Summary

• Objects (1 modified, 1 added, 0 removed)
  • Caselist.RoundClass[54]
  • Caselist.CitesClass[63]

Details

Caselist.RoundClass[54]

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,1 +1,1 @@
1		-2017-02-04 19:03:49.961
	1	+2017-02-04 19:03:49.0

Caselist.CitesClass[63]

Cites

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,14 @@
	1	+1st- dromology defined
	2	+Wood Considered - the Faculty of Education blog at Canterbury Christ Church University Should education policy have a speed limit? Slowing down the process of change by Phil Wood on Thursday, 11 April 2013 in Education Policy Phil Wood is a lecturer in education at the University of Leicester. His research interests focus on understanding and developing learning and teaching through participatory research. In this piece he considers the extent to which the pace of change is damaging education. http://www.consider-ed.org.uk/should-education-policy-have-a-speed-limit/
	3	+Over the past 15 years policy development in English education has seen an ever more acute acceleration. This acceleration was first identifiable under New Labour and ‘deliverology’ which demanded ever faster increases in examination outcomes. Driven by a need for higher and ever more improbable targets, faster and more complex policy initiatives were developed, self-evaluation forms, personalised learning, learning styles, curriculum innovation, and diplomas. Since the Coalition government has taken power, this need for accelerated policy development has continued. Much of the educational landscape is seeing radical change, sometimes untried and untested, sometimes not even seeing initial implementation before being abandoned or changed. Paul Virilio, urbanist and cultural theorist, defines social and political acceleration, particularly relating to technology, as ‘dromology’, the compression of time as a consequence of geopolitics, technology and the media leading to an emerging process of velocity and acceleration. Rather than leading to better, more efficient social systems acceleration can lead to detrimental impacts.
	4	+2nd- the political- Status qou politics construct *truth* through dromology- a prerequisite to engage in ethics, the political or debate itself is to deconstruct dromology
	5	+Wood Considered - the Faculty of Education blog at Canterbury Christ Church University Should education policy have a speed limit? Slowing down the process of change by Phil Wood on Thursday, 11 April 2013 in Education Policy Phil Wood is a lecturer in education at the University of Leicester. His research interests focus on understanding and developing learning and teaching through participatory research. In this piece he considers the extent to which the pace of change is damaging education. http://www.consider-ed.org.uk/should-education-policy-have-a-speed-limit/
	6	+ Neoliberal policies have brought greater volumes of data and information often identified as some form of analytic ‘truth’. Virilio, however, sees greater information and data as a recipe for disinformation and confusion. Politicians are able to hide, embed and control, ‘speed is power itself’ (Virilio, 1999, 15). As policy generation accelerates, those outside of government are in a constant state of reaction attempting to understand and analyse new sets of ideas as the next policy is already being announced. By instigating reform at a very fast pace, a Secretary of State essentially creates a ‘power-grab’, the sheer velocity and acceleration of change eroding debate, ensuring less resistance and short-circuiting the democratic process. In addition, the media become the dromological troops of politicians (Eriksen, 2001). Eriksen (see Levy’s associated lecture) focuses on the dromological impact of modern society, arguing that ‘fast’ time increasingly drives out ‘slow’ time. Slow time is important as it allows for deliberation, thought, debate, and considered ways of working which are important in all facets of the educative process. But society and the commercial world eradicates slow time; fast time is becoming dominant in society at large, and in education. Eriksen identifies six problems with this change: speed is an addictive drug speed leads to simplification speed creates an assembly line (Taylorist) effect speed leads to a loss of precision speed demands space (it fills gaps in the lives of others, just consider your e-mail in box!) speed is contagious, spreading and killing off slow
	7	+
	8	+Thus the role of the ballot is to reject systems of dromology- key to better education
	9	+Wood Considered - the Faculty of Education blog at Canterbury Christ Church University Should education policy have a speed limit? Slowing down the process of change by Phil Wood on Thursday, 11 April 2013 in Education Policy Phil Wood is a lecturer in education at the University of Leicester. His research interests focus on understanding and developing learning and teaching through participatory research. In this piece he considers the extent to which the pace of change is damaging education. http://www.consider-ed.org.uk/should-education-policy-have-a-speed-limit/
	10	+time In education, these effects are all too obvious. Recourse to ever more complex data systems allows rapid generation of targets and tracking sheets which become regarded as ‘truth’. Learning must be ‘measured’ in every lesson, and progress assessed- sometimes not even every 50 minutes, but every 15! The illusion persists that we can ‘know’ the extent of the learning of every child at the end of every lesson. As a result, the desired speed for learning and progress has indeed demanded the space of professional dialogue and reflection. Data systems are ‘fast’ processes – they give the illusion of progress, of learning – and so the acceleration of education has in part gone hand in hand with ever greater reliance on numeric data, both internal and external (league tables for example). The dromological impact of social and political change might lead us to believe that we need to make faster, better decisions and changes. The mantra of fast time leads to perpetual revolution and a chimera of perfection constantly found just ahead of us. But I argue that this is (self-) destructive. Kahneman (2011) highlights that acceleration in decision-making and change is based on gut reactions, emotions and biased perceptions. Decisions become based on associating new information with old rather than synthesising information to bring new insights. The constant speeding up of reform, demands for progress and an increasing focus on the short-term have served to blunt critical capacities, to surrender professional and community debate to ever more rapid production and enslavement to numeric data. This is what Hargreaves and Fullan (2012) describe as the ‘business capital’ model of education. An alternative view of the process of education, both in school and at policy level is the notion of ‘professional capital’ again outlined by Hargreaves and Fullan. This approach to education is based on seeing teachers as valued professionals who require time and resources to develop and perfect their professional skills and thinking. They argue that this is best achieved in