One thing Prof. Knupsky said to us in our last class really stuck with me. After a certain point, having an excess of statistics loses your reader as well as the meaning/argument.
Reading through the first several pages of Chapter 3 once again featured statistic after statistic, and I don't know if it was because of my less than ideal state of sleep deprivation that my attention span and cognitive abilities are limited, but I feel as though I could have skipped the first ten pages without any real trouble, as he doesn't get to his own argument until "That's the claim" on page 84. Did we really need 12 pages of introductions and statistics before he got to what he really wanted to talk about?
Anyway, I, like Rachel, found that my reactions to this chapter were somewhat choppy and therefore may require some bullet points.
-Moving on in a different (more familiar) direction, Bauerlein returns to reading, and this time he actually has some good statistics that I was able to digest. Leisure reading of any kind correlates to a student's grades more than anything else. However, being veterans of Psych 206, we all know that correlation does not equal causation. Why is that correlation there? Tell me that, and I'll be impressed and listen to you a lot more.
-The rising IQ thing I feel as though goes along with our rising comforts, accessibility to early schooling (as mentioned in the book) and increase of stuff in our lives? I don't think that really made sense... I'll try to elaborate in class.
A lot of the points touched on in this chapter were discussed in Baron's Always On, which made me glad that I had that base of opinion and specific view that she offered. Once Bauerlein started his real argument, he did bring up some good points, even if he featured them in the "untrue/that's the claim" section.
-On page 84, the same I mentioned before, he has a really interesting statement right before the "that's the claim" line. Here it is in case you don't have your book handy (you little Millennial, you!)
Individuals who've grown up surrounded by technology develop different hard-wiring, their minds adapted to information and entertainment practices and speeds that minds maturing in pre-digital habitats can barely comprehend, much less assimilate.
Bam. I guess you could say this is one point I would like to discuss in class. I remember mentioning it during our Baron reading period but I don't think it was stated so explicitly as it is here.
Here's the Hulu ad from the superbowl which states that aliens intend to melt your brain using their new form of free, mobile television.
As Alec Baldwin states, "And the best part is, there’s nothing you can do to stop it. I mean, what are you gonna do, turn off your tv AND your computer?"
Does using this technology make us smarter or dumber? People are arguing both sides, and no one really seems to know. What about people in Japan who kick our butts at math and science and everyone is permanently glued to their all in one cell phone?
I know you're not supposed to let your infant watch Baby Einstein videos as it messes them up, but is there anything wrong with settling down with some quality Sesame Street? I feel like there are a lot more interactive, semi-educational shows now than there were when I was young... it was all about waking up for the mindless Saturday morning cartoons and Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Cowabunga, dude.
Comments (1)
"I love being a turtle."
Posted by Dan | April 9, 2009 11:26 PM
Posted on April 9, 2009 23:26