Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Awesome video, though I wouldn't give up today's technology.

http://sftimes.co/?id=216&src=share_fb_new_216

We made today's technology just to keep the younger generations from eclipsing us.

I don't feel old enough to complain about young people generally or talk about the Good Old Days.

Wall to wall club music on the radio, however, is a disappointment.

Cherry picking stuff from the past to paint a rosy picture while decrying the current age? Well this is new and interesting.

I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

My generation are for the most part terrible parents. As are the previous generation.

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

My generation are for the most part terrible parents. As are the previous generation.

Ill-prepared for life, yes, but weaker and dumber? Care to explain that?

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? Also define what you mean by ill-prepared for life considering the qualities required to get a job 30 years ago are quite different than today.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ahtman wrote:
Cherry picking stuff from the past to paint a rosy picture while decrying the current age? Well this is new and interesting.

Spoiler:

Lol agreed, the vid was pretty cringe-worthy.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? Also define what you mean by ill-prepared for life considering the qualities required to get a job 30 years ago are quite different than today.

People who go into Uni don't know how a washing machine or a dishwasher functions, taxes surprise people, you don't know what any of the umpteen different bills are for... There's so much stuff that nobody prepares you for, but you are expected to know.

I'll be honest I do find bills fairly complicated but I've never met anyone around my age who doesn't know how to work a dishwasher or washing machine but then again maybe Kamloops breeds super kids.

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

My generation are for the most part terrible parents. As are the previous generation.

Interestingly there is quite a bit of data to support that view.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? Also define what you mean by ill-prepared for life considering the qualities required to get a job 30 years ago are quite different than today.

1. Because essays are copy/paste not written.

2. Because research means type a word on Google, not go to a library and read reference books. And that isn't just a time saver, word finding functions allow data to be cherry picked rather than understood through reading appropriate chapters.

3. Because 'textwalls' exist like its' a problem. If people cant be bothered to read textwalls what will they do when they come to read chapters.

4. Because spellcheckers remove the need to learn to spell.

5. Because any search or study has built in distraction through the same media trying to educate you, when Googling your latest 'research' subject one can also YouTube some entertainment, or go on Facebook. Distracted people tend to learn less.

6. Because information provision is instant, patience is not developed. It takes time to think, more time to ponder. The go-go rush.

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

8. Because too many people txt or type in l33t.

9. Because punctuation is considered optional, especially in txt.

10. Because people communicate my mobile phone and not talk to each other.

11. Because electronic toys and media offer instant gratification they draw young people more readily. It takes time to set up a boardgame, get changed to sport clothes, pazint miniatures etc, the X Box only needs to be turned on with disk inside.


A study was done on a group of children IIRC approx aged six. They were shown into a room lined with toys , on the left wall were electronic toys, on the right wall traditional toys and games. Each child choose to play with the electronic toys, each settled with their own toy because there were enough to go around, and none spoke to each other. Later the children were ushered from the room, when they reentered the electronic toys were gone and only traditional toys remained. The children chose toys, either alone or in groups, they talked and interacted with each other as they played. Even those with a toy intended for solo play interacted with the other children while they played with their toy.

Orlanth, you forgot the apparent lessening of memory due to information always being at the fingertips and not needing to retained.

Younger people are just different to previous generations not worse (except for hipsters of course), I just wish they'd stop being so holier than thou because I never was when I was growing....yes I was

I actually worry about future generations where people aren't allowed to express themselves without being howled down by a plethora of inappropriate. I also worry about humour being around as humour by it's very nature is inappropriate. Small worries I know but they bother me.

1. Because essays are copy/paste not written,

I hope they make it through the plagiarism machines then.

2. Because research means type a word on Google, not go to a library and read reference books. And that isn't just a time saver, word finding functions allow data to be cherry picked rather than understood through reading appropriate chapters.

You know you can read books on the internet and it's kind of unnecessary to read all of The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex if only a small portion of the book is relevant to my essay topic it just makes sense to to be efficient with my time.

