College Freshmen Struggle With Tech Literacy

snow_man writes to mention an article on the E-Commerce News site about techno-literacy problems with incoming college freshmen. Some schools, like CSU, are planning on including a technology comprehension test alongside their English and Math evaluations for new students. From the article: "Not all of Generation M can synthesize the loads of information they're accessing, educators say. 'They're geeky, but they don't know what to do with their geekdom,' said Barbara O'Connor, a Sacramento State communications studies professor involved in a nationwide effort to hone students' computer-research skills. On a recent nationwide test to measure their technological 'literacy' -- their ability to use the Internet to complete class assignments -- only 49 percent of the test-takers correctly evaluated a set of Web sites for objectivity, authority and timeliness. Only 35 percent could correctly narrow an overly broad Internet search."

Comments

i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[treat]

At first I suspected it was because I've been doing searches since the days of archie. But more and more I've come to realize that some people just have no skill when it comes to doing a web search. I think it's primarily due to poor reading comprehension and poor reading speed.

These people who can't do searches, they click on results where the summary clearly shows that it is not the desired material. If they had read every word, it would have been clear.

It's a basic literacy problem. Americans have really poor literacy. The destruction of the concept that parents should educate their children, combined with an increasingly poor public education system, has left us with a generation too illiterate to do a web search.

Re:i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[TubeSteak]

But more and more I've come to realize that some people just have no skill when it comes to doing a web search.

I second that.
I know people that are somewhat web savvy, but couldn't Google their way out of a paper bag.

And it's not even a smart vs stupid kinda thing.
Some people just have no clue wtf they're doing.

Re:i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[ivan256]

The destruction of the concept that parents should educate their children

That's the entire problem right there. People have come to expect that the government is going to do that job for them, when really it is their responsibility to make sure their child learns. A typical child's success learning to read or write has little to with how much money the local school has, and everything to do with whether the parents culture is one of reading and teaching, and the parents career is one that allows for that.

Re:i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[Anonymous Coward]

Have you been to a public high school lately? Half the kids don't speak Enlish, much less read or write it. With 'no child left behind' the teachers have to cater to the slowest part of the class, while the rest are left to their own devices. A signle disorderly student (that belongs to a juvie hall) wrecks the educational process for 20-30 other people, and the teachers can do NOTHING (you can't use red pens anymore, much less give the turd a four-across-the-eyes or expell him, and their parents that should be doing the job just plain don't give a fuck).

Even worse, colleges will not take kids with poor education, preferring to enroll foreign students instead. Have you wondered why you see so many aliens on campuses? Well, that's because they are better than our failing public education system can produce.

And the poor American kids are left in a hole with only two ways out: army or meth cooking.

And it will take radical measures to fix this growing prlobem.

Re:i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[xenocide2]

Which of course is why the PTA meetings are always empty and impotent. And Parent-Teacher conferences ignored. Lets not overlook the facts, even when we can just make them up to support a Libertarian agenda instead!

Re:i have noticed this strange phenomenon

[lattyware]

What annoys me is where people cannot search at all, you say 'Oh, check out Automatix' and they say 'URL?'. How hard is it to google the thing?

Missing the point...

[Anonymous Coward]

This sort of topic has come up before, and the conclusion that should be drawn is the same -- this situation has little to do with technology, and a lot to do with lack of basic critical thinking skills.

As long as US schools (for what it's worth, I don't necessarily know if it's a lot better elsewhere) continue to fail in teaching critical thinking skills properly, early enough to make a difference that is, then people will continue to be clueless when it comes to the sort of problems highlighted. Again, it's not a technology problem, but an educational one, which in fact is basically a symptom of the current values of our society and their effect on education. But that's another story altogether...

Re:Missing the point...

