An interesting thing happened on the way to learning in the 21st Century...
George Siemens said "Technology is altering (rewiring) our brains. The tools we use define and shape our thinking." I can think of no more poignant a statement for today's social and political climate than this statement. Technology has become both our savior/liberator and our prison. We are tethered to our various social networks and information outlets during the majority of our waking hours. We search for answers to all questions through Google, obtain feedback instantaneously through FacebookLive, and we respond to the world's problems and in-the-moment opinions and commentary in blips through Twitter. How is this NOT rewiring our brains? I am reading an article for another class that had a quote by Henri Poincare ́, a physical scientist, I think really applies here. ‘Science is built up of facts, as a house is built of stones; but an accumulation of facts is no more science than a heap of stones is a house.’ Accumulation of technology, how much tech we own, is not the main factor; the main factor is how much we use on a daily basis, in our jobs and in our free time. This is the deciding factor on how much it affects our brains. For example, reading books encourages imagination and focus, it takes time to get the information from many different sources. On the other hand, the advent of technology and the access we have to mountains of information at our fingertips has encouraged the abilities of rapid and efficient scanning of information. The importance of processing, analyzing, and synthesizing that information? This is something that is lacking in our culture and in our schools. So, I agree with Siemans. Technology is literally changing the neurons for creating the pathways of thinking in our brains, changing how our brains receive and process the information. I was reading a research study on the effects of regular video game playing on the manual dexterity of laparoscopic surgeons - an average of more than 35% increase on surgery skill level as a direct result. It's impressive to think how much computer use or game console use can have an effect on our brains and bodies. But the effect does not stop there. Technology is affecting how, when, where, and why we are learning. According to many neuroscience researchers, the ever-growing exposure we have to technology for information gathering/input is quite literally rewiring our brains. We process information differently than we did when it was just books or magazines, just as the change from handwriting to typing changed the way our brains were wired to process and read and write information. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21128236.400-susan-greenfield-living-online-is-changing-our-brains/ (Links to an external site.) Biologically, our bodies are linked to our brains, hence the order in which most humans learn to walk. It doesn't start with walking or even standing, it begins with the body up on all fours, rocking to and fro, before falling back on the belly. Walking happens only when the brain is ready for it. I think there is a big parallel here. But getting the brain ready and training the brain for for learning via technology is only half of the issue. The other half concerns the location of the knowledge and information. In today's world, we have Wikipedia, Google, Answers.com, AskIT, and millions of other sites we can go to for information. I have heard many times, 'Why do I have to know this? I can just Google it.' Knowing where to go for knowledge is good, it makes for good research. However, without the prior knowledge to connect new knowledge to, we are doing nothing but opening up files and looking at isolated facts. That is not learning nor is it conducive to locating and understanding correct information. We have to know how to process the information we find, connect it to other information, and come up with new ideas to contribute to the subject, or at least new ways of thinking about it. Innovation and new ideas have both exploded and suffered at the hands of technology, in my opinion. The future of learning will be finding ways to combine information overload with information processing/synthesis and fact confirmation.
0 Comments
This week, as part of my Social Media & Digital Culture class, I looked at Quora, located at www.quora.com (Links to an external site.). The purpose of Quora is, simply put, for people with answers to link up with those who have questions. However, Quora goes so much beyond the simple. I found a plethora of articles relevant to my interests, both personal and professional, from poetry and novel writing to art and education. How have I not heard of this before? As a seeker of knowledge, why is this new to me? How is Twitter bigger than this site? As I went in search of answers, pun intended, something occurred to me. Twitter is a no holds barred, raucous, sounds like incoherent ramblings sometimes, short blip of a conversation. Quora is a place to ask and answer questions - Easy questions, such as "What fruit starts with the letter 'n?'" and more complex questions "Why is reading so important? or Why do we need quantum mechanics?"
Another aspect of Quora I find intriguing is the algorithm it seems to use to determine what questions you might find interesting to answer, and ones you might find intriguing to read. After a week, I seemed to be relegated to college and art questions. I then updated my topics and was greeted with a plethora of enticing questions to read and answer. The more subjects you list, the more varied topics for questions you are exposed to; however, Quora pays attention to the questions you seem to like to answer as well. You can "pass" on answering questions and get more questions to read or answer. It seems to be a never ending process, but one that is fascinating to take part in. After vetting more than five dozen answers to questions I researched the answers for, I discovered most of the answers for concrete subjects were accurate. There was some conversations and debates for more subjective answers to questions, especially in the art section; which is as it should be. On the whole, Quora is worth a look and worth returning to as it is much more entertaining than Wikipedia. Favorite question I've read on Quora so far (and only tabletop RPG participants will get this, but it is very relevant to another class I am taking) "How do I, as a DM, deal with a pair of Chaotic Stupid and Stupid Neutral alignment characters?" If you play RPG's and have ever played D&D, you will get this and it is amazing that there are two dozen answers to such a niche question and there are almost a thousand views of the answers. Pro's and Con's: Pro: There are so many different articles from many professionals and everyday people to read and process. The subjects seem to be endless and varied. Lurking is easy as is answering questions in an almost anonymous manner. Con: There are so many different articles - I got lost in the rabbit hole for hours. There does seem to be a group of posters and question answer gurus that I see frequently, there may be something strange here about this, but maybe not. |
Kait E CottengimA wandering leaf, teacher, lifelong book addict, ofttimes artist/writer, & eclectic spiritual explorer. ArchivesCategories |