I am reading some literature about millennial children and technologies. It is said that these children are typically very comfortable with using technologies and are usually super-multitasking. They claim that: listening to music while studying actually help me concentrate, but the parents simply don't understand us! So I began to re-think the whole notion of multitasking helping concentrate. I was paranoid about that my mind cannot concentrate, because it keeps getting distracted and wants to find some other things to do. Now I begin to realize that this probably is not a bad thing.
First, I don't think this is the result from using modern technologies, because I don't regard myself as a technology geek, I didn't grow up in a super-technological environment or play a lot of video games as the millennial children do. Nor do I feel completely comfortable with using technologies as they do. I feel my brain is naturally capable for multitasking, and if I restrain it, it will have extra energy that cannot be released, and will feel uncomfortable.This extra energy cannot be added to the single task I try to concentrate on, it is just extra and must be released through some other channels to keep my brain healthy. Second, if this empirical feeling is generalizable to people other than me, that is, most people's brain are naturally multi-tasking, there should be all kinds of channels to release the extra energy, but it also highly individual, certain people will feel more comfortable using certain ways than other people. I wasn't feeling comfortable working while listening to music, especially music with lyrics when I was in China,and was thinking in Chinese. Now since most of time I use English in my work and daily life, I feel listening to music with Chinese lyrics can help me concentrate on my English work. I feel my brain think in English and listen in Chinese, and well comprehend them both at the same time. Also since they are completely different languages, they won't interrupt each other. The Chinese songs make me feel at home and keep me calm, warm and awake. Consequently, this calm and secure feeling help me concentrate more in my English thinking. Third, based on my arguments above, the modern technologies actually provide the children more choice of channels to release their extra brain energy, as long as the children find the certain channels that they feel comfortable with, modern technologies have the great potential to help children more concentrate rather than distracted, and keep their brain healthy. Finally, my opinion here is purely empirical, and at this moment, I don't know any of the theories of human mind or linguistics that can support the arguments, but I think there should be some interesting things there if I look into, and I will keep an eye on them, and if any of my readers know something about relevant theories, please don't hesitate to give some advice. Anyway, I am so released that I found some excuse for my "distracted" mind and some effective ways (working bilingually) to help me concentrate.
By the way, today is Valenti's day. It's overall not a bad day, though I still do not have a boyfriend with whom I can celebrate this holiday. I got a call from China in the morning, I went out for dinner in a Japanese-Karen restaurant with a female friend and had a pleasant conversation. When I got home in the evening, I found a box of chocolate on my desk from my sweetheart dear roommate! So, happy Valenti's day, no matter whether you married, in a relationship, or still single! Enjoy the time being single, when you are still single!
Showing posts with label children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label children. Show all posts
Monday, February 14, 2011
Thursday, February 10, 2011
A Tender Loving Point in My Heart for Young Children
This post was supposed to be a book recommendation. I am reading this book named Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications (Fifth Edition) by William Crain, and I really love it! This book is assigned for the ENE695 Developmental Theories and Engineering Thinking class. I recommend it not because of it's theories or scientific methods or anything like this (though it does hold a very neutral, analytical and comparative perspective most of the time), because I am by no means an expert who could recommend a psychological book based on its content now. I recommend it simply because the way it is written. From my non-native English speaker's perspective, it is really well-written and easy to read and comprehend. The class assigns several other similar texts, but this is the one I am really into and think through. From a cognitive theories' perspective, it unloads my cognitive burden of struggling to understand and make sense of the texts, thus shifts my brain to engage in some deeper thinking. By the way, the cover picture of this book is really a nice art piece (They changed the picture in the 6th edition, but I like this one better).
In my opinion, all intellectual productions should be presented in this kind of easy comprehensible ways, which could make communication and innovative activities so much easier. However, this is so far away from reality. At least, we need to try to reduce all those boring,empty, hard to read,...,intellectual garbage in every academia disciplines a little bit more and more.
Another thing I am feeling (this is a little bit off-topic here, it's an extended paragraphs about papers that I don't like) is that I begin to become dislike those papers about so-called "complete" "unified" or "integrated" models. They are different from the "intellectual garbage" I mentioned above, indeed, many of them are regarded of great value, I just personally don't like them. In my opinion, there are different theories, and different people have different opinions and different ways to make their arguments, and backup their claims. I used to always wonder there must be a way to unify them, to achieve a universal or at least eclectic theory. However, now I kind of like the existing of diversity. Just like the failure of achieving a universal theory in Physics, such kind of efforts are highly possible to be also failures in other fields. We just need to appreciate the difference, and different applications, like Newton's law and Relativity are both valid in their respective domains.
Let's go back to the title of this post. This book is about the developmental and learning theories of mainly young children. After almost five years' "screaming" that I am interested in psychology, this is the first psychology book I really read through. This book evokes my love for working with young children. They are always my love. I am thinking creating a digital interactive touch book for children for a course project and also write something about the underlying psychological and cognitive principles of technologies and children, but this is only for a semester, I probably won't be able to fully engage in research about children in my later PhD years. It's okay, I have other also important topics that I need to investigate, but working with young children will always be my love. If I have any opportunities in the future, I will definitely go for it. :)
In my opinion, all intellectual productions should be presented in this kind of easy comprehensible ways, which could make communication and innovative activities so much easier. However, this is so far away from reality. At least, we need to try to reduce all those boring,empty, hard to read,...,intellectual garbage in every academia disciplines a little bit more and more.
Another thing I am feeling (this is a little bit off-topic here, it's an extended paragraphs about papers that I don't like) is that I begin to become dislike those papers about so-called "complete" "unified" or "integrated" models. They are different from the "intellectual garbage" I mentioned above, indeed, many of them are regarded of great value, I just personally don't like them. In my opinion, there are different theories, and different people have different opinions and different ways to make their arguments, and backup their claims. I used to always wonder there must be a way to unify them, to achieve a universal or at least eclectic theory. However, now I kind of like the existing of diversity. Just like the failure of achieving a universal theory in Physics, such kind of efforts are highly possible to be also failures in other fields. We just need to appreciate the difference, and different applications, like Newton's law and Relativity are both valid in their respective domains.
Let's go back to the title of this post. This book is about the developmental and learning theories of mainly young children. After almost five years' "screaming" that I am interested in psychology, this is the first psychology book I really read through. This book evokes my love for working with young children. They are always my love. I am thinking creating a digital interactive touch book for children for a course project and also write something about the underlying psychological and cognitive principles of technologies and children, but this is only for a semester, I probably won't be able to fully engage in research about children in my later PhD years. It's okay, I have other also important topics that I need to investigate, but working with young children will always be my love. If I have any opportunities in the future, I will definitely go for it. :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)