Unmotivation, even with everything going on in my personal life, school was still going. However, the motivation that was there even when online learning started, went away and up until now has not come back completely. Missing assignments started to pile up and I just did not care about it at all. Professors not being understanding and assigning even more homework than what they used to before the pandemic. Their excuse; “you guys spend the whole day at home.” And all these led to another unexpected emotion, confusion. With everything going on I started to question myself in many ways. “ Do I really like this major?”, “Should I withdraw my classes?”, “Should I not register for next semester?”, “Why is this happening to me?” and a bunch of other questions that I had no answer for.

Two months of the same went by and it was June already, the 4th month of the pandemic. By then the semester was over and all that stress from school was over, however the questioning it created was still there. Thinking about the summer months brings back the best memories of the year. I got to spend quality time with my family, something that would not have happened if things were normal. In August I also got to travel to a different state for my birthday. I spent 10 days there and for the first time in six months I got to see one of my friends, which would have seemed crazy at the beginning of the outbreak. Those experiences brought back an emotion I hadn’t felt in months, joy, the kind of joy I  had not felt since the beginning of that year. The next four months of the year went by insanely fast, Fall semester started, unmotivation and all the questions were still there. At some point I just did things because I had not and not because I wanted to. Excuses were made and I just kept going with it. 

 

Thankfully by the end of the year the situation had immensely gotten better. Vaccine research and studies were giving great results,  blended learning started to be offered. 

After a year of living with COVID-19 I learned that people have to appreciate every second of their lives because one would never know when things can completely change. I think that if the coronavirus hadn’t happened there would be many things I wouldn’t have realized. Good and bad things happened in 2020, it is surely going to be one of the most impactful years of my life, it changed me in multiple ways and taught me many lessons. At the end everything happens for  a reason.

• What were you told about Wikipedia in your early schooling? How has that changed after reading Purdy?

Looking back to my early schooling, ever since I started having access to the internet my teachers always recommended not to trust wikipedia, because I was told it was not reliable nor true to use. Those that contribute to the Wikipedia articles do not need to be experts or professionals, and incorrect information can seep in. At first it was a recommendation to as years went by it became a rule, wikipedia information was not allowed in any of my essays or research projects and if I used it they would take out many points from my work. I think that having that rule caused that I grew up having the mentality that wikipedia would never be useful for any kind of work. Now that I’m older every time I look something up I don’t even open the wikipedia link, it’s like it doesn’t even pop up, I just ignore it exists.

After reading Purdy’s ideas, I understand that college level writing should involve more advanced sources, rather than a general encyclopedia, which includes the use of Wikipedia. However, even other sources are not reliable and have many errors.

• What are some ways that Purday explains Wikipedia can be a useful tool to you as a student and scholar? Describe at least two.

According to Purdy’s article, Wikipedia is a good source that can be used as an aid to explore and find more further information or articles connected to the topic you can access too when you are reaching for. Since Wikipedia has links citing the sources used for the information listed on their site. Its easy to look at such sources and evaluate for yourself if they are credible and how reliable they are for your research.

Also Wikipedia can help you see at a glance of an outline for your research. The table of contents and headings can aid and provide ideas for your research papers.

• After reading about how Wikipedia works, would you consider it a community platform? For what reasons? Were you aware of the conversations taking place over every article edit?

Before reading Pursy’s article I did not know that much about Wikipedia, as I said before I have always ignored the fact that wikipedia existed. The only times I have used wikipedia were when I had been really desperate to find information of something.  However I have never used it as a primary source and I have never cited wikipedia for any of my works. Yet, most of the time when you search for something in Google Wikipedia is one of the first that pops up. Yes, I will consider this a community platform because is like a collaboration group working together building information, and interacting as well. I did not know that there is a conversation taking place over every article edit. 

• Carr argues that having such advanced technology in our pants pockets is affecting the way we learn and read. What does Carr mean when he says having access to infinite knowledge is making us stupid?

