In the end, does it really matter?

FINAL Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein

Here's the deal. Bauerlein complained a lot in this book. So much so that I was ready to call him up since he teaches here in Atlanta. I get that he has his own agenda and opinions, but one of the basic writing principles is to combat readers from saying, "Yeah, but what about (fill in the blank)?" I got encouraged from a few pages when he wrote about the ArtShow: Youth and Community Development. Then he ruined it when he complained about the work not carrying over into the kids' attitudes about school. Come on already, Bauerlein. Stop complaining and offer some solutions.

I have shared in previous posts how conflicted I feel about technology. I still feel conflicted. After a ton of reflection, I have come up with a few more questions.

1. This is a question I have already posed, but here it is again. Are teachers part of the technology problem? I mean, the printables from the teacher handbooks are all about finding the answer to fill in the blank. Those are easier to grade. Teacher use them. 
2. Is the problem that teachers are only working for summer break? Obviously, I don't think the answer is an unequivocal, "YES!" I do, however, think there are far too many teacher who hate their jobs, and it shows in their teaching.
3. If we are to complain about technology stupefying a generation, shouldn't school systems STOP pushing edutainment software that promises to improve test scores?

Obviously, I had to do some pop culture research about how people feel in regard to technology in schools. I stumbled across this gem:

Please watch the entire video, otherwise my comments won't make sense. 

Maybe Ellen earned auto correct. But today's kids haven't earned anything. I like that Ellen equates writing to thinking. Awesomeness. Ellen gets it. When she brings up cavemen and communication, she does miss the idea of visuals and pictures as language. Cavemen had primitive iPads if you consider their hieroglyphs as app icons. They communicated for a purpose, which is explained well in this site I found called Caveman Communications. This guy gets it. He admits that he is a caveman, primitive. He also gets that getting back to basics is the way to go. (Okay, maybe he doesn't completely say that, but that is my take-away from him.) My point is that this Caveman offers some solutions.

But getting back to Ellen. She has a good point about iPads for kindergartners. If pediatricians recommend limiting screen time each day, why are schools pushing it as a significant part of the curriculum? 

As I am writing this, I can't help but think of the Pixar movie, Wall-E.  Is this where our future is headed?

About 2 minutes in, there is an incredibly brief scene of babies in bouncy seats watching the screen (Ellen's point about iPads?), becoming brainwashed with branding. Face-to-face communication does not exists. You talk to the person next to you via screen messaging. There is no human interaction. I get that Bauerlein is giving me a grown up version of Wall-E, but I need solutions. I know there is a problem. I am walking away from The Dumbest Generation even more dejected than before about the challenge of engaging students to become critical analyzers of the information they consume. 

I wonder if technology in the classroom is just this generation's hot topic. Back in my school days, administrators still used corporal punishment. Then it was class size and test scores. Every few years there is some reason for American kids performing poorly on tests. We don't keep up with the rest of the civilized world. I don't think technology in the classroom is destroying the American work ethic. History is. We teach kids that each generation more advanced than the previous. But are we really just teaching them to mindlessly follow along and accept whatever information they are fed? 

While this push back text offered plenty of stats to support a decision to utilize less technology in the classroom, I don't think it is realistic. Kids are too "plugged in" to their devices. If teachers come in and tell them they are the dumbest kids ever, teachers might as well hang it up. The trick is to find an appropriate curriculum that balances student-centered technology with learning-centered education instead of entertaining students with short sound bytes and watered down handouts. The problem is more far-reaching than Bauerlein would have his readers believe.


In the end, does Bauerlein have a point? We all know what he is telling us. He just dazzles us with enough statistics that make teachers want to nose dive from their mountains of federal mandates right into the falling test scores.

Who's the problem and where's the solution?

Intermediate Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein


A couple of disclaimers are necessary before I go any further with this blog:

1. It has come to my attention that my posts are "lengthy," so don't feel obligated to read them unless you are grading them. Read to enjoy it, not out of obligation.
2. If it hasn't been clear yet, I have not committed to a side on the debate about technology in the classroom. I think it is overused. I think kids engage less critically in their lives (in broad terms). I think there is more to the problem than technology. Make of that what you will.

