Browsing by Author "Klichowski, Michal"
Now showing 1 - 6 of 6
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Does cyberspace increase young children's numerical performance? A brief overview from the perspective of cognitive neuroscience(AMU Press, 2017-04-06) Klichowski, Michal; Przybyla, TomaszThe neural link between numbers and praxis is not only concerned with conditions for the processing of numbers, but also with the process of acquiring mathematical competences. From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, finger training thus becomes an important element of the process of teaching young children maths. Cyberspace may become an excellent space for such training. Most often, young children have access to it through touchscreen tools (e.g. tablets or smartphones) – in other words, tools that make it possible to take part in various finger games via mobile apps. To shed some light on this issue, we investigated mobile apps available for children and directed at finding examples of mobile apps that can increase children's numerical performance not through performing mathematical operations, but through finger training; in other words, apps that can be directed at young children (who do not perform mathematical operations yet). Sharing the example of this type of mobile apps can be useful for both parents and teachers of young children.Item Does the human brain really like ICT tools and being outdoors? A brief overview of the cognitive neuroscience perspective of the CyberParks concept(Edições Universitárias Lusófonas, 2017-03) Klichowski, Michal; Patricio, CatarinaThe paper presents an overview of the latest studies on cognitive neuroscience that can help evaluate concepts that promote technologically-enhanced outdoor activities, such as CyberParks. The following questions are asked in the paper: does the human brain really like ICT tools? Does the human brain really like being outdoors? And finally: does the human brain really like technologically-enhanced outdoor activities? The results of the studies presented show that the human brain does not like ICT tools yet, it likes being outdoors very much. At the same time, it was shown that outdoors activities may be encouraged by ICT tools, yet outdoors activities themselves should be free from ICT tools. Using ICT tools and physical activity at the same time is a dual task, a type of activity that leads to cognitive and physical processes being destabilised, which leads to weakened effects of both cognitive and physical tasks. From the perspective of cognitive neuroscience, CyberParks are not a solution that the human brain really likes. Another issue is also discussed, namely: do technologically-enhanced outdoor activities—such as in CyberParks—really increase the quality of life?Item Learning in CyberParks. A theoretical and empirical study(Adam Mickiewicz University Press, 2017-12) Klichowski, MichalThe theoretical part of the book shows that learning in CyberParks takes the form of technology-enhanced outdoor learning and is an element of smart learning, i.e. the latest concept of ICT-supported learning. Learning in CyberParks can also become an element of smart education – a concept of formal learning in the smart city. Learning in CyberParks is supposed to provide students with contact with nature and stimulate them to be physically active. It is thus a type of a dual-task. Studies in cognitive neuroscience suggest that this type of cognitive-motor interference can expose students to a motor danger and weaken their cognitive capabilities. If this was the case, the idea of learning in CyberParks would need to be modified. In order to solve this, two experiments with the use of mobile EEG were carried out. The empirical part of the book indeed shows that during dual-tasks in CyberParks students are less focused and more stressed, and the dynamics of attention and meditation ceases to reflect the dynamics of the cognitive task. Thus, before CyberParks become learning spaces, the idea of CyberParks has to be modified. The cognitive activity intended in CyberParks should be separated from physical activity. When learning in CyberParks, one should be sitting and using applications that do not require movement. Staying close to nature improves the functioning of the brain, therefore such learning is more effective than that carried out indoors. It is also more healthy. When designing CyberParks, one thus has to think not only about the technological infrastructure, but also about making spots for using ICT while sitting available. In this approach, learning in CyberParks becomes an important concept that can be used in practice in order to provide an answer to numerous problems of contemporary educational institutions, related to students’ lack of contact with nature and consolidation of their sedentary lifestyle.Item Learning in hybrid