Opportunities in the Digital World - Essay Example

The end of the 20th century brought about several opportunities like the growth and changeover to the digital world. The forerunners of today’s generations are now witnessing students becoming global citizens, tethered by a common interest and thirst; the ability to access all the world’s foretold knowledge in a fundamental manner through cell phones and internet databases. This evolution of the new generation has drawn concerns for the authors of the article, Today’s Students: Same as Always, but More So. Arthur Levine and Diane Dean express a unanimous concern that there will be a knowledge-based generational gap if higher education is not transformed to keep with the accelerating changes of digital information. Levine and Dean do identify and make the valid claim that the majority of students believe they will achieve success based on previous generation’s ability to do so, and how students do not take into account the reality of a poor economic infrastructure. However, students do recognize that a stagnant economy will curtail the possibilities of monetary success. It is important to acknowledge what students today think about the future of the economy; twenty years ago, tuition was never thought to reach the price and investment that it has today. Although the authors reveal and extol their concepts on how society as a whole is changing inevitably through the digital revolution, it is conveyed in an editorial point of view. The author’s concerns have a sense of legitimacy, but many assumptions are made without taking into account that life and society is always changing. Change, by definition, is an ever-evolving transformation that at times can seem to occur instantaneously. The credibility such as the statistics given becomes skewed and misleading to the audience because of the way Levine and Dean interpret them. Although Levine and Dean make broad assumptions, they do, however, make agreeable depictions on the concept of how grades are more inflated, but not how they perceive it to have been done. “Forty-one percent of undergrads have grades of an A- or higher” (Levine & Dean), this statistic may be true, but the point of view from the authors mislead the audience by claiming that a student who has an A got that grade because grades are inflated, which leads to their assumption that today’s undergrads are “weak academically”. The authors do not take into account that every teacher is different in his or her own way, an assumption cannot be concluding with the evidence given. This is in addition to the basic, but potential truth that students, too, have individual differences in perception and understanding. These two factors are overlooked by the authors of the said article making their argument null to the extent of proving lack of competence in the field they purportedly write. The statistic given is not specific enough, whether the institution is a community college, public, private, or Ivy. The author’s has misled the audience with the data given, and propose that all professors should stop inflating grades. Levine and Dean cannot just demand professors to “stop giving inflated grades” (Levine & Dean), and expect them to do so. The authors do not take into account the realities that the economy is faced with today; more highly educated people need to enter the work force. As “half of recent college graduates cant find full-time jobs”(Axelrod, 1), students are facing challenges in supporting themselves. Levine and Dean cannot make the assumption that because more students have more A’s than undergraduate students are weak academically. The authors also do not take into account effort and dedication that is used to gain a more profound depth in education to get high grades. Levine and Dean cannot make the assumption that just because a higher percentage of people have more A’s than that makes this generation academically weak. Levine and Dean analyze the current conditions between students and their parents, in saying overly intrusive parents in the long run would disrupt the nature of the student’s ability to achieve success unaided and be entirely independent. With their interpretation of “helicopter parenting,” the result is a failure to see the future of the student’s successes unassisted. Although the authors receive conclusive data “two of every five students are in daily contact with their families”, through their point of view, they conclude that parents who are too involved with their children’s lives the cause will lead to an “immature generation, inexperienced in dealing with adversity”. While parents are becoming more “intrusive,” Levine and Dean make a bold assumption about the upcoming generation. They fail to reach a median within parenting, and do not explain that having parents who show strong support making the transition between the youth at home and going off to a university easier (Bridgeland and Milano 8). Through their point of view, Levine and Dean only interpreted the involvement of parents in a young adult’s life, but failed to mention parents who are not involved. Parents are more involved today because parents want to see success from their kids; parents want to see their children “ be at least as well off as [themselves] (Levine and Dean). The role of parents is perceived as a degenerative cause for their children in molding half-baked graduates and children in their endeavors in life. The authors direct the attack at parents for babying their children and turning them into social failures of sorts, especially with the over-protective nature and highly intrusive