3. Because 'textwalls' exist like its' a problem. If people cant be bothered to read textwalls what will they do when they come to read chapters.

Very few of the university courses I attend I read the full textbook and generally I do alright.

4. Because spellcheckers remove the need to learn to spell.

Sure that's what happens with technology, it makes some skills less relevant.

5. Because any search or study has built in distraction through the same media trying to educate you, when Googling your latest 'research' subject one can also YouTube some entertainment, or go on Facebook. Distracted people tend to learn less.

You might have a point there.

6. Because information provision is instant, patience is not developed. It takes time to think, more time to ponder. The go-go rush.

You do realize even if you find info instantly it still takes time to read and understand it and is still not guaranteed to be relevant which means back to more searching.

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

World Illiteracy rates seem to be falling sorry for bringing stats into this.

8. Because too many people txt or type in l33t.

What does that have anything to do with this? Most people are able to distinguish between formal and non-formal communication and people aren't using "text-speech" because they can't spell they use it as quick communication.

9. Because punctuation is considered optional, especially in txt.

Most people aren't using "text-speech" for school work and they use it with friends and if they can understand each other I don't see what the big deal is.

10. Because people communicate my mobile phone and not talk to each other.

Yeah a lot of people use the aid of phones and the internet when they aren't in talking distance to each other how is that surprising.

11. Because electronic toys and media offer instant gratification they draw young people more readily. It takes time to set up a boardgame, get changed to sport clothes, pazint miniatures etc, the X Box only needs to be turned on with disk inside

I don't see how that makes someone dumber I guess you could say it makes someone less prepared for life as stuff like learning to drive, getting a career, takes takes a lot of time.

A study was done on a group of children IIRC approx aged six. They were shown into a room lined with toys , on the left wall were electronic toys, on the right wall traditional toys and games. Each child choose to play with the electronic toys, each settled with their own toy because there were enough to go around, and none spoke to each other. Later the children were ushered from the room, when they reentered the electronic toys were gone and only traditional toys remained. The children chose toys, either alone or in groups, they talked and interacted with each other as they played. Even those with a toy intended for solo play interacted with the other children while they played with their toy.

Yeah, it's probably not too great of an idea to be introducing too many electronic toys to a kid it's a type of stimulus that nothing else competes with.

Bullockist wrote:
Orlanth, you forgot the apparent lessening of memory due to information always being at the fingertips and not needing to retained.

.. #12 then. Good addition. I did indeed miss that one, but my answers were not intended to be an exhaustive list, but reasons to be wary of the advances of the information age pulled from the top of my head. This is nothing new, the ancient Egyptians worked through the same problems, here is a fable later recounted by Herodotus.


Pharaoh prayed to Ra the Sun God and said.
"Father Ra, I have invented the wheel."
and Ra replied
"Very good my Son. Now you will be able to build chariots and subdue all Egypts enemies."

Pharaoh went away pleased with himself, he bolstered the armies of Egypt and pondered new ways to please Ra.

Later he prayed again saying,
"Father Ra, I have invented irrigation."
and Ra replied
"Very good my Son. Now when the Nile's flood waters have ebbed you will be able to feed the people of Egypt with lush ground."

Pharaoh went away pleased with himself, Egypt proepsered and was hungry no more and Pharaoh pondered new ways to please Ra.

Later he prayed again saying,
"Father Ra, I have invented hieroglyphics."
and Ra replied
"My Son, you are a fool. Now you teach men to forget."

If this needs explaining, the problem being recognised was that literacy removed the urge to maintain the bardic tradition, presumably Egypt was one of the first cultures to suffer this loss.

Bullockist wrote:

Younger people are just different to previous generations not worse (except for hipsters of course), I just wish they'd stop being so holier than thou because I never was when I was growing....yes I was

Every young generation makes that mistake, and every generation as it gets older things it remembers what youth was like from a youthful perspective.

