I work with the Erikson TEC Center that makes Tech recommendations and guides for young children. I thought that resource might be helpful here: http://teccenter.erikson.edu/
Really interesting RE balance table. @Lily made something similar last year: http://fab.cba.mit.edu/classes/863.17/Harvard/people/lilygabaree/final.html
Thanks for sharing the pice on the gap between philosophers (and I’d argue many in the social sciences / humanities who engage in all kinds of analysis and critique) and generative domains (art, design, engineering).
Am part of an informal group here at the media lab that meets to discuss ways to bridge that gap in our own work. Some of the things we’ve found helpful have been conversations in design communities to use social science and philosophical approaches to think more critically about a design space and as part of design processes.
A couple things we’ve found helpful:
- EquityXDesign’s work to adapt the design process to think more about inequity and structural issues RE power, oppression, etc. IDEO’s K12 Lab adapted their HCD process based on EquityXDesign’s approach (slide deck here)
- Frame Innovation by Kees Dorst - also found this book quite helpful for designing / engineering around complex problems
I wasn’t able to make it to the first meeting for AI and Ethics, but am planning on going to the one next week. Can keep you posted. But def like how intentional they’re being about who is in the room, how they facilitate space for conversation, and how that fits into other work that MIT is doing.
I like this. To add, I think artists DO bridge this gap, but their work doesn’t scale like design and eng does.
Two important talks up this week
Doctorow: asking for coders to expand their view to law and norms (form leesig’s “code, markets, norms, and law” as tactics for change
Rushkoff : asking us to join team human https://www.ted.com/talks/douglas_rushkoff_how_to_be_team_human_in_the_digital_future?language=en&utm_campaign=tedspread&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=tedcomshare