1

PROJECT CURIOSITY: Applications for a better world

Simon Sim

sbksim@yahoo.co.uk

Independent Researcher

Submitted to Aalto University on 25 Oct 2013

via email

Recipients: Atso Andersen (atso.andersen@aalto.fi)

&

Seppo Laukkanen (seppo.laukkanen@aalto.fi)

2

PROJECT CURIOSITY: Applications for a better world

Introduction

This project proposal is segmented into three different papers, addressing the concept,

tool and applications to meet the challenge of the question – What do we not know. This

paper expands on the potential applications arising from the concept and development of an

ark of knowledge. The concept is as outlined in the paper, PROJECT CURIOSITY:

Knowledge Evolution – An approach to knowledge exploration and creation.

There are three domains, which are targeted for the development of applications,

namely education, policy formulation and idea incubation. This paper explains the rationale

for the selection of these domains and how their corresponding applications contribute to a

better world. Essentially, we are aiming to achieve a total change of paradigm in our thinking

with these applications.

A better world is one that is open, collaborative (not just cooperative), sharing,

transparent and empowers individuals as well as collectives to achieve a reasonable state of

well-being, not perfection. It is a world that embraces diversity and yet reflects only one

identity in spirit. It is a global village that continually unlearns, learns and re-learns where a

problem for one is a problem for all. To attain a better world, ignorance needs to be

superseded with knowledge and learning.

The world has progressed from Agrarian to Gutenberg, and in the last century, the

Internet Revolution. In each major leap, a single innovation has changed everything in the

world. The observable commonality in each of these innovation was technology, Johannes

Gensfleisch zur Laden zum Gutenberg with the invention of the printing press, Sir Timothy

John "Tim" Berners-Lee with the invention of the World Wide Web. It is however the non-

technological aspects of the innovations that brought change – the spread of knowledge. The

intent of the applications is to strive towards this desired end state, addressing current

challenges, meeting future ones with a foundation on our past.

Education domain

There are many differences in educational institutions globally, whether pedagogical

or otherwise. There is however one single common factor amidst differences. It is learning –

exploring the domain of knowledge, understanding and application. Learning in educational

institutions occurs through reading, teaching, experimentation (including observation) and a

host of many other activities. Bloom’s taxonomy of learning, a classification of learning

objectives was proposed as early as 1956, updated in 2001 by Anderson and Krathwohl (Iowa

State University, Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching, Jan 2012), offers a more

holistic view of learning. The revised version redefines the cognitive domain as the

intersection of the Cognitive Process Dimension and the Knowledge Dimension.

In Iowa State University’s handout (2012), the Knowledge Dimension classifies four

types of knowledge that learners may be expected to acquire or construct – ranging from

concrete to abstract as depicted in figure 1.

3

concrete knowledge abstract knowledge

factual conceptual procedural metacognitive

knowledge of

terminology

knowledge of

specific details and

elements

knowledge of

classifications and

categories

knowledge of

principles and

generalizations

knowledge of

theories, models, and

structures

knowledge of

subject-specific skills

and algorithms

knowledge of

subject-specific

techniques and

methods

knowledge of criteria

for determining when

to use appropriate

procedures

strategic knowledge

knowledge about

cognitive tasks,

including appropriate

contextual and

conditional

knowledge

self-knowledge

Figure 1. The Knowledge Dimension – major types and subtypes

In the same handout, the Cognitive Process Dimension is as reflected in figure 2.

