Academic gag reflex

The other day I was sitting on the train on the way home and reading some research materials I found on Google Scholar for a paper that I am thinking about on social check-ins (you know, foursquare and services like that for an academic environment). I came across a qualifying paper from about a year ago on augmented reality.  It seemed interesting so I though I would give it a quick look - after all, a qualifying paper has been vetted by a tenured or tenure-track professor who has a PhD, so it can't be that off, right?

Well...it turns out that I was wrong.  This was merely a 15 page paper but I could not get past page 2 (double spaced) because of the insane amount of references to the digital native and descriptions of this "generation" of learners as having been born with a keyboard in-hand and a lot of other inaccurate cliches. I guess it was sort of like a gag reflex on my part when I kept reading about the digital native and hoping that it got better (i.e. that these false references would cease)...but they didn't...*sigh*

I put the paper in my "discard" folder on the iPad since I wasn't planning on using it, and moved on to more intellectually stimulating (and perhaps more accurate) articles on augmented reality.  When I got home I wondered if any other academics, and people of learning in general, out there have the same reaction to BS in articles and books.  Does a heavy stream of front-loaded BS impede your ability to forge on and read the rest of the article (or book, or book chapter)? Or do you just shrug these things off and just keep reading in search of a small ounce of accuracy?

Comments

I don't have time to read anything that starts of that poorly - I guess if there is a gem later in the paper I am going to miss it, because I will never have made it that far.
I think the rule in writing to argue a case is to lead with a strong point and then infill with crap after the audience is hooked. Bundles of lumber, boxes of apples or cages full of budgerigars at the pet shop always lead with the most enticing. Either the author was clueless on writing tricks or digital natives was as deep as it went and you saved yourself time by not reading further.

On the other hand, I'm now curious as hell about the article and this blog may very well be a convoluted gorilla marketing scheme designed lure the innocent amongst us.

An interesting dilemma here. Can we become so sophisticated we miss things?

Scott

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion forums in MOOCs are counter-productive...well, sort of...

Academic Facepalm (evaluation edition)

Latour: Third Source of Uncertainty - Objects have agency too!