Value of Predictions

I've been reading a few posts on 2008 predictions. Stephen Downes wrote a post that critiqued and graded several of the 2007 predictions. It was an interesting read, but I found myself agreeing with some of the concerns Karl Kapp raised about the whole grading activity...especially the portion of grading your own prediction. Stephen gave himself an A-; however, his "prediction" on the trend of video continuing in popularity is very much of the "more of the same" prediction that he criticizes other people for. Also, since the personal learning environment didn't happen (which he said it would) and paid content and software remains strong (which he said it wouldn't), it begs the question of why the A-. Yes...the Wii may have been the greatest tech story of the year, but this hardly had a earth moving shift on the learning market.

All that being said, Stephen does bring up good points on what makes a good prediction. That is, it should actually happen, and it should be precise and novel. This helped me revise my original prediction, but in the end, I guess I don't get that wrapped up about predictions in general. Someone that guessed it correctly this year could fail miserably next year. I think the real value is seeing what different people from different expertise view as up-and-coming areas in the learning field because it expands your horizon.

What I actually appreciated most about Stephen's post was his summary of what happened in the learning field in 2007 (which probably wasn't his original intention). Because there were such a wide range of predictions, it was a nice little recap of the field in 2007.