eukaryote

A eukaryote (/juːˈkæri.oʊt/ or /juːˈkæriət/) is any organism whose cells contain a nucleus and other structures (organelles) enclosed within membranes. Eukaryotes are formally the taxon Eukarya or Eukaryota. The defining membrane-bound structure that sets eukaryotic cells apart from prokaryotic cells is the nucleus, or nuclear envelope, within which the genetic material is contained.[1][2][3]The presence of a nucleus gives eukaryotes their name, which comes from the Greek ευ (eu, “well”) and κάρυον (karyon, “nut” or “kernel”).[4] Most eukaryotic cells also contain […]

eukaryote (/ju??kæri.o?t/ or /ju??kæri?t/) is any organism whose cells contain a nucleus and other structures (organelles) enclosed within membranes. Eukaryotes are formally the taxon Eukarya or Eukaryota. The defining membrane-bound structure that sets eukaryotic cells apart from prokaryotic cells is the nucleus, or nuclear envelope, within which the genetic material is contained.[1][2][3]The presence of a nucleus gives eukaryotes their name, which comes from the Greek ?? (eu, “well”) and ?????? (karyon, “nut” or “kernel”).[4] Most eukaryotic cells also contain other membrane-bound organelles such as mitochondria or the Golgi apparatus. In addition, plants and algae contain chloroplasts. Many unicellular organisms are eukaryotes, such as protozoa. All multicellular organisms are eukaryotes, including animalsplants and fungi.

Cell division in eukaryotes is different from that in organisms without a nucleus (Prokaryote). There are two types of division processes. In mitosis, one cell divides to produce two genetically identical cells. In meiosis, which is required in sexual reproduction, one diploid cell (having two instances of each chromosome, one from each parent) undergoes recombination of each pair of parental chromosomes, and then two stages of cell division, resulting in four haploid cells (gametes). Each gamete has just one complement of chromosomes, each a unique mix of the corresponding pair of parental chromosomes.

The domain Eukaryota appears to be monophyletic, and so makes up one of the three domains of life. The two other domains,Bacteria and Archaea, are prokaryotes and have none of the above features. Eukaryotes represent a tiny minority of all living things;[5]even in a human body there are 10 times more microbes than human cells.[6] However, due to their much larger size, their collective worldwide biomass is estimated at about equal to that of prokaryotes.[7] Eukaryotes first developed approximately 1.6–2.1 billion years ago.

volición

  Pronunciación:  [ bo.li.ˈθjon ] (AFI) Etimología: del latín volo (“quiero“) Sustantivo femenino Singular Plural volición voliciones 1 Filosofía y Psicología. Acción voluntaria Antónimo: nolición 2 Deseo o determinación de pasar al acto. La conducta cotidiana de los seres humanos está guiada por mecanismos de autorregulación. SECUENCIA DE LA CONDUCTA. Fase ponderativa  (elige y decide a qué objetivos dirigir a conducta). Las personas ponderan esencialmente […]

 

  • Pronunciación:  [ bo.li.??jon ] (AFI)
  • Etimología: del latín volo (“quiero“)

Sustantivo femenino

Singular Plural
volición voliciones
1 Filosofía y Psicología.
Acción voluntaria

2
Deseo o determinación de pasar al acto.

La conducta cotidiana de los seres humanos está guiada por mecanismos de autorregulación.

SECUENCIA DE LA CONDUCTA.

Fase ponderativa  (elige y decide a qué objetivos dirigir a conducta).

Las personas ponderan esencialmente dos aspectos: el valor de cada una de las metas y las posibilidades que cree tener de alcanzarlas.

Fase pre-ejecutiva (planifica).

La persona debe querer llevar la conducta a cabo. La tarea esencial en esta fase es la planificación detallada de las circunstancias en que se llevará a cabo la conducta (cómo, cuándo, dónde, por cuánto tiempo, etc.).

Fase ejecutiva (lleva a cabo la conducta dirigida al logro de una meta propuesta).

El mantenimiento de la conducta sera determinado por la intensidad del compromiso asumido de llevarla a cabo y las estrategias específicas mediante las que el sujeto procurará mantener el control sobre su conducta.

Fase retrospectiva (valora su esfuerzo y los resultados obtenidos).

La persona procede a una doble valoración: por un lado, de los resultados alcanzados, y por otro, si los resultados alcanzados merecían el esfuerzo invertido. Para llegar a estas valoraciones finales el sujeto retoma prácticamente las deliberaciones efectuadas en la primera fase, y evalúa la eficacia de la planificación de conducta, así como de cada uno de los pasos efectivamente dados para dar cumplimento a dicha planificación.

MOTIVACIÓN Y VOLICIÓN.

