Por Alma Dzib Goodin
The interaction between brain and cultural tools started practically since Homo Sapiens apparecenced on the planet, because this is a main characteristic of his evolution.
Unlike
the Neanderthals, and many other species of hominids, Homo Sapiens developed
tools, based on cognitive skills of design and its development, gave to the
specie a particular capacity to use them to respond to the needs in the
cultural environment that allow a surviving opportunity and developing of new
skills.
These tools were designed specifically to solve problems,
which of course had impact on the brain, so there is a symbiotic relationship
between a designer brain and a learner brain and the use of tools, in this
sense, It can be tools such as fire, that exacerbated the sensory systems,
while the use of sticks and stones benefited the use of thumb, while others developed
movement as walking and the observation of the environment, all that eventually
open the door to reading, writing and mathematics that gave rise to science.
Whole brain is a wonder of responsiveness to the
environment, generating neural connections able to go beyond, literally,
including the Moon and Mars, to benefit not only the human specie, but others,
under the knowledge that those who do not adapt and respond to the environment,
disappear from the face of the Earth, just as it did with its predecessors the
Neanderthals and many other creatures.
It's so thousands of years after a first Homo Sapiens has
used a stone to ward off a predator, the digital age opens steps, fast if we
think that 30 years ago there was notablets, and breaks in the cultural,
economic and educational environment, but in contrast to those who claim that
this damages the brain, some others, from an evolutionary point of view, look
it just like another step in human evolution.
Nature has provided to all species of mechanisms of self
preservation, able to respond to the enviroment needs, human beings in
particular thanks to the evolution and management of tools designs, which need
a reflective thought open the door to a process called brain plasticity that permits
the brain adjust to each new need even auto repair in order to continue providing the ability to
solve problems.
Years later computers burst as tool simulating a brain,
giving answers and simplifying tasks, through artificial neural networks able
to simulate many cognitive tasks, with ever greater precision and elegance.
Simulating the brain activities, new technology has
understood that brain changes, with each
learning creates new neural networks, removed those that are not used, sharing,
recycling, although unlike their natural model, gadgets are renewed at a very
large cost, while never leaving the goal
of perfection as the natural model, that has never achieved because the brain
never stops passing, because it can not!, when it is thought that a task is
already well learned, comes a change in the environment, or even human
creativity opens the door and says: and if do I add this?, and if do I do it
this way?.
The brain is constantly using information, so it has specialized
its data storage system. While memory is finite, its hability to recover it is
prodigious, specially when the stimulus provided as a question or key is
correct.
However the maximum capacity of the brain maybe are language,
thought and creativity, and computers can
not yet achieve that perfection, as example I can find Siri, the personal Secretary of Apple which is incapable of
understanding the inflections of the language, the double meaning or slight
changes in modulation.
So at this sense, analyzing the role of technology as a
learning tool, as education has been trying during the last decade, wishing an
interface between the brain of the natural and the artificial, able to share
files with one click, it is not possible since we can not forget a fundamental
principle: the natural brain controls and
provides information to the artificial brain.
No matter how incredible is a word processor, still
requires the ideas of a writer to convert a blank screen in a worthy article of
a Nobel Prize winner, and this will require also the social acceptance of
ideas, despite the marketing claim that this or that gadget is an intelligent
devices, the user will have the last word against its use and productivity capabilities
and troubleshooting.
Brain 2.10 million vs Web 3.0
My brain is renewed, learns, adapts, auto repairs, auto
analyses, is capable of determining errors in its performance and start again,
searching new paths of answers and even questioning. This is not a simulation
of artificial systems, they are perfected processes on the basis of other
natural prototypes that have been able to survive despite everything, and we
took the best of every one, for example, from reptilian prototype, we obtained
emotions, of the mammalian model, we got a selective memory, and attention. The
human brain is the evolutionary sum of other prototypes and every day we learn
more of its simple capacity to adapt.
Before a paper sheet, there were human brains communicating.
Before the video in HD, there were people telling stories. Before radio
stations, there were brains sharing news and art. Before satellites, there were
brains sending messages to the rest of the world. Before smart phones, there
were intelligent brains who thought them, believed them possible, designing
them, tried them, arranged their problems and returned to start, perfecting
every detail, adding applications that make our life easier.
