From the two readings listed below, comment upon one or two of suggested challenges we face as teachers. How might you deal with these in your classroom?
After reading the 2 articles listed above, I can better understand why some of my professors in college insisted on the following criteria in choosing my resources for my research; only 3 out of 10 sources can be an online website and they must be reliable sources (i.e. historical society etc.). It is true that technology development has brought many positive changes into our lives. However, with so many changes happening so quickly, perhaps we haven’t found a proper method in controlling the possible negative outcomes; such as the problems mentioned in the 2 articles listed above. In the near future I, as a teacher, will have to deal with the “consequences” of living in the world where great deal of information is readily available at just the click of a button. The problem then becomes how to deal with these challenges, without preventing the students from keeping up with the new technological advances. As for me, with my future job in the field of teach English as a second language, one of the biggest challenges I will have is the potential for students abusing the free online translations websites when doing their homework. Online translation is perfectly adequate for simple, straightforward translations, but for when using words that have double meanings, the task becomes much more complicated. As of right now the best possible solution I have is to show the students the possible pitfalls of using online sources such as translate.google.com, babelfish.yahoo.com, freetranslation.com and etc through several examples. In addition, I would put an emphasis that using online translation website to do homework is considered cheating and that I could just as easily use the website they have used to check to see if they have in fact used it to do their homework. Hopefully, I will be able to design homework and other course materials that are so interesting and far more superior to what online translation websites have to offer so that students will feel engaged and want to do the homework on their own.
Those were the two emotions I had running through after reading both articles.
I was scared from reading the first, because I would have been the same noncritical, accepting consumer of information as the students. I would have trusted the source and not even blinked an eye. If I am not sophisticated enough in my own searches, how can I teach others?
Second, it's taken me three days to read the second article. I know that I am more distracted yet I read much more than my predigital self.
Both articles remind me that the road is not important if the destination is unknown. Information technology tools are just that--tools. It's up to the us to apprentice those placed in our care by updating and being as close to technological edge with a wiser and more discerning eye.
It took me about 3 tries to finish reading the second article too. I found it ironic and funny because the article mentioned how the tech development may have weakened our abilty to read deeply, and it seemed as if I was one of those people.
Although I understand the two authors' concern, I still wanted to see the Internet as a great opportunity to make us wise rather than stupid. Accessing lots of information with many different viewpoints frees us from being biased by limited information from traditional media. However,at the same time, I also think the Internet is only focusing on its own job just throwing information as much as it can. The following steps are on us to scrutinize, choose, contemplate, judge, absorb and apply it. I believe that once we take these steps properly, the Internet would be a great blessing on us. Therefore, teachers and parents may need to train students to take these steps by well-designed assignment or discussion such as talkback, further research, guide questions..etc. Moreover, distinction between faulty resources and reliable resources is critical step as the base step of other steps. It would be also needed that to provide children with useful tips and sessions with web professionals in the field.
The first article highlights what I think is one of the biggest problems in our schools and our education system: we do not teach students how to think. The internet is the perfect tool for teaching how to think and how to critically analyze information, and hence, the world. The misinformation from the internet did not become a real problem until it was taken from the internet and printed into a textbook. The problem was not the information itself, but how people were interacting with it. I think that a curriculum that builds the cognitive tools of information analysis and critical thinking is absolutely imperative in the world that we live in. Education and pedagogy have not caught up with the technological world that we live in and that is why we are running into problems such as this one; students are using a tool that they have not been taught to properly use yet. Most adults do not know how to use the internet as an effective research tool. But in an even bigger picture, this is about changing the way we think. In my opinion, students need to learn how to think critically, solve problems, and question the information that they read. Our education system has rarely focused on these skills and the internet provides a more accessible opportunity for educators and students to do so.
I think that the changes in how our brains process information in the information age are still not known. However, I think that while there is potential for a degradation of intelligence and "humanity" that the author sounds so afraid of, there is just as much potential for real positive change in how we are able to exchange information and ideas on a massive scale. I have found myself reading much more than before, and I have no problem reading a long article such as the one I'm writing about. Everyone is different and maybe it's a generational thing. There is a sense of information overload, but I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. What does concern me is the idea that Google and other tech companies think that there is a single perfect algorithm to find the "best information." I'm concerned about Google's goal to replace the critical thinking process one goes through when comparing search results with Google's own artificial intelligence. Not to get too sci-fi, but it seems to me that a truly intelligent AI would understand logic from a quantum system and not an Aristotelian a/b either/or binary system (quantum computing is not here yet but it's coming). I see the internet as a tool to help build critical thinking skills, not replace them.
