Interactive Machine Learning

Posted on December 2, 2016 by Sarah Shugars

For one of my class projects, I’ve been reading a lot about interactive machine learning – an approach which Karl Sims describes as allowing “the user and computer to interactively work together in a new way to produce results that neither could easily produce alone.”

In someways, this approach is intuitive. Michael Muller, for example, argues that any work with technology has an inherently social dimension. “Must we always analyze the impact of technology on people,” he asks, “or is there just as strong an impact of people on technology?” From this perspective, any machine learning approach which doesn’t account for both the user and the algorithm is incomplete.

Jerry Fails and Dan Olsen fully embrace this approach, proposing a paradigm shift in the fundamental way researchers approach machine learning tasks. While classic machine learning models “require the user to choose features and wait an extended amount of time for the algorithm to train,” Fails and Olsen propose an interactive machine learning approach which feeds a large number of features into a classifier, with human judgement continually correcting and refining the results. They find this approach removes the need to pre-select features, reduces the burden of technical knowledge on the user, and significantly speeds up training.

should civic educators modify their neutral stance?

Posted on December 2, 2016 by Peter

(Washington, DC) I’m here for the National Council for the Social Studies annual convention. Right after the election, the NCSS sent a “post-election message” that talked generally about the importance of teaching about government and civic engagement:

As social studies educators, we teach and learn about our system of government, about controversial and timely issues, and about making informed decisions as active participants and defenders of our democracy. Our civic duty did not end at the voting booth; in fact, it has just begun. We can share instructional practices about the electoral process, the upcoming transition plans for newly elected leaders at all levels, and the new teams that will play a central role in our conversations for the next several years. We teach the principles of our U.S. Constitution.

This message could have been sent after any presidential election in the past century. There was no mention of Donald Trump or anything unusual about the campaign or the condition of the republic. I am not necessarily critical of this stance, which reflects a deep-seated and well-grounded commitment to a certain form of political neutrality. Many other schools, districts, universities, and nonprofits have taken a similar stance. However, civic educators must at least consider whether a different set of principles should apply in 2016.

Here are some arguments for neutrality:

It’s dangerous for an arm of the state, a public school, ever to take sides on political issues. Citizens are forced to pay for public education and face considerable pressure to turn their kids over to these institutions. Children form an impressionable, captive audience in the classroom. Teachers have great power over students’ life-prospects. It’s unethical for them to use that power to change children’s political views.
If teachers take–or imply–critical positions about any particular party or leader, elected officials and electoral majorities can press them to take different positions. Neutrality is no longer a shield.
We are all subject to bias. Teachers split their votes between Clinton and Trump, but a majority preferred Clinton, and in big city districts on the coasts, the ratio was no doubt very high. Like everyone, Trump opponents need to remember that they could be wrong. Lots of people believe that Barack Obama is a dangerous enemy of American values. I heartily disagree, but this disagreement shows that judgment is fallible. A critical estimate of Donald Trump is a judgment, not a simple matter of fact. The “text” that we must interpret is the vast quantity of his statements over many months. People hear different points and take different messages from all this verbiage. Those of us who think Donald Trump is a profound threat to the republic could be wrong; and teachers shouldn’t communicate uncertain ideas as if they were truths.
One of our worst problems is political polarization, a failure to interact with and understand people who disagree with us. We don’t learn or practice deliberation enough in the US today. But there is always some ideological diversity in a social studies classrooms, and teachers can advance deliberative values by creating spaces for open conversations. Further, if a particular group (such as Trump voters–or Trump opponents) happens to be missing from a given classroom, teachers can help students to understand the absent perspective. However, if the teacher takes a position, that can chill deliberation.
Schools teach civics and social studies in the first place because elected officials tolerate it. Civics is rarely a high priority and is often on the list to be cut. Yet students benefit from civics. Therefore, the responsible course is for educators–and especially associations like NCSS–to keep their heads down. The last thing they should do is appear to oppose the incumbent administration, because it will be easy for federal and state governments to eliminate civics entirely.
Since individual teachers will bear the brunt of any criticism and retribution, administrators and nonprofit organizational leaders should adopt a tone of complete neutrality to protect them.

