about my presentation

I understand this is a day late. I just wanted to uh, apologize for the crazy presentation I gave. I went totally over the time limit, and I failed to show you my blog other than a brief glimpse to link the Prezi itself.

I hope I got across all the main points I wanted to make – I’ll reiterate them again before the end of this post – but my execution was just a little all over the place.  I don’t think I’ve ever spoken that fast in my life. Again, coffee and jitters do not make a good mix. I’m sorry!

So, here’s basically what I was trying to say:

The millennial generation is transitional, in the sense that we’ve experienced the best of both worlds. We developed both before and through the advent of digitization. Carr, on the other hand, is a Boomer, and so he matured in a much more traditional setting. Even though he later adapted to the internet, he couldn’t fully adjust to it because he didn’t develop under the same kind of immersion that we did. In fact, to him it “felt like someone was tinkering with [his] brain.”

Neuroplasticity is the idea that our neurons realign themselves in order to adapt to any sort of outside stimulus or change. In that sense, the internet is tied directly in with neuroplasticity because it serves as that stimulus. Because we are, essentially, naturally wired to adapt to such change, the best thing we can do for ourselves is to accept it and change our systems too — because ystems are unmoving on their own, and they exist of us to support us.

The internet has changed society, the sense that it has brought about a new skill set within people. Because we, the millennials, are hyper-attentive and hyper-connected, we are collaborative learners, multi-taskers, and excellent researchers.

The internet is collaborative in nature. If you think about it, every article, every video, and every blog post has a comments section. This promotes the idea that there’s always room for improvement, and that it’s a shared effort. Therefore, we are collaborative learners. We work groups — but only when technology eases  that face-to-face social tension. Group work is efficient in and of itself, because it paves the way for job simplification.

The internet is an open forum, meaning that there’s an abundance of unreliable information out there, and so we have to learn how to weed out the good sources from the bad ones. The internet requires us to interpret multiple streams of information and then later assess their validity, and thus it requires us to multitask. (I define multitasking as switching rapidly between tasks rather than devoting mental effort to a number of tasks at the same time.) Multitasking is efficient in and of itself, because it means getting things done without spending too much time or effort on something that would be unusable regardless.

After finding a decent/valid source, the problem then becomes finding information that’s relevant within that source. In that sense, the internet is a test in being able to find relevant information — because not everything in that 50 page scholarly paper is going to be stuff that you need. Again, not wasting time on irrelevant information is already efficient behavior.

So, to reiterate, all of these skills induce efficiency in the modern fast-paced workplace. That means that they’re more survival skills than anything.

Going back to the idea that the fault lies within antiquated systems, rather than the people using those systems, I want to talk about libraries. As much as I love libraries, I recognize the fact that they are changing and they must continue to change if they want to compete with the internet. They must take on a tech-savvy front, wherein they push electronic resources, computers and free WiFi, etc. Books are far less efficient than the internet (though often they are more reliable) because they contain a lot of irrelevant information that’s more difficult to go through. Thus, the internet is more efficient.

So basically what I’ve been trying to say with this post (and with the harried presentation I did yesterday afternoon) is that we, the millennial generation, though different from generations past, still have all the potential to take over the world. We’re efficient and productive and we know how to use what little time we have well.

Just so you know I wasn’t trying to take down the Baby Boomers or Generation X either. The boomers made our parents, who made us! We wouldn’t be here if it wasn’t for them! It’s just, we don’t deserve the flack we get. It’s not our fault – or anybody else’s for that matter – it’s just that the systems aren’t changing fast enough to accomodate our needs and so it makes the generational gap seem much bigger than it actually is.

Okay, I’m done now. Bye!

thesis + supporting claims

So as I was reading through The Shallows I found myself getting more and more annoyed with Carr. I understand that the structure of the book was purposefully crafted to further push the point – what with the (otherwise useless) historical anecdotes – but come on. He’s so condescending. Even when he apologizes, when he brings first-person narration back into play, it felt like he was trying to elevate himself above his audience.

