Do you ever feel that we're regressing instead of progressing in the move for more open discussion of scholarly ideas? As if the obscenely long journal review process wasn't bad enough ...
My former school, BYU, I guess is in the middle of some controversy because a physics professor is doing research claiming that the WTC towers fell because of controlled demolition and not from the planes. This is, of course, not a belief shared by many, and some are very upset about his allegations. But here's the part of it that irks me: The student newspaper reported that a BYU PR spokesperson said, "My advice to him, as I would tell any professor, was to not discuss a paper until it was published."
What!?! Why would you not discuss your work just because some random profs haven't yet blind-reviewed it? I would think you should encourage professors and scholars to talk about their research as often as they can, believing that exchanging ideas will help them refine and improve their papers for review. The process shouldn't be "wait, publish, then discuss" but "discuss while writing, discuss after writing, and more discussion after publication." Wouldn't that improve our ideas as well as circulate them more quickly around the world?
I know the PR spokesperson is trying to protect the university and its professors from half-baked research that hasn't passed peer-reviewed muster, but I think we shouldn't be afraid to stand by our ideas and discuss them--whether they've been peer reviewed yet or not. I want to be clear that I am not criticizing this spokesperson, because I've heard her speak before and she seems like a wonderful person. I'm sure she's following protocol, and it's the protocol I take issue with.
But that's just my opinion, and I haven't published it. Maybe I shouldn't be discussing this yet!
Monday, December 05, 2005
Wednesday, November 30, 2005
Fuel alternatives?
More reports today about scientists' efforts to create fuel from chicken fat:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051130/ap_on_sc/chicken_fat_fuel
Don't they get it? They're barking up the wrong tree! What we need is an invention to convert HUMAN fat into fuel. Then we wouldn't have to rely on foreign fuel imports at all! :-)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051130/ap_on_sc/chicken_fat_fuel
Don't they get it? They're barking up the wrong tree! What we need is an invention to convert HUMAN fat into fuel. Then we wouldn't have to rely on foreign fuel imports at all! :-)
Saturday, November 19, 2005
So what is school really about? (football)
It's so encouraging to know what really drives our systems of higher education! This morning I got up bright and early to try and get some extra work done at school, and once I arrived on campus realized it was GAMEDAY. (If you don't read this blog often, I should mention I'm a new student at the University of Georgia, where they take their football, seriously).
So I did, miraculously, find some parking open near my building in between the tailgaters already set up for the game, but can I park on campus? No! I would need an athletic parking permit, priced at several hundred dollars, or pay a hefty fine. What if I wanted to just park there for a few hours? $20 for a single stall in the parking terrace.
But wait! Isn't this an institution of higher learning, not higher football playing? Isn't the point of these buildings existing so I can study and develop my intellect? Shouldn't a student trying to find a quiet cubicle to work take priority?
You would think so.
And Georgia officials wonder why their school does so poorly in academics and ranks high in partying. Is it any wonder?
(BTW, I am typing this post at home, where I will attempt to work with toddlers in the background. I love sports--and I love football--but I love education more, and it's sad to see which activity rules the roost at my new school.)
So I did, miraculously, find some parking open near my building in between the tailgaters already set up for the game, but can I park on campus? No! I would need an athletic parking permit, priced at several hundred dollars, or pay a hefty fine. What if I wanted to just park there for a few hours? $20 for a single stall in the parking terrace.
But wait! Isn't this an institution of higher learning, not higher football playing? Isn't the point of these buildings existing so I can study and develop my intellect? Shouldn't a student trying to find a quiet cubicle to work take priority?
You would think so.
And Georgia officials wonder why their school does so poorly in academics and ranks high in partying. Is it any wonder?
(BTW, I am typing this post at home, where I will attempt to work with toddlers in the background. I love sports--and I love football--but I love education more, and it's sad to see which activity rules the roost at my new school.)