[INT_QRK]

Reminds me of a political debate that I frequently found myself engaging to defend my funding when I ran a military technical school back in the 90's. The story went something like this: "Kids today are born knowing about computers! Classroom training is expensive and redundant! Computer based training is more efficient and cost effective!" The fallacy, of course is the opening gamut. Kids then and today (first hand experience -- I put three of my own kids through college) mostly know about how to manipulate a mouse and navigate basic menus -- not the same as "knowing about computers," as in, understanding architectures, languages, logic, etc.. Trial and error in redoing questions until "Thats right!" appears does not critical thinking make or even promote. Another problem is that kids often have trouble maintaining focus on text of length greater than about a half-web page. At least a good instructor can detect a confused look as s/he pans the classroom, ask a focused question to check for comprehension, and recursively present examples, anecdotes, and analogies that eventually may wear away the confusion. I concur completely with the need to reemphasize critical thinking in the schools -- first step is to get rid of the idea of the education major and have CS majors teach CS, math majors teach math, engineers teach...

Re:Missing the point...

[Swimport]

...with lack of basic critical thinking skills

That and lack of knowledge. Hard to find subjects are best found in my experience with the "exact phrase" searches using the quotes and -minus to remove common unwanted results. Of the people I help with their computers I've never seen any of them use these. Or click the advanced search to learn about them. Most people just type How do I do X, and like most things with computers, just expect it to work.

What about non-internet sources?

[dircha]

I would be surprised if freshmen were much better at evaluating and weighing objectivity and authority in traditional sources such as books, journals, and newspapers.

And I would like to know the criteria for the "correct" evaluation of the objectivity and authority of these sources.

"Only 35 percent could narrow an overly broad internet search"

Yeah, and what percent of incoming freshmen new how to narrow an overly broad search using whatever ancient, proprietary electronic card catalog system the school useswithout being taught? Probably less than 35%.

Technoliterate? Pah!

[Atlantis-Rising]

Sadly, however, it is not techno-literacy that's the problem. The real problem is that I know people who have come out of graduate programs who can't write a letter. When I was in university, I would easily say that seventy-five percent of my graduating class could not write a proper thesis statement, to say nothing of any particular other style that might be required.

Let's not screw around with these modern ideas of technology- we have to go back to the basics; reading and writing. Let's make sure people can read a newspaper before we ask them to read code. Let's make sure they can multiply before we ask them to write it. Our society depends on these things. Not knowing how to find the 'start' button or what a network stack is lags an extremely distant third, if at all.

Re:The Next Generation...

[ivan256]

It' almost like people do thees studies so they can pipm their concept for a name of the current generation. I just assume anybody who feels the need to do that has no credibility by default and is simply after the publicity.

Which CSU?

[Corvaith]

Is it really too much to ask to actually write out the full names of universities? I realize it's a short way into the article, but seriously. I live in Ohio. CSU is Cleveland State, to me. KSU is Kent State. Elsewhere, KSU might be Kansas State (and is, as far as domains go), and CSU is apparently California... but especially as summaries go, I can't psychically know that you mean California. USC is more commonly the University of Southern California... but it's also the University of South Carolina.

Nobody's fingers are at risk of falling off from those few additional letters, are they?

I know, it's not *that* important, but it makes me peevish.

The test

[tonsofpcs]

Is there anywhere that slashdotters can have a go at the test, so we know just what the results mean?

the education fraud

[nido]

That's the entire problem right there. People have come to expect that the government is going to do that job [educate their children] for them, ...

Ah yes, the classic bait-and-switch technique. Government: "we're going to educate the children now, so every child gets a chance at developing to their full potential." Meanwhile, they're building an alternate set of "education railroad tracks" that lead to a land where illiteracy is the norm and 'the masses' (We the People) are easy to trick and control. Government goons take over the train's engine and throw the switch, all while proclaiming that all their schools need are a few superficial fixes to make them work right.

Maybe if I hadn't wasted all that time in the government's schools my analogy would be more coherent. John Gatto is very articulate in his trashing of the government school concept. Be sure to read (if you can, that is) /The Underground History of American Education/, and The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher.

Re:the education fraud

[dangitman]

Maybe if I hadn't wasted all that time in the government's schools my analogy would be more coherent. John Gatto [johntaylorgatto.com] is very articulate in his trashing of the government school concept.

So, we trashh the government schools. What then? Who educates the people who can't afford a private education?

