Common Core: More Than ‘Just Standards’? Not Such a Tin-Foil Hat Question After All?
Stop the presses! The biometric measures used in schools and the connection to Common Core State Standards might just not be solely a right wing tin foil hat concern after all. The article linked above states how eye tracking software can be used in schools. From New computer software corrects a wandering mind:
“Their software tracks a person’s eye movements with a commercial eye tracker. The system figures out if the person’s mind is on the task by observing specific features in the way the eyes move, such as how long they fixate on words, where the eyes move next, their overall movement patterns and other contextual cues.”
If the software picks up on what looks like waning concentration, it will pause the session, send a notification to the user and highlight the missed content for them to read over again. “This can lead to improved learning,” D’Mello told Sandhana. “For high stakes tasks such as military or aviation, this can prevent catastrophic disasters.”
The software also has applications in improving study materials for high school and university courses because it can figure out how engaged the students are as they’re using study materials at home, and can identify which content causes a lapse in concentration.
According to New Scientist, the first version of the ‘mind wandering detector’ is expected to be ready in months.
Remember the GRIT report from the Department of Education about non-academic behavioral measures? Do the bureaucrats wear tin foil hats at the USDOEd or do we take this document as a blueprint of education reform? From ed.gov (not a mom based blog):
In the spirit of an iterative development process, we posted the Promoting Grit, Tenacity, and Perseverance report for public comment. Please review submitted comments below.
Can this eye tracking possibly be connected to Common Core State Standards Initiative? Proponents marginalize those who connect affective computing to the standards. The excerpt below is from the GRIT report. Using your critical thinking skills after reading the USDOEd’s draft on GRIT, do you think:
- The Math standards allow for the measurement of non-cognitive skills and are more than ‘just math’?
- Is there an emphasis by the Department of Education toward identifying potential new roles for technology to measure non-cognitive skills?
- Would that potential new role for technology include eye tracking in schools as stated in the sciencealert.com article?
Is the Common Core State Standards Initiative the vehicle for affective computation on students and does that include the future use of eye tracking? How do you interpret this government document? The technology is now available. Eye tracking is mentioned as a valid measurement in the document. Non-cognitive measurements are present in the Math standards to measure. Is this a tin-foil hat concern for the proponents to deride or are these appropriate ‘connect the dots’ questions?