In my opinion Carr is trying to convey the idea that advanced technology has given us so much convenience and infinite information, leading people to misunderstand the knowledge they  have or know. In Carr’s article, it mentions that “because they would be able to “receive a quantity of information without proper instruction,” they would “be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant.” My understanding is that the internet has allowed  people to search for any knowledge or anything they want to know without any guidance just by having the internet, and this gives people the illusion that they have and hold the knowledge because they can look it up whenever they want, but in fact, it is only temporary because maybe the knowledge they get is partial or not always accurate. The more we rely on artificial intelligence to make us smarter, the more we become mechanic, like artificial intelligence. The flood of information is at our fingertips, and the making of the web is purposefully designed to distract our attention as we navigate it. As scientists have seen, our brains continue to create paths and connections, and the use of the internet creates paths that favor skimming through words while comprehending less, rather than patiently reading and maybe re-reading articles.

• Do you think there are problems with having immediate access? What are we losing by doing this? (For example, have you ever had to go to the library and find a physical book to conduct research?)

To be completely honest I don’t think there’s any problem to having immediate access to internet and technology. Having this resource at our immediate reach has made everything easier for me multiple times. I actually do enjoy the convenience of immediate access. However I am aware that due to the immediate access to technology, many people has become dependent to it.  Our brains has become lazier and we might lose interest in many things because looking for answers and researching about something that we’re curious about doesn’t take any effort. Finding answers to some of our questions can only take 3 minutes sometimes, you just have to look up the question and snippets of the parts of the book that has the answer will pop up, and we end up only reading that part instead of the whole book.!We also might lose concentration because there are too many things that distract us from reading on the internet, there’s many things such as social media, videos and even publicity.

• Shirkey argues that by constantly having access to the internet, we are able to experiment with new areas of knowledge in a much easier/accessible way. What are the pros/cons of this?

There’s pros and cons to having constant access to the internet. In my opinion some of the cons are that it makes people less likely to innovate because the huge amount of information on the internet makes people have a fixed mindset and rely on the internet to look up things without thinking really thinking about their our opinion or  position towards different situations. And the pros are that the internet allows to receive real time updates of news stories, play games, or chat with someone who is on the other side of the planet. It is a straightforward experience that lets us access a wealth of knowledge. Thanks to technology, you can access this information in the comfort of your home and looking up things doesn’t take as much time as it could.

• What do YOU think? Is the internet giving us new knowledge, or is it melting our brains in a way? Or both?

Honestly I think the internet has both giving us new knowledge and has melted our brains in a way. Having access to the internet to find answers and research about certain things has made things easier and faster, however I think it also has kind of melted our brains because most of us rely on the internet more than we should, sometimes we don’t even make an effort to do a proper research about something, instead we just find it in the internet and trust that the answers or articles that pop up are right. When Carr mentions in his article, that infinite knowledge makes us stupid, I think it’s true, for my own personal experience I am pretty reliant on the internet, when I am confused or need to find doubt about something  my first thought is to go online and search for it, to find the answer or the solution, my brain doesn’t make an effort to have my own thoughts first and then maybe use a little help from the internet, all I do is look it up and then use the answers I found . I have become impatient so I no longer want to take a long the time to understand why things are the way they are, I don’t care about the process, I only care about the result which also leads to me not remembering the knowledge as much because I simply don’t fully understand it.

• Carr addressing how as time progresses, our reliance on technology becomes stronger and stronger. For example, the tragic incidents of the plane crashes mentioned in the article. Do you agree? What could have changed the outcome of these incidents/How can we fix this?

I  mostly agree with Carr because it’s good that we have advanced technology that helps us solve problems but at the same time It’s not safe for us to always depend and rely on technology because even when technology is advanced it cannot think or act as one would do which might cause technical issues. As technology is evolving we should also be gaining new skills and knowledge as well so technology can be relied on for certain convenience. The plane crash incidents show us how we should rely on technology by keeping the plan control automatic even so It shows how we also have the unique skills to adapt, innovate, and creativity. What could have fixed this incident is placing someone who is highly trained and someone who doesn’t lack situational awareness.

• Do you think it’s a matter of improving technology or improving the skills of the workers? Why?

