Shrinking Attention Spans

[rynner2]

Stress of modern life cuts attention spans to five minutes
Attention spans have halved to just five minutes over the last decade, with young people the worst at maintaining concentration, new research claims.

By Matthew Moore
Last Updated: 6:46AM GMT 26 Nov 2008

The pressures of modern life are affecting our ability to focus on the task in hand, with work stress cited as the major distraction, it said.

Declining attention spans are causing household accidents such as pans being left to boil over on the hob, baths allowed to overflow, and freezer doors left open, the survey suggests.

A quarter of people polled said they regularly forget the names of close friends or relatives, and seven per cent even admitted to momentarily forgetting their own birthdays.

The study by Lloyds TSB insurance showed that the average attention span had fallen to just 5 minutes, down from 12 minutes 10 years ago.

But the over-50s are able to concentrate for longer periods than young people, suggesting that busy lifestyles and intrusive modern technology rather than old age are to blame for our mental decline.

"More than ever, research is highlighting a trend in reduced attention and concentration spans, and as our experiment suggests, the younger generation appear to be the worst afflicted," said sociologist David Moxon, who led the survey of 1,000 people.

"Lack of attention has a serious impact on task performance and increases the risk of accidents.'

Last year more than £1.6 billion of damage was caused by people not concentrating properly, the research found.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healt ... nutes.html

Please keep any replies short - I can't be bothered to wade through long posts!

 

[GNC]

Hm? Sorry mate, I wasn't listening.

 

[baracine]

That sort of reminds me of a recent article that explained how our attention spans had been halved by the stress of modern life or something. Excuse me. Phone ringing.

 

[James_H]

wat?

My attention span varies. If I'm deeply involved in something, like painting, I can go on for hours without really thinking about it, because I'm in a certain mood where attention to detail feels more important than regular cigarette breaks.

But sometimes, not.

 

[squizita]

I've worked in education as a teacher and in various professional roles for over 12 years and IMHO :imo: it's a myth -but one of those which can be 'proved' by paying attention to part of a survey whilst ignoring other parts- people have claimed this for years (longer than the scale of the research). Concentration varies on the person- one person gets in the 'zone' from maths, another from art ... what's generally agreed on by a lot of research is that the things that engage kids, and the activities that trigger 'the zone' of concentration, are fundimentally different from 30 - or even 15- years ago.

Additionally, it seems more of a problem today because other social factors mean that many kids/adults will 'kick off' and make their boredom clear rather than being passively non-engaged( (as many grammar school kids would 30 years ago- there's a dearth of information about SMs, I've discovered - giving a skewed 'it was wonderful in the past' result which jars with case studies I have found). The rule of thumb with kids is chronological age + 2 min before you change the style of your input or re-stimulate. This hasn't really changed. Their reactions once bored have.

In fact the web and computer games have increased interactive concentration by several minutes! Teachers/child psychs who say 'oh- kids can't concentrate nowadays' often can't explain why those same kids can focus on a role-play game (so, imagining too) for hours on end. The flip side is that passive concentration (of we the older TV generation) is no longer enjoyed very much. The child needs to be DOING- kinaesthetic learners have increased over the last 15 year, as have visual. Audio has fallen, as we become more and more exposed to visual input 24-7.

The rise in accidents can also be attributed to kid not learning for themselves due to being overprotected, or the culture that 'nothing is my fault' (compensation culture, 'nanny state' stuff, some parents/teachers instilling rights but lacking the confidence to apply the rules/responsibilities that come with them ). Those two factors have resulted in a noticable drop in 'risk taking' OR the opposite (the kid becomes reckless and blames all accidents on mum/teacher/grown ups) - neither way keeps them safe. The biggest problem I've experienced is this elongation of that child-like state- 16 year olds with high IQs asking 'what do I doooo?' when asked to plan their own itinerary for a day out (for example) and totally lacking initiative or perseverance. Perseverance is different from concentration: that's what I think is falling. Indeed, many LEAs now teach it as part of the PSHE/life skills courses- role plays that make it clear things WILL go wrong, mum WON'T always be there to bail you out ... but guess what? Learn to get up/roll with the punches and you'll be OK.

