Final Project Video

There is an article in the upcoming issue of the Journal of Effective  Teaching related to this project.  Here is a link to the article:  Click here to read article

Module 6

Dr. Soloway, in the pod-cast, discusses the things or “atoms” that are the tangible object – the computer, the cell phone, the i-pad, etc.  However Soloway also points out that the “thing” is not as important as the “service” in today’s tech oriented, digital society.  This required a change not only in the perspective of what one needs to have but in the meaning or definition of what is technology.  In the past technology was a thing – the technology enhanced classroom, the new technology purchased for our school, etc.  We appear to believe that the technology (all by itself) would make something happen.  From my experience I have seen some professors do wonderful things in the technology-enhanced classroom and some do things that are absolutely useless, however I have never seen the classroom teach all by itself.  It is important to recognize that technology (as a thing) can facilitate something positive, but all by itself – technology as a thing – does nothing (positive or negative).

I have been watching “Watson” (the IBM Computer) on Jeopardy this week.  Watson is an atom-based machine/computer.    On Tuesday’s program Watson appeared brilliant compared to his human competitors...until final jeopardy.  Both human competitors had the correct question and Watson was wrong!  So what happened?  The answer to final jeopardy item required multiple pieces of information:  A US city (the category), has 2 airports, a war hero and a major battle!  While the two humans were able to process all these factors and come up with the correct answer, Watson did not! So while the IBM team behind Watson conquered the ability to recognize “natural language” the complexity of the high level cognitive thinking process requiring access of multiple items from one’s long-term memory (storage) – still was not doable.   So my conclusion --- while I was watching the show (the first 20 minutes), I was feeling pretty low about the future of the human mind, but after a good night’s sleep to reflect on the outcome of final jeopardy – I have concluded it is essential that we do not promote or accept a world in which technology is seen as the dominant force in education, economic, health or any other segment of societies function.  Clearly it is a resource but it is not the ultimate perfect brain. 

So how does all this related to the global divide and the haves and have-nots?  Clearly Soloway, the Bloomberg Report and even the European Information Society European information society have a perspective.  However until we live in a utilitarian society we need to recognize individualization, choice and differences – both those of free-will and situational constraint. I am all for fairness and equality and equal access to help others learn, grow, and achieve their dreams.  But I am not certain why equality to technology is any different than equality to health care, education, or financial wealth?  Are we looking for a society based on equality or uniqueness or variation?

 I also think we sometimes use concerns about barriers to technology as an excuse to not look at more process or service oriented issues.  Both in my own experience and in the experiences I have heard others share throughout one of the greatest barrier is the lack of the atom-based things, with little attention to what will be done with the things – once they are purchased.  Therefore I think Soloway is on target in saying we need to embrace the services and not the items of technology.  In this shift, the emphasis is re-focused to the human to human interaction and not the machine.

Additional reading:

The Digital Divide Workshop: http://www.digitaldivide.net/

Module 5:

•  When you decided to obtain a DVD for your science fiction assignment in Module 4, where did you go to find a movie based on a Philip K. Dick book? Did you rent or purchase a DVD, or did you view it digitally on your computer using Netflix or a similar vendor of video on demand?

I viewed it digitally, online.  As I shared before, I am not a sci-fi fan and we are not big movie watchers (last time I was in a movie theater I saw…Chicago).  In fact, we do not have a DVD player, so on-line was the only option.

•  Is the current competition between DVDs and video on demand (VOD) an example of increasing returns or Red Queens?

DVD and VOD technologies are an example of Red Queens.  According to Thornburg (2009), increasing returns are two innovations that hit the marketplace at the same time.  On the other hand, according to Thornburg (2009), Red Queens are two technologies that are dominating the marketplace and confronting each other in a struggle to continue to benefits the consumer and to remain ahead of its competitors.  The technology of VOD came after the DVD (Anderson, 2004).  Just like the DVD was a more convenient (better) evolution of the video cassette, the VOD was a more convenient (better) evolution of the DVD.  However the VOD did not immediately lead to the obsolescence of the DVD.  They both found a place in the market and continue to compete for a niche in the consumer market.  For example, DVD’s have a niche market with children and educational settings.  Young children often want to watch the same program repeatedly, thus the durability of the DVD meets this need.  Similarly, individuals who reside in geographic areas with limited cable or internet service will find the disk-based recording of a DVD more reliable and user friendly.  On the other hand, persons who just want to view something once or one the fly will find the ability to instantly access the VOD more preferable.  Identifying the respective niche markets and evolving their respective technologies to meet their needs is important to the continued presence of DVDs and VOD in the technology market place.

•  Where do you think DVDs and video on demand are on the four criteria of McLuhan’s tetrad?