A Smartphone can say how to get to a place, but it needs
to know the destination.
So we can say technology is an effort to simulate the
brain, understanding the infinite plasticity that a natural brain has,
therefore this is discarded, becomes obsolete, as well as those areas that are
not used, as Darwin observed that any part of our body will atrophy and studies
show that the brain also. Saturated information in a chaotic day, or week of
exams, after days without sleep, similar to artificial systems after saturating
the RAM memory.
The other process that has been copied as an application is
the ability to process information, it is true, computers make it faster, but
still can not interpret it without the support of their natural example.
Although Google has an algorithm to complete words, you need sufficient
information to decide what you want or need to search. This same ability to
complete information that the cognitive
process has been refined over thousands of years.
Computers and education
The first great tool exploited by education in order to share
specific information for the purpose of teaching - learning was the book. This
replaced the word, and its most ingenious application was not improved until
Jan Amos Comenicus in 17th century put images in textbooks, to help to children
learning better.
Three centuries later, the next revolution, changed the
books by screens, but is only a another implementation tool at the service of
learning to which the brain will adapt, it’s not adding anything new, except some
memory and over stimulation, which it had been aside since the man could rest
from their predators, creating what is known as attentional problems which
actually is the awakening of the consciousness after having spent centuries
with face looking to the front and the mystical silence inherited by
ecclesiastical education.
There is no mystery in these new tools, brain adapts to
them, because they are part of the environment and they are used to solve problems.
More adapted people are those who use them in everyday life, the rest of us mortals
only employs an average of 12 apps and we know only about 20% of its total functions.
Generation X was born with this technological revolution,
they did not have to learn the language of Basic to open and close documents or
applications, they did not know the monochrome computer or 5 1/2 floppy disks.
They did not fight with point printers. In return, they were born with Windows,
not the first version that revolutionized, presenting the information with an
easy-to-read structure and the wonderful quality of having icons, icons?, like the
images in the books of Jan Amos Comenicus?.
After few prototypes, we add sound to our readings, we added
movement and the ability to customize environments, being the last great step
removal of buttons and keys, creating interactive displays, on tactil screen.
Millions of bits of information currently available, it
is said that practically you can learn everything you want in a digital system,
seriously?, well, first there will be to teach to select relevant information to
resolve a question or problem from a good design process that leads to a goal.
Where was the human brain in the middle of this?, it didn’t
go anywhere, continues fulfilling its role that nature gave it, which gave all
species the possibility to create specific responses to the environment,
continues its process of evolution, similar as smart devices, since its legacy is literally
renew or die.
When it says that technological age has produced changes
in the brain, are right, but refuses the constant motivation to respond to the
environment. Even species that depend on genes closed such as bees and birds,
have shown that its survival depends on its neurowear, which is the set of
neural connections.
The human brain has managed to overcome what no other species
has been able to do, not only has adapted to the environment, has adapted the environment, change it, provided
shelter, uses imagination, it’s creative, all this thanks to the use of same
tools created by itself, seeking always to make them better, creating new,
always imagining other forms, textures and functions. Technology should be seen
as an extension of the creative mind, which has no reason to curb the
evolutionary legacy. The brain will continue its process of adaptation with
technology no matter what kind of.
Proof of this is that there are groups who have never
seen a computer, and yet are capable of creating spaces of identity. The
culture is in this sense, their
parachute to support creation of answers, as anthropological and ethological
studies show it.
Are there benefits in the use of technology?, this is a
constant question, and I would say that the benefit is that now our responses will
employ different tools. There are currently three ways to close a door: the
movement of an arm, with a button or touching a screen, but should not forget
that these three methods are achieving the same goal and all depend on the
response of a brain.
A problem seen in educational strategies is the
forgetfulness of this capacity, with the tendency to create specific response
patterns: thus made things, according to a specific algorithm, but this is
going against thousands of years of evolution, brain became creative, became from
an Néandertal brain to a Sapiens, but we should not forget that many other species
have accompanied the human brain. There are reptiles, viruses and bacteria. How
can we think that a tool can affect something that remains and will remain as a
prototype?.