Thursday, November 17, 2005
Call for ideas: Systemic change and distance learning
I'm co-authoring a very short blurb for TechTrends on the possible impact systemic change theories could have on distance learning, or vice versa. Any ideas out there about this? I'd love to hear them as we're in the thinking stage of this right now.
Here are some thoughts I've had ...
Here are some thoughts I've had ...
- The impact of alternative degree-granting DL
institutions on change in higher education (and K-12
for that matter). It seems that whereas higher ed's
been resistance to change, the emergence of
competition from these alternative avenues for getting
a degree is forcing higher ed, to some degree, to
change. Maybe we could point this out, and talk about
how systemic change thinking is important in higher ed
because we can either thoughtfully design how we will
change or else change only as a necessary reaction to
the competition in order to stay marketable.
- It seems that DL is pushing change in many ways
besides just the fact that more courses are now
offered online. Because of the nature of DL learning,
it seems instruction is moving towards more
self-regulation,and project/problem-based activities,
etc. So DL can be a powerful tool for effectuating
change in teaching pedagogy and practice -- and do far
more than simply offering "anytime/anyplace learning"
which is what people think the main advantage of DL
is.
- DL is changing the hierarchical structure of
instruction as well, flattening it out so that more
people have access to learning opportunities
regardless of their situation. This is especially true
in developing countries, I think, with many of the
initiatives to bring open learning there.
- There are many ways that DL is changing the
educational system besides just how people are taught.
For example, I have been reading an Educause report
about how the emergence of DL is forcing us to rethink
things like accreditation (how do you accreditate
completely online programs where you can't visit the
campus and "see it for yourself?), funding (should fed
government have different process for awarding
financial aid for DL courses?), and quality control
(what is "good" DL? How do we protect students from
I'm also wondering how to talk about systemic change and DL when DL is very unsystematic. Can it still contribute to systemic change in education?
wasting money on DL degrees that may not help them?
Thursday, November 10, 2005
Some things shouldn't be done! (Star Wars musical)
Well, I haven't had the most productive day today, but it's comforting that whatever I've done will hopefully be more useful than this!
"The MIT Musical Theatre Group will be staging a musical version of the Star Wars Trilogy (Eps. IV through VI). There will be tap-dancing stormtroopers, singing Ewoks, etc."
"The MIT Musical Theatre Group will be staging a musical version of the Star Wars Trilogy (Eps. IV through VI). There will be tap-dancing stormtroopers, singing Ewoks, etc."
Wednesday, November 09, 2005
Video blogging is upon us!
Here's a fun video blog leading the way-- a group of students in New Jersey.
http://www.starw.org/acrc/
http://www.starw.org/acrc/
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
Google's hypocrisy?
A friend of mine, Rich Culatta, just vented his frustrations over Google:
With Rich, I share more than the same first and middle names--I also share this growing annoyance with Google's product limitations! For a corporation that claims to value open/free access to products, information, etc. with its Google Print and other initiatives, why do they close the doors to a small, but significant share of the market when they don't port their products to Macintosh? Why shouldn't Picasa run on all platforms? Why would you claim Google Talk allows you to talk to anyone, "anywhere in the world" when it doesn't run on Mac? I know you can run Google Talk with the help of other clients, but that just seems silly--why not just use these other clients then?
And for goodness sake, why do you still need an invitation to sign up for Gmail? This closed-door approach is really annoying, and if Google's interfaces weren't so much more usable than any of their competitors, I'd be tempted to switch.
A year ago I thought Google was the answer to all of the world’s problems, today I’m changing my mind. I have two major frustrations with Google. The first is that they do not release any of their products for Mac users. I would pay to have a copy of Picasa for Mac if they would just port it over. Perhaps they think that because Mac users have iPhoto they don’t need Picasa (probably because they’ve never actually tried using iPhoto). Anyway, there is no similar excuse for not releasing Google Earth and Talk for Macintosh.
