And, if this were not enough, the underlying instructional model has not changed that much from the days when teaching was equivalent to telling. This curious situation is tantamount to putting an internal combustion engine in a horse, rather than designing an automobile. Now that information is abundant, our challenge is no longer how to gain access to information, it is deciding what to make of it when we get it. Moore and Metcalfe have told us how the technology is advancing, but the human aspect of the equation lies strangely vacant in the face of these technological advances. While you might quibble with the mathematics of Kao's Law, the underlying principle makes sense.
Diversity stimulates creativity, as does divergence of opinion.
This is not to suggest that knowledge is unimportant, only that it is not the end goal of our activities. The implications of this for education are profound. Instructivism needs to be replaced by constructivism, not because Piaget said so, but because it reflects a fundamental paradigm shift in how human beings will function in the world. If the pedagogical models of Piaget have found few adherents in the past, it is perhaps because he was so far ahead of his time. The future is changing at light speed, not because it is evolving at the force of some hidden hand, but because we are actively inventing the future every day.