Alternative names are bulleted and in italics.

low order thinking skills high order thinking skills

remember understand apply analyze evaluate create

recognizing • identifying

recalling

• retrieving

interpreting

• clarifying

• paraphrasing

• representing

• translating

exemplifying

• illustrating

• instantiating

classifying

• categorizing

• subsuming

summarizing • abstracting

• generalizing inferring

• concluding

• extrapolating

• interpolating

• predicting

comparing

• contrasting

• mapping

• matching

explaining

• constructing

models

executing

• carrying out

implementing

• using

differentiating

• discriminating

• distinguishing

• focusing

• selecting

organizing

• finding

coherence

• integrating

• outlining

• parsing

• structuring

attributing

• deconstructing

checking

• coordinating

• detecting

• monitoring

• testing

critiquing • judging

generating

• hypothesizing

planning

• designing

producing

• constructing

Figure 2. The Cognitive Processes dimension – categories & cognitive processes

4

An interactive three dimensional model consisting of both dimensions can be found at

Iowa State University, Centre of Excellence in Learning and Teaching’s website

(http://www.celt.iastate.edu/teaching/RevisedBlooms1.html).

The application designed in PROJECT CURIOSITY for the education domain is to

address both dimensions from concrete to abstract knowledge and from low to high order

thinking. Essentially, we are removing the glass ceiling from classrooms, lecture theatres and

places of learning. Through the graphical representation of concepts and associations,

individuals and collectives can explore knowledge rapidly at their own pace. Slow learners

can be scaled up quickly on their understanding while faster learners can continue on their

journey of discovery, even creating new knowledge, without being confined by scope. All of

which can occur within the same learning place simultaneously (given that each learner has

his or her own workstation to access the application). This is not entirely a new concept as

researchers in Taiwan have experimented with the notion of knowledge exploration with

concept association techniques (Liu and Fan Chiang, Chou, Chen, 2009). The key difference

is scope and flexibility. The scope in our application is only limited to the population of

knowledge through verifiable sources in the ark, with the means for further manipulation. In

addition, all concepts are tagged to a verified source of text, which can be extracted on

demand for reading. Individuals can add more concepts from various disciplines into a single

concept map of a single discipline, where there are available associations. Alternatively, they

can also make their own associations and register that as a new association. Here, tacit

knowledge is created, captured and becomes explicit.

Beyond learning and teaching, the application serves as a useful tool in multi, inter

and cross-disciplinary studies or research. There are two common problems in such studies

and research. The first is the different lingo, terminology and concepts. The second is finding

common associations between the disciplines other than a problem to be solved, for example

global warming. A more typical example would be a team of system analysts developing an

IT system for a hospital. System analysts do not possess domain knowledge on medicine or

hospitals. Thus information elicitation techniques such as focus groups, questionnaires, and a

host of other techniques are deployed to rapidly overcome the knowledge gap. This however

takes time, effort and much disruption to hospital staff, to derive knowledge essential to

developing a system that fits the needs of the hospital. Our application is designed to provide

a common concept map for reference, that associates concepts of one discipline to another (or

more), such that everyone can scale up quickly on understanding, identification of

commonalities and /or tensions between disciplines and assessment of potential new areas of

knowledge exploration.

The application in the education domain will radically change where, what, why,

when and how we learn, educate and create knowledge for the future. In the present, it serves

to provide a common map for overcoming today’s multifaceted challenges. In essence, the

application is an enabler and leveller. If education is a vehicle for social mobility (Iannelli

and Paterson, 2005) then it must be accessible to all, not a few. Robert Haveman and

Timothy Smeeding in their 2006 paper, “The Role of Higher Education in Social Mobility”,

strengthen this point. Education must become relevant and connected. A single discipline or

particular domain of knowledge cannot be the way forward. Neither can science &

technology be the only solution to all global problems, without inclusion of the humanities

and arts. If we are indeed in the Knowledge Era with a knowledge economy, we therefore

need to approach knowledge not from a specialised viewpoint but a generalised perspective,

without sacrificing the finer points of a single discipline. Knowledge is a single entity, with

5

many branches of sub entities which are interconnected. That is clearly representative of our

own interconnected world. One possible pathway to knowledge exploration and creation is

through the study of these interconnections.

