An Analysis Of The Dumbest Generation English Language Essay

An Analysis Of The Dumbest Generation English Language Essay The Dumbest Generation, How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Dont Trust Anyone Under 30) is a critical analysis on the effects of the prolific spread of information and communication technology on the youth of today. In it, Mark Bauerlein argues that while this technology could have been used to increase access to knowledge and therefore improve the minds of children, it has only been used to distract them from useful knowledge and skills which he strongly implies, although rarely explicitly states, only currently come from books and exposure to art. The book at its core is a research paper, using hundreds of facts and an eight page bibliography to support his thesis, and free from having to defend his beliefs on a philosophical level, Bauerlein spends much of his paper explaining his many cited statistics and presenting his conclusion about what would happen if the trend was allowed to continue. Besides the obvious and repeatedly stated concl usion that an unchecked spread of technology would cause a completely ignorant generation, Bauerlein concludes his paper with an explanation of how an informed society is necessary to uphold a democratic government. Hidden more subtly throughout the book is the hidden message that technologys isolation of its users from the outside world and contact with the kinds of people we might not enjoy being around causes the psychological maturing process to slow, rendering a generation raised in the digital era perpetual children. Although his book is intended to be read by a wide range of audiences, Bauerleins target audience is the adults of today, or more specifically, the educators of today. His solution, placed in the final chapter of the book, where he was no doubt aware that only those with a personal stake or a love of knowledge would reach before putting it down, is to encourage children to read and learn for their own edification. He mentions several counter arguments to his, but doesnt refute their logic as much as drown them in empirical data showing that they have little to nothing backing them up. Through this book Mark Bauerlein jumped into a national debate already brought up by another similar book, The Age of American Unreason, by Susan Jacoby. But who is Mark Bauerlein? His most obvious feature is being a professor of English at Emory University, as stated in his web page at Emory Universitys official website and on the cover of his book. Also according to the same sources, he took a break for a couple of years to be a Director of Research and Analysis at the National Endowment for the Arts, showing that he does have experience in both gathering and interpreting the data with which he generously fills his book. His own personal website reveals that he is a fairly prolific writer himself, from such topics as racism and literary criticism itself, but for the most part Bauerlein writes about the humanities. While this information would obviously lead to Bauerlein having a personal stake in the state of American literacy, it does not really offer any evidence of bias either way for whether or not there actually is a literacy deficiency. Bauerlein uses his credentials well, relying only on his own credibility to properly evalua te data and to extrapolate the results, allowing the actual risk of misinformation to lie with his sources. For the most part, his information consists of surveys of participation in certain activities and tests of academic skill, primarily the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is a program run by a subdivision of the U.S. Department of Education (Bauerlein 14-5). Where Bauerlein seems to falter in his credibility is in trying to avoid sounding reactionary or out of touch, discussing the information revolution as a form of Youth Rebellion (Bauerlein 178), making sweeping comments such as Young people have too much choice (Bauerlein 156), and showing disdain for the design of websites conforming to the whims of their readers, whose compositions include large bold headlines intended to grab audiences and putting the broad, useful information first to keep the reader paying attention, while completely ignoring the existence of these tactics in newspapers and within his own book. However, one can understand why the condescension was included. A moderate book doesnt sell, and an English Professor knows this better than anyone. But despite some issues regarding his relationship to the subject, the book does successfully display the flaws of the so called dumbest generation, and it certainly accomplishes its retroactively stated goal, to open up the issue to some sober skepticism, to blunt the techno-zeal spreading through classrooms and libraries (Bauerlein vii), found in the preface of the paperback edition. The purpose of the book is plain, and stated in its title, sub title, and sub-sub title. Bauerlein uses statistics and logic to show that the current generation of children will be incapable adults in order to convince parents and educators to encourage the children to read books, learn history, experience liberal arts. Like any good research paper, Bauerlein begins his exploration of the effects of technology with a moving introduction. In it, he sympathizes with the struggles facing the ambitious youth, who have to tirelessly fight to be the best out of millions just to progress to the next step in their lives. However, near the end he suddenly shifts to his own images about the average American student, which are quite grim. The introductions lack of relevance to the main subject was most likely added to pull in someone who would naturally expected the opposite of what is depicted in the first part of the intro based on the title. Also, by conceding the efforts and hardships of the young academics, he does not alienate them, in a way separating those potential readers from the sweeping accusations made later in the book. The pleasantries aside, Bauerlein dives into the fray with his mountains of data, citing over one hundred statistics in the first chapter. He