I think it’s a matter of improving worker’s skills because humans are unique, as I said before technology as advanced as it is cannot act as a human would act towards the situations and problems presented, especially if it’s an unusual situation. Us humans  have certain characteristics, emotions and we have the ability to gain skills, technology does not have those unique aspects as we do. Since we have this ability it’s good to make use of it, the more we learn and improve the better we could do in these different life situations and problems that are presented.

• Do you think this relates to the concern of technology taking jobs? What is your stance on this controversy?

I think this does relate to the concern of technology taking jobs because If technology were to take our jobs, how will we make money to pay for our living expenses? People would be at home without anything to do, losing and wasting energy from inactivity, this can lead to humans becoming useless. It’s better to have technology used as a helpful resource however over using technology can result in a complete disaster. Giving people’s jobs to literally a machine when people who are looking for jobs just doesn’t make sense to me.

• Can you brainstorm an alternative approach?

I think the best approach people could take is to find a balance. Technology will always be of great use for us humans because it can make so many things easier for us, however technology should always be controlled by humans and should never be completely trusted.

Bonus: Honestly , I would  say I’m a person that’s very reliant on technology. It is required for online schooling, socializing with friends, and entertainment, among other things. Now that we’re home most of the time my technology use has increased drastically, because there’s not much to do, however I do try to control my technology usage.

• How does Litt describe the relationship between literature, writing, and technology?

Litt describes the relationship between literature, writing and technology as dependable. By saying that literature is not alien to technology in fact because literature is technology to begin with, so the relationship between technology and literature is that literature depends on technology. As technology advances it has led to literature regression, technology makes people get constant temptation of snippets and  distractions from writing. Before, writers did not have these temptations. Therefore, Litt believes that writers will continue to happen, but technology and its trivia can take something away from the people and the writers. She believes that many writers write worse now because they cannot write classical prose which does not fit modern technology anymore, indicating a regression in literature.

• Litt discusses how many classical tales were driven by distance, or lack of connectivity, rendering these plotlines obsolete in the digital age. Has technology affected your perceptions of more classical literature? What do types of issues are the stories of today driven by?

From my own personal experience I think that technology has affected my perception of classical literature because it has put certain ideas in my head, and then when I learn more about classical literature, I tend to compare it to what I see and learn now, and therefore it makes me not fully understand what classical literature is really about. As technology advances, silence fiction and modern literature is what it’s most likely to be found in our everyday lives. Therefore, nowadays I have little access to classical literature unless it’s presented in a class and I “forcefully” have to learn about it.

• How might you see technology disrupting/change the stories of today or the future? (Consider how might tropes might change as technology advances, or how it has already) 

The way I see things is that technology has brought many advantages. Technology has changed the way people view, interpret, and the way they write about stories. Since now everyone has access to the internet, people are able to express themselves in many ways, writing blogs, posting their personal stories and even when people rate products they’ve bought. Which means that many people can now present their ideas, inspirations, techniques in any way they want on the internet that can be seen by different people or even by people in different countries, which makes it easier for different writers and others to learn different ways of creating and writing.

• What is your opinion? How does reading on a screen or through these various interfaces affect you/your learning/reading comprehension?

Honestly I have been reading through the screen ever since I got into reading fiction books back when when I was 12 years old. I know many people can differ to my opinion but for me reading through the physical book took me longer because I couldn’t read everywhere or any time I wanted, So even having the physical books I always ended up downloading the digital versions of it. So for me reading through the screen doesn’t really affect my learning nor my reading comprehension because I  have been used to reading like this for many years now.

1-In your own words, what is a single story? What is it a metaphor for?

In my opinion a “single story” is a story that’s based on a group that shares their background or perspectives. It’s written by someone’s perspective so not everyone would be able to relate to it, stereotypes and bad opinions towards someone can be created with single stories. A metaphor states that one thing is another thing.

2- What type of stories did you have to read growing up? What were the characters/plots/tropes like? Were they guilty of portraying a single-story such as Adichie describes?

Growing up I read a lot of stories since I really enjoyed to read. Most of them were fiction, looking back books always had an villain who I believe were misunderstood because the author most of the times didn’t write about the villain’s background they were just a part of the plot to make the protagonists the heroes of the story.

3- Do you think modern technology somehow contributes to these single-stories? If so, how?

