So Much For The Information Age Analysis

The Internet: Connection or Disconnection? The Internet is an incredible invention. It brings a whole world of information to our fingertips. It can literally connect us with people across the globe; people who we otherwise would never have the opportunity to connect with. However, as Dr. Alex Lickerman shares in an article on Psychology Today.com, “even as the Internet has shrunk the world and brought us closer together, it is threatening to push us further apart”. The threat, the danger, is that Internet connection with whole world will ultimately disconnect us from the most important and vital relationships in our lives. Human beings are created for relationship and have a deep drive and need to be connected with others. Cheryl
Coyle and Heather Vaughn of Bell Labs Human Factors Group in New Jersey state that humans are social beings and need relationships with others in order to survive (13). They also reference that this need to emotionally connect was documented as early as 1958 by psychologist, Harry Harlow (13). Though today, in our Internet world, we define social networking as connections made through social web sites such as facebook and twitter, Coyle and Vaughn define them as a “configuration of people connected to one another through interpersonal means, such as friendships, common interests, or ideas (13).” With this definition in mind, the argument can be made that true interpersonal relationships needed to fulfill our desire for quality connection cannot possibly be made and maintained online, where there is no voice connection and no physical connection. Consider for a moment how voice inflections and tones are lost through online communication. Think of how a single smile can immediately brighten your day. Ponder how laughter is contagious. Reflect for just a moment on how a hug can instantly comfort you. Remember how just hearing your mom’s or dad’s or grandparent’s voice could make you feel completely safe and secure. The true, desired and needed effects of these interactions cannot be part of Internet relationships. Dr. Lickerman warns that we should not “expect more from online relationships than they can give.” He further cautions that problems arise when we begin to substitute our online connections for physical ones. Though some would argue that with new technologies such as video chatting voices and laughter are heard and smiles are seen, I contend that as connecting as they seem, they still cannot replace the physical connection gained with face to face interaction. There is no doubt that Internet connections can be a great source for communication but they cannot replace traditional face to face relationships. There is growing concern about the amount of time that people are spending on the Internet. A survey completed by Ipsos in 2011 reports that the amount of time Americans spend on the online is averaging more than thirty hours per week; and that people between the ages of eighteen and twenty nine can even spend up to forty hours a week on the Internet (Demographics). These are staggering and sobering statistics which should cause great concern for our families. If mom, dad, brother and sister are spending most, if not all, of their free time on the Internet how is the family dynamic being affected? In a article entitled “Online Communication and Adolescent Relationships” Patricia Greenfield and Kaveri Subrahmanyam disclose results from a four year video study of the how technology has affected modern family life. The study included thirty families with children whose parents both worked. Not far into the video study, it was reported that when a member of the family was occupied with a computer when the father arrived home from work, they would only greet him one-third of the time, and that only with a mechanical “hi” while continuing with their electronic activities (Greenfield). It was also reported that half of the time the children would ignore the father all together, never even acknowledging his presence. Furthermore, the video study showed that when parents did try to engage their children in family communication and activities, they found it difficult and would often give up (Greenfield). The behavior exhibited in the video study reflects the family disconnection fostered by the Internet connection. If this type of disrespectful behavior is allowed and accepted in the home, family relationships will suffer. Parents must set the standard and create communication no matter how difficult it seems. Creating communication can begin with something as simple as family dinners at least three times a week where sharing between family members is encouraged. Setting the standard for family connection could begin with game night. Additional suggestions for creating an atmosphere of open communication could be setting time limits on television viewing and computer use and keeping electronic devices in a family room.
