Mark BauerleinBesprekingen

This book written in 2005 about Gen Y and had me researching today the results of their influence on reading in 2024 and by the numbers there are fewer and fewer of us who live for reading and cherish books.

This book is flawed on every level. It posits that only an education clinging to a 75-year-old canon can primp and cajole the young into intelligent life. It argues that cultural cohesion depends entirely on the trivial references curated by elites. It mourns the passing of self-styled demigod mentors displaced by the Internet. It bristles at the threat to a Western Civilization that has utterly failed in its most critical and most basic responsibility: preservation of the planet. It winces in stylized horror at the idea of its fusty, decaying tenured academics not being daised, laureled and fawningly sung as our chosen eminences.

The Internet is Protean and readily feeds seekers of knowledge regardless of origin or class. This the self-important simply can't stand.

The literary classics are not the only source of moral exempla.

Too much negative thinking and way too many assumptions to paint an entire generation as mindless selfish cretins hellbent on instant gratification without a respect for history or the consequences of an incomplete education.

Chi non ha un profilo su un social network? Chi usa lo smartphone solo come telefono cellulare ?Chi accende il personal computer, fisso, portatile o tablet che sia, solo per motivi professionali o di studio? Se avessi un pubblico davanti a me, nessuno alzerebbe un dito per rispondere positivamente al mio quesito e anch’io farei altrettanto! Tutti siamo armati di un mezzo che ci catapulta in un mondo che da reale è diventato virtuale, anzi no, un universo che è tanto sociale che spesso si tramuta in qualcosa di patologico.

Basta guardarsi attorno in qualsiasi ambito, locali pubblici, mezzi di trasporto e per strada per realizzare che la gente ha perso l’abitudine di parlare, tutti intenti ad armeggiare con lo smartphone.
Pare che non si possa vivere senza un costante contatto con il mondo virtuale, qualsiasi esso sia e sempre a discapito delle buone chiacchierate tra amici e dei rapporti personali, con il rischio di cadere vittima della sindrome di Hikikomori, termine giapponese dalle parole hiku "tirare" e komoru “ritirarsi" e la cui traduzione letterale è “stare in disparte, isolarsi” recentemente associato anche all’abuso di internet.

Ma questa patologia del Sol Levante non è l’unica, c’è anche il FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out), ovvero la paura di essere emarginati ed al quale sono legati molti utenti dei social network che non vogliono perdersi nulla dei profili dei propri amici, veri o virtuali che siano e temono di essere tagliati fuori da tutto quanto fa tendenza. Purtroppo c’è anche spazio, tanto cyber spazio per chi vuol farsi veramente male, il Dark Net, una grossa fetta di mondo virtuale, dagli esperti stimata 500 volte più grande rispetto al web, dove è possibile muoversi liberamente nell’illecito, dove pedofili e terroristi trovano un ambiente fertile, che si tramuta in una sorta di mercato nero per trafficanti d’armi e di droga.

Ma come è possibile tutto questo? Uno dei modi più seguiti è quello di accedere alla Dark Net per mezzo di Tor, un software che fa rimbalzare il traffico dati tramite vari sistemi crittografici e che garantisce l’anonimato degli utenti rendendo invisibile l’indirizzo IP del computer.
Sicuramente è inquietante sapere che nel ventunesimo secolo sia possibile muoversi così liberamente in siti altamente pericolosi soprattutto per i giovani, senza che si possa bloccarne il traffico da parte degli organi competenti. Il mondo della tripla W ha aperto un universo sconfinato, che comunque bisogna saper dosare con saggezza ed intelligenza per non correre il rischio di cadere nelle maglie di quella che si presenta come una nuova dipendenza e che può avere forti ripercussioni sull’autostima di utenti di qualsiasi età.

Scorrete i file degli scaffali dei libri su GoodReads alla voce "social networking" e vi renderete conto di quanti libri in tutte le lingue si occupano di questo argomento. Il mondo è diventato davvero un "social network" in tutti i suoi aspetti umani, sociali, politici, culturali, religiosi ... Puoi sapere tutto di tutti in maniera immediata se non addirittura prima che gli eventi accadano. In effetti le chat, gli sms, i tweet, le connessioni creano i fatti anticipandoli in "bits & bytes", in una vera e propria ragnatela nella quale chi segue resta imbrigliato senza comprendere bene cosa stia accadendo.

