Check out this link to take a sneak peak at 13 hours of my life, on what I thought would be a pretty chill, unstructured day. This time, featuring a Pig in Lipstick.

This week I chose to focus my attention on Media Convergence, and you can view my MindMap on the topic here! Below, you can watch as Bovine Morgan takes you on a journey through his many thoughts about the topic.

Alternative Title

“Algorithms; Math Gone Wild”

Here’s a link to my assignment this week. I wanted to embed it directly into my blog, but some features weren’t working that way, and you deserve the full experience. You’ll find my references embedded in my presentation.

Whose artificial intelligence is it anyway?

I went a bit overboard this week, something I may not be able to sustain long term – but I had a lot of fun putting this together! The animated video and clipart are courtesy of Adobe Express.

References

BBC News. (2016, January 26). AI pioneer Marvin Minsky dies aged 88. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-35409119

Biography.com Editors. (2020, July 22). Alan Turing . Biography. https://www.biography.com/scientists/alan-turing

Buolamwini, J. (2019, February 7). Artificial Intelligence has a problem with gender and racial bias. Here’s how to solve it. Time. https://time.com/5520558/artificial-intelligence-racial-gender-bias/

Chollet, F. (2019). The measure of intelligence. ArXiv. https://arxiv.org/abs/1911.01547

Donovan, P. (n.d.). Herbert Simon: Father of Artificial Intelligence. UBS Nobel Perspectives. Retrieved January 24, 2024, from https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/laureates/herbert-simon.html

Hao, K. (2020, December 4). We read the paper that forced Timnit Gebru out of Google. Here’s what it says. MIT Technology Review. https://technologyreview.com/2020/12/04/1013294/google-ai-ethics-research-paper-forced-out-timnit-gebru

Harris, A. (2018, November 1). Human languages vs. programming languages. Medium. https://medium.com/@anaharris/human-languages-vs-programming-languages-c89410f13252

Heilweil, R. (2020, February 18). Why algorithms can be racist and sexist. Vox. https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/2/18/21121286/algorithms-bias-discrimination-facial-recognition-transparency

McCarthy, J. (2019). What is AI? / Basic Questions. Stanford.edu. http://jmc.stanford.edu/artificial-intelligence/what-is-ai/index.html

OpenAI. (2024). ChatGPT (GPT-4 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat

OpenAI. (2024). DALL-E (Version 3) [Large language model]. https://labs.openai.com

Sutton, R. S. (2020). John McCarthy’s definition of intelligence. Journal of Artificial General Intelligence, 11(2), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.2478/jagi-2020-0003

Wikipedia Contributors. (2019, October 15). John McCarthy (computer scientist). Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_McCarthy_(computer_scientist)

Winston, P. H. (2016). Marvin L. Minsky (1927–2016). Nature, 530(7590), 282–282. https://doi.org/10.1038/530282a

Ponderings on Usability

What is usability? 

Perhaps it is simpler to view usability through the lens of a stone age technology. The wheel proliferated because it is infinitely usable. To borrow from Issa and Isaias’ usability criteria (2015, p. 33), the wheel was easily understood and adopted across various cultures (learnability). It could be adapted for use in many places (flexibility). When properly designed, it rarely failed (robustness). The wheel significantly reduced the effort required for transportation (efficiency), and its design was simple, effective, easily reproduced, and impossible to forget how to use (memorability). Small imperfections don’t usually effect its utility (error handling), and it made people’s lives better and easier (satisfaction). When we are designing tools for use, usability must be the end goal, or else we are building Rube Goldberg machines; complex machines that perform tasks in indirect and convoluted ways (Wikimedia Contributors, 2019) that are more of a puzzle and pastime for the designer than solutions to widely held problems or ways to improve quality of life. 

What about educational usability? 

From an educational lens several ideas are missing. Unlike the profit-driven motives of the free market, which often lead to excluding certain users in technology design, the education system prioritizes inclusivity, catering to diverse learning needs, and supporting both teaching and learning processes. When technologies have been designed for commercial usability rather than educational, educational outcomes and learning effectiveness are often sacrificed. Adding features necessary for ensuring support for different age groups, modes of learning, technological proficiency and integration with learning standards are not marketable in the same ways.