La motivación externa no es suficiente para que la conducta se active. Además es imprescindible que el individuo asuma el compromiso de poner en marcha la conducta y se esfuerce por mantenerla hasta alcanzar la meta, poniendo en juego las estrategias apropiadas para hacer frente a los obstáculos que a buen seguro encontrará en el camino. A este compromiso de conducta y esfuerzo consiguiente llamamos voluntad.

El concepto de set-mental y sus implicaciones.

Cuando uno está realizando una tarea se asume que se desarrolla un set-mental (un estado de funcionamiento cognitivo), relacionado con las demandas de la tarea, cuya finalidad es favorecer el desarrollo de la tarea, y que condiciona:

  • el tipo de información que se atiende y procesa;
  • cómo se procesa dicha información;
  • y grado de apertura a recibir y procesar información nueva.

A cada fase de la secuencia conductual corresponde un set-mental. En este sentido, podría hablarse de 4 set-mentales, correspondientes a las fases mencionadas. No obstante, nos referiremos exclusivamente a los que denominaremos set-motivacional (fases predecisional y evaluativa) y set-volitivo (fases preejecutiva y ejecutiva).

set-mental motivacional.

El set-mental activado durante las fases de deliberación y evaluación de resultados se caracteriza por las siguientes notas:

Procesamiento de información congruente:

cuando de lo que se trata es de elegir el objetivo, serán más accesibles aquellas informaciones relativas a la bondad de las distintas metas posibles y la posibilidad relativa de alcanzar unas u otras. En el momento de la evaluación, por su parte, serán mucho más accesibles, cognitivamente hablando, aquellas informaciones que permitan al individuo establecer el contraste entre lo proyectado y lo logrado y valorar los distintos pasos del proceso por el que ha llegado a lograr los resultados que está valorando.

Objetividad e imparcialidad del procesamiento de la información:

se postula que el procesamiento de la información en estas fases será imparcial, carente de sesgos que puedan llevar a la formulación de unos objetivos de conducta incorrectos que abocarían fácilmente al individuo a la frustración y al desaliento.

Apertura a la información:

que le pueda ayudar a establecer sus objetivos.

set-mental volitivo.

Procesamiento de información congruente:

aquélla relativa a las circunstancias en que se debe realizar la conducta, la naturaleza de la tarea a llevar a cabo y las características positivas de la meta por cuyo logro se está esforzando. Este tipo de información adquiere primacía frente a aquella otra que pudiera conducir a replantearse la bondad o conveniencia del objetivo fijado.

Sesgo optimista:

Lo esperable es que el individuo localice su atención en aquellos aspectos e informaciones que no pongan en cuestión la elección que se ha hecho y refuercen el esfuerzo que se realiza.

Procesamiento restrictivo:

el individuo restringe su atención solamente a aquella información que puede ser relevante para mantener el valor de la meta y el esfuerzo que se está realizando.

EVIDENCIA EMPÍRICA.

 

PROCESAMIENTO DE INFORMACIÓN CONGRUENTE.

Gollwitzer, Heckhausen y Steller sometieron a prueba la siguiente hipótesis: el set-mental favorece el procesamiento de la información congruente con la fase conductual en que se encuentra el individuo. Aquellos que se encontraban en un set motivacional, en una tarea de memoria recordarían mayor cantidad de información relativa a expectativas, valores, consecuencias. Aquellos que ha habían tomado una decisión (condición volitiva) recordarían mayor cantidad de información relativa a circunstancias y estrategias para realizar la conducta.

La conclusión es que pedir a los sujetos que se preparen para tomar una decisión (condición motivacional) o para llevar a cabo una decisión previamente tomada (condición volitiva) activa un estado de funcionamiento cognitivo (deliberación-ponderación vs. Implementación) que hace más saliente la información congruente con dicho estado y facilita su procesamiento.

¿sesgos en el procesamiento de la información?

Una segunda característica que diferencia el funcionamiento cognitivo de los sujetos que se encuentran en la fase predecisional, a distinción de quienes ya han tomado una decisión y están considerando cómo u cuándo llevarla a la práctica, es la parcialidad o imparcialidad con que se procesa la información.
La hipótesis es que mientras el individuo está ponderando los pros y contras de tomar una determinada decisión, procesará la información de manera más realista e imparcial, que cuando ya ha tomado la decisión y está considerando la estrategia más adecuada.
Para analizar este supuesto, Taylor y Gollwitzer llevaron a cabo una serie de experimentos en los que esencialmente estudiaron el efecto que sobre la valoración de sí mismo y la percepción de riesgo de sufrir determinados accidentes y problemas, tenía la inducción de set mentales motivacionales o volitivos. La hipótesis fue que cuando los sujetos ya han tomado una decisión y se encuentran planificando la estrategia concreta para darle cumplimiento, mostrarán una percepción de sí mismo significativamente más optimista y positiva, encontrándose precisamente este resultado.

