No comments…

The human condition summed-up in a picture.

Kids Do It Themselves

As I stated last week, information systems should also be mostly analysed on how they will shape our lives in the future, and how new ideas can actually increase our dependency in these systems. A friend of mine pointed out that I seemed a little bit negative and pessimistic in regards to this dependency, when reading again my post I realise that may have been the case.

As such I would like to present you this week with an example that shows that this increased dependency in information systems and their incorporation into our daily lives can actually be a good thing and improve our lives and improve our society as a whole.

This particular example was presented last month by David Merrill, an MIT graduate student, and shows how a simple idea of implementation of information systems can improve the learning experiences for the youngsters and develop the society by allowing for an increased flexibility of the mind and an incentive to creativity.

Information Mobility

Over the last month I have been posting about the importance of information systems in our lives, and the imperative their are to our current condition. Over these weeks I have been focusing mostly on the current information systems and their applicability in our current lives. But as has been pointed out to me, I am focusing maybe too much on past events and past technologies. The truth is technology is changing at an impressive speed, and is being used to keep us company in every moment of our lives: and I’m not just talking about the simple cell-phone, however sophisticated it may be. This week, instead of a long speech with my thoughts on the matter, I’d rather post a video which has been posted into an online pitch area this past Tuesday 10th of March and regards to a presentation done last month by Pattie Maes and her team from the MIT. This video reflects exactly what I mean by our dependence on future information systems and how these may become just an essential part of our lives: one single idea of a product that when inserted into the market and properly working, people just simple wont be able to live without. Enjoy…

e-University

Do you have any idea what is the room which is most used in almost any decent University? The computer lab.

University has taken a new form. Although the chalk and blackboard still prevails in the classrooms, a rising portion of classes no longer use this tool as the primary instrument to convey the graphical elements needed for a proper learning. LCD displays, touch screens, projectors and laser beams are now the primary tools used by professors. These allow for a better preparation of the session and a higher degree of interaction with students. Some companies have been taking advantage of this, and when you take the Apple example you can clearly see that a big element of its success lies on the University customers (students and teachers): it develops its products so that it becomes attractive to these students (with a high component of design and interactivity, such as the capability of controlling your presentation with your iPhone).

Although personally I’m all in  favour of implementing new technologies in the University arena, and pushing students to adopt these technologies that can help their lives, the truth is that an underlying issue seems to be forgotten when implementing these strategies: we now have a shift in competitiveness. This shift in competitiveness is given at an internal level on two approaches: the teachers and the students.

As to what the teachers are concerned, we have the issue of proper use of the technology. Let’s face it, as good a researcher as a teacher may be, he can have absolutely no skills in presenting this material to pupils. When implementing these technologies, many teachers hide behind them to mask their lack of aptitude towards the science of teaching. And as much as this camouflage may help them feel better, the reality is that these technologies are information systems that should be there to enhance a presentation and allow for more interaction with the students: the idea is not for teachers to be able to hide behind video effects and shift the attention towards the media element. The focus should always be on the teacher and on the discussion of what is being said. As much information as a PowerPoint presentation may give us, it cannot replace the art of transmitting knowledge: it cannot teach you, and you cannot discuss with a PowerPoint slide a divergence of opinion. A presentation, like a textbook, imposes information and requires you to comply with it even without understanding it and the logic behind it. Some teachers have understood this concept of supported teaching, other haven’t. If Darwin theory could be applied to Universities, the latter would soon be eliminated.

Students face a very different dilemma: the knowledge of these technologies and the maximum use of their capabilities allows for better presentations to be made and for a better processing of all the information and content provided by the teachers. Thus, the deeper are the knowledge of these technologies by the students the better are the chances he has to excel in his academic performance: for instance, a management student who is able to create a highly interactive presentation platform will certainly be able to present a much more interesting case study than a student that has basic PowerPoint capabilities. Since the evaluation of students is done with a high degree of importance given to the projects developed throughout the academic year, the final grades of the students who have a better understanding of these technologies will probabilistically be higher then the ones who lack this higher understanding, even if the latter has a better understanding of the content of the course content. College students in current times are required to be authentic system information engineers and produce innovative content. Many companies have also grasped this element and created platforms in order to help students develop their skills in this matter and create stunning presentations and report, capitalising on this through advertisement or through small charges for “premium” services. To what extent should then students be prepared before entering these institutions to use these technologies and what secondary effects could surface from such education?

Portugal has adopted a highly publicised campaign with the intent to introduce students to these technologies from a very young age, providing students with the possibility of having a personal portable computer and installing digital blackboards in the classrooms. This could bring a high competitive advantage to these students were it not for the fact that most of the teachers in these schools have obsolete knowledge of these technologies and high lack of update, not being able to properly tutor these young minds to properly use these technologies. The result is obvious: pupils will use these technologies to engage in gaming activities, illegal downloads, and will bring this ideas into their adulthood as if it were taught on them by what used to be called “the wise minds” of the society. Technology is not the most important factor in these programs: the way the technology is used is what can make the difference. Technology is only the base of support that can provide the competitive advantage to these students: the competitive advantage is the knowledge itself (and taught on the proper and ethically correct way).

Networking Social Intra-Action

As I have been pointing out in my last two posts, the society we live in our days is highly dependant on information systems. When comparing the fresh generation of newly-graduated college students to our parents’ generation we conclude that their concept of fundamentals is radically different: while the latter sees human progress dependant on industry and manual labour, the youngsters seem to have understood that the progress relies rather on the fundamental networking between individuals. This networking is, however, no longer dependant on direct human contact, and with the concept of globalization now turned into reality, the networking has now shifted to a spectrum of diverse online communities.

Networks such as Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, ASmallWorld and even TheStarTracker serve as the platforms promoting this networking. Some more restrictive than others, they all promote networking between individuals at various levels and remove the need for personal and physical introductions, one of the main social barriers to the exponential increase of any individual’s social network.

Nevertheless, although some might defend that these networks are a great tool to eliminate social barriers and fight ethnic disparity, the truth is that these networks tend to promote the increase in the gap between social backgrounds. With selective membership criteria such as ASmallWorld (where only a few selected members are given the privilege of being allowed to invite a few of their friends to join the network and where any slight misconduct leads to being expelled to the ABigWorld network), even sometimes being nationality restrictive, such as TheStarTracker (exclusive for Portuguese with abroad experience). The reality is that these networks promote social contact between individuals of the same social class, and outcasts the so-called aliens. Some people might refute this examples with the particular example of Facebook… But with further analysis we come to the conclusion that Facebook has just the same effect: people are friends within their own social background, the difference is that you ate the one who defines this social group, and not the network managers. With this Facebook managed to capture a maximum number of clients and then be able to use this user database to capitalise on advertisement. The social barriers remain within its core: if you observe a matrix of connections within Facebook you could be able to see groups of “islands”: these are the different social groups within Facebook that have intra-action rather then inter-action.

Raises then the issue of establishing up to what point does the lack of access to these social networks alienate individuals from their social origins and deprives them of the value of the networking with these individuals at a global level. In my opinion the human contact still prevails in these networks and is the only one that can effectively establish the trust factor needed in any kind of relationship. And although many of these networks do help to open doors and keep in touch with people we meet throughout the World, the truth is that I have been witnessing ever more people committing Facebook Suicide and going along well and much more relaxed in their day to day social lives: nevertheless these facts still remain to be studied.