Dimo Ringov is an Associate Professor at Esade’s Department of Strategy and General Management.
Getty
We live in an era of fake news, all-you-can-eat distraction, and vanity. Disinformation and hoaxes popularly referred to as ‘fake news’ are accelerating and affecting the way individuals learn and interpret information. A recent Ipsos Public Affairs survey found that ‘fake news headlines fool American adults about 75% of the time.’ Only 24% of respondents believe social media sites ‘do a good job separating fact from fiction’ according to the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
What is more, human average attention spans have declined precipitously in the last thirteen years and are now shorter than that of a goldfish. The average attention span for the notoriously ill-focused goldfish is nine seconds, but according to a new study from Microsoft Corporation, people now generally lose concentration after eight seconds. Finally, diagnoses of narcissistic personality disorder have risen sharply over the last decade and research suggests social media use may be a contributing factor. The average British user nowadays spends more than two hours a day on various social media and checks their smartphone every twelve minutes.
How should educators approach these substantial changes in our learning environment and the context within which learning takes place? As a professor at a leading European business school, I often ask myself this question. How do we help students cut through the noise, develop the acumen and judgment to identify fake news, and maintain a perspective grounded in reality? While these are complex, far-reaching questions deserving of equally deep and comprehensive answers, I would like to briefly highlight three points:
First, we should ask ourselves (and encourage others to ask themselves) about the underlying motivations for upholding or promoting specific positions, information, or beliefs. For instance, what is the background, financing, or objective of a given news source? Who is considered a credible expert in a given field by his or her respective community of scholars or practitioners? Moreover, is one pursuing further education out of love for knowledge, learning, excellence, contribution, and personal growth – or primarily out of fear of otherwise being perceived as not-good-enough, disrespected, outcompeted?
Second, educational institutions have (or can promote) practices that help address the above challenges. The effect of fake news can be mitigated by promoting lifelong learning and discussion communities, rigorous training in the scientific method, diversity in the classroom, and broad cross-disciplinary education. The effect of distractions can be mitigated by implementing practices that encourage ‘technology detox’ such as ‘no laptop/electronic device use in the classroom unless specifically authorized’ rules. Judgment and perspective can be cultivated by helping internalize universal human values alongside the development of professional and executive skills, and by supporting open, collaborative, welcoming learning environments as well as by forming inclusive learning communities that incorporate and engage underprivileged groups/individuals.
Last, but not least, research-focused educational institutions are well-positioned to make a difference through focused efforts to promote further research on the above challenges facing education in the twenty-first century as they apply to specific educational and research settings. Business schools, in particular, can serve as true catalysts for research-driven debate on how to transform education and research organizations to better serve our changing learning and research environments through rigorous research programs, innovative educational practices, and active presence in the social debate. Thought leadership and entrepreneurial action are needed to envision and enable systemic change. Will we answer the call?