The responsibility of effectively managing a household, including creating an atmosphere of open and clear communication where relationships can thrive, clearly falls on the shoulders of parents and guardians of the home. Gillian Thorne, Director of UConn Early College Experience, boldly states in a letter entitled “What Students Don’t Know and who is to Blame” written to the editor of The Chronicle of Higher Education that “we have created a culture focused on children in a way that leaves them isolated with their peers, deprived of meaningful adult role models.” She shares that adults have disconnected their children from real accomplishments and reasonable consequences, and have fostered a self-centeredness that can actually stunt their development of maturity. The previously mentioned video study supports Thorne’s opinion. The relationship and nurture that exists between parent and child cannot be replaced by a computer or an online connection. Parents must take the initiative to set priorities and guidelines in order to maintain their family connections. Through open and clear communication parents can set simple limits and boundaries on Internet use that the entire family can easily adhere to.
Parents who help their children find a healthy balance of Internet use may be helping them more than just in their family relationships, but also helping them connect to their classroom studies as well. A study conducted at the University of California in Los Angeles found that multitasking negatively affects learning (Rosen). Poldrack, who conducted the university study, notes that his research proves that a different area of the brain is used “for learning and storing new information” when a person is distracted or multitasking (qtd. in Rosen). He is quoted as reporting that the brain of people who are multitasking stores information in the striatum, the part of the brain used for learning new skills, while people who are not distracted by multitasking are using the hippocampus, the part of the brain used for information that needs to be recalled (qtd. in Rosen). In other words, people who are multitasking while learning may not be as likely to recall the information as those who are not multitasking while learning. Poldrack is quoted as warning listeners of a recent radio interview that “We’re really built to focus. And when we sort of force ourselves to multitask, we are driving ourselves to perhaps be less efficient in the long run even though it sometimes feels like we’re being more efficient” (qtd. in Rosen). I can personally attest to the findings of Poldrack’s study. When studying while listening to the radio, I find that it is very difficult to recall the information when needed for a test or exam. Once I listened to a recorded book on compact disc while driving on a long road trip and expected that I would be able to recall the important facts for a report, however, I retained very little of the information heard. Though multitasking can seem like an efficient use of time, it is actually creating a vacuum of it. Here in the 21st Century it seems that multitasking has become a new way of life for most of us.
Everyone does it, which gives the illusion that it is effective for learning. However, Ted Gup in his article, “So Much for the Information Age,” sheds light and bears out proof that multitasking is a façade. As he shares some of his experiences as a college professor of students who were unaware of important current and historical events, he expresses his disbelief that these students are part of the celebrated information age (499). He even states that “they disprove the notion that technology fosters engagement” (500). From Gup’s perspective, though his students have more information and technology at their fingertips than any other generation before them, they are not utilizing it. In fact he expresses that not only is this generation not using the information afforded them, but that they are more disengaged than the generations before them that did not have these technological luxuries. Perhaps the answer to this quandary lies in the lack of parental guidelines and continued Internet multitasking while in class or while doing homework. Perhaps this multitasking trend has caused the students of the information age to store the material viewed, taught and studied in the area of the brain that is not for recalling that
information.
However, technology, especially the Internet, makes information and data for teaching, and therefore for studying, much more accessible to educators and students. In a recent study conducted by CompTIA sixty-five percent of educators expressed that due to technology in the classroom students are more productive now than they have been in the past while a lower seventeen percent expressed that technology provides little benefit in the classroom (Lytle). Certainly, the plethora of information and teaching methods the Internet brings to the classroom are not the problem, but rather how it is utilized by both the teacher and the student. Perhaps the key to technology in the classroom is moderation. Kristen House, a former instructor at Belmont University says, “A great teacher can do more for a student than any amount of money or technology you can throw at it. Gadgets go out of date and humans do not. We only get better with age and with teaching and our gadgets all break down. (qtd. by Lytle).” Although, Lytle also shares that House acknowledges that the use of technology does help with educational research and communication. Technology arguably offers many benefits for classroom research, communication, and connection, as long as it is tempered with an even amount of interaction between educator and student, as well as student with student.