So I’m going to channel that frustration into my essay. I’m taking the pro-internet stance to stick it to the man.

My thesis will probably be some derivative of the following:

The learning process is an extension of neuroplasticity, in that we learn only after our brains have adjusted to make room for new experiences and information. Neuroplasticity allows us to adapt to technology and move forward — in the same way Generation Y is doing so today. The millennial generation learns differently from previous generations because the internet is such a prominent force in our lives — and no technology before the internet has ever been quite as momentous. The internet is structured in a way that allows its users to search for information quickly, effectively, and with little effort. This has changed the way we learn, and as a result, the way we do research. As a result, the internet is changing the face of not only libraries, but also the field of Library Science itself. However, there’s something that Carr overlooks in The Shallows — and that’s the idea that change isn’t necessarily bad. In fact, change is good. Today’s youth learn differently, but that doesn’t mean that we’re vapid and incapable of thought. We rely on the internet for our educational needs, but that doesn’t mean libraries across the globe are doomed to fail due to lack of patronage. We, the members of the internet generation, are hyperconnected — and we’re getting along perfectly fine, thank you very much.

Obviously this is due to change but that’s the basic form. I hope it’s not too long, but the introduction is supposed to be a page to a page and half anyway so I think the length of my thesis is proportionate to that.

So, there are a number of ways I can go about structuring the essay. I think after the introduction, I’ll take a paragraph to further delve into the idea of neuroplasticity and the way we learn, and then try and transition that into the neuroplasticity has allowed the internet to change the way the millennial kids think. After that I’ll talk about how the fast-paced nature of the internet has affected the way we do research, and therefore our library use. And then after that I’ll transition into libraries research institutions. And then finally, I’ll conclude my essay by dismantling general claims that Carr made in The Shallows.

Here are a few supporting details and claims I plan to use in my body paragraphs:

  • The millennial generation is hyperconnected, which means we are team-oriented multi-taskers. We are programmed to play off of each other strengths, and thus we are constantly improving ourselves. Though we are unable to concentrate for long periods of time, that doesn’t mean we are incapable contemplation. The way we think is, essentially, a game of association; we connect what we know and what we want to know to build something better. We, as a whole, are greater than the some of our parts.
  • Libraries are used less for research and more internet and public services. However, most librarians recognize the need to adopt more electronic and web resources. The fault lies within the system, not within the patrons. The transformation of the Library Sciences will make information more accessible — and more reliable, as reliability tends to be an issue with internet sources.
  • The internet seems to be much more detrimental to our learning abilities than it actually is because we are in a constant state of flux. We have changed, and there is more change yet to come. Even I am more in the transitional stages of “internetization.” (I’m sorry I know that’s not a word but it’s like 1 AM and I cannot think of a better one right now.) The finished product will be much more tangible than it is right now, and there is really no need to have a conniption about the fact that it takes me longer to read Jane Eyre than it would have taken a college student in the 1950’s.
I have more ideas to stake and more claims to make, and obviously the finished product will sound a bit more professional, but that’s about the gist of it.

citations

Both sources were found through Academic Search Complete.

CITATION ONE:
Mantell, Alexa, and Barbara Brynko. “Dealing with Hyperconnectivity.” Information Today 29.6 (2012): 9. Academic Search Complete. Database. 13 Nov 2012. <http://web.ebscohost.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/ehost/detail?sid=4f2154b6-e710-4ec8-bf34-1f639dd02900@sessionmgr13&vid=1&hid=25&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ=>.

This source presents both sides of the argument that I’m looking at. It doesn’t necessarily maintain a neutral tone, but it doesn’t outright slam the way hyperconnected students learn either. Here’s a quote in the article that I can maybe dig into:
“Millennials are developing into nimble multitaskers who will be increasingly conditioned to expect instant gratification and to seek quick fixes.”

