NotPart91

Now that I've got your attention;

Today's student has a vastly different look at life vs. some of us that were schooled and received degrees without technology (i.e. were using the fastest computer at that time that was called a slide rule and x,y and z were known on paper as planes and axises).

I'm curious how opinions vary, concerning the following example of today's brain conditioning, (what I refer to as generational learning).

Please watch the video.

I'd like to see if anyone agrees that this person's brain wiring, per se, is directly correlated to his specific generational learning, teaching methods and the influence and interjection of technology that, I believe, has degraded his eye to hand coordination and concurrent analytical quick thinking, (vs. his very young child who adapts and adjusts quickly using his young analytical mind).

https://youtube.com/devicesupport / ViewPure
NP

Tom a Hawk

Neat video, I love riding bikes and I'm pretty sure I'd never want to try that. I thought it was interesting what he said about only being able to retrain hi brain and not teach it to do both. Obviously both pathways are still there because he was eventually able to get back onto a normal bike and not have it take 8 months.

Learning to ride a bike or fly an airplane is often very intense. As a kid riding a bike is a huge step, you work really hard at it and it means a lot. Flying is the same way. You invest a lot of time, effort, and emotion in it. It takes a HUGE amount of effort to relearn something that had that big of an effect on you.

As far as steam gauge vs modern cockpits, well you still fly the same way, pitch, power, bank, and rudder. The way you read the data is different, so I feel like it is a smaller leap. Like learning to drive a big truck when you only know small cars. It takes some effort but the control is still the same.

I do see examples of generational learning influenced by technology all the time. I'll often see my mother and father in law having a whole conversation trying to remember some little fact. They'll spend forever talking about and thinking about whether a certain restaurant is open for lunch today. Trying to remember if they ever went there for lunch on a Tuesday, or if they ever remember seeing it on the sign. They might even say "well we can't go there, we don't know if it's open". Meanwhile I whip out my iphone and in 5 seconds know what time the place is open today. Both of those are learned responses based on what resources/technology have been available to us for long periods of our lives.

Another example is when ATC gives us a late unexpected crossing restriction. As a habit because of how I was taught this airplane I tend to go heads down in the fms trying to input a point and altitude and arm the vnav and then wait until the computer figures it out to only then realize we are high a minute later. Someone not as familiar or dependent on the vnav would just look at how far we are from the point and immediately know if we were behind or not.

So no I don't think technology is causing a decrease in hand eye coordination or analytical thinking. I do agree however, that our learned responses and habits can inhibit us from finding the solution to a problem quickly. The technology is just the tool that might be the quick/correct answer or might be the thing to avoid in any given situation.

NotPart91

Thanks TH,

I'd like to see a in-depth study of this type of phenomena, as I've seen active brain monitoring while a person's given different stimuli and the specific action/reaction.

It's pretty amazing to see this "reversed operator input" bicycle and possible correlation of the negative effects of today's type programming of the brain due to the daily use of technology enhancement vs. pre-computer analytical learning and developmental thought processes of days past.

Remember, today's technology and computers were mostly developed by engineers and scientists that learned things the unassisted way.

NP