Week 5: Questions for Thought Generation Like and Digital_Nation

Week 5: Digital_Nation and Generation Like

Source

Questions for Thought:


1. Compare and Contrast each documentary.  What was similar or different from the first one Digital Nation filmed in 2010 to Generation Like filmed in 2014?  



From Digital Nation filmed in 2010 to Generation Like 2014, one thing that is extremely evident is how the web has not lost its lure and has become more powerful than ever.  Douglas Rushkoff, takes a candid look at the evolving and complicated relationship between teen, social media, pop culture, and big brands in the video Generation Like.  Similar to the documentary Digital Nation, we see that children, teenager, and young adults and adults alike rely on technology to connect to one another.

Generation Like

2.  Your thoughts on multitasking.  Do you agree?  Can you multitask?  Do you disagree with the video on the topic of multitasking? What do you think our students think about multitasking today?


Based on the FRONTLINE video, DigitalNation—Distracted by Everything, I believe that multi-tasking has become an action and word synonymous with our culture, our society, and our 21^st century world. We have grown very accustomed to our attention being diverted and stretched in all different directions as a “21^st century multitasker.”  However, as most of us pride ourselves on having the ability and skills to multitask while comprehending and solving complex problems with thoughtful attention to detail, and follow-through, I do not believe we are asserting our minds with the same effectiveness as evident in concentrated activity. I base my opinion upon careful consideration of the interviews and testimonials of students interviewed at MIT. These students are among the worlds smallest and most wired in the world.  They constantly multitask with their tech mood.  Yes, I would say that we are able to complete multiple tasks, shifting our mind in and out of various subjects, content, people and places; however, it does seem to come at a cost.  The work that students are producing is not cohesive.  This is substantiated with the studies done at Stanford University with MRIs of the brain.  Professor Clifford Nass explains that in general our brains can’t do two things at once.  The research choses subject that are very high “chronic multitaskers” (chosen because they are doing 5 or more things at once.)  Nass conducted studies to test how quickly students can switch between tasks without losing their focus.  What they found is that despite the students confidence in their skills and ability, the multitaskers yielded troubling results.  They are, in fact, terrible at multitasking.   The experiment showed that students switching between tasks are not as successful, as they think and proclaim. It turns out according to Nass, “They are terrible at every aspect of multitasking.  The get distracted easily.  Their memory is very disorganized.  Their analytic reasoning is compromised.  The concern is that we are creating people that do not think well and clearly.”  

Furthermore, MIT students confirm that distractions diminish the returns in their work.  This is exemplified when we examine student’s writing.  Their writing can be described as bursts of paragraphs, but no cohesive content tying them all together.  One students at MIT, laughs this off as being completely the truth.  Their intelligence is not even a consideration.  However, the constant distractions and multitasking has its drawback as evident in their writing and the flow between paragraphs.

I thought that the Digital_Nation documentary gave an insightful perspective regarding multitasking, as FRONTLINE producer Rachael Dretzin and correspondent, Douglas Rushkoff, investigate the world of technology and its implications of being connected at all times.  They interviewed Massachusetts Institute of Technology students, some of the “most technological savvy in the world,” and some professors on the subject of multitasking.  It appears that students feel very competent in their ability to perform well while weaving in and out of lectures. Most time they can be found dividing their attention between their studies while juggling Facebook, goggles, texts, emails, IMs, plans for the future, comments of the moment, the list goes on and on, and on…  However, according to Associate professor at MIT, David Jones, he explains, “There are two sorts of things you can you can test student upon.  You can test how well they’re paying attention in lecture.  You can test how well they’re absorbing information on readings you assign.  I gave midterm and the mean score was 75%." In his opinion, Prof. David Jones, does not think that they doing either of these things well.  He goes on to support his reasoning by explaining that, “It’s not that the student are dumb.  It’s not that they are not trying.   They are trying in a way that is not as effective because they are distracted by everything else.”

Sherry Turkle, Director, MIT 

Professor Sherry Turkle,Dir., MIT Initiative on Technology and Self, who has been teaching at MIT for over 30 years shares her expertise with us, “I teach the most brilliant students in the world.  But they have done themselves a disservice by drinking the Kool-Aid and believing that a multitasking environment will serve their best purposes.  There really are important things that you cannot think about unless it is still, and you are only thinking about one thing at a time.  “There really are important things that you cannot think about unless it is still, and you are only thinking about one thing at a time.  There are just some things that are not amendable in conjunction with 15 other things!
--Prof. Sherry Turkle, Dir., MIT Initiative on Technology and Self

3.  Is there an addiction happening in society today with technology or is it just a new way of living?   Should we be concerned?

ad·dict·ed

əˈdiktid/

adjective

physically and mentally dependent on a particular substance, and unable to stop taking it without incurring adverse effects.