Data privacy is another concern. Individuals of legal age can consent to technology use and data terms, but schools must prioritize student data privacy, often facing higher costs for technology that adheres to these standards, unlike commercial tech subsidized through data sale (Canadian Centre for Cyber Security, 2023). Ultimately, one could define educational usability as technology that meets Issa and Isaias’ criteria on top of being ethically responsible and inclusive, which prioritizes the learning process, and recognizes the financial and security challenges that are unique to the educational field. 

When usability studies go wrong 

User-centred design is integral . Woolgar effectively argued that in his observed usability study, he saw the configuration of the user to the technology. This is problematic because it can lead to a notable mismatch between user needs and the technology, resulting in a product that is difficult to use, or doesn’t serve the problem it is intended to address. It also leads to potential user frustration and disengagement because they are forced to adapt to a system that doesn’t align with their natural behaviours, expectations, and motivations.  

One issue that stood out for me was the very close presence of testers during the process. The testers were physically in the space and verbally guided the users along the way, telling users when they could give up, or providing positive reinforcement to encourage useful behaviours like reading a manual (Woolgar, 1990, p. 85). Would users outside of this ecosystem persist in their use of the technology, and where would users genuinely struggle? Configuring the users muddies the water. 

Woolgar highlighted the insider/outsider contrast, with insiders like tech support often surprised by outsiders’ real-world use of technology, exemplified by simplified computer instructions posted in a school computer lab. (Woolgar, 1990, p. 72). The sheer depths of knowledge and experience of designers act as blinders to the everyday needs of average users, who may not share the same level of expertise or perspective. Perhaps a better process for usability testing would have helped create a device that was more intuitive. 

Usability over time 

Woolgar’s points on usability are particularly relevant when considering the DOS-based 286 computers he references in 1990, which, due to their novelty and hardware constraints, necessitated user adaptation and lacked key usability aspects like learnability and satisfaction set out by Issa and Isaias 25 years later. It is likely that in Woolgar’s case users legitimately needed to be configured. Now that technology is ubiquitous, and screen recording technology/keystroke-logs exist we can now take the lessons learned from Woolgar and apply them in a way that helps users configure the tech rather than vice versa. Testers no longer need to physically be in a room with those doing the testing, as we can gather helpful data virtually. In Woolgar’s case, usability studies were an end of process project to be completed shortly before heading to market, whereas Issa and Isaias frame usability evaluation as a recursive process of prototype releases; this is a significantly more proactive, user-centric approach. Ultimately, when read together these pieces highlight how important it is that our conceptions of usability do not remain static. 

References 

Canadian Centre for Cyber Security. (2023, August 4). Protecting your information and data when using applications- ITSAP.40.200. Canadian Centre for Cyber Security. https://www.cyber.gc.ca/en/protecting-your-information-and-data-when-using-applications-itsap40200 

Goldberg, R. (1931). Self-operating napkin [Comic]. In Wikimedia Commons. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/Rube_Goldberg%27s_%22Self-Operating_Napkin%22_%28cropped%29.gif 

Issa, T., & Isaias, P. (2015). Usability and Human Computer Interaction (HCI). In Sustainable Design (pp. 19–36). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-6753-2_2 

Wikipedia Contributors. (2019, April 10). Rube Goldberg machine. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rube_Goldberg_machine 

Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: The case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(1_suppl), 58–99. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.1990.tb03349.x 

Preface 

It is crucial to understand that marginalized populations are often constrained by the systems imposed by the dominant culture, through no fault of their own. What follows aims to offer a historical perspective on how these communities can become entangled in their own marginalization while trying to effect change from within systems that have historically excluded them or limited their access.

Original Question 

What kind of information is provided in early documents about Indigenous Education in Manitoba seemingly endorsed by Indigenous groups? 

Search terms 

• “Indian” – as I am searching for an early document around Indigenous education in the Province of Manitoba I am restricted to using the terminology of the time period 
• “Education” 
• “Manitoba” 

Document Source 

My initial search was completed using the Government of Canada’s Publications catalogue. Using my search terms, I was able to uncover a document entitled “Indian education in Manitoba: information for educaters [sic] & band officials”, which was published in 1972 by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs. The document starts with a 2-page letter of introduction from the Manitoba Indian Brotherhood, the forerunner of the current Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs (Manitoba Historical Society Archives, 2022). 

