More information help us make good long-term decisions or not

[shootingstar]

Generally for the cycling world, there's way more useful information for everyone on bikes, gear, trends and infrastructure. For cycling comfort, it's been helpful. And the Internet forums reach cyclists who don't have many local cyclists for support.

But in other areas, all the Internet information, easier access to info., hasn't stopped some terrible things happening in the world.. ie. bombing on Doctors without Borders medical clinic in Syria (what for?)..or to a Canadian to see strange support of D. Trump in the U.S. (Trump's sentiment is in direct contrast to where I live: we have a mayor who is Muslim, East-Indian, Canadian-born and Harvard educated.) Proves that some people will only select information to support what they believe and support their actions.

We're all prone to this but sometimes I get the powerful feeling all the information in the world, is making some people even more strongly "tribal", more insular. The Internet full of information can be a blessing, but can cause serious challenges in sending out critical info. to all citizens equitably that they need to know on soon to help themselves.

[Aromig]

I think part of the problem with the internet is that just because it's information doesn't mean that all information is good. equal, or even truthful. It horrifies me to see the political stories that go around the internet. I read them and think "that just simply can't be true" while many of the radical persuasion see such stories of justification and support for their point of view. In fact, I think finding support for radical positions on the internet makes radical people feel *not so radical* and maybe even encourages such viewpoints.

People who want to be truly educated and use knowledge to help themselves found the knowledge they needed well before the internet came along. People who don't want to be educated and rather want to stick with their point of view no matter what haven't changed either.

[OakLeaf]

People who want to be truly educated and use knowledge to help themselves found the knowledge they needed well before the internet came along.

To an extent. But we got our news from weekly newspapers and monthly magazines, and while it kind of forced us to get background, it meant we were constantly behind the news. Maybe if we had a good local bookstore, we could get newspapers from major cities in our own country the day after publication, and from other countries several days or a week late. Some of us got urban newspapers mailed to us, which would take one to three days, and wasn't cheap.

If we wanted to read scholarship or precedent, it meant traveling long distances to an academic library or law library even to search the catalog. Now, we can at least search abstracts without leaving home or office; some of us have access to full text via Sci-Hub or student/alumni access or firm subscription or other arrangements, or at the very least we know what journals to pull down if we make the trip to an academic library.

[shootingstar]

True, Oak. We can get news more immediately if we choose to.

A lot of the major online newspapers with established history of journalism, do have paywalls that limit what one can read. I haven't paid for any online access to fuller version --yet. Most likely I should use my local library online bar code number and get fuller access to their paid sponsored content for media news.

Coming from the side of the municipality: one can no longer expect a message about govn't program can be placed through online/paper news, tv or radio and later known by majority of citizens. That is if the city can even afford all those media channels. Nor can one expect people to subscribe to govn't twitter, fb feeds or generic emails, unless one wants to put up with a tsnami of news of which one might find only 15% relevant/useful. The communication channels have become much more diverse to reach everyone, or anyone.

I agree with Aromig, that glut of Internet news doesn't help people to even analyze the news and know even basics of what to look for in terms of veracity / reliable sources, etc.

[OakLeaf]

? But the Internet also makes it much, much, much easier to check sources. Pre-Internet, searching for credentials and affiliations and prior writings by a particular author, meant that same long trip to an academic library, and a tedious slog through their catalog, which often was WAY more than the situation called for. The ability to quickly check a source's reliability, IMO, is one of the greatest benefits of the internet.


As far as newspaper paywalls - different papers have different arrangements, but most of the ones I read most often simply limit you (via cookie) to a certain number of articles per month, per device. (And I confess to deleting the cookies if I really want to read something when I'm past my limit ... with at least two papers, we do have a paid subscription in the household, but I log in anonymously and delete the cookie at the end of the session anyway - they can have my subscription fee OR my personal data, but not both tyvm.) Many times, those same publications allow unlimited access when you're clicking through on a link from somewhere else. It's more in the world of commerce news where certain articles are free and others are paid access only, as in the WSJ or FT. But again, same thing as with the academic and professional journals - you can get the headlines right away, just as you can the research abstracts, and then if you want to know more without paying for it, you make the trip to the library, but you know ahead of time what you're going there for.

