Response to Bauerlein & Howe

After watching the video on Millennials, this image came to mind. I believe that many Americans view Millennials as technology-obsessed robots. The sad truth is that this image does not seem altogether unfamiliar to me. Just walk down pedestrian walkway here at UTK and you will see a similar picture. But does this attachment to technology make Millennials a dumb generation?

Response to Bauerlein's argument:
Bauerlein seems to take a matter-of-fact stance on the concept that technology is decreasing the intelligence of the younger population. While he acknowledges a few of the ways in which Millennials are actually advancing our society, such as attending college at a higher rate than any previous generation and being less likely to get involved in criminal activity, he spends the rest of presentation arguing that Millennials are hindering our society. On the one hand, I have to agree that the prevalence of technology in our daily lives will have some negative consequences that we are just now beginning to investigate. However, I find it difficult to buy into Bauerlein's argument that technology is obstructing learning simply based on his choice of evidence. Is it fair to gauge someone's intelligence based on the number of books he or she has read in the last year or even in their lifetime? Or to assume that their lack of literary or historical awareness is attributed to their reliance on technology? In fact, it was quite amusing to me that Bauerlein used statistics on Millennial's understanding of U.S. history to support his theory. As a social studies educator, I realize that history and the rest of the social sciences have been the "red headed stepchild" in public education for over a decade. And with more recent education reforms, such as Common Core, social studies is being increasing devalued in public education. So Bauerlein using Millennial's lack of historical understanding as a way to indicate their lack of intelligence seems completely unwarranted. Millennials are going to reflect the trends in education that existed during their schooling. We do not need to blame the younger generation for not knowing a famous FDR speech when math and ELA are what is being emphasized in public schools. 

Response to Howe's argument: 
I found Howe's argument more difficult to follow, as he jumped around quite a bit and seemed to use somewhat irrelevant data to support his claims. His use of college readiness and attendance ratings seems a bit disconnected with the increase in technology and more aligned with improvements in public education. With that being said, I think that Howe brought up a few valuable points. Millennials are more well-rounded than any previous generation, as they are exposed to many different opportunities and have instant access to knowledge via technology. On the other hand, this relationship with technology has caused declines in formal writing, public speaking, and other forms of non-technological communication. 

Of course, as a Millennial myself, I believe that we have new skills to offer the world because of our relationship with technology. I also think that we are not less intelligent than older generations. However, I do not think either speaker really gave a persuading argument due to their choice of evidence. But what kind of evidence could you use to develop an opinion on the topic? Is it even worth trying to compare us to older generations? We have grown up under different circumstances and have adapted to the world in which we see today. I think that there are always going to be generation gaps as long as our society continues to advance.