Archive for Technology

Is technology producing a decline in critical thinking and analysis?

Studies shed light on multi-tasking, video games and learning

As technology has played a bigger role in our lives, our skills in critical thinking and analysis have declined, while our visual skills have improved, according to research by Patricia Greenfield, UCLA distinguished professor of psychology and director of the Children’s Digital Media Center, Los Angeles.

Learners have changed as a result of their exposure to technology, says Greenfield, who analyzed more than 50 studies on learning and technology, including research on multi-tasking and the use of computers, the Internet and video games. Her research was published this month in the journal Science.

Reading for pleasure, which has declined among young people in recent decades, enhances thinking and engages the imagination in a way that visual media such as video games and television do not, Greenfield said.

How much should schools use new media, versus older techniques such as reading and classroom discussion?

“No one medium is good for everything,” Greenfield said. “If we want to develop a variety of skills, we need a balanced media diet. Each medium has costs and benefits in terms of what skills each develops.”

Schools should make more effort to test students using visual media, she said, by asking them to prepare PowerPoint presentations, for example.

“As students spend more time with visual media and less time with print, evaluation methods that include visual media will give a better picture of what they actually know,” said Greenfield, who has been using films in her classes since the 1970s.

“By using more visual media, students will process information better,” she said. “However, most visual media are real-time media that do not allow time for reflection, analysis or imagination — those do not get developed by real-time media such as television or video games. Technology is not a panacea in education, because of the skills that are being lost.

“Studies show that reading develops imagination, induction, reflection and critical thinking, as well as vocabulary,” Greenfield said. “Reading for pleasure is the key to developing these skills. Students today have more visual literacy and less print literacy. Many students do not read for pleasure and have not for decades.”

Parents should encourage their children to read and should read to their young children, she said.

Among the studies Greenfield analyzed was a classroom study showing that students who were given access to the Internet during class and were encouraged to use it during lectures did not process what the speaker said as well as students who did not have Internet access. When students were tested after class lectures, those who did not have Internet access performed better than those who did.

“Wiring classrooms for Internet access does not enhance learning,” Greenfield said.

Another study Greenfield analyzed found that college students who watched “CNN Headline News” with just the news anchor on screen and without the “news crawl” across the bottom of the screen remembered significantly more facts from the televised broadcast than those who watched it with the distraction of the crawling text and with additional stock market and weather information on the screen.

These and other studies show that multi-tasking “prevents people from getting a deeper understanding of information,” Greenfield said.

Yet, for certain tasks, divided attention is important, she added.

“If you’re a pilot, you need to be able to monitor multiple instruments at the same time. If you’re a cab driver, you need to pay attention to multiple events at the same time. If you’re in the military, you need to multi-task too,” she said. “On the other hand, if you’re trying to solve a complex problem, you need sustained concentration. If you are doing a task that requires deep and sustained thought, multi-tasking is detrimental.”

Do video games strengthen skill in multi-tasking?

New Zealand researcher Paul Kearney measured multi-tasking and found that people who played a realistic video game before engaging in a military computer simulation showed a significant improvement in their ability to multi-task, compared with people in a control group who did not play the video game. In the simulation, the player operates a weapons console, locates targets and reacts quickly to events.

Greenfield wonders, however, whether the tasks in the simulation could have been performed better if done alone.

More than 85 percent of video games contain violence, one study found, and multiple studies of violent media games have shown that they can produce many negative effects, including aggressive behavior and desensitization to real-life violence, Greenfield said in summarizing the findings.

In another study, video game skills were a better predictor of surgeons’ success in performing laparoscopic surgery than actual laparoscopic surgery experience. In laparoscopic surgery, a surgeon makes a small incision in a patient and inserts a viewing tube with a small camera. The surgeon examines internal organs on a video monitor connected to the tube and can use the viewing tube to guide the surgery.

“Video game skill predicted laparoscopic surgery skills,” Greenfield said. “The best video game players made 47 percent fewer errors and performed 39 percent faster in laparoscopic tasks than the worst video game players.”

Visual intelligence has been rising globally for 50 years, Greenfield said. In 1942, people’s visual performance, as measured by a visual intelligence test known as Raven’s Progressive Matrices, went steadily down with age and declined substantially from age 25 to 65. By 1992, there was a much less significant age-related disparity in visual intelligence, Greenfield said.