Nel giro di poche ore sono assicurati mutamenti e contraddizioni. La verità non verrà mai acquisita, la post-verità prenderà il suo posto, diventando un "post", la fotografia di un momento destinato ad allungarsi e diluirsi senza fine nel tempo e nello spazio. Ho letto questo libro uscito solo qualche anno fa e mi sono reso conto che molte delle cose che dice sono già obsolete. Tutto è destinato a cambiare perchè ogni cosa è "social", vale a dire mutabile, volatile, liquida. Se e quando tutto questo cambierà non è facile a dirsi. Sopratutto difficile dire come questa "socialità" evolverà ... Chi vivrà, vedrà ...

how youth are failing at connecting with real world

Honestly, I don’t know why I’m even writing this. As someone born after 1980, I’m scarcely qualified to breathe on my own.

This, at least, is the case according to Mark Bauerlein, author of “The Dumbest Generation.” That’s not the full name of the book, but I got bored 15 percent of the way through (seriously, 20 words in the title). Apparently, we’re the dullest things since the bread-slicers they used to make sliced bread after the first hundred loaves or so.

(Don’t worry, I had someone much older write that joke for me.) Naturally, as a card-carrying member of the targeted generation I feel somewhat compelled to defend it. Unfortunately, there are two problems with me doing so. First, any argument I make will automatically be viewed as biased. Second, as a complete incompetent, who’s going to trust my interpretation of facts?

I will say that Bauerlein’s statistics seem somewhat … selective. As many people do when they try to assert positions that are difficult (if not impossible) to prove, he tries to drown the reader in numbers. Using the National Assessment of Educational Progress test, he cites from a variety of different versions and decades.
To wit: he mentions the 2005 science exam has scores three points lower than 1996, with an average score of 147. Then he mentions twelfth-graders haven’t improved upon their scores even though the number of them taking calculus tripled from 1978 to 1994.

Of course, these numbers mean almost nothing. The science exam scores dropped literally two percent in nine years, and the “shocking” truth is that math scores have stayed exactly the same.

Hardly a harbinger of hare-brains.

This is not a wholesale discounting of his claims. Lord knows there are plenty of stupid young people, many of whom attend WSU. I’ve edited enough columns, research papers and hate-filled e-mails (sent to me, not by me) to unequivocally state that. Indeed, he makes some good points regarding how utterly our educational system fails some students.

The problem stems from Bauerlein’s dichotomous approach – either this generation is smarter than the previous ones, or dumber. There isn’t any middle ground. If his argument was that our educational system needs to be reformed, I’m all for it. If he’s arguing that we need to have higher minimum standards, I’m in.

But that’s not what he’s saying. I suspect Bauerlein may be a bit of an old fogey. He doesn’t restrict himself solely to questioning the intelligence of the youth, but also harps on entertainment choices and cultural aesthetics. In the first chapter, he says the youth “refuse the cultural and civil inheritance” that created America. In his eyes, we’ve swapped intellectual possessions for material ones and trade in “pop styles and techno skills.” Bauerlein’s trouble with digesting a new society is his rigid approach to what “knowledge” is. Yes, there are a depressing number of teenagers out there who don’t know what the three branches of government are (chocolate, vanilla and strawberry) or who could recite the names of the Supreme Court Justices (John, Paul, Ringo and Diana Ross).

But in addition to an increasingly specialized approach to knowledge, the resources available to people are far greater than ever before. I can’t really picture the situation that would arise where an instant command of the Monroe Doctrine is required (save for policy analysts or history professors), but if you could call up a complete dissection of it within 10 seconds on Wikipedia, how is that any different than remembering it?