"she became addicted to alcohol and diet pills"

synonyms:  dependent on;

·      enthusiastically devoted to a particular thing or activity.

"he's addicted to computers"

synonyms: devoted to, obsesses with, fixated on, dedicated to, fanatical about, passionate about, enamored of, a slave to…




This is indeed a very complex question.  I was initially going to respond to this question by saying that I believe it is completely subjective.  Our society is made up of individuals, so it seems extreme to make a blanket statement that would suggest that collectively we are all “addicted.”  However, after looking up the definition and reflecting it on the interviews seen in our research, I thought it was wise to recant my first response; truth be told it just doesn’t seem as truthful as I would have liked to believe.  I would have to say that that there is, without a doubt, “an addiction happening in society” that has become a new way of living.  It may be subtle for some, and more extreme for others; however, make no mistake, technology has become that which we are dependent on.  The outliers are the one’s who have not participated in this craze in technology.  They would surprisingly not be considered the norm in our society though. 

In retrospect, I personally would consider myself to be a pretty grounded person.  For the most part, I see technology simply as a resource.   I suppose I am old fashioned in the way that I value face to face time, refuse to give up my paperback books, and through my study of message construction have come to understand that there is so much to be left to interpretation, or should I say “misinterpretation” when it comes to texting.  HOWEVER, and that’s a huge “HOWEVER,” I can admit that I do not do well without my technology.  Regardless of the consciousness in this shift that has brought us into a world of dependency, I think that you may be able to relate to my story?  I can distinctly remember last semester our home wireless Internet router broke down.  My husband sent it out to be replaced and we would get our new one in four days. “Wait!!!  Hold on.  “You mean that we are not going to have our Internet for FOUR DAYS!!!!!  What!!  That is ridiculous!!!!” I protested.   Four days of not being able to access the Internet through my home computer seemed like an eternity in my world of having it happen in a New York second!  It was the longest four days of my life--papers, research, deadlines ALL reliant upon something so darn trivial?  Honestly, the transition may have been subtle, but we do live in a digital age and like it or not I’m in it.  How many of us could really deny that we would be, at best, not as a society  “enthusiastically devoted to” our smartphones, iPod, and/or Facebook, so on and so forth?  I mean unless you are living under a rock, I think that we all can relate to that feeling of loyalty towards our tech of choice.  On a more extreme level let’s think about those that are influenced beyond the point of normal consumption and functioning in regards to technology.  A quick glance at Facebook becomes an endless web of links, videos, likes and dislikes. The World of Warcraft doesn’t end until ten hours later and a sleepless night. Anxiety and panic sweeps over us as we realize we have forgotten our smartphone and are not connected.  These are all behaviors that one could be characterize as an “addiction.”  As we have documented and established in our past blogs—technology stimulates us and is associated with pleasure.  This pleasure seeking behavior isn’t necessarily in itself a problem.  However, when it becomes excessive and leads to health issues such anxiety, withdrawal, low self esteem (i.e. exemplified with teenagers linking their self worth with “likes”), eye strain, and attention deficits, I think that it is time to rethink our usage of technology and its negative implications.

I can’t help but think of Asia’s digital revolution as an extreme case of a society addicted to tech.  South Korea’s digital culture embraced high-speed Internet access to gaming and created a craze like no other. It has, in the most extreme cases, been linked to death after kids played in gaming marathons without food or water for over 50 hours.  Korea is notorious for its 24/7 gaming cafes that offer nonstop accessibility to video games.  While these gaming cafés recovered South Korea from economic crisis they have also taken a toll on young teenagers that have succumbed to its digital culture.  It is not surprising that South Korea was one of the first countries to confront the fallout of the digital revolution.  It was heartbreaking to hear a mother talk about her son and his addiction to playing video games.  Her young son went from being at the top of his class, to being at the bottom.  She sadly states, “His inability to communicate with his own mother makes me so sad. This is an addiction.  Only an addict could act this way.”  In an effort to help young kids that are casualties of the digital revolution, they have opened up a free program to help children that have an addiction to technology.  However, it is not determined whether these programs actually are a success.

I think that we should be concerned. Children in South Korea are taught how to use computers responsibly as early on as the second grade.  Children are taught etiquette, manners and ethics, then the technology.  This seems like a positive approach to a digital concern.  By educating students early on we can empower them in a digital age.

4.  Do video games serve a purpose in education or are they a waste of time?

Schools should be wary of embracing too much technology, cautions Todd Oppenheimer.  Oppenheimer is a journalist and the author of The Flickering Mind.  However, James Paul Gee, leading proponent of developing educational games for children argues that it depends upon the learning that is built around that activity.  It depends on the context in which these games are used.  If that person is making connection and connecting it with new skills then it can be positive.  It really depends on what you do with it.  James Paul Gee goes on to elaborate on the kids that are doing positive things with technology.  However, he does explain that the kids that are benefiting from technology are those that do different virtual activities along with say soccer, or theater.  The children do not become obsessed with it.  They want to try new things and connect their skills with something new.  Good mentoring does seem to be key.  Parents should be aware of the games their children are playing and the quality of their gaming.  In the middle class families the media that was giving was supplemented with mentoring that was guiding the children to picking something that was a little above their reading level.  The results suggested that the middle class children learned new skills in complaisance with the poor children who did not have guidance.

