Carr draws extensively from cognitive neuroscience literature to make his deterministic argument that the Internet is changing who we are. He weaves the findings together well, but on closer inspection, his use of the literature is occasionally questionable and at times outright indefensible. He seems to ignore the scientific literature that has actually found that new digital technologies might be better for how we learn (Gardner, 2006) and how we socialize (Pew, 2010). Furthermore, in his discussion of hypertext and the ways it hurts deep thinking, he draws from a Canadian study (Landow & Delaney, 2001) that, as Rosenberg (2010) argues, does not prove Carr's argument. The study was actually analyzing a specific type of hypertext fiction and was never meant to be extended to all hypertext. This example is a microcosm of Carr's book as a whole, a valid argument that extends itself too far.
Mary Fahey Colbert on 21 Jul 12This guy gives a great review of "The Shallows" by Nicholas Carr, and he goes on to talk about how he hopes to see educators come to with appropriate Internet use: "It's not impossible that educators will come to a consensus about what constitutes healthy Internet usage and we come to think about it in the way we now think about risks to our physical health. Perhaps children in 10 years' time will be taught to do 2 hours' book reading for every hour online." This is the ultimate challenge I see facing me and all of us in the classroom. We do need to address the reading and empathy piece head on, but how is the question.