The Washington Post has an interesting article considering the durability of myths (may require free registration to view) (I discovered in a Slashdot post). Don’t be put off by the word myth – most of the examples in the article concern disputed political positions.
The research also highlights the disturbing reality that once an idea has been implanted in people’s minds, it can be difficult to dislodge. Denials inherently require repeating the bad information, which may be one reason they can paradoxically reinforce it.
It turns out that people are not good at learning what information comes from credible sources and that we tend to forget labels/tags we attach to memories indicating that the information is not credible.
What are the implications of such findings in the Internet age and the related issue of information credibility? I am guessing the concerns expressed in this article are not relevant to biased information one might encounter on occasion. The capacity to critically evaluate such information as received might be productive. The situation described in these studies seems to concern information that we encounter repeatedly and followed by an explanation of why the repeated position is false/biased. For example, what might be the consequences of viewing/listening to a station/program with a consistent bias even if we also receive and accept an explanation of the bias that is present?
Does this mean it is pointless to address myths? The article claims silence is not the best course of action. However, dwelling on the falsehood may be counter-productive.
… it is better to make a completely new assertion that makes no reference to the original myth.
If you like exploring open source software, my most recent recommendation is NeoOffice. This is a Macintosh only implementation of OpenOffice and runs on the Macintosh without xterm and using traditional Macintosh key stroke conventions. I have been using this suite now for a little over a week without problems, but the developer does warn all users to backup often.
I spend little time on YouTube, but an event in which I participated recently ended up as a YouTube video. Amazing they could talk 1/3 of us into doing this.
YouTube finds related posts and offers them to viewers. In this case, the next UND video on the list is something about a drunk student participating in a campus parade. I guess this is the reality of the participatory web in action.
Oh, I’m the guy in the green shirt about half way up just to the right of the D.
A recently completed Harris poll offers some information on the question of do parents take a role in introducing their children to the Internet. Mothers, particularly mothers who grew up with the Internet, seem to take a much more active role. The survey itself appears to have been focused on who introduces children to the Internet and at what age. What was missing in the data provided, which seem to indicate many children are involved at a young age, was information regarding what advice/direction young Internet users were given. 1-800-905-Geek, the sponsor for the study, offers some summary data and related suggestions for keeping children safe online (see pdf).
Most higher education is based on modernism, with its roots in the Enlightenment and the values of optimism, discoverable truth, reason, and science. Postmodernism tends to be more pessimistic, sees “truth” as individually created, to value opinion and preference over truth, experience over science or reason, and to foster a delegitimation of authority. (Taylor, 2006 pdf)
It is interesting how thinking patterns can fall into a rut. I seem to recall an expression to this effect – “if the tool you have is a hammer, everything begins to look like a nail”. Clearly, technology is my hammer.
I am involved in a graduate class focused on developing the teaching skills of future college professors. No, I am not there because of personal skills, but I do have plenty of stories to tell. The course has involved me with a different literature than I normally follow. The introduction to the book the group is reading made reference to studies on college freshman (e.g., the annual American Freshman survey) and the expectations and attitudes of this group. A great deal of the descriptive information sounded familiar and seemed to match the “engage me or enrage me” challenge (Prensky) I have somehow connected to digital natives. This is a literature with a broader view of education and learning than classroom educators (professors) tend to adopt. It has more of a “Dean of Students” and “Student Affairs” perspective. Technology is there among the influences, but it is important to note that greater use of technology covaries with other factors.
I think I prefer thinking of myself as a modern (rather than a postmodern) in comparison to an immigrant (rather than a native). Beyond that, this new material raises similar concerns and similar challenging and sometimes confusing suggestions.
Students can only connect the course’s content to their own lives, in application and meaning, if they are given the opportunity to actively work with the material. The time pressures on many students obviate this happening outside of class, so it must happen in class.
Class time is too valuable to spend transmitting information. ….. If students must pass a content-based quiz at the beginning of each class to participate in that day’s learning activities, ….. they might be more likely to come to class prepared to learn. (from page 2:52 of the pdf linked above).
The use of class time has become one my new preoccupations. Whatever happened to “study” or self regulated learning. My poor pragmatic mind just has difficulty making the pieces fit. I do encourage your reading of this material – I guess I assume you also fall into the modern category. 😉
Cindy alerted to me a blog discussion between David Warlich and Matthew Tabor concerning the value and purpose of educational blogs and blogging. Without a thorough reading of the entire strand and thus without addressing these bloggers, here is my take on the issue.
