Mayumi Blogger Template

As I watched "The Dumbest Generation" clip, I realized that a lot of the claims made by the professionals, but disagreed with their overall claim that we are the dumbest generation because of our distractions with technology. To me, it would be more appropriate to call us "The Transition Generation" because we are the first generation to have this new technology and media readily available to us (ie. Internet, etc.). Because of this transition period, I'm not surprised that reading and writing skills are diminishing, but I don't necessarily think that's a bad thing just yet. It was mentioned that our generation likes to write in paragraphs with little transitions. Perhaps, as we move into the future, this is what schooling needs to focus on more; the transitions between our ideas. We need to learn to use these distractions to our advantage by continuing to have a paragraph-style writing with a short burst of ideas, but we can't lose the importance of our transitions between ideas. I agreed with Marc Prensky the most because he pointed out that many people are confused with "old, best ways of doing something, with doing something forever" when that shouldn't always be the case. People will always be afraid of change and I think this is just another example. Do I consider myself to part of the dumbest generation?... No, I consider myself to be part of the next transitional generation; one where current norms may not survive in the 21st Century.

In response to your second question I do not think that new media is compromising our academic capabilities, I think it is enhancing it in a new manner. Mark Bauerlein’s argument of a “dumb generation” is engaging and the reliance upon new technology is a reoccurring theme we’ve seen throughout this semester in regards to new media. But what the big deal? These are man made inventions of the centuries and since we are the creators we deserve to indulge in the projects of our intelligence. As for academia, reading and writing are such valuable skills, they were around from the beginning of time and centuries later, they are still crucial. I personally prefer picking up a physical book and being I am journalism major and my passion is for writing I will always choose the pen and paper to the computer or any other media device. Theorists should remember that within a generation there may be a common trend, but there are is always a portion that goes against the norm. Would they still be considered part of a dumb generation? I think I would consider myself that portion. I am not well educated on technology, I know the basics and what gets me through. Also on a side note, I just want to point out Zach post made a good point in regards to being “transitional.” I think that would make a better title to the argument proposed in the video.

In my response to the previous posting, I talked about new media having a consequence on the younger generations. I do believe new media has the potential to enhance learning, but the current system is taking far too long to "catch up." I believe there is a lot of hesitation and fear in changing what is believed to be the right and proper way to teach and learn. Of course, there are movements and places incorporating technology into classrooms, but of course this comes with a cost--equal distribution will be tough to regulate.

I would like to point out, though, that there are some things technology can't help, an example that does show that many forms of new media aren't necessarily or bettering the current system. Take the movie "Up in the Air" with George Clooney. I will not go into too much detail, but a younger girl comes into a corporation with ideas that video webchatting will make firing people easier and more economical. Yes, there are budget factors that make the system sound wonderful. However, the movie shows that face to face human communication cannot be replicated. It is an interesting lesson to learn. I realize this may not directly relate to the documentary, but is another way to look at the side still for traditional methods.

I strongly disagree that this is an unbiased article. The article focuses on students at MIT, which seems like an inaccurately biased, non-random sample. According to the US Census Bureau, as of 2007, 29% of the US population did not have Internet access (U.S. Census Bureau Information and Communication Table 1118, http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/). It seems very difficult to argue that new media, primarily taking the form of Internet-based communication, can significantly impact a generation when 29% of the population does not have access to said media. Though I do not doubt there is some change in the way our generation operates due to increased media exposure, I do not believe that this film is an accurate representation of how this change is manifested.

I do not feel like I am less academically capable because of my access to certain types of media influence. While I do agree with the idea that the media instruments can change the way that we learn and interpret information, I think that it depends on the type of knowledge we are looking to acquire. I know that I use the internet, my phone, television and other new media artifacts as ways to gain knowledge, but I do not see this as something that makes me less academically capable. I find the statistic that Kyle posted above me as something that is crucial to analyzing the importance and relevance of the article because of the lack of accessibility of the internet and other new media artifacts.