uses several kinds of statistics; so me to show that children do not pass subject material exams, some to show that a large amount of children do not know a specific fact that one is normally expected to know, and some to show that other factors one might consider for causes of a lower average intelligence such as school time (Bauerlein 30), finance (Bauerlein 31), and leisure time (Bauerlein 32) have only become less restrictive over time. After having thoroughly proven that todays students dont know what they should, he moves on into the next chapter to discuss why this is. Bauerlein simply says that children dont choose to learn enough. His weapon of choice now is the survey of students in which he shows that children do not read literature or participate in the arts. The main survey he brings up is a report from National Endowment for the Arts, Reading at Risk, in which Bauerlein show that the reading of any kind of literature is declining, and especially so in children. However, the survey asked about voluntary reading, not reading required for work or school (Bauerlein 45) and despite assertions that to be considered a reader one merely had to read any work of any quality of any medium-book, newspaper, magazine, blog, Web page, or music CD insert (Bauerlein 47), it is unlikely that most of the people who said that they did not read were aware of or understood this qualification, and in all likelihood disregarded a ny reading they did do as sufficient. Bauerlein goes on to give several examples of the positive effects of a zeal for reading such as Frederick Douglass and Walt Whitman, which serve more to emotionally touch the reader rather than to logically prove his point, as the last section did. Back to the facts, Bauerlein sends out scores of numbers indicating that the youth of today spend a disproportionate amount of time on screen technology. However, instead of merely analyzing the data, he takes the time to bring up counterarguments. He shows how other authors such as Steven Berlin Johnson have explored the special social and thinking patterns that could only occur in a world of instant communication and interactive digital worlds in such books as Everything Bad is Good for You, and doesnt actually protest their reasoning, and even gives us his own visions of an ideal world where the technology created a vibrant massive community seeking knowledge and obtaining true enlightenment. And then Bauerlein caps it off with an answer to the rhetorical question Why, then, should bibliophiles and traditionalists carp so much? with the short maxim, Because that glorious creation of youth intelligence hasnt materialized (Bauerlein 107). He shifts once again to his statistics, now not only showing poor scholastic performance but poor job performance as well, painting a new picture of a generation of perpetual children who know little and know nothing practical. Not only do the digital medias have less complex vocabulary (Bauerlein 128-9), but they foster peer absorption (Bauerlein 133) and poor attention spans (Bauerlein 148). He describes the newest batch of young adults as twixters (Bauerlein 160) who despite financial stability, technology, and readily available education, do not settle down and wander through life fairly aimlessly. The solution, according to Bauerlein, is for the educators of America to rise up and promote reading and arts instead of technology alone, which has been shown to be ineffective by itself to promote learning and knowledge. In the final chapter, Bauerlein compares an ignorant adults that the ignorant children would become to Rip Van Winkle (Bauerlein 204-9), knowing nothing that they need to in a world that suddenly demands their attention and participation, and unaware of how to feel about the issues surrounding them. Bauerlein closes with a conclusion that if uncorrected, the trend of an unintelligent youth would undermine democratic society, and that only by reintegrating tradition into learning could we save society from the sovereignty of youth. (Bauerlein 223) brought about by a freedom from material that challenges what they think. The overall structure of the book is designed for a broad range of readers. An interesting introduction pulls in readers of all sorts, and then a series of facts puts the issue of childhood ignorance freshly onto the minds of concerned adults. Specific proof of his claim trails this to counter those who doubt the validity of his claim, followed by acknowledgement and rebuttal of claims to appease those more enlightened on the subject, and he finishes the book with a powerful, almost alarmist message that exploits the fears of a society of idiots and their patriotism to swing to his side his colleagues, students, and critics. Of course, Bauerlein is certainly not the first to comment on the rising ignorance among todays young adults. Just three months before The Dumbest Generation was published, The Age of American Unreason, a book by Susan Jacoby, hit the shelves with a similar conclusion, that the digital age has caused the current youth to become self absorbed and ignore what goes on around them; Bauerlein mentions it in passing. For long years it has been suspected that digital technology would not improve education. In an essay by Michael Schrage from 1997, aptly named Computers Will Not Transform Education, shows doubt about the young internets ability to revolutionize education, and points out that neither the radio nor the television had a great impact on student performance. This sentiment was also expressed in another essay that year, Computers Cannot Replace Good Teachers, by Clifford Stoll, who makes the calm assertion that most learning isnt fun. Learning takes work. Discipline. Responsibilit y-You have to do your homework. Both of the predictions of a high amount of spending on technology by education and an insignificant change in performance are evident in The Dumbest Generation. However, Bauerleins presentation of poor performance seems to contradict the Flynn effect, the rise of IQ over time, but instead of contesting it, he lets it sit, and in some ways appears to ignore the elephant in the room when discussing