With Rich, I share more than the same first and middle names--I also share this growing annoyance with Google's product limitations! For a corporation that claims to value open/free access to products, information, etc. with its Google Print and other initiatives, why do they close the doors to a small, but significant share of the market when they don't port their products to Macintosh? Why shouldn't Picasa run on all platforms? Why would you claim Google Talk allows you to talk to anyone, "anywhere in the world" when it doesn't run on Mac? I know you can run Google Talk with the help of other clients, but that just seems silly--why not just use these other clients then?
And for goodness sake, why do you still need an invitation to sign up for Gmail? This closed-door approach is really annoying, and if Google's interfaces weren't so much more usable than any of their competitors, I'd be tempted to switch.
Thursday, October 20, 2005
Reflecting on impending doom! :-)
One of the exciting :-) aspects of AECT this year is the impending arrival of Hurricane Wilma this weekend. Some say Saturday, some say Monday. Some say complete destruction of Florida, some say only light rain.
Who do we believe?
In my carpool, we're taking day by day. we're not leaving today, and whether we leave tomorrow may depend on tonight's nightly news. We definitely do not want to pull a Houston and get stuck on the freeway trying to escape.
I've been thinking the last couple of days about the irony of what my religion (LDS - Mormon) teaches us about emergency preparedness and the reality of the situation I am in. As Mormons, we're instructed to be ready to support ourselves and our families in any kind of emergency. We are encouraged to stockpile a year's supply of food in our homes, several weeks' worth of water, and well-equiped 72-hour kits for immediate evacuations.
I have my 72-hour kit. And some stockpiled food. And where is it? At home in Georgia. And where am I? In Orlando, in the path of the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the Atlantic, without anything more than a banana in my hotel room to preserve in case of food shortage.
That's ironic ... and probably foolish on my part. But my presentations aren't until Friday and Saturday, so I'm turn between whether to stay or leave! Plus, who knows how dangerous this situation will turn out to really be?
Who do we believe?
In my carpool, we're taking day by day. we're not leaving today, and whether we leave tomorrow may depend on tonight's nightly news. We definitely do not want to pull a Houston and get stuck on the freeway trying to escape.
I've been thinking the last couple of days about the irony of what my religion (LDS - Mormon) teaches us about emergency preparedness and the reality of the situation I am in. As Mormons, we're instructed to be ready to support ourselves and our families in any kind of emergency. We are encouraged to stockpile a year's supply of food in our homes, several weeks' worth of water, and well-equiped 72-hour kits for immediate evacuations.
I have my 72-hour kit. And some stockpiled food. And where is it? At home in Georgia. And where am I? In Orlando, in the path of the strongest hurricane ever recorded in the Atlantic, without anything more than a banana in my hotel room to preserve in case of food shortage.
That's ironic ... and probably foolish on my part. But my presentations aren't until Friday and Saturday, so I'm turn between whether to stay or leave! Plus, who knows how dangerous this situation will turn out to really be?
AECT conference in Orlando
I'm here in Orlando at the Association for Educational Communications Technology conference. For some reason (perhaps the fact that this is a conference on Ed technology?) I thought there would be wireless. In fact, wireless is spotty, so my blogging this week may be spotty.
And then when I get home, I won't remember anything that was said, so I won't have anything to post about! Oye!
In reality, my biggest barrier this week might be that I'm giving too many presentations (3). Two of these are also collaborative efforts with student researchers from other universities that I don't see very often, so (you guessed it) it was hard to pull our presentation together until we were physically together this week.
There's something there to be learned about the realities of the difficulties in distance collaboration. I always think with all of the powerful CSCL tools we have available to use that distance collaboration will be a snap, and it's always more challenging than expected.
Anyway, so my posting will be spotty ... but I've hopefully learned my lesson and will take on less challenging tasks for next year!
And then when I get home, I won't remember anything that was said, so I won't have anything to post about! Oye!