Re:the education fraud

[nido]

Who educates the people who can't afford a private education?

My mother's parents couldn't afford to send her to Kindergarten (in 1950's Texas, Kindergarten cost extra), so they sent her to a caretaker's instead. It was cheaper than kindergarten, in that it allowed her mother to work full time.

Mom was bored out of her little mind at the caretaker's. With a little help from some slightly older children, she taught herself to read. But she learned a much more important lesson: If there was anything at all she wanted to learn, it was her responsibility to teach herself.

Government schools hurt children because they teach children that all knowledge comes from a higher authority.

Gatto gives examples of notable americans who educated themselves in an early chapter in his Underground History.

Re:the education fraud

[dangitman]

The poor will still be able to go to school, but the schools are no longer government owned.

So, how would the ownership being private make any difference to the quality of education? It would probably just end up costing the government a lot more money, and a bunch of shonky institutions would spring up to suck off the government teat, with little concern for quality education.

It also raises problems - like government money being spent on schools which might violate separation of Church and State, for example. What's wrong with improving government schools? I don't see why the concept of the government owning schools is bad in itself. Privatization is also not a guaranteed cure for poor education. There are plenty of terrible private schools out there.

Re:the education fraud

[porkchop_d_clown]

Again, where are underprivileged kids going to get access to materials and mentorship?

Wow. you're really struggling with the whole parenthood concept, aren't you?

I was reading before kindergarten; my dad drove a truck and my mother was a waitress. But they still made time to focus on helping me learn.

Oh, and they have these wacky inventions in most cities? They're called libraries they let you read books for free.

I lived in ours.

Re:the education fraud

[ConceptJunkie]

The problem is that the government solutions tends to sacrifice the good of the many to solve the problems of the few. Some people can't or won't educate their kids? Then create crappy mandatory government schools where no one gets a good education. Then vilify anyone who thinks we should have an alternative.

Another example: You used to be able to buy little pills to dissolve in distilled water to create contact lens cleaning solution. It seems some people were too stupid to do this right, so you can't buy them any more and you have to buy premixed solution, which of course is much more expensive.

I won't even mention jarts.

The government can't solve these kinds of problems because it simply can't create solutions that will be efficient, effective and have a reasonable cost for all people. In fact, if you can get one of these three for more than a quarter of the target population, you're lucky.

Of course, the government should be providing education to those who can't provide it for themselves. The problem is that it needs to be a good education, and those people who are in the worst socioeconomic situations usually have the worst schools. But even if the government wanted or could to fix the problem, the teachers' unions have too much to lose if the status quo is disrupted.

Re:the education fraud

[Mad_Rain]

And why do we need to ensure (meaning spending taxpayers money) to make sure that everyone grows to their "full potential"? I personally don't care if someone their is so fucked up they cant teach themselves to read in their spare time. More cheap labour to serve me and less potential competition for me.

I don't know what kind of business you're in, but I think of the situation this way: More education=better jobs. Better jobs=more income. More income=more money to spend on you and your company's product. Bonuses in that More income=money into tax system for other important things, and more income=less likely to rob your ass.

Where does that all start? With better education, and people given some opportunities to improve their situation. There is no guarantee that this will result in better paying jobs, but even if it doesn't, it has other benefits as well. (I'm a fan of the saying "A rising tide lifts all ships.") With increased access to education, you could end up with a more informed electorate. More art. Maybe even fewer fucking stupid people who ruin shit for the rest of us! ;)

Literacy

[ShakaUVM]

What on Earth does Technological Literacy have to do with being able to evaluate a web site's authority and timeliness?

Seriously, that's more of library science issue, or whatever you call it. Technological literacy is the ability to use technology to get stuff done. Website criticism isn't really much part of that.

Re:Uh...

[dragonturtle69]

I take "geeky" in this context to mean "uses electronic devices frequently", like a PC, mobile phone, or game console. Just because they use "tech" devices does not mean they understand how they actually work. A calculator is an example. Many are taught how to use one, but have no concept of the math involved. An example that would include people in earlier generations is how to calculate a square root, without a calculator. Overall, the percentage of people who critically analyze the information they receive is no different from one generation to the next.

