I take issue with Todd Gitlin's article. Gitlin's article, and most responses to it, expresses a perspective held by many of his generation (which attended college before the "Age of Info-Glut"). I found his descriptions alarmist and melodramatic -- I sense a feeling of alienation. I grew up watching Mtv and CNN, and I use the Internet daily. Sure, the incredible availability of today's information can be overwhelming, but only if one allows it to be. Being raised in a "high-velocity, reckless, and lightweight culture whose main value is marketability" (a description I do not find inaccurate), has cultivated my sense of discretion, if anything. I personally love being able to explore any subject I want in five minutes, then spend hours immersed in history books -- I appreciate the choice. This shouldn't for one moment suggest that I am incapable of comprehending, or worse still, am uninterested in more enduring, timeless subjects. The speed with which trends change today is blinding, and as a result members of my generation have a high appreciation for that which is authentic. If what we deem "authentic" is more contemporary than Melville, it is not because of any lack of exposure or taste. Gitlin's admirer's are a choir and he is a preacher. Obviously many of his day agree with him. Still, he should realize that he lacks the necessary perspective to understand how today's students feel about the Information Age. He should remember that the character of this new age is not one bit unfamiliar to us. If Gitlin wants to make a qualitative claim about the availability and nature of information today, fine, but he should stop to consider that perhaps it is today's teachers, and not their students, who are suffering.
JOIN THE DEBATE Be sure to include your name and affiliation. Legitimate requests for anonymity will be honored. Submissions may be condensed or edited for clarity.
| ||||||||
previous response
Copyright 1998 The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inc.