the relevancy of new visual learning techniques, relying nearly entirely on test performance. However, not all of the data works in favor of Bauerlein. According to The Nations Report Card, the official web site for the National Assessment of Educational Progress, Mathematics scores for 9- and 13- year-olds are higher than all previous assessment years and that Reading skills at all three ages improve since 2004. Furthermore, according to the charts on the long-term trend section of the web site, average scores overall have increased gradually but constantly since the first test in 1978. So while Bauerlein may be correct that the number of students who pass the test may be decreasing, this is mainly due to the level of competence being raised faster than the children are getting better, a much less frightening scenario. In fact, On both the reading and the math tests, and at all three tested ages (9, 13 and 17), the lowest-ever scores in the history of the NAEP were recorded by children born between 1961 and 1965 (Neil Howe). However, the raw score increase has not gotten any faster in thirty years, the increase is most likely due to increased incomes, higher teacher to student ratios, better health, and many of the other improvements that Bauerlein points out rather than technology, which would have shown higher improvement in recent years, when the information revolution started. Of course, all of this is only relevant if you put your faith into NAEP tests, which according to Jim Hull of The Center for Public Education in The proficiency debate: A guide to NAEP achievement levels, you cant. Hull shows that NAEP standards for proficiency in a subject are higher than nearly all of the state regulated proficiency tests, and the tested material often widely differs from state curriculum. One of Bauerleins main sources is Reading at Risk, a report explaining the results of a 2002 survey of reading habits by the National Endowment for the Arts, which he states indicates decreased reading in all age groups and a large decline in young readers. However, the 2008 results were released in January 2009, as a sort of sequel titled Reading on the Rise, which bared the unexpected news that the percentage of literary readers had actually gone up, and even more astoundingly, Literary reading has increased most rapidly among the youngest adults. This isnt just contradictory to the trend of 1992 to 2002, from which Bauerlein draws proof of a non reading public; it completely turns it upside down. And while the report was published eight months after The Dumbest Generation, the survey itself was taking place as Bauerlein was finishing his book, and that the miraculous return to literature had begun and reading rates were rising as Bauerlein was writing about how the reading rates w ere falling, and he didnt notice the complete reversal happening right under his nose, or chose to ignore it. Most people who picked up The Dumbest Generation were probably expecting a lot of expanded logic and presumptuous reasoning like what makes up the counter arguments to this book such as Everything Bad is Good For You, which do not have much true evidence. I was personally delighted to find that Mark Bauerlein had taken the time to find not just adequate data, but a tremendous amount of information. For the most part, his logic is sound; however, his main struck a bad chord. Because technology has increased while the intellectual performance of the newest generation has gone down, technology must be causing the newest generation to be the dumbest. Post hoc ergo proptor hoc. While he briefly explains why several other possible causes for lower test scores havent happened, he doesnt ever find a factual link between technology and the change in scores other than the times in which both occur. As far as books and technology, print reading would naturally decrease as web usage went up, sim ply due to the limits of time. In fact, Bauerlein doesnt have any proof of high literary reading from before twenty years ago; we are simply expected to believe that those before us spent all of their free time reading. What Bauerlein fails to address is the fact that social networking is not the result of technology on reading, but the effect of technology on actual, face-to-face social interaction. Ill jump to agree with the assertion that a decrease in performance could be based on the ability to choose not to succeed, but it is society, not technology, that facilitated this shift. The children of today arent expected to read literature much, and dont gain anything concrete from it, so most of them dont and I would expect it. Am I supposed to believe that the students of yore read The Divine Comedy for fun? They didnt, and for the most part, people read only what they like to read or what they have to read. And when children dont have to read much, they mostly read whats fun, eac h other, and other frivolities like video games. In The Dumbest Generation: How the Digital Age Stupefies Young Americans and Jeopardizes Our Future (Or, Dont Trust Anyone Under 30, Mark Bauerlein uses out of context information to convince readers that our advancements have made my generation the dumbest, when really it is simply not expected to do more, and its opinion is valued as important as the instructors. Indeed, with discipline, technology can be and already is used for incredible feats in learning. Without the photocopier, the online databases paid for by my school, and the internet, I would know nothing more on this subject than what is in this book. If more was expected of students, both student knowledge and beneficial use of technology would rise, to the point where English professors like Mark Bauerlein would stop separating published content into the categories of print and web. And quite frankly, Im insulted he used the title The Dumbest Generation when a title more fitting to his thesis would be The Laziest Generation. An alarmist book, The Dumbest Generation was written to sell a malformed idea that an English professor had a lot of published work already invested in, and was written to sell a lot of books. In both of these he succeeded.