I tend to have to convert the arguments of others to my own circumstances and language. I suppose this frustrates others, but as I understand the position of the social constructivists to claim to do otherwise would be a misrepresentation. Here are some distinctions I find useful and where I see my view of blogging within these distinctions.
1) Information transmission vs. personal knowledge generation.
I see the teaching/learning process as involving these components. The phrase “knowledge transmission” is probably on the outs these days. It is lumped with other derogatory phrases such as “sage on the stage”. I am not going to take the time to argue that this position is simplistic here, but rather to suggest that learning requires inputs and to argue that I would prefer quality inputs. I don’t feel blogs represent quality inputs. The information “A listers” for me don’t seem to have blogs (at least to my knowledge).
I think blogs come into play in that “personal knoweldge generation” stage. One of my most common work related complaints (according to my wife) is that I don’t have colleagues I can engage to discuss my academic interests. Even at the most educated level, I am surrounded by psychologists and instructional designers, but not instructional technologist. It is very difficult locally to find individuals who read what I read or think frequently about what I think about. Partly through blogging, the Internet provides these types of conversations. There is the opportunity to search for folks who at least write about what I find interesting.
I treat what these bloggers have to say the same way I treat “coffee room” conversations. The give and take in these settings helps me think about what I value and helps me feel connected. However, the conversations drift from current topic to current topic and I can exercise little control over the agenda. I pick up things here and there. Perhaps this should be described as general education rather than something more specific, but at least the topics are within my general field of interest. Even within this context, any blogger is free to generate a post focused on whatever is personally relevant. Like the conversation with colleagues, sometimes this turns the conversation and sometimes it does not. At least you had the opportunity to think about what you had to say.
I have a second way of describing this same distinction. In my research I make a distinction between information acquisition processes and study processes. I create and evaluate technology supported environments and it has been helpful to claim my interest is in applications to the study environment rather than to the acquisition environment. I think of blogging as more of a study tool.
2) Primary vs. secondary vs. everyone has an opinion sources
It probably is beginning to become more apparent where I am going. Somewhere along the way I started thinking about the difference between primary and secondary sources. I think the context had something to do with Cindy’s “Teaching American History” grant because the terminology is common in that context. Whether appropriate or not, I have adopted the ideas to other circumstances. Unless one’s purpose is to comment on the specific practices of blogging, I see blog content when well done as representing a secondary source. Most often, it should actually be positioned in the third category.
I make this observation regarding only the “content” of the blogosphere. As my first distinction indicates, the process of sharing opinions and secondary sources can be beneficial to those who externalize their opinions and summaries as blog posts and to those who treat such sources as opportunities for conversation.
3) Blogging is what you (not they) make it
Somewhere in the archives of this blog is my attempt to represent the main reason why my own blog exists. I was too lazy to search for it for very long and probably did not include key words that would make the post easy to find.
Briefly put, I think what I decided was that my blog was a place I keep personal comments I think are interesting at the time and I may want to use more purposefully later. As in – I think I found a web site with that kind of information or offering that kind of service, I think I remember a book on that topic – now where did I see that. I also assume others may sometimes find these same ideas/services to be useful and my posts may represent a “heads up” for them.
If you blog, your intent may be different. You may be prioritizing the meaningful conversation potential of blogging (even if you are mostly talking to yourself – self-talk is OK). You may even feel you are offering your learned comments for the benefit of others.
Blogging is what you make it. But you can only make it that for youself.
This is kind of interesting – the U.S. Census Bureau has compiled a collection of data relevant to the K12 environment under the heading Back to School 2007-2008 (thanks to Ray Schroeder for this lead).
You have to scroll down quite a ways to find the technology section. In looking at the topics (e.g., use of computer or Internet to complete school assignments – 75% and 66%), I continue to be amazed by how dated the sources are on such topics. The government cites data from 2003. I have been trying to remember how I used a computer in 2003. I remember the components were pretty much the same (keyboard, monitor, etc.). I don’t remember Second Life, creating a wiki, creating a wiki within Blackboard, YouTube, free CNN video, Last.FM, slingbox, the iphone, listening to college lectures from MIT and U.C. Berkeley as late night entertainment when I can’t sleep, etc. Now, some of these options may have been available and they escaped by attention, but most are new. Think the stats have changed?
I do appreciate the effort of whomever put together the list. Not his/her fault the data are old.
Manage Consent
To provide the best experiences, we use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.