Colin's Third Paper
From Mizzou Wiki
We live in a country today, much different than 20 years ago and culturally unique from the rest of the world. We tend to take the things we use every day and the rate of advancement we currently have for granted. We assume that these differences in our lives are for the better and we await the next best thing. Our lives become filled with devices and bright lights, while our minds become cluttered and fried. And while there has always been a counterculture in our country, it seems that no one is paying attention and ensuring that this technological revolution is moral, logical, and beneficial. We cannot allow anything with this much sway go unquestioned and unchecked. We should never close our mind, unconsciously march, and ignore the effects of the external world. What effect does technology have on us, you, me, our education, or in essence, our future? In Dr. Wesch's anthropology video his back to the basics message resonates while emphasizing cultural literacy and technology's effect on us.
Dr. Wesch has assembled a video at Kansas State University that questions the assumed positive effect that technology has on students, teachers, and the classroom setting. His video entitled, “A Vision of Students Today”, begins by questioning the relevance of a classroom setting, asking, “If students learn what they do...what are they learning sitting here?” Also, he looks to delve a little deeper into the subject of a student and their struggles with the demands of a college life. His video takes place in a lecture hall filled with students, who participate in relaying his message to us. They hold up signs with various statements that are related to what a student is experiencing and what they must deal with while in school and beyond. He touches on the subject of how much and what kind of reading and writing an average student will do in a year, suggesting that we are more interested in the small scope of our lives and what immediately affects us.
Another issue brought up in the video was the immense demands that are put on a student without enough time to accommodate. Due to the rate technology is expanding, universities expect students to accomplish more than previous generations. While the point of technology is to add convenience and luxury to our lives, it is unfair to assume that technology will make the demands of students’ lives easier to handle. Through the video, we see the concern lies with the student and the education system. Much emphasis is placed on furthering our education system through improvement of the facilities provided, such as buildings, structures, and systems. Everything has become faster, more convenient, and cheaper. You can view, explore, apply, track, plan, chart, and in some cases, graduate from a college without ever having to come in contact with a human being. Wifi, Blackboard, online course catalog, online financial statements, online application, online classes, virtual tours, automated FAQ’s, expected date of graduation, etc. are all inventions that are intended to lower time and costs to the student and university. The system has improved dramatically and the theory has been scrutinized, toyed with, and improved over and over. Practice, however, has been largely untouched and forgotten and is probably the most important aspect of technology use in the classroom. Is the amount of preparation for the real world from our education worth the financial burden? Is technology a constructive or a deterrent to our education system?
No one could have predicted the incredible rate at which our civilization would advance and the inventions and science that have evolved in the past century. Our advancement has not only been lightning fast, but is increasing exponentially with the quality and quantity of technology that is developed. A quote in the video states, "The inventor of the system deserves to be ranked among the best contributors to learning and science, if not the greatest benefactors of mankind." This was written by Josiah F. Bumstead, in 1841, and though wrote over 150 years ago, it rings truer today than when it was written.
The point of Dr. Wesch's video was to ask if anybody is worried about what technology will become, and possibly do to us, as a culture, if we do not question its effect on us. People today take so much for granted and demand convenience so take shortcuts for comfort. What gets lost on the way? Values are indispensable, but are being muddled by superficial substitutes. People have begun placing more weight on qualities such as speed, ease, tranquility and expect technology to bend nature to better accommodate them while becoming less flexible and more stubborn themselves. What about the traits of hard work, dedication, patience, simplicity, and order? The fact that he has used a video camera to document his message, posted it on the internet, on one of the most popular and addicting websites among college students to 'complain' about technology is so ironic, that the subject is actually the definition of irony. Yet he absolutely achieves his goal of getting people to think about what they are using and ask why and what benefits are coming from this. The number of times the video has been viewed is proof of that, with a running total of almost 2.4 million. He obviously feels the only way to achieve what he wants with the desired effect is to broadcast his message through what he demonizes. We, as a culture, might be so far along that the issue isn't whether should we guard ourselves against the possibility, but, instead, can we survive without everything we depend on.
Unfortunately, Wesch fails to offer any real solutions to the problem he poses. While he opens a connection to myself and, likely, other students, he fails to resolve anything. He does an excellent job of bringing awareness to the subject, but never fully explains his opinion, nor offer an explanation.
He states through the video that, 18% of my teachers know my name, suggesting that personal relationships and human interaction is crucial and wanted. He then proceeds to break down the average number of hours in a day and how they are spent by a typical college student. The numbers simply do not add up, forcing students to multitask and suggesting that the hours aren’t spent productively. Two hours a day spent talking on a cell phone compared to three hours in class or two hours working. 2,300 web pages and 1281 Facebook profiles compared to eight books read per year. All that activity and ‘stress’ add up to $20,000 worth of debt after graduation.