Initial Analysis 

* I did not include uses of the word Indian when referring to organizations/groups like the Manitoba Indian Brotherhood or the Department of Indian Affairs, or in document titles. 

* Only the main body text was analyzed, not appendices. 

Added to the original search terms, I included the names of Indigenous Nations in the province of Manitoba, both as used by most groups themselves currently as well as historical terminology, which is recorded in quotation marks in the chart above. Interestingly, while terms used to represent the entirety of Manitoba’s Indigenous population were used well over 140 times, names specific to a cultural group were only mentioned a total of 14 times, and only in instances referring to language. Anishininiimowin (Oji-Cree) identity is completely unreferenced. Given the several times the document refers to the importance of cultural understanding (see paragraph 3 on page 107 for example) on the part of non-Indigenous peoples, this seems like a notable discrepancy. The prevalence of generalized terms over specific cultural group names suggests a broad-brush approach to Indigenous identity within the document, which contrasts with the expressed emphasis on cultural understanding. This raises questions about the depth and authenticity of the cultural awareness and sensitivity claimed in the document. 

The map above shows the heterogeneous nature of the Indigenous communities within the Province of Manitoba. (MFNERC, 2015)

In my initial review of the document, several aspects stood out, particularly in light of historical context: 

1. References to Residential Schools: The document frequently mentions residential school facilities, detailing their amenities and procedures for enrolling Indigenous students. This is particularly striking given the traumatic legacy of these institutions in forcibly assimilating Indigenous children, a practice now widely recognized as part of Canada’s colonial history. 

2. Mentions of the Child Welfare System: There are notable references to the child welfare system, including contacts for agencies to be alerted if there were concerns about the welfare of Indigenous children. During this period, welfare agencies were actively involved in the removal of Indigenous children from their families for adoption into non-Indigenous homes, a practice later termed the Sixties Scoop (Sinclair & Dainard, 2021). The legacy of this system still has a residual hold on us; national Canadian data shows that over 50% of children in foster care today are Indigenous, in Manitoba that number is closer to 90% (Hobson, 2022) 

The broad-brush approach to all Indigenous groups, and the references to residential schools and the child welfare system made me think about the ways in which marginalized populations are often positioned within dominant societal narratives, particularly in historical contexts. It highlights a systemic approach to managing Indigenous affairs that prioritizes assimilation and control over the preservation and respect of diverse cultural identities. 

In terms of its impact on teacher professional development, I think that it was probably progressive for its time. Unfortunately, I still think that it would have reinforced stereotypes and encouraged stigmatizing and problematic behaviours from non-Indigenous readers. On one hand, historically used derogatory terminology is absent (with the notable exception of settler names for some Indigenous groups), but from a modern lens the frequent use of the term Indian is jarring. The document explains that intelligence tests cannot be removed from culture (p. L1) and gives some attention to the importance of cross-cultural training (p. C3). But ultimately, the information contained within reflects the values of the dominant Manitoban culture, and reinforces systems that continued to do significant harm to Indigenous people. Much of the document is about funding allocations, welfare concerns, and different residential school locations. 

Updated Question 

How does the 1972 ‘Indian education in Manitoba’ document, despite its endorsement by Indigenous organizations, fail to reflect the complexities and realities of Indigenous education and cultural practices of the time? 

Analysis  

The opening note from the MIB sets out goals of educational autonomy and Indigenous control of their own education, ultimately a push back against the system. The final line of Verna Kirkness’ letter stating that the document that follows “will… provide you with the information on ‘things you have always wanted to know about Indian education but were afraid to ask’” makes no qualifiers on the quality of the information, and its use of quotation marks strikes me as an indication of MIBs critical stance on the material included within. However, the rest of the document presents a systemically aligned perspective on Indigenous education. From the uncritical eyes of non-Indigenous readers, this could be seen as acceptance. 

