Technology in the classroom will always have my vote. I have always been a big believer in making use of employing just the right amount of tech in the classrooms. In the past, some of these thoughts have taken the shape and form of actual blog-posts. link, link, link and link.
In the words of Thomas Friedman 'It should not be about time spent (in the classroom) but more about stuff learned". Listening to a teacher for hours on end, droning on about any given topic is a very inefficient mechanism for imparting education. Something that I have blogged about.
Now there has been a lot of good innovation, specifically when it comes to the medium. The medium relating to how education is imparted, focusing on the emergence of MOOCs. But when it comes to delivering the 'concepts', the synthesis of what information is supposed to represent. That problem has been addressed in bits and pieces, as we can only innovative so much within a medium that is confined to text/audio/video.
Here, virtual reality is a game changing product. It will give students of all types the ability to pickup and absorb the knowledge in a much richer format. For example: reading something vs actually performing the task has a completely different impact on your cognitive cycles. The chances that you will forget something that you read are pretty high. In retrospect, your brain forms neural pathways and registers how you go about acquiring any new skills. This is precisely the reason why it is next to impossible to forget a skill, like riding a bike.
Also, there are so many other benefits when it comes to leveraging VR for education. No limitations when it comes to physical space, unlimited chances for trial and error without any harmful effects in the physical world, the ability for collaborating with others from any given part of the world e.t.c. Also, since all the interactions are occurring in the digital world, these interactions and the sum total of the outcomes can be measured and aggregated in greater details. This will be particularly beneficial, when it comes to the issue of jobs, skills training and eventually in getting rid of the job/skills mismatch.
Today I decided to Google the term 'Oculus for education' and when you click on the video section on Google, then this is one of the first videos that comes up (below).
This makes me really happy. This can transform education as we know it, entire societies and the world. But why limit it to just the education industry. Virtual reality can transform the world.
What a great invention! Great work by Palmer Luckey (in particular) and the folks at Oculus Rift.
Excerpt from the Asteroid Mining page on Wikipedia.
Didn't doubt the numbers when I first heard about this, which was a couple of years ago.
Space exploration, colonization and mining can offer unimaginable opportunities for our species.
So apparently this aerogel technology is 83 years old and it has certainly evolved during this timeframe.
Future state and potential unconventional uses for the aerogel. I am thinking of a couple of ideas here and in random order.
This is definitely future state. Maybe 10, 15 or 20 years out.
Some of these thoughts and then some more, were inspired by this book I am reading. 'The Visioneers', written by a gentleman by the name of W. Patrick McCray. Who, by the way, was very kind in responding back to one of my tweets and even ended up retweeting one of them.
Halfway through this book, I started thinking of a somewhat new form of transportation and perhaps a new mechanism and method for manufacturing. Not so new, if you read the book, as a significant majority of the content revolves around the fine work done by Eric K. Drexler. What a great guy!
Then, I started thinking of lighter than air particles and eventually lighter than air machines. Or a combination of the two. Then I happened to be looking at some basic research being done when it relates to self-assembling nano-machines. And I thought to myself, could all of this be combined together? So that a million different individual components could come together to form a bigger structure?
Next, I literally got this idea of injecting stuff in space, over the more conventional approach of using rocket based technology. Don't get me wrong, I love the advances that have been made when it relates to rocket based technology. But in order to colonize space, we either need to build an elevator that goes into space or we need to come up with another mechanism for getting huge amounts of materials into space and back.
Hence the idea of a giant space needle, the kind that injects stuff into space and sucks it back. During that brief moment, when I started questioning my sanity. I happened to be looking out the window and saw the sun shining on a set of puffy clouds.
That's when I got my Eureka moment! Thinking, wondering if what I had envisioned in terms of swarms of machines that we can ride atop lighter than air material. Then we could theoretically transport them onto a different level of elevation. So again, clusters of machines, sitting atop clusters of aerogel. Picked up by a charge of static electricity. Taken to a higher level of elevation. Eventually transported into space. That is where the machines break free from their aerogelly mould and would then come together.
I admit, this is one of the craziest idea I've ever thought of. But, it is theoretically possible, specially with the advancements being made with certain technologies and how they will evolve in a relatively short amount of time.
These ideas compliment part of my vision for the future. Where objects move seamlessly, in a very stable method, without any noise and with very little to no human intervention. Poetry, must possess multiple forms.
A 2.5 kg brick is supported by a piece of aerogel with a mass of only 2 grams. (Source: Wikipedia)
We are witnessing and about to witness two major transformations:
This means that a lot of older models will start breaking down and newer models will be required.
There are many different kinds of Leaders. They possess a combination of different strengths that make them the type of leader that they really are.
However, this idea just came to me the other day.
I think, relying on a single leader to lead throughout the entirety of the operation. That might not be an ideal approach during all the different phases of a venture’s existence.
I say this because I have personally witnessed how:
This type of a leader will keep throwing something at the wall to see if it sticks. But they will introspectively slow down all interactions that happen during that process to really figure out what is going on in that construct. But that, they will do this really quickly.
Their intent is to always figure out how something works and more importantly, why something that they are vested in, does not work. Their process is messy. But give it time, a system, adequate amount of chances, mentorship and this leader will bloom.
This type of a leader is a natural rebel. They are dissatisfied with the status quo.
These type of leaders have a much higher propensity for helping change the world. They get others to buy into their vision. They engineer ideas, continually dream of disruption and they throw one heck of a party.
They provide themselves the authority to form conclusions, make decisions and act. However they go through that process a number of times, they test and retest their hypothesis to ensure that their decisions would contribute towards overall operational stability. They know how to balance process vs innovation. They are always mindful of the fact that you cannot fall into the process trap and thus end up killing innovation as an unthought-of consequence. The stabilizer is good at forming relationships, finding and capitalizing upon newer opportunities, is astute and great at guiding the venture towards calmer seas.
Maximizers can experience an enormous amount of trouble dealing with non-linear, chaotic, messy disruptions. When they find themselves in such a situation, maybe they should seek help from an activator, who is very good at making sense out of chaos.
That being said, this is the rarest amongst the already rare breed of good entrepreneurs. Maximizers are the ideal candidates for leading ventures that eventually help launch economies of scale. Great maximizers are relentless when it comes to the diversification of their revenue streams. Generally they create institutions that last a very long time.
It’d be pretty rare if a single leader possessed all three of these characteristics. But it happens. I think it might be more common for any leader to possess 2 out of the 3 characteristics. And when they do, they either find someone who would possess and compliment the area that they are lacking in. Or that they would form an entire team to be able to fill that gap.
In an era of increasingly complexity, leaders would have to rely upon others, in order to run the operations during the different phases of venture’s existence. Don’t try and do something that you are not good at, specifically during a time when a lot is at stake. Ideally, every venture would cultivate these three types of leaders from the get go. And from time to time, they’d have to pull the activator from the party to ask them what should be done.