In my interpretation he is questioning so many issues that are intertwined and deeply connected, changing one changes another. But his issues with today’s education system and students are contradictory to an extent. Dr. Wesch feels that classes are too big and impersonal and that tuition costs are too high. If universities were to lower class sizes they would have to hire more professors which would drive up tuition costs. Dr. Wesch fails to address this contradiction by not supplying a solution. While, subtly, encouraging cultural competence through interaction outside the classroom, he fails to ask where this time will be found. Should we cut back on eating and sleeping, or should we simply slow earth’s rotation so we have more hours in a day? Should we spend less time cruising the internet, checking e-mail, looking at Facebook, and watching silly, little YouTube videos? The video, however, does acknowledge that these problems are our own and, in turn, we must figure it out for ourselves. Keeping in mind that the decisions we make are linked together in the ebb and flow of cause and effect.
In September 2000 the Alliance for Childhood published Fool’s Gold: A Critical Look at Computers in Childhood and issued a call for action, endorsed by dozens of leading educators, health professionals, researchers, technology experts, and other advocates for children. The group called for a moratorium on the further introduction of computers in early childhood and elementary education, a new emphasis on ethics, responsibility, and critical thinking in technology education for older students, and a broad public dialogue on how cmputers affect the real needs of children. The Alliance’s actions ignited a storm of news stories and public debate on questions that previously had barely registered on media radar: Do children really learn better with computer than without them? Do the gains found by some short-term studies of children’s use of technology persist in the long term? Has research on the effects of children’s use of computers been compromised by the influence of corporate funding? Is the increasing use by children of electronic technologies actually undermining their health and well-being?
What are the solutions to this problem that is constantly expanding and intensifying? Do we contest, obstruct, or work with technology? Should we use old techniques and tools to incorporate change or do use technology to combat technology? It continues to permeate and saturate every aspect of our lives, decaying some and contradicting others. I believe a balance must be achieved through agreement and reasonable measure. We should guard ourselves against unobstructed and limitless growth without questioning it’s morality and positivity. In the case of our education system, find a medium between convenience and contact. Nothing can replace the guidance of a competent advisor or physically experiencing the ambience of a campus. Though sounds and images can aid in retaining information, the distractions of a classroom are amplified with the installment of technology. The inconvenience of attending class can be frustrating and deterrent, but it should never be replaced by streaming or recording lectures, via the internet.
Some universities have already placed bans on where and how far the internet can reach on and from their campus. There is a continuing battle between students and professors on this issue. While it may be getting blown out of proportion, with some professors banning laptops from their classroom altogether and law students appealing to the American Bar Association on the grounds ‘that they were being denied an up-to-date education.’ We need to have an open, public discussion about technology’s advantages and drawbacks in order to settle on a compromise. After all, that is always the best way to resolve an issue, no matter how big or small it may be. Like most systems that are in place, the main goal is to guide institutions and individuals against common mistakes and invisible pitfalls. Ultimately, the success of any decision will come down to the individual. No one can ever be made to pay attention, to care, or to try, therefore, it must be a conscious effort on the part of the individual. That is why it is so important to install an effective system that guides and encourages students and professors towards the right decision.
The world, today, has essentially been shrunk by the wonder of technology. We are in closer quarters, despite no physical movement, because of technology. We find ourselves becoming used to the fact that sharing political opinions or creative ideas, media, or art is a click of a button away. You can post a blog on the internet, read or watch the news and you are connected to countries on the opposite side of the globe. Because of this proximity our communication and personal skills must continue to improve. An education gained in our collegiate system does not seem to prepare you for this current phenomenon. There is no emphasis on cross cultural education and we should not sacrifice internal growth for that of the external. Cultural literacy is cognitive recognition and acknowledgment of the history, contributions, and perspectives of cultural groups, including one's own. Also, observing different traditions, social mores, and unique characteristics of a culture, with clear eyes and without pretension to have an understanding of reading, writing, and other media. Cultural competence refers to the ability to function in a multicultural setting. It involves being aware of behaviors, attitudes, beliefs, rules, and laws that exist in a system. The University of Missouri-Columbia requires core classes that emphasize an understanding and encourage practice in cultural literacy and competence. Sociology, history, and foreign language classes are meant to help the process of expanding your cultural experiences. Sociology asks you to look beyond the scope of your own social class and demographic, while history and foreign language open up past and exotic worlds. However, the history classes offered are all American history or political science classes. Also, they are very general and, obviously, very bias towards the United States and democracy. What are we really gaining from these required courses? Do they really contribute to your knowledge or are they just pretentious and for show?