Family relationships and classroom relationships set the stage for how we relate to our community. Scholar Robert M. Hutchins is quoted by Ted Gup in “So Much for the Information Age” as saying “The object of the educational system, taken as a whole, is not to produce hands for industry or to teach the young how to make a living. It is to produce responsible citizens.” Citizenship, which is community engagement, is a vital connection in our lives. It requires our active participation, much like our family relationships and classrooms connections require. Therefore, if we learn to engage in healthy family communication, practice the discipline of strong classroom connection, we will in turn exercise the participation needed to be responsible and engaged citizens.
Our future, the future of our children, and the future of our nation depend on our community relationship and civic involvement. In a web article entitled “The Internet’s Effect on Relationships: Detrimental or Beneficial?” the author, Ben Turner, shares the following excerpt on social decay.
In an influential article, Putnam (1995) documented a broad decline in civic engagement and social participation in the United States over the past 35 years. Citizens vote less, go to church less, discuss government with their neighbors less, are members of fewer voluntary organizations, have fewer dinner parties, and generally get together less for civic and social purposes. At the societal level, social disengagement is associated with more corrupt, less efficient government and more crime. When citizens are involved in civic life, their schools run better, their politicians are more responsive, and their streets are safer. Certainly we do not have to look very far to see evidence that the effects of social decay outlined are prevalent in our world today. This social disengagement seems to closely parallel with increase of Internet use. However, it can be duly noted that the Internet, if used accordingly, does provide a quicker and less intimidating means by which to voice civic concerns to local and national government officials, to research political candidates and stay abreast of community and national issues. There is no doubt that the Internet is having a profound impact on our society.
The increase of technology, the introduction of the Internet and its growing force, have and will continue to affect the way we communicate within our families, our classrooms, and our communities. Dr. Alex Lickerman warns that “Like any useful tool, to make technology serve us well requires the exercise of good judgment.” We must heed the warning, exercise good judgment by setting guidelines for Internet use, so we do not fall into the trap of Internet disconnection. It is up to parents and guardians, educators, and us as individuals, to assure that online connections serve only as a supplement to the vital personal relationships needed for healthy human existence. Relationships with our family, in our classrooms and with our community can never be replaced by Internet connections.

Works Cited
Coyle, Cheryl L., and Heather Vaughn. “Social Networking: Communication Revolution
Or Evolution?” Bells Labs Technical Journal 13.2 (2008) Gale Power Search
Web.
21 Sept. 2012.
“Demographics.” New Media Trend Watch. 8 Oct. 2012. Web. 13 Oct. 2012.
Greenfield, Patricia and Kaveri Subrahmanyam. “Online Communication and
Adolescent Relationships.” The Future of Children 18.1 (2008): 119. General
OneFile. Web. 15 Sept. 2012.
Gup, Ted. “So Much for the Information Age.” Read, Reason, Write: an Argumetn Text and Reader. 10th ed. Ed. Dorothy U. Seyler. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. 498-
501. Print.
Gup, Ted. “So Much for the Information Age.” Read, Reason, Write: an Argumetn Text and Reader. 10th ed. Ed. Dorothy U. Seyler. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012. 498-
501. Print.
Lickerman, Alex. “The Effect of Technology on Relationships.” Psychology Today.com.
Sussex Publishers, LLC. 8 June 2010. Web. 21 Sept. 2012.
Lytle, Ryan. “Study: Emerging Technology Has Positive Impact in Classroom.”
USnews.com. US News and World Report, 14 July 2011. Web. 28 Sept. 2012.

Rosen, Christine. “Can you Finish this Story Without Being Interrupted?; Doing too
Many Things at Once may not be Saving us any Time, and Could be Harming our
Health.” Toronto Star [Toronto, Ontario] 2 July 2008: L01.
Infotrac
Newsstand. Web. 28 Sept. 2012
Turner, Ben. “The Internet’s Effect on Relationships: Detrimental or Beneficial?” benturner.com. Soapbox. BenTurner. n.d.Web. 21 Sept. 2012.

“What Students Don’t Know, and Who’s to Blame.” The Chronicle of Higher Education
54.35 (2008). Academic OneFile. Web. 15 Sept. 2012.