¿restricción o apertura a la información?

La hipótesis general en este caso diría que en la fase previa a la toma de decisión los sujetos se encontrarían abiertos y procesarían mayor cantidad de información que aquellos que ya han tomado la decisión y se preparan para llevarla a término.
Este mecanismo favorecería el que no escape a la atención del individuo información que podría ser relevante a la hora de tomar una decisión, mientras, por otro lado, al restringir el campo atencional protegería la decisión ya tomada evitando que el individuo vuelva una y otra vez a replantearse la decisión tomada, dificultando de esta forma el inicio de la conducta apropiada.

CONTRIBUCIÓN DE LOS PROCESOS VOLITIVOS.

La evidencia disponible nos indica que el análisis de potenciales metas o alternativas de conducta, la ponderación de las ventajas e inconvenientes de cada una de ellas y la valoración de su viabilidad y repercusión emocional, confluyen en la creación del estado motivacional que llevará finalmente a tomar la decisión de actuar en una dirección u otra; elegir uno u otro objetivo de conducta.
Pero, de igual manera, se puede afirmar que en muchas ocasiones la decisión tomada, incluso estando respaldada por una intensa base motivacional, no parece suficiente para iniciar la conducta consecuente con tal decisión. Este es el caso, por ejemplo, de conductas nuevas o que, aun teniendo claros beneficios futuros y resultando, por ello, atractivas, su implantación supone un elevado coste inicial para el individuo.

hipótesis y evidencia empírica.

En estas circunstancias es preciso el concurso de la voluntad, de procesos de autorregulación que, a la postre, se concretan en la determinación y el compromiso de poner los medios necesarios para el logro del objetivo fijado, para hacer realidad la decisión adoptada. Con esta finalidad los seres humanos disponen de estrategias que hacen operativos estos procesos volitivos. Entre ellas, y de especial relevancia por cuanto facilita el inicio de la conducta, está la planificación cuidadosa y detallada de las circunstancias en que se iniciará y llevará a cabo.

En 1997, Gollwitzer y Brandstätter llevaron a cabo una serie de experimentos que apoyan e ilustran claramente las argumentaciones expresadas. La simple formulación de la intención de conducta, la sola toma de decisión, es insuficiente en la mayoría de los casos para poner efectivamente en marcha la conducta congruente con la decisión adoptada.

El tomar una decisión y la formulación de la intención de conducta consiguiente dependen fundamentalmente de factores motivacionales, apoyados, a su vez, en procesos cognitivos y emocionales. Mientras que la ejecución de la conducta y la persistencia en la misma hasta alcanzar el objetivo propuesto son más bien función de estrategias autorreguladoras-volitivas, mediante las que el individuo define las condiciones y el modo (estrategias) en que va a controlar las circunstancias que acompañarán el desarrollo de la conducta y que pueden facilitar o entorpecer su realización.
Las estrategias autorreguladoras, volitivas, se ven favorecidas, asimismo, por factores motivacionales como la importancia y valor de la meta propuesta, la confianza que uno tenga en sí mismo y en la capacidad para hacer frente a las dificultades con que uno puede encontrarse en la prosecución de la meta, o la intensidad con la que se ha comprometido a llevar a cabo la decisión tomada.

mecanismos explicativos.

Dos han sido los mecanismos propuestos para explicar que contextualizar la intención de conducta facilita el inicio y desarrollo de las acciones consistentes con tal intención:

Por un lado, al identificar las circunstancias específicas en que se llevará a cabo la conducta, aquéllas se hacen más salientes, manteniéndose activas cognitivamente, focalizando la atención sobre las mismas y favoreciendo su procesamiento más eficaz.

Por otro lado, el establecimiento de la asociación entre tales circunstancias y la conducta, favorece que aquéllas actúen como auténtico disparador de la conducta, facilitando su inicio inmediato y automatización una vez presentadas las circunstancias anticipadas.

Los datos de estudios sobre el tema prestan un apoyo significativo a las ideas siguientes:

  • El empleo de estrategias autorreguladoras-volitivas, como, en este caso, la planificación de las circunstancias en que se ejecutará la conducta, favorece su inicio y desarrollo.
  • La activación cognitiva de los elementos contextuales a los que se asocia la ejecución de la conducta, facilita su más rápido y eficaz procesamiento.