Detailed and nuanced analysis would be impossible to concoct in such a situation, but how often are you called upon to create one in 10 seconds? Lengthy explorations of topics often require lengthy amounts of research to prepare. Whether you’re recalling information on the computer or out of your brain, isn’t the important part that you know how to do so?

Frankly, I don’t really have a preference between the physician who knows how to research across the entire spectrum of medical knowledge or the old country doctor who relies on his accumulated wisdom. If anything, I’d lean toward the former’s breadth rather than the latter’s experience, but both are simply different kinds of knowledge.

In an age where adaptability and resourcefulness are valued far above rote memorization, it’s difficult to fathom preferring to stick with old models of knowledge that have no relevance.

But then, what do I know?

Has some excellent background, grounded in research, in the front half of the book. Particularly interesting is the change in reading habits of teens through college students and the implications on education.

This definitive work on the perils and promise of the social- media revolution collects writings by today's best thinkers and cultural commentators, with an all-new introduction by Bauerlein.

It's hard for me to review this book because I came at it expecting something different than what I got. I should know better than to judge based on title, but I was expecting a book dealing with economic disparity and our media culture. Instead, I got a fairly basic (to me as someone with a masters in this subject) collection of older literature focused on the different effects of media on the brain and culture. It is not uninteresting and those without much knowledge of the subject may get a lot out of it, but it wasn't for me. Also I think a great deal of it must be taken as historical context at this point. It's sad to consider things written in 2006 outdated, but that's how things are on a field like this.

Bauerlein pulls together some compelling statistics and makes some interesting observations. Anti-intellectualism in American society is a very real crisis, and he does a good but incomplete job in pointing to some of the reasons why. The issues he discusses regarding the impact of the Internet and other technologies are more thoughtfully addressed in Nicholas Carr's The Shallows: What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains. For an astute critique of the American education system, see Diane Ravitch's The Death and Life of the Great American School System.

This is a bunch of essays written about the revolution of social media.

This is an incredible compilation of essays by significant thinkers--ten
of whom, including Mark, have been guests on the Future of Education show--on the "perils and promise of the social- media revolution," and frames the important discussions about the development of our digital culture back to 1996! There are contributions by Mark Presnky, Steven Johnson, Maryanne Wolf, Jim Gee, Gary Small, Nicholas Carr, Don Tapscott, Douglas Rushkoff, Maggie Jackson, Clay Shirky, Sherry Turkle, Henry Jenkins, Cathy Davidson, John Palfry, Tim O'Reilly, Andrew Keen, and more. From the publisher's description:
“Twitter, Facebook, e-publishing, blogs, distance-learning and other social media raise some of the most divisive cultural questions of our time. Some see the technological breakthroughs we live with as hopeful and democratic new steps in education, information gathering, and human progress. But others are deeply concerned by the eroding of civility online, declining reading habits, withering attention spans, and the treacherous effects of 24/7 peer pressure on our young.
” This is an essential read for teacher librarians and you can access Steve Hargadon’s interview with the editor at Classroom 2.0 done on May 14, 2012. ---- Review by Steve Hargadon

This definitive work on the perils and promise of the social- media revolution collects writings by today's best thinkers and cultural commentators, with an all-new introduction by Bauerlein.

Twitter, Facebook, e-publishing, blogs, distance-learning and other social media raise some of the most divisive cultural questions of our time. Some see the technological breakthroughs we live with as hopeful and democratic new steps in education, information gathering, and human progress. But others are deeply concerned by the eroding of civility online, declining reading habits, withering attention spans, and the treacherous effects of 24/7 peer pressure on our young.

With The Dumbest Generation, Mark Bauerlein emerged as the foremost voice against the development of an overwhelming digital social culture. But The Digital Divide doesn't take sides. Framing the discussion so that leading voices from across the spectrum, supporters and detractors alike, have the opportunity to weigh in on the profound issues raised by the new media-from questions of reading skills and attention span, to cyber-bullying and the digital playground- Bauerlein's new book takes the debate to a higher ground.

Sure not to be a popular thesis in a world that rushes to enhance the self-esteem of American youth, the author points out that the current generation is not actually smarter than previous generations, and that many of the things that are being done in education and parenting now may threaten to dumb-down society to a dangerous level. An interesting thesis, and well written. The authoer has a very readable style.