In reality, my biggest barrier this week might be that I'm giving too many presentations (3). Two of these are also collaborative efforts with student researchers from other universities that I don't see very often, so (you guessed it) it was hard to pull our presentation together until we were physically together this week.
There's something there to be learned about the realities of the difficulties in distance collaboration. I always think with all of the powerful CSCL tools we have available to use that distance collaboration will be a snap, and it's always more challenging than expected.
Anyway, so my posting will be spotty ... but I've hopefully learned my lesson and will take on less challenging tasks for next year!
Wednesday, October 12, 2005
Wikipedia and credibility of sources
Just writing the title to this post almost made me gag--it seems we have too much discussion in the blogosphere already about Wikipedia and whether it is or isn't a credible resource.
But here's some more thought to add to the conversation.
I found it interesting this past week or two that there's been a heated debate on the EdTech listserv about this issue. This listserv is mostly read by K-12 teachers and technology coordinators, so there is a good mix of conservative and skeptical folks when it comes to new technology ideas, as well as the "jump on the technology bandwagon" folks. I won't go into what both parties argued in the debate because, really, it's the same argument that goes round and round on the internet about Wikipedia.
There were many in this debate who argued that whether you use or don't use Wikipedia as a resource, that you should definitely always be critical of all your sources and be sure you know where you get your information and if the source of the information is credible. In other words, we should be critical readers.
I definitely buy into that. I think the most important thing teachers can do nowadays is teach HOW to read, not WHAT to read, but that's another post for another dayl.
The funny thing about the debate on this listserv is that immediately after it finished, someone asked for a reference for the quote, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Of course, about a dozen people offered that this was a quote by Thomas J. Watson, IBM founder, in 1943.
What was funny, however, is nobody cited where they got this citation. If they did, they usually cited websites on technology history or sites that are a collection of funny (but who knows if they really said it) technology quotes. The most credible citation was one fellow who cited Wikipedia! The next best credible citation was from a secondary source--a Microsoft Research presentation by Gordon Wood at ACM 1997. Even more ironic, Wikipedia, the supposedly "unreliable resource", was the only cited reference to raise the warning voice that "there is no evidence he (Watson) ever made it (this quote)."
I brought this to the attention of the listserv, by saying that we were being hypocritical proclaiming how important it is to be critical of our resources when everybody agreed Watson said this quote, even though nobody could prove it. How critical were we, really, then? How thoughtful about the credibility of what we were quoting and saying? Not very much.
My point is that we shouldn't criticize people for using Wikipedia, and other like sources, if we are not critical and careful readers ourselves in the sources we use to get our information. Also, I agree with many of the posts in the listserv that argued that it is not about Wikipedia OR Encyclopedia Britannica, but rather an argument of WHEN Wikipedia and WHEN Encyclopedia Britannica. Both have different purposes, different kinds of claims to credibility, and different educational uses. So use both.
And above all, teach the kids that what matters is HOW they read and think, not WHAT they read.
But here's some more thought to add to the conversation.
I found it interesting this past week or two that there's been a heated debate on the EdTech listserv about this issue. This listserv is mostly read by K-12 teachers and technology coordinators, so there is a good mix of conservative and skeptical folks when it comes to new technology ideas, as well as the "jump on the technology bandwagon" folks. I won't go into what both parties argued in the debate because, really, it's the same argument that goes round and round on the internet about Wikipedia.
There were many in this debate who argued that whether you use or don't use Wikipedia as a resource, that you should definitely always be critical of all your sources and be sure you know where you get your information and if the source of the information is credible. In other words, we should be critical readers.
I definitely buy into that. I think the most important thing teachers can do nowadays is teach HOW to read, not WHAT to read, but that's another post for another dayl.
The funny thing about the debate on this listserv is that immediately after it finished, someone asked for a reference for the quote, "I think there is a world market for maybe five computers." Of course, about a dozen people offered that this was a quote by Thomas J. Watson, IBM founder, in 1943.