La significativa concordancia entre planificación y ejecución efectiva de la conducta, apoya la idea de que tales eventos situacionales se convierten en auténticos elicitadores de la conducta, que se activaría de manera automática en cuanto aquellos estén presentes, sin necesidad de que el individuo sea enteramente consciente de ello.
El nexo cognitivo establecido entre factores contextuales y la conducta planificada felicitaría la implantación y automatización de la misma.

La disminución del peso que la experiencia conductual previa tiene sobre la conducta futura en aquellos sujetos que han planificado su ejecución, indica que esta estrategia (el establecimiento de un nexo cognitivo contexto-conducta por simple repetición cognitiva) podría ser tan eficaz, si no más, que la repetición conductual de la asociación contexto-conducta para modificar la conducta del individuo o implantar conductas nuevas.

utilidad de la planificación como estrategia autorreguladora.

La planificación de las circunstancias en que se realizará la conducta con la que uno se ha comprometido está indicada para facilitar el inicio de la conducta motivada, de manera especial en aquellos casos en los que la conducta no está aún sólidamente establecida en el repertorio de conductas de la persona, o su ejecución supone un coste o requiere un esfuerzo importante, al menos en sus estadios iniciales.

Pero es más, se aporta evidencia que sugiere que también facilita la persistencia en la conducta hasta alcanzar la meta, al menos durante los intervalos de tiempo contemplados en las distintas investigaciones, facilitando, además, su automatización e incorporación al repertorio de conductas habituales del individuo.

In Search of Lost Time

information technology ‘For a long time I would to go to bed early. Sometimes, the candle barely out, my eyes closed so quickly that I did not have the time to tell myself: I’m falling asleep.’   Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time Taking the code literally The performers are reading the machine-code version of […]

information technology

‘For a long time I would to go to bed early. Sometimes, the candle barely out, my eyes closed so quickly that I did not have the time to tell myself: I’m falling asleep.’  

Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time

Taking the code literally

The performers are reading the machine-code version of Marcel Proust’s novel. During the eight hours of a working day the humans are playing computer. For these purposes the text is first deconstructed into its individual parts — the letter and characters — which in turn are decoded into the Ascii-code — a code underlying digital text processing. Each letter is represented by an individual sequence of signs, consisting of zeros and ones. The performance is situated in an ironic lab situation and attempts to find beauty inside of the microstructures of the digital. During the act of reading, interpreting and presenting the work of art emerges, posing questions about the nature of the digital and the analogue, of work and art, time and beauty.

From the analog to the digital and back again

The sequence of events of the performance is described in this manual.
Starting from the ASCII-Version of Marcel Proust’s novel ‘A la recherche du temps perdu’ it is then re-coded into zeros and ones and then read by two performers alternately (one is reading the zeros, the other one the ones). The third person is CPU (the Central Processing Unit): She interprets the zeros and ones with the aid of an ASCII allocation table, cuts out the corresponding letter from the prepared sheets and turns it over to Display, who sticks it onto the wall panel.

After eight hours of performance about 250 characters can be processed.

Concept: Karl Heinz Jeron and Valie Djordjevic

A five minute extract from the performance “A la recherche du temps perdu” on 20 March 2006 in SPACE, London, during the xxxx festival 2006 (http://1010.co.uk/xxxxx_arch.html). Performance by Karl Heinz Jeron and Valie Djordjevic. More info on http://khjeron.de/alarecherche

We are using the electronic versions of the first three parts of ‘A la recherche du temps perdu’ from Project Gutenberg.

The performance is licenced under the GNU General Public License.

Credits:

First performance on 19 November 2005 at the allgirls gallery in Berlin.

Participants:

True: Valie Djordjevic
False: Karl Heinz Jeron
CPU: Heissam el-Wardany
Display: Dani Djordjevic

Second performance on 20 March 2006 in SPACE, London , as a part of the xxxxx event series.

Participants:

True: Valie Djordjevic
False: Yair Wallach
CPU: Karl Heinz Jeron
Display: Elvina Flower

Third performance on 10 September 2006 in Blumberg, Vienna, during the paraflows festival.

Participants:

True: Verena Brückner
False: Florian Kmet
CPU: Thomas Hörl
Display: Peter Kozek

nolición

NOLICIÓN La palabra nolición es un término filosófico que se refiere al acto de no querer, a la acción de tener una negación de la voluntad hacia algo. Procede del latín escolástico medieval nolitio, nolitionis ya con ese significado. Es probable que la acuñara, o al menos la difundiera, Guillermo de Ockham (muerto a mitad […]

NOLICIÓN

La palabra nolición es un término filosófico que se refiere al acto de no querer, a la acción de tener una negación de la voluntad hacia algo. Procede del latín escolástico medieval nolitio, nolitionis ya con ese significado. Es probable que la acuñara, o al menos la difundiera, Guillermo de Ockham (muerto a mitad del s. XIV) que es el primero que la usa profusamente con gran cantidad de apariciones de la palabra en su obra. La palabra está construida sobre el verbo latino nolle (no querer), por analogía con el vocablo latino volitio, volitionis (volición, acto de querer), derivado del verbo velle (querer). Anteriormente en latín existío un término para la acción de no querer y la aversión que era nolentia, empleado por Tertuliano y algún otro autor del s. IV d.C.