“In a 1992 study, visual IQ stayed almost flat from age 25 to 65,” she said.

Greenfield believes much of this change is related to our increased use of technology, as well as other factors, including increased levels of formal education, improved nutrition, smaller families and increased societal complexity.

http://www.enn.com/sci-tech/article/39185

I think we may benefit more as a society from research done on whether what is being taught in schools today is even relevant in the technology-based society that we live in, rather than asking whether technology is “producing a decline in critical thinking and analysis.” Whether people like it or not, technology is here to stay. We live in a society built on the use of technology. Information and the web are the furture, yet most of the schools in this country’s education system are still opporating under the 1950′s model of preparing children for a workforce based on factories and labor jobs (even though many of these jobs have been sent overseas to be filled by cheaper labor.)

Ask children whether they like to learn. They will undoubtedly say yes. The quest for knowledge is hard-wired into humans. Ask children whether they like school, and they will likely say no. When are our school systems going to catch up to our rapidly changing economy and society? When are researchers going to understand that children are bored in schools where they are not taught subjects relevant to the world in which they live, where they are much more advanced and skilled than their teachers when it comes to technology and its uses?

Technology provides us with more opportunities for critical thinking and analysis than ever before as the amount of information available at one’s fingertips is larger than any other time in recorded history. Maybe it is not that critical thinking and analysis skills have decline, just that they have shifted as society has shifted.

“Wiring classrooms for Internet access does not enhance learning,” Greenfield said.

What kind of learning, I ask. Does teaching out of decades old text books enhance learning? Do we even learn the skills we need to survive and function as a productive member of society in school? Why was I never taught any history that occurred after World War II? (Many events relevant to the formation of today’s society and political culture were not taught.) Why was I only taught American and European history when India and China have incredibly rich histories full of scientific, mathematical, and medical discoveries? (We now participate in a global economy in which India and China also participate.) Why was I never taught how to manage money or anything about loans, interest rates, or even balancing a checkbook? (All applications of mathematics relevant to everyday life.)

Wireless classrooms provide educators with the wealth of resources available on the internet to enhance and supplement lessons in a way more suited to today’s students. Videos on any subject imaginable can be viewed for free on many sites, most notably, YouTube. Wireless classroooms also provide educators with the chance to interact with other educators across the country, to exchange ideas and teaching methods, and even conduct telelectures. Imagine a sixth grade science classroom watching live streaming video shot inside a greenhouse or on a farm, teaching them about organic farming methods and environmental sustainability. Virtual fieldtrips are just one example of how Internet access in classrooms can and DOES enhance learning. What experience is more memorable in the mind of a child – watching an exciting video in which they actually get to see what they are learning about in action, or listening to a teacher talk for 45 minutes about what is in a dusty text book that was written before the child was born? What is more relevant to the society in which we live? The point of establishing an education system is to prepare today’s youth to be tomorrow’s leaders, is it not? How can we expect children to lead us into the future when our country’s education system is stuck in the past? Our children are not failing us with poor test scores and declining critical thinking skills. We are failing them by not properly preparing them for the sometimes harsh and cruel world which they will inheriet from us. By applying technology in the classroom, and by utilising the internet, we can ensure that children are better prepared for adulthood.

Leave a Comment

Low-cost LEDs May Slash Household Electric Bills Within Five Years

A new way of making LEDs could see household lighting bills reduced by up to 75% within five years. Gallium Nitride (GaN), a man-made semiconductor used to make LEDs (light emitting diodes), emits brilliant light but uses very little electricity. Until now high production costs have made GaN lighting too expensive for wide spread use in homes and offices.

However the Cambridge University based Centre for Gallium Nitride has developed a new way of making GaN which could produce LEDs for a tenth of current prices.

GaN, grown in labs on expensive sapphire wafers since the 1990s, can now be grown on silicon wafers. This lower cost method could mean cheap mass produced LEDs become widely available for lighting homes and offices in the next five years.

Based on current results, GaN LED lights in every home and office could cut the proportion of UK electricity used for lights from 20% to 5%. That means we could close or not need to replace eight power stations.

