Making a case for #genomics #biotech in #education #edtech

Momentous falls, after unique proficiency ranges, ignored

 

Systems Theory: when unique encoding is too diluted and disintegrated

 

 

Article reference: Why Good Professional Development Still Fails

 

Consider minimal overlap of an original code origin, like humans. From a narrow set of simplex, develops multidimensional complexity that through every stage of evolution, is triggered by at least a minimum of commutative, momentum-providing permutations like major inventions. History is rife of these examples, where an increasingly stagnant, diluted value set requires an injection of evolutionary impetus.

So where does this value set of humans now stand? Have the scales tipped back from the USA's initial birth, from Europe, to necessitate a scalar upgrade even multiples beyond the addition of the computer? And where does the impetus of original encoding stand, whether labeled DNA or Genomics, in triggering the next evolutionary upgrade in the species scale?

The article linked to above, includes a measurement of volume in a cylindrical value set. Not unlike spin physics in a simplex-to-complex evolutionary scale, such as humans evolving from a single-cell organism, to a spine-based (see the aforementioned "cylindrical value set" for commutative permutations), multidimensional set of complexity; the next stage of evolution arises from integrating the 'larger' code base that is miscalculated in the article's cylinder problem.

Consider that if, indeed, original proficiency encoding eventually arises as a critical evolutionary 'leaping point', through too much ignorance of individual originality, then now is a crucial timeframe to integrate Genomics mapping in education curriculum. Televised programs like AncestryDNA, and the continuing development of Genomics in biological fields, has unveiled further proof that each individual is born with at least a minimal proficiency set, and can be developed as not only a choice past-to-present range scale, but also commutative to future permutations of evolutionary scale.

Gone are the days where ignorant beliefs of automaton cyborgs, eliminate organic humans. Indeed, just the last few years of organic and synthetic integration in various medicinal sets, around the globe, have proven otherwise. So how does the scalable timeline of computer-to-biotech get better integrated into education? What role can edtech play in such a target set?

What can YOU do to help?

The Role of Semantic Differentials in Learning

Scalable Behavioral Ranges, Scalar Differential Equations

In Behavioral Science, oppositional differentials maps are the norm. The counselor will start with troublesome areas that the patient is experiencing, then map out options from there to provide a better range of freedom, and at scale, a better state of well being. So the question at hand is: can this mapping be used to advance students in more accurate proficiency/competency range(s)?

Historically, simplex to complex scales. So what does that mean? Just as early eras of humans had more simpler, narrower sets, so do individual lifespans. A child starts out with a minimal set of tools, and evolves more complex sets. Imagine 7 humans living in a cave, with bare essentials for survival, and evolve to 7 billion living and surviving~thriving (see: oppositional differential sets above) today. Now imagine that each individual as a range of narrow-to-broad spacetime (narrow~broad 'behavioral range'). Add the heavy lean toward many-to-one education in most public schools, and do the results in this fundamental equation eventually get too narrow? How long can we entrench early development into narrower sets, and expect different results?

The field of #genomics is an evolved stage of genetics. Campaigns like AncestryDNA are revealing inherited competencies as a norm now. The field of #bioinformatics is reaching new heights in disseminating data commutative (overlapping) to genomics. These fields can be integrated with #edtech with more and more accuracy.

Now ask yourself an honest and open question: would I rather have future generations with narrower behavioral ranges, or broader? Can ranges of inherent competencies be evolved with more accurate curriculum, so adult stages have more choice? How can I help integrate this burgeoning field into my system?

Inquiry-based Learning

Open vs. Closed data>info>knowledge>wisdom

Much is made in #edtech over Inquiry-based Learning, discounting Closed System Individualism too often. As usual, there’s a balance/symmetry that should be as fully understood by the mediator, to their fullest capacity/range.

In basic Topology, Open Sets are mediated by Clopen Sets, with Closed Sets completing the differential set. At scale, educational systems have been guilty of leaning toward strict Open or Closed, and rightfully so. But now we’ve passed a point of departure where a full range of learning, at earlier developmental stages, is necessary in order to broaden the following adult stages/sets to handle equally increasing complexity.

Let me place further emphasis, at this point, on “scale” - since there is a broad range of students, around the globe. The sheer volume of differentiation that arises from persistent simplicity sets, vs. complexity sets in more developed countries, should be implied.

Now lets introduce Individual/Subjective vs. Group/Objective differential sets. As a teacher, ideally, an educational system has prior evaluation data for each student, so the teacher/mediator can plan individual and group pairings on an ideal 25 student set. If a student has more Closed, Individual learning tendencies, then mediating that student amongst a balanced/symmetrical set of 5, is the ideal peak-performance set. Curriculum should equally scale to the prior and projected evaluation sets, so consistency can have more efficient, post-graduation integrative-value at the next level. Likewise, #edtech software should be consistently integrating this process, otherwise systemic entropy eventually collapses the set, and the fallout can be immensely difficult to recover from.

So is the educational system you’re involved with implementing these basic techniques? If it’s too inconsistent, asynchronous, and asymmetrical, is there someone that can take the lead that you can work with to integrate this upward scaling?

Root Cause of Major Civilization Falls

How ignorance of basic logic causes systemic failure

Let’s do some basic, pragmatic math: things come from other things, and must have a minimal difference from the parental set, in order to sustain. Each successful generation of a dominant species evolves, and at the very least, survives via basic evolutionary differences (differentials in Behavioral Science).
So how do children evolving stage by stage, evolve into adults that have enough knowledge of themselves (physician, heal thyself) – especially in an ever increasing complex system that the US is  – when educational systems are generally practicing the mindset of ‘just get them through’? If we persistently refuse to use our best tools, like genetic predisposition of DNA proficiencies children inherit from their parents, and nurture these differentials through each stage of development, then how can we expect each following generation to pass on sustainability and keep on evolving? Hasn’t history taught us enough about apathy, complacency, and the eventual failings of always following the easiest path?
This is why it has become a critical factor in our current state, that we persistently solicit leadership – especially locally where you are – in changing the prime prerequisite in our public schools, to Behavioral Science. And along with placing the very best Behavioral Scientists in these crucial teaching positions, we may just be able to turn the tide of an increasingly disastrous tipping point of a major fall.
So use Facebook, Twitter, and every social media and local neighborhood association you can, and initiate this vital change. Not only could you be curbing major loss, but you could very well be adding tremendous value that can be built upon, for generations to come.

Behavioral Science, or Bust!

Changing the Prime Major from English to Behavioral Science

Up until this point, teaching future generations the commonly used language, along with parental and close adult guidance, was sufficient to empower people into a broad, sustainable behavioral range. But if you sincerely take stock in the increasing lack of direction more and more children have going into adulthood today, you’ll find that the increasing overload of information leads to a broader disintegration of individual-to-group success rates, and an eventual, total, system collapse.

So now we’re left with no other alternative but to instill Behavioral Science, at scale, from early developmental stages to latter, as the Prime Major in correcting this dangerous trend. Placing the best adult Behavioral Scientists, in early Prime positions, scales along with the above math as well. And inevitably, if this running equation can eloquently be distributed persistently enough, broadly enough, we can overcome the downward tipping point and keep on rising as we would prefer.

So talk to your neighbors, existing networks, and go viral in soliciting local leadership in affecting this vital change.

#BehavioralSciencePrimeMajor