El verbo nolle es un compuesto creado a partir del verbo velle con la partícula ne- de la negación subjetiva (así de *ne volo -no quiero-, se forma por contracción nolo -no quiero-). El verbo latino volo ( expresado en infinitivo, velle), de raíz alternante vol-/vel-, y que significa "querer", se asocia a una raíz indoeuropea *wel que indica deseo y querencia. De ahí palabras como voluntad, voluntarioso, veleidad, benévolo y malévolo. También se vincula a esta raíz indoeuropea la palabra latina voluptas, voluptatis, "placer" en latín, pero en origen toda pasión, deseo o querencia vehemente por las cosas, y que genera nuestro adjetivo voluptuoso.

the cone of experience

People remember 10%, 20%…Oh Really? Publication Note This article was originally published on the Work-Learning Research website (www.work-learning.com) in 2002. It may have had some minor changes since then. It was moved to this blog in 2006. Introduction People do NOT remember 10% of what they read, 20% of what they see, 30% of what they hear, […]

People remember 10%, 20%…Oh Really?

Publication Note

This article was originally published on the Work-Learning Research website (www.work-learning.com) in 2002. It may have had some minor changes since then. It was moved to this blog in 2006.

Introduction

People do NOT remember 10% of what they read, 20% of what they see, 30% of what they hear, etc. That information, and similar pronouncements are fraudulent. Moreover, general statements on the effectiveness of learning methods are not credible—learning results depend on too many variables to enable such precision. Unfortunately, this bogus information has been floating around our field for decades, crafted by many different authors and presented in many different configurations, including bastardizations of Dale’s Cone. The rest of this article offers more detail.

My Search For Knowledge

My investigation of this issue began when I came across the following graph:

Chigra1

The Graph is a Fraud!

After reading the cited article several times and not seeing the graph—nor the numbers on the graph—I got suspicious and got in touch with the first author of the cited study, Dr. Michelene Chi of the University of Pittsburgh (who is, by the way, one of the world’s leading authorities on expertise). She said this about the graph:

“I don’t recognize this graph at all. So the citation is definitely wrong; since it’s not my graph.”

What makes this particularly disturbing is that this graph has popped up all over our industry, and many instructional-design decisions have been based on the information contained in the graph.

Bogus Information is Widespread

I often begin my workshops on instructional design and e-learning and my conference presentations with this graph as a warning and wake up call. Typically, over 90% of the audience raises their hands when I ask whether anyone has seen the numbers depicted in the graph. Later I often hear audible gasps and nervous giggles as the information is debunked. Clearly, lots of experienced professionals in our field know this graph and have used it to guide their decision making.

The graph is representative of a larger problem. The numbers presented on the graph have been circulating in our industry since the late 1960′s, and they have no research backing whatsoever. Dr. JC Kinnamon (2002) of Midi, Inc., searched the web and found dozens of references to those dubious numbers in college courses, research reports, and in vendor and consultant promotional materials.

Where the Numbers Came From

The bogus percentages were first published by an employee of Mobil Oil Company in 1967, writing in the magazine Film and Audio-Visual Communications. D. G. Treichler didn’t cite any research, but our field has unfortunately accepted his/her percentages ever since. NTL Institute still claims that they did the research that derived the numbers. See my response to NTL.

Michael Molenda, a professor at Indiana University, is currently working to track down the origination of the bogus numbers. His efforts have uncovered some evidence that the numbers may have been developed as early as the 1940′s by Paul John Phillips who worked at University of Texas at Austin and who developed training classes for the petroleum industry. During World War Two Phillips taught Visual Aids at the U. S. Army’s Ordnance School at the Aberdeen (Maryland) Proving Grounds, where the numbers have also appeared and where they may have been developed.

Strange coincidence: I was born on these very same Aberdeen Proving Grounds.

Ernie Rothkopf, professor emeritus of Columbia University, one of the world’s leading applied research psychologists on learning, reported to me that the bogus percentages have been widely discredited, yet they keep rearing their ugly head in one form or another every few years.

