is our kids getting more dumber?

[u2roolz]

I would add into the mix that our children (or younger generation) are having more distractions and albeit confusing ones.

How many reality shows out there are geared towards a high school demographic (or sometimes younger)? There's a show on MTV called 16 & Pregnant and if you get pregnant at 16 and send MTV a letter they will come to your house and film you for 6 months and voila you'll be on television. And if MTV likes you enough they'll come back for more and do a show called Teen Mom. Add to that the likes of Keeping Up With The Kardashians, Something Wild, Jersey Shore, The Hills, and on the other side of the fence you have the music industry and sports industry with their present "role models". Edit: I should add that in nearby Gloucester, MA a "pact" between more than 5 high school girls involved getting pregnant while in high school.

 

The point is it seems/feels like this younger generation is thinking that being on tv or being famous for being nothing is better than thinking ahead about a career. It sounds cool to them. I know this from the younger generation that I worked with at my previous job. They were talking enthusiastically about The Hills like my friends and I talk about Lost. This is only a sample size, but if you go and check on IMDB or Facebook it broadens that tenfold. If younger people are watching these shows over scripted tv series what type of message does that send to them? Some don't realize that these "reality" shows are scripted too. It leads me to my next finger wag.

 

Facebook: Or The Breeding Ground For Future Megalomaniacs: Ah, yes. You got to love a site for posting pictures of oneself and posting your thoughts for the world to see er....I mean your "friends" that you can choose or deny. This is fuel to the fire that is known as the microcosm of high school that seemingly has no blinders for a student. This is what they know and may further the blow that is known as going to college and meeting people from every walk of life. Furthermore, Facebook tends to blur the line between public and privacy that most kids won't come around to until it hurts them. This is a generation that is growing up by posting pictures of almost everything that they do on a daily basis. How does that change their ego from generations prior?

 

And a close friend of mine was a high school shop teacher who found his job very frustrating. His main concern was the number of high school students who wanted to take his class to just sit around and goof off figuring it was an easy A. This didn't flow well due to being surrounded by all sort of tools for the auto industry that they thought were toys. He also made several mentions of kids getting up during class to go to the bathroom without asking permission. He found this to be an obvious difference from when we were in high school to now. Then his biggest concern was the use of cellphones in class. They were not allowed, but kids snuck them in anyhow and caused disruptions left and right because they had to get their texting fix in before class dismissal. From what my friend told me these two cases of disrespect were common in the present day classroom at the high school.

 

While most of this doesn't have to do with school per se, it does in the sense that this is what the kids bring with them to school every day. Meaning thoughts of The Hills, what went on on Facebook, and let's text about it for the duration of the day to make it go by quicker so that we can get out of here and go back to what really seems exciting and cool and less judgmental.

 

Edit: Oh yeah one more thing. We need a defender of the word "of". I hate seeing this butchered even by friends my own age and even older.

[Lammycat]

Small class sizes.

 

the county i live in is a clusterfuck of an education system as a result of nepotism and racism that no one wants to talk about.

 

What about small class sizes?

 

Which country do you live in, amigo?

[Guest Speed Racer]

How does that change their ego from generations prior?

 

I find it really, really, really hard to believe that this generation of feeling-event-sharers is somehow more ego-driven and self-absorbed then the generation I belonged to when I sat in my room listening to Heartbreaker, Gold, Being There and Summerteeth wondering if anyone else would ever understand how the weight of the world hung on my shoulders.

[Guest Speed Racer]

A few more thoughts for u2roolz:

 

re: Texting in class

 

Back in my day, teachers continually and daily confiscated notes my classmates and I were furiously writing to pass to our friends between classes. Is texting that much different?

 

re: Reality shows

 

Keeping Up with the Kardashians, ripping it's title from the old-as-dirt phrase "keeping up with the Joneses."

 

re: Morals and Technology

 

Since when is Risky Business a family-friendly flick? Wasn't rock n' roll dangerous?

 

re: Public v. Private

 

Every bathroom stall in every girl's room (and boy's room) in every school, ever. Judy has always been a ho, whether the stall says she is, her "friends" (the ones who spread rumors without computers or with) say she is, the dude says she is, or she posts photos saying she is.

[Good Old Neon]

A Washington Post profile of the women pushed to have Thomas Jefferson removed from textbooks:

 

After the 2006 election, Republicans claimed ten of fifteen board seats. Seven were held by the ultra-conservatives, and one by a close ally, giving them an effective majority. Among the new cadre were some fiery ideologues; in her self-published book, Cynthia Dunbar of Richmond rails against public education, which she dubs “tyrannical” and a “tool of perversion,” and says sending kids to public school is like “throwing them into the enemy’s flames.” (More recently, she has accused Barack Obama of being a terrorist sympathizer and suggested he wants America to be attacked so he can declare martial law.)