groups, through collaborative endeavour. However, this is not to be a top-down model driven by senior leaders, fulfilling their own agendas or those of government, but driven by teacher groups who are given the space to exercise their own professional judgement – in short it is a dialogic approach. Data is still important, but it acts as the starting point for discussion and development, not as a numeric yoke under which teachers are expected to toil. A dialogic approach may be criticised as ‘soft’, ‘cosy’, a system where individuals can hide and be left to do as they wish. Nothing could be further from the truth; for example, the Finns understood in the 1980s that they needed to improve their education system but it was only thirty years later that they felt in any definable way they had achieved what they set out to do. No quick fixes, no acceleration in policy change, but a reasoned, debated and consensus driven approach, where honest dialogue about educational processes, theory and practice built strong foundations to aid in the emergence of the system as it stands today. Hardly a rulebook for standing still, more one of considered and transformatory change. Education in England has been under an increasing dromological pressure over the past 15 to 20 years, with more and more policy used as a lever to bring faster and faster change. However, how far has this brought us? Gains in academic achievement are questioned by many; ever greater incursion of private finance into education has started to break the system apart, both organisationally and increasingly professionally and politically. We are accelerating into an uncertain future, with little reasoned debate or consensus building. Dialogue may not feed an event hungry news-media, it may not promise increased examination outcomes in a matter of weeks. However, if developed professionally, if used to engage with local communities, and used to forge strong foundations for sustained development and professional capital, surely dialogue is a better basis for our country’s education system than that of dromology?
	11	+
	12	+And, the squo erases subjectivity through the imperial gaze-the neg is needed to a. restore subjectivity b. eliminate unjust domination- precondition to any framework. Thus, the alterative is to reject the subjectivity of the AC
	13	+Harris 6 — Chad Vincent Harris, Lecturer at the University of California-San Diego and Adjunct Professor in the School of Journalism and Media Studies at San Diego State University, holds a Ph.D. in Communication from the University of California-San Diego, 2006 (“The Omniscient Eye: Satellite Imagery, ‘Battlespace Awareness,’ and the Structures of the Imperial Gaze,” Surveillance and Society, Volume 4, Issue 1/2, Available Online at http://library.queensu.ca/ojs/index.php/surveillance-and-society/article/viewFile/3457/3420, Accessed 10-05-2011, p. 101-103)
	14	+located at the center of military command structures, where surveillance, control, and organized state violence come together in a set of abstracted and routine social and technical practices. It is where surveillance is most directly attached to concrete purposive action: the precise application of force and violence for organized warfare, perhaps the ultimate act of purposive agency. In this article, I explore, in close detail and with some deep description, a specific historical instance of the use of aerial and satellite imagery in a military C4I (command, control, computers, communications, and intelligence) system during combat operations. The focus on a warfare scenario provides an extreme example of what is at stake with systems of overhead surveillance that are deployed in the larger society, systems seemingly as mundane as commercial observation satellites or Google Earth. Ultimately what is at stake is the creation of a specific kind of subjectivity, an attempt to create an omniscient or imperial gaze by connecting what Sturken and Cartwright (2001) call “practices of looking” directly to the technologies and practices of state administrative control. Large satellite imagery and intelligence architectures are what Donald MacKenzie calls “technologies of power” (MacKenzie, 1990: 28, 34-36), deployed by nation states for the administrative control of space and territory. In warfare these systems are deployed for the precise application of force and violence. Large intelligence and weapons systems in the US military and their interoperation as system architectures provide a rich context for exploring how satellite imagery surveillance and reconnaissance systems not only detect objects and people, but also produce both objects on the ground and surveillant subjects. These ideas may have relevance to other civilian surveillance systems like closed circuit television (CCTV) systems, police command and control centers, and publicly-available satellite imagery databases like Google EarthÔ.2 They produce objectivity, a techno-discursive distance between the observer and the observed, and a particular kind of modern surveillant subject. This subjectivity is structured by an omniscient, imperial gaze, a particular kind of subjectivity that signifies dominance over what is being observed. In order to illustrate this process, I will discuss how violence can be rendered everyday, bureaucratic, and even mundane by the technologies and practices of imagery production. Technologically, distance is produced by layers of systems that combine surveillance with weapons control, referred to in the US military as “C4I” systems that combine the practices and technologies of “Command, Control, Communications, Computers, and Intelligence.” The targeting cycle in Operation Instant Thunder was a feedback system that transformed data into targets and then back into data, a center through which information and commands generated by the entire U.S. war effort had to pass through on their way towards the destruction of these targets. The personnel who ran this center were never actually required to be in direct proximity to the carnage of combat, but they were nevertheless central to its organization. It is where extreme forms of violence and normal bureaucratic practices are co-extensive, because we must step back from this series of mundane translations (images into data, data and images into targets, targets turned back into data, and thus back again to images), in order to see the destruction that these activities were committing. It is this distance that creates an isolated and dominant subjectivity: isolated from the violence on the ground, but interpellated in a dominant imperial gaze.

EntryDate

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+2017-02-04 19:03:52.668

Judge

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Maddie Stevens

Opponent

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Dullus

ParentRound

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+54

Round

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+5

Team

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+North Crowley Reed Neg

Title

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+1- Virillio K

Tournament

...	...	@@ -1,0 +1,1 @@
	1	+Collyville Heritage