Children Left Behind, part 1
I was hoping that this class, on the Tuesday before Thanksgiving, would take a total of thirty minutes. Maybe an hour. We have now rounded the second hour.
I tell them to plug keywords into the database search just like google. They know Google. They worship Google. If they had their druthers they worship the search engine like a god. When the calculator came out, it posed certain problems to the math community: how to teach math to people who could just as easily use a machine. It required a total realignment of intelligence. Suddenly it was necessary to teach the use of the calculator to perform the basic tasks--it was no longer necessary to teach the basic tasks. Now, no one knows the basic tasks. If the calculators break tomorrow, they'll have to reinvent calculus after second semester, because past that point, nothing can be done without a calculator. Forget statistics. No one has figured out twenty factorial in years.
That was just the calculator and math. Google is like a calculator for all human knowledge. Everything that there is to be known is on Google--including nonsense, sure, but the many handed god has more good hands than bad. We tell our students otherwise, but I'm pretty sure they know we're full of shit. Without Google, my students know nothing.
But they do know how to use Google, that's for damn sure. I find myself using the metaphor of the search engine in discussing indexes in books. That's pitiful.
Anyway, they're at the database which accepts keywords, ala EbscoHost, and all they have to do is find and correctly put into MLA format six peer reviewed journal articles.
"How do we get peer reviewed?"
There's a little box under the place you type the keywords that reads "peer reviewed," but Google doesn't have that little box, so it might as well be written in Farsi for all they understand.
"You...click the box that reads peer reviewed."
This will give them sixty articles; they only need six. This should take all of five minutes, but it ends up taking two hours. Why? Because they are used to getting one website per search on Google and then moving on. Why Google has more than three results is beyond me. The new generation of computer user looks at three results and if their answer isn't in those three, they start over.
Thus, when my students get one result, they start over. It would be humerous if it didn't seem like the kind of mistake a robot would make in trying to analyze Shakespeare. It is a babblefish translation error of some sort. I walk over to them, point out that they have summoned up sixty articles, look at them for some spark of recognition, think I see something, and walk away. Half an hour later, I will return and they will have plumbed into another eight searches.
"This article says its about anorexia and teenage girls."
"Yes."
"And I'm doing my paper on anorexia and teenage girls."
"Yes."
"Is this a good article?"
Good God!
"Do you have any keywords to look for inside the document?"
There's that Google metaphor again.
"Yeah, I've got anorexia, anorexic, girls, women, woman, female, females, and fat."
She's really covered the whole gambit on this. Even a Microsoft thesaurus would have come up with more. I bite my tongue before suggesting that she add "Daddy Issues" to her list. Too obvious?