The optimist in me sure didn't want to believe many of the clas in this book, but the realist in me did. Unfortunately for my children it provided me with reasons to continue limiting screen time and being an old fogey.

One major problem with this book is that the author immediately refutes his own claim. He isn't saying the under-30s are the "dumbest" generation, just that they aren't as brilliant as he thinks all their techno-toys should make them. So what?

It's not a great argument and reading the book is a lot more like listening to someone rant than reading to a well-constructed thesis. A lot of facts are thrown out that might support his ideas, and just as easily might not.

A wonderful bok showing clearly how the self-absorbed use of the internet causes a great dumbing down.

Despite its regrettable title, this book delivers, not only a clear definition of the problems of the igeneration, but also an insightful approach to mending the digital age's neuroses and harnessing its greatest contributions.

I am so tired of sensationalist, chicken little, sky is falling books like this.

According to the author,Mark Bauerlein, the internet is making young people ignorant about just about anything, and destroying their ability to read. As a society, we are apparently doomed.

I would be worried, but at 55 years of age I have heard it all before.

When I was a kid it was television that was turning children away from books. Before that it was crime and horror comics (remember "The Seduction of the Innocent"?). And before that it was radio.

In 1955 "Why Johnny Can't Read" was the eighth best selling non-fiction book of the year. It was a "shocking" expose of how the suburbs were failing our children, and how suburban schools were churning out kids who didn't know how to read.

That was 54 years ago, for the love of heaven.

And in spite of the claims of Bauerlein and his many predecessors more books are being printed and sold (and presumably read) than ever before.

In his book Bauerlein points out that many high school graduates today do not have the basic reading and writing skills that are needed to succeed in university and, later, in life.

That is true, and it's a concern. I am frequently stunned by the poor quality of the resumes that potential job seekers submit to my office.

But it is not, as Bauerlein wants us to believe,a new problem that has arisen since, and because of, the birth of the internet.

In my first year of university well over half of the first year students were sent to remedial reading and writing classes. That was 37 years ago, in 1972 (this review is really starting to make me feel old).

Another point that the author of The Dumbest Generation tries to make is that young people do not "read" the internet in the same way that older people read books. Instead, they quickly scan a web page and, if nothing catches their interest, move on. They also bounce back and forth from site to site,instead of focusing on one at a time.

From this and similar data the author jumps to the conclusion that young people are losing the ability to focus and, therefore, are losing the ability to read books.

Well, I'm 55 years old and read web pages in pretty much exactly the same way that the author complains that the internet generation does. That hasn't stopped me from reading the better part of 100 books each year.

There have always been kids who love to read, and kids who hate it. My brother has probably read less than 20 novels in his life, but he still managed to obtain a degree in engineering and is extraordinarily bright.

He has three sons. They all grew up with the internet, love computer games, and text constantly.

The 17 year old is a strong reader. The 15 year old doesn't read a lot of books, but he devours the daily newspaper. And the best word to describe the 12 year old's reading habits is "voracious". He always has his nose in a book.

My clerk's 8 year old daughter also loves to read. Her birthday is approaching, and she gave her parents a list of 10 books that she wants.

In my job I regularly deal with a lot of young people, and my personal experience after 30 years is that they are no different today than they were when I started. Most are great, some are rotten. Some are brilliant, most are bright, and some are "intellectually challenged".

The Dumbest Generation is yet another book that relies on scare tactics and slanted research to rack up sales and make money for the author. I never felt that Bauerlein actually believed what he was writing- he's just out to make a fast buck.

He is, by the way, a professor who is paid to teach the dumbest generation. Must be a real joy to be one of his students

Although Bauerlein spends a lot of ink (bits) in attack mode, he gives plenty of evidence to support his claim and his title.

