course revolves.
A one-time unique experimental course for undergraduates, graduate students, faculty, and all! Customizable for level, credit, schedule, forms of presence! Contact Katie King (katking@umd.edu) for details!
===
Week Four: the future is now:
===
Katie's field notes re Latour MOOC on FUN (mentally comparing with CD MetaMOOC for discussion):
Facebook: Saturday, February 15, 2014
Who else is taking the Latour MOOC? Has anyone started their
news blog yet? I love that this is all about sorting knowledges, and that the
terms here are all about detecting connections: "keep a blog in which
you’ll note all the instances you will be encountering where you can detect
connections between a piece of science or a technical project and another piece
of culture, society or politics. Yes, it is a huge task, but it is on the
connections you have to focus. What you have to do first is to follow the press
or to subscribe to several news feeds, blogs or newsletters. You may also want
to jot down notes about conversations that you have heard or in which you have
participated where the questions of expertise, public discussions around
evidence and proof, or the effect of this or that technology are being brought
in. Ideally you should write every day. The crucial point is to follow the news
in real time; that is, from the first day of class to the last. It is the only
way to share in the difficulty that all readers have when they have to find
their ways through the maze of news before the issue is settled."
9 others like this.
• Katie King:
Merci de fournir les informations suivantes pour vous
connecter à votre compte F...See More
• comment #1: I've watched only the first video. I was
trying not to get behind on the History and Future of (Mostly) Higher
Education. But I may have to choose only one! I'll work it again on Sunday.
• Katie King: I'm doing both and I think they go
together well! the blog thing is very cool as exercise and I am having students
do Field Notes for the Meta-MOOC (Davidson) which is more individual but has
some possibilities for crowdsourcing. As far as I understand it, Latour MOOC is
simultaneously teaching people to do Actor-Network analysis of world news on
science, blog by coding elements of the network in real time, and then all this
can be crowdsourcing data as well as big data illustrative of what ANT could
do. And I think this is only one piece of the MOOC. Looks very cool!
• Katie King: one could do this without taking the MOOC
but it would not have the crowdsourcing possibilities: AFTER READING SCIENCE
NEWS ITEM: 1) underline people & organizations (ACTORS )shaping it all as
you read; 2) inventory of participants (eg: =places & events =organizations
=stakeholders with different interests =individual =views of the world) 3)
comment: what have you learned about the making of science? exemplify, clarify,
dispute what is said in MOOC? interconnect with observations of others in MOOC.
• Katie King: I had already marked this news item for
my grad class for thinking about so-called new materialisms (so-called here =
boundary object), seems perfect for this:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/soft-lobbying-war-between-sugar-corn-syrup-shows-new-tactics-in-washington-influence/2014/02/12/8123da00-90dd-11e3-b46a-5a3d0d2130da_story.html
Inside the secretive war between sugar and corn syrup
www.washingtonpost.com
New documents show how rival industries poured millions into
academic research, groups
• Katie King: read responses from Latour and others and
suddenly I'm performing: added inventories and more. MORE: Scored first
comment! "Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and
discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which
private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S.
government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy,
economics, and popular opinion." WE ALL LOVE TO BE NOTICED!
===
COMMENT:
.
KatieKing environ une heure avant
I am interested in the
struggle between Sugar and Corn industries here, and how agribusiness is
shaping research and policy making through money and influence. What gets lost
is how to evaluate the claims, whether differences between corn and sugar
matter that much and if so how, to bodies with and without, say, type 2
diabetes. As a person reading the news, I am required to be increasingly
skeptical here about "academic research" which loses authority
because corrupted by money. Similarly the FDA and other regulatory entities are
also corrupted, and so how does adjudication happen except in my own head? how
collective except on the internet? wondering just how effective crowdsourcing
and investigative reporting are for such claims? I am forced back onto the
evidence of my own body, which is a different type of knowledge than
epidemiological data or other kinds of knowledge producing data sorts. This is
far from a satisfactory default, even though it has its own rationality.
Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S. government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy, economics, and popular opinion. PÉDAG
Hi Katie, thanks for adding this in-depth inventory and discussion! This topic provides a great window into the channels by which private industry, academic institutions, non-profit institutions, and the U.S. government are linked and work to produce (or avoid) change in policy, economics, and popular opinion. PÉDAG
.
- places and events: Washington DC, USA, petition to US FDA, release of internal documents, meta-analysis of peer review articles, statement by Corn industry officials, money invested over 2 years, 2009 email details plan, 2004 document on consultation with private research firm, 2010 study on metabolic effects, 2010 attempts to rename corn syrup, formation Citizens for Health 1992.
- . organizations: Citizens for Health (non profit funded by sugar industry), Food and Drug Administration US, Center for Responsive Politics, Sugar Association, Corn Refiners Association, Coke, Pepsi, Rippe Lifestyle Institute, Center for Consumer Freedom, Cargill, Berman & Co., the Academic Network.
- stakeholders with interests: consumers, sugar companies, corporate interests, washington policymakers, traditional lobbyists, nonprofit groups, academicians, journalists, lawmakers, regulators, donors, food markets, agricultural sectors, food manufacturers, science advisors, doctors, consulting agencies, peer reviewed journals, lawyers, data itself?
- . individuals: James Rippe (cardiologist & consultant for corn industry), Audrae Erickson (Exec Corn Refiners), Richard Berman (DC lobbyist), Adam Fox (lawyer for sugar industry), James Turner (founder Citizens for Health)
- . views of the world (network of controlling values): healthful attention to food and food labeling, profit maximization for corporations, influencing DC policy, expertise, investigative journalism, public opinion, regulation of interests pressuring lawmakers, electoral politics, forms of data collection, “soft lobbying,” science as POV for expertise and policy advising, clinical experience and expertise, experimental practices, peer-review publication, shaping of public opinion by tv, news, online, aggressive tactics to promote interests, sorting good and bad data, validation of data in public exchange
- . translation and composition: does the drama of the machinations between sugar and corn agribusiness interests and their paid agents create a media ecology in which the procedures for sorting data are generally discredited, rather than disarticulated in terms of political interests? When media audiences are confronted with the proper uses of such investigative journalism do they default to some forms of authoritative trust over others? in own body, in groups of belonging, to preferred kinds of knowledge practice?
===