[shootingstar]

I guess, Oak. A lot of people are not like us....research oriented. Nor figure out the credentials of authors. Nor understand how to pick out properly statistical data from a graph.

Lots of people prefer handholding about others who are more well-educated/familiar with govn't bureaucracies to get help.

I was unimpressed when our municipality touted that we had an innovative website for citizens because it was purely search engine driven by google. Are you kiddin.? It used language of our depts. that outsiders wouldn't at all understand. 2 years later, the municipality created hard coded pages with simple links to core services: Tax, Building Permits, Recreational Centres, etc. It's a very non-graphics website, simply too bureauractic for ordinary citizens.

[Crankin]

I remember walking into the U Mass library, when my older son had to return a (printed) book he had to take out for a very esoteric subject, when I drove out to visit one day. He looked at me and said, "You actually had to go to the library to do research, right?" I laughed. Taking out a book was a very unusual experience for him, even 10 years ago. When I explained what I had to do when I was briefly in a doctoral program, in the early 80s, it seemed mind boggling, even to me. I spent at least 30.00 a week on photocopying and had a special desk, behind the stacks, due to my status as a doctoral student. And, that was just for the required reading, let alone research. I also remember having to check out a microfiche reader to read ERIC documents at home. The thing gave me such a headache from reading, it literally made me sick, so I ended up having to stay at the library and read them. So, when I went back to get my counseling degree, it was much easier. I did everything from home, except read a couple of things professors had on reserve. So, I would agree with Oak that academic stuff is way better with the Internet. The other stuff, not so much. I am happy reading my one local paper, which is very good. I occasionally click on a NYT article and some months I get up up to the 10 article limit. But, I am not going to pay. I don't have time to read the Times. I also occasionally read something from a source in AZ, but those are very specific things, and I certainly do not agree with anything from the AZ Republic.

[Catrin]

Interesting topic! It makes me think of a couple of family members who I dearly love. I am shocked, however, when I see some of the FB posts they make where they are "sharing" some REALLY....well.... right-wing reactionary things. They are otherwise intelligent and loving people but some of the most bizarre things come from them, especially in presidential election years. I can, perhaps, see how someone can confuse socialism with communism if you've never researched it/read political history/20th century history/etc - but to REALLY believe that hordes of illegal Muslims are coming in over the Canadian border to infiltrate the country. How certain laws might affect the LGBT community (or, to personalize it, family members like ME for example)? There seems a total disconnect.

I am not saying these things to make fun of my family. There are good reasons why I don't live around them...but what I am saying is I've run across a lot of people like that over the years. There doesn't seem to be a...critical filter, for lack of a better way to put it. Without that filter, it becomes very difficult to make good use of ANY amount of information properly - how can one separate the wheat from the chaff?

On THAT depressing philosophical note, it's time to hit the hay :)

[shootingstar]

Even though I'm part of the first generation that even went to university/college. That said, it doesn't prevent one from believing illogical things. I just wince the belief that the Internet has helped us solve problems. Maybe some, but others surface...cyberbullying, etc. or are magnified in other ways.

[Catrin]

I agree Shootingstar, I was just thinking about the tendency of some to believe everything they read on the Internet. Then again, that tendency existed long before the electronic age, as long as it was in a book, article, etc. I wasn't trying to highjack the thread, it just seems I've run across so much of this recently.

[OakLeaf]

Yeah, I just have a hard time concluding that the decline of critical thinking is the result of the unprecedented availability of information to assist in critical thinking. Correlation, causation, etc ...

My own take on it is that it's the dismantling of public education, which is being done for precisely that purpose. But that's another discussion for another venue ...

[Aromig]

OH, I agree that the internet has really made research and finding information easier. I guess my point was that the original post was also talking about why, with so much information easily available at our fingertips, people aren't using it to educate themselves and I was making the point that why/how people want education is probably more important than the AVAILABILITY of information to educate people. Catrin just made my point in a better way than I did :-)

Speaking of weird internet stuff, I had a friend post (tongue in cheek thank goodness) a story about how Leonard Nimoy, who faked his death so he could become the head of the Illuminati, arranged for Scalia's death so that Obama would get to appoint a liberal justice to change the Court and to ensure that the US will stay liberal to allow the UN to continue to take over our country. I guess my point was that if I read these things I think they're funny but I sure do see old high school classmates post stuff like that with complete sincerity.

