Saturday, March 24, 2012

College Students are Bad at Google

Read an interesting article at Mashable on students and google: http://mashable.com/2011/08/22/the-google-gap-college-kids-arent-good-at-searching-study/

It also links back to this article: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2011/08/22/erial_study_of_student_research_habits_at_illinois_university_libraries_reveals_alarmingly_poor_information_literacy_and_skills

“It wasn’t so much that students were inefficient in their use of Google, but rather that students are often ill-equipped to sufficiently evaluate or refine the results that are returned,” says Andrew Asher, an anthropologist at Bucknell University and one of the project leads. “…I don’t think this is a problem limited to students.”

“They were basically clueless about the logic underlying how the search engine organizes and displays its results,” adds an article on the study by Inside Higher Ed. “Consequently, the students did not know how to build a search that would return good sources. (For instance, limiting a search to news articles, or querying specific databases such as Google Book Search or Google Scholar.)”

Just want to say that I deal with this every day. For being the children supposedly born ready to use technology, my current students are awful at researching, word processing, and file management in general. They are also the first generation to have gone from beginning to finish in the No Child Left Behind program.

These kids can't think critically and have been spoon fed information for tests and from basic search queries their whole lives. They need to be asked much more often to read in context and question the validity of what they read about.

Of course, this is only one study... but I have a confirmation bias because the majority of my students have this issue.

Democracy is worthless with an uninformed public.


Thursday, March 22, 2012

Second thoughts on online collaboration

I have been reading a book called "Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking". The book deals with the fact that one third to one half of all of us are introverts, and yet we live in a culture that is increasingly favorable to extroverts. Our schools and businesses are built to favor and to create extroverted people. Our celebrities are gregarious people, etc etc.

One of the ideas in the book I found relevant to this course was a chapter on "New Groupthink", which was a concept that started as internet collaboration became easier. Business executives saw how open source coding (when the DNA of a computer program is shared so all can edit and build on it) improved creativity and productivity. It was thought by businesses (and eventually schools) that the best things happen in group work. The problem is that the exact opposite is true.

"Since then, some forty years of research has reached the same startling conclusion. Studies have shown that performance gets worse as group size increases: groups of nine generate fewer and poorer ideas compared to groups of six, which do worse than groups of four. The “evidence from science suggests that business people must be insane to use brainstorming groups,” writes the organizational psychologist Adrian Furnham. “If you have talented and motivated people, they should be encouraged to work alone when creativity or efficiency is the highest priority.”
The one exception to this is online brainstorming. Groups brainstorming electronically, when properly managed, not only do better than individuals, research shows; the larger the group, the better it performs. The same is true of academic research—professors who work together electronically, from different physical locations, tend to produce research that is more influential than those either working alone or collaborating face-to-face.

Page(s): 110-110, Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking by Susan Cain
NOOKstudy (Matthew Pietrucha, truedatkey@gmail.com). This material is protected by copyright.
---------------

So perhaps our group project wouldn't have turned out any better (or perhaps worse) if we had collaborated in person. Personally, I have always hated group work. But I enjoy working online.

Susan Cain may have a point for more online work and less face-to-face group work.

Monday, March 5, 2012

Bjork's Biophelia Apps: The future of music and education?

Bjork released just last year a suite of apps corresponding to each track of her new album, Biophelia. The album tries to unify and plain clear the interactions of nature, music, and technology. Each app allows the user to interact with the music and the ideas in the subject matter of the song. For instance, the song "Virus" involves the user having to submit or be taken over by the virus DNA to complete the song. "Moon" features an elliptical based generative music sequencer that also has MIDI-out. This allows users to use the application to control other electronic instruments.

Bjork has commented in interviews that this project for her served to satisfy "the frustrated music teacher" inside of her. Bjork studied music at a school in Iceland for ten years.

Biophelia will appear as part of an education program touring major cities along with Bjork's live performances of the album. The applications, used on iPads, will be used to teach younger students about nature, music, and technology in an integrated little package that is fun and creative.

Is this the future of music (and other subject area) education? It's a bit simplistic to argue about, but I believe the approach of integrating multiple subjects into a fun and intuitive medium is a large step in the right direction. Why can't we learn music through history? Or learn music through science? Or learn art through phys ed? We don't teach subject areas in the grand scheme of things anyways -- we teach disciplines.

The apps are about $2 a piece, or $10 for the entire suite.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dikvJM__zA4