Sunday, November 25, 2012
GUD - Chapter 4 Reflection
After you have read and taken notes on Chapter 4, "The Net Generation Brain," use one of the current events sources linked at http://mrsfridaysclass.wikispaces.com/Current+Events to find a recent news article that relates to, supports, or refutes Tapscott's assertions. Your comment should include the title of the news article, a link to the article, and a summary of the article including an explanation of how the article relates to an issue addressed in chapter 4 of GUD. In this response, be sure to include a reflection on the relevance of this information to your own life. Don't forget to check your rubric for evaluation criteria!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129256077 The article "Video Games: The 21st Century's Fine Art Frontier" supports the use of video games throughout adolescent and adult life, because video games encourage a taste for aesthetic pleasure and help with several skills in coordination, evaluation, and deciding. Therefore, the arguments about the Net Gen being the "ADD Generation" or the "Screenagers" are addressed in this article, as the author of it admits to the fact that he has considered his inability to focus and continue on long tasks as they become more and more lengthy. Finally, this relates to my life however in a different way. i have not played many video games but when I have they forced me to make snap decisions, and had improved my hand eye coordination, as my abilities became stronger as time went on. I do however believe that video games do lead to not being able to focus, as my attention span proves that during class sometimes.
ReplyDelete"Young Attention Spans Impaired by SpongeBob and Rapid Games, Study Says" http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/09/12/young-attention-spans-impaired-by-spongebob-and-rapid-games-study-says/
ReplyDeleteIn this article, the author reviews data from a study suggesting that television and video games are nothing but detrimental to the minds of the youngsters of this generation. The article begins with stating how the minds of this generation are slipping and technology used constantly by children is the cause. It says how shows like "Spongebob" help with nothing but a shorter attention span in class. It then explains the results of a study conducted in which the students who took a test or quiz before watching "Spongebob" did better than the students who took the test or quiz after watching "Spongebob." The article concludes by saying how the recent television and games children are so addicted to could possibly damage their mind permanently if not temporarily. This article completely refutes Tapscott's idea of the effect of video games on the minds of students. Where this article states how fast-paced games will only hurt the minds of "Net-Geners," Tapcott says how quick video games make Net Geners think quicker and only further develop their brains. Tapscott says how video games have assisted those who try for important jobs like architects or surgeons. In my life, I would have to agree with the assertion of Tapscott that video games do assist in developing the brain. I know when I play video games like "Halo" or "Call of Duty," I find myself thinking incredibly hard about strategy while also trying to look around the confusing battle grounds. My friends who incessantly play these games are definitely good at picking out small details in everything and thinking in different ways. None of them seem to have short attention spans because of the effect of games, but most of them are able to grasp some concepts faster than those in my class who do not play games since gamers are accustomed to thinking on their feet.
The Evolving Teenage Brain
ReplyDeletehttp://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/the-evolving-teenage-brain/
Throughout the text of this article, although implied, the writer displays his/her thoughts on the teenage mind. The author of course states the general information that the teenage mind goes through a massive learning process. The article does not directly address the "problem" of online interaction but states that the older generations are wiser and have the answers to everything. To some the author would demonstrate ignorance, as many say the net geners do.The author also goes over how teenagers are making less sophisticated choices than the older generation. Even with all of this opinion, Tapscott has found an argument to cut through it all. First off Tapscott proves that the adolescent brain goes through immaculate changes at the ages of 12- 25. Tapscott uses arguments that due to the net geners time online they are learning and processing more than any other generation. They can track more objects simultaneously, manage a cluttered world,and process rapid stream. Even "gamers" develop hand eye coordination that can benefit them later in life as surgeons or other tedious lines of work. Tapscott also argues that geners learn critical skills online such as trial and error, learning by experiment, role playing, and failure. With all of the compelling arguments made by Tapscott how could an article like this even be believable?
Even in life now,I find myself sorting through pages of relevance on the internet. Sifting through articles and social media outlets is a drastic part of my daily life as a net gener.
