[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.She didn t seem to know.And I think thatthat s Internet related.I really do. e young people that Drabinski encounters highschool and college students, and sometimes even their teach-ers don t understand that only they can determine the rel-evance of the information they retrieve, not Google, notYahoo!, not even their librarian.is discernment requiresreading and thinking and evaluating, because there isn tone answer out there to the questions that require analysis.As computer critic Joseph Weizenbaum says, ere is onlyone way to turn signals into information: through interpre-tation. 11 And, unless I m behind on technological develop-ments, interpretation can only be done by the human brain.What was life like before the Internet? Before you hadthe Web, where you could just go to Google and type in Should there be a Palestinian state?, when there was a cardcatalog, you had to think of your subject, noted Drabinski. You had to think critically about the kind of words and lan-guage you wanted to use, because you had to guess where inthe card catalog that information could be found. A research-er would begin by assembling a list of keywords Palestine,Israel, diaspora, Israel-Arab relations.en the searcher wouldpursue these avenues of research as each round of efforthelped to refine the question. Now you don t do that.Youjust type it in and take the top three results on that page andyou hit Print. For several years, Drabinksi worked at the library of aliberal arts university near a public high school in Yonkers, in google we trust 67New York.is school is one of the few public schools tohave an International Baccalaureate program, a rigorous edu-cational and assessment program with an international focus.I went to speak with students who had worked with Drabin-ski, and their teacher, Brigid McMaster, a former nun andnow a history teacher, whose classroom is decorated withquestion marks and handmade posters advertising academ-ic databases.McMaster decided that, in light of all of the talk about oureconomy entering its period of greatest challenge since theGreat Depression, she would move around the curriculum ofher History of the Americas class to talk about that period inU.S.history right away.is kind of switch would be unheardof in a typical class that had to adhere closely to the curricu-lum, which itself adheres closely to a standardized exam.Butso would be a program that requires students to take a classin the theory of knowledge, which relates learning from vari-ous disciplines to concepts, historical events, current events,and issues of importance.I asked Julie, a senior at Yonkers High School, how shewould go about searching for information on the GreatDepression to prepare for her classroom discussion tomor-row.I was prepared to hear that she d Google Great Depres-sion, go to the Wikipedia page, and take it from there.I waswrong. Well, Great Depression. at s kind of broad. She pro-ceeded to explain how she would have to narrow down thequestion and use keywords, and through a presearch discerna much clearer idea of what she wanted to learn.With so much gained in terms of access to information,with the advent of online research tools, what s missing now,according to Drabinski, is a sense of research as work. Pre-vious research methods including the use of card cata-logs forced people to be more creative and rigorous in theeffort to access the information sought.Now, said Drabinski, 68 culture: questions or answers?students think all research will be easy. e Internet makesresearch easier until it doesn t, and then students aren t equippedto deal with things not working, or going wrong.[ e Inter-net] de-skills you. Students can t find what they re looking for unless theInternet does it for them.Sure, it s reasonable to ask why stu-dents should have to work so hard to find information if it snot necessary.But then we are forgetting that the purpose ofthese research exercises is not to produce papers worthy ofentry into academic journals though they might but todevelop habits of mind that will serve these young peoplethroughout their lives.Drabinksi also worries that students fail to recognize thatthe way information is structured online its content, form,presentation, and authority is invisible in a way that itwasn t before. It becomes invisible as information is priva-tized.e algorithms containing the secret of how our searchengines give us information are themselves secret.Do we eventhink about where the information comes from or are we justhappy to find the answers we are looking for?Yahoo! One Authority Young People Don t Question e speed of young people s Web searching indicates thatlittle time is spent in evaluating information, either for rele-vance, accuracy or authority and children have been observedprinting-off and using Internet pages with no more than aperfunctory glance at them, according to the Google Gen-eration report.12 is phenomenon the search, print, andrun was familiar to every educator I spoke with across thecountry.A 1999 report by Sandra Hirsh found that fi h graders rarely mentioned authority as an evaluation criterion and in google we trust 69generally did not question the accuracy or validity of theinformation they found from any electronic resources. 