Chapter+3


 * Cindy**

Wow this chapter is even more eye-opening than the last chapter which both were quite interesting. His ongoing referencing to the neuroscience concept and research such as "neuroplasticity" has really plastered the idea that the brain has a fixed number of cells ;but ,on the contrary that cells can recreate and fixed intelligence is no longer the assumption. How revolutionary! This reminds me of the ongoing studies being done on students with autism and how with the right unconventional methods of chelation,therapy, immune and allergy supports some students which have improved and have reached near developmental and intelligence growth. Hopefully, some of this new "brainscience" could carry over to the field of alzheimers.Secondly, this idea of sixty percent of students are either visual or visual kinesthetic. This is absolutely true more and more visual learners are evident in the classroom now then when I first started teaching. They love videostreaming videos, computer activities, interactive centers,science activities, interaction types of language arts activities where they are fully involved in the learning. Lastly, this generation is definitely different and the more neuroscientists share their findings with educators the more classrooms will greatly change in the future. Now, let's convince the school boards the importance of not cutting the tech.budget.http://www.thelearningweb.net/brain-based-learning.html


 * Nick**

After reading this chapter my eyes were opened even more than in the previous two chapters. Reading the research on how the brains of the digital generation are "wired". I particularly found the idea of certain brain synapses being used get stronger and develop more as students get older depending on how much they are used. If kids are only using those brain functions and cells used in video and computer games, watching movies, or using devices like cell phones thqan those are the brain functions that are going to develop faster and on a continual basis. On the flip side, the brain cells and functions used for academic uses such as reading comprehension, writing, mathematical skills, etc. will be under developed and grow weaker as the student gets older. As a result the further the student goes in school the more they will need these skills on more and more advanced levels. If they are under developed or weak than how are they going to succeed in the academic world??? this is why older teachers are having a harder and harder time relating to and therefore teaching today's students. Generation Y and X teachers have an easier time relating to and teaching today's students because they [we] had some exposure to the technology of today when they [we] were in school. Granted their [our] exposure was on a more basic and less advanced level, but they [we] at least have been exposed to technology in the classroom and can more easily incorporate it into our teaching. The research on tracking brain development and impedement as a result of being exposed to technology can help educators learn more about our students and how to better serve them by using more tech in the classroom. Here is some research on how technological advances are contributing to the generation gap among teachers and students as well as parents and children. [|Tecnology and the Generation Gap]


 * Doug**

Chapter 3 was very intersting and informative. It was broken up into little sections about a number of different topics. I feel like I was getting "bombarded" with new information on every page, which is probably why is was such an easy and enjoyable read. I did start to lose understanding when the authors got into the specifics about the chemistry of the brain. It was interesting, yet hard for me to follow the whole time. The part/quote that really grabbed my attention was on the top of page 28 when they stated that at least 60 percent of students are visual learners, visual kinesthetic learners, or a combination of them. After reading that I immediately thought of Howard Gardner and his theory of multiple intelligences. Because of this new technology age and students learning differently, are all of his intelligences valid anymore? I thought about how his research findings may differ if his studies were done now, in this age of digital bombardment.
 * ​**Gardner has since done mupltiple updates on his theory, incrporating this increase in technology.

Chapter 3 was interesting. I liked that it discussed the brain and mind function, and the reorganization/resturcturing. It was interesting to hear the term "digital bombardment" and the impact this is having on the way the digital generation processes information. On page 25, "As a result of these digital experiences, some are now beginning to conclude that our students are processing the very same information we process, but differently than we do." Here is an interesting article that reviews current information on children’s developing brains. I found this to be quiet interesting “the average 8-18 year-old spends 7 hours and 38 minutes using entertainment technology throughout a typical day” (Balance?) Children's Brains 2.0  Different Views: Baroness Greenfield, an Oxford University neuroscientist says, “My fear is that these technologies are infantilising the brain into the state of small children who are attracted by buzzing noises and bright lights, who have a small attention span and who live for the moment” Social Websites Harming Childrens... Another article on Neuroanthropology says, //“// //If we search for analogies, we can think of countless previous techno-moral panics that now seem positively quaint: the dangerous effects of rock ‘n’ roll, comic books, music videos, television, the wireless, air conditioning, trains… Mesopotamian parents were probably fearful of the impact of the newfangled chariot, and German parents no doubt fretted about what horrors Gutenberg’s movable type was about to introduce into their homes” Is Facebook Rotting Our... //
 * Felicia**

Adam

This chapter was great! I really enjoyed the information presented about the change in the way children over the past few decades has changed greatly as part of enhanced technology. The findings that the brain truly CAN "re-grow" cells and learn new ideas, concepts and information clearly shows how students are evolving.

With the information present, it is clear that today's educators must begin hopping on the bandwagon and admit that we will also have to change the way we present information and educate our students. Steven Johnson, as listed in our book, was one of the authors that spoke about digital bombardment. The author summarizes the complex differences and cognitive developmental issues that have come about with higher technologies.

I visited his weblog - **Steven Johnson Weblog .**

Check out his archives and his thoughts on the technology age that is upon is. It's interesting to see his thoughts and ideas, as well as how technology is changing the way we live our lives.

One thing that I like about this book, and this chapter again reminds me, is how easy it is to read. While I am reading about how the make up of our brain is changing, I am reading with ease and understanding. One point that hit home with me, being an ELA teacher, was how students of the digital generation view a piece of text. That, instead of reading in the way that we do, they completely overlooked the "right side and bottom half of the page...unless they are highly motivated to do so" (27). This brings two questions to mind - 1st - what motivates them to read those sections of the text? and 2 -does this work on all sizes of texts or just large texts? Perhaps if it is just larger texts, then we should be breaking it into smaller chunks on a page so that our students get the most of what they should. If our students aren't reading the way we are expecting them to, then what does that mean for their comprehension? As for helping to bridge the gap, here is a good video that has a few other video clips from PBS with Arne Duncan.

__Chapter 3__ There are times I wish I could look into a crystal ball to foresee the future. Unfortunately, we all know that is virtually impossible. However, throughout history, there have been some brave souls who have attempted to predict the future. For instance, the authors refer to Plato’s warning “that reading would be the downfall of oral tradition and memory” (23). And according to the authors, Plato’s prediction was correct. A more recent example of an attempt to predict the future is by William Gibson, who once said, “The future is already here…it’s just not evenly distributed.” Interestingly, Gibson is a science fiction writer who actually coined the term “cyberspace” and “digital imaging,” making these words part of our lexicon shortly after Bill Gates proposed MS-DOS to Microsoft and light years before the Internet was in place. And as coincidence may have it, the authors point out that our children think differently today because of their “experiences with digital technologies” (20). To support their point, the authors give a brief, yet convincing explanation of the brain’s physiological components at work. They suggest that previous research shows the “fixed” learning potential of humans. However, due to, yes, technology, studies show just the opposite—that the brain is constantly reorganizing and restructuring, thereby creating new thinking patterns (21). With this in mind, the authors point out that our students can continuously process all sorts of information--in fact the same information we process—however, the difference is that the younger generation processes information unlike we do. As a result, the authors pose a very interesting question—“who here really has the learning problem?” (29). It’s true, we don’t have a crystal ball to foresee the future and we don’t know what the future holds. However, it is believed that Plato’s prediction was correct, and maybe William Gibson knows something many of us do not—“the future is already here.”
 * Diane**

Wordle created from Chapter 3 text: Chapter 3 Wordle - Adam