Many people now associate the bogus percentages with Dale’s “Cone of Experience,” developed in 1946 by Edgar Dale. It provided an intuitive model of the concreteness of various audio-visual media. Dale included no numbers in his model and there was no research used to generate it. In fact, Dale warned his readers not to take the model too literally. Dale’s Cone, copied without changes from the 3rd and final edition of his book, is presented below:

Dalesconegif

Dale’s Cone of Experience (Dale, 1969, p. 107)

You can see that Dale used no numbers with his cone. Somewhere along the way, someone unnaturally fused Dale’s Cone and Treichler’s dubious percentages. One common example is represented below.

Chigra2

The source cited in the diagram above by Wiman and Meierhenry (1969) is a book of edited chapters. Though two of the chapters (Harrison, 1969; Stewart, 1969) mention Dale’s Cone of Experience, neither of them includes the percentages. In other words, the diagram above is citing a book that does not include the diagram and does not include the percentages indicated in the diagram.

Here are some more examples:

From_josh_bersin_webinar_5262005_jpeg

Coneoflearning_1

Retentionchart_large

The “Evidence” Changes to Meet the Need of the Deceiver

The percentages, and the graph in particular, have been passed around in our field from reputable person to reputable person. The people who originally created the fabrications are to blame for getting this started, but there are clearly many people willing to bend the information to their own devices. Kinnamon’s (2002) investigation found that Treichler’s percentages have been modified in many ways, depending on the message the shyster wants to send. Some people have changed the relative percentages. Some have improved Treichler’s grammar. Some have added categories to make their point. For example, one version of these numbers says that people remember 95% of the information they teach to others.

People have not only cited Treichler, Chi, Wiman and Meierhenry for the percentages, but have also incorrectly cited William Glasser, and correctly cited a number of other people who have utilized Treichler’s numbers.

It seems clear from some of the fraudulent citations that deception was intended. On the graph that prompted our investigation, the title of the article had been modified from the original to get rid of the word “students.” The creator of the graph must have known that the term “students” would make people in the training / development / performance field suspicious that the research was done on children. The creator of Wiman and Meierhenry diagram did four things that make it difficult to track down the original source: (1) the book they cited is fairly obscure, (2) one of the authors names is spelled wrong, (3) the year of publication is incorrect, (4) and the name Charles Merrill, which was actually a publishing house, was ambiguously presented so that it might have referred to an author or editor.

But Don’t The Numbers Speak The Truth?

The numbers are not credible, and even if they made sense, they’d still be dangerous.

If we look at the numbers a little more closely, they are highly unconvincing. How did someone compare “reading” and “seeing?” Don’t you have to “see” to “read?” What does “collaboration” mean anyway? Were two people talking about the information they were learning? If so, weren’t they “hearing” what the other person had to say? What does “doing” mean? How much were they “doing” it? Were they “doing” it correctly, or did they get feedback? If they were getting feedback, how do we know the learning didn’t come from the feedback—not the “doing?” Do we really believe that people learn more “hearing” a lecture, than “reading” the same material? Don’t people who “read” have an advantage in being able to pace themselves and revisit material they don’t understand? And how did the research produce numbers that are all factors of ten? Doesn’t this suggest some sort of review of the literature? If so, shouldn’t we know how the research review was conducted? Shouldn’t we get a clear and traceable citation for such a review?

Even the idea that you can compare these types of learning methods is ridiculous. As any good research psychologist knows, the measurement situation affects the learning outcome. If we have a person learn foreign-language vocabulary by listening to an audiotape and vocalizing their responses, it doesn’t make sense to test them by having them write down their answers. We’d have a poor measure of their ability to verbalize vocabulary. The opposite is also nonsensical. People who learn vocabulary by seeing it on the written page cannot be fairly evaluated by asking them to say the words aloud. It’s not fair to compare these different methods by using the same test, because the choice of test will bias the outcome toward the learning situation that is most like the test situation.

But why not compare one type of test to another—for example, if we want to compare vocabulary learning through hearing and seeing, why don’t we use an oral test and written one? This doesn’t help either. It’s really impossible to compare two things on different indices. Can you imagine comparing the best boxer with the best golfer by having the boxer punch a heavy bag and having the golfer hit for distance? Would Muhammad Ali punching with 600 pounds of pressure beat Tiger Woods hitting his drives 320 yards off the tee?

The Importance of Listing Citations

Even if the numbers presented on the graph had been published in a refereed journal—research we were reasonably sure we could trust—it would still be dangerous not to know where they came from. Research conclusions have a way of morphing over time. Wasn’t it true ten years ago that all fat was bad? Newer research has revealed that monounsaturated oils like olive oil might actually be good for us. If a person doesn’t cite their sources, we might not realize that their conclusions are outdated or simply based on poor research. Conversely, we may also lose access to good sources of information. Suppose Teichler had really discovered a valid source of information? Because he/she did not use citations, that research would remain forever hidden in obscurity.