Bullockist wrote:

I actually worry about future generations where people aren't allowed to express themselves without being howled down by a plethora of inappropriate. I also worry about humour being around as humour by it's very nature is inappropriate. Small worries I know but they bother me.

The changes to what society feels 'appropriate' are a control mechanism, ultimately they need to be challenged, sadly the doctrines behind them if challenged lead one to be labeled. There are strong parallels between the political correct movement and the control abuse of the medieval church, complete with heretics.

Dern videos...why can't I just read an article? I always hate it when people make videos for news stories.

 dementedwombat wrote:
Dern videos...why can't I just read an article? I always hate it when people make videos for news stories.

Its not really a news story, but an opinion piece, in a way it's a politicised art video and works well in the media chosen.
Could have been written up as an article, but I think it works fine as is.

 Orlanth wrote:
1. Because essays are copy/paste not written.

Never copy/pasted an essay in my life and in fact I quite enjoy writing them assuming I give two gacks about the topic, although I can see how things could be made easier by modern technology.

2. Because research means type a word on Google, not go to a library and read reference books. And that isn't just a time saver, word finding functions allow data to be cherry picked rather than understood through reading appropriate chapters.

Agreed. Although walking through a library has a charm all its own I must say that I think this is a positive change. More ready access to information is nice, as long as you can be reasonably sure it's quality information.

3. Because 'textwalls' exist like its' a problem. If people cant be bothered to read textwalls what will they do when they come to read chapters.

See my previous post for my stance on this. 100% agree with you on this point. That's kinda sad. Although I am guilty of jumping on the audiobook train at a young age. I'd much rather have something read to me than read it myself. Doesn't mean I can't tear up a book if I want to though.

4. Because spellcheckers remove the need to learn to spell.

Being incredibly challenged in the spelling (and handwriting) arena my entire life makes me appreciate not having to look up every third word in the dictionary. Again 100% agree with this point but appreciate it and don't think it's wrong.

5. Because any search or study has built in distraction through the same media trying to educate you, when Googling your latest 'research' subject one can also YouTube some entertainment, or go on Facebook. Distracted people tend to learn less.

Agreed. I usually have some measure of self control, but I can see how this is a huge problem.

6. Because information provision is instant, patience is not developed. It takes time to think, more time to ponder. The go-go rush.

Fair. I personally like thinking sometimes and can sit around doing absolutely nothing but thinking far longer than most people I know. But again I understand how this is a problem and agree with this one.

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

How unfortunate. I still remember my 9th grade grammar class...well some of it anyway. It's always good to know how to write properly. Great first impression for professional things.

8. Because too many people txt or type in l33t.

Agreed. It's annoying.

9. Because punctuation is considered optional, especially in txt.

See above. With the caveat that there is a difference between professional writing and "lazy writing" like I'm doing here. As long as I'm about 80% understandable I will accept the time saved not to worry about formatting.

10. Because people communicate my mobile phone and not talk to each other.

Being rather unfortunately antisocial I don't really do much of either. No opinion. That said (written?), I blame that aspect of my character not on modern technology but on being an only child who was way too smart and would rather do stuff by myself because all the other kids were dumb and thought kicking a ball around was supposed to be fun

11. Because electronic toys and media offer instant gratification they draw young people more readily. It takes time to set up a boardgame, get changed to sport clothes, pazint miniatures etc, the X Box only needs to be turned on with disk inside.

I'm on this forum. I don't think my views on that subject need to be elaborated particularly much. There's a lot of value in stuff you've personally made. It's why I love 40k so much. Just building (and painting...even though I never realize it until I start) the models is as much fun as playing.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Orlanth wrote:

 dementedwombat wrote:
Dern videos...why can't I just read an article? I always hate it when people make videos for news stories.

Its not really a news story, but an opinion piece, in a way it's a politicised art video and works well in the media chosen.
Could have been written up as an article, but I think it works fine as is.

