The history of technology in education. A comparative study and forecast

Area, launched in 1999 with the Bologna Declaration, has bestowed such a magnitude and unprecedented agility to the transformation process undertaken by European universities. However, the change has been more profound and drastic with regards to the use of new technologies both inside and outside the classroom. This article focuses on the study and analysis of the technology’s history within the university education and its impact on teachers, students and teaching methods. All the elements that have been significant and innovative throughout the history inside the teaching process have been analyzed, from the use of blackboard and chalk during lectures, the use of slide projectors and transparent slides, to the use of electronic whiteboards and Internet nowadays. The study is complemented with two types of surveys that have been performed among teachers and students during the school years 1999 - 2011 in the School of Civil Engineering at the Polytechnic University of Madrid. The pros and cons of each of the techniques and methodologies used in the learning process over the last decades are described, unfolding how they have affected the teacher, who has evolved from writing on a whiteboard to project onto a screen, the student, who has evolved from taking handwritten notes to download information or search the Internet, and the educational process, that has evolved from the lecture to acollaborative learning and project-based learning. It is unknown how the process of learning will evolve in the future, but we do know the consequences that some of the multimedia technologies are having on teachers, students and the learning process. It is our goal as teachers to keep ourselves up to date, in order to offer the student adequate technical content, while providing proper motivation through the use of new technologies. The study provides a forecast in the evolution of multimedia within the classroom and the renewal of the education process, which in our view, will set the basis for future learning process within the context of this new interactive era.

A machine learning approach to identify clinical trials involving nanodrugs and nanodevices from ClinicalTrials.gov

BACKGROUND: Clinical Trials (CTs) are essential for bridging the gap between experimental research on new drugs and their clinical application. Just like CTs for traditional drugs and biologics have helped accelerate the translation of biomedical findings into medical practice, CTs for nanodrugs and nanodevices could advance novel nanomaterials as agents for diagnosis and therapy. Although there is publicly available information about nanomedicine-related CTs, the online archiving of this information is carried out without adhering to criteria that discriminate between studies involving nanomaterials or nanotechnology-based processes (nano), and CTs that do not involve nanotechnology (non-nano). Finding out whether nanodrugs and nanodevices were involved in a study from CT summaries alone is a challenging task. At the time of writing, CTs archived in the well-known online registry ClinicalTrials.gov are not easily told apart as to whether they are nano or non-nano CTs-even when performed by domain experts, due to the lack of both a common definition for nanotechnology and of standards for reporting nanomedical experiments and results. METHODS: We propose a supervised learning approach for classifying CT summaries from ClinicalTrials.gov according to whether they fall into the nano or the non-nano categories. Our method involves several stages: i) extraction and manual annotation of CTs as nano vs. non-nano, ii) pre-processing and automatic classification, and iii) performance evaluation using several state-of-the-art classifiers under different transformations of the original dataset. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The performance of the best automated classifier closely matches that of experts (AUC over 0.95), suggesting that it is feasible to automatically detect the presence of nanotechnology products in CT summaries with a high degree of accuracy. This can significantly speed up the process of finding whether reports on ClinicalTrials.gov might be relevant to a particular nanoparticle or nanodevice, which is essential to discover any precedents for nanotoxicity events or advantages for targeted drug therapy.