I found the first article alarming, simply because one of those history teachers could have easily been me. In a former school district where I worked, we were mandated by the state to use certain curriculum, and during my time as a new teacher, I never questioned that…So it was quite disturbing to read about controversial historical content being delivered to students through mandated textbooks. It was even more shocking to learn that the content derived from an online search. As a teacher, I would have trusted the content of the textbook, over an internet source, but as we can see, neither was reliable…that is scary. As I was reading, I couldn’t help but wonder- How long was this textbook used before the misinformation was discovered? I believe that the instruction of evaluating digital sources is not only important for students, but teachers as well.
In "Is Google Making Us Stupid," Nicholas Carr reflects that "now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I'm always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle." Clearly, Carr relates what many of us see in our classes: glimmers of brilliance interrupted by a quick check of Facebook. And if I'm honest, I know my attention span has withered too. Like Jan, I don't see the increased use of Google as necessarily a dangerous or bad thing. I'm even ok with supplementing our brains with Google as is the supposed ambition of the company's founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. I'd argue that having more information constantly at our disposal would definitely be a good thing and would change the way we live in unimaginable ways.
But what worries me more is the passivity of it. As an English teacher I see true value in not just the consumption of information, but also the creation of it. But if all students do is glance at bits and pieces, what then becomes of the writing process? I'd also argue that the reading process, and especially "deep reading" involves an interactive process that is VERY active. So what can we do, and what can I do? I agree with Ryan that we must continue to help students learn how to think. While the acquisition of data is becoming easier and easier, the students do need a coach of sorts to help show them what to do with this information. I believe that the role of librarians is changing right now and will be drastically different in 10-15 years from now. As an English teacher, I must specifically get kids reading. Yes, it is difficult to read a difficult and long novel like Crime and Punishment, but there is an award of intellect, critical thought and enjoyment from that process that I don't think Google can ever replace. Us readers and teachers know that, but we have to keep preaching it and practicing it with our students. And there is hope: with the ability to read interactively on an app like a kindle, I think “deep reading” might not be lost to the internet, but rather enmeshed with it through a new form of active reading. If we're active readers, we can still be writers and thus still create rather than only consuming. It's a daunting task, but I do believe we're up to it.
Technology expands the opportunities for gathering information in the classroom, which raises the concern: is the information our students are exposed to appropriate, accurate and relevant? The New York Times article exploring this issue reinforced my belief that it is up to the teacher to be guides through the education process. There is no guarantee a student won’t discover an unsavory website or faulty information. The integration of media and technology in a classroom adds a special challenge for the teacher, who must facilitate learning while monitoring for suitable and safe websites and sources. When students compose a research paper, teachers usually require a works-cited containing many references. Why? Because teachers want proof that the student pulled and verified information from several sources. In the same way, teachers must be cultivating information from many sources, constantly substantiating information. Not only does this promote accuracy, it can be the gateway for discussion and interdisciplinary learning when inconsistencies arise. Teachers must also guide their students in the best way to execute Internet research: how to critically analyze information to determine its validity. This process not only promotes critical thinking, but also problem solving and collaboration. The second article raises concerns about how we read and process information differently with the increased use of the Internet. While it is alarming that our ability to keep our attention focused on long pieces of text is dwindling, the value of the massive quantities of information and the efficiency of the Internet cannot be denied. As is the common solution to so many problems, I believe this is one is the same: compromise. Our new educational model must include the reading and critical assessment of longer works and a focus on the intricacies of the writing process, as well as include a system for discovering and using information on the Internet. Both processes have an incredibly significant place in the classroom. In the article, Maryanne Wolf said, “We are not only what we read, we are how we read.” It is now critically important to adapt our education system to be in line with the practices and expectations of our students.
After reading the 2 articles listed above, I can better understand why some of my professors in college insisted on the following criteria in choosing my resources for my research; only 3 out of 10 sources can be an online website and they must be reliable sources (i.e. historical society etc.). It is true that technology development has brought many positive changes into our lives. However, with so many changes happening so quickly, perhaps we haven’t found a proper method in controlling the possible negative outcomes; such as the problems mentioned in the 2 articles listed above.