American History-Civil Rights

During the years 1939 to 1953 the United States armed forces changed a policy of restricting and segregating the Negro into one that had equal opportunity and integration. This revolution took a great deal of time and struggle. Throughout American history the blacks in America considered their military service in the nation's conflicts as proof of their loyalty and as a brief for their claim to full citizenship. At the same time white Americans appear to have realized this, and they always sought to restrict or reduce the black soldier's military service.The national armed forces always were the most integrated major segment of American life. Therefore, the desegregation of the United States Armed Forces has become truly a social revolution in American history. The extent of the desegregation of the United States Armed Forces was discussed several years ago and remains actual among historians to this day. The purpose of this study is to describe and evaluate the debate among historia ns concerning the desegregation of the United States Armed Forces and the Negro's reaction to this policy. In reaching this goal, the paper will also shed some light on American race relations during these years.With the World War II crisis of 1939-1945, the questions of restriction, discrimination, and segregation in the United States armed forces became one of two major problems for black Americans. Employment discrimination was also important, and this subject has been examined by historians. Although employment discrimination was the chief everyday issue for Negroes in World War II, discrimination and segregation in the United States armed forces was the more emotionally charged issue. Most historians claim that a black â€Å"revolution† or â€Å"revolt† occurred in 1954, 1955, 1960, or 1963.Silberman (1964) writes that segregation was necessary to stop bloody racial conflict and a reduction of the armed services' potency. Silberman is one of the spiciest critics o f American race relations. In his book Crisis in Black and White, he reminded Americans that the United States â€Å"is a racist society in a sense and to a degree that we have refused so far to admit, much less face† (9-10). In 1950, members of the Court obtained evidence from the President's Committee on Equality of Treatment and Opportunity in the Armed Services prior to some important decisions that pointed toward a reversal of the separate but equal position.In 1954, before the important decision on desegregation, members of the Court read in manuscript form journalist Lee Nichols' Breakthrough on the Color Front (1954), the first book-length account of military integration. Usually North Carolinians – at least most white North Carolinians – tend to look back at the years 1939 to 1953 and their adjustment to changing times with pride. But historians reporting progress in the South seldom give North Carolina high marks.Writer Roland (1984) in his book on the South since World War II writes with considerable disappointment because the southern state with the best race relations prior to the Brown decision failed to lead the region in the integration of blacks into society after 1954. In his study of southern governors and desegregation, Horton (1960) expresses a similar disappointment. The writer observes that North Carolina escaped much of the demagoguery characteristic of several neighboring states because Tar Heel governors tried to keep the peace and found local solutions to racial problems.On a contradictory note, however, Silberman (1964) calls the Patriots of North Carolina as a â€Å"sedate version† of the Citizens Council and attributes to the Patriots and their successors, the North Carolina Defenders of States' Rights, the names of some of the â€Å"most respected men of North Carolina† (14). From the beginning of a military tradition in America, black manpower has been used for military aims. Most of historians (Benjamin Quarles, The Negro in the American Revolution; Dudley Taylor Cornish , The Sable Arm: Negro Troops in the Union Army, 1861-1865; Robert J.Dwyer, † The Negro in the United States Army: His Changing Role and Status,† Sociology and Social Research; L. D. Reddick, † The Negro Policy of the United States Army, 1775-1945,† Journal of Negro History) who have investigated the problem have noticed a desire on the part of white Americans to limit the participation of the blacks in military affairs until an emergency or crisis