What was funny, however, is nobody cited where they got this citation. If they did, they usually cited websites on technology history or sites that are a collection of funny (but who knows if they really said it) technology quotes. The most credible citation was one fellow who cited Wikipedia! The next best credible citation was from a secondary source--a Microsoft Research presentation by Gordon Wood at ACM 1997. Even more ironic, Wikipedia, the supposedly "unreliable resource", was the only cited reference to raise the warning voice that "there is no evidence he (Watson) ever made it (this quote)."
I brought this to the attention of the listserv, by saying that we were being hypocritical proclaiming how important it is to be critical of our resources when everybody agreed Watson said this quote, even though nobody could prove it. How critical were we, really, then? How thoughtful about the credibility of what we were quoting and saying? Not very much.
My point is that we shouldn't criticize people for using Wikipedia, and other like sources, if we are not critical and careful readers ourselves in the sources we use to get our information. Also, I agree with many of the posts in the listserv that argued that it is not about Wikipedia OR Encyclopedia Britannica, but rather an argument of WHEN Wikipedia and WHEN Encyclopedia Britannica. Both have different purposes, different kinds of claims to credibility, and different educational uses. So use both.
And above all, teach the kids that what matters is HOW they read and think, not WHAT they read.
Thursday, October 06, 2005
NVue and other Mac software
Everyone who know me, knows I love Mac. When we talk about my reasons why, they often counter with, "Yeah, but, you can't get very much software for a Mac."
That may have been true once, but not anymore.
Richard Miller on theBYU Mac User Group listserv I belong to recently posted three great sites for finding free Mac software:
That may have been true once, but not anymore.
Richard Miller on theBYU Mac User Group listserv I belong to recently posted three great sites for finding free Mac software:
http://www.freemacware.comI looked around on freewacware.com and found out about NVue--a dreamweaver/frontpage competitor that is open-source and free. And it runs on a Mac. I'm downloading it right now and can't wait to try it out!
> http://www.coolosxapps.net/
> http://www.macworld.com/weblogs/macgems/
Tuesday, October 04, 2005
One nice thing about leaving Utah
This if to anyone reading this blog from Utah, from which I recently moved to Georgia. I was reflecting on something really random this morning: I'm sure glad I don't have to hear CEO Dell Schanze's (of Totally Awesome Computers) annoying screech on the radio every time I get in the car about how his computers are "tooootally awesome!"
That is an unexplicable new luxury of having left the state!
That is an unexplicable new luxury of having left the state!
Monday, October 03, 2005
Why we shout at each other
Ironic twist of life: Today's Calvin and Hobbes' reprint on ucomics.com is a nice companion to the inevitable clash in America over the new Bush nomination to the Supreme Court. In this strip, Calvin tells Hobbes that we all argue and shout at each other because it keeps the monotony away.
Can't we all just get along? Or agree to disagree? :-)
Can't we all just get along? Or agree to disagree? :-)
The Web Wars: Yahoo and Google
As a consumer, I love it when two companies work their tails off to beat each other--it just means better tools for me to use! But I think the battle between Yahoo and Google is starting to get old. Turns out Yahoo now wants to do an online digital library too, just like Google. Do we really need two online digital libraries of everything ever printed? No, we don't. One would be nice, and I've always been supportive of Google's idea. Two will just be silly.
Yahoo, Inc.: Get your own innovation and do something unique. You don't have to be Google to beat Google.
Yahoo, Inc.: Get your own innovation and do something unique. You don't have to be Google to beat Google.
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
Blog trauma--help!