 

The article in full - http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2010/1001.blake.html

 

I don't know if it's the the kids or their parents that are getting dumber.

[fatheadfred]

No, I thought it was a phrase implying that you're saying what you want with little interest in whether facts back them up. Oddly enough, not at all meta-what thinking.

 

 

 

You totally missed what I was getting at, but that's okay, I probably phrased it poorly. I was insinuating that you disagree with what a lot of people think, and therefore devalue their ability to meta-what think.

 

I have quite a bit of interest in the subject. Your request for facts when we are faced with an overload of superficial knowledge blanketing our ability to create for ourselves has proven the point.

 

Talk about generality..."i disagree with what a lot of people think". Geez.

[u2roolz]

 

re: Texting in class

 

Back in my day, teachers continually and daily confiscated notes my classmates and I were furiously writing to pass to our friends between classes. Is texting that much different?

 

 

Yes. You can reach a wider audience with your cellphone. Or you can send out a mass text to all of your friends in the class and even those still sitting in the cafeteria.

I'll agree the intent is the same, but the means of communication via technology is staggeringly different. And sneakier too. Teachers don't have to look around for kids passing post it notes around, now they have to look for whoever has their head down and their arms hidden. And it makes it a bit uncomfortable for the teacher to ask who the kid was sending the text to without checking the cellphone which is technically the property of the kid.

[Guest Speed Racer]

Eh, "geez" back at you. Again, my generalization was an extrapolation from what you said - what your generalization might be getting at.

 

I simply disagree that a statement that "lots of kids and adults have lost the ability to meta-what think" has weight as anything other than a generalization.

 

Yes. You can reach a wider audience with your cellphone. Or you can send out a mass text to all of your friends in the class and even those still sitting in the cafeteria.

 

How does that make students more self-absorbed?

 

I'll agree the intent is the same, but the means of communication via technology is staggeringly different. And sneakier too.

 

Students take notes for class on paper. Students also write notes to friends on paper. How can you possibly get any sneakier? I wasn't talking about passing notes in class, but writing notes in class to pass to students between periods.

 

ETA: I think a student is just as likely to get caught passing a note as they are to text. Both can be done surreptitiously and stupidticiously.

[u2roolz]

 

How does that make students more self-absorbed?

 

Students take notes for class on paper. Students also write notes to friends on paper. How can you possibly get any sneakier? I wasn't talking about passing notes in class, but writing notes in class to pass to students between periods.

 

Well, from a kid's point of view you are sending out a message to 10 people at the same time through a cellphone. Talk about an ego trip. In other words: you are sending out your thoughts to 10 different people who will be reading them without any personal distractions as in real conversation. It's like always "holding the floor" which may impair a kid's communication skills in the real world without a cellphone to use.

And then you are waiting to hear from those 10 people.

And the cycle goes on.

 

RE: the "Paper" situation: Paper is a physical piece of evidence that teachers probably keep an eye out for in between classes. A text message is unknown to the passerby. I'm sure kids are smart enough to put their cellphone on silent.

[Guest Speed Racer]

Well, from a kid's point of view you are sending out a message to 10 people at the same time through a cellphone. Talk about an ego trip.

 

But think about the things they aren't saying - the things that are timeless: did YOU not think you were going through some sort of horrible case of teenage angst that no one - not even your friends - could understand? Isn't that what every John Hughes movie is about? American Graffiti?

 

RE: the "Paper" situation: Paper is a physical piece of evidence that teachers probably keep an eye out for in between classes. A text message is unknown to the passerby. I'm sure kids are smart enough to put their cellphone on silent.

 

Cell phones are not invisible, and in fact look very different from the pieces of paper that students are supposed to be taking notes on. Teachers notice cell phones - kids texting or reading texts in class - just as they would notice a kid passing a note. Teachers also miss them, just as they missed me passing notes 98% of the time.

 

Kids reading/sending texts while not in an academic setting are no different than kids chatting between classes.

 

Kids should also be smart enough to not post incriminating photos on Facebook, but, um...oh, right, they still do.

 

without any personal distractions as in real conversation

 

Because kids who read texts aren't: watching tv, surfing the internet, talking with other kids, driving, riding a bus...?