13 It snot that they couldn t figure whether the source was credible,if they wanted to; it s that they didn t think to question thelegitimacy and accuracy of the information they got throughtheir search engines.Unfortunately, understanding the importance of the cred-ibility of information, and the skills to ascertain that credi-bility, doesn t come automatically with age.A 2001 report byMichael Lorenzen found that high school students had giv-en very little thought to how to evaluate what they found onthe Web, and they didn t understand whether the informa-tion they uncovered was good. ey didn t know how tofigure it out.14 Likewise, a 2000 report by Nathan Bos foundthat high school students conducting research online wouldbe hampered in their ability to practice the evidence-basedreasoning at the heart of science because they couldn t iden-tify biases in the scientific resources they encountered on theWeb.15ese findings and others led the author of the article Children, Teenagers, and the Web to conclude, Youngusers encounter problems in selecting appropriate searchterms and orienting themselves when browsing.ey havea tendency to move from page to page, spending little timereading or digesting information, and have difficulty makingrelevance judgments about retrieved pages.Information seek-ing does not appear to be intuitive, and practice alone doesnot make perfect. 16In a culture that prizes finding the answer, it becomesless important to evaluate the source, the relevance, or theauthenticity of that answer.From mindlessly plugging interms to power browsing through whatever is found, with littleattention paid to whether those sources are relevant or credi-ble, young people are determined only to find their answer.Many recent studies indicate that children are not asking 70 culture: questions or answers?questions to make judgments about the information theyretrieve.ey re not asking, Is this information true? Is itrelevant? Is it credible? Is it authoritative? Does it with-stand scrutiny? How would I go about scrutinizing it? eybelieve and trust that search engines are neutral actors, sim-ply offering what is most helpful to them in their pursuit ofan answer [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl centka.pev.pl
.She didn t seem to know.And I think thatthat s Internet related.I really do. e young people that Drabinski encounters highschool and college students, and sometimes even their teach-ers don t understand that only they can determine the rel-evance of the information they retrieve, not Google, notYahoo!, not even their librarian.is discernment requiresreading and thinking and evaluating, because there isn tone answer out there to the questions that require analysis.As computer critic Joseph Weizenbaum says, ere is onlyone way to turn signals into information: through interpre-tation. 11 And, unless I m behind on technological develop-ments, interpretation can only be done by the human brain.What was life like before the Internet? Before you hadthe Web, where you could just go to Google and type in Should there be a Palestinian state?, when there was a cardcatalog, you had to think of your subject, noted Drabinski. You had to think critically about the kind of words and lan-guage you wanted to use, because you had to guess where inthe card catalog that information could be found. A research-er would begin by assembling a list of keywords Palestine,Israel, diaspora, Israel-Arab relations.en the searcher wouldpursue these avenues of research as each round of efforthelped to refine the question. Now you don t do that.Youjust type it in and take the top three results on that page andyou hit Print. For several years, Drabinksi worked at the library of aliberal arts university near a public high school in Yonkers, in google we trust 67New York.is school is one of the few public schools tohave an International Baccalaureate program, a rigorous edu-cational and assessment program with an international focus.I went to speak with students who had worked with Drabin-ski, and their teacher, Brigid McMaster, a former nun andnow a history teacher, whose classroom is decorated withquestion marks and handmade posters advertising academ-ic databases.McMaster decided that, in light of all of the talk about oureconomy entering its period of greatest challenge since theGreat Depression, she would move around the curriculum ofher History of the Americas class to talk about that period inU.S.history right away.is kind of switch would be unheardof in a typical class that had to adhere closely to the curricu-lum, which itself adheres closely to a standardized exam.Butso would be a program that requires students to take a classin the theory of knowledge, which relates