I do think modern technology contributes to these single stories because anything can be put on the internet and taken out of context because of lack of explanation. There’s always many sides of a story or a person there’s never enough explanation to anything and then everyone judges based on stereotypes.

4- Are these two pieces speaking about overlapping issues of identity, or separate issues?

These two pieces do speak about overlapping issues of identity as Hassan says that dealing with the negative connotation around his name because of what people presume about Muslims that he would purposely pronounce it wrong to try and avoid it, similarly Adiche mentions how people have perceptions based on what they’ve heard or seen that contribute to a single story and negative stereotypes.

The section I choose to read was “Some People Are Just Born Good Writers” which is the bad idea that the author focuses on. Most people do not consider their writing as an art because they can not match the “god-like” genius that is often portrayed as good writing. The author says this is a bad idea because the people who are creating the standards for “good” writing are of the highest educated, they have the ability to decide what is considered good. “Students who were privileged to be of the right socioeconomic, national, or ethnic background already wrote to the university’s standards because they were part of the group in power who set the standards. Therefore, their perceived talent perpetuated the author genius idea because these desirable students were already seen as good writers while the less desirable students were not.” Making it so that less educated students were considered less because they were not up to their standards. This is a bad idea because it teaches people that they are not as intelligent, or their work is simply not as good because they do not write in a standardized way. Another bad idea is that all writing needs to be at the genius level, in order for it to be considered artwork. The individuality and ever-changing perspectives created by all writers are what makes writing creating art. There are individuals who are naturally more gifted in writing, as they have a more creative brain not because their writing matches the expectations. I do believe that there are some naturally talented individuals, who receive higher education to perfect their abilities.

1. 3 unique takeaways/tips from the readings were thinking about who the primary audience of the text is, breaking down the introduction so that you can understand what the text will be about and considering the author’s choices. These would help me in particular because I have a very hard time at comprehending and trying to understand WHY the author writes what they do, their thought process etc. Comprehending and understanding is a big part of learning for me because you can’t really take away from a reading if you can’t or really anything if you don’t have a full understanding of what you’re reading.

 

1. I think that this means to go into a reading as if you’re a part of the reading. While reading the text you could think, why is this being said, who is this meant to touch, why is it so important etc, You break down the text better which leads to a way better analysis.

 

1. You can learn the context of a text before reading by figuring out the author’s purpose and who the intended audience is.

1. A single-story is basically a rumor that gets told over and over again. Many single stories however, lead to stereotypes and people to have a certain view over a certain place or group of people.
2. I liked to read fantasy stories. Books like Harry Potter, Artemis Fowl etc, The characters were usually outcast with secret incredible gifts. I don’t think the stories I read specifically created any single-stories for me because my mom kind of taught me about different cultures and backgrounds at a very young age. It wasn’t until I got to middle and high school that I noticed the different single-stories in the books I was reading. 
3. Modern Technology definitely contributes to single-stories just because it opened different lifestyles people had to live up to you. Also, with modern technology there’s memes and live streams etc that allow people to openly express any narrative they want and millions of people have access to it. Modern technology has caused single-stories to spread faster than before which leads to way more stereotypes.
4. I feel like these two pieces are talking about how single-stories contributed to identity issues and with how they viewed their world against the world they read about.

I do agree with what Carr was saying about our reliance on technology growing. When we need to find somewhere to eat, find directions, do research for a paper or anything, we use our phones/computers. We automatically run to technology. Because of this sometimes we feel like we don’t really need to learn certain basics or take it as seriously because technology will always be there to fall back on. These crashes could have been prevented if the pilot would’ve taken his training a little more seriously. Also, if who/whatever trains the pilot, should not only teach the pilot how to work the technical side of the plane, but should also be taught how to take control of the plane when the computers etc fail. I think it’s a matter of the worker. As a society, we unfortunately rely on technology way too much. When the wifi shuts off, a whole household stops. We shouldn’t constantly upgrade technology just so we don’t have to do any of the heavy work. Technology was created to help and make things more efficient. Not completely take over our lives and do everything for us. I don’t really have much of a stance on technology taking jobs. It is definitely a possibility which is why we should start trying to catch up to technology so that if THAT fails, we won’t be completely screwed.