- Published: August 20, 2022
- Updated: August 20, 2022
- University / College: The University of New South Wales (UNSW Sydney)
- Language: English
- Downloads: 20
Clive Thompson and David Gelignite, who are both authors have strong opinions on how computers effect students. While Clive feels as though the use of computers encourage the youth to read and write more: David does not agree with the constant use of technology. Both authors have made very strong and valid points on the topic. Clive Thompson, who is a science and technology writer for the New York Times Magazine feels that since computers, text messaging and different social sites have come available to everyone, it offers kids the opportunity to write more.
In this generation kids are constantly exiting one another and engaging in various social networks, compared to older generations who only wrote when It was required for them to do so. He makes points by explaining that social media and status updates encourages kids to write more to their audience explaining their daily tweets and online blobs. On this topic, Thompson discusses a lot of research by Professor Andrea Langford and finds himself agreeing with her studies; stating that, ” I think we’re in midst of a literacy revolution the likes of which we haven’t seen since Greek civilization,” she says.
A lot f socializing starts online and sometimes Involves testing, status updates and blobbing. It’s giving the young people the ability to express themselves more through their writing, where they effortlessly communicate back and forth with their peers. Clive Thompson makes a great point by explaining how computers effect the young generation into writing to their peers and not Just their professor for an assignment. In conclusion, he agrees with Langford, stating that,” Technology isn’t killing our ability to write. It’s reviving It and pushing our literacy in bold new directions. ” David
Gelignite, who received his undergraduate degree from Yale University In classical Hebrew literature and is a professor of computer science at Yale; feels exactly the opposite. Unlike Thompson, he feels that computers should be in the schools and could help accomplish great things in subjects that he feel are being neglected as art and music. The difference is that Gelignite feels as though, ” Computers make our worst educational nightmares come true,” he says. He makes a point on how the software on computers computes auto-spelling and also arithmetic. He explains that understanding what the author is conveying to the audience.
David explains his theory on his conditions on how a computer should be used. First he states that there should be a new software for children that ignites the child’s imagination to get them to become more involved. Second, he wants to limit the use of computers for only recess and relaxation periods, for the purpose of kids not becoming dependent on it. Most important, he feels like educators should learn what parents and teachers already know: you cannot teach a child anything unless you look him in the face. ” The computer’s potential to do good is modestly greater than a books in some areas.