Serendipity35

Australia implemented a world-first nationwide ban on social media access for children under 16, effective December 10, 2025. The law, passed in November 2024 under the Online Safety Amendment (Social Media Minimum Age) Bill, requires major platforms to take "reasonable steps" to prevent users under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts. This includes age verification methods like behavioral inference (analyzing online activity), facial age estimation (e.g., via selfies), ID uploads, or linking bank details.

Millions of accounts are expected to be affected as companies, such as TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, Snapchat, YouTube, and X, face fines of up to $33M for serious or repeated noncompliance. The law places responsibility on companies rather than families, and platforms must demonstrate that they have taken “reasonable steps,” such as implementing age checks and removing suspected underage accounts.

The measure is cast as a child-protection and mental health safeguard, citing research showing 96% of 10- to 15-year-olds use social media, with many encountering harmful content, grooming, or cyberbullying. Critics say the law is difficult to enforce. It may even push teens onto harder-to-monitor platforms. Another criticism is that it may pose privacy risks.

Read the research from Australia used to create this ban
https://www.esafety.gov.au/research/the-online-experiences-of-children-in-australia/report-digital-use-and-risk-among-children-aged-10-to-15

Other countries have taken similar steps, such as strict youth modes or time limits.
https://studyinternational.com/news/countries-social-media-ban-children/

There was an unexpected shift to virtual learning triggered by the global pandemic. It's not that virtual hadn't already existed for decades in various formats.
The global shift to virtual education has highlighted the crucial need for effective instructional design, particularly in enhancing student engagement. Traditional long lectures struggle to maintain attention in the digital environment, making the strategic adoption of microlearning important for success.

Microlearning delivers content in small, focused segments, which are far more effective for learners to absorb and retain information. This approach consists of “bite-sized” educational chunks, typically lasting only a few minutes. By delivering short, structured, and fine-grained activities, microlearning aligns with how working memory functions, fitting within the constraints of human cognitive capacity. This technique significantly enhances engagement and reduces cognitive overload, helping to move information from short-term to long-term memory more effectively than traditional, lengthy content.

A major advantage of microlearning is its ability to address the forgetting curve . The forgetting curve demonstrates how humans naturally lose a substantial amount of newly learned information over time unless it's reinforced. Microlearning counteracts this decline through spaced repetition techniques. This involves recalling the same material multiple times over a period, which successfully solidifies the information in long-term memory with each recall.

Furthermore, microlearning enhances online student engagement by allowing students to complete lessons according to their own schedule, rather than a fixed external one. This flexibility enables students to be entirely focused and more engaged in the learning process. Since online learning often happens outside the classroom, microlearning allows for a greater potential for application by integrating learning with real-life experience. Instructors can seamlessly integrate microlearning into online education using various digital tools to incorporate interactive quizzes, short videos, or specific micro lessons that run parallel to the main course, ensuring a more dynamic and interactive experience.

 

A bit of a promo, but still a useful overview of good structures for short-form learning and information about using YouTube, Descript, Kajabi, TalentCards, LearnWorlds, TalentLMS, et al as microlearning platforms.

I found a reference this past week to the original Apple II AppleWorks and it got me thinking about how amazing the program was for its time. The software was light and efficient, and it ran on limited hardware.

The "light architecture" of AppleWorks (developed by Rupert Lissner and released in 1984 for the Apple II) was impressive for several reasons. It was an Integrated Suite that combined a word processor, database, and spreadsheet into a single application. On the 8-bit Apple II's limited resources (often starting with just 128K RAM), this level of seamless integration was no less than revolutionary. You could easily share data (via a "clipboard") between the modules.

AppleWorks was written almost entirely in assembly language for the 6502 processor. This gave it incredible speed and efficiency, allowing it to perform complex tasks much faster than programs written in higher-level languages like Pascal.

Its memory management system was highly flexible and sophisticated, allowing it to utilize not just the 128K of the Apple IIe/IIc but also various third-party memory cards. It effectively made up to two megabytes of memory appear as one contiguous space on an 8-bit machine, which was a remarkable technical feat.

It became the "killer application" that extended the life of the Apple II platform well into the late 80s and early 90s. That is when I was using it in my middle school classroom, and as the computer coordinator in my building, I worked with every teacher because they all had at least one Apple IIe in their room.

Although AppleWorks was thought of as something teachers would use most of the time, the user experience was very good, and students would use at least the word processing portion. All three modules shared a consistent, menu-bar-driven user interface with simple text-based controls (often utilizing the Apple II's "MouseText" characters for visual elements like folders and separators). This was highly intuitive and much easier to learn than many contemporary command-line programs. The design prioritized ease of use, making personal computing accessible to a much broader audience, especially in homes and schools.

AppleWorks, compared to other productivity suites of the time, such as Microsoft Works or the original Mac software, demonstrates a fundamental shift in design philosophy that prioritized integration and efficiency over raw power. Earlier Apple II programs were often monolithic (like stand-alone VisiCalc for spreadsheets) or required users to switch between separate, disparate programs with different interfaces to move data. This efficiency was its competitive edge, keeping the Apple II relevant years after more powerful Macs and PCs emerged.

In the AppleWorks vs. Microsoft Works (for Mac/PC) battle (Works eventually became Apple's main competitor in the integrated suite market) Apple demonstrated a different design approach. But Apple was constrained by the 8-bit Apple II. Microsoft Works and later versions of AppleWorks/ClarisWorks (for Mac and Windows) were developed for 16-bit and 32-bit systems (Macintosh, Windows PC), and these platforms had more abundant memory, faster processors, and graphical user interfaces (GUIs).

The last time I sat down at an Apple IIe was at a tech conference, it was in a "museum "display. As crude as it might seem to users almost 50 years later, I still marveled at what it could do. I was one of those people who found so many later programs, such as Microsoft Office, bloated memory hogs with more horsepower and features than most users would ever need.

Despite the technical differences, both AppleWorks and Microsoft Works shared the goal to provide an all-in-one, cost-effective, and easy-to-use suite for casual users, students, and small businesses who didn't need the complexity or expense of full-blown professional packages like Microsoft Office or Lotus Symphony. The key difference was that AppleWorks achieved this integration on an extremely limited architecture, which is why its design is often cited as a more remarkable technical feat.