develops. Then black manpower was utilized as a military necessity. Quarles notices that this pattern was established in the colonial militia.Each colony followed this policy that excluded Negroes as soldiers. Dwyer writes when emergencies such as Indian threats emerged and there was urgent need for manpower, however, most colonies saw fit to overlook these exclusion laws and volunteered Negroes (19). When the Continental Army was creat ed at the beginning of the American Revolution, the black soldiers were excluded. Once more, when white volunteers became harder to find, this policy was changed, and about five thousand Negroes served with the American revolutionary arms.In The New York Times, Hinton observes that there occurred important changes by the end of World War II that made it more difficult to maintain the racial status quo in America. The ballots of American Negroes had become a powerful political force. The belligerent spirit that matured during the war made Negroes shure to fight segregation wherever it stood in the way of full citizenship. The United States became the leader of the non-Communist world. The race problem was a weakness in its Cold War attempts to influence the emerging nations.A new President took office in the centre of the changing situation. He realized that the status quo in American society relations had to give way to a new race order. Unlike his forerunner, this President would h ave found it difficult to take a passive stand on Negro rights even if he had wanted to do so. The race problems in civilian life reached a new peak with the end of war. This was especially true in the South where there was fear that the status quo in race relations would be further upset by the many returning Negro veterans.In Freedom and Equality: Addresses by Harry S Truman Horton (1960) writes about racial violence and revival of riots in this period. Many people believed that a wave of race riots would begin with a new force in the country as they had after World War I. Among those people who remembered the riots after World War I and who was afraid that they would be repeated was President Harry Truman. Two particularly violent attacks induced President Truman to some significant action in order to protect civil rights. Horton (1960) gives examples of cruelty.For instance, in February, 1946, Isaac Woodard, a newly discharged veteran still in uniform, was blinded when South Car olina policemen pulled him off a bus and jabbed their night sticks into his eyes. In July, 1946, two Negro veterans and their wives were taken from a car near Monroe, Georgia, by a mob of white men. The four Negroes were lined up and killed by approximately sixty shots pumped into their bodies (12). To stop this kind of violence President Truman created the President's Committee on Civil Rights on December 6, 1946.The purpose was to examine the nebulous authority of the Federal Government in the civil rights area and to recommend appropriate legislation. Horton (1960) considers the beliefs on civil rights of this man from Missouri with a Southern heritage. He quotes Truman, â€Å"I was raised amidst some violently prejudiced Southerners myself†. Perhaps Truman reflected his own transformation on this matter when he stated his belief that â€Å"the vast majority of good southerners understand that the blind prejudices of past generations cannot continue in a free republic.â⠂¬  Horton says that it is clear that Truman had support from Negro voters as early as 1926. He inherited black support from the Pendergast machine of Kansas City, and he managed to maintain this support throughout his career as a senator (34). At President Truman's first news conference a Negro one reporter asked him a question – what stand he would take on civil rights matters. Truman replied: â€Å"I will give you some advice. All you need to do is to read the Senate record of one Harry S Truman† (Public Papers of the Presidents).As a candidate for the Vice-Presidency in 1944 Truman had also directed interested persons to his Senate record. Surely he was proud of his position on civil rights. â€Å"Without exception,† one student of Truman's Senate record has concluded, :Senator Truman acted to provide greater protection for minorities and to afford equal treatment under the law† (Horton 14). Truman continually supported antilynching bills. He also sig ned petitions for cloture and voted for the amendments to the Selective Service Act of 1940 intended to stop discrimination.