The education application

The application will consist of a web browser interface from which users can interact

with the ark of knowledge. Users can extract concepts from one or more disciplines as well

as their associations and study the concept map in detail. Users can also access the source

material from which the concept was originated for further reading. With the rapid

advancement of visual graphical interfaces, it may become feasible for users to view the

concept maps in a three dimensional viewpoint.

Users may also view tacit knowledge added on by other users, as well as add their

own tacit knowledge as well as new associations between concepts. Communities of practice

and subject matter experts will verify these new additions accumulated in the ark and respond

accordingly.

Policy formulation domain

“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”

– Albert Einstein. While education is the way to the future, we also need to address the ways

of the present because there will be a direct impact. The present is heavily dependent on the

public policies that govern our world today, from Argentina to Zambia. Policy formulation

refers to how policy options are formulated within government (Howlett, 18, 2011). The

process of formulating policy options cannot be bereft of any knowledge. The ark with its

vast knowledge past and present, represent the best knowledge base for policy makers to

explore options and their basis. The opposite of good policy making is an ad hoc or short-

term policy response to an immediate problem. Poor policy making often results from

unintended consequences that a piecemeal approach has not taken into account (Curtain, 36,

2000).

Good public policy is both effective (achieve its goals) and efficient (do so in a way

that achieves the greatest possible benefit at the least possible cost), with a long-term

perspective. It starts with a comprehensive understanding of the current environment and

defining what society’s needs are in a way that an appropriate policy response can address. It

could, for example, involve developing likely ‘futures’ scenarios in which a proposed policy

might need to operate. Good public policy also involves attention to process, including the

giving of end users ample opportunity to participate in a variety of ways. It also involves

ensuring, for example, that the ‘silo’ effect of departments operating independently of each

other is minimised. Good policy also needs to be outcome-focused by identifying carefully

how the policy will deliver desired changes in the real world. Policy makers also need to

ensure that they are inclusive by putting in place policies that take full account of the needs

and experience of all those likely to be affected by them, whether they be individuals or

groups, families, businesses or community organisations (Curtain, 35-36, 2000).

Good policy also requires involving those outside government in policy making. This

includes consulting with those who are the target of the policy, outside experts, and those

who are to implement the policy. Finally, good public policy is based on learning from

6

experience. Policy making needs to be a continuous, learning process, not as a series of one-

off, isolated initiatives. This requires making use of evidence and research about the

problems being addressed. It may also involve making more use of pilot schemes to

encourage innovation and to test whether proposed options work. It also requires clearly

specifying and evaluating independently the objectives of all policies and programmes and

making public the lessons of success and failure and acting upon them (Curtain, 36, 2000).

Our application aims to achieve these requirements of making good public policy. In

the aspect of involvement of parties outside of government, we identified two possible

parties, the citizen and iKnow Consortium.

iKnow is one of six Blue Sky foresight research projects funded by the European

Commissions Seventh Framework Programme for Research and Technology Development

(FP7) under the Socio-economic Sciences and Humanities (SSH) theme. The project is aimed

at interconnecting Knowledge on issues and developments potentially shaking or shaping the

future of science, technology and innovation (STI) in Europe and the world. Overall, iKnow

has two interconnected objectives:

To develop and pilot conceptual and methodological frameworks to identify and

analyse Wild Cards and Weak Signals (WI-WE); and

To assess the implications and impact of selected WI-WE on, science, technology

and innovation (STI) and key dimensions of the European Research Area (ERA).