Fair. I just prefer written over videos as a way of acquiring information. Personality trait of mine. I think in words much better than pictures (internal monologue actually. Sometimes it goes not so internal and I start giving a running commentary of everything I'm thinking. That can be unfortunate at times).

And with that I'm off to the pub. I really have spent far too long reading dakka when i could be drinking and eating greasy bar food...you know, you might have a point about this "modern technology" stuff.

 Cheesecat wrote:

1. Because essays are copy/paste not written,

I hope they make it through the plagiarism machines then.

Easy to do. You just change a few words to break up the sentence structure. Plagiarism tests are just comparison searches.

2. Because research means type a word on Google, not go to a library and read reference books. And that isn't just a time saver, word finding functions allow data to be cherry picked rather than understood through reading appropriate chapters.

You know you can read books on the internet and it's kind of unnecessary to read all of The descent of man, and selection in relation to sex if only a small portion of the book is relevant to my essay topic it just makes sense to to be efficient with my time.

You definitely misunderstand that. when in a reference library you do read a secrtion of a book, like a chapter. An online search narrows down to actual sentences searched for, the relevant paragraph is copy pasted, very little reading is involved, only the paragraphs being copied, not the grounding and context of them. The time you think wasted in 'inefficiency' is actually quality research, Cant you see that it will have negative effects on learning if you fast forward through the education process?

3. Because 'textwalls' exist like its' a problem. If people cant be bothered to read textwalls what will they do when they come to read chapters.

Very few of the university courses I attend I read the full textbook and generally I do alright.

Ok, maybe you can get away with that, but if you don't read the whole book, you will likely miss something yes? Admittedly some books are repetitive, or written to be used as reference, but as a rule of thumb there is a relevance to the study books.

4. Because spellcheckers remove the need to learn to spell.

Sure that's what happens with technology, it makes some skills less relevant.

You must be joking, a university student saying that. Tell me college boy, when you are writing something by hand, where is the spell check function on your pen?

6. Because information provision is instant, patience is not developed. It takes time to think, more time to ponder. The go-go rush.

You do realize even if you find info instantly it still takes time to read and understand it and is still not guaranteed to be relevant which means back to more searching.

Depends on the information, if its a fact check the fact can be copy/pasted, and forgotten in the move on. Some information needs to be digested, but then the problems you dont see a problems, not digesting the whole text because you do 'alright' by cutting corners can take its toll on the quality of learning experience.
Degree courses take years, net searches take seconds. There is a reason why the education is spaced out, its to provide room for understanding and retention.

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

World Illiteracy rates seem to be falling sorry for bringing stats into this.

This is because kids in Asia, Africa and India get an education now, which more than compensates for kids in Europe and America with the playstations and cellphones.
Lesson for you: If you settle to do do 'alright' in your study you can read a graph, if you educate yourself properly you might interpret the same graph.

8. Because too many people txt or type in l33t.

What does that have anything to do with this? Most people are able to distinguish between formal and non-formal communication and people aren't using "text-speech" because they can't spell they use it as quick communication.

Some can, but many cannot. Txt communication is proliferated amongst very vulnerable age groups. Its all very well for an eighteen year old who gets a mobile phone with txct not to be corrupted much, but txt is used by pre-teens and mobile phones are seen in primary school.

9. Because punctuation is considered optional, especially in txt.

Most people aren't using "text-speech" for school work and they use it with friends and if they can understand each other I don't see what the big deal is.

You would see the big deal if you could understand corruptability. As you cant see the big deal with not reading properly at degree level I am not surrised you cant see the problem with young people overly indulging in txt communications. Please remember that txt is not an infrequently used tool, having a mobile phone with txt is required by peer pressure to fit in and is used extensively.
Maybe you should ponder what happens when a teen or pre-teen child uses a device extensively, might it have an influence in development. Especially if more time is spent txt than studying, the weighting between being taught proper grammar and being given a tool that rewards improper grammar should be evident to you.

10. Because people communicate my mobile phone and not talk to each other.

Yeah a lot of people use the aid of phones and the internet when they aren't in talking distance to each other how is that surprising.

