MyFace

In Ch. 4 of The Dumbest Generation, Bauerlien uses both facts and opinions to strengthen his central argument of the chapter, which is the idea that youth cultures do not use the technology available to them in order to gain valuable knowledge. Instead, today's they utilize online technology for purely social endeavors.

While Bauerlein does a wonderful job in providing substantial facts and figures from educational research bodies, I think there is a distinction that needs to be made concerning the different ways he appeals to the reader in this chapter. For one, the majority of studies that he cites are very relevant to his argument, especially the study conducted by the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance that was mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act (123). However, I do believe these statistics are in place to strengthen his political rationale for arguing that government money spent on technologies is not necessarily paying off the way the government intended. In addition, I would have been more engaged in this section if Bauerlein concentrated on the reverberating effects of No Child Left Behind and how that supports his focus.

Bauerlein shifts his argumentative style after he covers the economic risks of new technology in the classroom to a more socio-cultural appeal as a way to warn readers about the misuse of an array of technologies. In this section, I found Bauerlein's language to be particularly interesting because it seems to be elevated (using such words as sanguine on p. 131) in order to supplement his argument against the way 'tweeners and teens' are spending their leisure time. Perhaps Bauerlein is using elevated language in order to coax the ready-minded reader to consult Webster's Online Dictionary and search for the meanings of such words, which would be extremely entertaining in itself. In that case, his objective plan for how technology should be used would be fulfilled.

Nevertheless, I do think Bauerlein drove his cultural call to arms home when he talks about the notion of peer pressure and consciousness to stay connected. In class, we have talked about issues of connectivity and competency with Naomi Baron. Bauerlein's claim about the youth generation is no different. Bauerlein does not believe that we should totally abandon the leisure activities that has shaped our culture since the post-war period, but he does believe that new forms of communication between the individual and the outside world should be mediated in a way that the technologies may be used in the most efficient manner when they need to be. At this point, the latter idea is easier said than done.

I think I will leave the class with the following questions: Where do we draw the line between the incorporation of technology into the classroom and the use of already established modes of learning? What kind of cultural and academic gain could we obtain by successfully drawing new forms of technology into education? Finally, how can we make sure that the uses of new technologies that students obtain in the classroom will carry over to their social lives as a way to provide more insightful language and quests for knowledge?

P.s. Here is the music video that I spoke of a few weeks ago that I wanted to put on the blog. I think it embodies many of the issues that we have talked about this semester. Have Fun!

Our class has had several discussions about the ability to multi task and how the ability has gotten better as we use the Internet more often. It seems to be Bauerlein's opinion that if we use the computer for things like online gaming and facebook, then we must not have the ability to obtain and use information found on the Internet. It is hard to believe that Bauerlein can have such a strong opinion about an entire generation without many facts to back it up, just more opinions.

Since the beginning of this semester, I have put considerable time and effort into the formation of my research question. I feel as though I have developed a good question to use at least for the preliminary stages of the process. Despite the progress that I have semester, the studies that I have found at this point in the process does not do a thorough job of defending my thesis.

With the struggles that I have encountered during the preliminary research phases of my comp, I have begun to examine other possible topics of study that still deal with different motivation in different ways other than drinking. I have thought of an idea that I will need to research a little more to determine if switching my topic is the most beneficial move that I can make.

At this point, my comp project has taken a number of different turns. Most of these changes deal with logistical issues (i.e. time lines for experimental projects in the fall) that are simply not practical right now. However, I have not changed my methodological approach for the project very much. Thus, I am still looking at persuasion and attitude formation.

A study by Olsen and Thjomoe (2003) looked at advertising brand processing on mere exposure and additional elements of exposure within low involvement groups. The goal of the study was to discern which route of persuasion (central or peripheral) would be triggered as a result of the conditions. Participants consisted of undergrad business students who viewed slide shows of advertisements varying in detail. One of the greatest strengths of this study was that the brands shown were fictional and realistic and the information in the ads also varied with little or a lot of information. Results showed that mere exposure to a brand created a more favorable opinion of the brand with participants in low involvement. In order to trigger peripheral processing, additional information was added to each of the brands. Participants used this information as a cue for inference when evaluating a brand.

A methodological concern with this study I had was that the sample only included college students and did not include any part of the population. In addition, the study was set up specifically for low involvement with the brand; however, I would be interested to see how a high involvement study would have turned out. Nevertheless, the study is an excellent piece of literature for my ongoing research project into ELM and attitude formation.

Olson, E., & Thjomoe, H. (2003). The effects of peripheral exposure to information on brand preference. European Journal of Marketing, 37(1), 243-255.