[Guest Speed Racer]

And then you are waiting to hear from those 10 people.

And the cycle goes on.

 

How is that different from calling your friends (on a landline!) because of an extreme teen emergency? It might have been different for girls than boys, but I'll be damned if I didn't enjoy the days where I had a darmn good crisis worthy of calling at least 5 of my closest, personal confidantes to ask for help STAT. And then wait for some to return my calls. And OMG you would NOT believe what one of them said [reaching for the phone...]

[bleedorange]

The only thing I find really objectionable about the Texas textbook stuff is the reduction of TJ's importance. That's pretty ridiculous and makes absolutely no sense. A lot of Jefferson's political principles are things that conservatives are supposed to believe. But we get this certain faction with religious myopia that hold that above everything else.

[u2roolz]

To further color my point I will add my own recent experience and then choose to apply that to something in a high school environment.

 

I was at a recent Oscar party with 16 people total. It was very hard to get any word in or for that matter to converse with one person out of 16 or with all 16 people via a comment made by one.

It was this big cacophony of noise (these are the "personal distractions" that I was referring to). After a few comments that went unnoticed I decided to not talk again because I was discouraged that no one could hear anyone.

 

High School Cafeteria: A table of 10 or more kids with 10 or more opinions being shouted at without rhyme or reason (these are the "personal distractions" that I was referring to). It's tough to take "the floor" here. Usually the one with the "Big Mouth" makes their presence known early and quickly. The one with the "Big Mouth" may feel like the center of that little universe because their thoughts are known. Now when you take into account a cellphone and its uses for sending mass text messages that line begins to blur ("Big Mouth"). Your voice is finally being heard. Same goes with why Facebook is so popular. In reality it offers a false sense of security. You can't bring your cellphone into a meeting into a job to make a presentation. You actually have to talk and command the floor. So my case is: If kids are relying on their message being heard through a tiny electronic device (or a computer) and not honing their interpersonal communication skills then they'll be entering a world of hurt and trouble.

 

Also, I feel with a cellphone one is more in charge of who gets their message as opposed to a note being sent around haphazardly and into someone's wrong hands.

 

RE: The Oscar Party. After I went home and felt like I came off as anti social because I didn't say much of anything. I found it challenging to find the right time to shout out something. As a Communication major I was ashamed.

[Guest Speed Racer]

I was at a recent Oscar party with 16 people total. It was very hard to get any word in or for that matter to converse with one person out of 16 or with all 16 people via a comment made by one.

It was this big cacophony of noise. After a few comments that went unnoticed I decided to not talk again because I was discouraged that no one could hear anyone.

 

How is this a new situation? Parties are as old as dinosaurs.

 

 

Now when you take into account a cellphone and its uses for sending mass text messages that line begins to blur ("Big Mouth"). Your voice is finally being heard.

 

No, your voice is being projected. My aunt sends a million chain emails (most of them homophobic (!!!) and conservative), and I delete all of them. My friend is a non-profit canvasser, and has chosen to mass-text, Facebook, and email all of her friends under the guise of social matters, but really just wants money or a signature. I delete her texts and block her from my Facebook feed, because she hasn't shown to be much of a friend - just a solicitor.

 

ETA: I'm still unclear as to how these kids are less-distracted because they're reading a text in a cacaphony of noise. Whenever they get the text and choose to read it, they're likely doing 18 other things.

 

Ignoring people is just as easy in the Facebook age, and I think that every texter, Facebooker, and kid at the lunch table finds that out when they want to hang out on a Friday night and no one has gotten back to them - or worse, to find their so-called friends posting updates about the cool party they weren't invited to.

 

People find out about rejection and failure long before the conference room.

 

So my case is: If kids are relying on their message being heard through a tiny electronic device (or a computer) and not honing their interpersonal communication skills then they'll be entering a world of hurt and trouble.

 

It is ridiculously simplistic and short-sighted to think that kids aren't engaging in interpersonal activities and performing class presentations simply because they *text*.

[Lammycat]

Not sure why the debate on technology. It's a great tool and can have a vast amount of educational value. I'm in the last class of an M.A. ed.program done all on-line and never once meeting a peer, teacher, advisor, etc. face-to-face. I'm ok with this.

 

Texting/passing notes? Kids still pass notes and cell pohones are confiscated if they are caught being used during classroom time. Not a big deal, really.

 

Kids aren't less functional because of technology. If anything, they are more prone to adapt to the technology world than any generation prior to them as the'y are now born into it. Technology is not making them lazy or stupid, it's just changing the way they learn. I'm ok with this, too.