They also use them inside classrooms, they also often don't know how to write a letter.

11. Because electronic toys and media offer instant gratification they draw young people more readily. It takes time to set up a boardgame, get changed to sport clothes, pazint miniatures etc, the X Box only needs to be turned on with disk inside

I don't see how that makes someone dumber I guess you could say it makes someone less prepared for life as stuff like learning to drive, getting a career, takes takes a lot of time.

Several portions on the list make people dumber, the less prepared for life bit is another linked consequence, being less prepared for life also can lead to despondency during development which can in turn make people 'dumber'.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? Also define what you mean by ill-prepared for life considering the qualities required to get a job 30 years ago are quite different than today.

Because while once upon a time, a college degree meant you really had to know something, and know it well...now, with all that information at your fingertips, many/most degrees are simply a "Bachelor's of Google"

As for the weaker part, that is true and also not true at the same time. We're seeing in the military, the number of "automatically qualifying" people dwindle to almost nothing. By automatically qualifying, I mean the height/weight standards (granted, those are SEVERELY outdated), as well as physical abilities standards upon initial entry. While some folks out there point to the number of obese kids going down, it's still extremely high, and this affects any line of work where physical condition is applicable.

I would also define ill-prepared for life as that "gold star" mentality that we instill in kids... that whole "there are no losers" at kickball, self-esteem is everything that is still running rampant throughout the school system is hurting kids' abilities to cope, adapt and overcome obstacles presented to them.

I don't know if texting makes people any dumber or more specifically more illiterate as I found some studies like David Crystal's claiming that it improves literacy but others claiming it doesn't have an effect or it makes things worse it seems thing are inconclusive.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I don't know if texting makes people any dumber or more specifically more illiterate as I found some studies like David Crystal's claiming that it improves literacy but others claiming it doesn't have an effect or it makes things worse it seems thing are inconclusive.

The complete lack of any punctuation here really isn't helping our case.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I don't know if texting makes people any dumber or more specifically more illiterate as I found some studies like David Crystal's claiming that it improves literacy but others claiming it doesn't have an effect or it makes things worse it seems thing are inconclusive.

Honestly, I think it's one of the many "issues" that society deals with, when using a living language. People like Benjamin Franklin, George Washington, etc. would probably not understand half of what we talk about, or would ask us why we use such simple language, or why, when describing something, we didnt use a particular word, etc. English is a living language, and as such is constantly evolving. In the 70s we had Jive talk, and the 80s and 90s each had their own "pop culture language" if you want to call it such, and it has had an affect on language as a whole. I think that, with the amount of technology in the average human life today, txt speak, or 133t speak, etc. is simply the modern "jive"


Now, where I think that this would make someone less intelligent, is when they cannot communicate in a normal fashion, without the use of texting abbreviations, etc.

 dementedwombat wrote:

Never copy/pasted an essay in my life and in fact I quite enjoy writing them assuming I give two gacks about the topic, although I can see how things could be made easier by modern technology.

Wombat, in general I agree with you on how the net has made things easier and that its generally a good thing. Its only a bad thing if its a crutch.

 dementedwombat wrote:

Although walking through a library has a charm all its own I must say that I think this is a positive change. More ready access to information is nice, as long as you can be reasonably sure it's quality information.

People should know how to do well with both.
You are also right about dubious quality of information found online.

 dementedwombat wrote:

See my previous post for my stance on [textwalls]. 100% agree with you on this point. That's kinda sad. Although I am guilty of jumping on the audiobook train at a young age. I'd much rather have something read to me than read it myself. Doesn't mean I can't tear up a book if I want to though.

The problem is the phenomena itself, not the presentation or even the media. A 'textwall' of several hundred words being too long to read ought to be a worrying phenomena allowing for how long books can be. It's direct evidence of a growing culture of gross impatience with literacy.

 dementedwombat wrote:

Being incredibly challenged in the spelling (and handwriting) arena my entire life makes me appreciate not having to look up every third word in the dictionary. Again 100% agree with this point but appreciate it and don't think it's wrong.