Below are tetrads of the DVD and VOD: 

Both technologies enhance accessibility to this form of entertainment and promote family time and groups viewing of programs/movies. While the focus is on promoting the family (or small group) unit, both the DVD and VOD have a potentially negative impact on “big” business – such as movie theaters and the movie making industry.  Here are some articles that detail these implications: 

• DVD Downturn panics filmmakers
• Film industry...financial impact
• Impact...film industry today

Both the DVD and the VOD have the potential to revolutionize the movie industry.  The question is what technology will best meet the needs of its niche consumer base while maintaining a collaborative working relationship with the mainstream movie making industry.  On the other-hand, there may be another yet to emerge technology that will obsolete both DVD and VOD.  `

References:

Anderson, C. (2004). Tech’s long tail [Video]. Retrieved 2/2/2011 from  http://www.ted.com/index.php/talks/chris_anderson_of_wired_on_tech_s_long_tail.htmlchris_anderson_of_wired_on_tech_s_long_tail.html

Thornburg, D. D. (2009). Increasing returns and red queens. Laureate Education, Inc. Retrieved from http://sylvan.live.ecollege.com/ec/crs/default.learn?CourseID=4199715&Survey=1&47=5797856&ClientNodeID=984645&coursenav=1&bhcp=1

Thornburg, D. (2008). Red Queens, butterflies, and strange attractors; Imperfect lenses into emergent technologies. Lake Barrington, IL: Thornburg Center for Space Exploration.

Module 4: Second Life as a disruptive technology

Second life has the potential to be a disruptive technology by giving the individual an ability to create an alternative persona.  Human being are complex social creatures, each created with a uniquely combined set of genetic material which manifests as appearance, personality and individual attributes and characteristics that are part of our social-cultural interaction with others. But a person’s avatar in Second life can change one’s appearance, attitude, placement in family or social/community structures and much more.  Choice and not natural  selection and genetics determine who you will be.

One of my concerns about virtual world, especially when used by vulnerable populations (i.e. children, individuals with medical or physical challenges, mentally ill, etc) may lead to a false sense of reality.  For example – a Virtual Ability Island  – begins with the narrator being excited that she can walk, run and fly.  She also mentions that she can “swim with the fish” and breathe underwater.  We subsequently learn that she has MS (Multiple Sclerosis) – therefore the ability to walk and run allows her to regain skills that the disease has taken away.  However, swimming with the fish and breathing underwater are not human skills.  So….what happens if she believes this is possible and blurs the distinction between the virtual and real worlds???

In another discussion second life is described as a “marketer’s paradise” (Web Link) .  A follow-up from the  Burlington Free Press discusses the Vermont tourism department using second life to depict a virtual Vermont vacation complete with beautiful scenery, exciting skiing, wandering wildlife, and a visit to the gold-domed capitol.  If it really is that realistic, why would I deal with the TSA pat-down at the airport and the travel time to visit Vermont in person?

Finally a more news oriented article from Forbes Magazine outlines some of the down-sides of networked technologies, one of the major one being the loss of privacy and the compromising of what make us uniquely human.

In terms of what second life displaced – I think it displaced the art of intrapersonal and interpersonal relationships.  It allows us to avoid learning how to come to know and to be responsible for our own being and for the social impact of our existence and action/inaction on the well-being of others.  If I shoot someone in second life, they can repel the bullet, and in the end we may even become friends recognizing that our difference was only a misunderstanding.  However, in the real world or our first life – that bullet has a lasting and real impact both on the person who did the shooting and the person who was shot.  Having a technology that allows behavior without consequences has the potential for significant disruption within society and on global well-being.

I am not a user of Second Life and have not been able to undertand what it offers.  A number of years ago, I did become interested in Second Life and even attended a number of professional presentations, but the consensus of opinion was the difficulty to program the site as well as the cost involved to purchase an island and the associated features.  Thus, I lost interest.  Also in my field - teaching nursing - we have virtual environment with high fidelity simulators which allow the real person to interact in simulated situations with other real people.  In health care - even when the patient and the provider are at different sites (i.e. tele-medicine), the persons need to relate on a human level.  Therefore I forsee limited use of second life in the education of health care providers.

Module 3: Rhymes of History

My mother and grandmother often tell stories of evening gatherings with family and friends on the front porch of the “Downey’s” (the family matriarch) and sharing the activities of the day, news of the family, or discussion world events.  The neighborhood kids would play and neighbors came together!

 Today, we log-on to facebook to connect with family and friends to share the activities of our day, news of the family or discussion of world events.  We know who is pregnant, who is working tonight, and who's child saw snow for the first time, "pooped" in the toilet or did something else too cute for words (thus the photos or video upload)!

Therefore I propose that facebook is the rekindling of the “front porch” where individuals come together to share and socialize.  The difference is that technology makes it possible for us to connect with a larger network of friends and to share across longer distances.  The one limitation is – there is no sharing of the fresh-baked cookies and pies made by the neighbor!

_________________
Here are some social networking sites focused on families:  Sort of a virtual front porch!!
e-family , 10 family friendly social networking sites 

Module 2: Learning Community Assignment

The photographic camera has a long history and has undergone many changes over time.  The beginning of the photographic camera dates back to the 4^th century when philosophers described the principles of optics and in the 1660’s when Isaac Newton discovered that light is composed of different colors.    The earliest camera were introduced in the 1800’s but required up to eight hours of light exposure and the image subsequently faded.  Throughout the 1800’s a number of individuals introduced new chemical processes and way to create and preserve photographic images, all based on the exposure to light.   In 1900 the “Brownie” was the first mass-marketed camera. The Brownie was followed by the 35mm still camera, the flash Bulb, film variations, the Polaroid camera, and the point and shoot camera (Bellis, 2010b).  In 1980 Sony demonstrated the first consumer camcorder and in 1990 the photo CD was introduced as a digital storage medium (Bellis, 2010b).  By the mid-2000 digital cameras were used by many photojournalists and becoming available to and accepted by the general public. 