A GaN LED can burn for 100,000 hours so, on average, it only needs replacing after 60 years. And, unlike currently available energy-saving bulbs GaN LEDs do not contain mercury so disposal is less damaging to the environment. GaN LEDs also have the advantage of turning on instantly and being dimmable.

Professor Colin Humphreys, lead scientist on the project said: “This could well be the holy grail in terms of providing our lighting needs for the future. We are very close to achieving highly efficient, low cost white LEDs that can take the place of both traditional and currently available low energy light bulbs. That won’t just be good news for the environment. It will also benefit consumers by cutting their electricity bills.”�

GaN LEDs, used to illuminate landmarks like Buckingham Palace and the Severn Bridge, are also appearing in camera flashes, mobile phones, torches, bicycle lights and interior bus, train and plane lighting.

Parallel research is also being carried out into how GaN lights could mimic sunlight to help 3m people in the UK with Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD).

Ultraviolet rays made from GaN lighting could also aid water purification and disease control in developing countries, identify the spread of cancer tumours and help fight hospital ”�super bugs’.

Funding was provided by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC).

About GaN LEDs

A light-emitting diode (LED) is a semiconductor diode that emits light when charged with electricity. LEDs are used for display and lighting in a whole range of electrical and electronic products. Although GaN was first produced over 30 years ago, it is only in the last ten years that GaN lighting has started to enter real-world applications. Currently, the brilliant light produced by GaN LEDs is blue or green in colour. A phosphor coating is applied to the LED to transform this into a more practical white light.

GaN LEDs are currently grown on 2-inch sapphire. Manufacturers can get 9 times as many LEDs on a 6-inch silicon wafer than on a 2-inch sapphire wafer. In addition, edge effects are less, so the number of good LEDs is about 10 times higher. The processing costs for a 2-inch wafer are essentially the same as for a 6-inch wafer. A 6-inch silicon wafer is much cheaper to produce than a 2-inch sapphire wafer. Together these factors result in a cost reduction of about a factor of 10.

Possible Future Applications

1. Cancer surgery. Currently, it is very difficult to detect exactly where a tumour ends. As a result, patients undergoing cancer surgery have to be kept under anaesthetic while cells are taken away for laboratory tests to see whether or not they are healthy. This may need to happen several times during an operation, prolonging the procedure extensively. But in the future, patients could be given harmless drugs that attach themselves to cancer cells, which can be distinguished when a blue GaN LED is shone on them. The tumour’s edge will be revealed, quickly and unmistakably, to the surgeon.

2. Water purification. GaN may revolutionise drinking water provision in developing countries. If aluminium is added to GaN then deep ultra-violet light can be produced and this kills all viruses and bacteria, so fitting such a GaN LED to the inside of a water pipe will instantly eradicate diseases, as well as killing mosquito larvae and other harmful organisms.

3. Hospital-acquired infections. Shining a ultra-violet GaN torch beam could kill viruses and bacteria, boosting the fight against MRSA and C Difficile. Simply shining a GaN torch at a hospital wall or trolley, for example, could kill any ‘superbugs’ lurking there.

http://www.epsrc.ac.uk/PressReleases/LowCostLEDs.htm

Leave a Comment

Switching Light Bulbs? Consider Going Mercury Free!

Seattle startup Vu1 Corporation plans to launch a new type of light bulb that functions like a TV tube. Contrary to what you’d think, the technology is amazingly environmentally friendly. Vu1(View One) has raised $13 million to develop a brand new technology by fusing three existing technologies. “It is not induction lighting. It is not plasma. It is not fluorescent. It is not halogen. It is not LED,” said Ron Davis, the chief marketing officer in an interview with Greentech Media.

So what is it? It’s an ultra energy-efficient flood light which is reminiscent of the way old TV tubes worked with the only difference being that the light bulb lights a room much better. The light bulb is comprised of an integrated electron source which fires electrons attached to a phosphor-coated glass. The phosphor, upon contact, transforms the signals into bright light. The product that emerged from this three-way process is a 17-watt bulb for recessed light cans; the type of lights you use in kitchens and living rooms.

The company has named its technology Electron Stimulated Luminescence (ESL). ESL’s major attraction is that it is mercury-free and hugely energy conserving. The bulb is unique on the American market and emits 40 lumens per watt. That’s the equivalent of a 65-watt incandescent bulb.

