Was it some old professor of Latin, or English? Was it a retro author who still uses a typewriter? Some curmudgeon in the Philosophy department? NONE OF THE ABOVE. IN FACT, IT WASN’T EVEN RECENT.
Why am I bringing this up? Simple … because whenever new technologies are introduced there are critics who claim that they are bad for learning and education … especially teachers. The question I am asking is: what does Google do to our concept of intelligence? Note: using Google as an archetype here … the Idea of Google … which is good search & retrieval … not actual Google.
B4 we can answer … what is intelligence? Definition has changed over time …
Don’t know that we’ll answer this … But …
In late 2008, Nicholas Carr wrote “Is Google Making us Stupid?” for the Atlantic Monthly, and it instantly became the most-discussed magazine article of the year. Title is google; actually about web in general
First, students in some cases are seeking quick answers that others have created – received wisdom, so to speak. And second, he’s saying that they’ve also even lost the ability to personally seek for answers. That’s a serious challenge to an education system. If students don’t want to figure out the answer and also won’t strain themselves to find it personally, teaching anything beyond search and retrieval skills starts to sound like a significantly difficult uphill battle.
Google does, in most cases, because you are learning knowledge divorced from it’s actual application. McLuhan, of course told us that media privilege certain kinds of discourse … and knowledge …
Media, information consumption and synthesis and creation skills …
Even with multiliteracies, the google danger is “getting the answer” We still need to store some facts and processes in our brains
John Koetsier – UBC twitter.com/johnkoetsier sparkplug9.com Tweeting? Use hashtag: #ace2009 Intelligence in the Age of Google
"People who invent new technologies are not the best judges of their usefulness and value. Your invention will not help people to get smarter and learn more; it will in fact cause the exact opposite … they will forget more and learn less.
“ You have not invented a better memory but just a way to search for ideas. And the students who use your invention will not in fact acquire real-world knowledge but rather data. They will think they know much when in fact they are incredibly ignorant.”
Those who acquire it will cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful; they will rely on writing to bring things to their remembrance by external signs instead of by their own internal resources. What you have discovered is a receipt for recollection, not for memory. And as for wisdom, your pupils will have the reputation for it without the reality: they will receive a quantity of information without proper instruction, and in consequence be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.
"Since Google, students need an answer quickly, so they don't know how to use a glossary or index. They want something right away, and to look back to a previous paragraph is too much effort."
The key thing is likely the need to integrate new capabilities with old skills
A teacher I interviewed: "We're all tempted to take the path of least resistance,” he said, but we need to be able to use all kinds of resources, including print, and be able to work from first principles to more complex knowledge.
Math skills: without a solid grasp of math fundamentals, the higher orders of mathematical thinking are forever closed to people, regardless of how many Google searches they do (Lee, Stansbery, Kubina, Wannarka, 2005).
Deep knowledge is needed to free up short-term memory slots.