"Electracy" & "Is Google Making Us Stoopid?"

"Electracy"

Gregory Ulmer introduces a new theory that is described as a supplement of religion and science; this theory is "electracy.” It is thought to be a skill set needed to effectively communicate in today's world, which has been largely dominated by electronic media. While I've never heard of the specific term for this transition that society is undergoing, I have been able to see the characteristics of the theory being applied more and more in schools as we are growing up.

When I think back to kindergarten and elementary school, I remember a few basic parts of my average school day. I remember snack, naptime, and reading. The emphasis in lower school really was on reading out loud so that students would be able to be able to efficiently communicate, as they grew older. I believe that this strong emphasis on reading in lower school has made me to feel confident in my communication skills today. With the every changing technology and norms and today's world, I cannot even imagine what lower school is like for children attending now, only 15 years later from when I was there.

When I babysit, usually for kids who are between 4 and 10, I notice an obsession that the younger kids have with technology. One kid is four years old and is always carrying around his iPad. I can honestly tell you that I don’t remember what my favorite toy was when I was 4, but I know for a fact that it wasn’t anything nearly as expensive or complex as an iPad. Anyways, this little boy is always playing games that I wouldn’t necessarily consider educational, but I can honestly tell you that I have never met a kid as mature and intelligent as he is. He’s 4 years old and is at a 10 year old’s reading level, and when we talk he will correctly use terms that weren’t even in my vocabulary when I was 4, let alone 10 years old.

I found this article interesting, particularly because I felt the uncertainty of this new theory, since it is so far from our traditional learning styles (religion and science). But I do agree that this new theory is critical since technology is the new way that people are learning to communicate, and while it seems so different from how we learned, we must adapt or else we’ll be unable to effectively communicate the future generations.

Discussion Questions

1. What do you believe are the electrate equivalents to the traditional literate learning methods?

2. Is it thinking faster or thinking further that makes different thinking different? Why are some people so opposed to this new style of learning?

"Is Google Making Us Stoopid?"

This article is critical in today's world, particularly because technology and media activity makes up a large part of our everyday life, whether we know it or not. I was reading for my Mass Communications class about media activity and found it very surprising that the average person spends around 11 hours of their day involved in media activity, only 5 of those hours are intentional. So the other 6 hours that we are involved in media activity is done while we are doing something else.

I’ve never considered myself to be a TV junkie, but I do consider myself to be up to date with most media platforms. I was that kid growing up that was only allowed a set time period to use any type of media (usually that involved watching TV or going on the computer). Growing up I always loved to read and felt that I could spend hours engaged in a good book. I still love to read today, but since times have changed, so have the ways that one reads. I typically read books on my iPad now, and with that mobility and ease also comes the loads of distractions.

I do agree with Carr in that I spend a lot of time online, even though a lot of that time is dedicated to my schoolwork. But with all of the links, banner ads, and other distractions, I feel that I am no longer able to stay as focused while surfing the Internet, but also in my everyday life. You would think that this style of accessing information would make us smarter, since it allows us to reach more information in a shorter period of time, but I believe that it only adds confusion since we aren’t spending enough time looking in the actual information- we’re just skimming it over to get main ideas.

While I do believe that all of this technology has resulted in information overload, I believe that in a few years time we’ll have a different standpoint on it. I feel the main reason why people are so opposed to learning through technology is because it is so different to what my generation, and those before me, is used to. But it’s important to adapt to this new style of learning if we want to be able to communicate with future generations. 

Discussion Questions

1. Why do some people consider knowledge obtained from the Internet not to be "real knowledge"? Those who don't consider Internet information to be "real knowledge," what do you consider to be "real knowledge?"

2. Have you had any classes at Furman that do not use any sort of technology in the classroom? How have those classes compared to those which use a lot of technology in the classroom? Which style of learning do you prefer and why?