Clark Quinn (cnquinn@knowledgeu.com)
Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:15:09 -0800
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 1999 09:15:09 -0800 From: "Clark Quinn" <cnquinn@knowledgeu.com> Subject: Re: Some random comments
>What was my original question anyway? Oh yes. Learners are pretty much
>the same today as a decade ago, a generation ago, or a millennium ago.
>You haven't changed my mind on this issue.
Well, it's a tenet of some schools of cognitive science that the medium
affects the message. Thus, we very much think differently based upon how
we learn. That would argue that we are different learners than the
generations before.
Certainly, Patricia Greenfield of UCLA documented different cognitive
capacities in the video generation from the radio generation (better
spatial, less able linear for the video generation, if memory serves).
Does that mean we learn differently? I don't know. I'd be inclined to
think that my generation (and, implicitly, those before me) learned to
learn in a way that worked but was not optimal. I'd argue that kids today
can learn in different and more effective ways (as we have richer media
options at our disposal).
I don't think that undermines David's point that there are certain
cognitive prerequsites: designed activity and guided reflection with
specific information available. That is, we all can learn the same ways,
but I as a child of the television generation may learn better in a
different way than a child of the book generation or the radio generation
or the video game generation.
We *can* learn to learn in the same ways, but we may be *oriented* to learn
in different ways depending on the core media we were exposed to. As we
are all social beings, that is probably a constant, but the ease with which
we assimilate information in different media is likely to be skewed
depending on our exposure to each.
Some ruminations, -- Clark
-- Clark Quinn Knowledge Universe Interactive Studio (510) 768-2408 cnquinn@knowledgeu.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Fri 19 Feb 1999 - 18:51:42 MET