Carr, pages 115-176

Blog Post due Monday, March 24^th, Carr, pages 115-176:

Summary

            In Chapter Seven: “The Juggler’s Brain,” Carr discusses the connection between the Internet, multitasking, and a loss of deep reading.  He discusses that the Internet has made it easy to multitask; subsequently, people are constantly encouraged to move from page to page, reading more words than ever before, faster than ever before, but absorbing and reflecting less.  He connects this back to his history of intellectual technologies by connecting web reading with scriptura continua by stating that reading on the web, with all of its distractions, is taxing our cognitive load in much the same way that reading a continuous script did in the past (p. 122).  Reading on the Internet is not the same as reading words on the pages.  We read web pages in an “F” formation and read maybe 18% of the content provided by web pages (p. 135). 

In the Chapter titled “a digression,” Carr discusses the argument some may make in order to defend peoples’ intelligence in the modern era.  Some cite the Flynn effect, that IQ scores have risen steadily, as an argument that our intelligence is increasing, not decreasing.  This chapter summarizes several ways in which the Flynn effect does not necessarily mean that our intelligence is greater than those before us. 

In Chapter 8: “The Church of Google,” Carr discusses Google’s origins and their attempts to digitize the written word.  In this chapter, Carr reviews how Google started, how it made money (through AdWords), and its means of continuing to make information available at the lowest possible cost (its digital book effort).   

Critique

            One of the reasons I like this book is Carr’s connection of seemingly disconnected topics from the Flynn Effect to the rise of Google, he hammers away at his theme that we are reading more words with less depth—we are superficial thinkers.  However, I find that although Carr often presents both sides of an argument, he often makes unsupported overstatements such as the following: “The intellectual technologies it has pioneered promote the speedy, superficial skimming of information and discourage any deep, prolonged engagement with a single argument, idea, or narrative” (Carr, 2011, p. 156).  I know on the whole many people skim web pages at a fast pace, I and others spend many hours researching online, reading articles thoroughly, and using the Internet to probe those ideas deeper.  Thus, I find these overstatements skewed.

Connection

            I am interested in studying how to get students to use digital tools for deep reading and creative writing to further their academic literacies.  I appreciate Carr’s arguments, but I also find that they lack evidence.  How many studies have looked into whether or not students can use technology for deep thinking if taught how to do so?  I’m excited about the opportunity to research this question, and Carr’s book seems like good justification for the need to teach students to use technology for academic as well as social pursuits.