The context of research makes a great deal of difference. If we don’t know a source, we don’t really know whether the research is relevant to our situation. For example, an article by Kulik and Kulik (1988) concluded that immediate feedback was better than delayed feedback. Most people in the field now accept their conclusions. Efforts by Work-Learning Research to examine Kulik and Kulik’s sources indicated that most of the articles they reviewed tested the learners within a few minutes after the learning event, a very unrealistic analog for most training situations. Their sources enabled us to examine their evidence and find it faulty.

Who Should We Blame?

The original shysters are not the only ones to blame. The fact that many people who have disseminated the graph used the same incorrect citation makes it clear that they never accessed the original study. Everyone who uses a citation to make a point (or draw a conclusion) ought to check the citation. That, of course, includes all of us who are consumers of this information.

What Does This Tell Us About Our Field?

It tells us that we may not be able to trust the information that floats around our industry. It tells us that even our most reputable people and organizations may require the Wizard-of-Oz treatment—we may need to look behind the curtain to verify their claims.

The Danger To Our Field

At Work-Learning Research, our goal is to provide research-based information that practitioners can trust. We began our research efforts several years ago when we noticed that the field jumps from one fad to another while at the same time holding religiously to ideas that would be better cast aside.

The fact that our field is so easily swayed by the mildest whiffs of evidence suggests that we don’t have sufficient mechanisms in place to improve what we do. Because we’re not able or willing to provide due diligence on evidence-based claims, we’re unable to create feedback loops to push the field more forcefully toward continuing improvement.

Isn’t it ironic? We’re supposed to be the learning experts, but because we too easily take things for granted, we find ourselves skipping down all manner of yellow-brick roads.

How to Improve the Situation

It will seem obvious, but each and every one of us must take responsibility for the information we transmit to ensure its integrity. More importantly, we must be actively skeptical of the information we receive. We ought to check the facts, investigate the evidence, and evaluate the research. Finally, we must continue our personal search for knowledge—for it is only with knowledge that we can validly evaluate the claims that we encounter.

Our Citations

Chi, M. T. H., Bassok, M., Lewis, M. W., Reimann, P., & Glaser, R. (1989). Self-explanations: How students study and use examples in learning to solve problems. Cognitive Science, 13, 145-182.

Dale, E. (1946, 1954, 1969). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden.

Harrison, R. (1969). Communication theory. In R. V. Wiman and W. C. Meierhenry (Eds.) Educational media: Theory into practice. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Kinnamon, J. C. (2002). Personal communication, October 25.

Kulik, J. A., & Kulik, C-L. C. (1988). Timing of feedback and verbal learning. Review of Educational Research, 58, 79-97.

Molenda, M. H. (2003). Personal communications, February and March.

Rothkopf, E. Z. (2002). Personal communication, September 26.

Stewart, D. K. (1969). A learning-systems concept as applied to courses in education and training. In R. V. Wiman and W. C. Meierhenry (Eds.) Educational media: Theory into practice. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Treichler, D. G. (1967). Are you missing the boat in training aids? Film and Audio-Visual Communication, 1, 14-16, 28-30, 48.

Wiman, R. V. & Meierhenry, W. C. (Eds.). (1969). Educational media: Theory into practice. Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Experience & Education

Experience & Education is a short book written in 1938 by John Dewey, a pre-eminent educational theorist of the 20th century. It provides a concise and powerful analysis of education.[1] In this and his other writings on education, Dewey continually emphasizes experience, experiment, purposeful learning, freedom, and other concepts of progressive education. Dewey argues that the quality of an educational […]

Experience & Education is a short book written in 1938 by John Dewey, a pre-eminent educational theorist of the 20th century. It provides a concise and powerful analysis of education.[1] In this and his other writings on education, Dewey continually emphasizes experience, experiment, purposeful learning, freedom, and other concepts of progressive education. Dewey argues that the quality of an educational experience is critical and stresses the importance of the social and interactive processes of learning.

Dewey suggested that students organize fact-based comprehension through meta-cognition, or by building onto prior experiences, preconceptions, and knowledge, and therefore, the educator’s role is in creating an educative experience.

Dewey argues that not all experiences are educative and that, in fact, some experiences can be mis-educative. The central challenge to experience-based learning is to create fruitful experiences and organize them in progression to guide students’ learning. A mis-educative experience stymies the growth of further experiences. Enjoyable experiences may be mis-educative if they are disconnected and promote dispersive, disintegrated and centrifugal habits. In traditional schools, people associated boredom with the learning process. The experiences had by teachers and students were of the “wrong kind.” It Is not the absence of experiences in traditional schooling that Dewey finds troubling, but the defective nature of these experiences. Therefore, the educator’s duty is to determine the quality of an experience. Each experience has two aspects: the immediate agreeableness or disagreeableness and its later impact on further experience.