Okay, let's flex the power of the supportive blogosphere and see if we can help Rick out. I'm having a couple of problems, and I don't know how to fix them:
1. On this blog, you can't have trackbacks naturally through blogger, so I installed a plugin through HaloScan to allow readers to trackback to me. However, I just realized today that it doesn't email me when people leave comments, like Blogger used to. I don't ever actually read my own blog, so I never know if I have comments unless they are emailed to me. (And all this time I thought nobody was commenting on this blog, when, in fact, there have been a few kind posts left and I haven't known about them).
So how do I get HaloScan to email me when people post? Or is there a better way to get trackbacks, and emails of postings, through Blogger?
2. The bigger issue is trying to get my edublogs blog going, because eventually I want to leave my blogger past behind and migrate to edublogs. I already have the domain at rickwest.edublogs.org, but I'm wanting this new site to be able to function as more than my blog, but also as my online portfolio for first year review here at UGA, etc. (that's the whole point for using WP instead of blogger: having more flexibility).
Everything was fine, but suddently the rich text editor no longer shows up when I log into my edublogs blog! I know html, but what's happening is all the stuff I've written are jumbled into one big mess within the editing window, so knowing html doesn't help. I need the rich text editor back!
Otherwise, I may have to abandon this edublogs experiment and stick with my blogger blog :-(
Anyone have any ideas to help out? (and I WILL read the comments to this post! :-)
1. On this blog, you can't have trackbacks naturally through blogger, so I installed a plugin through HaloScan to allow readers to trackback to me. However, I just realized today that it doesn't email me when people leave comments, like Blogger used to. I don't ever actually read my own blog, so I never know if I have comments unless they are emailed to me. (And all this time I thought nobody was commenting on this blog, when, in fact, there have been a few kind posts left and I haven't known about them).
So how do I get HaloScan to email me when people post? Or is there a better way to get trackbacks, and emails of postings, through Blogger?
2. The bigger issue is trying to get my edublogs blog going, because eventually I want to leave my blogger past behind and migrate to edublogs. I already have the domain at rickwest.edublogs.org, but I'm wanting this new site to be able to function as more than my blog, but also as my online portfolio for first year review here at UGA, etc. (that's the whole point for using WP instead of blogger: having more flexibility).
Everything was fine, but suddently the rich text editor no longer shows up when I log into my edublogs blog! I know html, but what's happening is all the stuff I've written are jumbled into one big mess within the editing window, so knowing html doesn't help. I need the rich text editor back!
Otherwise, I may have to abandon this edublogs experiment and stick with my blogger blog :-(
Anyone have any ideas to help out? (and I WILL read the comments to this post! :-)
Wednesday, September 21, 2005
When is it profitable to redesign your interface?
Rumors are spreading that Microsoft is planning to completely overhaul their new interface for the Office series of programs. Great. That's the last thing I need is to have a "sharp learning curve" for the technologies I NEED to function every hour of every day.
Woah. Did I just say that? Can there be such a thing as techno-addiction because apparently I've got it.
As I was thinking about this new interface design and the pain it will cause me and millions of users, I began wondering why Microsoft would do this. Despite competition, MS has a pretty solid consumer base, so they don't need to redesign the interface to stay profitable necessarily. So why tick off all your users by redesigning what everyone is comfortable with?
I don't get it.
And this led me to another thought: At what point is redesigning your interface warranted by the return on investment you'll receive? For example, MS must be expecting some benefit from redesigning their interface--will that benefit be enough to compensate for all the ticked off users who had to learn the new interface? At BYU, the library has become very well known for redoing their website's design nearly every year. Each iteration of the design is supposedly more usable and "better", but everyone on campus has such a poor opinion of the library's website, and in interviews I had a couple of professors explain that their productivity was impacted because of the annual learning curve of learning the website all over again.
So, at what point can you expect the benefit to outweigh the difficulty you'll create for your users? It seems that many times, even if the new interface WOULD be better (which is often a debatable assumption), it may be better for your users if you just left good enough alone and didn't mess with the design anymore.