[emily_in_nc]

My own take on it is that it's the dismantling of public education, which is being done for precisely that purpose. But that's another discussion for another venue ...

This.

Additionally, the incredible rise in cell phone usage among school-age kids has got to play a role. According to some articles I've read, attention spans are very short now between texting, tweeting, etc.

[Crankin]

And, remember, that dismantling does not come from teachers. It comes from the same people who might believe the Leonard Nimoy faked his death story, when they become low level town/city politicians, or parents who push their own agenda on school boards. People like to believe they know what is good for kids to learn, because, gee, they went to school :).
I went to public schools that emphasized it was more important to learn how to get information and read than memorize things. That is, until I moved to the great state of Florida. My education essentially ended in grade 10, except for maybe math. Thankfully, my kids had the same type of education, at least in middle and high school. And, I taught in a school like that, too. A very diverse school, I may add, that made a commitment to this type of learning.
I may have stopped teaching, but I still get crazy over this. After seeing hundreds of young teens develop a love of reading and writing, and become thinkers, I can't stop.

[shootingstar]

And, remember, that dismantling does not come from teachers. It comes from the same people who might believe the Leonard Nimoy faked his death story, when they become low level town/city politicians, or parents who push their own agenda on school boards. People like to believe they know what is good for kids to learn, because, gee, they went to school :).
I went to public schools that emphasized it was more important to learn how to get information and read than memorize things. That is, until I moved to the great state of Florida. My education essentially ended in grade 10, except for maybe math. Thankfully, my kids had the same type of education, at least in middle and high school. And, I taught in a school like that, too. A very diverse school, I may add, that made a commitment to this type of learning.
I may have stopped teaching, but I still get crazy over this. After seeing hundreds of young teens develop a love of reading and writing, and become thinkers, I can't stop.

Some of us are more than willing to hear from caring adults who have long experience in cultivating bright/curious minds to think, analyze and read deeply. Not just tweet mindlessly.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/pediatricians-no-more-than-2-hour-screen-time-kids/ Interesting article, but I've read in several other sources, that very young children should be strictly limited on use of iPads, computers when under age of 5. In fact, no exposure and reading with child, word games and above all, daily interaction with caring,responsive significant adults in everyday dialogue and discussion helps develop a multitude of skills simultaneously. A very young child cannot learn to read and write by themselves, they need live adult interaction and reinforcement in addition to the tool itself (book, computer, game, tv, etc.).

I admit that I'm very surprised to see occasionally, toddlers fiddling with iPhones that a parent has given. The kid can barely walk!

I am not a parent, just career wise a librarian and also by formal training. I have never been a children's librarian. Only a librarian for adult clients in professional work environments and govn't. Unlike whatever stereotypes exist ...a lot of them either deal with resources in all formats, teach people on licensed content databases or they work and teach solely in e-resources.

Yet, I do get questions from parents occasionally how they help encourage their child to read outside of school. This is for situations where the child doesn't want to read/dislikes reading.

There has been lots since the free Internet and the love of googling, about among adult learners, the loss of analytical thinking for some people unless an adult has been taught earlier, about critical thinking and information selection, through a series of research exercises/projects. It goes as far as judges hopefully not citing Wikipedia (well, who wrote that wikipedia entry??) in their court written judgements, issues of jurors doing Google research, etc.

[lph]

Darn, my long post written while in a metro tunnel yesterday disappeared into the ethers. Anyways. I think those of us who grew up without the Internet are the most gullible, because we grew up trusting mainstream media (more or less). And it's human to do so. If you have a limited source of information, and everybody you know has the same source, that sort of defines reality. You had to be well educated, well travelled and curious to really expose yourself to significantly different ways of viewing the world. My impression is that young people today have a much better understanding of what the Internet is, a huge mass of information, not necessarily true. I would say that for someone with just a little critical sense it's a huge bonus. On the other hand, you can find a peer group that supports your particular brand of extreme thinking anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to be in your neighbourhood anymore.

Re tweeting: I'm not sure what you meant, shootingstar, but in Norway at least debate on twitter is by no means mindless. It's a political playground.