CITATION TWO:
McAlister, Andrea. “Teaching the Millennial Generation.” American Music Teacher 59.1 (2009): 13-15. Academic Search Complete. Database. 13 Nov 2012. <http://web.ebscohost.com.remote.baruch.cuny.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=2295797b-872b-4e5a-b5a3-9cb99a85f581@sessionmgr13&vid=2&hid=25>.

Okay, so this source is a little old (is 2009 too old?) and it’s more oriented towards teaching the millennial generation about music…But still, it outlines a number of traits that today’s internet savvy youth have developed over time. So even if the information in this article is a little too applied for me to use, it can still help me contextualize the learning process for our generation.

I’m still looking for sources about neuroplasticity and the way internet usage has affected libraries. The library database kept linking all of the neuroplasticity entries I found back to The Shallows, so maybe I’ll use Carr as the basis for that part of my argument. As for libraries, well, I’m still filtering through all the stuff the database gave me, but I’m sure I can find something helpful. If anything, I can go back to the source we discussed in class  – the one that we agreed was dated – and look for newer information through that journal.

I will edit this post and add anything else I find from the database later on. Check my research venues tab for additional sources found through other means.

 

proposal

The adaptability of the brain – neuroplasticity – has made it so that we have changed the way we think, and therefore, the way we do research. My intention with this essay to explore neuroplasticity, as characterized by Generation Y’s internet use and the transformation of the Library Sciences.

Carr writes about neuroplasticity to emphasize the idea that the internet has changed the way we think. The concept of neuroplasticity is interesting to me, because it uses science to give shape to the miracle of human consciousness. I realize it’s a bit of broad way to start out, but I intend to narrow my scope through exemplification.
However, because this is an argumentative essay and not just an exploratory one, I have to have an opinion somewhere in there. I frequently use and praise the internet, so it would be hypocritical of me to argue that the internet’s effect on our brains is detrimental. However, I cannot deny how difficult it is for me concentrate for long periods of time. As a result, my stance on the matter is a little unstable. Every time I try to think about it, I end up contradicting myself.

I understand that I will have to pick one side – if only for the sake of being able to write and clear and cohesive essay – but for now I’m just going to continue to weigh both arguments against each other.

It’s going to be really difficult for me to argue that the internet is ultimately beneficial  — especially since Carr, our primary source of information for this unit, seems to think otherwise.

I have to acknowledge the notion that the internet destroys the ability to concentrate for extended periods of time. I may have a short attention span, but if there’s one thing I’m good at it’s making connections. The nature of the internet allows us to absorb more information in a quick and timely manner, thus encouraging us to consider more perspectives and think on broader scale. (Though that’s not necessarily true — there’s an abundance of voices on the internet, and it’s pretty easy to ignore the ones you disagree with. You can immerse yourself in like-minded people because there is no shortage of them.) Being able to draw connections may not be able to provide the same kind of innovation that extensive thinking does, but it certainly makes improvement easier.

As much as I love libraries, I also have to acknowledge that the internet undermines their authority as research institutions. The way the internet presents information is much easier to process than reading books. In fact when I read, I often find myself wishing I could press ‘ctrl + f’ to find what I’m what I’m looking for. However, not everything on the internet is a reliable source. Books are generally more credible because the publishing process is brutal in terms of fact-checking and editing. And the fact that libraries are used more for WiFi and public services than they are for actual research isn’t issue with society, so much as it is an issue with the system. The systems need to change to accomodate the people, not the other way around. As for the field of Library Science itself, well, it’s going through nightmarish changes right now — but at the very least, the final product will be easier and more accessible. It’s just a matter of being able to filter through the crap to get to what’s really pertinent.

