Is Sherlock Holmes obsolete in the Google age?

By -

During a recent class discussion about a Sherlock Holmes story ("Adventure of the Speckled Band") my students and I had read, it occurred to me that maybe Holmes would be out of work in the 21st century. After all, anything that he could possibly think of (in this case it was a "swamp adder" from India) could be googled. So I asked my class what they thought. The immediate response was that Holmes was obsolete. Google could take his place. All of his knowledge was available right there for quick and easy access. Why memorize when you can google it?

Then there was a pause.

They caught themselves and actually began to think about it. I could have stopped right then and called the entire class session a success. Heck, that might even be considered a successful week. But we did continue. It was time to press my luck and see where this thought was going. First one voice (you gotta love that one - the one you sometimes wait to call on until many others have had a turn), and then several more chimed in and realized that it would be highly unlikely to have thought of what to search for without prior knowledge. Holmes put the pieces together because the pieces were already there, in some form, for him to work with. He had studied and learned the material previously. Did this lead them to an "a-ha" moment and then did they succumb to the fact that they need to study every minute detail and learn it all, thus becoming scholars and making me a hero among my colleagues and a positive topic of conversation at parent cocktail parties? Not a chance.

What it did accomplish was to make me realize that there needs to be some content in memory before we can begin to process and work with it. I often hear the question "Why memorize when we can search the internet?" Was a similar question asked 30 years ago but modified to "open an encylopedia" instead? It seems that some content knowledge needs to work as a foundation. Brain research and recent studies in cognitive science support this as connections are made which are an essential part of the learning process. Sure the content and knowledge are going to change. They always have. What that content is will be up for debate for as long as there are schools. But do we stop learning about something because in 10 years we may see some things differently?

It seems that we can use these tools for research and information retrieval quite well and need to pass that on to our students. But I think the tools can be used far more effectively in helping us learn the content. Whatever process we created to help us learn the information in our notebooks or books may be recreated and/or improved using the available tools. Maybe then we can all be a 21st century Sherlock Holmes. It's certainly not something just "elementary" to strive for.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boost Learning in Presentations and Games

By -
For those teachers who use games for learning and review, it's apparent the rise in engagement that they bring to the classroom. But, does this engagement and enthusiasm always lead to learning? According to research by neuroscientist Paul Howard-Jones, adding an element of chance can help further increase the chances of learning. It's just a matter of adding it at the right time. For instance, the addition of a simple 50/50 chance of losing all points associated with a correct answer leads to more effective learning. But where in the process does the learning peak? I asked Howard-Jones via email and it turns out that the following sequence works well: student/team answers question student/team is given a 50/50 chance to "double or nothing" their points correct answer is revealed It turns out that even if they lose points or answer incorrectly, the learning is still at a peak because of the state of mind of ALL the students involved. Good or bad, even those who a
Read more

How do students know what they know? (an effective exit slip)

By -
I remember sitting in class a few (plus!) years ago and at times totally following what was going on. It could have been almost any subject but there were times when it seemed to click.  At least I thought so. Then I got home and started the homework. Different story. It just wasn't that clear anymore and I realized that I didn't quite get it the way I thought. This was not exclusive to homework as it also happened at times on quizzes and tests. I thought I had studied enough (which, admittedly was what I always thought) but it did not pan out. I want my students to avoid this problem and the trick is for them to answer the question: "How do I know when I really know it?" But how? I recently saw a tweet for a webinar run by Ray Jimenez, who is a great webinar presenter by the way, entitled "Learners Don't Know What They Don't Know." Of course, I was excited to get the long-awaited answer to my question in one interesting hour but, ironically e
Read more

Are We Testing Enough?

By -
As I watched my sons play a new video game the other day, it occurred to me that maybe the problem isn't that we are assessing students too much, it's that we are assessing them too little. Look at gaming environments. Players are constantly being assessed, challenged, and tested. They adjust and maneuver or crash and/or die. Then they get back up and begin the process all over again. It's demanding but the gamers are resilient. I have often wondered how this type of learning could be transfered to the literature classroom. An obvious possibility would be to create time periods or even particular settings so that students could experience them first hand. Imagine going into the house from Poe's "The Black Cat" and interacting with the characters. I am not sure what the "game" would be - stop the murder, find the body, or even attempt to throw a dead cat through the window? What fun! My parent/teacher conferences would be standing room only. While thi
Read more