[Crankin]

Thank you, for the kind comment, Shooting Star. Re: toddlers with electronic gadgets? Just say no! A few years ago, in my first counseling job, the medical records director came crying hysterically to the clinic director. This woman was a younger mom, whose 3 year old had clicked on something on her I Pad and ended up "buying" apps, adding up to hundreds of dollars. The clinic director was a 40 year old mom of elementary school age kids, who tried to explain that it is not appropriate for a 3 year to have free access to an I Pad, emphasizing the point that it is necessary to read to young children. I happened to walk into her office during this discussion, and explained all of the skills a child learns when you read to him/her: beginning, middle, end, directionality (reading left to right, up/down), page turning, letters, prediction, etc. This young mom looked at me like I was from another planet. She really didn't want to hear what we were saying, but wanted a quick fix to learning to lock her IPad, so the kid couldn't rack up purchases. She and her husband had bought the kid her own IPad for Christmas, beause they thought she "needed" one.
Oy.

[OakLeaf]

And, remember, that dismantling does not come from teachers.

Oh, totally. I hope no one got the impression I thought teachers were responsible.


I have mixed feelings about growing up with tech though. I'm of that narrow age group that first learned to write (really write, college and post-graduate level essays) with pen and paper and typewriter, and then later shifted to real writing (legal briefs) on the computer. It's been so long now that I don't even remember the ways in which my writing changed, but I remember, at least remembering that it changed very drastically, the way I approached a project and put drafts together. It's different, for sure, and I completely understand those many novelists who already had well-established writing methods before personal computers came along, and still insist on writing from beginning to end in a less ephemeral fashion. But I wouldn't be so quick to say one is better than the other.

I'm reminded of the recent controversy about children learning to write in cursive. All the skills that are touted as being fostered by cursive writing, are skills that are served even better by learning the arts. If writing the alphabet is the greatest exposure to the arts that a child ever gets in school (which I know it is these days - and I'm not talking about calligraphy or illuminating manuscripts, either), that's just really sad and misguided, to me. The only thing I would say about cursive writing is that it's much less distracting than typing is, to the person or people on whose words I'm taking notes. Voice recording and speech-to-text would solve that; or if people want to stay with old-school solutions, they could go back to teaching shorthand in high school ...

[Crankin]

Oh, I never thought that, Oak. And, as far as writing either by hand or computer, I agree, if one works for you, use it. I used to have my students hand write their first drafts, to facilitate peer editing and self editing. The only kids who got to write their first drafts on the computer were kids with learning issues/ADD, etc. Then, some of them said they wanted to do the whole thing on the computer. The issue mostly was, I alloted time for them to do the drafting and editing in class; I didn't have enough computers (maybe 4?) in the classroom, plus Alpha Smarts that were really for the learning disabled kids, to have everyone do this. Laptops would have helped here! A few of the really bright kids would type it up at home and bring it in to do their peer editing. But, most did not complain at all.
As far as cursive goes, I personally think it is a waste of time, and I thought this before everyone started word processing. Why do we need 2 systems of writing? Both of my very verbal sons have terrible handwriting, and learning cursive was torture for them. Both of them learned to type on the computer, with Mavis Beacon Typing Tutor in 3d grade, at home! I made them learn, and this was in the early nineties. Byt he time they got to the obligatory 7th grade word processing class, it was a non-issue. The older one was typing 123 words a minute and his teacher thought he cheated on the timed tests. Really, handwriting is one of those rote skills that does not give an indication of your intelligence. I cannot tell you the number of parents I would talk to and when i was saying "writing," they thought I meant handwriting. Ugh.

[Aromig]

I have mixed feelings about growing up with tech though. ...

I presume no one thought you were blaming teachers. In fact, living in a state where the Governor (who, to my knowledge has never been involved in education besides, perhaps receiving one and I'm not positive about that) has been very publicly fighting with our Education Secretary for years over standardized testing and numerous other issues, I know that I'm very cognizant of the fact that teachers rarely control the education process.

I struggle with how I feel about tech. I typed my papers through high school and I know I was much more careful and deliberate and actually used outlining. I was lucky enough to get a "word processor" my Senior Year (it could display three lines at a time on the screen and looked like a typewriter), but by the time I was in college computers were readily available for word processing. I procrastinate a lot more since editing is so easy.

