Education >
Educational Philosophy
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedShould basic skills tests evaluate Internet reading?
Results so far:
| Yes | 43% | 10 votes | Total: 23 votes | |
| No | 57% | 13 votes |
Yes
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesTo say that Internet reading and book reading are entirely the same thing is patently wrong. While there are some shared skills for both types of reading, the depth and purpose of reading tend to be very different. Readers generally sit down with a book and read through it. The only distractions they might endure are distractions off the page. The family might come in and distract the reader, or the telephone might ring. When reading online, the reader is constantly bombarded with a wide variety of different stimuli from pup-up advertisements to friends chatting on IM. These distractions are not physically separate from the material being examined, but immediately fused with whatever material is being read.
Beyond the differences in medium, readers on the Internet tend to utilize a different set of skills than readers of a book. When someone is reading a book, they are looking for a depth of knowledge. The goal of reading a novel is to completely understand the story. When reading a biography, the reader wants to learn a somewhat complete story of a historical character's life.
When reading on line, the reader is almost always looking for an answer. Think about the last few searches you entered into your favorite search engine. You were looking for a quick bit of information regarding a random piece of information. A quick visit to Google Trends reveals that the top 25 trending searches are pertaining to celebrity trivia, Applebee's restaurant menu and "do black people get sunburned?" These searches are very unlikely to yield the kind of reading we would desire from a physical book. Honestly, when is the last time you went to a library to get a book which would help you answer the question, "do black people get sunburned?"
Knowing that people go to on line sources to answer questions, we understand that there are some important skills at play. First, what kinds of questions do people ask, and how do they ask those questions? You will notice, if you visit the Google Trends link, that most of the searches are words or phrases. There are occasional questions, but a skilled searcher knows that most good results come from a few well chosen key words.
All of this leads to an important idea in on line reading. Should the reader read every line of text? I would challenge you, next time you do an Internet search, read every line on the screen. You will find that reading every line is unneeded. You will also find yourself frustrated by the slow pace that your search is going. The opposite possibility is equally bad. If you do a search for Tree Octopus, you will find a quick link to a sham website. The website presents some very interesting arguments about the campaign to save this endangered animal. Now, return to the search page and scan the page for a credible website.
This scanning of search engine results is an important skill in on line reading. If a reader cannot master this skill, it will be difficult for her to be an efficient and effective citizen of the digital age. Students need to be taught this skill, and the skill needs to be assessed in a meaningful way.
In general, reading on line is reading for a quick bit of information, while reading in a book is for more depth or pleasure. While there are many similarities, there are also important differences. These differences are the reasons that on line reading should be taught and tested.
Learn more about this author, Jonathan List.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
No
The argument that Internet reading should not be granted "core skill" status is a valid one. I'd like to add another point to the debate that draws on an understanding of the historical context of public education. One asks, what is the purpose of school? Is it to develop (or assist the parents in developing) well-rounded individuals? Is it to supply competent workers to the labour market? Or is it simply a matter of truancy, keeping teens off the street who would otherwise be vandals? The truth is, there is an element of all three in schooling. Each pertains to the issue at hand.
The creation of well-rounded individuals requires just that, a well-rounded experience. Think back to the turn of the last century. The vast majority of the population existed in a rural context, and learned such skills as shooting, swimming, and farm-related tasks. The few afforded the luxury of schooling were introduced to new experiences and world views in order to enrich them. The aforementioned skills were not taught in school, because children already got them at him.
It's just like that with the internet. Why teach something kids do on their own anyway? There's no problem with honing the finer points of skill, or teaching proper research levels to those who want to prepare in a professional capacity, but including the internet in the daily curriculum seems like adding "planting crops" to the 1930's school day. It just isn't necessary.
In terms of training good workers, one must ask oneself just how jobs use the Internet. Industry, Commerce, Health services, Government and Military jobs all use computers to some extent. But few use them ubiquitously, and those that do provide thorough, in-house training programs requiring only cursory knowledge to begin with.
In terms of truancy, how many kids, faced with the wide avenues of the world wide web before them, will stay on the site the teacher assigned? The blatant reality is that the Internet is simply too much freedom to all kids at that developmental stage. There tends not to be any structure, and although software to provide this structure is available, the trend is for teachers to be unskilled in the employment of such software. To say nothing of the dangers and harmful content, the temptation to play games and 'goof off' is simply too difficult to resist.
School systems should focus on the core skills that make using the Internet possible, such as literacy, expository writing, and most importantly, critical thinking skills. The sacred duty of education in this information age should be to enable students, to the greatest extent possible, to filter, consider and critically assess the hordes of unfettered data being flung at them on a daily basis. "Don't believe everything you see on TV" must be carried over into this new Internet era, because there are as many harmful uses for the Internet as there are good ones, and arming kids with the ability to make good choices and recognize questionable ones will literally save lives.
Hearken back to the printing press. Suddenly ideas could be disseminated with an alacrity heretofore unseen, The result? A great awakening of learning and knowledge, but also great social stresses and strife because the people had trouble sorting through all the new information and were sometimes misled or drew mistaken conclusions. Kids today are in danger of information overload, and it's our job as educators to equip them to deal with just that.
Learn more about this author, Michael Hicks.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
- Educational Philosophy
- Should the architects of 'No Child Left Behind' be blamed for the victimization of schools by parasites and predators?
- Should disease prevention curriculum be considered the highest priority for teachers to use in developing contexts?
- Returning local control to schools will enhance education
- Is engaging parents in their children's education a major factor in turning around low-performing schools?
- Is the Internet hurting reading skills?