 

[rynner2]

Whoah! Lots of acronyms there! This threw me:

as many grammar school kids would 30 years ago- there's a dearth of information about SMs, I've discovered - giving a skewed 'it was wonderful in the past' result which jars with case studies I have found

Er... Sado-masochists? :? :shock:

Lost me there, I'm afraid.

(Perhaps my grammar-school education, over 40 years ago, has warped my perceptions? )

 

[baracine]

Whoah! Lots of acronyms there! This threw me:

as many grammar school kids would 30 years ago- there's a dearth of information about SMs, I've discovered - giving a skewed 'it was wonderful in the past' result which jars with case studies I have found

Er... Sado-masochists? :? :shock:

Lost me there, I'm afraid.

(Perhaps my grammar-school education, over 40 years ago, has warped my perceptions? )

You're just not paying attention... Seriously, I had to show persistance to get at the root of those acronyms. Here is what I found so far:

PSHE = Personal, Social and Health Education (aka Citizenship; English National Curriculum subject)

LEA = Local educational agencies (in the US, at least)

SM is representative of at least 537 common acronyms, among which "self-mutilation" and "sperm measurement".

 

[JamesWhitehead]

I'm afraid that whole post is an after-shock of the spasm of piffle which passed through the education gut about five years ago, prompting a deluge of bumf about Kinaesthetic Learners and how they were being left behind.

It was badly-researched junk, wasted everyone's time in Emperor's New Clothes sessions and the literature has been shredded. There is no such thing as a Kinaesthetic Learner though a brief blip of interest will naturally follow any novelty. Didn't we know that already?

Fashion has moved on and we are squandering our own much-abused attention-spans on this year's piffle: such as what to do in KS3* now that SATS** have been shredded. It won't be an outbreak of common sense, that's for sure!

*11s to 13s. What used to be called Years 1, 2 & 3. Now called years 7, 8 & 9.

**SATS stood for Scholastic Aptitude Test in the US. Over here it was almost never defined! I have seen several different explanations of the acronym in use within schools. Yet teachers wittered about them endlessly and parents were encouraged to fret about their children's performance in them. Now they are gone, as if they had never been.

 

[James_H]

I'm afraid that whole post is an after-shock of the spasm of piffle which passed through the education gut about five years ago, prompting a deluge of bumf about Kinaesthetic Learners and how they were being left behind.

Haha, yes, I had to laugh once when they tried to sort us into Kinaesthetic, Visual, Auditory etc learners. It's just bollocks! Teach us something, for god's sakes!

 

[Graylien]

That's an NLP thing isn't it? An odd mixture of psychobabble and classical stoicism and a certain inane smugness on the part of Master Practitioners or whatever they call themselves. I do think it's actually true that people have different preferred learning styles, though. Mine is to actually do something rather than have someone merely show me how to do it while I stand there apparently watching them (but actually thinking about something else entirely).

If there's one way I really can't learn, it's by watching someone standing in front of a succession of Powerpoint slides with loads of bullet points on them who then reads out the text on the slides to me. Um....hello! I can actually read you know. If all you're going to do is read out your slides, couldn't you have just emailed me the slides!

Sorry - went off on one there for a minute...

 

[JamesWhitehead]

Sorry - went off on one there for a minute . . .

PowerPoint! The Devil's own application. The hours we have all spent being lectured by a twonk with only PowerPoint as his or her qualification for speaking at all!

I did once stand up and ask a visiting speaker if he intended to use PowerPoint OR did he have anything useful to impart?*

He dealt with the question quite gracefully but only in order to carry on with the session as scheduled - with PP. I suppose it was a day we were all being paid for but I bet the twonk with PowerPoint got paid a lot more than we did.

*My Head of Department frowned meaningfully at me for weeks after that. So I got paid too.

9:53 pm: edited for literal: spend for spent, line one

 

[James_H]

My preferred learning method is more or less self-driven. I don't think I can really learn about something unless I'm really interested in it, but lucky I seem to have the capacity to find even the most boring things fascinating. But it's got to be whatever I'm into at the time, which I why I spent more of my schooldays hiding in the library when I should have been in lessons than is strictly recommended. Now I learn art and music, I'm wildly enthusiastic about both, which lends itself to obsessive learning.