To do so, iKnow has used Foresight and Horizon Scanning (FHS) approaches to

support the research and technology development (RTD) agenda associated with each

objective. Foresight is a systematic, participatory, prospective and policy-oriented process

which, with the support of environmental and horizon scanning approaches, is aimed to

actively engage key stakeholders into a wide range of activities anticipating, recommending

and transforming (ART) technological, economic, environmental, political, social and ethical

(TEEPSE) futures. Horizon Scanning (HS) is a structured and continuous activity aimed to

monitor, analyse and position (MAP) frontier issues that are relevant for policy, research and

strategic agendas. The types of issues mapped by HS include new/emerging: trends, policies,

practices, stakeholders, services, products, technologies, behaviours, attitudes, surprises

(Wild Cards) and seeds of change (Weak Signals). (iKnow, 2013)

Although iKnow is currently focussed on European and global science, technology

and innovation (STI) policy, it is still useful to connect on the basis that these areas have a

direct impact on public policy. iKnow brings to the policy formulation process foresight. The

ark adds to the process 20/20 hindsight (History) and the necessary foundations. In practice,

we are combining inputs from iKnow, citizenry (or civil society), government and knowledge

to construct a more holistic process. The concept association tool enables connectivity

amongst the inputs. The application hopes to expand on the involvement and inclusion of

minority voices. Public policy affects everyone, and should not be solely a case of majority

wins. While diversity may connote complexity, it also brings with it creativity. An added

unintended benefit is to ensure the transparency of the process.

The European Union is an ideal test bed, given that it is a union of many nationalities

rich in diversity. This presents an opportunity for the application to present a common map

to member states to quickly make sense of differing opinions and views, with knowledge as a

backdrop. A common map is perhaps a better navigational tool for consensus building,

without disregard for the minority, through understanding.

7

The policy formulation application

The application will consist of a web browser interface where users can view a

concept map produced from concepts, policy issues and various inputs. The concept map is

constructed from a combination of inputs from iKnow and concept banks from the ark of

knowledge, as well as any other concepts or issues added by users, either government or

citizen. Users can view; manipulate concepts and/or policy issues, as well as their

associations. Users can also access the source material from which the concept was originated

for further reading.

Users may also view tacit knowledge (possibly as a form of feedback, suggestion

and/or insight) added on by other users, as well as add their own tacit knowledge as well as

new associations between concepts. Communities of practice and subject matter experts will

verify these new additions accumulated in the ark and respond accordingly.

Idea incubation domain

In principle, every person has innate talent/s and idea/s. In practice, talent sometimes

remain hidden, as with ideas. The question then is why. On the talent front, there is a

multitude of reasons, ranging from circumstantial to ignorance. The discovery of one’s talent

is however a personal journey, dependent on one’s willingness to explore it further, albeit the

narrow window of opportunities. Our application in the education domain can certainly help

widen this window if individuals are willing to take their first step to explore. Ideas are

however definitely easier to elicit, given an appropriate environment. Perhaps, with ideas, we

may even uncover more hidden talents.

The principles of the Ark Initiative provide a sound basis and foundation for the

creation of a suitable environment, for ideas to be elicited and incubated. Furthermore, the

premise should be that no idea is too small to be accepted as all great things evolve from

small ideas and some even from mistakes. The Post-It pad is a good example of how a

“failure” became a useful product, as it is with the discovery of penicillin. Nikolai Tesla is an

example of how radical ideas, met with opposition, gave us alternating current, as with many

other innovations that make a difference in our world today. Ideas also have a limited

lifespan. It dies with the originator, if not made explicit. The UN estimates that the current

world population is now at 7.2 billion (UN Press Release, 13 June 2013). If we make the

assumption that everyone in this world has at least one idea, wet would have a total of 7.2

billion ideas at a minimum. How many ideas would become explicit and how many would

die with its originator. How many of these ideas that die with its originator, would change our

world for the better? “Every man is born an original, but sadly, most men die copies” –

Abraham Lincoln. On the flipside, some ideas have invariably caused our world more harm

as well. Nobel with the invention of dynamite, the advent of nuclear technology to nuclear

weaponry. However, it must be noted that the original intent of the idea was never a

destructive creation, but unfortunately was applied in that sense. Ignorance is not bliss. “We

do not know until the shell breaks what kind of egg we have been sitting on.” – T.S. Eliot.