ReplyDeleteIn the near future I, as a teacher, will have to deal with the “consequences” of living in the world where great deal of information is readily available at just the click of a button. The problem then becomes how to deal with these challenges, without preventing the students from keeping up with the new technological advances. As for me, with my future job in the field of teach English as a second language, one of the biggest challenges I will have is the potential for students abusing the free online translations websites when doing their homework. Online translation is perfectly adequate for simple, straightforward translations, but for when using words that have double meanings, the task becomes much more complicated. As of right now the best possible solution I have is to show the students the possible pitfalls of using online sources such as translate.google.com, babelfish.yahoo.com, freetranslation.com and etc through several examples. In addition, I would put an emphasis that using online translation website to do homework is considered cheating and that I could just as easily use the website they have used to check to see if they have in fact used it to do their homework. Hopefully, I will be able to design homework and other course materials that are so interesting and far more superior to what online translation websites have to offer so that students will feel engaged and want to do the homework on their own.
Great point about how technology can make direct translation easier but that nuance is lost.
DeleteHave you ever tried the itranslate app on the ipad? Ran across it on a website and was curious.
I actually haven't. I should try that out. Thanks!
DeleteScared and worried.
ReplyDeleteThose were the two emotions I had running through after reading both articles.
I was scared from reading the first, because I would have been the same noncritical, accepting consumer of information as the students. I would have trusted the source and not even blinked an eye. If I am not sophisticated enough in my own searches, how can I teach others?
Second, it's taken me three days to read the second article. I know that I am more distracted yet I read much more than my predigital self.
Both articles remind me that the road is not important if the destination is unknown. Information technology tools are just that--tools. It's up to the us to apprentice those placed in our care by updating and being as close to technological edge with a wiser and more discerning eye.
It took me about 3 tries to finish reading the second article too. I found it ironic and funny because the article mentioned how the tech development may have weakened our abilty to read deeply, and it seemed as if I was one of those people.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I understand the two authors' concern, I still wanted to see the Internet as a great opportunity to make us wise rather than stupid. Accessing lots of information with many different viewpoints frees us from being biased by limited information from traditional media.
ReplyDeleteHowever,at the same time, I also think the Internet is only focusing on its own job just throwing information as much as it can. The following steps are on us to scrutinize, choose, contemplate, judge, absorb and apply it. I believe that once we take these steps properly, the Internet would be a great blessing on us.
Therefore, teachers and parents may need to train students to take these steps by well-designed assignment or discussion such as talkback, further research, guide questions..etc. Moreover, distinction between faulty resources and reliable resources is critical step as the base step of other steps. It would be also needed that to provide children with useful tips and sessions with web professionals in the field.
The first article highlights what I think is one of the biggest problems in our schools and our education system: we do not teach students how to think. The internet is the perfect tool for teaching how to think and how to critically analyze information, and hence, the world. The misinformation from the internet did not become a real problem until it was taken from the internet and printed into a textbook. The problem was not the information itself, but how people were interacting with it. I think that a curriculum that builds the cognitive tools of information analysis and critical thinking is absolutely imperative in the world that we live in. Education and pedagogy have not caught up with the technological world that we live in and that is why we are running into problems such as this one; students are using a tool that they have not been taught to properly use yet. Most adults do not know how to use the internet as an effective research tool. But in an even bigger picture, this is about changing the way we think. In my opinion, students need to learn how to think critically, solve problems, and question the information that they read. Our education system has rarely focused on these skills and the internet provides a more accessible opportunity for educators and students to do so.
ReplyDeleteI think that the changes in how our brains process information in the information age are still not known. However, I think that while there is potential for a degradation of intelligence and "humanity" that the author sounds so afraid of, there is just as much potential for real positive change in how we are able to exchange information and ideas on a massive scale. I have found myself reading much more than before, and I have no problem reading a long article such as the one I'm writing about. Everyone is different and maybe it's a generational thing. There is a sense of information overload, but I'm not so sure that's a bad thing. What does concern me is the idea that Google and other tech companies think that there is a single perfect algorithm to find the "best information." I'm concerned about Google's goal to replace the critical thinking process one goes through when comparing search results with Google's own artificial intelligence. Not to get too sci-fi, but it seems to me that a truly intelligent AI would understand logic from a quantum system and not an Aristotelian a/b either/or binary system (quantum computing is not here yet but it's coming). I see the internet as a tool to help build critical thinking skills, not replace them.
