If you are reading this blog, then I passed the Blogger spam review. A few days after I posted my initial reflection, I was informed that my blog exhibited signs of a spam blog and would be locked if I didn’t submit to a review. Curious about what might signal that my blog could be spam, I linked to The Blogger’s definition page, which provided the following helpful information: “Blogs engaged in this behavior are called spam blogs, and can be recognized by their irrelevant, repetitive, or nonsensical text, along with a large number of links, usually all pointing to a single site.” Since my blog links to no other sites, I have to conclude that my previous reflection contained “irrelevant, repetitive or nonsensical text.” Ouch! Here’s hoping reflective posting #2 does not set off the spam alarms!
This incident reflects the very impersonal and mass mentality side of technology. My invention would highlight the exact opposite; it would focus on the ultimate personalization of the learning experience.
My invention would be the e-Learning Optimizer Brain Monitor: It would use feedback from the participant’s brain to customize the learning program in real time and make sure the learner is processing the information effectively. I think we all have taken one or more tests to determine our learning style, but that is based mostly on our own perceptions. In fact, I have found that my learning strengths and styles were different on every test I took, and results depended greatly on how questions were worded or how I was feeling. That is not to say that there is no validity to a test based on one’s own perceptions. And perhaps I was overthinking the questions. But you can’t fool your brain. This monitor would record brain activity and responses of the participant through a series of mini-activities to customize the training program to the learner; the monitor would adjust the program segment or style depending on how the learner’s brain was reacting in real time in order to maximize the learning experience. Of course, this would mean that program design would have to be up to the task as well; each segment of a program would have to have multiple options to address the different learners. However, results would obviously help instructional designers improve program design over time as well. This technology would also be able to determine when a learner was losing motivation or maxed out, and would stage an “intervention” to stimulate the learner through a “break activity” or other type of mental stimulus. If the program kept picking up brain signals that user’s ability to process information was impaired and limiting learning progress, the program would have the option to shut down and tell the learner to return later. I think both of these functions would help me in the learning process. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve fallen asleep on my computer trying to absorb information that’s going nowhere. And last time I looked, computer-to-brain osmosis wasn’t a feature on either a Mac or a PC. Wait a minute! Now there’s a learning technology someone should look into inventing.