On music, I learnt clarinet and piano to a highly limited level at school, and found it impossibly boring. Practice was a drill and a chore and I'd avoid it.

At some point I picked up the guitar and started learning music unstoppably for the sheer joy of it. Now I play much better clarinet and piano than I ever could when I could actually read music.

 

[JamesWhitehead]

I think your notion of Obsessive Learning is a fine one - except that it is so unusual that we give it the medical tag.

Babies learn from dawn to dusk. What stops us?

It is horrible to observe keen and eager 7th Year pupils have the fun knocked out of them by the realities of Secondary Education. Well it used to be. These days, it's been done for us in Primary!

Any serious enquiry into educational standards would begin with the simple question of quite why so many subjected to our educational system are unable even to recognize simple self-interest?

To throw down the gauntlet, I don't think they are supposed to.

 

[James_H]

I was thinking about this the other day in regard to playground crazes. Why did the teachers have to clamp down so hard on people learning tricks on the yo-yo, when they were actually enjoying learning (and learning how to learn) for the first time?

 

[squizita]

Over here it was almost never defined! I have seen several different explanations of the acronym in use within schools. .

Never, ever officially called SATS on and government literature. They were the Key Stage Three National Tests. Everyone (including teachers) called them SATs though.

The so called 'piffle' research started much further back than a few years. It got adopted by a certain type of 'trendy' teacher and this coloured it in the eyes of many as just a trend, based on woolly research (because trendy teachers are often weak on pedagogy/subject knowledge in favour of enthusiasm ... and hate that practical learning, to give it its old 'un trendy' name, started in military schools in the 1950s) and so forth.

As graylien says " I do think it's actually true that people have different preferred learning styles, though. Mine is to actually do something rather than have someone merely show me how to do it while I stand there apparently watching them (but actually thinking about something else entirely). " - that's essentially practical (or kinaesthetic) learning.

I do like to switch to the old fashioned terms and have the 'anything new is piffle' brigade agree, then disagree, with the same theories in conversation.

I also like to throw in the age group with the highest levels of illiteracy - the over 35s. Dickensian poverty and dropping out of school young still casts a nasty shadow.

 

[baracine]

Over here it was almost never defined! I have seen several different explanations of the acronym in use within schools. .

Never, ever officially called SATS on and government literature. They were the Key Stage Three National Tests. Everyone (including teachers) called them SATs though.

The so called 'piffle' research started much further back than a few years. It got adopted by a certain type of 'trendy' teacher and this coloured it in the eyes of many as just a trend, based on woolly research (because trendy teachers are often weak on pedagogy/subject knowledge in favour of enthusiasm ... and hate that practical learning, to give it its old 'un trendy' name, started in military schools in the 1950s) and so forth.

As graylien says " I do think it's actually true that people have different preferred learning styles, though. Mine is to actually do something rather than have someone merely show me how to do it while I stand there apparently watching them (but actually thinking about something else entirely). " - that's essentially practical (or kinaesthetic) learning.

I do like to switch to the old fashioned terms and have the 'anything new is piffle' brigade agree, then disagree, with the same theories in conversation.

I also like to throw in the age group with the highest levels of illiteracy - the over 35s. Dickensian poverty and dropping out of school young still casts a nasty shadow.

NEVER MIND ALL THAT! What does "SM" MEAN???!!!

 

[rynner2]

NEVER MIND ALL THAT! What does "SM" MEAN???!!!

Sexually mediocre?

Sexually Magnificent!

Substandard manuscripts?

Superficial mediocrity?

Specifically mentioned...

Sherbert Mangoes... (Mmmm!)

Super-Moronic...

Satellite Monitored...


(I could go on all night! )

 

[baracine]

NEVER MIND ALL THAT! What does "SM" MEAN???!!!

Sexually mediocre?

Sexually Magnificent!

Substandard manuscripts?

Superficial mediocrity?

Specifically mentioned...

Sherbert Mangoes... (Mmmm!)

Super-Moronic...

Satellite Monitored...


