I learned through the peer review was that I should try to make my closing statement longer and lower the amount of quotes. Maybe instead to paraphrase what the quote meant instead. Also a question I have is how long should each section roughly be. How long should I spend on opening Thesis, support and Closing.

This Chapter is titled “The Juggler’s Brain” which is fitting because Carr, in this chapter, argues that we juggle the use of our attention when using the internet. he asks “What can science tell us about the actual effects that Internet use is having on the way our minds work?” Carr uses several experiments, studies, and journals to back up his answer to this question, that the internet promotes cursory reading, hurried, and distracted thinking.

The first point Carr makes is during the use of the internet we “repeat the same or similar actions over and over again.” The second important statement he makes is that “The net provides a high-speed system for delivering responses and rewards.” These statements by themselves are just observations, but support his next idea that the long-term influence of the net is that it seizes our attention, only to scatter it.  Carr also states “The net is, by design, an interruption system, a machine geared for dividing attention.”

Carr reinforces that idea with a plethora of experts and experiment findings. Gary Small, an expert in Physiological and Neurological effects of digital media, says he’s discovered that the explosion of digital technology is rapidly and profoundly altering our brains. An experiment Small conducted showed using the internet, even only for five hours, can drastically change neurological pathways. The last point Small suggests is “Using the net as an informational medium is so intensive, when it becomes our primary mode of thought, can impede deep learning and thinking.” John Sweller, an educational psychologist, theorizes that the net influences the depth of our thinking. He elaborates on short-term and long-term memory and explains that we have a harder time forming long-term memories through media. Another experiment in 1990 showed how hypertext reading increased cognitive load by comparing reading text to reading hyperlinked-text. In a similar experiment in 2001, two Canadian scholars found that the group reading plain text routinely scored better on memory and read time than the hyperlink-text group.

In summation, Carr suggests we are rewiring our brains. Maybe in ways that are self harmful to the attention span.

This chapter is centered around one key point. Being that the internet has an almost limitless capability. Alan Turing was the inventor of the enigma machine and had believed this fact, and he was right. only a few decades after his death it became the “Universal Medium”. The world wide web began in the early 1960’s and every year after it’s creation doubled it’s traffic. First the web started taking over sound mediums. from radios and phonographs to streaming audio. Shortly after, it started also taking over  the video industry  via streaming services.  Then it’s capability exploded with the exponential factor of data sharing through social media.  according to this chapter, by 2009 an average American was spending 12 hours a week on the internet. double the average in 2005. The print medium is now at the lowest point of usage in it’s existence, yet still will probably never be obsolete. Old mediums stays relevant for a long time or indefinitely but usually fall out of  their economical and cultural force. Old mediums when converted into the net are not just conversions. They are their own entity in which the net tries to replicate. It makes them more accessible by making it fragmented and connected in other ways only the net can. The data we see is only going to continue to be accessible with the common use of cell phones.  The powerful mobile computers in our pockets is proof everyone carries, of the exponential nature of technology.

The article begins with a disgruntled professor who is upset at the lack of respect, and standards students of the current generation show. Those standards being how students communicate with professors informally in emails, as well as calling them on a  first name basis publicly. The author makes the argument that titles in this day in age help “protect disempowered minorities” and “ensure the modern university belongs to all of us.” The author continues to say that having these titles forces students to give the respect that was earned the hard way, regardless of background. the author then plays devil’s advocate, and tries to see how a student would be in the situation to call a professor by their first name. Ultimately though, she concludes communicating on a first name basis “can impede good teaching and mentoring.” As well as “Undermines what the academic titles are meant to convey.” It also gives the idea that the name carries value to those enrolled in higher education. Otherwise , why seek it, if it holds no value?