Vu1 says its product will hit the stores on Earth Day 2009 and the price tag is about the same as a 65-watt dimmable incandescent lamp and lower than the price of indoor Light Emitting Diode (LED) bulbs, which are in the range of $80 to $140. The fitting of Vu1’s bulb is the same as those of ordinary light bulbs. Another amazing feature of this new light bulb is its life span; one bulb lasts an estimated 6,000 hours. Much longer than an incandescent and slightly less than the more expensive Compact Florescent Light Bulb (CFL). Heat generated by an ESL bulb is half that of an incandescent.

Vu1’s closest U.S. competitor is the plasma light invention launched by Eden Park Illumination, another startup, which also is mercury free. The Eden Park lamps, available around the globe, convert a gas to light the same way a plasma TV works.

Other truly environmentally friendly lamps are those that make use of Organic Light Emitting Diodes (OLEDs). But, like LEDs, these types of light bulbs are pricey and not too reliable as yet.

The main reason why inventions like the one of Vu1 and Eden Park’s are so important is that their lamps don’t use free floating gas inside the bulb to generate light. The gas in a fluorescent and many other bulbs contains mercury and if the lamp breaks this gas is extremely hazardous for people’s health and the environment.


http://www.enn.com/lifestyle/article/39160

Leave a Comment

Text Message Price Fixing – How Wireless Providers Rip You Off

In response to growing concerns over the increased text messaging costs, US Senator Herb Kohl (D-WI), chairman of the Senate Antitrust Subcommittee, sent a letter to the heads of each of the four major wireless providers requesting information about the 100% price increase per text. He asked for justification for these increases, such as proof of increased cost to the companies. He asserted that the increases seemed to be more the result of a “decrease in competition, and an increase in market power” rather than an actual increase in costs to the providers (1). Each of the companies responded with explanations of the pricing of their text messaging plans, but failed to address the reasoning for increased cost to customers.

The four major companies, TMobile, AT&T, Verizon, and Sprint have all instead chosen to side-step the issue and have made excuses for the price increases. They have identified the increasing numbers of text messages sent in recent years as reason for increasing per text charges. However, when the issue is explored a little deeper, we find that costs to the providers have not increased due to larger text volumes. In fact, text messages are a “free-rider” tucked into control channels, which is space reserved for operation of the wireless network (2).

Text messages are very small, and are limited to 160 characters to qualify them as free-riders. Despite costing the provider virtually nothing to transmit, customers are charged an incredible amount to send very little data. According to Consumers Union, the nonprofit publisher of Consumer Reports, “600 text messages contain as much data as a one minute phone conversation. At 20 cents a pop, 600 text messages would cost $120.00,” (3). This is just one example of the gross overcharging of customers at the hands of the major wireless providers.

According to physorg.com, “texting is four times more expensive than receiving scientific data from space,” (4). So it costs four times more to send and receive texts than it does to receive information from the Hubble Telescope! According to Techcrunch.com, AT&T’s text messages cost $1,310 per megabyte. This means that texting for TMobile, Verizon, and Sprint also cost $1,310 per megabyte, as each of the four major companies charge twenty cents to send and receive texts (5). At this rate, downloading one 4MB song would cost over $5,000. I recently saw calculations someone had done on an AT&T forum (of all places) – if broadband internet cost as much to transmit data as texting, it would cost about $1.2 million per month. All of these calculations further prove what I have been claiming for years – that texting is a major rip-off!

Read more:
KOHL CALLS ON CELL PHONE COMPANIES TO JUSTIFY RISING TEXTING RATES

What Carriers Aren’t Eager to Tell You About Texting

Do Text Messages Cost Too Much?

Text Rip-Off? Pricey Messages ‘Cost Virtually Nothing’ to Carriers

1. http://kohl.senate.gov/~kohl/press/08/09/2008909B29.html

2. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/28/business/28digi.html?_r=4&adxnnl=1&partner=rss&emc=rss&adxnnlx=1230562967-KaKhYQ8CqVqcN%20nGFnNASg

3. http://jetl.wordpress.com/2008/09/24/all-major-cell-phone-companies-double-the-price-of-text-messages/

4. http://www.physorg.com/news129793047.html

5. http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/07/01/atts-text-messages-cost-1310-per-megabyte/

Leave a Comment

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.