“Does Multitasking Lead To A More Productive Brain?”
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127771658
The article begins by asking questions on multitasking such as whether or not our brains can properly function while multitasking and if the digital world is distracting humans too much. The author of the article then goes on to interview two professors of neuroscience on whether or not multitasking is good for the brain. The professors conclude that instead of doing two things at one time, the brain is actually switching its thought process to each thing which brings a negative impact to each activity. One professor states that his findings show that the people who multitask the most are actually the worst at it. The professors go on to concur that children who multitask will likely form a different brain function from that of any other generation. This function will provide them with the ability to multitask but will also prove to be negative because this new function will make everything the child does at low quality. The article coincides that as multitasking becomes more frequent in the next generation, the lives of the generation become less productive. This article corresponds with Tapscott’s assertions in “The Net Generation Brain.” Both the article and Tapscott agree that as the Net Generation becomes more indulged in multitasking, they lose the ability to process things at high quality. Tapscott states that even the slightest digital distraction affects all of the activities of a Net Gener. Tapscott finds from research of a professor that it takes double the time for a Net Gener to accomplish a task when they are trying to multitask. All in all, this article agrees with the allegations made by Tapscott in the fourth chapter by both stating that multitasking for the next generation leads to a less productive lifestyle.
“The Evolving Teenage Brain”
ReplyDeletehttp://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/the-evolving-teenage-brain/
This article discusses why teenagers act the way they do at such ages. The article describes how young adults are more susceptible to changes and alterations of their brain during their teenage years. It discusses how with different activities during a teenager’s life might cause their brain to develop in different ways such as if they often play video games then their coordination might be improved as to those who do not play video games. This article directly relates to chapter 4- “The Net Generation Brain” because both discuss how teenagers brains are developing rapidly and are easily influenced by that teenagers activities. An example found in the chapter that shows a correspondence to the article is when Tapscott says that an experiment was held to see if video game players were better at rapid fire response than non video game player, which they were. This experiment shows that with increased video game performance leads to an increase of hand-eye coordination and quick responses. The example shows a relationship between the article and the chapter because both discuss how activities morph a teenager’s brain. Overall, the article and chapter are related because both discuss how teenager’s minds are easily influenced by their activities.
"Growing Up Digital, Wired for Distraction" http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/technology/21brain.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
ReplyDeleteIn chapter four of "Growing Up Digital", Tapscott discusses how Net Geners' brains develop differently due to their amount of exposure to technology, and how this affects different parts of their behavior. Tapscott states that the generations that were far less exposed to technology could not multitask and scan for information at the level that Net Geners could, but they were far better at reflection and deep thought. This article agrees with Tapscott. It gives examples of high school students becoming absorbed in short and quick activities with cellphones and Facebook. Spare time for socializing is spent online and via phone or computer and not in the school yard or at a local dinning area. Teachers would still had to teach students with technology, but wish to wean them off, due to how easily every student is distracted by the slightest tech-related sight. Teachers also see a lack in sustained focus necessary in classes like english or history which leads to worse grades. Even so, technology-based classes have seen an improvement. In essence, Tapscott's claim of semi-spastic behavior and lack of focus mirror what is seen from the Net Generation.
"Disruptions: Your Brain on E-Books and Smartphone Apps"
ReplyDeletehttp://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/your-brain-on-e-books-and-smartphone-apps/
In chapter four of Grown Up Digital, Tapscott focuses on the unique way one's brain can develop even into adulthood, contrary to popular belief, and how this discovery directly is effected by the use of technology. Nick, Bilton, author of the above article, provides a perfect example to Tapscott's revelation. Bilton relates Tapscott's idea of incessant alters to one's brain through his anecdote about his experience with technology. Bilton, a thirty-six year old man, finds his own brain adapting to his habits online even while he is offline. He says one day while reading a magazine, he found himself attempting to scroll down in order to turn the page. He recieves insight to this bizarre behavior through Clifford Nass, whom explains that the brain develops based upon efficiency. Since individuals brains' have picked up on the fact that technology is the most efficient tool recently, the brain responds with wanting to utilize this technology. Tapscott states that net-geners spend on average 20 to 30 hours on interactive technology. The habits formed during this precious time has transformed humans brains to function differently than once necessary. In conclusion, Bilton proves Tapscott's theory that brains change into adulthood, and he explains how technology has made this transformation possible. In my own experiences, I believe that technology is altering the way that people think. In my opinion by brain functions much differntly than my parents who spend little time utilizing high-tech gadgets.