Research and studies have shown that textbooks are the least effective ways to teach according to Gee.  If you offer a child a game or a textbook the children will take the game.  We need teachers to use games to teach with innovation and creativity.  We should give them new experiences through games.  For instance, facts and physics are about solving problems.  Even with people with As in physics does not say that that person can actually use their knowledge to solve complex problems.  However, games do not just give you a manual but they marry words with experiences goals problems and solutions. 

5.  How did what you watched in the two videos support your feelings about technology or how did it change your views?


I found this documentary profound and very relevant to the times that we are living in.  These videos confirmed my feelings about technology.  First off, I completely related to the introduction of the video Digital_Nation where Rachael Dretzin shares her thoughts as a segue into the documentary.  She shares her realization that everyone is in the same house, but in different worlds.  “It snuck up on us.”  This caught my attention and made me want to explore the world of technology more.  What are its’ implications?  What does study and research reveal?  These videos supported my initial feeling in regards to technology. I believe it is a powerful resource.  It has the power to build, transport, and connect at incrediable speeds unlike anything our world has ever witnessed.  On the flip side, it has the power to distract, dumb down, and destroy. 

I believe that technology is not good or bad.  It depends upon the context in which it is used.  I think that as educator we have a responsibility to incorporate it into the classroom in fun, creative, innovative ways.  Also, I think that one of my peers made a great point in her blog when she explained that technology should be mindful and have direction.  This is a very important component to technology that adds meaning to our lesson and concepts.  

 

6.  Are kids and adults today ruining their digital footprints by sharing too much information online without realizing that it may be detrimental to their future? Should they care?  Are they focused on too much of what others think?
I think that kids should definitely be educated on what "digital footprints" means and how it will impact them and their future.  I think there is something to be said for a little mystery.  It is my opinion that a little "mystic" adds to one's appeal.  However, that is just my opinion.  While I would not expect younger generations to adopt my point of view, I would like them to consider all the implications of sharing too much online.  I think that it is very empowering to hold all the facts and then make an informed educated decision.  From the interviews on Generation Like, it is very evident to me that they care what others think of them.  They spend hours creating an online identity and then searching for that approval from others.  I don't think that this is unordinary for teenagers.  However, my concern with this new digital age is the exploitation that goes on with this random information.  I think that a child's/teenager's identity should be protected not exploited.  I think that teenager and young adults today are incredibly savvy.  I give them credit for their creativity, freedom of expression, and innovation.  As such, it would behoove them to take control of what they put out there.  I am a firm believer that sometimes less is more.  

7.  What do you feel are the dangers of technology use?  Are there any?

I think that there are more profound affects or dangers on younger children with developing brains. According to the latest Kaiser Family Foundation data, 8-to 18 year olds are spending more than 50 hours a week with digital media.  That’s more than a full work week. Dr. Gary Small is the director of UCLA’s Memory and Aging Research Center.  He claims that, “young people who’s brains are not fully developed may have difficulty in memorization.  A young brain goes through a process called 'pruning.'  Within this early developmental stage (children through adolescents) 60% of the synaptic connection between the brain cells are being pruned away.  So what a young person chooses to expose their brain to will have profound effects for the rest of their life." 

Overall Final Reflection:

Please add anything else you feel would explain your views about the videos and how they relate to educational technology or your personal lives.

listen to ‘Midterm Reflections and Course Objectives’ on Audioboo

What was your favorite part of either video?  Why?  Most interesting?
I thought that it was very interesting to see the "man behind the curtain"  in the video Generation Like.  It was fascinating to see the actual process in the huge corporate commercial push.  The Audience creates demographic data, and knows how to turn "likes" into currency.  

I thought it was ingenious the strategy used by The Audience.  This publishing network really knows how to build and leverage a social network.  First, they help their client build a fan base.  This was shown through their client Liam.  Liam has a genuine talent, but he needs to merge his fan bases together in order to become a success.  He does this throughout he help of The Audience.  He features other "talents" in his videos to attract a larger fan base.  Moreover, I was even more intrigued with the information depicted with Ian Somerhalder and The Audience.  Oliver's company, The Audience, follows Ian Somerhalder's "like."  Likes are then dissected, analyzed, and monetized.  Those valued interactions means prized endorsements.  The concept is pretty straightforward and transparent.  Basically, you are your own media company.  Brilliant marketing concept!!!