Ethan Jarmush
It may seem like recently we started to vilify technology in areas in our lives like at work, at school, and at home. But this has been going on since nearly every new invention because people seem to have a hard time adapting to new things or think that just because it’s different it must be bad. Nicholas Carr, Paul La Farge, Farris Jabr, Cathy Davidson, and Olivia Goldhill each seem to have their own take on whether or not technology has a positive or negative effect on us. Although there may be some consequences to technology, whether or not some of the authors want to admit it, technology is now essential in our lives, especially in education when we are training children for the real world.
When reading articles online about the topic of online reading, you get two different arguments. One being that online reading is bad and that reading on paper is better, while the other side states many of the good things that online reading can offer. In La Farge’s article, “The Deep Space of Digital Reading”, he acknowledges the drawbacks of digital reading that others like Nicholas Carr have stated about how reading online decreases comprehension and memory compared to paper. But he refutes this by saying “If those same students expected on-screen reading to be as slow (and as effortful) as paper reading, would their comprehension of digital text improve?” (La Farge “The Deep Space of Digital Reading”). In school, kids appear to be taught that reading online is bad and reading on paper is where they’ll really learn. If they are taught this and choose to believe that online reading is worse than paper, then obviously they will perform better when reading on paper. Since people skim a lot no matter what they read online because that is the habit they’ve put on themselves, there’s the chance they could miss information due to them quickly scanning the article. But that is their fault that they are skimming the information and this same problem could be said for a number of different activities which is easily solvable. La Farge goes on to cite a few studies actually showing the opposite of what many others who disagree with him are saying, specifically that things like hypertexts actually improve comprehension compared to regular reading. If you go on Wikipedia and want to learn about a subject but there’s many words that relate to the subject that you don’t understand, you can click on all of them to learn the proper vocabulary and get back to the main subject at hand. Schools need to be teaching kids all the amazing things that websites like Wikipedia offers instead of acting like all the information is wrong and shouldn’t be used. This way, not only are kids getting relevant information very quickly, but they also get the impression that online reading can be beneficial which could change their perception of it so they comprehend more.
Jabr brings up a lot of the same evidence that Carr does his article “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens”. He makes claims that reading online leads to inferior comprehension as well as memory. Even with this evidence, he still brings up a good point at the end when he talks about how the two medians (paper and screens) are very different forms of reading. We should use both paper and screen but evolve screen reading to better fit things that it is used for like quick information and news (Jabr “The Reading Brain in the Digital Age: The Science of Paper versus Screens”). The points in the article about how navigating online articles being second-rate when compared to paper is true but that is for reading full length books. If we try to improve reading for informative articles, like the ones that millions of students are already using for school, then if you do it right, productivity and learning could increase by a large margin.
Just like we have to change technology to better suit our needs, our brains are changing to adapt to the times as well. We see this when we read into Cathy Davidson’s book “Now You See It”. Davidson references how our brain is like an iPhone and how it can download different apps to complete apps. She goes on to say “Those things that most capture our attention-our learning and our work, our passions and our activities-change our actual brain biology. In this way the iPhone brain also corresponds nicely with recent advances in what we know about neural plasticity, the theory that the brain adapts physically to the sensory stimuli it receives, or what psychiatrist Norman Doidge calls “the brain that changes itself.””(Davidson 15). We can conclude that if we intend to skim through articles for the most important parts, our brains will physically change in order to become more efficient.Another issue of this argument is multitasking and whether or not we should embrace it or try reduce it as much as possible. Olivia Goldhill’s article “Neuroscientists say multitasking literally drains the energy reserves of your brain” also shows evidence on this topic by stating many of the negatives of multitasking. Both of these pieces provide pros and consequences to the subject so we will be able to find a good middle ground that will benefit everyone. In Goldhill’s article, she explains that by multitasking you tire yourself out quickly which “uses up oxygenated glucose in the brain, running down the same fuel that’s needed to focus on a task.” (Goldhill “Neuroscientists say multitasking literally drains the energy reserves of your brain”). Taking breaks while working is very important and will lead to more productivity. Goldhill’s solution to these problems is to set aside a certain amount of time in order to do your work without distractions. She also said you can implement software that “forces users to take breaks every couple of hours.” (Goldhill “Neuroscientists say multitasking literally drains the energy reserves of your brain”). We can combine these techniques with what Davidson has said by working with people in order to not miss important details. What the education system doesn’t seem to be doing right now is foster cooperation between people and allowing them to work together to complete tasks. The simple experiment that Davidson talks about throughout is the video of the people passing the basketballs and halfway through, a gorilla walks through the middle. A lot of the people missed the gorilla walking through the middle, but the few that did were able to contribute information to the group that was important. So if we combine working without distractions, taking breaks, and cooperating with others to contribute information, then students are going to be much more efficient and presumably less stressed. This is sadly, not something that is being taught in the school system which is a very important skill that everyone should learn so they can succeed in this world.
If schools want to educate children in order for them to be prepared for the future, they can’t be afraid to use and teach students proper online reading. This includes using Wikipedia and showing how to properly use their time online so they don’t drain their energy reserves. In order to adapt to the digital age, it would be a detriment to not embrace with open arms digital reading and everything it offers. That’s not to say we shouldn’t change reading online from what it is right now. But if we change it to be better for what it is intended for, then not only will students benefit, but everyone that uses computers or phones around the world will as well.