Ultimately, the document remains a product of its systemic context. Its portrayal of residential schools is notably softened, a stark contrast to the more troubling accounts that have emerged since. For example on page 36 of the document, it simply says that it became evident that it was “not desirable” to remove children from families, and speaks of the benefits of Day Schools, racially segregated schools that served to assimilate Indigenous students in conditions that were frequently abusive, staffed by unqualified and non-Indigenous teaching staff and the subject of a significant Class Action Lawsuit finalized in the year 2019 (Pind, 2023). Traditional spirituality, family organization, and cultural practices are conspicuously absent from the discussion; material which quite literally is information teachers and educators should know about Indigenous education. Furthermore, the document not only encourages but also provides the necessary contacts for readers to engage with existing child welfare systems. This guidance subtly positions Indigenous families under the scrutiny of non-Indigenous systems, reflecting a lack of recognition for their autonomy and cultural integrity. 

Reflection 

My interest in this topic stems not only from the importance of understanding historical context in the process of Reconciliation but also from my personal identity as a member of the 2SLGBTQIA+ community and my background in social history. Like Indigenous advocacy groups, early 2SLGBTQIA+ rights groups, such as the Mattachine Society, The Daughters of Bilitis, and ONE, Inc. in the United States, and the Gay Alliance Toward Equality in Canada, faced similar challenges as a historically marginalized population struggling to gain public acceptance. These groups often adopted a strategy of respectability politics, which included things like members being forced to adhere to the acceptable gender norms of the time to avoid being labeled as deviant. For instance, having a ‘friend’ was considered acceptable, but openly describing an intimate relationship with a same-sex partner was not, as noted by Case in 2020. This approach created a divide within the marginalized communities between those who conformed to these norms and those who either could not or chose not to do so.  

If we apply a definition of ‘respectability politics’ as the way in which more privileged members of marginalized groups attempt to agree with and promote mainstream cultural norms to advance their group’s condition (Dazey, 2021) then it becomes clear that this strategy, while offering potential short-term gains in acceptance and rights, can also perpetuate long-standing inequities and internal divisions. It is from this lens that I have analyzed the following document. What becomes clear is that systemic change alone is not enough to effect true and lasting societal transformation. While changes in policy and practice are crucial, they must be accompanied by a deeper shift in societal attitudes and a genuine acknowledgement of the diversity and autonomy of marginalized groups. In the case of the document I analyzed, the focus on institutional structures like residential schools and the child welfare system, even when ostensibly endorsed by Indigenous groups, reflects a top-down approach that does little to empower these communities or respect their cultural uniqueness. 

Ultimately, what I will take from my reading of this document is the critical need for direct and authentic engagement with specific Indigenous communities, rather than solely relying on broad systemic approaches. True progress hinges on listening to and learning from these communities themselves, ensuring their voices and specific cultural needs are at the forefront of any educational and policy development.

References 

Canadian Encyclopedia. (n.d.). Timeline LGBTQ2S . https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/timeline/lgbtq2 

Case, M. (2020, July 15). ONE: The First Gay Magazine in the United States. JSTOR Daily. https://daily.jstor.org/one-the-first-gay-magazine-in-the-united-states/ 

Dazey, M. (2021). Rethinking respectability politics. The British Journal of Sociology, 72(3), 580–593. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12810 

Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. (1972). Indian education in Manitoba: Information for educators & band officials. https://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/aanc-inac/R44-134-1972-eng.pdf 

Hobson, B. (2022, September 21). More than half the children in care are Indigenous, census data suggests. CBC. https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/census-indigenous-children-care-1.6590075

Manitoba Historical Society Archives. (2022, October 26). Manitoba organization: Manitoba Indian Brotherhood / Assembly of Manitoba Chiefs. https://www.mhs.mb.ca/docs/organization/assemblymanitobachiefs.shtml 

MFNERC. (2015). Traditional First Nation Community Names. https://mfnerc.org/community-map/

Pind, J. (2023, August 23). Indian Day Schools in Canada. The Canadian Encyclopedia. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/indian-day-schools-in-canada 

Sinclair, N. J., & Dainard, S. (2021, February 17). Sixties Scoop. The Canadian Encyclopedia; The Canadian Encyclopedia. https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/sixties-scoop