# Reading Responses

# *Make it Stick: The Science of Successful Learning*

Baseball is the key to understanding learning skills. Well, not actually, but that is a metaphor made by the authors of Make it Stick: The Science of Successful Learning. I found this metaphor to be the most resounding piece of information I pulled from this chapter. As an athlete, I can understand how quick wit and picking up on minor signal changes can increase your ability to perform. The poignant message is, “every time you learn something new, you change the brain” (Brown, Roediger, McDaniel 7). However, I can say that I am a member of their skeptical group that they mention on page 8. Today, there is the constant circulation of “fake news” that muddies the water on what will truly be effective to enhance one’s ability to learn. So to this I ask, how does one not only know that advice is trustworthy, but that it will be effective with their own personal needs? We are taught in school to do things like put distractions away, chew gum, or sit up straight to stay focused.They also often teach in the similar style mentioned in the chapter, referred to as “fire hose” style. It's been proven that this is not a successful way to sustain any learning done. So, why is this still the main form of information dispersion seen today is schools? I am interested in continuing to learn of the other ways to successfully teach students with different learning needs and hindrances, as the current ones do not aid all students equally.

# Professor Reagle: Gossip
Like a spider weaving its web, internet communities intertwine and overlap in more ways than one can imagine. It is in our human nature to interact with others and learn about people. With this, however, also comes our desire to spread this information we learned. This is the gateway to gossip. As Joseph Reagle mentions, “A large group is better protected against predation than a small group is, but it also has internal competition for food and mating” (Reagle, 2019). No matter how close a group may feel, there will always be a level of tension and competition. Gossip is a direct product of this, becoming an easy way to stir the pot and plant seeds of doubt in people towards their other relationships in the group.
An example of this can be seen in the women’s basketball team at Northeastern. We are all fighting for the same playing time. Due to this, there is a level of competition within the group. Oftentimes, this can manifest as cliques and drama, meaning gossip about opposing groups is not far behind. Similarly, as mentioned by Reagle, “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” (Reagle, 2019). Understanding the more intricate relationships within a group, as well as the secondary relationships, is imperative to having a good pulse on the group you are a part of. Ultimately, no matter how “close knit” a group may feel, human nature will always return us to a primitive state of survival methods. Even if they have evolved to look more like a rumor mill, they still function similarly to that of monkeys fighting over food. Maybe this is a new angle in proving evolution, humans and monkeys similarities in the world of gossip.

# Bullying and Harassment
The line between censorship and monitoring hate speech is slowly beginning to blur. As mentioned in the article written by Shannon Bond, it is getting harder by the day to differentiate what is playful banter and inside jokes versus what is hate speech and bullying on FaceBook (Bond). That being said, many comments and posts are then left up to interpretation, which enters into a very muddy area of bias and opinion. This raises the question of how we can have effective content policies without restricting people’s freedom of speech? There is no denying that these major social media platforms have an affiliation to one or the other political party that is running for office, so would content regulators with a political bias be inclined to mark an opposing campaign's information as disinformation? These questions are pressing in this current conversation over social media censorship.
Another issue arises when it comes to people finding their way around the algorithm that flags things such as hate speech and bullying. An example of this can be found on TikTok. Whenever people want to type something on their video that does not follow the app's guidelines, they will spell it with a different character. For example, instead of typing “college”, I would type it as “cõ//ege” so that it does not get flagged for the use of the prohibited word. Although people may report the post, the algorithm typically sends people with a similar ideology to these videos, so the majority of people do not want it taken down. This leaves the minority that did not intend on viewing this content somewhat powerless. With rules on political correctness and appropriate content ever evolving, will these large corporations be able to keep up? Or will angles to avoid being banned from social media platforms become even more complex?

# Exam Review
Short Answer 1: Define Machiavallianism

Short Answer 2: What is the Tragedy of the Commons? Provide an example.

Multiple Choice 3:
Which of these 4 options is not a form of fake news:
A- satire
B- journalistic outlets
C- out of context information
D- false or misleading info

Multiple Choice 4:
Which is the definition of disinformation:
A- bad intent behind information
B- wrong information being provided
C- bad intent and wrong information provided
D- information with the intent to cause a dilemma

ANSWERS:
Answer 1: The desire to manipulate people/ someone who enjoys manipulating people

Answer 2: The Tragedy of the Commons is when groups have to share a limited resource. An example of this can be seen when you hear people complaining about traffic and wanting people to take public transport, yet they are on the roads and not taking public transport.

Answer 3- B (journalistic outlets)

Answer 4- C (bad intent and wrong information provided)

# The Open Source Identity Crisis
Geek is chic once again. And how do I know this? Well, as soon as I stepped foot on an academically high-level college as an athlete, I realized that geek was in, and athlete was out. It was a culture shock for me. This school is not like Clemson or Alabama. Academics and intelligence are held in high regard, while athletics are somewhat frowned upon due to their ability to get a less intelligent athlete in the door. In a quote by Joseph Reagle, mentioned in “The Open Source Identity Crisis” by Naomi Slater, he mentions that he is not surprised that “geeks” tend to be very picky about who they allow into their subculture. This stems from years of being ostracized for their quirks and defining characters. I understand this, but to me, this is a contradiction.
As I stated previously, as an athlete at Northeastern University, we receive a lot of ostracization due to stereotypes from fellow students. Oftentimes, they do not want to work with us in groups due to not trusting our intelligence or our ability to get work done on time. However, these characteristics are the opposite of mine. I would say I toe the line of geek and athlete. Here is where my grievances come into play. How can a group of people who were ostracized for so long turn around and do it to someone else? I find subcultures that are extremely exclusive like this to be very fascinating. Rather than trying to curb the exclusivity seen in the world and the bullying that comes along with it, subcultures often continue to perpetuate it. So yes, in my small world, “geek is chic” once again. However, this is just in my small bubble. Subcultures in power are fluid depending on so many different factors of an environment.