Now, back to The Dumbest Generation. I am bothered by the chapter "Online Learning and Non-Learning." I feel like Bauerlein is blaming the kids for not knowing how to appropriately use technology. Kids don't know how to use anything until you teach them. I had encyclopedias in my house as a kid (I know, I'm old), but I didn't know how to correctly "use" them until I learned about plagiarism and copyright in school. So why doesn't Bauerlein place any of the blame on educators for not keeping up with the kids? Aren't we supposed to be one step ahead of those we teach? If kids don't know how to cite resources from the Internet or figure out the validity of a website, I think teachers are the problem. If kids use the Internet to connect to the world, educators should teach them to connect responsibly.

I do agree with Bauerlein and his stats about the massive amounts of money spent on technology in schools. It seems wasteful to funnel funds to technology if it isn't helping kids get "more educated." It is great to have computers and Internet in every classroom; but if you shove 40 kids into a class, does it matter how many computers you have? There is definitely a crisis in education, and I don't think technology and its use are the root of the problem.

I also wonder this: if test scores didn't change when school went "digital," doesn't that mean technology is NOT the problem? I think there are lots of problems that have NOTHING to do with technology! Aarrgghhhh! I feel like Bauerlein is so busy bashing technology in schools instead of offering any practical solutions. Maybe there is more wrong with kids and schools than the Internet.

Bauerlein brings up some valid concerns about language acquisition in the digital age. If kids only text, email, and play video games, where do they learn communication? I get that he thinks kids get the watered-down vocabulary of popular culture. But I think it is even worse. Kids are lacking in communication in general. Like basic communication. Like making an actual phone call. Or learning to interact in an interview for a job. Digital natives are lacking in some basic skills, and I think educators the part of the problem. They expect students to come to school on day one with an advanced skill set, so they neglect to teach the basics from day one. If you miss the basics in elementary school, kids are at a deficit when they hit middle and high school. Since Bauerlein wants to bash technology in schools, spread the love and bash elementary applications, too.

In order for me to commit to a side of the debate, I need more than endless statistics thrown in my face. I want to hear about possible solutions and changes. I want to hear promise and compromise. I want to know that people are doing more than sitting around complaining. I guess I am frustrated with Bauerlein because he is doing a lot of trash talk without taking off the researcher hat and spouting some solutions. If he doesn't start offering me a ray of hope in this book, I might cry.

Success with Non-Traditional Texts

Response to:

• Apps in Education, a blog
• "Telling Stories with Video" by Carl Young and Sara Kajder
• "Empowering Children as Critics and Composers of Multimodal Texts" by Phyllis Whitin and David J. Whitin

I feel like I am complaining a lot about technology in the classroom, and I haven't committed to a side in the debate. Maybe it is bad. Maybe it isn't.

I decided to research a little to see what I could find in support of non-traditional applications of technology in the classroom. First of all I thought about non-traditional texts (like cereal boxes, movies, still photographs), but then I thought about popular technology. This response is a little bit of both. I started with the thought, "There's an App for that!"

I came across this pretty cool blog that breaks down apps by subject. A fairly practical list, it includes a variety of categories and price points. If we all know that kids are using their phones, can't we use it for their benefit (and ours)? If Reading Rainbow has an app, shouldn't we just accept technology as part of the curriculum? I think successful educators embrace the tools available. And apps are available. This blog, Apps in Education (linked above), offers twenty applicable apps for the English classroom. These twenty have been reviewed for usefulness and list the cost associated with each. Half of the apps reviewed are free, and the remaining ones range from $0.99 to $3.99. Additionally, nearly 80 unreviewed apps are listed. WOW! And that is just for English!

While trying to find classroom applications for new technology, I ran across this article which offers a variety of alternatives, ten to be exact, for the traditional book report. There are some limitations to integrating technology as a requirement (I would guess), but as long as the appropriate resources are available during class time successful implementation is possible. I do wonder how long it will be before all students are expected to have access to the Internet and a computer at home. These technologies seem prevalent; but when I observed in a local high school in the spring, a number of students required access to the classroom computers before or after class to complete/correct/print required assignments. Students completed potions of the assignments on their phones, but they lacked the other components necessary to turn in an assignment. The article I talked in a previous post, talked about blogs as a location for "publishing" homework. That seems like a practical solution in this case.

Here is another article which encourages the use of technology in the ELA classroom. Written by two assistant professors, this article is short, sweet, and to the point. Their ideas are in line with the content of ENGL 7741 here at KSU.  