 

My take is that schools are not adjusting to what works in education fast enough. On top, I feel there's less burden/expectation/"accountability" placed on parents to assume responsibilities for the learning of their own kids. In most Title I schools, kids enter kindergarten unprepared, meaning the parents have failed them from the start in terms of their education. Yet, the schools and teachers take the rap under NCLB when the kid is reading at a 3rd grade level in 5th or 6th grade because he's been playing "catch up" from the start.

[u2roolz]

Not sure why the debate on technology. It's a great tool and can have a vast amount of educational value. I'm in the last class of an M.A. ed.program done all on-line and never once meeting a peer, teacher, advisor, etc. face-to-face. I'm ok with this.

 

 

I've heard the opposite. And this was also in Master's classes.

 

Most complaints I've heard are about what you are ok with.

 

People are upset that they didn't know who was in their class to form study groups with or to ask someone in their class a question or even a teacher.

People have told me that the teacher is like The Wizard in the Wizard Of Oz. They come in and assign homework and then field one question and then leave.

This was one school, but I'm not entirely sold on online classes.

 

Not to mention: Never meeting your peers how can you network?

[Guest Speed Racer]

Kids aren't less functional because of technology. If anything, they are more prone to adapt to the technology world than any generation prior to them as the'y are now born into it. Technology is not making them lazy or stupid, it's just changing the way they learn. I'm ok with this, too.

 

Exactly. And for every 10 (or maybe 100) kids using Facebook to lolomg, there are the Bobbobs, SarahCs, mpolaks and Speed Racers of the world who spent their adolenceses talking about weightier things in full sentences on message boards. It's all about how you use technology, but you should also absolutely expect teenagers to spend as much time as possible being egotistical and doing not much at all, because that's what they do and have always done.

 

My take is that schools are not adjusting to what works in education fast enough. On top, I feel there's less burden/expectation/"accountability" placed on parents to assume responsibilities for the learning of their own kids. In most Title I schools, kids enter kindergarten unprepared, meaning the parents have failed them from the start in terms of their education. Yet, the schools and techers take the rap under NCLB when the kid is reading at a 3rd grade level un 5th or 6th grade because he's been playing "catch up" from the start.

 

That's exactly what I was talking about earlier, when I talked about how I never really learned grammar. Knowing about prepositions is a lot less important than reading at your grade level, but the bottom line is that when teachers see so many kids who need to play catch up, it's the rare teacher who does that instead of pushing forward with the established curriculum.

 

Never meeting your peers how can you network?

 

Every online class I've ever seen has a message board where peers can connect. Some programs even have group projects.

 

My friend put a house up for sale, and posted the listing on Facebook. I reposted the listing on my account. My uncle (whom I've never met, who lives out of state) saw the posting, and contacted a guy who works four blocks from my home (whom I've never met), who sent the listing to a man I've never met, who visited the house with his wife the day after I posted the listing on my account.

 

That was Wednesday. They close in a few weeks.

 

Networking is about knowing people who know other people. That posting just as easily could have been a job opening.

[Lammycat]

I've heard the opposite. And this was also in Master's classes.

 

Most complaints I've heard are about what you are ok with.

 

People are upset that they didn't know who was in their class to form study groups with or to ask someone in their class a question or even a teacher.

People have told me that the teacher is like The Wizard in the Wizard Of Oz. They come in and assign homework and then field one question and then leave.

This was one school, but I'm not entirely sold on online classes.

 

Not to mention: Never meeting your peers how can you network?

 

 

My experience has been great. In traditional grad classes you are placed in a group for collboration (in education, at least) without a choice. No different on-line. You meet your peers through a cyber cafe. You respond to eachother in real time (or as close as possible). The program I went through was/is very well run with resources, collaborative communities, easy access to professors (phone numbers, too!), etc.

 

Networking can easily be done through never meeting face-to-face, too.

 

I guess it depends on the school/program. Plenty of colleges now have virtual classrooms where physical bodies actual sit together in a room yet work independently (and collaboratively) on their own computers. Sort of a combination of on-line and traditional.

[u2roolz]

My experience has been great. In traditional grad classes you are placed in a group for collboration (in education, at least) without a choice. No different on-line. You meet your peers through a cyber cafe. You respond to eachother in real time (or as close as possible). The program I went through was/is very well run with resources, collaborative communities, easy access to professors (phone numbers, too!), etc.

 

Networking can easily be done through never meeting face-to-face, too.