Dewey maintains that students must feel a sense of purpose in their learning to avoid mental slavery. Dewey describes a slave as someone who “executes the purpose of another or is enslaved to his own blind desires.” A genuine purpose consists of impulses, desires that are measured against perceived consequences. A purpose involves thinking about future consequences resulting from acting upon impulse. Schooling should not just concern itself with appealing to a student’s desires or impulses. Educators must help students foresee the consequences of enacted impulses and desires. More importantly educators must help drive the direction of the purpose. The formation of purposes involves: observation of objective conditions; an assessment of past experiences with similar conditions; and judgment of observation combined with memory to determine significance.

Exploding Apple products are rare

Credit: Regional Express Apple’s iPhones are always among the hottest gadgets of any holiday shopping season, but for one passenger on an Australian flight, the phone was too hot to handle — literally. While on Australian flight Regional Express ZL319 Friday, a passenger’s iPhone 4 (not the iPhone 4S, which is Apple’s latest model) suddenly […]

Credit: Regional Express
Apple’s iPhones are always among the hottest gadgets of any holiday shopping season, but for one passenger on an Australian flight, the phone was too hot to handle — literally.

While on Australian flight Regional Express ZL319 Friday, a passenger’s iPhone 4 (not the iPhone 4S, which is Apple’s latest model) suddenly started “emitting a significant amount of dense smoke, accompanied by a red glow,” according to a Regional Express statement.

The plane, which was flying from Lismore to Sydney, was in the midst of landing when the incident occured. “In accordance with company standard safety procedures, the flight attendant carried out recovery actions immediately, and the red glow was extinguished successfully,” according to Regional Express’ statement.

After landing, the iPhone was handed over to officials at the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. There’s no official word yet on what caused the phone to combust.

Exploding Apple products are rare, but explosions have happened in the past, mostly related to the devices’ lithium ion batteries overheating.

The European Union launched an investigation in 2009 after multiple instances of iPhones and iPod Touches exploding or catching fire midflight were reported in the U.K., Holland, France and Sweden.
Apple also recalled its first-generation of iPod nanos sold between September 2005 and December 2006 because the battery would overheat and “pose a safety risk,” according to the company’s website.

Pasos a seguir para promover el aprendizaje significativo

Proporcionar retroalimentación productiva, para guiar al aprendiz e infundirle una motivación intrínseca. Proporcionar familiaridad. Explicar mediante ejemplos. Guiar el proceso cognitivo. Fomentar estrategias de aprendizaje. Crear un aprendizaje situado cognitivo. La teoría del aprendizaje significativo se ha desarrollado y consolidado a merced de diferentes investigaciones y elaboraciones teóricas en el ámbito del paradigma cognitivo, mostrando […]

  • Proporcionar retroalimentación productiva, para guiar al aprendiz e infundirle una motivación intrínseca.
  • Proporcionar familiaridad.
  • Explicar mediante ejemplos.
  • Guiar el proceso cognitivo.
  • Fomentar estrategias de aprendizaje.
  • Crear un aprendizaje situado cognitivo.

La teoría del aprendizaje significativo se ha desarrollado y consolidado a merced de diferentes investigaciones y elaboraciones teóricas en el ámbito del paradigma cognitivo, mostrando coherencia y efectividad. Cuanto más se premie al educando en el proceso enseñanza aprendizaje mayor resultado mostrara al fin del año escolar pero esto será difícil sin la ayuda de los padres dentro del proceso. Debe tener el aprendizaje significativo un nivel de apertura amplio, material de estudio que sea interesante y atractivo y una motivación intrínseca o extrínseca .Además de realizar dos estrategia que son la elaboración (integrar y relacionar la nueva información con los conocimientos previos) y la organización (reorganizar la información que se ha aprendido y donde aplicarla)Como en el caso de las personas que reciben una educación a distancia donde es básico la disposición y auto regulación que tiene el alumno para obtener todo el aprendizaje significativo y que pueda aplicarlo en su entorno personal y social.
El aprendizaje significativo sin duda alguna, contribuye al aprendizaje a larga distancia ya que mediante este proceso se pueden adquirir diversos conocimientos e incluso terminar una formación académica sin la necesidad de acudir presencialmente a un aula y tomar clases. El aprendizaje significatico fusiona las bases del conocimiento previo con el adquirido, incrementando nuestro conocimiento del tema previamente conocido.

Nanodots

Nanodots are innovative magnetic tools used for exploring the nature of geometry, math and physics.

Nanodots are innovative magnetic tools used for exploring the nature of geometry, math and physics.