According to dictionary.com, human ecology is defined as the branch of sociology concerned with the spacing and interdependence of people and institutions. The university seems to push us, as students, towards exploring the subjects of sociology and history. They teach us to see its relevance, especially on a local level. However, they simply show us the door. It is our responsibility to walk through it. While we are exposed to cultural literacy early in our college careers, it is no stretch to say that we forget and dismiss what is taught. The university does as much as they can when it comes to providing cultural literacy and cultural competency. The range of majors offered here are ample and credible. They allow for a student to choose electives outside of their chosen major. This is done to enable students to pursue other interests and experiences, which is valuable in reinforcing cultural literacy and competence.
Columbia, Missouri is a fairly diverse city, partly due to the recruiting done by the university, especially considering the location. If you drive 40 minutes in any direction, the demographics change dramatically. The diversity adds culture and flavor to a city that would likely be much smaller and unadorned. The buildings downtown are a testament to this. There are Middle Eastern and Asian food markets, Greek, Thai, and Indian restaurants. The architecture of city hall is typical of a mid-Missouri town, but the art festival hosted right outside its doors is not. In spite of this, Columbia is not void of common segregation within it’s city borders. East campus is notorious for hippies and free spirits, Rollins drive is Greek town, Forum road hosts some of the nicest houses in all of town, and between Broadway and Business Loop 63 some of the poorest. Not surprisingly, these groups tend to band together and push for the good of those similar to them. This kind of behavior and segregation is the nemesis of cultural literacy and competence and an overall consideration of each other. Overall though, Columbia, its people, that make up our ecology is very positive and important in the understanding of culture and creed.
We, as a student body, can propose and endorse change in our education system by demanding that the university make more of an effort and expect more out of the everyday student. We can urge the university to force the student to get out, experience, and interact more. Unfortunately, that is exactly where the problems lay. We, as students and as people, should expect more out of ourselves and not rely on institutions or outside influences to inspire and compel. Besides, with our time and energy maxing out due to the increasing demands of the everyday student, how would the university expect more without reaching a breaking point. Maybe Wesch was right, maybe we spend too much time cruising the internet, texting friends, and posting blogs. Either way, the proposed changes that might be brought about would certainly be rhetorical. It is easy to propose change and insist that someone else come up with the solution. We seem to have a problem with that, not only on a local level, but on a national level as well. Currently, at Mizzou, we have a consensus around campus between student, staff, and faculty that there is not enough parking. I hear students constantly complaining and teachers arriving to campus earlier every year. Any idea is coupled with unwanted consequence and can never find a positive public reaction. If we want more parking garages, should we tear down the Columns? If we want more buses, are we willing to pay for them? Supposedly, there was an idea to offer public bikes to students while on campus. They would take the bike, ride it to class, and leave it on the bike rack for another student to use. Inevitably, those bikes began appearing all over Columbia, in the hands of homeless people, kids, or on the side of a road. No solution to any social problem will ever be perfect, so until we begin to take action on a personal and public level, the only improvement will be our rhetoric.
I feel I lead a normal college existence and felt a connection with many of the issues brought up in Wesch's video. The hours in a day are often unfulfilling and my list of things to do is a consistent run on of a previous day's work. It leads to me feel conflicted on many different levels. It forces me to question whether I am lazy or not productive enough. Is the amount of time and energy spent towards school is just enough or my maximum effort? Or if any of it really matters in the whole scheme of things. I question if what I want to do is selfish or trivial when I have so much more that I need to be doing. I am constantly juggling prior engagements with more pressing issues. I am constantly trying to find where the balance lies. That's the internal battle, the external one is much more complicated. Is this education going to lead me down the path it intends to and the one I hope it will be? The money and time and stress, etc. is constantly labeled as sacrifices that need to be made. But are they? These questions and problems run parallel with the problems that technology has posed for me personally. With the convenience of technology everything is expected to be faster and better, with no learning curve, no margin for error. This presses me and has the opposite effect it is intended to have. Instead of being relaxed and without worries because technology is taking care of life's inconveniences, I feel rushed and stressed, but for the same reason. Like everything, I believe that it is important to find a balance. After all, you don't want too much of a good thing.
After watching Dr. Wesch's video, a lot of questions came to mind about his message and whether or not to believe it. He obviously did a very good job of creating awareness on this issue and has gotten a lot of attention. I believe that the most important thing that should be taken away from the video is that we should consciously question technology's effect on us, whether it is in an educational setting or in our own personal lives. This rapid technological advancement will not stop, especially if it continues to improve lives, so we must keep pace. Because of our new proximity with people of different race, religion, and culture we cannot let our internal qualities fall behind the external. Of course, technology has made the quality of life better but that doesn't mean we should allow it to spread into every aspect of life without first questioning the consequences. Hopefully, more people like Dr. Wesch will step forward and lead the way.
