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.

Studying the laws of software evolution in a long-lived FLOSS project

ome free, open-source software projects have been around for quite a long time, the longest living ones dating from the early 1980s. For some of them, detailed information about their evolution is available in source code management systems tracking all their code changes for periods of more than 15 years. This paper examines in detail the evolution of one of such projects, glibc, with the main aim of understanding how it evolved and how it matched Lehman's laws of software evolution. As a result, we have developed a methodology for studying the evolution of such long-lived projects based on the information in their source code management repository, described in detail several aspects of the history of glibc, including some activity and size metrics, and found how some of the laws of software evolution may not hold in this case

Merging person-specific bio-markers for predicting oral cancer recurrence through an ontology

One of the major problems related to cancer treatment is its recurrence. Without knowing in advance how likely the cancer will relapse, clinical practice usually recommends adjuvant treatments that have strong side effects. A way to optimize treatments is to predict the recurrence probability by analyzing a set of bio-markers. The NeoMark European project has identified a set of preliminary bio-markers for the case of oral cancer by collecting a large series of data from genomic, imaging, and clinical evidence. This heterogeneous set of data needs a proper representation in order to be stored, computed, and communicated efficiently. Ontologies are often considered the proper mean to integrate biomedical data, for their high level of formality and for the need of interoperable, universally accepted models. This paper presents the NeoMark system and how an ontology has been designed to integrate all its heterogeneous data. The system has been validated in a pilot in which data will populate the ontology and will be made public for further research.

¿Es este un proyecto de Mies? / Is this a Mies s project?

Is this a Mies?s project? Disappearances, or the art of being a Mies project Angel Borrego Several years ago I had to solve the structure of Mies House of the Werkbund exhibition of 1931 as an exercise for a course named Structures Projects in the School of Architecture of Madrid. We were offered this house as an exercise because there had been some complaints about having to calculate and deal with ?bad, real, anonymous? architecture widely recognized as such, in so far as it has been widely published, that furthermore had some ideal quality to it, a quality reinforced by the fact that it was not there anymore, one could not go and see it, old and deteriorated, all images we have of it are of a shiny new object: in fact its ideal quality was even present in that it had not even been designed to be a completely real house, as nobody ever lived there and wasn?t supposed to. It was a three dimensional representation of a house, what gave it a further flair of ideality. And it was as well the representation of an idea, and we all liked that. Last but not least, it had Mies to back it up, which promised us the remote possibility of analyzing one of his works in depth, with proper tools (this was a structures course, and we had already read, or heard, something about the importance of structures in Mies?s work.) We were lured by the possibility of reconstructing, if not the pavilion, some of the ideas leading to it. Ideas that were themselves structural, like the ?perfectly regular all columnar structure?, an ideal structure. We had a sensation that we could somehow reproduce the process and thoughts of Mies leading to the solution of a particular work, investigate him in a cuasi archaeological manner, reconstruct the project, as if being able to reconstruct one work we could reconstruct the entire Mies, and placing ourselves in his position replace him, which was to know for once where we were (1). All these thoughts, passed through our minds more or less abstractly, believe it or not, before we realized that we were supposed to imagine that the roof was also supported by the walls and that the plan was lacking two columns, which was short. We could not believe that only to make the exercise more difficult, as it was admitted, the professors would mutilate a Mies work in such a way. The exercise had lost all interest to us and there were some timid protests. The surprise came when, though admitting that the supporting walls had been their idea, the professors said they had not manipulated the plan of the house at all. Some confusion followed, since that seemed quite incredible to us, even more to professors I guess. Two of us went to the library and checkout two books, one being the ?History of Modern Architecture? (the Benevolo as it was known), from where they said to have copied the plan of the house for the exercise, and another book on Mies that included the same project. The Benevolo was actually lacking the two columns, but the other book included them, making clear our point. We were able to reorient the exercise and calculate the house just as Mies had designed it. We, the students I mean, were really happy, since we had a voice in the discipline of architecture: our own discipline since we were the ones being disciplined, and we had been allowed to freely talk our way through it. I had the nice sensation that what happened was curiously and rewardingly similar to, or a kind of metaphor for, the flowing space of the free plan, that was allowed to move through the perfectly regular structure, a most disciplined structure. As Mark Wigley has noted, discipline is intimately related to prothesis. The concept of prothesis (pro-thesis) would be already architectural as ?the act of placing before?, referring to a structure that has to be placed before anything else; it is already a structure, rather than being something added that could be removed..

Invariantes del pensamiento en los arquitectos de Madrid. Primera década del siglo XXI. Una historia de transmisión oral