Re: the changes in brain processing, just ran across this frontline that might be interesting to watch:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/
Cheers.
I found the first article alarming, simply because one of those history teachers could have easily been me. In a former school district where I worked, we were mandated by the state to use certain curriculum, and during my time as a new teacher, I never questioned that…So it was quite disturbing to read about controversial historical content being delivered to students through mandated textbooks. It was even more shocking to learn that the content derived from an online search. As a teacher, I would have trusted the content of the textbook, over an internet source, but as we can see, neither was reliable…that is scary. As I was reading, I couldn’t help but wonder- How long was this textbook used before the misinformation was discovered? I believe that the instruction of evaluating digital sources is not only important for students, but teachers as well.
ReplyDeleteIn "Is Google Making Us Stupid," Nicholas Carr reflects that "now my concentration often starts to drift after two or three pages. I get fidgety, lose the thread, begin looking for something else to do. I feel as if I'm always dragging my wayward brain back to the text. The deep reading that used to come naturally has become a struggle." Clearly, Carr relates what many of us see in our classes: glimmers of brilliance interrupted by a quick check of Facebook. And if I'm honest, I know my attention span has withered too. Like Jan, I don't see the increased use of Google as necessarily a dangerous or bad thing. I'm even ok with supplementing our brains with Google as is the supposed ambition of the company's founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page. I'd argue that having more information constantly at our disposal would definitely be a good thing and would change the way we live in unimaginable ways.
ReplyDeleteBut what worries me more is the passivity of it. As an English teacher I see true value in not just the consumption of information, but also the creation of it. But if all students do is glance at bits and pieces, what then becomes of the writing process? I'd also argue that the reading process, and especially "deep reading" involves an interactive process that is VERY active. So what can we do, and what can I do? I agree with Ryan that we must continue to help students learn how to think. While the acquisition of data is becoming easier and easier, the students do need a coach of sorts to help show them what to do with this information. I believe that the role of librarians is changing right now and will be drastically different in 10-15 years from now. As an English teacher, I must specifically get kids reading. Yes, it is difficult to read a difficult and long novel like Crime and Punishment, but there is an award of intellect, critical thought and enjoyment from that process that I don't think Google can ever replace. Us readers and teachers know that, but we have to keep preaching it and practicing it with our students. And there is hope: with the ability to read interactively on an app like a kindle, I think “deep reading” might not be lost to the internet, but rather enmeshed with it through a new form of active reading. If we're active readers, we can still be writers and thus still create rather than only consuming. It's a daunting task, but I do believe we're up to it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTechnology expands the opportunities for gathering information in the classroom, which raises the concern: is the information our students are exposed to appropriate, accurate and relevant? The New York Times article exploring this issue reinforced my belief that it is up to the teacher to be guides through the education process. There is no guarantee a student won’t discover an unsavory website or faulty information. The integration of media and technology in a classroom adds a special challenge for the teacher, who must facilitate learning while monitoring for suitable and safe websites and sources. When students compose a research paper, teachers usually require a works-cited containing many references. Why? Because teachers want proof that the student pulled and verified information from several sources. In the same way, teachers must be cultivating information from many sources, constantly substantiating information. Not only does this promote accuracy, it can be the gateway for discussion and interdisciplinary learning when inconsistencies arise. Teachers must also guide their students in the best way to execute Internet research: how to critically analyze information to determine its validity. This process not only promotes critical thinking, but also problem solving and collaboration.
ReplyDeleteThe second article raises concerns about how we read and process information differently with the increased use of the Internet. While it is alarming that our ability to keep our attention focused on long pieces of text is dwindling, the value of the massive quantities of information and the efficiency of the Internet cannot be denied. As is the common solution to so many problems, I believe this is one is the same: compromise. Our new educational model must include the reading and critical assessment of longer works and a focus on the intricacies of the writing process, as well as include a system for discovering and using information on the Internet. Both processes have an incredibly significant place in the classroom. In the article, Maryanne Wolf said, “We are not only what we read, we are how we read.” It is now critically important to adapt our education system to be in line with the practices and expectations of our students.