Learn to discern

Technology is, of course, an aid to education, says Frank Webster, but we must teach students how to evaluate and filter information

August 4, 2011



Credit: Elly Walton


A generation ago in universities, talk was of "computer literacy"; nowadays it's "media literacy" - if we can't handle Web 2.0, then we are failing our students. Having built a career around initiatives to meet this purported challenge, I offer some cautionary advice.

First, lay off the "literacy" metaphor. The ability to read and write needs to be achieved in childhood in order for cognitive development to proceed. Learning about information and communication technologies is much less vital. It is also asserted that digital technologies are so fundamental that someone ill at ease with them will be for ever disadvantaged. But hey, food is essential to everyday life, yet I don't hear calls that we become "food literate", even if lack of knowledge has demonstrably horrible consequences.

Media literacy is typically about technical skills, but the reasoning behind this prioritisation is flawed. There appears to be a belief that if students don't learn about the new technologies, they might cede power to experts who are technically able. But it can't be said loud enough that technical skills do not translate into power. The fact is that we live in an era when we are all dependent on expertise of one sort or another. We can't acquaint ourselves with every expertise going. We have to trust those experts who in their turn must rely on others. It is hard to see anything exceptional about ICTs in this regard. These technologies are indispensable, but as Max Weber observed about slavery, we ought not to confuse indispensability with power.

The fact is that how to use digital technologies is much less important than what the information accessed is for and what might be done with it. For this, one needs information skills - the sort provided by librarians and teachers. Here, educationalists might warn of risks with regard to lack of attentiveness, especially among the "digitally native". There is good evidence that most are superficial "skimmers", clicking hyperlinks and changing pages after a perfunctory glance. A few enthuse about this as a novel, non-linear practice, but most are concerned about the risks to logic and reasoning that can accompany a trend that succours facile and immediate gratification. As one student said about YouTube: "You can get a whole story in six minutes. A book takes so long."

We need to encourage close reading and the capacity to concentrate over lengthy and accumulating stretches of time; something that is jeopardised by the instantaneity and ease of the internet. We need to regain the confidence to insist that to gain intellectual competence requires hard work and perseverance. We need to insist that our students read for a degree; this demands time, focus and commitment.

We do need to be alert to the problem of information overload that requires filtering to cope with the excess. We can recognise "cocooning" - wrapping oneself in an information blanket that receives messages only from people like oneself. Without some cocooning, we would be hard pressed to get through the day, but we need to remain alert enough to admit information that is unfamiliar but important.

The only way in which this balance might be achieved is by education in the analysis and evaluation of information. We can access so much more than hitherto, but we need to combine openness and scepticism towards what is available on the internet (which is decidedly not the same as cynicism). We need to nurture in our students what Howard Rheingold calls "crap detector" tools - capabilities that help users to develop the ability to check authorities. Who owns the site? What is the affiliation of the author? Are sources cited? What qualifications does the writer have?

We should encourage users to develop appropriate filtering mechanisms. In this regard, Twitter has potential, since it allows one to select via tested sources, as well as to investigate through its search facilities and through one's own tweets that can call on a wide network.

So I urge people to use the interactive facilities of Web 2.0. These can stimulate and aid learning as well as provide opportunities to speak out. None of them requires us to embrace "media literacy" programmes, but they can cultivate critical thinking, the one ingredient that is essential in order to be able to prosper in the information age.

You've reached your article limit.

Register to continue

Registration is free and only takes a moment. Once registered you can read a total of 3 articles each month, plus:

  • Sign up for the editor's highlights
  • Receive World University Rankings news first
  • Get job alerts, shortlist jobs and save job searches
  • Participate in reader discussions and post comments
Register

Have your say

Log in or register to post comments

Featured Jobs

Most Commented

Monster behind man at desk

Despite all that’s been done to improve doctoral study, horror stories keep coming. Here three students relate PhD nightmares while two academics advise on how to ensure a successful supervision

celebrate, cheer, tef results

Emilie Murphy calls on those who challenged the teaching excellence framework methodology in the past to stop sharing their university ratings with pride

Sir Christopher Snowden, former Universities UK president, attacks ratings in wake of Southampton’s bronze award

Reflection of man in cracked mirror

To defend the values of reason from political attack we need to be more discriminating about the claims made in its name, says John Hendry

But the highest value UK spin-off companies mainly come from research-intensive universities, latest figures show