I guess it depends on the school/program. Plenty of colleges now have virtual classrooms where physical bodies actual sit together in a room yet work independently (and collaboratively) on their own computers. Sort of a combination of on-line and traditional.

 

Not sure how that holds true if the "cyber" person never even wants to respond back to any emails.

 

See from what I heard people left the online area after the teacher set forth the assignment and asked "If anyone had any questions" to which people would reply with questions and that teacher would respond to one then would leave the chat room. Peers that I knew that did both online and regular face-to-face classes at the Graduate level felt this way: they hated it and wished to change/or get out of their online classes. Their main gripe was never getting ahold of their "electronic" peers. The assumption was that these hard to get people weren't interested in meeting up in real life because they were too busy with a job and family. Nothing wrong with that btw, but it sucks if you're looking for one or two peers to form a study group with. Not to mention that no one used the message board forums.

 

Now that being said I'm friends on Facebook (cue irony) with all of my peers from high school, college (film/video), & graduate courses. I don't think I could have achieved being Facebook friends at my Grad school via an online course if people were acting like that.

 

Edit: The above online classes were for Grad Level Marketing, Accounting, & Operations Management FWIW. And from what I was told there was no group projects at all which maybe accounted for the individualist approach.

[Guest Speed Racer]

Not sure how that holds true if the "cyber" person never even wants to respond back to any emails.

 

Don't you know of any friends outside of the cyber world who never respond to emails or phone calls? I sure do.

 

The assumption was that these hard to get people weren't interested in meeting up in real life because they were too busy with a job and family.

 

Bad teachers and busy, hard to reach, unwilling people (who might also be teachers) existed long before the internet, and they still exist. Awesome teachers also exist online. To that I would say: just as with any other school, one should pick an online program carefully. If they want teacher accessibility, they should make attempts to reach out to faculty before they apply. If they want networking, they should seek out alums (who, for good programs, should be really easy to find, as schools do like to brag) and ask them about their experiences. Some programs are designed to get you in and out with just a degree, others emphasize networking; some students just want to get in and out with a degree, others want networking, too.

 

ETA: HA! I just realized that the guy whose house I posted on Facebook is moving because of an opportunity he learned about through one of his online degree classmates.

[Lammycat]

Sounds like a specific case of ineptitude on the part of a particular professor/school. I don't understand the wanting to get together with a study group point, though. The on-line classes generally cover the nation....

 

Technology can be a hinderance and an enhancement depending on how it's used, I guess could sum that up. Either way, we've strayed from the focus....

[u2roolz]

Don't you know of any friends outside of the cyber world who never respond to emails or phone calls?

 

 

Not sure what you mean by that? My point was how can you meet anyone or network with if they won't open up a simple dialog with you on the internet.

They are merely strangers taking the same online class as you are.

 

If everyone acted in every class like this in college people wouldn't know Jack from Diane.

 

To Lammycat: People liked the comfort of knowing a few people in case if they had questions about the material. A safety net if you will. This safety net was present in the face-to-face classes because people were willing to get to know each other and bond. Certain people had strengths: people kept coming up to me for help in my Marketing class because they knew that I had a Communication Media FIlm/Video background. These people were engineers who I came up to for help in more of the math centric courses.

[Guest Speed Racer]

Not sure what you mean by that? My point was how can you meet anyone or network with if they won't open up a simple dialog with you on the internet.

They are merely strangers taking are the same online class as you are.

 

I mean that people I know outside of Computerland often don't return calls when I need something from them. You call about an apartment, and no one gets back to you; I asked my co-worker about borrowing her pick-up truck, and it took her three weeks to get back to me though I saw her every day and she would even ask me to remind her ; you inquire about a job posting and no one gets back to you. You don't need the internet to find people who won't open up a simple dialog.

[Lammycat]

Not sure what you mean by that? My point was how can you meet anyone or network with if they won't open up a simple dialog with you on the internet.

They are merely strangers taking are the same online class as you are.

 

If everyone acted in every class like this in college people wouldn't know Jack from Diane.

I guess not everyone wants or needs to meet others face-to-face while taking the same class. I've learned how to effectively collaborate with others via my computer just as I will need to as an educational administrator. We've done long and complex papers together. It's merely another means of collaborating. I've "networked" with some folks, too, as I've gotten to know them throughout the two-year program. Honestly, though, I'm not looking to form bonds, just looking for my degree.

[Guest Speed Racer]

Unfortunately, that's how I felt about most of the courses in my major in college. That's also how I feel about law school, so I'm happily applying to the part-time evening program to get an older, less-whiney student-base.