A lap 2018. november 19., 13:17-kori változata

General information

This information unit can be seen by each affected person (like Student, teacher, actor, actress, partner, etc.) having a theater-ticket  before starting the first presentation/performance. Therefore, this information unit is a kind of textual trailer...  

Ars virtualica - in medias res:

• The QuILT as a conception should/will become a movement - step by step!
• QuILT is not a kind of theater pedagogy.
• The QuILT is going to support processes, where Students and teachers could face with potential and individual ideals concerning teaching & learning.
• In this process, a teacher is rather/mostly a mentor,
  • who makes possible to identify a lot of point of views without any enforced statements, declarations -
  • without the hoped position for itself having the very/final truth.
• However, individual/customized ideals need a lot of responsibilities both from teachers and Students.
• To achieve a rational level of interactivity (between Students, teachers and also the both parties) can be seen as a step-wise project:
  • first: Students will be confronted with potential ideals concerning behavior patterns in knowledge transfer processes (like learning, teaching).
  • then: Students can criticize the offered patterns, rules, terms and conditions (see QuILT-citical-demo),
  • but: each critical manifestation should have a massive part of argumentation, alternative solutions and the evaluations all of them
• Ideals will be legitimated through log-based big data and artificial intelligence based evaluations: it means, through PLAN-FACT comparisons.

MOTTO (Knuth, 1992, Stanford): "Science is what we understand well enough to explain to a computer. Art is everything else we do."

Why: THEATER?

• The frontal teaching is not interactive enough,
• but the realization of a real interactivity needs a lot of preparation works.
• Classic theater performances are capable synchronizing thinking methods.
  • The first performances will be written by teachers and presented by actors, actresses, teachers.
  • In the second phase, story boards/screen plays/scripts will be created by Students, and presented by the teaching staff.
  • In the next phase, the whole performance will be made by a group of Students.
  • Later, the scripts created by a group of Students can be performed by an other group of Students.
• So, a development of the interactivity can be realized step by step.

QuILT tries to entertain all. However, nothing is free of charge. Everybody has to pay. At first: PAY ATTENTION!

Why: LEARNING?

• The offered patterns concerning potential ideal behaviors should be catalyze reaction by Students and also by teachers - as a kind of chained effect...
• Learning by doing and doing by learning can be merged through the gamification frames.
• Parallel, real performances (like learning materials) will be worked out through common legitimated games.
• As practical knowledge may be seen each experiences having direct connections to the real life of Students.
• Theoretical is a knowledge, if a direct connection to the Student's reality is not given.
• What is more direct for a Student then a learning process as such.
• First of all, QuILT will work with phenomena like KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY, where technical (ICT) and human aspect can and should be be merged.
• QuILT is - therefore - a kind of general course for thinking methodology (or development of personality or support for self-identified learning methodologies).

Why: INTERACTIVITY

• Log-based evaluation of performances can only be made if log-data are given.
• Just activities can be logged (if EEG-s are still not involved into the monitoring system).
• Hearing and seeing/watching are less relevant as doing/creating.
• Activities can be constructive (like extensions, adaptations, substitutions, etc.) and destructive (c.f. exploring critical aspects).

Why: QUASI

• Interactivity can also be dangerous (it means: less effective or efficient, than declaration-based processes), if nobody is able to canalize efforts.
• Offered ideals are just potentials.
• Human intuitions are very important, but not always excellent.
• There seems to be not a final truth, but a lot of way leading to a higher level of thinking complexity.