But here is the opposite argument:

We teach civics to instill republican, liberal, democratic, and humane values. We ask our students to preserve the republic against threats, both domestic and foreign. The acid test of good civic education is whether every graduate would “stand up” instead of “standing by” when a would-be dictator appeared on the scene.
Yes, it is a matter of judgment, not a demonstrable fact, that Trump poses a threat to republican values. But some major Republican intellectuals and GOP political opponents have called Trump an authoritarian and a racist. One can give reasons, evidence, and arguments for these conclusions. Uncertainty remains, but uncertainty does not excuse us from having to decide. As Hannah Arendt would have said, “Ven zee cheeps are down, ve must make yudgments.” Judgment under uncertainty is exactly what citizenship demands. If we’re wrong, we pay the consequences, because–as Arendt would say–“politics is not a nursery.” Incidentally, Trump needn’t be remotely like a Mussolini or a Franco to pose a real danger. A Putin or a Berlusconi would be bad enough.
To teach “standing up” or (as postwar Germans call it, Civil Courage) needn’t be partisan. In fact, if you think that the price of liberty is eternal vigilance, then most of us liberals should have been more vigilant during the Obama years. We should have stood up when the current president executed people extra-judicially by drone strike. In other words, Civil Courage would support criticism of Trump, but it would extend far beyond him.
Schools aren’t and shouldn’t be neutral, anyway. Among the values that they must defend are pursuit of truth and basic decency for all. Any political leader who exhibits a lack of regard for truth or bullying behavior violates principles that schools must uphold. They can’t give kids bad grades for using false information, or make them stay after school for bullying, and yet ignore such behavior by the president.
Many teachers have students who are directly threatened by Trump–or feel that they are–and it is wrong for adults to ignore their sentiment by treating the President Elect as a normal leader. By extension, in a class where everyone feels safe, the students should be made aware of how others feel.
If we refrain from exercising Civil Courage because of possible budget cuts or other political consequences, we are abandoning free speech. That is exactly how republics fall.

I actually think the the choice between these two approaches is fairly hard. Individuals and groups can reasonably reach various conclusions. I write only on my own behalf and do not know what I would say if I represented something like the NCSS or a school district. But, at a minimum, everyone involved in educating the next generation should consider this choice.

Engaging Ideas – 12/2

Posted on December 2, 2016 by Public Agenda Newsfeed

Engaging Ideas – 12/2

Posted on December 2, 2016 by Public Agenda Newsfeed

Top Resources for Post-Election Dialogue Across Divides

Posted on December 1, 2016 by Roshan Bliss

Earlier this week, NCDD hosted a special post-election Confab Call during which over fifty of our members and affiliates had a rich, inspiring, and for some, therapeutic conversation about what kind of work people in the dialogue and deliberation field are doing to address this post-election moment.

The call was part of our ongoing #BridgingOurDivides campaign, during which we’ve been encouraging our members to share about the work happening in our field that’s aimed at fostering bridge building, and to share resources that can build capacity to move forward together despite differences. The Confab Call was its own kind of resource, and if you missed the call, you can hear about all the great projects, insights, and resources that were discussed during it by listening to the recording here or reading over the discussion and links from the call’s chat transcription here. But there are many more resources we want to share with you all today.

As we’ve mentioned before, there are important needs being felt in the wake of the election year’s end that dialogue and deliberation can address: D&D can help us process our feelings and what’s next, it can help promote and maintain civility, it can assist in bridging long-standing divides, and it can facilitate interactions that humanize people or groups who’ve been made into caricatured “others” and out groups. NCDD wanted to know how our field is responding to these needs, so we recently asked our D&D community to share their resources, tools, and projects that could help address post-election issues with us.

We received a wide variety of wonderful resources in response to that call, and in our continued efforts to help the field rise to the needs and opportunities presented in this challenging moment for our country, we’ve created a list of some of the best resources the NCDDers shared. We’ve linked to over two dozen resources below that we hope D&D practitioners will find useful as you engage with your communities over the coming weeks and months.

Please continue to add to this list in the comments section, as we’ll be continuing to archive the best of these and other tools in our Resource Center for future use. For now, take a look through the list below of valuable D&D resources.

Processing Emotions and What Happens Next

Much of what is needed across the country after the election is simply spaces and methods to process our thoughts and feelings about the election season, the outcome, and what they want to see happen next – together. There are tons of great resources in our field for doing that, and here are some of the good ones:

The Conversation Café process (CC) provides a simple structure for people looking to have thoughtful dialogue to reflect on the election as well as what they’d like to see happen now. We recommend the Quick How-To Guide, or you can delve into more comprehensive list of CC resources. You can also read a great overview and history of the CC method here
We also recommended the “What’s Next After the Election?” conversation guide from NCDD member organization Living Room Conversations to help you have conversations with people who think differently from you
Another NCDD member org, Essential Partners, is running a social media campaign that invites commentary – especially video and audio responses – about what people want to see happen after the election, and you’re invited to join the conversation using the #AfterNov8 hashtag
The National Association of Community & Restorative Justice has released a talking circle guide for teachers trying to help younger students process their thoughts and feelings about the election
The racial healing-focused organization Coming to the Table has a circle guide focused on race dialogues if you’re hosting conversations around race

Promoting and Maintaining Civility

With the divisiveness and rancor of the election season’s rhetoric on all sides, a huge part of the need D&D can fill right now is to help build the capacity for civil conversations when we’re disagreeing – whether within families, in the media, or in the legislature. Below are some of the best resources for supporting civility after the election:

