This document provides directions for an activity where students are asked to take a position on whether technology is making us more or less intelligent and defend their position using evidence from two provided articles. For each article, students are asked to identify the most and least convincing argument and explain their reasoning. For the first article, the student found Steven Pinker's argument most convincing because it addressed changes in the brain naturally occurring, and Maryanne Wolf's argument least convincing because it did not provide reasons for her view. For the second article, the student found Nicholas Carr's argument most convincing as it discussed shallow thinking from constant information, and they could not identify a least convincing argument.
This document provides directions for an activity where students are asked to take a position on whether technology is making us more or less intelligent and defend their position using evidence from two provided articles. For each article, students are asked to identify the most and least convincing argument and explain their reasoning. For the first article, the student found Steven Pinker's argument most convincing because it addressed changes in the brain naturally occurring, and Maryanne Wolf's argument least convincing because it did not provide reasons for her view. For the second article, the student found Nicholas Carr's argument most convincing as it discussed shallow thinking from constant information, and they could not identify a least convincing argument.
This document provides directions for an activity where students are asked to take a position on whether technology is making us more or less intelligent and defend their position using evidence from two provided articles. For each article, students are asked to identify the most and least convincing argument and explain their reasoning. For the first article, the student found Steven Pinker's argument most convincing because it addressed changes in the brain naturally occurring, and Maryanne Wolf's argument least convincing because it did not provide reasons for her view. For the second article, the student found Nicholas Carr's argument most convincing as it discussed shallow thinking from constant information, and they could not identify a least convincing argument.
Working with Evidence Thematic Question - Is Technology Making Us More or Less Intelligent? Directions As a culminating activity, youll be challenged to take a position regarding the question, Is technology making us more or less intelligent? In order to defend your position, you'll be asked to make reference to evidence presented in either or both of the articles with which were working today. Use this exercise to help prepare your argument and its defense. Article #1: The Defense of Computers, the Internet and Our Brains by Nick Bilton Which argument did you find most convincing? Restate the argument here. Analyze and explain what made this argument especially effective: Steven Pinkers argument is the most convincing. His argument states that changes in the brains form are natural and have occurred many times in the past. Which argument did you find least convincing? Restate the argument here. Analyze and explain why the argument failed to win you over: Maryanne Wolfs argument is the least convincing. She never states any reason as to why she believes the internet is dangerous for the mental development of the youth. She then proceeds to say that there arent any things wrong with our brains changing or with the use of the internet. Article #2: Is Google Making Us Stupid? What the Internet is Doing to Our Brains by Nicholas Carr Which argument did you find most convincing? Restate the argument here. Analyze and explain what makes this argument especially effective: Nicholas Carrs argument is the most convincing. His argument states that the internet is making us shallow thinkers. By taking part in the constant barrage of information, you are never allowed to think on a higher level. Which argument did you find least convincing? Restate the argument here. Analyze and explain why the argument failed to win you over: Bruce Friedmans argument, because all he really says is that since hes been on the internet hes lost the ability to concentrate on reading for long periods of time. Hes also completely lost his ability to read and form proper sentences. I wanna be da big dinosaur. I luv appojews.-Bruce Friedman 1992-2015 Lets give a hand to our big boy Bruce God bless his heart and brain. Looks like Friedman has fried his brain (This is a joke; we couldnt find any arguments other than Carrs)