knowledge management system?
How can a knowledge management system aSsist teachers? Will it help or cause confusion?
The term "knowledge management system" was new to me, so I too a look at Wikipedia. Here’s what it said such a system was:
"1. Document based i.e. any technology that permits creation/management/sharing of formatted documents such as Lotus Notes, web, distributed databases etc.
2. Ontology/Taxonomy based: these are similar to document technologies in the sense that a system of terminologies (i.e. ontology) are used to summarize the document e.g. Author, Subj, Organization etc. as in DAML & other XML based ontologies
3. Based on AI technologies which use a customized representation scheme to represent the problem domain.
4. Provide network maps of the organization showing the flow of communication between entities and individuals
5. Increasingly social computing tools are being deployed to provide a more organic approach to creation of a KM system."
This sounds like yet another example of what Professors of Education do to justify their jobs and salaries. Having spent way, way too many years as a student, this looks like a collection of catch-phrases designed to obfuscate the essential tasks which have been performed by competent teachers since Socrates.
For example "document based technology." Sounds an awful lot like "books and internet" doesn’t it. "Ontology/taxonomy" is probably the best example of edubabble. Since when haven’t teachers identified concepts and organized them? But then, whoa, "using AI (artificial intelligence) technologies" to "represent the problem domain?" I can attest that most teachers would welcome artificial intelligence to their classrooms — if only to provide some assurance that there would be at least SOME intelligence there. Number 4: looks like more mutisyllabic jargon-babble for a flow chart. Since when do individuals communicate with "entities?" Once you’ve been teaching for a while, seems to me you ought to know who talks to whom and who the decision makers are. Finally, the catch-all popular jargon term "organic." I’d throw in "holistic" just to round out the BS content of "KM."
So, my answer is that, if teachers aren’t already performing these functions, they’re not doing their jobs and a "KM system" can only help them create and perpetuate the bogus impression that they actually know what they are doing. I’m sure that numerous useless Ph.D. dissertations will or have beaten this topic to death.
I think that teachers should just continue to organically maximize the conceptual interface of the interpersonal transmission of conceptual habilimentary actualities — as they always have. That’s what they’ve been doing all along, haven’t they?
December 9th, 2009 at 2:07 am
The term "knowledge management system" was new to me, so I too a look at Wikipedia. Here’s what it said such a system was:
"1. Document based i.e. any technology that permits creation/management/sharing of formatted documents such as Lotus Notes, web, distributed databases etc.
2. Ontology/Taxonomy based: these are similar to document technologies in the sense that a system of terminologies (i.e. ontology) are used to summarize the document e.g. Author, Subj, Organization etc. as in DAML & other XML based ontologies
3. Based on AI technologies which use a customized representation scheme to represent the problem domain.
4. Provide network maps of the organization showing the flow of communication between entities and individuals
5. Increasingly social computing tools are being deployed to provide a more organic approach to creation of a KM system."
This sounds like yet another example of what Professors of Education do to justify their jobs and salaries. Having spent way, way too many years as a student, this looks like a collection of catch-phrases designed to obfuscate the essential tasks which have been performed by competent teachers since Socrates.
For example "document based technology." Sounds an awful lot like "books and internet" doesn’t it. "Ontology/taxonomy" is probably the best example of edubabble. Since when haven’t teachers identified concepts and organized them? But then, whoa, "using AI (artificial intelligence) technologies" to "represent the problem domain?" I can attest that most teachers would welcome artificial intelligence to their classrooms — if only to provide some assurance that there would be at least SOME intelligence there. Number 4: looks like more mutisyllabic jargon-babble for a flow chart. Since when do individuals communicate with "entities?" Once you’ve been teaching for a while, seems to me you ought to know who talks to whom and who the decision makers are. Finally, the catch-all popular jargon term "organic." I’d throw in "holistic" just to round out the BS content of "KM."
So, my answer is that, if teachers aren’t already performing these functions, they’re not doing their jobs and a "KM system" can only help them create and perpetuate the bogus impression that they actually know what they are doing. I’m sure that numerous useless Ph.D. dissertations will or have beaten this topic to death.
I think that teachers should just continue to organically maximize the conceptual interface of the interpersonal transmission of conceptual habilimentary actualities — as they always have. That’s what they’ve been doing all along, haven’t they?
References :
A large dose of BS repellent.