Since the emergence of modern man some 200,000 years ago, people and technologyhave been inextricably linked to each other. However, unlike traditional technology -such as leverage (and derivative applications such as hammers, wheels and crankshafts),and control of fire - smart technology is equipped with adaptive capacity. Whereas intraditional technology people have to think and handle in terms of technology in orderto apply technology successfully and purposefully, technology with, for example, itsown learning ability adapts to humans. This means that smart technology influencesdevelopment in a different way than traditional technology. Changes in the relationship between human development (brain) and smarttechnology - technology with its own learning capacity and adaptability - have led tothe articulation of 4 requirements technology should meet: 1. it must be sustainable, 2. it must not block development and if it does it must be clear how, 3. there must bea logical argument why the technique can be used and how it can be explained, also in terms of psychological development and, finally, 4. the social and ethical discoursemust be stated in a transparent way. At a fast pace, futurologists and management gurus are presenting “theories” abouthow smart technology will change us permanently as individuals. Requirements 1(sustainability) and 2 (technology influencing human development) are at stake here.However, these ideas cannot be substantiated by scientific research. Psychology(and the other social and human sciences) have not yet been able to generate a convincing interpretation of what is going on in the area of brain and technology (living technology). In fact, there is a need for argumentation. In order to arrive at an argument-based psychology, insight into the non-linearityof processes is indispensable. The Brain & Technology research group is exploring the great possibilities to bridge the distance between people and their limitations by using smart technology, or possibilities, especially when it comes to argument based applied psychology! In this document, mainly the argument requirement is considered, because in the rapidly changing technological processes, the argument often does not sufficiently develop and the argument lies pre-eminently at the level of applied psychology, brain and technology.
MULTIFILE
Among other things, learning to write entails learning how to use complex sentences effectively in discourse. Some research has therefore focused on relating measures of syntactic complexity to text quality. Apart from the fact that the existing research on this topic appears inconclusive, most of it has been conducted in English L1 contexts. This is potentially problematic, since relevant syntactic indices may not be the same across languages. The current study is the first to explore which syntactic features predict text quality in Dutch secondary school students’ argumentative writing. In order to do so, the quality of 125 argumentative essays written by students was rated and the syntactic features of the texts were analyzed. A multilevel regression analysis was then used to investigate which features contribute to text quality. The resulting model (explaining 14.5% of the variance in text quality) shows that the relative number of finite clauses and the ratio between the number of relative clauses and the number of finite clauses positively predict text quality. Discrepancies between our findings and those of previous studies indicate that the relations between syntactic features and text quality may vary based on factors such as language and genre. Additional (cross-linguistic) research is needed to gain a more complete understanding of the relationships between syntactic constructions and text quality and the potential moderating role of language and genre.
DOCUMENT
from the article: Abstract Based on a review of recent literature, this paper addresses the question of how urban planners can steer urban environmental quality, given the fact that it is multidimensional in character, is assessed largely in subjective terms and varies across time. The paper explores three questions that are at the core of planning and designing cities: ‘quality of what?’, ‘quality for whom?’ and ‘quality at what time?’ and illustrates the dilemmas that urban planners face in answering these questions. The three questions provide a novel framework that offers urban planners perspectives for action in finding their way out of the dilemmas identified. Rather than further detailing the exact nature of urban quality, these perspectives call for an approach to urban planning that is integrated, participative and adaptive. ; ; sustainable urban development; trade-offs; quality dimensions
DOCUMENT