Invariantes del pensamiento en los arquitectos de Madrid. Primera década del siglo XXI. Una historia de transmisión oral es una Tesis Doctoral que parte de la elaboración de un archivo documental inédito, archivo que aglutina los testimonios de los más importantes arquitectos de Madrid presentes durante los primeros diez años del siglo XXI. Estos testimonios se recogen ordenadamente a modo de conversaciones transcritas, reflexiones puntuales y audios. La incorporación de los audios al trabajo documental permite comprobar a futuros investigadores, de manera directa, la certeza de las conclusiones o, incluso, establecer interpretaciones distintas. Los documentos sonoros son el germen de este trabajo. La Tesis Doctoral ordena e interpreta los testimonios en su apartado de ANÁLISIS/ DESARROLLO permitiendo entender a través de constantes demostraciones un hilo conductor del pensamiento en los arquitectos de Madrid. Se trata de una Tesis Doctoral que se entiende como un documento vivo, abierto y que gracias a su carácter inédito descubre matices y reflexiones de los arquitectos nunca antes recogidos en otros trabajos. Se ha conseguido reunir y ordenar por primera vez la voz y el pensamiento de los más importantes arquitectos de Madrid, muchos de ellos ya fallecidos. Se ha establecido un árbol genealógico ordenado y completo de los arquitectos de referencia indiscutibles desde el año 1939. Se ha conseguido reunir en un solo documento a los arquitectos y personajes más citados y recurrentes en el discurso de los arquitectos de Madrid, pudiendo constatar así sus referentes culturales más utilizados. Se ha descubierto y argumentado un pensamiento común dividido en cuatro conceptos: Oportunidad, Orden, Compromiso y Contención. Se produce una aproximación al arquitecto y a su pensamiento de la manera más natural y espontánea. Las grabaciones nos permitirán introducirnos, sin imposturas, no solo en el fondo, sino también en la forma de lo que se comunica, en el cómo. Una vez seleccionados los documentos sonoros más adecuados para el objetivo de este trabajo se ha procedido a su transcripción al papel. En este proceso se depura el lenguaje y se liman defectos de forma, al mismo tiempo se resumen las conversaciones y se recogen solo los comentarios más interesantes. En el proceso de transcripción, así como en la elección de las preguntas, existe una labor editorial, la aplicación de un criterio a la hora de seleccionar, resumir, corregir, completar, etc. Para abordar las conversaciones se ha recurrido a la bibliografía de referencia de cada uno de los arquitectos. Una vez transcritas las entrevistas, se establece una valoración crítica, una aproximación teórica al tema principal de la conversación. Bien puede tratarse de una reflexión sobre el arquitecto y su trabajo o sobre algunas de las opiniones o temas vertidos durante la charla. Para situar a cada uno de los arquitectos que se citan, se ha establecido un apartado genealógico completo donde cada uno se coloca en su lugar correspondiente conforme a sus apariciones en los textos principales de la historiografía reciente desde Carlos Flores hasta el año 2010. Esta Tesis Doctoral es un testigo de la diversidad de pensamientos y actitudes así como de las coincidencias. Las conversaciones mantenidas, las reflexiones y las opiniones vertidas al respecto han tocado reiteradamente muchos temas que aparecerán ordenados en el ANÁLISIS/DESARROLLO y en el apartado DESCRIPTORES. A partir de estos y otros temas genéricos, los pensamientos se aglutinan en torno a cuatro puntos que resumen las actitudes y los planteamientos conceptuales más recurrentes y coincidentes. Estos cuatro puntos definen de una manera concreta al arquitecto de Madrid. Oportunidad, Orden, Compromiso y Contención. Identidad generada a través de una historia de transmisión oral, desde los arquitectos de las primeras generaciones de posguerra hasta hoy. ABSTRACT Invariable thought in the architects of Madrid. First decade of the XXI century. A history of oral transmission is a Doctoral Thesis that starts with the development of a new documentary file, a file which brings together the testimonies of the most important architects of Madrid present during the first ten years of this century. These testimonies include conversations, punctual reflections and audio bites. Incorporating audio allows future researchers to check certain conclusions directly or even to have different interpretations. Sound bites are the seed of this work. This Doctoral Thesis orders and interprets the testimonies in the ANALYSIS / DEVELOPMENT section, through which a common thread of thought in Madrid architects can be ascertained. This doctoral thesis is meant as a living, open document, which, thanks to its unprecedented nature, discovers nuances and reflections of architects that had never been collected in previous studies. It has brought together and sorted for the first time the voice and thoughts of the most important architects of Madrid, many of them already deceased. It has established an orderly and comprehensive reference guide to the most important architects since 1939. It has brought together in one document the most cited and recurring architects and characters in the discourse of the architects of Madrid, which enables us to observe the cultural references they used the most. We have discovered and put forward a common thought divided into four concepts: Opportunity, Order, Commitment and Containment. The architect and his thoughts are revealed as naturally and spontaneously as possible. The recordings allow us to ascertain, without impositions, not only the substance but also the form of what is communicated. After selecting the most appropriate sound bites for the purpose of this work, we have proceeded to transcribe them to paper. In this process the language has been purified and formal defects have been dealt with, and at the same time the conversations have been summarized and only the most interesting comments have been kept. The transcription process and the choice of questions entails editorial work, applying a criterion when selecting, summarizing, amending, supplementing, etc. To address the conversations, the bibliographic reference of each of the architects has been used. Once the interviews have been transcribed, a critical appraisal and a theoretical approach to the main topic of conversation are established. It may be a reflection on the architect and his work or some of the views or issues discussed during the talk. In order to place each of the cited architects, a complete family tree has been devised in which each architect is situated according to his appearances in the main text of recent historiography, from Carlos Flores until 2010. This Doctoral Thesis is a witness to the diversity of thoughts, attitudes and coincidences. The conversations, reflections and opinions expressed in this regard have repeatedly touched many issues that will be sorted in the ANALYSIS/DEVELOPMENT and the KEYWORDS section. From these and other generic issues, thoughts coalesce around four points which summarize the attitudes and the most recurrent and similar conceptual approaches. These four points define the architect of Madrid in a concrete way. Opportunity, order, engagement and containment. An identity generated by a history of oral transmission, from the architects of the first post-war generations until today.