As Bauerlein started this chapter I thought maybe he was going to find something more positive to say about today’s students. I soon found however that he was continuing on with his negativity. He began with a discussion about a study of arts programs for troubled youth. At first he seems supportive of the arts programs, but he soon questions the validity of the reports made by these organizations.
Bauerlein states that if teens are left to themselves don’t have any forward direction (p. 164). The author looks at teen mentors for younger youth as a way to guide these young people by giving them some structure and directing their energy in positive ways. Bauerlein continues to refer to the documentary made by “Art Show” which seems to be an advocate for youth and their potential. This documentary encourages educators to treat students as colleagues (p. 165). If that is done then these students will be able to reach their full potential.
Bauerlein then introduces a group called “Twixters” which includes 22 to 30 year olds who are college educated and come from middle class families according to a Time magazine article (p.169). This group is reported to have achieved little and is on a journey of self-discovery. They are peer-oriented and feel that maturity is more social than knowledge based. It has nothing to do with learning or wisdom (p. 173).
Much of what Bauerlein presents in this chapter he blames on the indulgent attitude toward youth held by teachers and others dealing with youth. Tradition is seen as aggression and cultural tradition is seen as authoritarian (p. 175). He gives many examples of how this all began back in the 1960s and has continued on to the present. He rephrases a quote by Ronald Reagan to say “Knowledge is never more than one generation from oblivion” (p. 186). The implication is that focusing on the present and neglecting the lessons learned from history will lead to the downfall of our youth. He blames the poor achievement scores (p. 195) in relation to other countries on this attitude of making sure youth feel good about themselves. He believes that youth today won’t be able to function in society and lead the country in the future (p. 202).
While I found many of Bauerlein’s negative millennial comments to be redundant with previous chapters, I was intrigued by his discussion on page 167 & 168 about an art student who felt disaffected by his required studies of Rembrandt and Picasso. The 17-year-old student had this to say about his coursework: “I don’t want to be Rembrandt, you know, I’m a black guy from [words garbled], that’s who I am” (pg. 167). Bauerlein goes on to disparage this student for his disregard for artistic history and his feeling of superiority.
ReplyDeleteMy question to Bauerlein is this: Who did Rembrandt study? Who did Shakespeare model his writing after? Bauerlein seems to think that these classic artists and authors of the past must be studied and admired by today’s students or they risk being labeled uneducated. However did any of these esteemed classic artists and authors study others? Should we label them uneducated if they didn’t? While I do think it is important for students to know who these people are and to have an idea of their crafts, I do not think that they have to be the only people they know about. There are many contemporary artists/authors of different genders and ethnicities that are making a mark in their respective fields and I would like to see more attention paid to them by Bauerlein. He seems to value their contemporary contributions not at all. If promoting a more diverse, contemporary group of writers in my library makes me a multicultural mentor that enables “narcissistic, contemporary-focused worldviews” in my students, then that is a label I will proudly wear. I believe that multi-cultural education that promotes a contemporary worldview is just as valuable and important for today’s students as a tradition-focused curriculum. Indeed, I think that there needs to be a blend of both for students to be well rounded.
Geesh, this author is bringing me down. His work seems quit one sided. As an art teacher I do believe that the arts can have a profound influence on students' lives. This section is a departure from the author's technology related themes but he is discouraged by the lack of classical scholarship in standard education, only the Ivy League impresses him.
ReplyDeleteI was interested in his report about confidence vs. performance but even after reading it I'm unsure of the specifics of the correlation. Is it cause and effect? How could that be proven?
While this chapter was certainly not any more uplifting than the other chapters, I felt more inclined to receive his ideas positively, maybe because there were not pages of statistics being thrown at me. Like the other two commentators, I was struck by both the discussion of learning from "the greats" and the discussion at the end of the chapter about student self-confidence and the learner-centered classroom. On page 189, Bauerlein makes the claim that a learner-centered classroom is only beneficial for those who are interested in learning and does nothing for the students who do not have a desire to learn in the first place. This idea, combined with his discussion of narcissus, and the argument that we should teach less pop culture in the classroom, did in fact make me begin to think. Sometimes I too wonder what the benefit of me teaching my students about technology is, because my students are going to find out about technology on their own. However, like Bauerlein, I know the majority of my students are not going to read _The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn_ or _To Kill A Mockingbird_ if I do not require them to do so in school, and although I am excited by them reading _Twilight_ and/or _Harry Potter_ these books do not hold the same literary value.
ReplyDeleteI found some statistics in this chapter to be startlingly accurate. "Jane Eisner acknowledges the embarrassing voting rates of 18-29 year olds...Only if we address the structural reasons that young people don't vote can we begin to count on them to infuse our democracy with the ideas and idealism for which young Americans have always been prized". So the youth have lots of things to say, they complain about not being heard (according to Bauerlein, p. 185) yet they do not exercise their most accurate, reliable, opinion out there: their vote. In my government class we talk in depth about the non-voters and why people don't vote. One of the biggest reasons people don't vote is for the simple fact that they don't care about politics, the issues, the candidates, or any of it.
ReplyDelete"Adolescents are painfully self-conscious, to be sure, and they feel their being intensely, agonizing over a blemish on the cheek and a misstep in the lunchroom." (p. 198) Maybe this is why they want to hide behind a video game, computer screen, television. They can use an avatar instead of a real picture of themselves. They can be someone else in the WOW games but still have friendships and comraderies. "They leave school, but peer fixations continue and social habits stay the same. They grab snatches of news and sometimes vote, but they regard the civic realm as another planet." (p. 202)
Bauerlein is bringing his point back to the Jaywalking comments from the first section. In the Jaywalking segment questions about politics/civics/history are asked to this Dumbest Generation only to laugh as they fumble the answers to relatively simple questions such as the Vice President of the United States of America or how many US Senators are there in Congress? The sad part is most kids these days don't know unless they are forced to learn it in school.
So the point I gained from this section was that this dumbest generation is breaking down the foundation America was built on, our Democracy. They may exercise their right to vote but without taking the time to understand the issues or candidates it is worse than not voting at all.