That's my takeaway from all this--to be careful in my designs to limit the desire to innovate, change, and redesign so that, above all, it's usable and familiar to my users because it's intuitive and similar to what they've used before.
Woah. Did I just say that? Can there be such a thing as techno-addiction because apparently I've got it.
As I was thinking about this new interface design and the pain it will cause me and millions of users, I began wondering why Microsoft would do this. Despite competition, MS has a pretty solid consumer base, so they don't need to redesign the interface to stay profitable necessarily. So why tick off all your users by redesigning what everyone is comfortable with?
I don't get it.
And this led me to another thought: At what point is redesigning your interface warranted by the return on investment you'll receive? For example, MS must be expecting some benefit from redesigning their interface--will that benefit be enough to compensate for all the ticked off users who had to learn the new interface? At BYU, the library has become very well known for redoing their website's design nearly every year. Each iteration of the design is supposedly more usable and "better", but everyone on campus has such a poor opinion of the library's website, and in interviews I had a couple of professors explain that their productivity was impacted because of the annual learning curve of learning the website all over again.
So, at what point can you expect the benefit to outweigh the difficulty you'll create for your users? It seems that many times, even if the new interface WOULD be better (which is often a debatable assumption), it may be better for your users if you just left good enough alone and didn't mess with the design anymore.
That's my takeaway from all this--to be careful in my designs to limit the desire to innovate, change, and redesign so that, above all, it's usable and familiar to my users because it's intuitive and similar to what they've used before.
Wednesday, September 07, 2005
Syllabus keynotes online
Just found out that the video archives of the Syllabus 2005 keynote addresses are available online. You can view them here:
http://msite.sonicfoundry.com/mediasite/viewer/?cid=5afbae3e-74cc-4bc7-a66c-8375f5410682
I plan to check them out, when I have time. The problem, however, is they are only available in video stream format. Hey, Syllabus! Ever thought of a podcast? :-)
http://msite.sonicfoundry.com/mediasite/viewer/?cid=5afbae3e-74cc-4bc7-a66c-8375f5410682
I plan to check them out, when I have time. The problem, however, is they are only available in video stream format. Hey, Syllabus! Ever thought of a podcast? :-)
Tuesday, August 23, 2005
New drug lets us work harder, longer
File this (which I read on Slashdot) in the "sometimes scientific advances AREN'T advances" department:
Ryan O'Rourke writes "According to a study led by Dr. Sam A. Deadwyler and published by the Public Library of Science Biology, a new drug called CX717 developed by Cortex Pharmaceuticals has been shown to reverse the biological and behavioral effects of sleep deprivation. Tests performed on monkeys that were subjected to 30-36 hours of sleep deprivation revealed an average test performance accuracy drop to 63 percent, but that performance was restored to 84 percent after administering CX717. During normal alert conditions, performance accuracy of the animals was improved from an average of 75 percent to 90 percent after an injection of CX717.
What an awful drug! Who can't see where this will end? With humankind forcing itself to sleep less and work longer just to keep even with the other guy, and nobody being as happy. Even with the drug, I am sure sleeping less than we already do would be bad for our health and sanity. Eventually, a drug won't hold off mother nature, and we'll start falling to pieces.
Good night! I'm going to bed to sleep this bad dream off.
Ryan O'Rourke writes "According to a study led by Dr. Sam A. Deadwyler and published by the Public Library of Science Biology, a new drug called CX717 developed by Cortex Pharmaceuticals has been shown to reverse the biological and behavioral effects of sleep deprivation. Tests performed on monkeys that were subjected to 30-36 hours of sleep deprivation revealed an average test performance accuracy drop to 63 percent, but that performance was restored to 84 percent after administering CX717. During normal alert conditions, performance accuracy of the animals was improved from an average of 75 percent to 90 percent after an injection of CX717.