Students writing with multimodal tools, such as digital video editors, should use them selectively, intentionally, and it ways that leverage the unique capacities of the tools and media to accomplish a specific goal. As in print-centric writing tasks, the principles of choice and form matter, as does the larger context in which the writing is situated. To be fully literate, students must know how to use tools, but more important, they must also know which forms of literact will best support their purpose for a given audience and a specific context.  ~From "Telling Stories With Video" by Carl Young and Sara Kajder

There really isn't much to say about it because Young and Kajder sum things up nicely. I like how easy this article was to read and how straightforward they were with content. It is work the two-minute read.

One of the projects I was part of during this semester analyzed product packaging and its intended message. I ran across "Empowering Children as Critics and Composers of Multimodal Texts" after we completed the project bookmarked it as a site for reference. It is a study of cereal in the classroom. Basically, fifth grade students analyzed packaging and advertising of a product and created skits, ads, and PowerPoints to market the product themselves. I mention this article because the study was with FIFTH GRADERS. If they can critically engage with cereal, high schoolers should be able to do even more. I think that introducing students to multimodal texts earlier in the academic lives could encourage them to engage more critically in the future. The take away for me is that students need to be consumer AND producers of their language: multimodal texts.

The main point that I am trying to make with this seemingly unrelated group of articles is that technology isn't going away. The Internet is a great resource for teachers AND students if we teach everyone to use it responsibly. Nearly every educational article I could need to support methods in my future classroom is a few keystrokes away. If I am going to teach the digital natives, I need to be fluent in their language. Maybe we can all just learn from each other. Or maybe not.

At this point, I think it is about advocating responsible use. As Young and Kajder imply, you have to know the system before you can work the system. And it works both ways.

Does Technology Make Us More Stupider?

Response to The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Don't Trust Anyone Under 30) by Mark Bauerlein

Okay, so the idea of my Technology In Education class is to find useful ways to integrate technology into the classroom and to teach students digital literacy. So why am I reading a book that (seemingly) recommends the opposite? I had three texts from which to choose: The Dumbest Generation, Proust and the Squid, or The Shallows. I will admit I was more interested in either of the other two, but I was determined to save money this semester. In the name of saving money, I went to my local public library website to search. Of the three, they had this one. Hence, my decision was made. My point in sharing that? I don't know that this is really the book for me, but sometimes sacrifices are made in education. And I used the Internet to make my choice.

As a brief disclaimer, I need to make a few statements. I am older than 30. I have two children in public schools. I think technology is overused by everyone (I include video games and television in this category).

My personal feelings are somewhat in line with the premise of The Dumbest Generation. I do think that most people under the age of 30 are extremely reliant on technology. I know my own children have never used a real encyclopedia or a card catalog. They don't know what it means to research in a library. They think it is as easy as a few key strokes on google. I feel like my own children are great at taking the information they find and reworking information from multiple locations into a coherent single paper, but I don't think they could make connections between unrelated concepts that wikipedia doesn't list for them. I KNOW my kids can't do their homework without the Internet most nights. They rely on teacher websites that list homework and provide links. They don't know anything about telephones before caller id. The idea of leaving the house without a cell phone strikes fear in their hearts. How will we get home without the phone?

Here is a great video clip of a popular kid's show that demonstrates my point pretty well.

Worth a good laugh, if you are old enough to see the humor.

I don't think the idea of kids being "lazy" is a new problem. Students have always struggled to make critical analysis part of their assignments. I grew up in the days of encyclopedias and microfiche. Research was hard. It was time consuming. It required thought. And still many of my classmates just used a single source. One book. Usually the encyclopedia. And usually they plagiarized.

What am I saying? I don't believe that technology is the reason that kids are "lazy" or "dumb." Maybe my generation didn't have the Internet and video games to waste six hours of the day. But we still wasted a lot of time. We rode our bikes and climbed trees. We blew up kitchens and laughed. We "hung out" with friends. Now, kids still waste time. Then, we wasted time. We just wasted it differently.

The real tragedy is these kids have more tools with which to work, but they use it for funny sound bytes and status updates. Maybe they don't know how to critically engage, or maybe they don't want to. Yet. I think there is a lot to be said for maturity, and maybe that is what millennials lack. I don't know.

This is just my initial reaction to the book, but I think there is merit to both sides of the debate. I do agree that kids are much more interested in keeping up with their social issues rather than life issues. Stay tuned for further thoughts on the topic (and the book).