Reading This Will Change Your Brain

I totally agree with Wisconsin-Madison.

No one can predict what the future holds in stock for us.

Philip Emefe

If increased use of technology correlates highly with decreaesd ability to socialize (in the traditional way), wouldn't the tech-savy people be the ones "selected" out of the population? Those who lack traditional social skills, it would seem, might have a tougher time finding a mate...

Well, if increased use of technology correlates highly with decreased use of traditional social skills, wouldn't it seem that the technologically savy would be the ones to be "selected" out of the population? Those who can't socialize properly would have a hard time finding a mate, wouldn't you think?

This is a very interesting comment, but I'm very skeptical that natural selection can be involved in this. I'm no expert, but wouldn't natrual selection in this case require that people who are predisposed (by DNA) to interact well with digital information have a better chance at survival and reproduction? It sounds to me like this study simply shows that all our brains are highly adaptable at a young age. I doubt anyone is is already "hardwired" is going to die sooner or even reproduce less and even if they did, it only matters if we are taking something out of the gene pool. This article doesn't seem to say anything about differences between people who are predisposed to work well with technology and those who arent
WHAT A ***!!!!!!

sometimes when i poop on my keyboard it gets all fried like it actually mad at ME. It has a brain and seems not to like corn.

This is a very interesting comment, but I'm very skeptical that natural selection can be involved in this. I'm no expert, but wouldn't natrual selection in this case require that people who are predisposed (by DNA) to interact well with digital information have a better chance at survival and reproduction? It sounds to me like this study simply shows that all our brains are highly adaptable at a young age. I doubt anyone is is already "hardwired" is going to die sooner or even reproduce less and even if they did, it only matters if we are taking something out of the gene pool. This article doesn't seem to say anything about differences between people who are predisposed to work well with technology and those who arent

I sometimes feel that, when the machines delays to open or function, I often get angry and my BP rises. This could be dangerous and discouraging as missing a letter or card at boarding school pegion hole.

FARRR-OOOOUUUUUUTTTT

farrr-oouuuuuttttt

goods news....

good news ...thank you...

The internet is definitely changing the way children learn. Attention Deficit Disorder may by related to this or, more likely, what is being diagnosed as Attenton Deficit Disorder is really the inability to ponder the information obtained easily allowing the child the opportunity to go elsewhere having satisfied the immediate want or need. As an adult, I have found myself over the last few years as internet speeds have increased, being able to get deeper and deeper into the subject. I expect that children of the internet era have lost or are losing the ability to use their imaginative abilities and their curiosity will end up being shallow as a result of being too easily satisfied.

It would be very interesting to do a study on childhood curiosity using the frequency of use of the word "Why" by children in different age groups and comparing it over a period of perhaps the next 5 years. It would have great implications for education and mental health. I believe we are indeed seeing the birth of a new "Disease".

The main problem is not socialization; that is a symptom. A majority of children who have computers now read, research, and analyze almost exclusively off the computer; book reading is done only when assigned, and this has led to a change in the way children acquire information and process it. They can only concentrate on a few lines at a time. Dense intricate language cannot be followed. They learn to skim for key words, then scroll for more. They want the answers to pop up; they cannot follow sequential ideas to create a conclusion. They read just enough for an answer to a question; they don't question the text for why or how . The same thing is occurring in socialization; lack of depth in assessment, inability to reason through sequential concepts to reach a conclusion; need for instant shallow responses, immediate reaction to appearance without assessing why or how. That is the shift I see, and I have two teenagers who are high achievers in school, and I see all their friends who are also the high achiever crowd at schools.

This article is related to class discussion two weeks ago about the rise of Web 2.0 technologies and how students' minds are adapting to such changes. The rise of technology does have implications for the field of education because many students are familiar with technological literacies from which they access and create information. One key point that we focused on was the way in which the human mind is changed by such technologies. After understanding this, then we can move on to how we can incorporate these in our classrooms.

Also, I wanted to respond to the poster about how we no longer teach "proper grammar" or "sentence diagramming" in our classrooms. According to Freeman & Freeman in Essential Linguistics, teaching grammar has no significant impacts in terms of cognitive abilities. In fact, all these grammar rules we know about were imposed by Latin teachers once Latin was no longer the language of schooling. Therefore, we should consider what motivates us to teach "grammar rules" in our classrooms.

jh

I have been teaching third-graders for seven years and have already seen a difference in the way they learn. The parts of their brains that are used while playing video games are growing at the cost of the parts that control impulsivity, pro-active problem solving, and anything that takes longer than half a second to process or requires deep thought. The future will require "less of the traditional social skills and learning strategies that we have cultivated over eons". It is not our socialization that concerns me for the future, it is our ability to think beyond the reactionary.

As a teacher of third-graders, I was hoping the study would delve into the educational ramifications of technology use. I have been teaching for seven years, and have already seen a difference in the way kids learn and think. The parts of their brains that are used while playing video games are growing at the cost of the parts of their brains that control impulsivity, proactive problem solving, traditional social skills, and anything else that requires more that a half a second to process.

Oh, I just have to comment on the apostrophe postings below and, secondly, the social interaction theory.
Advertising careers -- my pre-retired state of mind -- give a person a strange insight to the way people evolve socially over decades. I noticed back in the 1980s (onset of computers) that even college graduates, when doing resumes which I was preparing for their job search, would use the funniest notion of their qualifications. For example, one I remember in particular mentioned as a special social skill he had was the fact that he ''swept the floor on Saturdy without supervision". Anothr said they worked at a weekend job at a restaurant that served (ad I quote) "PANCAKE'S".
Lesson here was that back in the 80s I noticed a tremendous trend for college students to use an apostrophe with ANY WORD that had an 's' in it. It was uncanny .... and alarming.
So, now I wonder, was that the decade in which our learning systems began to no longer teach the difference between PLURAL and POSSESSIVE, or was it because primary education no longer taught one of English's best lessons: the art of SENTENCE DIAGRAMMING?
I think that, in all fairness, these studies should include the course of EDUCATION EVOLUTION versus (or including) the use of technology and the impact on the brain and its ability for social interaction.

I wish that people, particularly news reporters would stop using the word "evolution" referring to subjects that aren't evolution. In paragraph one, the line "As the brain evolves and shifts its focus towards new technological skills, it drifts away from fundamental social skills." is quoted, then in the second paragraph, the line "Still, that's not the same thing as evolution." is used.