What an awful drug! Who can't see where this will end? With humankind forcing itself to sleep less and work longer just to keep even with the other guy, and nobody being as happy. Even with the drug, I am sure sleeping less than we already do would be bad for our health and sanity. Eventually, a drug won't hold off mother nature, and we'll start falling to pieces.
Good night! I'm going to bed to sleep this bad dream off.
Tuesday, August 16, 2005
Google to provide free WIFI?
Slashdot reports today that Google might be thinking about providing free WIFI to everybody. One more piece of evidence that Google understands the new information society. By spending the money to provide free WIFI to everyone, they would increase, exponentially, the access people have to Google's services! Plus, what wonderful PR--who won't love Google when you can open up your laptop anywhere and get connected.
I'm crossing all fingers and toes that this idea becomes reality, and doesn't get stalled like the Google Print plan ...
I'm crossing all fingers and toes that this idea becomes reality, and doesn't get stalled like the Google Print plan ...
Thursday, June 23, 2005
What has the field of Instructional Design added to education?
Joel Galbraith at Penn State started a blog, it appears, to ask and debate one post (hopefully he'll continue blogging afterwards! :-). It's a good discussion. Joel gives this background to the discussion:
"I don't think it's possible to answer that question in an easy way. Why? Because education is about people, not things, and as Josh says, we're really talking about systems or communities of people. Anytime you deal with people, you deal with too many variables. Answers don't fit neatly in little boxes. And that's actually okay. That's why research in our field is so important -- so we can find as many answers for as many possible variations as possible.
I mean, asking us what the "best ways to teach someone" are is like asking a sociologist the "best way people form relationships." Or asking a therapist the "best way to resolve disputes" or asking a child development professional the "best way to raise a child." These questions don't work, and they shouldn't be asked. We are not scientists looking for the one great truth, we are technologists (in the broad sense of the word) looking for ideas, tools, and solutions that may work, sometimes, with some people in some contexts."
Personally, this is why I think many people in our field struggle with defining what we should be doing and publishing about. We have too many people trying to be scientists, when really we are technologists (see an articles by Andy Gibbons in TechTrends and other places about this topic).
Anyway, a couple people in the discussion didn't like my answer. They want clean, simple answers to the questions. I don't think it's possible, but if you do, please go over to Joel's blog and add your ideas. I'll keep an ear tuned.
"I got a question today from a friend asking what the most "innovative teaching methods in higher education" were these days. I had to stop and think, and felt a bit frustrated that I had no quick response. Furthermore, as I asked fellow INSYSers, I got the impression that no-one had a good handle on an answer that didn't sound like we were treading water, and grabbing at straws."He then asks the following three questions for us to debate:
- What are the most "innovative teaching methods in higher education" these days?
- What are some innovative (effective) technology uses in higher education these days?
- What are some recent (you decide) significant developments/contributions of our field to teaching and learning?
"I don't think it's possible to answer that question in an easy way. Why? Because education is about people, not things, and as Josh says, we're really talking about systems or communities of people. Anytime you deal with people, you deal with too many variables. Answers don't fit neatly in little boxes. And that's actually okay. That's why research in our field is so important -- so we can find as many answers for as many possible variations as possible.
I mean, asking us what the "best ways to teach someone" are is like asking a sociologist the "best way people form relationships." Or asking a therapist the "best way to resolve disputes" or asking a child development professional the "best way to raise a child." These questions don't work, and they shouldn't be asked. We are not scientists looking for the one great truth, we are technologists (in the broad sense of the word) looking for ideas, tools, and solutions that may work, sometimes, with some people in some contexts."
Personally, this is why I think many people in our field struggle with defining what we should be doing and publishing about. We have too many people trying to be scientists, when really we are technologists (see an articles by Andy Gibbons in TechTrends and other places about this topic).
Anyway, a couple people in the discussion didn't like my answer. They want clean, simple answers to the questions. I don't think it's possible, but if you do, please go over to Joel's blog and add your ideas. I'll keep an ear tuned.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
