What is Google doing to our Brains?

As a result of using the Internet, technology, Google, etc our brains are changing.  Our lifestyle, the way we do business, the way we learn, and the way we communicate are also changing. Yes, our attention spans are changing, but our global society is also changing.  We have to manage more now than we did 50 years ago.  We are trying to multi-task and according to the research, we can't.  Are the common pulls on our attention responsible for students not being ready for college?  Yes, many students would rather watch Youtube videos while texting than read a complex text such as Thoreau's Walden, but is the fact that they are doing these things responsible for their lack of focus?

Mark Bauerlein tries to blame the inability to read complex texts on technology in his article Too Dumb for Complex Texts published in Educational Leadership in 2010.  While he cites evidence from the ACT scores and college freshman grades indicating that students aren't ready for college, I am not convinced that it is because of student technology use.  Could it also be because this generation has only had to take standardized assessments to progress to the next level? Could the fact that our economy and industry are changing, but we continue our industrial model school system.  Could it be because our family and social networks have changed and thus the attitudes toward school have changed?  Have students even been taught how to engage with and read these texts?  Are they given opportunities throughout high school to grapple with the complex ideas presented in these texts and demonstrate the ability to understand and apply the ideas they learn?  Are they provided a teacher with enough time and training to give adequate feedback on writing, challenge their thinking, and hold them accountable for reading and discussing the texts?  In a typical public high school a teacher can have from between 80 and 150 students.  How can that one teacher possibly give feedback and discuss these ideas with the kids?

Technology is not the problem nor is it to blame for these changes. According to the 2010 Kaiser Foundation study, teens spend an average over 7.5 hours using technology per day, but who is letting them do that? Who is failing to teach our teenage generation how to use these tools wisely? The number of vehicle deaths have increased because of cars.  We still use cars and don't blame the cars for the problems the humans who use them cause. I see using the technology tools in the same light. The technology tools are here, but we can choose how we use them.  It is our responsibility to use these tools to improve how we think and how we learn.  Part of the problem is that the technology has changed so quickly that social etiquette and norms are struggling to keep up. It is time to stop blaming the tool, and start focusing on how we can engage our students, provide a stimulating and relevant curriculum, and offer the opportunity for success in our world.

Baeurlein, M. (2010). Too dumb for complex texts. Educational Leadership, 68(5), 28 - 33. 

Dretzin, R. & Rushkoff, D. (2010). Digital nation: life on the virtual frontier. Public Broadcasting system. Retrieved from: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/digitalnation/. 

Rideout, V., Foller, U., & Roberts, D. (2010) Generation M2: media in the life of 8-18 year olds. Kaiser Family Foundation, Retrieved from: http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf.

How do we assess if students are learning?  A common answer is if students are passing tests or not. Dr. Douglas Reeves, founder of The Leadership and Learning Center challenges this notion.  He says "developing better tests of student learning in the 21st century is as futile as attempting to find a faster horse and buggy would have been in the 20th century"(2010).  Our traditional assessments don't let us know how much a student has learned as much as they allow us to sort students.  Sorting students will not help our students become successful in the 21st century economy. To measure student learning in the 21st century Reeves suggests we assess students in three ways: 

   1. In variable rather than standardized conditions

   2. As teams rather than as individuals

   3. With assessments that are public rather than secret

 

By focusing on these three areas we are able to measure growth in a variety of relevant skills beyond content acquisition. In fact, content acquisition becomes a minimum expectation and foundation for learning in the 21st century.  School used to be the only place a person could come to learn new content.  Tests that simply tested content acquisition made sense and were valuable.  Now content is widely available and the purpose of schools is shifting.  Our young learners must learn how to navigate through the content and become digitally literate.  Chris Dede, a professor at Harvard University offers eleven necessary skills to develop digital literacy.  In his model students must experiment with their surroundings, be able to "separate signals from noise", communicate effectively, and see diversity as an opportunity. Here is a graphic representation of Chris Dede's Digital Citizenship skills. 

Since the school's purpose is no longer simply to teach concepts, more emphasis in assessment then becomes focused on what students can do with their knowledge, including working in teams to solve problems.  Shifting from standardized conditions to variable conditions allows for flexibility in what is assessed. When many students were preparing to work in a factory conforming to schedules and assessing basic knowledge was valuable.  Now, these skills are irrelevant.  The current students will create their jobs and innovation will be an expectation.  How can innovation be assessed in a standardized condition when every assessor is trained to look for the same qualities in an answer?  

Our current students will need to be able to contribute to a group more-so than ever before.  In the 20th Century a great deal of our citizens needed to work as part of a team and simply fulfill their roles.  Those days are over. Our current students will need to be able to collaborate with a group to create products and solve problems.  Assigning grades and sorting students is no longer relevant because our teams will only be as strong as our weakest citizens.  We can no longer rely on a few individuals to serendipitously acquire skills such as problem solving, creativity, and innovation, but rather we must expect all of our citizens will learn these skills. 

Finally, public assessments provide validity to assignments.  When the audience is expanded beyond a single teacher, the quality of work increases because the projects mean something more than a letter grade.  Students taking tests to assess content matter sends the message that learning content is the most valued skill in our education system.  Perhaps teams are competing for a proposal for a company.  The assessment can occur throughout the project and thus students are able to process their feedback and apply it directly to the project. A vision is that students would then come to value and seek out feedback because it helps them grow and get better.