The dumbing-down of America continues at an astounding pace and an Emory University English professor believes that he knows why it is happening. Mark Bauerlein has written a book that will likely irritate as many people as there will be people who will praise it for its insights, starting with the very title of the book: The Dumbest Generation – How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future. Labeling any generation “the dumbest generation” is guaranteed to draw the wrath of most of those falling into that age group. Unfortunately for them, Bauerlein builds a strong case that the title of his book is entirely accurate.

But make no mistake. Bauerlein is not calling this generation stupid; he is saying that their ignorance is largely the result of the technology they have grown up with, technology that keeps them tied to their peers practically 24 hours a day, thus ensuring that they can completely insulate themselves from the rest of the world and whatever responsibilities and challenges they might be asked to face. Their worlds are so local and so superficial that they can completely cut off circumstances beyond their immediate circle of friends. If the subject does not involve “friends, work, clothes, cars, pop music, sitcoms (and) Facebook,” they are not much interested.

According to Bauerlein, and the numerous studies he cites throughout The Dumbest Generation, the main culprit in this sad story is the computer, the very tool that was supposed to give this generation an advantage over all that preceded it. But instead of using computers and the internet to their advantage, members of “the dumbest generation” have turned them into little more than combination telephone/television contraptions through which they can seamlessly socialize with their friends and peers.

A related problem is that these young people have grown up in a “disposable society,” one in which it is cheaper, easier, and much more fun to replace broken consumer items with new ones than it is to repair the old ones. It has become the norm for Americans to throw out old consumer electronics items and the like because, frankly, it is cheaper to buy new ones than to get the old ones repaired. Unfortunately, in the “cut and paste” society in which these young people live, knowledge has become just as disposable as any consumer electronic product. Students have convinced themselves that there is no point to retaining knowledge on any subject because that information can be found on the internet within seconds when, and if, they need it. So they “cut and paste” the information they need, often from dubious internet sources, and make almost no effort to retain any of it. Why bother, they think, when I know where to find it if I ever need it again?

Bauerlein builds a strong case that the failure of this generation to assimilate the history and culture of the society in which it lives is a dangerous thing, a breakdown that threatens the democratic system under which this country has thrived for more than two centuries. These young people, as a whole, do not read books; they do not study history, foreign affairs, civics, the arts or much else. If it happened before 1990, they are not interested. Bauerlein wonders where the next generation of “strong military leaders and wise political leaders, dedicated journalists and demanding teachers, judges and muckrakers, scholars and critics and artists” will come from and he hopes that his book will finally open the eyes of teachers, parents and reporters in time to save this generation – and our country’s future.

Of course there are exceptional members of “the dumbest generation,” young people who are as determined to learn and prosper as any who preceded. But they seem to be as much the exception as they are exceptional, and that is scary.

As Bauerlein puts it, “The youth of America occupy a point in history like every other generation did and will, and their time will end. But the effects of their habits will outlast them, and if things do not change they will be remembered as the fortunate ones who were unworthy of the privileges they inherited. They may even be recalled as the generation that lost that great American heritage, forever.”

Agree with it or not, this book will make you think. It might irritate you or it might upset you, largely depending on which generation you are a member of, I suspect. Read it with an open mind and decide for yourself.

Rated at: 4.0½

Interesting and eye-opening but it rambles on with many details. It took the author so long to make his point.

The author concludes that much of the relevancy of the internet is made moot by the dumbing down of the vocabulary used throughout. Technically, Dr Seuss exposes young people to a higher challenge by way of the vocabulary than popular media like TV, movies and even worse, the internet. If they don't get the challenge early on, they're not likely to get up to speed later either.

Excerpt: "And so, just as we evaluate schools and teachers every year, we should appraise the verbal media in private zones too. Which consumptions build vocabulary most effectively? Print far exceeds live and televised speech, even to the point that a book by Dr Seuss falls only slightly beneath the conversation of intelligent adults on the rare-word-per-thousand scale. A child who reads children's books encounters 50 per cent more rare words than a child who watches children's shows - a massive discrepancy as the years pass. Much of the preparation work needed for academic achievement takes place not on school grounds but in informal settings. This is why it's irresponsible for votaries of screen media to make intelligence-creating claims."

non-fiction, popular