Cultural and Ethnic Diversity Essay

The different beliefs, characteristics and looks of different ethnicities give more diversities in a place. The differences in cultures create color in every region. It allows people to understand each other and respect each other’s differences and beliefs. On the other hand, these differences are emphasized too much that instead of being the key to a harmonious living, leads to gaps, differences and even fights (Singelis 4). In a certain region, diversity is inevitable especially in a place like the United States. The United States is the melting pot of many cultures. Over the years, the country has become the destination of people from all over the world to achieve their dream. It seems that each state has its own taste of a different culture. Aside from that, immigrants have slowly settled in the country making it much more diversified. You wouldn’t be surprised that there is a little China Town in every state. There is also a growing number of Muslims in the country. This is a good sign for us as it shows that the war does not hinder our Muslims brothers to reside in our country. They are also given the freedom to stay here whenever they want. Other nationalities such as Filipinos, Indians, Japanese and Koreans have chosen to stay in the Land of the Dreamers. The Americans are known for their quest in reaching our dreams. And that is probably one of their best attributes. It is also probably one of the reasons why a lot of people choose to settle here. They too think that they will reach their dreams by going to America. Despite the diversity that has evolved in our culture, there is still this distinct American taste that is present is the American culture. This distinction in each culture paves way for people to know each other. (Singelis 152) Each culture, ethnicity is proud of its heritage. American families, for example, are very particular in implementing the American culture. American parents taught their children to love their country and have pride that we are Americans. This is, after all, the Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave. Our families teach us to be good Americans by passing on the value of citizenship, American holiday celebrations and traditions, leadership, entrepreneurship, competition and positive attitude. On the other hand, each culture is like that. The media plays a huge role in exposing the differences in each culture. Movies, documentaries all feature distinct qualities of each culture. These differences are somehow exposed in wrong way. Most of the time, cultures are perceived based from what people hear about them. I really think that the differences in cultures and ethnicities are given too much emphasis without being aware of it. In effect, this led to conflicts and gaps between cultures. It is a sad fact that instead of being united especially in these times of crisis, we are still separated by our personal beliefs. The media would be a really good help in promoting unity. It would help if similarities are focused and if people will be taught to respect one another’s beliefs too. A good example of this would be the movie Gran Torino. The movie is about an American old guy who lives near a bunch of Hmong people. Hmongs are people from China, Laos, Vietnam and Thailand who came to the United States to find their fortune. They decided to live altogether in one neighbor so that they too can perform their traditions and gather often. The American guy and some of the Hong’s turned out to be true friends and depended on each other. It was good to see the culture of the Hmongs in the movie. It was an eye-opener to many of those who have watched it. The only similarity between the American and the Hmongs was that they both wanted to live peacefully. It happened when they got to know each other and respected their own beliefs (The Gran Torino 1). Movies like Gran Torino should be featured more often. I think it is a good thing to showcase the different distinction of each culture especially the minorities. These minorities deserve their recognition from the world. Maybe with given much time, people should get to know the history, beliefs and traditions of the many cultures and ethnicities especially if they are just in the neighborhood. It is good to know that we are uniting for the sake of living peacefully and harmoniously. Work Cited Singelis, Theodore. Teaching about Culture, Ethnicity and Diversity: Exercise and Planned Activities. California: SAGE Publishing, 1998. â€Å"The Gran Torino. † 2008. Retrieved 20 February 2009 .

Spooky Dry Ice Fog Halloween Jack-o-Lantern

You can make spooky fog come out of your Halloween jack-o-lantern using a little dry ice. Heres how you do it plus a trick for getting the best effect. Spooky Jack-o-Lantern Materials Basically, all you need is a carved jack-o-lantern, dry ice, a container, and water. Warm water is more effective than cool or room temperature water. PumpkinTall cup or glassDry iceWater Lets Get Started! Okay, first you need to cut around the top of the pumpkin so you can scoop out the seeds and other pumpkin guts. If you are rushed for time, you can skip this step, but its easier to carve a clean pumpkin.Carve a face or design into the pumpkin. Keep in mind, carbon dioxide fog sinks, so more fog will flow out of the mouth of your jack-o-lantern than through its eyes. If you make the mouth relatively small, you usually can get fog to flow through the nose and eyes pretty well.When you are ready for the display, set a tall container full of water inside the jack-o-lantern. Try to find a can or glass that is taller than the eyes of your jack-o-lantern, since that is the trick for getting fog to flow through the whole carving.Drop a piece of dry ice into the water. Replace the top of the pumpkin. You want the lid to fit tightly so there wont be air currents dissipating the fog.You can add more dry ice over time.