The application also serves to connect ideas with knowledge, as well as ideas with

other ideas. An idea incubated by an originator can be connected with various concepts in the

ark, thus allowing the originator to scale up on his understanding on the various domain/s of

knowledge he or she may be lacking in. It also allows the originator to further expand the

8

idea by expanding the associations of concepts from other disciplines, previously not

identified by him or her. An idea may also have no current association with any concepts of

explicit knowledge. The idea thus becomes a starting point for knowledge exploration and

creation. When knowledge becomes available, the incubated idea may be ready for

verification and if plausible, actualisation. Similarly, an idea may not be actualised due to

limitations, but may be plausible if connected to other ideas.

Ideas are not just in the present, they are also for the future. Our imagination is the

greatest source of our ideas. One of the key objectives of the application is to capture this in

storage that ideas do not pass on naturally with the originator.

The idea incubation application

The application will consist of a web browser interface where users can insert their

ideas and draw on concepts and their associations from the ark’s concept banks. Users can

view a concept map produced from the association of concepts to their ideas, as well as other

ideas populated by other users. Users can view; manipulate concepts and/or ideas, as well as

their associations. Users can also access the source material from which the concept was

originated for further reading.

Associations between concepts and ideas can be captured into the concept banks of

the ark, enhancing its tacit knowledge. Users can also search for ideas based on keywords.

Users can also connect with one another via the application. Identities of users are kept

private in accordance with privacy laws, espoused by the Republic of Finland.

Conclusion

The three targeted domains have been selected on the premise that when knowledge is

shared transparently as far as possible within them and disseminated equally to all without

discrimination of age, ethnicity and sex, achieves a better world.

The suite of applications is designed to take stock of our past, address the present and

mould the future. There are two primary objectives of the applications – bringing parity to

the world and enhancing trust. The objectives are driven by quickly overcoming ignorance,

promoting open sharing & collaboration, removing hurdles & limitations, empowering

individuals & collectives to dream, and an emphasis on transparency.

9

References

Knowledge exploration with concept association techniques

Online Information Review Vol. 34 No.5, 2010 786-205

Chen-Chung Liu and Shih-Hsun Fan Chiang, Chih-Yueh Chou, Sherry Y.Chen

Does Education Promote Social Mobility?

CES Briefings No. 35

June 2005

Cristina Iannelli and Lindsay Paterson

http://www.ces.ed.ac.uk/PDF%20Files/Brief035.pdf

A Model of Learning Objectives based on a Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and

Assessing: A Revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of Educational Objectives

January 2012

Iowa State University

Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching

http://www.celt.iastate.edu/pdfs-docs/teaching/RevisedBloomsHandout.pdf

Designing Public Policies: Principles and Instruments

Routledge textbooks in policy studies

2011

Michael Howlett

Good Public Policy Making: How Australia Fares

Agenda, Volume 8, Number 1, 2000, pages 33-46

Richard Curtain

http://epress.anu.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/8-1-A-3.pdf

The Role of Higher Education in Social Mobility

The Future of Children, Princeton University and the Brookings Institution

Journal Vol. 16/No. 2/Fall 2006

Robert Haveman and Timothy Smeeding

http://www.princeton.edu/futureofchildren/publications/docs/16_02_07.pdf

World population projected to reach 9.6 billion by 2050 with most growth in

developing regions, especially Africa

13 June 2013

UN PRESS RELEASE

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/Documentation/pdf/WPP2012_Press_Release.pdf

10

Copyright Notice

All material in this paper is, unless otherwise stated, the property of Simon Sim. Copyright

and other intellectual property laws protect these materials. Reproduction or retransmission of

the materials, in whole or in part, in any manner, without the prior written consent of the

copyright holder, is a violation of copyright law.

Copies of this paper may be made, solely for personal, non-commercial use. Individuals must

preserve any copyright or other notices contained in or associated with them. Users may not

distribute such copies to others, whether or not in electronic form, whether or not for a charge

or other consideration, without prior written consent of the copyright holder of the materials.