One of the fundamental problems about using computers to educated is that it is much harder to be a pro-active learner, since it removes the capacity to physically engage with the medium. Rather, students who learn on computers tend to be passive learners, receiving the information as just that - information, rather than ideas. Because they can't write on the medium, physically interact with it, they are passive: eyes open, they take in the information as from a television. Since the point of education is to teach the mind to actively and thoughtfully engage with ideas, not simply process information, computers as a pedagogical tool can be contrary to the true purpose of education.
Well, yeah I did submit it, and it did get rejected, but whatever. They must get 500 submissions a second, so another news article about nanotechnology might have gone to the wayside.
It's all good.
Slashdot Mirror
One of the fundamental problems about using computers to educated is that it is much harder to be a pro-active learner, since it removes the capacity to physically engage with the medium. Rather, students who learn on computers tend to be passive learners, receiving the information as just that - information, rather than ideas. Because they can't write on the medium, physically interact with it, they are passive: eyes open, they take in the information as from a television. Since the point of education is to teach the mind to actively and thoughtfully engage with ideas, not simply process information, computers as a pedagogical tool can be contrary to the true purpose of education.
You may have already found out by now... in any event, it will be able perform 14 trillion more calculations/second than ES (ES can do 36 trillion).
Well, yeah I did submit it, and it did get rejected, but whatever. They must get 500 submissions a second, so another news article about nanotechnology might have gone to the wayside. It's all good.
Speaking of nanotechnology - some chemists at NYU have made a walking DNA robot. Read about it here.