Computer attitude and classroom computers

Computers not only increase the speed and efficiency of our mental efforts, but in the process they also alter the problem-solving tasks we are faced with and, in so doing, they alter the cognitive processes we use to solve problems. Computers are fundamentally changing our forms of thinking (Colc & Griffin, 1980). Therefore, the computer should be seen as not only having the potential to amplify human mental capabilities, but also of providing a catalyst for intellectual development.

Astrophysics on the lab bench

In this article some basic laboratory bench experiments are described that are useful for teaching high school students some of the basic principles of stellar astrophysics. For example, in one experiment, students slam a plastic water-filled bottle down onto a bench, ejecting water towards the ceiling illustrating the physics associated with a type II supernova explosion. In another experiment, students roll marbles up and down a double ramp in an attempt to get a marble to enter a tube half way up the slope, which illustrates quantum tunnelling in stellar cores. The experiments are reasonably low cost to either purchase or manufacture.

Beyond a battery hen model? : a computer laboratory, micropolitics and educational change

This paper investigates what happened in one Australian primary school as part of the establishment, use and development of a computer laboratory over a period of two years. As part of a school renewal project, the computer lab was introduced as an ‘innovative’ way to improve the skills of teachers and children in information and communication technologies (ICT) and to lead to curriculum change. However, the way in which the lab was conceptualised and used worked against achieving these goals. The micropolitics of educational change and an input-output understanding of computers meant that change remained structural rather pedagogical or philosophical.

Engineering an Ecosystem : Taking Cues from Nature’s Paradigm to Build Tissue in the Lab and the Body

This manuscript took a 'top down' approach to understanding survival of inhabitant cells in the ecosystem bone, working from higher to lower length and time scales through the hierarchical ecosystem of bone. Our working hypothesis is that nature “engineered” the skeleton using a 'bottom up' approach,where mechanical properties of cells emerge from their adaptation to their local me-chanical milieu. Cell aggregation and formation of higher order anisotropic struc- ture results in emergent architectures through cell differentiation and extracellular matrix secretion. These emergent properties, including mechanical properties and architecture, result in mechanical adaptation at length scales and longer time scales which are most relevant for the survival of the vertebrate organism [Knothe Tate and von Recum 2009]. We are currently using insights from this approach to har-ness nature’s regeneration potential and to engineer novel mechanoactive materials [Knothe Tate et al. 2007, Knothe Tate et al. 2009]. In addition to potential applications of these exciting insights, these studies may provide important clues to evolution and development of vertebrate animals. For instance, one might ask why mesenchymal stem cells condense at all? There is a putative advantage to self-assembly and cooperation, but this advantage is somewhat outweighed by the need for infrastructural complexity (e.g., circulatory systems comprised of specific differentiated cell types which in turn form conduits and pumps to overcome limitations of mass transport via diffusion, for example; dif-fusion is untenable for multicellular organisms larger than 250 microns in diameter. A better question might be: Why do cells build skeletal tissue? Once cooperatingcells in tissues begin to deplete local sources of food in their aquatic environment, those that have evolved a means to locomote likely have an evolutionary advantage. Once the environment becomes less aquarian and more terrestrial, self-assembled organisms with the ability to move on land might have conferred evolutionary ad-vantages as well. So did the cytoskeleton evolve several length scales, enabling the emergence of skeletal architecture for vertebrate animals? Did the evolutionary advantage of motility over noncompliant terrestrial substrates (walking on land) favor adaptations including emergence of intracellular architecture (changes in the cytoskeleton and upregulation of structural protein manufacture), inter-cellular con- densation, mineralization of tissues, and emergence of higher order architectures?How far does evolutionary Darwinism extend and how can we exploit this knowl- edge to engineer smart materials and architectures on Earth and new, exploratory environments?[Knothe Tate et al. 2008]. We are limited only by our ability to imagine. Ultimately, we aim to understand nature, mimic nature, guide nature and/or exploit nature’s engineering paradigms without engineer-ing ourselves out of existence.