But let’s say I argue the opposite side. The internet is detrimental to our thinking processes, in the sense that it wrecks our potential for concentration. I am living proof of this — which is why I always feel like Carr is mocking me, even when he tries to apologize for putting me through literary hell. I’m an English major who can’t sit down and read, and it makes me feel like I’m a caricature of myself. The internet makes it so that the information we need is condensed and available to us with a simple search tool. Though it’s convenient, it keeps us from being able to think on our own terms.

In addition to that, the internet essentially renders libraries impotent. Library systems across the US are losing money because nobody uses libraries for research anymore. And who reads physical books anymore? eBooks are cheap, portable, and there’s a built in ‘ctrl + f’ function on every eReader.

—

The problem with taking the pro-internet stance is that there’s so much room for contradiction. I feel like making so many allowances would undercut the strength of my argument. However, if I take the anti-internet stance, I sound far too cynical for my liking. And I feel like I’d fall into a slippery slope argument.

So basically I have no idea what to do with myself, but I’m working on it.

reflecting on “the shallows”

“O’Shea seems more the rule than the exception. In 2008, a research and consulting outfit called nGenera released a study of the effects of Internet use on the young. The company interviewed some six thousand members of what it calls “Generation Net”—kids who have grown up using the Web. “Digital immersion,” wrote the lead researcher, “has even affected the way they absorb information. They don’t necessarily read a page from left to right and from top to bottom. They might instead skip around, scanning for pertinent information of interest.” In a talk at a recent Phi Beta Kappa meeting, Duke University professor Katherine Hayles confessed, “I can’t get my students to read whole books anymore.” Hayles teaches English; the students she’s talking about are students of literature.” (Page 10, Paragraph 3)

Not to show off or anything, but in the third grade I set a school-wide record for most books read in a year. They weren’t picture books either – they were complex chapter books and every time I finished one I had to document it with my teacher. I read 202 books. As far as I know, my record still stands.The thing is, I can’t do that anymore. I used to be able get through Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone in one sitting. Now I have to take a break between each chapter. I just can’t concentrate long enough to stay put and keep reading. It’s unfortunate – especially because I intend to major in English.

I do indeed search for “pertinent information of interest” – mostly with academic reading rather than leisurely reading. To do so with leisurely reading would kind of eliminate the point.

We didn’t get a computer in my house until fifth grade, and I didn’t use the internet voraciously until middle school. My reading habits didn’t change until I began to embrace the in influence of the internet in my life. As a result, the way I pay attention has changed so that I can’t focus on a single stream of information. I’m a fast-paced thinker.

“A particularly striking illustration of how the Net is reshaping our expectations about media can be seen in any library. Although we don’t tend to think of libraries as media technologies, they are. The public library is, in fact, one of the most important and influential informational media ever created and one that proliferated only after the arrival of silent reading and movable-type printing. A community attitudes and preferences toward information take concrete shape in its library’s design and services. Until recently, the public library was an oasis of bookish tranquility where people searched through shelves of neatly arranged volumes or sat in carrels and read quietly. Today’s library is very different. Internet access is rapidly becoming its most popular service. According to recent surveys by the American Library Association, ninety-nine percent of U.S. public library branches provide Internet access, and the average branch has eleven public computers. More than three-quarters of branches alsooffer Wi-fi networks for their patrons. The predominant sound in the modern library is the tapping of keys, not the turning of pages.” (Page 51, Paragraph 2)

I spent a good portion of my high school career volunteering at my local library. The Brooklyn Public Library system loses more and more money each year. For awhile I wanted to go into the field of Library Science, but to be honest I fear for the future of libraries. Don’t get me wrong, I love libraries — if I didn’t, I wouldn’t have volunteered in one for so long. They’re important in terms of computer and internet access. They also provide the public with tax forms, voter registration cards, and other important government documents. But nobody borrows books anymore. Not when they can research infinitely quicker with Google. Libraries are still important fixtures for the public – but their research services are becoming obsolete. Which is a shame, because they’re supposed to be research institutions.