Using spell checkers isnt wrong, especially because people can type far faster than they write, and unlike pen and paper a keyboard and screen are often separated visually, typos can occur all too easily. Most of my posts make me look like I have very poor literacy skills simply because I speedtype and generate lots of typos.
Spell checkers are a good thing, but every time a spell check is flagged one should try and learn as one moves forward rather than not learn and use the spell checker over and over to catch the same words.

 dementedwombat wrote:

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

How unfortunate. I still remember my 9th grade grammar class...well some of it anyway. It's always good to know how to write properly. Great first impression for professional things.

Good literacy standards are also essential for the better jobs.

 Orlanth wrote:


The problem is the phenomena itself, not the presentation or even the media. A 'textwall' of several hundred words being too long to read ought to be a worrying phenomena allowing for how long books can be. It's direct evidence of a growing culture of gross impatience with literacy.

A Wall of Text isn't any long text, it's a long text without punctuation or spacing, the very thing you complain about in your own post.

Easy to do. You just change a few words to break up the sentence structure. Plagiarism tests are just comparison searches.

That's pretty true.

You must be joking, a university student saying that. Tell me college boy, when you are writing something by hand, where is the spell check function on your pen?

You do have a point there are probably lots of situations where spelling and grammar are really important but I think most people would still be able to get by fine in life even if they're not the greatest speller or have the best grammar so long as people can understand them.

This is because kids in Asia, Africa and India get an education now, which more than compensates for kids in Europe and America with the playstations and cellphones.
Lesson for you: If you settle to do do 'alright' in your study you can read a graph, if you educate yourself properly you might interpret the same graph.

To be fair you didn't specify what country or countries you're talking about.

They also use them inside classrooms, they also often don't know how to write a letter.

That's a bit assuming.

 Orlanth wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? Also define what you mean by ill-prepared for life considering the qualities required to get a job 30 years ago are quite different than today.

1. Because essays are copy/paste not written.

2. Because research means type a word on Google, not go to a library and read reference books. And that isn't just a time saver, word finding functions allow data to be cherry picked rather than understood through reading appropriate chapters.

3. Because 'textwalls' exist like its' a problem. If people cant be bothered to read textwalls what will they do when they come to read chapters.

4. Because spellcheckers remove the need to learn to spell.

5. Because any search or study has built in distraction through the same media trying to educate you, when Googling your latest 'research' subject one can also YouTube some entertainment, or go on Facebook. Distracted people tend to learn less.

6. Because information provision is instant, patience is not developed. It takes time to think, more time to ponder. The go-go rush.

7. Because literacy and numeracy standards have strongly indicated to be falling. we know this because we can compare coursework. Poor literacy is now a problem even at degree level study.

8. Because too many people txt or type in l33t.

9. Because punctuation is considered optional, especially in txt.

10. Because people communicate my mobile phone and not talk to each other.

11. Because electronic toys and media offer instant gratification they draw young people more readily. It takes time to set up a boardgame, get changed to sport clothes, pazint miniatures etc, the X Box only needs to be turned on with disk inside.


A study was done on a group of children IIRC approx aged six. They were shown into a room lined with toys , on the left wall were electronic toys, on the right wall traditional toys and games. Each child choose to play with the electronic toys, each settled with their own toy because there were enough to go around, and none spoke to each other. Later the children were ushered from the room, when they reentered the electronic toys were gone and only traditional toys remained. The children chose toys, either alone or in groups, they talked and interacted with each other as they played. Even those with a toy intended for solo play interacted with the other children while they played with their toy.

I too, will take some of these and comment wittily.

1- If only my students understood enough about what is being researched to even copy/paste, it'd be a start. They just tell me "It was too hard, so I gave up, give me the failing grade." Multiple times. Today. Affluent suburbs of Montreal.