“Teenage Brains Are Malleable and Vulnerable, Researchers Say”
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2012/10/16/162997951/teenage-brains-are-malleable-and-vulnerable-researchers-say
In the fourth chapter of “Grown Up Digital”, Don Tapscott discusses the net generation brain and how it develops. The author primarily discusses how technology affects the teenage brain, and he discusses why this generation is not the worst or most misbehaving. Tapscott discusses how video games help teenagers and young adults process images quickly, and how the internet helps teenagers. Furthermore, Tapscott discusses the idea that the current generation is not the generation with the worst record. In accordance with this idea, the article, “Teenage Brains Are Malleable and Vulnerable, Researchers Say”, gives details on several studies that prove Tapscott’s idea. The article states that when the chips are down, teenagers are more likely to think about a decision than adults. Furthermore, the woman who conducted the study believed that the heightened sense of accomplishment that teenagers feel actually helps them make good decisions. Essentially, the studies shown in the article completely back Tapscott’s assertions that the teenage brain is not broken, but teenage brains develop differently.
This idea directly relates to me, as I am a teenager and believe that I spend a lot of time pondering whether to do or not do something. I feel as though my decision making skills are not lacking, and that the studies shown in the article and the book are very relative to reality. Overall, I would say that most teenagers that are members of the net generation are actually quite strong decision makers.
"Multitasking Can Make You Lose ... Um ... Focus"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/25/business/yourmoney/25shortcuts.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0&gwh=C4231188DC3189963CE6F7ADD9D42FB6
Three out of four Net Gen students claim to instant message while doing their homework states Tapscott. The Net Gen is known for multitasking such as listening to music, watching TV, texting and various other things while doing homework or anything else they try and do. He argues that the Net Gen possible might be better at trying to do two or more complicated tasks then the boomers are. But the boomers complain that it’s the digital age that is cutting at their attention spans. This article “Multitasking Can Make You Lose… Um… Focus” reasons that you cannot divide your attention to separate two things but you can shift back and forth. It takes time for the brain to be able to switch tasks by a second or two, but when you are doing to many tasks the seconds add up. Drivers 17-24 years old were asked to a use a driving simulator to see how their driving was affected by texting and driving. The reaction time came back at 35% slower when trying to text and drive. That’s slower then driving drunk. Even though Tapscott argues that Net Geners might be better at multitasking then the boomers because they are growing up in a “digital age”. But the more you multitask the less deliberative you become says Jordan Grafman, who is the head of the cognitive neuroscience section at the NINDS.
http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/the-evolving-teenage-brain/
ReplyDeleteIn chapter four of "Grown Up Digital", the author Don Tapscott states that peoples brains are developing even after early childhood. He supports this by showing studies of how people who play videogames react differently than the ones that dont. The article "The Evolving Teenage Brain" supports this because it states that “as we move through adolescence, the brain undergoes extensive remodeling, resembling a network and wiring upgrade.” In this article it basically says that even though child hood is over the brain still changes. However during this time period the brain tends to change at a slower pace, and the brain is more or less be changed in structure rahter than gathring information.
"Psychologist Examines Effects of Technology Society"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.newswise.com/articles/psychologist-examines-effects-of-technology-society
Undoubtedly, technological advances carry with them psychological effects. The question is whether these effects are detrimental or beneficial. As Tapscott and the above article agree, these effects are, more often than not, detrimental. Multitasking, for example, can make it hard to concentrate. Not the least of the victims of these effects are students. The technology we have today undoubtedly hinders students' ability to study and complete work.