The National Institute for Civil Discourse is leading the charge to promoting civility through their Revive Civility campaign. As other sources of inspiration, we also recommend the guide to surviving Thanksgiving (or any holiday) dinner penned by NCDD member and head of NICD Carolyn Lukensmeyer and the joint statement that more than 20 prominent politicians signed calling for civility and respect in politics
The Tufts University Institute for Democracy & Higher Education created this facilitator training guide specifically for those wanting to facilitate civil discussions about politically charged conversations on campuses
The national organization Facing History and Ourselves also recently released a guide for civil conversations in classrooms geared toward teachers
The conversation guide that was created by the makers of Hi From the Other Side is simple but powerful for helping folks connect on a more personal level before wading into the election
The Frenemies Project at Virginia Tech is exploring whether facilitated dialogue can promote understanding and empathy between individuals who have vastly different perspectives. More information on their initiative, Frenemies Day, can be found here
The Inquiry Institute put together a free e-book, Thoughtful Citizenship, which includes a variety of essays that share guidance on how to listen and dialogue with people of differing views

Bridging Our Divides

The election both opened new divides and deepened old ones in our society, and helping individuals and communities bridge those divides need to be a special focus of D&D work today. We encourage you to learn more about how you can facilitate that bridging using the resources below:

As a follow-up to our recent national conference on this topic, NCDD is still running our #BridgingOurDivides campaign to talk about how the D&D community is working to help our country close its most persistent and painful gaps. We encourage you to check out the conversation via the #BridgingOurDivides hashtag on social media
Essential Partners offers a great Guide for Reaching Across the Red-Blue Divides for people looking to engage with those whose political perspectives differ from theirs, as well as a list of wise questions to start such conversations off.
For public officials and community leaders, there are some good ideas in the Key Considerations for Community Leaders Facing Civil Unrest toolkit as well as the Planning in Advance of Civil Unrest toolkit, both of which are from NCDD member Grande Lum of the Divided Communities Project
The NCDD affiliated Days of Dialogue initiative in LA offers a dialogue guide and facilitators’ handbook for hosting conversations on addressing the strained community-police divide
The Bring it to the Table project from NCDD member Talking Eyes Media has a great set of short videos that can help start balanced conversations between people who disagree on issues like economy, welfare , abortion, immigration,health care, and gay marriage
Years ago when Essential Partners was still the Public Conversations Project, they released their 188-page Guide to Fostering Dialogue Across Differences, and it’s still as relevant as ever

Humanizing Groups Seen as “the Other”

One of the most troubling needs after the election, especially in light of the spike in hate crimes over the last month, is the need to develop and implement D&D methods that can help people see the humanity in those who they’ve written off as “other” or “less than” themselves. This need is one that our field urgently needs to develop more robust resources for addressing, but there are some good ones out there, which we’ve listed below:

NCDD member organization Not In Our Town has a treasure trove of resources for hosting conversations and taking action to oppose bullying and hate groups. Check out their huge catalogue of videos (most of which come with discussion guides) you can use to start conversations about addressing intolerance. You can also check out their guide on bringing stakeholders together, their Not In Our Schools guides for educators, and their quick start guide
NCDD recently launched our new Race, Police, & Reconciliation listserv to support collaboration and exchange among those working in racial dialogue, community-police relations, and truth-telling & reconciliation work – all of which help break down barriers between “us” and “them.” We encourage all involved in such work to join
We recommend reading and sharing about AllSides.com, a project that helps reduce the disconnection from other perspectives that the echo-chamber effect of social media fosters by providing comparisons of the same news stories from left-leaning, right-leaning, and center-based sources
If you want to get sense of how thick your “bubble” is or help your friends think about theirs, check out this quiz that purports to give a rating of how insulated you are or are not from the experiences of working class people
On the creative side, the US Department of Arts & Culture is inviting communities to participate in their annual People’s State of the Union between Jan. 27 – Feb. 5 by hosting story circles that encourage telling real stories of connection, disconnection, and breaking through barriers. Check out the downloadable toolkit for hosts
This illustrated video of a webinar on the power of storytelling to humanize “others” has important lessons on listening to people we’ve been taught to hate
For some reflection on how we make those we don’t know into “the other,” check out the classic TED talk from Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie about “the danger of a single story”

What Other Resources Are Out There?

This list features some incredible resources, but we know it’s just a taste of what’s out there in our field, so we encourage everyone to continue sharing your resources for addressing post-election needs in the comments section below! For now, we encourage you all to keep thinking about how our field can make its broadest impact possible in moving our communities and our nation beyond its deep divides and toward a positive future.

If you want to find even more amazing D&D tools, be sure to visit NCDD’s Resource Center.