Computers and learning
If it is true that affect the evolutionary process, do computers
benefit learning?. If you are based on the idea that learning is part of the
ability to respond to the environment, and the environment is surrounded by
computers, no doubt the interaction is beneficial, the youngest brains are more
easily than those who have habits that make rigid response process adopted.
If a baby make a mistake, it is said that he or she is
learning; If an adult makes a mistake, it is said that it is a failure, I think
that if learning is seen from this window, education will continue slowing our creativity
and our need to innovate.
Sometimes I think that when adults can give themselves the
opportunity to accept that we are not more than a prototype and that the only
force capable of changing our environment is death, begin to create much more
adaptive responses, being able to increase the life expectancy of the people.
It is true that computers have helped us, but there is no achievement that has
not started with an idea, net and absolutely human idea.
Learning at the current time, depends on the recognition of
the technological environment provides that human remains as the centre of the
process and that humans are able to develop this ability to solve problems,
solutions, recognize the chain of events that come with clear, specific goals
and above all, successful ways to react.
It is clear that learning never depended only of a tool,
i.e., we do not learn only from books or teachers. Humans are the only species
that creates artificial learning environments, makes tests infertile and
maintains such environments for more than 20 years. For the rest of the species
on Earth, behavior modeling is brief and the further consideration is to
survive.
Believe that a technological tool will teach, means
changing the environment of schools by another, perhaps funnier, with greater capacity for
information, but equally sterile if the apprentice is not able to create adaptive
responses. While it is possible to order food online, still cannot get the
nutrients in this way, we still require food to physically meet the digestion
process.
While there is cybersex, is not able yet to fertilize an
egg and create a new life. Humans are tied to the natural demands, for some
years longer at least until virtual environments to become real environments for
the brain. But if Siri is not yet able to recognize words, I think that the
road is still long and windy.
In this sense, education must continue focusing efforts
on the student, which has not since part of the process since the ancient Greece, Because after its break
between the Catholic Church and the Anglican education focused on the
curriculum, and now more that ever students are bombarded by too much
information, which causes them problems not only to understand it, but applicate
it.
This is why, regardless of the technology, some believe
that we must bet on the development of meta cognitive skills, which enable
flexible, same thinking applies in everyday life, science and art, since they
create patterns of needs analysis for design patterns of responses, choice and
check of possibilities concerning specific goals using any tools available, in
order to adapt to the environment, including, of course, technology.
If we think for a moment, despite the wonders that it is
possible to achieve thanks to the support of computers, they wouldn't exist
without a human mind which thought them, designed them and made them work, and
sometimes, put them all together. We can marvel the ability of Apple products, but everything
is due to the genius of Steve Jobs and his team with an specific ability to
imagine. That is a distinctly human quality, that you don't get when the
information flows in avalanche and know that there is only one right answer, on
a review of all or nothing.
Hopefully one day education understand the brain
mechanisms and apply them, because when that happens, it will begin to teach
brains capable of learning.
REFERENCES
Alty, JL., Al-Sharrah, A., & Beacham, N. (2006) When humans
form media and media form humans: An experimental study examining the effects
different digital media have on the learning outcomes of students who have
different learning styles. Interacting
with Computers. 18. 891-909.
An, H., Shin, S., & Lim, K. (2009) The effects of
different instructor facilitation approaches on students’ interactions during
asynchronous online discussions. Computers
& Education.53 (3) 749-760.
Balaji, MS, (2010) Student interactions in online discussion
fórum: Emprirical research from “Media Richness Theory” perspective. Journal of Interactive Online Learning. 9
(1) 1-22.
Baran, E. (2013) Connect, participate and learn:
Transforming pedagogies in Higher Education. Bulletin of the IEEE Technical Committe on Learning Technology. 15 (1) 9-12.
Biswal, B.B., Mennes, M., Zuo, X.N., Gohel, S., Kelly, C.,
Smith, S., … Milham, M.P. (2010) Toward discovery science of human brain
function. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Science. 107 (10) 4734-4740.
Blooma, MJ., Kurian, JC., Kuan Chua, AY., Lian Goh, DL.,
& Huong Lien, N. (2013) Social question answering: Analysing knowledge,
cognitive processes and social dimension of micro-collaborations. Computers & Education. 69. 109-120.