(I could go on all night! )

Rank Abbr. Meaning
****** SM Small (size)
****** SM Stock Market
****** SM San Marino
****** SM Service Mark
****** SM Sutton (postcode, United Kingdom)
****** SM Santa Maria (California)
****** SM Superman
****** SM Santa Monica (California)
****** SM Submarine
****** SM Sailor Moon (anime)
****** SM Super Mario (Nintendo game)
****** SM Sports Medicine
****** SM Spider Man
****** SM Systems Management
****** SM Spiderman
****** SM Sales Manager
****** SM Shopping Mall
****** SM Serbia and Montenegro
****** SM System Management
****** SM Sheet Metal

More at: www.acronymfinder.com/SM.html

 

[JamesWhitehead]

The context would appear to rule out Sado-Masochist and Senior Management, which are the commonest implications.

More disconcerting is the word "fundimentally," which has a meaning, at least by extension, though probably not that intended.

What is a 'trendy' teacher and why does he or she lose the inverted commas later in the paragraph? Either you think the teacher is trendy or others do and you disapprove. It is difficult to tell. Do the commas indicate a distaste for the word itself? In which case, choose a better one. Do you have a clear idea you wish to convey or do the contours of your prose merely reflect the muddle in your mind?

The piffle I refer to was not the casual enthusiasm of a few odd teachers but a top-down initiative which infested the curriculum in hundreds of schools. It was heavily promoted by Local Authority subject advisors and Heads of Department; many hours were spent in meetings to make sure that no school was left behind in its understanding of this burning issue. It was not a good career-move to appear even slightly sceptical. Now it is paper spaghetti. That is where tax-payers' money goes!

Finally, squizita, have you never found the quality of your written English an impediment to your career? The standard of your writing is equivalent to that of my weaker Sixth Formers. I hope you are lying about your career but I fear you are not. I am sorry to appear so unwelcoming. I will proof-read for you, as I do regularly for the Head of English at one school I visit. She is, I kid you not, dyslexic. Now there's Equal Opportunities in action!

Edit 11:16 pm: Ambiguous 'and' in the fourth paragraph rendered unnecessary by slight rephrasing and clearer punctuation.

 

[Abendstern]

*raises hand gingerly*
Please Sir, this is a message board, sir!

It doesn't really matter if what squizita has written isn't totally grammatically correct or has a few spelling mistakes;we're not submitting homework here! As long as her post makes sense (which it does, along with what I believe to be a number of good points).

As for SMs...I'd go for 'statistical measurements/methods' myself.

*Abendstern hopes she won't be rusticated*

 

[Graylien]

I think that if you truly have a complete command of language, you will write well regardless of whether you're writing a thesis or a hurried text, simply because you have become incapable of writing badly - much as someone who has truly mastered a musical instrument is incapable of playing it badly. I'm certainly not at that stage myself - I always have to edit and reorder everything I write and I just don't have the patience to do that for a message board post or an email, nor would I really expect anyone else to. Still, that's another discussion for another thread, perhaps.

 

[James_H]

I think I've got a pretty good grasp of written English (semicolons and everything!) but don't always adhere to strict rules when writing short messages on the internet. Often drunk.

 

[squizita]

Why the rudeness, loaded sarcasm and hyperbole?

Your A level results must be excellent if I represent your weaker sixth formers. Well done. Let them know that a first-class honours degree from a well known red-brick, a Master's from the same and a secure career with no complaints or issues (bar people judging them on message boards) awaits!

My A level results are pretty good, too. Maybe I've been lucky enough to have years and years of independent learners who succeed in spite of my muddle headed ways. They do seem to grow out of the debating style whereby one attacks an irrelevant aspect of the other person's statement (for example punctuation) merely because they disagree. Comments such as 'muddle headed' wouldn't be tolerated were we in training for The Mace (a debating award).

I am indeed one of those dreadful people who types 'as I speak' on message boards. I am on the handwriting generation and have never become fluent in type. I assure you, work is drafted, checked and meets far higher standards of syntax, tone and vocabulary. Similarly, when I go to the pub, I use a regional dialect and accent, although none of my students are taught in anything other than standard English.

 

[synchronicity]

Did someone just say something?

Then again, maybe it's just those darned voices again....

 

[pTerryH]

To put baracine out of his misery . . .

Secondary Moderns?