This article raises similar concerns to Yonatan Zunger’s recent Twitter thread (which was triggered by the Cambridge Analytica whistleblower) about the need for explicit standards of ethics in computer science.
As an arts graduate who’s worked in IT for 20 years and has also studied health science, and as a science fiction writer who writes about how technology and culture shape each other, I’m all in favour of people in general having a broad rather than a narrow knowledge base, and being able to think about and discuss important human and technological questions. In a complex, interconnected world, deliberately cultivating ignorance is dangerous to yourself and others.
I’d love to see an entrepreneur or one of the existing education platforms come up with a set of courses that would introduce everyone to the basics of politics, economics, sociology, anthropology, psychology (with an emphasis on self-understanding, self-efficacy and self-care as well as understanding and communicating with others), effective writing, reading comprehension, study and research skills, computer science, manufacturing and logistics, engineering, project management, accounting, advertising and marketing, popular culture, “high” culture, physics, biology, chemistry, mathematics, history, geography – all in a way that showed how they’re interlinked, and how they all impact our everyday lives.
Via Adafruit Industries.
https://theconversation.com/steam-not-stem-why-scientists-need-arts-training-89788
Sometimes I don’t think it should be a debate over what material is required but how it’s covered.
You could, for example, start with a cellphone, break it down into its technologies and how they work and were developed (electronics, physics, CS, history). Then look at the source of the materials that make it up from the viewpoint of geography, chemistry, politics, economics, and history to show how they’re mined in the third world, and how that works out for the people who live there. Then trace them through the supply chain (logistics), manufacturing (looking at the history, economics, and politics of why that happens in China), spending some time on design. And then look at what people use them for, going into anthropology, sociology, psychology, and then look at the ethics, politics, and economics of the Cambridge Analytics issue, plus the changed economics, creative environment, and popular culture resulting from the Internet and related technologies.
Macquarie University (Australia) requires every student to study a “People and Planet Unit” – i.e. something outside of their degree area that’s either about people (sociology, psychology, media studies..) or the planet (geology, biology…)
There is a fair amount of complaining. “I’m studying computing. You’re already making me learn statistics, why are you making me learn about media or other stuff? I just want to program!”
Also, there’s the “Big History Project” – which is often used in both primary and high schools here in Australia. Which is doing that integrated teaching thing, with a focus on the sciences side.
It’s very awesome!
https://school.bighistoryproject.com/
Mike Reeves-McMillan It doesn’t look at the social effects, but have you seen the youtube channel “How to make Everything”?
It goes through the process of making everyday stuff from the very basics. So for a suit, it starts by looking at how you’d shear a sheep. For glasses, it talks about what is needed to smelt glass.
Then they attempt to make the stuff, so you really get a sense of the quality difference when you’re not using modern technology.
youtube.com – How To Make Everything
I haven’t seen that – I don’t spend a lot of time on YouTube – but it sounds great. Thanks!