"Are You Distracted By Technology"
ReplyDeletehttp://learning.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/02/are-you-distracted-by-technology/
In chapter four of Don Tapscott's book, "Grown Up Digital", he discusses if and how digital immersion affected the Net Generation brain. After further research, Tapscott discovered that digital immersion did in fact affect the brain of the Net Generation, but people disagree on whether it positively or negatively changed it. Don Tapscott believes that digital immersion enhanced the brain in a positive way because it helped the Net Generation develop critical thinking skills. These critical thinking skills come from browsing and searching for information on the Internet, which requires scanning and scrutinizing skills. In this article, students say that they are distracted from their technology while they are trying to get work done. They state that multitasking with their cell phones only burdens them when they are attempting to complete school work. Clearly, this article refutes Don Tapscott's belief that multitasking isn't necessarily bad for the Net Generation's brains. He argues that learning to use their technology at the same time as doing something, like writing an essay, will help them become more productive. This information has impacted me on a personal level because I now wonder if multitasking while doing my school work will benefit me in the long run.
"Cell Phone Radiation Affects Brain, Study Says" http://www.npr.org/2011/02/25/134059267/cell-phone-radiation-affects-brain-study-says
ReplyDeleteTapscott mentions in chapter 4 of Grown Up Digital that the extended use of electronics has an effect on the brain. He explains mostly positive changes to the brain, but also points out one or two detrimental effects of using electronics. He states that video game players and electronics users tend to notice more and have better reaction times. They promote the theory of "accidental learning" through trial and error and can build important skills for careers. However, multitasking causes a lack of focus. The article explains how using cell phones can harm a person's brain. Talking on a cell phone too much causes harm to the area of the brain nearest the antenna. This refutes Tapscott's theories that electronics use and video game playing builds important career skills, can teach through trial and error, and noticing more. However, the article supports his theory that some elements of electronics use can be detrimental and harmful to the brain.
"Video Games Boost Brain Power, Multitasking Skills"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.npr.org/2010/12/20/132077565/video-games-boost-brain-power-multitasking-skills
In this article, the author mentions a study by Daphne Bavelier which concluded that "video gamers show improved skills in vision, attention and certain aspects of cognition" over their non-gamer peers. This article also discusses that gamers are more focused, have faster reaction times, and can switch between tasks more efficiently than non-gamers. Also, Neuroscientist Lauren Sergio compares video gamers to musicians because like musicians, when gamers need to do something with their hands, they do not need to activate their brain as much as non-musicians or non-gamers because they are used to the hand-eye coordination. This article supports the information in chapter four of Tapscott's "Grown Up Digital" because Tapscott mentions a study which proves that gaming can make one more perceptive and speed up one's ability to process. Tapscott argues that video games help hand-eye coordination and increase reaction time, which is supported in Bavelier's study in the article. This information is relevant to my life because I do not often play video games because I never saw a purpose, but now that I know the benefits, I will consider playing video games more frequently.
"Give Me an Old-Fashioned Word"
ReplyDeletehttp://www.csmonitor.com/The-Culture/The-Home-Forum/2013/0117/Give-me-an-old-fashioned-word
Throughout this article, the decline in teenagers having intellectual thoughts and coming up with words that are not commonly used is discussed. The author talks about how the possible reason is because we live in a digitally based age where words all relate to the slang of today's latest technology and gadgets. He concludes that the society is headed toward becoming a culture that bases solely upon images. For example, he explained how he watches his teen son looks hypnotized in front of the computer and TV, not answering or listening. This refutes Tapscott's observations on the Net Generation's brain. In chapter 4 the focus was mainly on the positive effects of video games and technology. The idea that it gave various skills to teens such as hand coordination and higher observation ability.
I always supported the idea that too many video games and digital interactions did not do anything for the brain. Now I believe that under the right circumstances they can actually be beneficial and provide different skills.