Children and the ditigal age

[Cassandra]

I was at family's house yesterday and was going through some older books that they said I could take, which included an entire set of Encyclopedia Britannica from 1988. My half-niece who is about 12 picked up a volume of this and asked what it was. I answer that it's an encylopedia. I got a look from her like I had just fallen off of another planet. I just looked at her and said "well, in my day (I'm 29) we didn't have Google or Wiki and had to look things up in these". The horror on her face made my heart sink.

It just kills me inside to see that this generation does not know how to research using books. Yes, the internet is full of information, but it's not always accurate or correct. Also, not every single piece of information makes it way into cyberspace. For instance, I'm researching medical conditions that may explain the vampire myth. There is not alot of info out there on the net about this. But, in books I am able to find plenty of this information.

My college professors have all told us that if we cite Wiki or any site like it, even once in our papers, we would be given a failing grade for the assignment and if it happens twice we faced failing the class all together.

I felt kind of old and outdated. And I was saddened by the fact that this child did not know what an encylopedia was.

What are your thoughts on the path that these children are on now in education and the way computers and books play in path?

[Greenday]

I think it's great! As long as they are taught properly how to do it. You can find great research papers and journal articles online pretty quick.

My only problem is people who take wiki for its word.

[Giggle Goose]

My only problem is people who take wiki for its word.

Or even worse...if they actually cite it as a "scholarly source" for research papers!

[Red Panda]

Any kid that tries using an Encyclopedia for a paper will fail. Nobody ever has an encyclopedia that is less then 20 years old, at least thats what it seems like.

If you know where to look you can find pretty much any info on the web or at least sources where you can find what you need. To not teach students to use the web is a disservice to them.

[Greenday]

Or even worse...if they actually cite it as a "scholarly source" for research papers!

Someone in my human genetics course not only quoted from wiki in a research paper, she didn't even cite it or change the words. Needless to say, my teacher gave her a zero for being an idiot.

[AdminAssistant]

If you know where to look you can find pretty much any info on the web or at least sources where you can find what you need. To not teach students to use the web is a disservice to them.

Students should be taught to use web resources, but they should also be taught how to recognize credible sources. Wikipedia can be a great source of basic information, but it is not a credible source to use for papers. The web is great for scholarly journal articles - so much so that most new academic journals are online only and a number of existing ones are moving to online only. It's a matter of time before everything is published on the web.

Needless to say, my teacher gave her a zero for being an idiot.

Her teacher should have brought her up on charges of academic misconduct and/or plagiarism. I would have.

[Hobbs]

For the paper I wrote last week, I used completely electronic sources. I cited Congressional documents made available through PDF as well as several books and even a newspaper article. It's a lot more convenient to use a PDF (which is a primary source) than having to spend hours delving through stacks.

[Greenday]

Her teacher should have brought her up on charges of academic misconduct and/or plagiarism. I would have.

I agree with that. But my teacher said since she didn't cover plagiarism at the beginning of the semester, she would give a zero this time. Considering that was 20% of the grade, that's a huge hit.

[HYHYBT]

"Or anything like it" is pretty vague, though...

About the age of encyclopedias: I have a 1964 World Book, with all the annual "Year Book" updates from 1965 to about 1995 or 6. Someplace. Well, technically it's Mom's, but if anyone ever *finds* it, I'm claiming it

[jackfaire]

Most modern encylopedias are digital.

Also citing for online sources should depend partly on the topic of the paper.

If for example your in an economics class and doing a paper on dot coms then you need to cite the dot coms you used and the information you pulled off of their website. To say the person can't use online sources and cite online sources is ridiculous.

Like anything else it should be based on the validity of the source not the place they obtained it.

[Android Kaeli]

I remember those! I think I had some up to 1994, or around that time, they are really dated and a lot of new information has come up since then.

Honestly, I think it's much easier -- and a lot cheaper -- to have a reliable website that can be updated in five minutes then it is to update a paperback/hardback book. If information was made invaild for some reason, or needed to be updated, then the website can do that in a matter of minutes. Whereas it takes a lot more time, energy, and resources to update books or a series of books.

[Amanita]

I remember one Pagan lady at a local event. The woman was the closest thing to a luddite I have ever met in person. No word of a lie. She hated the internet and electronic media. When I told her that my conversion to Paganism was due in part to the 'net, namely reading the writings of Pagan authors and realizing how close my own beliefs were, she dismissed that. She started going on about some library I had never heard of, and their excellent Pagan collection.

Now don't get me wrong, I love books. I have lots of them and love to read. But what good is the most amazing library if you don't know it exists, let alone how to access it? And a good many of my books have come from the internet- I found out they existed thanks to the 'net. And more recently, I have used ebay and Amazon to source a fair number of rare and out of print books.

So I think both sources are valid, and that a person should know how to use both effectively for research. why does everything have to be either/or?

For example, say a junior high school kid has a school project on the Golden Gate Bridge. (In tech ed class, we had to choose an engineering marvel and do a project on it)
The kid could get a pretty good overview of bridge statistics by surfing on over to www.goldengatebridge.org . And there's lots of great bridge pics online. However, if they wanted a more in-depth look, I would suggest they go to their local library and pick up a few books which describe the bridge's construction and engineering in more depth. "The Gate" by John van der Zee would be a good one, as well as "Spanning the Gate", and "Golden Gate Bridge: report of the chief engineer". All of these are probably available through interlibrary loan, and contain stuff I have yet to find on the 'net.

[daleduke17]

I would like to see a class have an assignment where the students are not allowed to use any digital sources for an entire paper. They only time the students could use a computer is to type it up.

The bad part, some whackjob parent would call the ACLU and sue the school for abuse.

[Wingates_Hellsing]

I don't know about anyone else, but my middle and high schools were downright zealous about the 'internet is bad' crap. No internet sources allowed, if you can't find a book you're screwed etc. Even when the later high school classes opened up to the possibility of using online resources half of them demanded that we not use wikipedia in any way shape or form sometimes to the point where the teacher didn't want us using the sites that a wiki article cited.

That only really changed during my last year of highschool (by which time I was already like F*** this place) and the community college has been, if anything, more open to using the 'net. It's not about what form your source takes, rather that you can explain/demonstrate that the source, whatever it is, is credible enough to be included.

So daleduke, would you consider 4 years of papers and projects in a high-ranking public middle school and 3.5 ish years worth in one of the nation's best High-Schools adequate to quench your thirst for counter-technology mongering in education?

[Lace Neil Singer]

A friend of mine has a son at college; where he is, they can use wiki as a means to an end, ie finding sources. The sources are listed at the bottom of the article so it's a fantastic way of finding sites. However, anyone who cites wiki as a source as in, the actual page, will get an automatic fail. After all, everyone can edit wiki and sometimes the info on there isn't accurate.

As for books, I think that everyone should learn how to use encyclopedias. There are some instances where the internet won't be available (yeah, I know; rare in this modern world, but still) or at least, unavailable for a while. What if they have a paper to do and there's a power outage? Are they just going to not do the paper, just cuz there's no internet available? Every source must be able to be used by a good student, not just the one that's easiest.