Digitala prov

Lundaforskare förespråkar nationell satsning på digitala prov: http://www.svd.se/opinion/brannpunkt/infor-digitala-nationella-prov_8862904.svd

Det är förstås ganska självklara saker de påpekar. Idén med ett par tre prov per läsår ger jag däremot inte mycket för: gränsen mellan prov och inlärning kommer att gradvis suddas ut, förutspår jag, då själva prövandet, testandet, är en central del av inlärningen. Den motsvarar det jag i studietekniksammanhang kallar ”Efter”, dvs att arbeta med saker vi redan har lärt oss och tar fram igen. Digitala verktyg som underlättar detta kan på samma gång användas för den objektiva utvärdering som de nationella proven ska stå för. Om verktygen utformas korrekt minskar behovet av särskilda provtillfällen, vilka ofta nog inte är optimala för att korrekt mäta kunskaper.

Fake lecturer more credible

/The people behind this spoof were John E. Ware, Donald H. Naftulin and Frank A. Donnelly, who wanted to use this demonstration to spark a discussion on the content of the further education programme./ http://www.madsciencebook.com/05drfox.htm

In how many different fields could an actor outperform the real thing? What characterizes such fields?
Is it necessarily a bad thing?

Publicerat den
Kategoriserat som Uncategorized

Meditation changes the brain

Mental, intellectual or for that matter spiritual practices are not merely things people can choose to do, but they alter in fact the physical make up of the brain itself.

To people who are familiar with modern data on how the brain works, this should not be a surprise, but it is nonetheless easily forgotten. People who have practiced logical, rational thinking are in a very concrete way better equipped to reason. Similarly, people who practice meditation do develop areas of the brain that remain underdeveloped among those who do not practice.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=mediation-correlated-with-structura-11-01-22

Tiger moms and the nurture assumption

Bryan Caplan does not buy Amy Chua’s ideas that extreme strictness is doing children any good, and references Judith Harris’ research, which is basically a critique of what she calls the ”nurture assumption”, the idea that it matters very much how kids are raised …

The influence of genetic factors are not taken into consideration, he claims: http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2011/01/does_asian_pare.html

Group IQ differs from individual IQ

I have long wondered what it takes for collective intelligence to be better than individual intelligence. Under what circumstances and conditions will a group outperform an individual?

Boston Globe skriver om en studie av Thomas W. Malone, director of the MIT Center for Collective Intelligence: http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/12/19/group_iq/?page=full

Studien har publicerats i Science.
(HT: MR)

Happy mood good for creative thinking

http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/a-positive-mood-allows-your-brain-to-think-more-creatively.html

There are an endless number of studies like this, where they expose subjects to some kind of stimuli and then test their capacity to remember, learn, calculate or cooperate etc, and from the quantitative data, some form of scientific conclusion is drawn, and this data is then considered to be more or less trustworthy.

Fine. I have no problem with this, quite the contrary, I can think of a hundred similar studies I would like to see performed in this way.

It’s just that I think we are missing many pieces of knowledge that are quite readily attainable through development of the ability to observ one’s own thought processes, to actually study psychology using one self as the study object. That is not science in the general sense, but at the very least it can serve as a basis for dreaming up ideas for statistical examination – and I think this is how it is done many times. Many ideas might start with a person thinking ”this is how it works for me, let’s test it on a lot of people”.

The fact that something has not yet been tested on sufficiently many people though, is of course not a proof that a particular claim or hypothesis is not useful. Not relying on something on the basis that it is not properly studied yet, is perhaps a good strategy many times, but not always. I shall have to get back to this at a later time.