All of my kids' homework require the use of a computer to look things up. Most of his homework is done electronically and submitted on the teachers' website, etc. All kids in the district now have some form of computer (the school assigns them and the kids keep them all year, returning them at the end of the year) but we live outside of town where it is hard to get good quality high speed internet. My 13 year old goes to the public library after school to do his homework. it's convenient because he hates to ride the bus and my husband can't pick him up right away. If he has to do it at home our internet suffices, or he uses my ipad with cell service or our cell phones as hot spots, but I wonder about poorer children who don't have internet.

I can't quite tell if I like this system or not. I still love books, and hate that when I'm helping with homework we're flipping through pages on a screen. I personally have trouble finding things this way but perhaps kids have adapted. My kids also aren't very patient when they can't immediately find an answer, they don't seem to be willing to work very hard, instead expecting an instant answer to almost any problem. That, however, could just be my kids.

[shootingstar]

Re tweeting: I'm not sure what you meant, shootingstar, but in Norway at least debate on twitter is by no means mindless. It's a political playground.

Sure, if tweeting is used as quick disseminator link to more extensive article on the 'Net, it's helpful. Certainly during Obama's political campaign and even here in the city where I live, the mayor's first election win, was partially due to his team's reach to a huge younger set of electorate via twitter. First day in office, the mayor sometimes tweeted himself or his staff helped.. It's good but one needs yet another few daily hrs. of staff set aside for careful tweets, in addition to other regular media channels.

Cursive handwriting: If that is subsumed over computer typewriting, then it would be helpful to child to learn something detailed in with using their hands that's more manual and takes patience to ...create. This is another reason why we should always welcome all the younger generation uptake on DYI skills....traditional skills of sewing, knitting, gardening, woodworking, machine repair, word games with others, making perogies (a finer cooking skill) or just chopping up veggies manually, making your own meals..these are skills to my mind, that slow down a person and for a child, teaches them discipline without technology, to master something that demands focused attention, eye-hand coordination and above all, patience, plus detailed problem-solving. .WITHOUT computer technology.

Kind of like taking patience to walk for 15 min. to a store nearby to buy something and the weather is great, you have time ...instead of jumping into a car for such a short car ride. Healthier, cheaper....

[shootingstar]

Cursive writing is fine for young kids since they learn the letters slowly and build up understanding to words, etc. Don't know how kid's brain works learning strictly letters without learning to handwrite.

For adults, computers do help get around atrocious handwriting and may facilitate for some creative writers, even more creative brainstorming. I did handwrite some of my university papers in first 2 years. then my handwriting truly deteroriated to a point where 1-2 professors complained about my essay writing during tests. It affected my mark.

I find computer helps me move along with my thoughts when I want to spit them out as fast as I think. So for some writers and thinkers, computers can help in the creative/brainstorming process. Then I can edit later without physical effort of rewrites.

Had a long chat with 1 of my sisters who is having problems understanding her 8 yr. old daughter whom she knows has fabulous memory and was motivated to read 2 yrs. ago. But now she doesn't seem to be as motivated. I am familiar with the same child who loves hanging around adults and striking up conversations but doesn't naturally talk to children at length, her age.

As an aunt and non-parent, I try to be very careful how to offer advice. But at least sis and I were like all other siblings --all 6 of us became quickly voracious book readers as children. We know the value for lifelong love of reading. None of our parents read to us. Reading book to children is a cultural practice. For traditional older Chinese parents, they weren't raised like that. Nor did I read for baby siblings when I was a teen. It just never occurred to me nor was I told to do so at home.

Besides my mother doesn't know much English and my father was either at work or too tired. (He was bilingual. Taught himself English as an adult here in Canada when he had several young children already...) But he did monitor our academic marks...and if convenient, drive us to the library to drop/get books before he went to work in evening.

Her daughter wants to have her own blog...just like her aunt...me. It's disconcerting to my sister because I do have commenters which immediately sends a signal to daughter that there other people (strangers) out there on the 'Net.

I think it's the blog "stories", photos she likes to look at. :p I told sis, that blog can be made private to an select audience.... Rightfully, sis has limited her children 6 & 8 to iPad use on weekends.. under 1 hr. each day or something like that.