Re:Objective Sources?

[Literaphile]

While 'normal' people may view them as objective, news agencies (Reuters, Dan Rather, and the like) are hardly authoritative sources of information in the academic world.

Computers are like CRACK COCAINE

[Anonymous Coward]

And just like Crack Cocaine, computers have no business whatsoever in colleges or schools. Their use should definatly not be mandatory to complete a non-computer related class.

I'm not a ludite, I just learned the hard way, after 30 years of hardcore computer addiction. They will f*** you up. Staring at a 2d desktop screen all day will seriously dissociate you from reality, and you will lose lots of skills you take for granted. Starting with the social ones first. Staring at a computer screen for hours on end is not normal nor healthy.

Nothing wrong with pen and paper. Its reliable and worked well for thousands of years. CD roms lasts maybe 20 years at the most. Harddrives maybe 10. Some paper has lasted 2000 years. No electricity nor toxic chemicals required. No OS's to crash, no drivers to update, no software to install, nothing to go obsolete. Portable, durable, always on.

Oh, I can just see it now....

[DarkManaX]

All they'll do is take that one MS Office course and make it a requirement for all students. That'll teach 'em all about technology! Lazyness: 1; Everyone else: 0.

This has nothing to do with tech literacy

[testadicazzo]

from the editorial (but it's the same in the article):

49 percent of the test-takers correctly evaluated a set of Web sites for objectivity, authority and timeliness. Only 35 percent could correctly narrow an overly broad Internet search."

Evaluating information for objectivity, authority, and timeliness is a fundamental skill that's lacking, and it has nothing to do with the medium used to obtain the information. Look at how few people are able to read a newspaper or magazine objectively. Look at how many people, for example, think Fox news is real, unbiased, fair journalism. Thats SCARY.

So it turns out people are equally poor at this skill when using the internet, as they are when using the television, newspapers, books, magazines, or word of mouth. Okay, that's not surprising at all. Why should that make a difference.

That said, this is a problem and something should be done about it. But it's a mistake to characterize it as a problem with tech literacy. Tech literacy would be the inability to actually use the technology to sort the information. The article indicates that students have no trouble with this, rather with the more traditional cognitive skills.

Pajamas Media: We Blog, You DONT decide.

[sethstorm]

Unfortunately closed minded groups and certain people have a bit of an agenda that isnt simply "find the truth".
The first one may be a clear given, the third one politically motivated but still within the ballpark, but the second one regarding Reuters shows the true colors of who the critics are(and how they slant).

That is, Pajamas Media (the group associated with most of the criticism) has too much of a country club, right-wing, and pro-Israel slant(and does not mind showing it in the case of LGF). It continues on from LGF to Michelle Malkin who seems to get the idea that she is to dish but not take criticism(see all her entries that haven't yet been banned and see the "comments disabled"). This continues on to HotAir, also known as A**ahpundit, where they take on the unofficial policy that is summarized as "We're not responsible for the comments, but existence isnt guaranteed". While these may be the flagrant offenders, others may take parts of that policy; the constant is that they declare themselves holier than the "MSM".

If there's anything to be learned out of that group, it's to seek information that is factual, and has enough proof to make multiple opposing sides agree on the course of events. Otherwise, I'd rather read them, and then take a more serious look at those who allow a more open dialogue to see what pans out. If they're just going to delete and demonize the opposition, they're just speaking to the choir. In cases such as Reuters, I'd rather hear the objection come from someone who at least doesn't rely on hiding behind the "private group" defense to justify their objections to criticism.

Before those who support those groups say that "the other does it as well"- yes, it happens. However, such actions appear on a regular basis with such groups as Pajamas Media, and that they do so blatantly enough to make it a sign of their presence. Their policy and protocol is something that requires one to take their opinions a very large cube of salt before believing.

Google partially to blame too

[gelfling]

Google's interface is vastly richer than most people understand. If Google created cribsheets or had better assisted help that explained the richness of their entry syntax then people would be better at using it.

