At last we hear from a real life 'Multi-Tasker!' There is much written about such people but not much in the way of research studies to support each side of the discourse. At least that's my understanding after reading through our course linked materials and trying to find out more on the Internet. Even at MIT there are opposing views around the positives and negatives regarding the skills, capabilities, and brain functioning of the multi-tasking 'Digital Native,' a term coined by Marc Prensky to the dismay of some and the approbation of others! For Prensky it seems that
"It is very likely that our students’ brains have physically changed – and are different from ours – as a result of how they grew up. But whether or not this is literally true, we can say with certainty that their thinking patterns have changed."
However, there are many criticisms regarding the concept of a division between a 'Digital Native and a Digital Immigrant' , and the suppositions that the brains of each subcultural group are different. There is even much questioning on how this division became an accepted reality in the first place! For example, Jamie McKenzie harshly criticizes the origins of such ideas.
In the following video clip Sherry Turkle and others attempt to define what multi-tasking is and what it looks like at MIT.
In the following video clip Sherry Turkle and others attempt to define what multi-tasking is and what it looks like at MIT.
Sherry Turkle explains further and comments on the affects and effects of total, continual immersion in a digital environment, in this interesting article from New Scientist Tech.
Clifford Nass at Stanford University expresses how scary the future is because we just don't know what effects and affects the digital world is having on humans. In addition to the conjectured changes to the brain he talks about the level of attention we now pay to one another. He says,
"One of the biggest points here I think is, when I grew up, the greatest gift you could give someone was attention, and the best way to insult someone was to ignore them. ... The greatest gift was attention. Well, if we're in a society where the notion of attention as important is breaking apart, what now is the relationship glue between us? Because it's always been attention." (Interview with Clifford Nass, 2010)
Clifford Nass at Stanford University expresses how scary the future is because we just don't know what effects and affects the digital world is having on humans. In addition to the conjectured changes to the brain he talks about the level of attention we now pay to one another. He says,
"One of the biggest points here I think is, when I grew up, the greatest gift you could give someone was attention, and the best way to insult someone was to ignore them. ... The greatest gift was attention. Well, if we're in a society where the notion of attention as important is breaking apart, what now is the relationship glue between us? Because it's always been attention." (Interview with Clifford Nass, 2010)
Indeed the discourse concerning much of the pros and cons around digital media and current mobile and wireless technologies is becoming of greater concern: witness presentations to the House of Lords in England no less!
Without substantial research evidence perhaps all of the rhetoric is purely a strategy of our Brain Games?
Without substantial research evidence perhaps all of the rhetoric is purely a strategy of our Brain Games?
No comments:
Post a Comment