Castañeda, L, y Adell, J. (2013) La anatomía de los PLEs. Pp.
11-28. En: L. Castañeda, y J. Adell (2013) Entornos
Personales de Aprendizaje: claves para el ecosistema educativo en red. Alcoy:
Marfil. España.
Dabbaghm N., & Kitsantas, A. (2013) The role of social media in
self-regulated learning. International
Journal of Web Based Communities. 9 (2) 256-273.
Dehaene, S., & Cohen, L. (2007) Cultural recycling of cortical
maps. Neuron. 56 (2) 384-398.
Downey, V. (2010)
JA Comenius and the concept of universal education. The Encyclopedia of Education. Vol. 2, 1971.
Disponible en red: ttp://www.nd.edu/~rbarger/www7/comenius.html
Dzib Goodin, A. (2013) La arquitectura cerebral como responsable
del desarrollo del proceso de aprendizaje. Revista
Mexicana de Neurociencia. 14 (2) 81-85.
Dzib Goodin, A. (2013) La evolución del aprendizaje: Más allá de
las redes neuronales. Revista Chilena de
Neuropsicología. 8 (1) 20-25.
Edelson, DC., Werthelm, JA., Schell, EM., & The leadership Team
of the Road Map for Georgraphy Education Project. (2013) Creating a road map for the 21st century
geography education: Project overview. The
Geography Teacher. 10 (1) 1-5.
Goodyear, P., Carvalho, L. (2013) The analysis of complex learning
environments. En H., Beetham & R.,
Sharpe Ed . (2013) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Routledge. New York City.
USA. Pp. 49-63.
Gulati, S. (2006) Knowledge construction in online learning. Pp.
20-30. En: D. Whitelock, and S. Wheeler. (2006) Association for Learning Technology. 13th International Conference
ALT-2006. 5-7 September 2006. Heriot-Watt university, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Howe, C. (2013) Scaffolding in context: Peer interaction and
abstract learning. Learning , Culture and
Social Interaction. 2 (1) 3-10.
Iredale, A. (2006) Successful learning or falling promise? A
situated evaluation of virtual learning environments. Pp. 1-10. En :D.
Whitelock, and S. Wheeler. (2006) Association for Learning Technology. 13th
International Conference ALT-2006. 5-7 September 2006. Heriot-Watt university,
Edinburgh, Scotland, UK.
Kirschner, PA., & Van Merriënboen, JJG. (2013) Do learners
really know best? Urban Legends in
Education. 48 (3) 169-183.
Kwon, K., Hong, RY., & Laffey, JM. (2013) The educational impact of
metacognitive group coordination in computer-supported collaborative learning. Computers in Human Behavior. 29 (4)
1271-1281.
Lock, A., & Gers, M. (2012) The cultural evolution of written
language and its effects: A Darwinian process from prehistory to the modern
day. En E.L.L., Grigorenko, E., Mambrino, DD., Preis (Eds) Writing: A mosaic of new perspective. (pp.11-36). New York:
Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group.
Lotem, A., & Hapern. J.Y. (2012) Coevolution of learning and
data acquisition mechanism: A model for cognitive evolution. Philosophical Transactions the Royal
Society: Biological Science. 367 (1063) 2686-2694.
Mak, S., Wiliams, R., and Mackness, J. (2010) Blogs and fórums as
communication and learning tolos in a MOOC. Pp. 275-285. En: Proceedings of the
7th International Conference on Networked Learning 2010. University of
Lancaster, Lancaster.
Ng. W. (2012) Can we teach digital natives digital literacy? Computers & Education.
59. 1065-1078.
Sackur, J., & Dehaene, S. (2009) The cognitive architecture for
chaining of two mental operations. Cognition.
111. 187-211.
Voogt, J. Erstad, O., Dede, C & Mishra, P (2013) Challenges to
learning and Schooling un the digital networked world of the 21st century. Journal of Computer Assited Learning. 29
(5) 403-413.
Zuo, X.N., Ehmke, R.,
Mennes, M., Imperati, D., Castellanos, J., Sporns, O., & Milham, M. P.
(2012) Network centrality in the human functional. Cerebral Cortex. 22 (8)
1862-1875.
No comments:
Post a Comment