Now having said that, a few other issues -

Tech literacy in schools devolves to teaching kids how to use Microsoft applications like Office. And most of the problem with that is that MS has created overly complex beasts that are hard to use in the first place. Moreover, none of them was created with a student in mind.

People have short attention spans. If you're going to force people to 'use' the internet for school work then you're going to have to get Google and their ilk to partner with schools to provide more elegant and faster and more limited results windows to students.

You are going to have to understand that just like teachers teach to the test, students use tools to answer the specific question and no more. No one, or almost no one is going to surf the web to casually learn more about Rene Decartes or the history of wool. They are looking for the answers to questions 1, 3, 7 etc. on their worksheet. And if the result could spit back the exact sentence they could then write on their sheet, that would be great.

Next you're going to have to pare down technical complexity. My flat screen TV has a 63 page users manual (just the English). My phone's user's guide is more than 240 pages. Neither of them does exactly what I want nor do they do exctly what their vast tomes of documentation say they should do. Similarly if your computer apps are buggy, broken, poorly documented or overly documented then it means you probably did a poor job yourself on the fit and finish of the apps.

Last but not least, the general interface on computers is junk. In the broader sense, it assumes that the application you had me install is very important and has to be front and center all the time. My son's computer has so many icons in the system tray I don't even know what most of them are. Why would anyone in their right mind even screw with them and risk breaking something? I wouldn't.

College Freshmen Struggle with Literacy

[toddhisattva]

College freshmen struggle with literacy.

As do graduates.

Interface Jockeys

[Vellmont]

I can't say this is terribly surprising. There's a belief out there that computers are just one big interface, and if you can crack the interface then you understand the thing that underlies the interface. Kids these days have all mastered the art of understanding computer interfaces. Since they can remember they've been the family "computer expert" when Mom needs to find a recipe for chicken soup. "geezz mom!.. just type in google.com up in that address bar, type in "chicken soup recipe" down in that other bar, and click on those blue things". Mom thinks Jr. is some kind of frickin geniuous because he knew some small thing SHE didn't know.

Of course just because you can click the right buttons doesn't mean you know what the hell is going on. I've seen a guy that calls himself a "computer consultant" re-configure TCP/IP and not know a lick about what a router was, what an IP address is, what DNS is, what a netmask means, etc. And that'd be fine if there wasn't an assumption that you really knew what was going on. We all start out at that level, it's just most people never get any farther than being what I call a "interface jockey".

So I don't find it really surprising that this principle translates into the entire generation (and no, I don't think previous generations have been any better at the same skills). I think the lesson here is that we need to stop concentrating on the interface, and start concentrating on how to use the tool. Teaching a guy how to swing a hammer is nice and all, but it doesn't mean you know anything about building a fence. Similarly knowing how to do a web search is useless unless you know how to seperate good sources from bad, narrow your search, define your problem, learn how to refine your search through what you've learned, etc.

Funny story

[vga_init]

I'm reminded of the time I was an aide in my high school's computer lab. Usually the lab was used for drafting and design classes, so you'd expect the kids to have some experience with computers (if you've got to learn AutoCAD, you already know some basic functions).

So one day the teacher in charge asks me to help one student that is trying to log in. He can't figure out what the problem is, and the teacher doesn't want to fix it until he knows what is going on.

I go over there, and the kid just sits there, staring at the login screen. He asks me what to do, so I just read the screen to him; "Enter your username. Enter your password. Click OK." Pretty soon a window pops up that says "incorrect password."

So this kid isn't using the right password, and he can't figure it out even though it says so right on the screen. After I see the message, I try to inform him: "It looks like you don't know your password." The kid hears this and gets angry, "Yes, that IS my password." Actually, it's not his password--the proof was right on the screen. Upon hearing his complaint, I quickly rephrase my statement: "Oh, I'm sorry... the computer doesn't know your password." That makes sense to him, and I go have the password reset by the administrator.

True, lots of people are not "technologically literate" or whatever, but I think for a lot of people the problem is a little deeper than the mere fact that a computer was involved.