2- Again, back to comprehension issues addressed in #1. Context is wasted on my batch. Might as well give them soundbites from the Simpsons.

3- Education is not highly valued in Quebec, so why should the actually do anything for it? Reading? Come one, man.

4- Not even. I find you need to actually care about how you spell to even use or understand what spellcheckers are telling you. Not a given.

5- Yup, but it often comes down to personal discipline, which again can be instilled, but often isn't anymore. Why should we be harsh with them, it screwed us up, so we're not going to ever, ever let them feel like they can't have their heart's desire.

6- Ain't nobody got time fo' dat. Seriously. They are bored out of their minds, yet refuse to do the mental gymnastics that would keep them busy and, hopefully, teach'em something.

7- I can only speak locally. 49% of Quebecers cannot read or understand simple sentences, let alone a string of them. The study projects that that number will increase by at least 10% over the course of the next 12 years, as the "reform" students hit the job market.

8- Someone earlier said that it was irrelevant. If it was an isolated complaint, I'd say yes, but unfortunately, students now write "like they speak." And our speech (locally) is anything but stellar. Students are shocked that I actually grade on grammar, spelling and syntax.

9- See number 8, this shouldn't have been a separate point.

10- Bigger fish to fry, but on the whole, there must be a good way to use communication techs. I strongly believe that.

11- Boys will still kick a ball for hours on end rather than have to do arts, or write 5 sentences stringed together, or show me any kind of respect. The problem I see with this is that it stopped being a sport or a hobby, and has been fantasized by their community as the acceptable way to go through life. We have 200 boys in the "hockey track" at my school. From the coaches' briefings and reports (and our sad scores) I'd say none of them are particularly good at it. Yet they all believe they will end up in the NHL, so screw that high school diploma.

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:
1- If only my students understood enough about what is being researched to even copy/paste, it'd be a start. They just tell me "It was too hard, so I gave up, give me the failing grade." Multiple times. Today. Affluent suburbs of Montreal.

Dafuq... that just makes me sad. People went to the moon just because they wanted to and had nothing better to do than beat the Russians there. People with slide rules designed the SR-71 Blackbird (one of the most sophisticated and complex aircraft of all time) in 3 months because there was a need for it. And some students don't want to do a (presumably pretty easy) essay? That statement right there makes me despair for the future of the human race.

Anyone notice that the video couldn't quite connect the fact that the people who grew up in those amazing years, the ones who "made it", the blessedly and somehow stronger, those people were actually the ones who were responsible for those laws that ban lead painted cribs, those who developed the technology behind tablets, and smartphones? The ones who allow their children to be raised by TV and video games? They're the ones who demonize the schools when their feth-up kids can't do math. They're the ones who allowed the bubblewrapping of the children "these days".

I was born in '84. I'm on the tail end of those on this pillar, if you can even count me there at all. I work with a guy six years younger than I who I have a harder time relating to than the people who are 20 years older than me. There's a definite generational gap there in such a short span of time, I won't try to argue with that, and the size of the gap is profound. I point at him and scoff sometimes, but at the same time, I LOATHE that the same people who are patting themselves on the back here for being so tough with this self-righteous "hoorah us" are also belittling the generations they fethed up for being so fethed up.

You might have remarkable fortitude and be better than what you've created, but you're being proud of something you should not be proud of. I also must say that as far as trivial things like grammar and punctuation go, previously mentioned 24 year old actually does a pretty bang-up job compared with some of the older folks.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Mathieu Raymond wrote:

3- Education is not highly valued in Quebec, so why should the actually do anything for it? Reading? Come one, man.

Tee hee. Come one, come all.

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? .

Um, because they have easier access to information?!

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:

 Cheesecat wrote:

 SickSix wrote:
I feel fine saying kids born in the 90s and 2000s are generally weaker, dumber, and ill prepared for life.

Why would a younger generation that has easier access to information be dumber? .

Um, because they have easier access to information?!

I don't understand either. Can you explain?