At work I'm not able to listen to the embedded audio that is put into the blog posts but I definitely will when I get home. There may be something Bauerlein says in the extended interview that saves him but for now I disagree almost completely.
First off, I think extending the dumb age up to 30 is too old. I'm 24 and my first experience with computers wasn't until seventh grade and it wasn't until I was a senior in high school that typing one's school papers was required. We didn't even have a computer with Windows in the house until I went to college.
I am, however, willing to concede that high school kids are, in general, kind of vapid. I work with a bunch of high school kids as an assistant coach of a local high school speech club and I think the small percentage of those who excel that Bauerlein spoke of is much larger. I doubt he takes into consideration that the more stress one has and the more one works toward aquiring a higher level of intelligence, the more he or she is likely to turn to relaxing activities that don't require as much thought. Or as much thought relative to the work one does. Knowing sine and cosine functions and looking at lolcats are not mutually exclusive activites.

Sent by Sarah Lee | 9:12 AM ET | 05-23-2008

Interesting point, Sarah. Check out some other challenging arguments presented directly to Mark Bauerlein and his responses on the Boston Globe's website: http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/chats/transcripts/051408_bauerlein/

Sent by Angela | 9:31 AM ET | 05-23-2008

Anglea, I liked the link you posted.

The overall theme Bauerlein seems to be proffering is the idea that degrading the next generation into annoyance or anger results in higher academic productivity. I'm pretty interested in checking the sources cited in the book with the originals and seeing if anything comes up statistically significant. And I think I'll do so after I finish up the current trio of books I'm reading.

And I hate to say it, but this person's question kind of illustrates Bauerlein's point while smashing down on one of my own hot button issues (though I'm sure the individual is definitely not in "the dumbest generation" judging by the words used in the question):
Paul_Revere__Guest_: And when did someone tell these kids that is was acceptable to prounounce the "t" in the word "often". that makes me crazy and makes the speaker sound ignorant.

:: sigh :: Seriously, it's language evolution. I'm annoyed by the "t" in often, too, but language evolution happens all the time and we just need to get over it. That's my mini rant for the day.

And I'd like it to be known, in defense of TV, that I wouldn't have nearly the vocabulary I currently employ nor the interest in words if it wasn't for the old AMC show Remember WENN. A-thank-you.

Sent by Sarah Lee | 10:40 AM ET | 05-23-2008

@Sarah Love the point, and to your last sentence, I would pinpoint the webcomic XKCD as a perfect example of how inane humor and ridiculously baffling mathematics can be perfectly combined.

http://www.xkcd.com/

(And no, I'm not a marketing schill for them -- what you said just reminded me of that webcomic in particular)

Sent by Brian Retchless | 11:30 AM ET | 05-23-2008

Brian -
My sister posted that link not too long ago! It's pretty funny, the cos

Sent by Sarah Lee | 12:59 PM ET | 05-23-2008

I'll second the recommendations for XKCD (a cartoon so amazingy geeky that I, a dedicated geek, don't always get the jokes)and Remember WENN (WENN oh WENN will the DVD's come out?!)

I grew up watching "Johnny Sokko" and "Masterpiece Theater". Also "Tom and Jerry" and "Nova". What my parents taught me was to use my time deliberately. We could watch anything we wanted, but no more than an hour a day and we had to pick the show in advance. After TV we had to read, play, or practice. This choosy approach to media has served me better than any specific program they might have tried to make me watch.

I don't believe a person who lives their life in a rut, be it video games, channel surfing, or romance novels necessarily becomes dumber, they just get more focussed. They are doing themselves a disservice because people with more diverse interests are more adapted to survive in society and are more fun to be with. This is one of the reasons I have a problem with us venerating people who single-mindedly pursue music or sports. Why is someone who practices hoops or violin eight hours a day be considered a role model? Why are they more worthy of our respect than a champion Grand Theft Auto player? To me it's all just obsession. I have more respect for a person who does their job, writes a poem, rides a bike, and cooks a meal in the same day.