learning from vari-ous disciplines to concepts, historical events, current events,and issues of importance.I asked Julie, a senior at Yonkers High School, how shewould go about searching for information on the GreatDepression to prepare for her classroom discussion tomor-row.I was prepared to hear that she d Google Great Depres-sion, go to the Wikipedia page, and take it from there.I waswrong. Well, Great Depression. at s kind of broad. She pro-ceeded to explain how she would have to narrow down thequestion and use keywords, and through a presearch discerna much clearer idea of what she wanted to learn.With so much gained in terms of access to information,with the advent of online research tools, what s missing now,according to Drabinski, is a sense of research as work. Pre-vious research methods including the use of card cata-logs forced people to be more creative and rigorous in theeffort to access the information sought.Now, said Drabinski, 68 culture: questions or answers?students think all research will be easy. e Internet makesresearch easier until it doesn t, and then students aren t equippedto deal with things not working, or going wrong.[ e Inter-net] de-skills you. Students can t find what they re looking for unless theInternet does it for them.Sure, it s reasonable to ask why stu-dents should have to work so hard to find information if it snot necessary.But then we are forgetting that the purpose ofthese research exercises is not to produce papers worthy ofentry into academic journals though they might but todevelop habits of mind that will serve these young peoplethroughout their lives.Drabinksi also worries that students fail to recognize thatthe way information is structured online its content, form,presentation, and authority is invisible in a way that itwasn t before. It becomes invisible as information is priva-tized.e algorithms containing the secret of how our searchengines give us information are themselves secret.Do we eventhink about where the information comes from or are we justhappy to find the answers we are looking for?Yahoo! One Authority Young People Don t Question e speed of young people s Web searching indicates thatlittle time is spent in evaluating information, either for rele-vance, accuracy or authority and children have been observedprinting-off and using Internet pages with no more than aperfunctory glance at them, according to the Google Gen-eration report.12 is phenomenon the search, print, andrun was familiar to every educator I spoke with across thecountry.A 1999 report by Sandra Hirsh found that fi h graders rarely mentioned authority as an evaluation criterion and in google we trust 69generally did not question the accuracy or validity of theinformation they found from any electronic resources. 13 It snot that they couldn t figure whether the source was credible,if they wanted to; it s that they didn t think to question thelegitimacy and accuracy of the information they got throughtheir search engines.Unfortunately, understanding the importance of the cred-ibility of information, and the skills to ascertain that credi-bility, doesn t come automatically with age.A 2001 report byMichael Lorenzen found that high school students had giv-en very little thought to how to evaluate what they found onthe Web, and they didn t understand whether the informa-tion they uncovered was good. ey didn t know how tofigure it out.14 Likewise, a 2000 report by Nathan Bos foundthat high school students conducting research online wouldbe hampered in their ability to practice the evidence-basedreasoning at the heart of science because they couldn t iden-tify biases in the scientific resources they encountered on theWeb.15ese findings and others led the author of the article Children, Teenagers, and the Web to conclude, Youngusers encounter problems in selecting appropriate searchterms and orienting themselves when browsing.ey havea tendency to move from page to page, spending little timereading or digesting information, and have difficulty makingrelevance judgments about retrieved pages.Information seek-ing does not appear to be intuitive, and practice alone doesnot make perfect. 16In a culture that prizes finding the answer, it becomesless important to evaluate the source, the relevance, or theauthenticity of that answer.From mindlessly plugging interms to power browsing through whatever is found, with littleattention paid to whether those sources are relevant or credi-ble, young people are determined only to find their answer.Many recent studies indicate that children are not asking 70 culture: questions or answers?questions to make judgments about the information theyretrieve.ey re not asking, Is this information true? Is itrelevant? Is it credible? Is it authoritative? Does it with-stand scrutiny? How would I go about scrutinizing it? eybelieve and trust that search engines are neutral actors, sim-ply offering what is most helpful to them in their pursuit ofan answer [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]