inquiry based learning.

case study 2
H.G Wells and the World Brain
What was HG wells' book about? when published?
What are the benefits and drawbacks of collective intelligence?
Who is Robert Metcalfe?
Is collective intelligence better then single intelligence?
Can Robert Metcalfe then be a proper source of information when reviewing the topic of collective intelligence?
Is collective intelligence a possible reality in the future? If so, would humanity be willing to move toward the goal of achieving that?
What was H.G. Wells trying to say about the evolution of human society when he wrote "The World Brain"?
How do the concepts behind The World Brain relate to the growing use of the internet as a means of human communication and interaction?
Has "The World Brain" (i.e. Collective Intelligence) affected the development and study of human communication and interaction?
What past events influenced H.G. Wells and echoed in his work "The World Brain"?
Is Wikipedia the first step toward a real application of the collective intelligence as expressed in "The World Brain"?
Are the similarities between the Internet and the concepts of H.G. Wells' "The World Brain" coincidental? Or are they proof of a natural evolution in human communication and development?
What are the common concepts between Wells', De Kerchhove's, and Metcalfe's works?
In what ways were their concepts different?
What is the real meaning of collective/connected intelligence?
What are the differences between "Collective Intelligence", "Connected Intelligence", and "The Wisdom of Crowds".

case study 3
HANS!

Who is Hans Magnus Enzenberger?
When did he say “The new media are oriented towards action, not contemplation; towards the present, not tradition”?
What is "new media"?
Was all media considered new at one point?
Was all media considered media at one point?
Which sources has Enzensberger used to arrive at this conclusion?
Is it more important to stay with both the present and tradition?
Is tradition necessary?
what traditions are there in new media?
Is this the same jason as the last case study?
Is the assignment purposely designed to stop new media? or just a tradition yet to adapt?
Why does the professor simple put assignments online?
Why is there a minimum number of references?
Do more references take away from the writters creative freedom?
Is the humanities about learning to express yourself or to critique works previously established as great?
Is MLA the best way to reference new media?
Should new media be referenced?
Why is wikipedia an unusable source?
Is wikipedia acceptable as a starting point?
If one internet source is unusable does that not discredit all internet sources?
Should university reflet the world of the people teaching, or the people learning?
Are marks the most important part of university?
Does university program people to do mindless tasks without asking questions?
Is university in danger because of new media?
Does a new media, demand a new medium?
Should the new media be changed to be oriented towards contemplation?
If so what has given rise to this change?
Are essays the most effective way of making a point in the information age?
What is the best way to make a point in the information age?
Is our generation focused on action and not contemplation?
How old is the new media?
How long until the next media?
what can be done to change current university practice?
is it logical that practice DOES change?
in what other ways can "learning" in university be assessed?
who can pioneer that change?

my poli1p93 presentation

rather than to a traditional presentation, i decided that asking my seminar questions after giving a short spiel about CanCon
here are some of the questions I asked:
on radio, canadian content is required to be 35% of all that is broadcast, does this ensure good quality canadian music? or just filler? when someone mentions canadian content, what do you think of?
does cancon actually help preserve culture or could canadians continue as they will without policy and still have culture separate from america?
is cancon a positive or negative thing overall? what do you think could be done instead?
can you really place policy on art and culture without excluding someone?
are the policies outdated already?
how about the cuts to arts, and keeping cancon? is this hypocritical?
what do you think is more important to canada, culture or trade?
can you have one without the other?
do you think the government should be regulating the content, even if it is to "protect" our culture?