Sent by Dave Wiley | 1:30 PM ET | 05-23-2008

Ooo I like the way you think, Dave Wiley. There are probably a lot of people out there (myself included) for whom the phrase "jack of all trades, master of none" applies. People who don't excel at one thing in particular and may feel bad for not being one track minded. LOL just because I'm not awesome at one thing doesn't mean I can't be good at everything (or a lot of things).

And, Dave, I don't know if this means anything, but if you go to amazon.com and look up Remember WENN dvd you will actually get a page where you can sign up for an email notification of its release date ... whenever it gets one. I don't know if it means that the dvd set is in the works or if it's some cruel joke. I'm holding out for the former.

Sent by Sarah Lee | 3:16 PM ET | 05-23-2008

Wow. Perhaps Mr. Bauerlein is struggling to come to grips with his mortality - grasping to place the blame for what he perceives as society's shortcomings on someone, anyone. All I know is that I am 28, I vote, I work a steady job as a cartographer, I graduated from a state university (not an Ivy League), I listen to NPR, watch CNN, read the newspaper, am well read, well traveled, speak three languages... I could go on. Pop culture and ignorance are not embraced solely by the youth of America. Just as responsibility and cultural awareness are not necessarily practiced by those over the age of 30 across this great nation. I guess what I'm really trying to say is, "Thanks Mike. You made my day!"

Sent by Amanda Banner | 3:45 PM ET | 05-23-2008

I read through the interview posted by Sarah and have to say that I think Mr. Bauerlein's assertion is one of the more ridiculous things I have heard. I haven't read his book (nor do I intend to) so I can only speak in generalities. I can say, though , that it seems to me the generation that he refers to in his title actually has the potential to be one of the more productive groups society has seen in awhile.

I have no doubt that Mr. Bauerlein is correct in his statement that children read less in this day and age, however, his conclusion that this ultimately makes them the "dumbest generation" is just silly. In this day and age children have the ability to absorb information in ways that have never been possible. This terrible "digital age" that the author keeps referring to is in reality considered (by his own academic community) to be one of the most significant advances in all of human history. That children absorb information in different ways before does not make them dumb... it makes them different. And while change always seems scary to the oldest generation -- history has taught us that change is not a bad thing.

In my opinion, Mr. Bauerlein should spend less time flipping through educational statistics (and how is lapse in educational standards the pupil's fault?) and spend more time studying brain chemistry and how the young mind today absorbs information in contrast to historical standards. That to me would be better spent time than prophesying gloom and doom over generation of young people that he obviously does not understand.

As Bob Dylan said:
Come mothers and fathers throughout the land. And don't criticize what you can't understand. Your sons and your daughters are beyond your command. Your old road is
rapidly aging. Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand. For the times they are a-changing.

Sent by Dan | 2:07 PM ET | 05-27-2008

I went to the website and right away I wasn't too happy about this. I have my action figures, I play video games, and I am on Facebook. Still, I wrote a book last year, read over 100 books, kept up to date with the news (thanks to you guys mostly!), knighted at the Star Wars Celebration, and kept my apartment cleaner than anyone else I know.

Everyone has different priorities, and comparing my grandmother (b.1905), my mother (b.1948), and myself just isn't fair. I don't think I am smarter than them and I work hard in different ways. They had two or more children by my age (26) and were wives in a time where a lot of people didn't have high school diplomas. (I have a B.A., married, and want kids but I have no idea when!). I don't think that we can compare all the generations today since they are so different. There are so many factors to why education is not working, and why these things are happening. Still, I don't think that people will change that much. We haven't really over the course of the human race. Reading science fiction, people will stay the same, but the way they do things is changing. Just like war. The weapons have changed, but the reasons for wars happen remains the same.

Sent by Natasha | 12:00 PM ET | 06-01-2008

I couldn't agree more. Technology has been a wonderful work tool that has brought information to the masses. What the masses choose to DO with it is altogether a different matter! This generation is taking it all for granted and letting technology "think" for them. The ones that will get ahead are the ones who think there has to be more to it than what is already out there, like those who think abstractly, objectively, constructively, creatively about problems that still exist.

Sent by nanana | 6:05 PM ET | 07-08-2008