While the introduction of the digital camera would seem like the next step in this cluster of technologic progression of the camera, it is not.  The modern day digital camera is not a result of the cluster of photographic cameras and camera related technologies, based on Newton’s knowledge of the light spectrum, but a rekindling of the technology from the early 1950’ used to capture live images by television cameras and to convert this information into electrical (digital) impulses which were saved to magnetic tape.  This was known as a video-tape recorder (VTR), which was funded by the Bing Crosby laboratories and was in common use by the television industry by 1956 (Bellis, 2010a).  Both those early television/video cameras and the digital cameras of today use a CCD (Charged Coupled Device) to sense light color and intensity of the image (http://www.electronics-manufacturers.com/products/digital-photography/ccd-camera/ ).   In addition in the 1960’s as part of the space race, NASA used a precursor to digital camera technologies to converted analog to digital signals with space probes to map the surface of the moon. 

Thus the emergence of the digital camera is an example of McLuhan’s idea that tetrads can grow as clusters or as chains (Thornburg, 2008). As I approached this assignment, I was certain this tetrad would be part of the cluster of the evolution of the photography.  However, as I learned more about the technology of digital cameras I realized it is an example of a chain because the digital camera diverts from the evolution of film and light exposure photography to the digitalization of live images.  Thus the technology of the digital camera is a reverse or rekindling of the technology used in the 1950’s and 1960 by the pioneers of the television industry and NASA scientists.   Here is a tetrad illustrating the emergence of the digital camera.

So what is next – maybe 4-dimensional or holographic photography?  Scientists at the University of Central Florida have a working prototype of a zoom lens that mimics the working of the human eye (Piquepaille, 2007).  Thus virtual photography will instantaneous dissemination may be on the horizon.

References:

Bellis, M. (2010a).  History of the digital camera.  About.com: inventors.   Retrieved 12/23/10 at: http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/bldigitalcamera.htm

Bellis, M. (2010b).  Photographic timeline.  About.com: inventors.  Retrieved 12/23/10 at:  http://inventors.about.com/od/pstartinventions/a/Photography.htm

Electronic Manufacturers (2007).  Retrieved 12/23/10 at:  http://www.electronics-manufacturers.com/products/digital-photography/ccd-camera/

Piquepaille, R. (2007).  Zoom liquid lenses for digital cameras.  Retrieved 12/23/10 at: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/emergingtech/zoom-liquid-lenses-for-digital-cameras/639

Thornburg, D. D. (2008b). Emerging technologies and McLuhan's Laws of Media. Lake Barrington, IL: Thornburg Center for Space Exploration.

Module 1

How to prepare students to act in unexpected situations is a challenge for educators in high risk practice based professions. Understanding nursing care needs and developing the professional judgment needed to provide safe care don’t happen in a single moment or through the discrete event of hearing, reading or watching. Responding to a complex phenomenon requires learning opportunities that are cumulative, integrative and multifaceted.  In the teaching of health professions curriculum, high fidelity simulation has emerged as a possible solution.

Simulation allows events to occur simultaneously and the nurse learns to identify relationships essential and common to safe and effective practice in a setting. Unlike a classroom setting, simulation allows learners to function in an environment similar to the clinical setting and to think on their feet and to “act as the nurse” without the constraints of potential harm to the patient or liability issues. Simulation allows the integration of technical skills with the knowledge and the application of professional judgment foundational to safe and effective nursing care. Simulations are optimized for learning. With the use of simulation, the educational experience is determined by the needs of the learner and not the needs of the patient. Learners have permission to fail and to learn from the negative consequences of the failure to recognize and act. This isn’t feasible in the clinical setting.  The use of simulation removes the potential of risk to the patient and lets learners experience the outcomes of their actions or inactions in the clinical setting.

One disadvantage often cited in discussions about the use of simulated learning experiences is the cost. While simulation may be more costly and time-intensive than the ad hoc clinical experiences available in the practice setting, the lack of risk to patient well-being, lack of liability and ability to explore the impact of failure to act may outweigh the financial investment in the simulator and development time.  A second limitation is when educators use simulation as a replacement activity.  Some setting have tried to use simulation in place of direct patient care experiences, and the outcome has been less than satisfactory  

This technology has potential benefits to society as nurse competence and safe patient care outweigh the cost associated with the use of simulated nursing situations as learning opportunities. 

Here is a video demonstrating the use of simulation in a nursing laboratory setting:  Video and a link to an article abstract:  Article Abstract

These photos are from a community based project, using high-fidelity simulation that we are developing for parents preparing for their infant's discharge from the NICU (neonatal intensive care unit).