Here's what Bauerlein's argument boils down to: this generation, including anyone under the age of thirty, is dumb. We have been proven dumb because our test scores are falling, our reading time is flat lining, if not declining, and we are attached to screens and technology, yet we are not learning anymore from the technology. Each point is presented in a different chapter with statistics, surveys, testimonies, and modern examples to prove what Bauerlein is saying. In splitting up the sub-arguments of his argument, we are convinced that we are dumb, one point at a time. At the end of the book, it all comes around to the conclusion: we are dumb, but there is something we can do about it.
This is the sole definition of concerning. Mark Bauerlein, for the sake of your sanity, I hope you never ever ever ever ever ever saw this and never do. This is Kellie Pickler, a 26-year-old country singer and American Idol contestant. Try not to cry at her stupidity.
Two passages I agree with:
"To replace the book with the screen is to remove a 2,500-year-o.d cornerstone of civilizations and insert an altogether dissimilar building block. The enthusiasts of digital learning maintain that screen-influences brains possess qualitatively different mentalities than book-influenced brains, and so we must conclude that the e-book and the rest will spawn other knowledges and altered communications."
Dear Mark Bauerlein, we are the same person in regards to this statement. I agree with him because as a hardcore reader, I love holding the book in my hands. This inevitably makes me biased against e-books and reading online. At the same time, Bauerlein provides statistics and all sorts of proof that we are not learning online. This goes to prove that replacing a book with a screen would not help us read and learn; technology hasn't been furthering our learning, so why would giving us e-books change that? Sure, it could be a different kind of learning, but is that what we are looking for? I'm all for sticking with I-can-hold-it-in-my-hands-and-turn-the-pages books :)
'"What are you doing?' That is the genuine significance of the Web to a 17-year-old mind, not the universe of knowledge brought to their fingertips, but an instrument of nonstop peer contact."
Sadly, this rings true to me. As a child in the dumbest generation, the web seems to exist to please us. Go on Facebook and what does it say? What are you doing? Well, someone should tell all the annoying people of the world that we don't care what they are eating right now. If you don't have something interesting to say, don't say anything at all. We go online to visit social networking sites, to find pictures, to chat with friends, find help on homework, and occasionally conduct research for school. but even when "conducting research," the web is there to please us. Just type in anything you want to look up on Google, and you immediately get thousands of results. Don't like what you've found? Reword it or - dare I say it - go on to the second page of search results. You can click around until you've found what you want. The web appears to be there to please us.
Two passages I disagree with:
"Let's get specific," I goaded. "You are six times more likely to know who the latest American Idol is than you are to know who the Speaker of the U.S. House is." At that point, a voice in the crowd jeered, "American Idol is more important!"
I dislike agree this passage in the sense that it writes off all teenagers and young adults as unconcerned with the world of politics. Walk into any MoPro class and you will know without a doubt that high school seniors are aware of politics and what political party they identify themselves with. I understand that Bauerlein is providing an anecdote to show that young Americans are more concerned with pop culture than they are with the people who run their country, but not everyone knows who the latest American Idol is...I haven't watched the show in YEARS. Overall, I think young adults are more likely to know facts about pop culture and social networking, but we aren't limited to that kind of knowledge, contrary to what this segment is implying.
"May generations ago, adolescent years meant preparation for something beyond adolescence, not authentic selfhood but serious work, civic duty, and family responsibility, with parents, teachers, ministers, and employers training teens in grown-up conduct...not anymore."
Okay, first of all, we do not spend our adolescence frolicking through fields and disregarding all responsibility for the future. Sure, years ago adolescence was not nearly as socially bound as it is today, but that doesn't mean that today's kids aren't preparing for the future. I started working as a dance teacher in seventh grade, but I also have a Facebook. Does having a Facebook mean I am not preparing myself for adulthood? Not last time I checked. Today's students are cramming their schedules full of honors and AP classes, clubs, intramurals, sports, volunteering, church groups, and jobs. During the rare spare time (at least it's rare for me, and I'm assuming for many other students with busy lives), students end up online. We consider it a break from our busy lives, the busy lives that are preparing us for college and the world beyond college. There are the kids that play Call of Duty all night, get drunk, do drugs, spend all their time on technology and friends and never do their homework, but there are always those kids. The rest of us are trying to prepare for adulthood.
How effective is Bauerlein's argument? Effective. He begins with his warrant in the preface, explaining that he isn't writing this book to out our generation; this is a serious problem, and he has enough authority to discuss it. Throughout the book he shocks the audience with horrendous statistics and embarrassing moments. We laugh when reading that the caller identified The Great Gatsby as "that guy who was great," but we cannot identify Mitch Albom or the U.S. Speaker of the House. Bauerlein's examples are easy to connect with; he references Jay Leno, Harry Potter, Google and video games. The way he presents the information makes us, the audience, realize that WE are part of the problem. It isn't as funny when we can't answer the questions he poses, or when shocking statistics prove that we aren't doing as well as we think we are. Bauerlein backs up everything he says with statistics and information from other sources. This helps to establish his credibility throughout the book, giving us reason to listen to him. Whether or not we agree with Bauerleins argument that we are the "dumbest generation," we are inclined to listen to him as he reasons out his argument and persuades us to listen to him with examples and situations we can identify with.
That girl is SO. DUMB. But she's got sass.
ReplyDelete