I'm going to just say it: I think I really do agree with Nicholas Carr. I do believe that our constant access to the internet and ability to answer our questions at the drop of a hat is making us less educated over time. Let's just take a moment and think: how much do you really know about, say, the Civil War? Now, how much do your parents know? Probably more than you do. Why is that?
It's most likely because generations before us didn't get all of their information off of Wikipedia. They didn't get their homework done by just looking up the answers on the internet. They learned it, they really studied it, and when they had a paper to write their only resource was books and journals. No quick Google to find a topic, to answer a prompt, to find easy sources to cite. They even had to remember how to site a source from memory! no easybib.com for them!
It's not only todays students who I think are suffering from this convenience we call the internet. Young teachers are having the same problem. I had a teacher in middle school who would get all of her information on topics from Wikipedia. She would stand in front of us with the printed out article and just spew facts about Communism in China or Apartheid in South Africa, and then laugh and say "sorry, I don't really know much about this." That's really great for us students. Thanks a lot.
Helen Fraser, head of a charity which runs independent girls schools in Britain, says that students "should be reading whole books, rather than gathering a few shallow impressions" because "deeper learning takes time, like a 'slow casserole'" and that "quick-fix answers from internet search engines can leave children with a lack of awareness of different views and a one-dimensional view of topics."
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Yeah, Nicholas Carr has it right. We definitely need to start reblogging less photos and reading more books.
Coughlan, Sean. "Learning 'infantilised' by Relying on Internet." BBC News. BBC, 06 Dec. 2012. Web. 24 Sept. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-18410520>.
Even though people choose to use Wikipedia as a source to find information it is not the best source. Wikipedia is not a reliable source and anybody can add information to the site. I agree that our parents might know more about a topic like the Civil War, but that is because the sources they used were scholarly sources. Wikipedia is just a starting point and what the general public knows. I would say that people are making themselves stupid. they are lazy and putting the time in to learn. Wikipedia can be a great source when used correctly since it has references at the bottom of each page. this shows that the articles on it are just summaries, people choose to just take that information. Its easy to put the blame on Google for making people stupid but if people are not making an effort to find information that's out there is their own fault they become stupid.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree on what you're saying. Since it's so easy for us to find information, I feel the subject matter would stick more if I actually took the time and researched it in a book. The faster the information, the faster it leaves our heads. But then again, it is our choice on how we research it, we've just gotten lazier...or maybe busier?
ReplyDeleteAlso the fact that your teacher used Wikipedia as a learning tool says a lot about our generation and worries me for the next generation to come. Wikipedia can easily be edited by anyone, who is to say these facts are reliable? That's the dangerous part I feel about using the internet. I feel like a book is where it's at.