Well, Bob Simpson (Durham University) seems to think so in an article in the latest Times Higher Education from 22 May 08. (“In an age of memory sticks, precious little knowledge adheres”). Let’s get my own opinion out of the way right from the start: I believe that the author looks at things from a somewhat skewed angle.
It smells to me a little like outrage before the advent of printing in an oral society: “does the printing press cause our rich heritage to vanish by young people failing to memorise our stories?” Indeed, there’s reference to Hunters and Gatherers who needed to store the information & knowledge (the debate between the two is for another day …) in their heads. But surely, in an age of exponential data (let’s call it data to remain as neutral as possible, or perhaps facts? Information? For ‘knowledge’ does require the human mind for processing – or doesn’t it? ooops, I didn’t mean to get into that debate) with the necessity to make connections between the vast amount of data and find the nodes that lead to the next level of realisation, it is impossible to rely on small, chosen and ‘digested’ amounts of information.
In short, we are creating experts in retrieval, collection and filing who can live happily in the knowledge that facts, information and techniques that once would have required a rather more challenging existential engagement can sit on a server or hard disk to be accessed at any time.
But do we? The author’s examples are certainly compelling (one student who did not feel it necessary to spellcheck, because he couldhave pressed the spellcheck button; another who believes that being in possession of the photocopy i.e. the information, was enough to warrant a “yes” in response to “did you read it”) and yet I am asking myself first and foremost: is it the fault of the technology (ICT, printing press, papyrus) or is it the lack of insight into how students should be guided to use it?
I certainly would not want to fingerpoint (as the author so beautifully worded the usual path of blame) but if we don’t tailor the activities towards learning and processing of information instead of ‘processing’ the information in an external processing unit, then why should students err from the path of least resistance and believe their ICT skills might be synonymous with their learning/studying skills?
ICT is not what hinders deep learning. Its mis-use of it is.
Why not have students take the ‘processed’ date and process it to create and reach the new level of realisation AKA learning? Yes, I know, this is the hard bit, but hasn’t it always been?
Still, I very much thank the author for writing this article, because it got me to think and is this not the greatest gift an author can give to a reader and vice versa? Thanks, Bob Simpson, you certainly took me above and beyond storing the article on a data processor. 
Let’s end with a last and final quote:
Are we not encouraging a climate in which information, ownership and control is repeatedly mistaken for action and engagement? Instead of creating conditions in which time is factored in to acquiring knowledge that is appropriately “deep”, are we not prone to sending students skittering off across vast, flat plains of information? Might the curiously ambivalent state of unconsummated intentionality be a reasonable response for students faced with the latest ICT developments? If the answer to any of these questions is “yes”, we would do well to think carefully about how we go about building into our learning and teaching strategies strong reminders that the internalisation of memory is a capacity that we neglect at our peril and one that we may have to protect and preserve.
With this, I wholeheartedly agree, because the author gives us a heads-up and a push for a step forward.
The latest of the Eduserv Second Life Snapshots is out, and John Kirriemuir has put together another excellent report. Now, before I send you to a brilliant blog post of my MACS lecturer pal, I’d like to point out to anyone who reads this that I have been credited with a lot of quotes in the report. This is a mistake! I put together our survey response in a very very short time and on my own (handful of hours), expressing my own opinions, but also using quotes from Judy’s blog – to make sure that I got her opinion absolutely right – and from my own blog, and also from Judy’s course documents. Because of the short time poor John had to put it all together in the end (I think I sent ours out with an hour to spare …) it has all been mistakenly attributed to me, but you will find that a lot is Judy’s work. Just so that this is clear. Thankfully Judy took it philosophically.
However, her rant about technology and distance learning? I would happily say the same thing. “Technology is not going to solve all distance learning problems!”
Now, though, it’s time to point you to Judy’s excellent blog entry about the Second Life Snapshot. I meant to write an entry after reading the snapshot, but alas, my comments would probably pale, because you have to read how she deals with a loaded negative comment and takes it apart with intellectual razor blades. Go read!
Dear vast readership of … 1? 2? 
Have you ever had the feeling that so much in your work life is changing, morphing, transforming, shifting that you really don’t feel like consolidating anything, not even a thought, by writing/blogging? If yes, welcome to my recent world. If not, nevermind.
The transforming and changing seems to have come to a (possibly temporary) halt and I have some brain space to think and write about what matters to me above and beyond the daily grind.
I’ve been teaching my module, and while I find it strange to even call it teaching – it IS teaching, but if you’d ever taught academic staff you know you are tiptoeing around while never trying to use terms such as “students” (I call them participants) and “teaching”. What do I call the latter? Nothing, I’m usually the Queen of Paraphrasing.
It has been fascinating so far (take this as you will …). It always is, but this time I have more experience and have learned from some mistakes, while happily adding new ones. Action Research? Nah … common sense. The application class went swimmingly, though, despite grumblings to the contrary “what, we have to *work*?” – a joke it was, surely, the groupwork results were very well thought-out, with solutions to challenging scenarios that showed engagement, reflection, and innovation. Well done, cohort! Also, I took a leaf out of lecturer pal’s book and offered a prize to the winning team. It was only chocolate covered bikkies, but alas … who said adults can’t enjoy hippo, tiger, lion and monkey shaped sweeties? It has also been encouraging, because it is rather motivating to hear positive ongoing feedback. It is hard to run a module with participants who have not chosen to be there, and it is extra rewarding when they actually enjoy it and get a lot out of it. Of course, one cannot please all, but I never expected that.
The distance learning cohort is doing brilliantly, with such insightful work, I can see the assignments forming before my eyes, and that throughout the module. A true pleasure to work with such creative folks.
And now to run a session on podcasting in education, and trying to come up with a needs analysis survey. As usual, everything has to be done with no time to spare, but I guess everyone feels like that.
