Vote Compass: Direct Democracy and WikiLaws

Australia will hold a federal election on Sat 07-Sep-2013. Until then political parties promise what they will do if granted power. The policies and promises come as a package; all from Party A or all from Party B (or Party C). But with modern information and communication technology every voter could have input on every policy; rather than the collective package. This would require replacing representative democracy with direct democracy.

Direct Democracy

The ABC (Australia's national public broadcaster) is currently polling the populace via Vote Compass. To date 887,998 results have been submitted; more than 5% of enrolled voters. In this online poll people can express their views on a number of policies and examine where they stand in the Australian political landscape.

Extending this idea further, the online poll could become THE election. Policies could be voted on directly by all voters throughout the year as required. This would eliminate the need for elected representatives. (Similar to Democratising Football.)

The following diagrams demonstrate the different policy outcomes between representative and direct democracy for the same number of voters. Red, green, and blue represent different political persuasions. The type of democracy employed influences the power of each persuasion.

Representative Democracy

Direct Democracy

Without representatives voters do not need to decide between packages of policies, but can vote on each policy independently. And direct democracy gives each vote equal value. An entire layer of government could be removed, and the technology exists today to compensate for it.

So how would laws be written and passed?

WikiLaws

WikiLaws

Laws are basically a collection of documents which are displayed, evaluated, edited, accepted, and reviewed. A wiki is an excellent method for compiling, editing, and displaying documents. Actually, laws can be considered as a collection of instructions (actions/consequences), and could follow a software development model.

Laws could be:

1. developed in a staging wiki (red)
2. tested by online discussion (orange)
3. accepted by general vote (yellow)
4. and if accepted put into the production wiki (green)

See diagram for data-flow. Click to enlarge.

Someone would still require the authority to enact the laws, and implement policy. The Head of State could continue in this role, with an appropriately selected Executive Council.

Change Management

The technology to implement direct democracy exists. It would need to be ubiquitous, and all voters would need to be informed and aware of how to utilise it.

A much bigger change would the cultural and power shift. Voters would require a knowledge and understanding of the legal framework in which they live, rather than an opinion of a three-word-slogan policy. And they would need to engage enough to consider each policy, evaluate it, and cast a vote.

This amount of change may take generations to implement.

Summary

1. The use of information and communication technology to implement direct democracy could remove the need for several layers of government.
2. Implementing direct democracy would require an educated populace, a neutral broadcast media, and a massive shift in power structures.

Distracting Education: Social Media vs Deep Knowledge

Life, Stan Wayman, 1964

I never got to see The Beatles live in concert, but my Mum did. And apparently they were loud; well, the screaming was - she didn't hear much of the music, but she never forgot the experience.

Today, I can listen to The Beatles or watch a performance. I can join an online group to discuss which Beatle was more talented, or better looking. But I can never see them perform live; never enjoy Beatlemania.

Applying this to education; I believe virtual teaching, and embedded social media, are beneficial in some circumstances, but they are inferior substitutes for discussions in a real-world space with an expert mentor and a group of peers. They may in fact distract from a deep learning experience.

Video Conference and shared Interactive Whiteboard

Virtual Classroom

Just like the difference between watching a concert on TV and actually attending the concert, the emotional and sensory difference of watching a lecture online and actually being in the room may be measurable.

There are certain circumstances where virtual is the best you can get. For example taking a virtual excursion through the Powerhouse Museum, and asking the curator about the Enigma machine as he describes it's purpose and function. Much more viable than loading the class on a plane!

But as a learning experience I would argue that it's more memorable and valuable to actually be in the Museum, speaking face-to-face with the curator, and seeing the Enigma in real-space.

After teaching an HSC course via a virtual classroom for two years, virtual may be the best-effort when circumstances prevent real-world interaction; but when possible, real-world experience provides better sensory and memory learning.

laurenmacewen.com/category/socialmedia/

Social media

My understanding of the purpose of social media in education is to improve student engagement; to promote shared experiences. I have seen how shared experiences such as in-class debates, performances, brainstorming sessions, and group projects have helped students explore personal qualities in a safe environment which they may have never attempted otherwise.

I've run classroom blogs and forums, and these can engage students (particularly the quiet/shy); but I think a teacher understands the needs of the class far better via direct contact; when you can "see the whites of their eyes".

In general, the "social" classroom (particularly for high-school students), is less about engagement of ideas, and more about discussion of things (e.g. cars), or people (e.g. celebrities).

And, due to the Dunning-Kruger effect, students can not be expected to evaluate their own learning needs, or that of their peers. Consequently, they are unlikely to independently commit time and resources in order to focus on the details and conceptual applications of a new idea; and therefore never acquire deep knowledge or understanding.

In fact, social media may inhibit or distract from real discussions about the core concepts.

Neuroplasticity

Deep Knowledge

Having an expert mentor to guide you through a field of study is essential.

Deep knowledge and understanding in any subject requires focused time and energy:

1. to establish links to previous knowledge
2. to explain, comprehend, and reinforce concepts
3. to examine conceptual application in familiar and unfamiliar settings

The expert mentor can guide students through the concepts, and peers may contribute additional linking material, but if the social media conversation does not contribute to the depth of knowledge, it might distract and/or detract from the train of thought, drawing focus away from the subject, and disengaging the neural pathways that are required for deep knowledge.

Summary

I believe the best learning environment is with an expert mentor (and maybe some curious peers). Students can interact in real-time, grow as people, and grow in knowledge and understanding, without the filter and delay of intermediary technology. Virtual classrooms and social media are great substitutes if you can't engage in real-world activities due to distance or other circumstances; but they are only substitutes.

Online learning, virtual classrooms, and social media might be best-effort pedagogy, but not best-practice pedagogy. There's nothing like seeing the band perform live.