spaces as a technology-enhanced outdoor learning: Key terms(Edições Universitárias Lusófona, 2019-01-11) Klichowski, Michal; Menezes, Marluci; Smaniotto Costa, CarlosOne of the ideas for improving urban green spaces is adding to them a virtual dimension, or - in other words - equipping them with some kind of technological infrastructure. Such spaces, combining a nature with technology, are named in many terms, e.g. outdoor cyber-mediated spaces, technologically enhanced urban green spaces, blended digital/urban green spaces or - what is the most precise - hybrid spaces. Hybrid space is quite innovative solution, because traditionally the natural environment and digital domains are seen as distinctly different. In addition, researchers agree that hybrid spaces offer an attractive learning context. Although little is known about learning in hybrid spaces. This paper defines learning in hybrid spaces as a technology-enhanced outdoor learning and discusses contextual key terms as technology-enhanced learning and outdoor learning, and also technological requirements for technology-enhanced outdoor learning, selected technologies of technology-enhanced outdoor learning such as personal digital assistant, e-library, quick response codes, Kinect-laptop-integrated system, geographic positioning system, digital textbooks, cloud computing; and finally design guidelines for technology-enhanced outdoor learning. This can be useful for anyone interested in educational use of hybrid spaces.Item Świat małego dziecka. Przestrzeń instytucji, cyberprzestrzeń i inne przestrzenie dzieciństwa(Wydawnictwo Naukowe UAM, 2017-04-06) Krauze-Sikorska, Hanna; Klichowski, MichalNiniejsza książka to już piąty tom prac z serii Świat małego dziecka. Tegoroczna edycja została tak pomyślana, by skoncentrować uwagę czytelnika na tych aspektach analiz teoretyczno-empirycznych i praktyki edukacyjnej, które pozwoliłyby dostrzec zmiany związane z kreowaniem przestrzeni rozwoju i twórczości małego dziecka. Uznaliśmy, że współczesne dziecko egzystuje głównie w dwóch typach przestrzeni: przestrzeniach instytucji i cyberprzestrzeni. Obserwacje zglobalizowanego i zbiurokratyzowanego świata, skłaniają bowiem do konstatacji, iż teraźniejszość dzieciństwa osadzona jest z jednej strony na mechanizmach instytucjonalizacji – dynamika wzrostu dziecka jest w pewnym sensie funkcją zinstytucjonalizowanych interakcji. Z drugiej strony jednak, dzieciństwo w dużej mierze rozgrywa się w cyberprzestrzeni – świat małego dziecka jest w coraz większym stopniu wirtualny i hiperrzeczywisty, a samo dziecko staje się obiektem procesów transhumanistycznych i cyborgizacji. Oczywiście, świat małego dziecko to także inne przestrzenie – jest ich tak wiele, i są tak zróżnicowane, iż nie odważyliśmy się sformułować kategorii elegancko je opisującej. Te „inne” przestrzenie stanowią często antidotum dla targającej dzieckiem instytucjonalizacji i rozpraszającej jego klarującą się tożsamość wirtualizacji. Są to bowiem przestrzenie dające wolność i szansę powrotu do natury, do normalnego, wręcz organicznego rytmu rozwoju i prawdziwego, realnego, szczerego, bezpośredniego, słowem: zwykłego świata małego dziecka.Item We Do Not Like It: A Likert-Type Scale Survey on the Attitudes of a Young Population towards the Transhumanistic Theory of Education(2018-09-04) Adamczak, Zuzanna; Agacinska, Julia; Bialecka, Oliwia; Bogacz, Urszula; Carewicz, Kinga; Chudy, Oliwia; Fiebig, Katarzyna; Fiszgala, Olga; Frackowiak, Beata; Frackowiak, Joanna; Frackowiak, Marika; Gizycka, Karolina; Golinska, Alicja; Hamerska, Natalia; Janczak, Weronika; Jedruch, Oliwia; Karpinska, Dajana; Kmiotek, Julia; Kolasinska, Natalia; Kolcz, Katarzyna; Kurkowiak, Michalina; Kurpisz, Zuzanna; Luleczka, Agnieszka; Madrzak, Monika; Maliszewska, Maja; Nadolny, Wiktor; Nowak, Anna; Nowak, Kinga; Nowicka, Dominika; Okupniak, Aleksandra; Pabisiak, Marika; Paszkiewicz, Klara; Pietrasik, Wiktoria; Polczynska, Alicja; Pozdrowicz, Patrycja; Roszak, Natalia; Stolarek, Adrianna; Synoracka, Patrycja; Szwemin, Katarzyna; Szymanska, Ewa; Szymanska, Kinga; Tomczak, Olga; Urbaniak, Joanna; Urbanska, Maria; Wachowiak, Malgorzata; Wisniewska, Malgorzata; Wlochal, Olga; Zeberski, Patryk; Zeszotarska, Justyna; Zielinska, Paulina; Zietek, Weronika; Zimowska, Karolina; Ziobrowska, Joanna; Ziolkiewicz, Karolina; Klichowski, MichalTranshumanists assume that future education may be purely based on technological stimulation. The question is: Do potential clients of education “like” such vision? In order to check this, we asked over one thousand two hundred young Poles to evaluate their identification with the transhumanistic theory of education. The results are quite surprising: its show that they disagree with the assumptions of this theory, while they rather agree with the postulates of more traditional (and no technology-based) concepts of education.