nature in their children’s academic progress and involvement in school and collegiate affairs. Parents acknowledge that their children have a better chance for success, although an opportunity for economic investment for higher education is present. Parents have come to realize that; in order for their kids to be successful they must be in connection with them and make sure they are on the right path in higher education. Levine and Dean fail to acknowledge that more people are going to college today than ever before. Parents who do not have a college degree want to see their child succeed, therefor parents are likely to be more involved in their child’s life, to make sure they receive that level of education. Through the point of view from the authors, it is apparent that kids are being “coddled and praised” too much because the adults today did not have as intrusive parents. Levine and Dean also do not take into account that technology, such as phones, and email; has made it easier to communicate with family members. The authors are failing to acknowledge that having a phone and other digital devices are becoming the social norm. Levine and Dean describe the way students on campus live their lives as a community. However, they express their opinions in their own point of view and do not take into account society as a whole and college students’ perspective. They describe social life on a college campus as “[students] connected online 24/7,” demonstrate poor face-to-face communication skills and is the classic image of a pack of students walking across campus together each on a phone (Levine and Dean). Although a complete overstatement, the concepts revealed by Levine and Dean are conceived to be true due to the assumption they make. This is in regard to having people who spend hours on end on the internet or their smart phones browsing the World Wide Web, texting, or even talking on their phones, which is a form of communication. However, Levine and Dean are not in a position to assume that technology is a hindrance to interpersonal skills, especially when it comes to face-to-face interactions. Instead, they should view it as advancement in technology that is bringing people together from across different cultures and corners of the earth. This is because; students continue to socialize more than ever before not only virtually; but also face-to-face all thanks to the same technologies that Levine and Dean are downplaying. As a result, the generation is evolving through technologically as people of all ages will always socialize personally not just virtually proving their point moot. In addition, as we develop more into the digital revolution, the percentage of people not just 25 and under, but people older are adapting to the new normal (International Telecommunication Union). The assumption that students are on their devices 24/7 is not credible and misleads the audience. This is because; the authors fail to consider and applaud that which technology has to offer, and how it stands to impact not only the present generation, but also the global society as a whole. In addition, the article by Levine and Dean attacks the application of technology by belittling it, and saying that the college student generation has poor face-to-face communication skills. The authors assume that students are continuously connected to technology and are “little involved in campus life; [and] disenchanted with politics and government (Levine and Dean).” This is a clear-cut assumption that is backed up with no statistics; there are over hundreds of clubs and activities around campus. The above said claim by the two authors proves the lack of command in their area of writing, seeing that there are no real statistics or evidence from qualified persons to attest to their claims. This turns them from not just assumptions, to misrepresentation of their perceptions as allegations lodged against the present generation. Also, Levine and Dean assume their allegations in relation to their observations on students as they walk from class to class. This implies that they fail to conduct assessments on extra-curricular activities that students are likely to engage in after school. Therefore, the author’s opinions mislead the audience by suggesting that students are connected to technology twenty-four hours a day and seven days a week, as they claim that this generation has little interest in politics, actual statistics would counter otherwise. The assumption is not true because according to the Census Bureau of the United States voter turnout for people ages 18-24 has been on the steady rise at 48.5% as of 2008. Works Cited Axelrod, Jim. "Half of college grads cant find full-time jobs - CBS News." Breaking News Headlines: Business, Entertainment & World News - CBS News. CBS Interactive Inc., 14 May 2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. Bridgeland, John, and Jessica Milano. "Opportunity Road The Promise and Challenge of Americas Forgotten Youth." Civicenterprises.net. Civic Enterprises & America’s Promise Alliance, n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. International Telecommunication Union. "The World in 2011 ICT FACTS AND FIGURES." www.itu.int. International Telecommunication Union, n.d. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. Levine, Arthur and Diane Dean. "Todays Students: Same as Always, but More So." The Chronicle of Higher Education 10 Sept. 2012: n. Print. The United States Census Bureau. "Voting-Age Population, Percent Reporting Registered, and Voted." Census.gov. The U.S Census Bureau, 27 June 2012. Web. 5 Nov. 2012. Read More