Universities admit students who are 'almost illiterate', lecturers warn(telegraph.co.uk)
telegraph.co.uk
Universities admit students who are 'almost illiterate', lecturers warn
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/2017/02/16/universities-admit-students-almost-illiteratelecturers-warn/
10 comments
More anecdata for you then.
My wife is a lecturer in an English department at a Russell Group university, and whilst some percentage of her students are extremely critical she has had a very hard time getting them to have a basic comprehension of critical English. By this I mean, the students cannot define the words that they use, and do not understand the language that they consume and create.
Their vocabulary appears to be smaller, and the phrasing is reflective of people who are reading fewer long-reads, fewer critical pieces and papers.
She spends too much of her own allocated teaching time raising the standard such that she is able to work with them on more complex analytical thought towards the end of the degree.
The chances that the students may read Adorno in their spare time approaches zero, and so the chances of them comprehending Deleuze does not exist.
If that sounds lofty, bear in mind that the students that she has comprise a decent proportion of foreign students who cannot even pass basic English comprehension tests, and yet are admitted because the fees for them are so high that the university will accept them no matter what.
My wife is a lecturer in an English department at a Russell Group university, and whilst some percentage of her students are extremely critical she has had a very hard time getting them to have a basic comprehension of critical English. By this I mean, the students cannot define the words that they use, and do not understand the language that they consume and create.
Their vocabulary appears to be smaller, and the phrasing is reflective of people who are reading fewer long-reads, fewer critical pieces and papers.
She spends too much of her own allocated teaching time raising the standard such that she is able to work with them on more complex analytical thought towards the end of the degree.
The chances that the students may read Adorno in their spare time approaches zero, and so the chances of them comprehending Deleuze does not exist.
If that sounds lofty, bear in mind that the students that she has comprise a decent proportion of foreign students who cannot even pass basic English comprehension tests, and yet are admitted because the fees for them are so high that the university will accept them no matter what.
total anecdote
In my MSc in Computer Science in the UK we had 9 international(Chinese) students.
8 of them dropped out after 3 months - they could barely speak English, they definitely could not write in English, and the reason why they dropped out was because for 3 months they used our lab as a place to play League of Legends, and nothing else.
To be accepted, they all must have already obtained a BSc degree in Computer Science or related field from somewhere, and have at least 7 on an IELTS exam to demonstrate their English proficiency. I honestly don't see how either one was possible.
That has nothing to do with being called a man instead of a sir. They literally couldn't speak the language of the course they got accepted into.
I am tempted to say that it's the fault of the university for accepting them in the first place, but in a way, their hands are tied in how much vetting they can do, and things like IELTS are meant to be completely objective.
In my MSc in Computer Science in the UK we had 9 international(Chinese) students.
8 of them dropped out after 3 months - they could barely speak English, they definitely could not write in English, and the reason why they dropped out was because for 3 months they used our lab as a place to play League of Legends, and nothing else.
To be accepted, they all must have already obtained a BSc degree in Computer Science or related field from somewhere, and have at least 7 on an IELTS exam to demonstrate their English proficiency. I honestly don't see how either one was possible.
That has nothing to do with being called a man instead of a sir. They literally couldn't speak the language of the course they got accepted into.
I am tempted to say that it's the fault of the university for accepting them in the first place, but in a way, their hands are tied in how much vetting they can do, and things like IELTS are meant to be completely objective.
Curiously, I had the same experience with Chinese MSc/PhD students. My graduate-level CS discussion sections and labs skewed heavily Chinese, American, and Indian. The Indians seemed most prepared, the Americans right behind, and the Chinese were way behind. Group readings of recent research papers were an exercise in torture. Poor comprehension, near zero communication skill, and a total inability to find flaws/ask questions.
None (that I know of) made it out of the program. I have no clue how they ever got in the door, as this was a international top 100 program. I actually finished the semester by skipping the discussion section altogether, doing the readings in my own time, and going straight to the professor's office hours with my notes and questions. He understood completely. I think he actuall envied me my freedom.
On the flip side, my partner (whom I met in college) was a refugee with poor English her freshman year. Yet she graduated -- with honors -- in a shade over three years, with two degrees in the soft sciences and better written and spoken English than myself. Then she got a degree in a hard science. Then a masters.
And that's the problem with anecdotes. I could choose either to be representative of my experience, but I'd be wrong either way. Without some quantitative data, we really can't know if this is a real phenomenon or not.
None (that I know of) made it out of the program. I have no clue how they ever got in the door, as this was a international top 100 program. I actually finished the semester by skipping the discussion section altogether, doing the readings in my own time, and going straight to the professor's office hours with my notes and questions. He understood completely. I think he actuall envied me my freedom.
On the flip side, my partner (whom I met in college) was a refugee with poor English her freshman year. Yet she graduated -- with honors -- in a shade over three years, with two degrees in the soft sciences and better written and spoken English than myself. Then she got a degree in a hard science. Then a masters.
And that's the problem with anecdotes. I could choose either to be representative of my experience, but I'd be wrong either way. Without some quantitative data, we really can't know if this is a real phenomenon or not.
But is it a problem? Those 2 out 10 kids who continued in our CS class were marvelous. Meeting highly motivated kids from abroad was a boon for me, but when you can't communicated with them it gets really hard, and it's easy to think they are stupid or illiterate.
I guess this is even worse over here since many classes are not available in english.
I guess this is even worse over here since many classes are not available in english.
There are different definitions for "illiterate".
If you use the more restrictive "age 15 and over has completed five or more years of schooling" the UK has a literacy rate of 99%. That's not a useful definition, in part because the UK has laws forcing children into education until age 18, and partly because it tells you nothing about outcomes.
http://www.indexmundi.com/united_kingdom/literacy.html
If you use other definitions, such as that for "funtionally illiterate" you start finding many more people that meet the definition.
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/adult_literacy/illiterate_ad...
> More common is the use of the term "functionally literate". Around 16 per cent, or 5.2 million adults in England, can be described as "functionally illiterate". They would not pass an English GCSE and have literacy levels at or below those expected of an 11-year-old. They can understand short straightforward texts on familiar topics accurately and independently, and obtain information from everyday sources, but reading information from unfamiliar sources, or on unfamiliar topics, could cause problems
> Many areas of employment would not be open to them with this level of literacy and they may also struggle to support their children with reading and homework, or perform other everyday tasks.
That's not "at the level expected of a smart 11 year old", but the average 11 year old.
If you use the more restrictive "age 15 and over has completed five or more years of schooling" the UK has a literacy rate of 99%. That's not a useful definition, in part because the UK has laws forcing children into education until age 18, and partly because it tells you nothing about outcomes.
http://www.indexmundi.com/united_kingdom/literacy.html
If you use other definitions, such as that for "funtionally illiterate" you start finding many more people that meet the definition.
http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/adult_literacy/illiterate_ad...
> More common is the use of the term "functionally literate". Around 16 per cent, or 5.2 million adults in England, can be described as "functionally illiterate". They would not pass an English GCSE and have literacy levels at or below those expected of an 11-year-old. They can understand short straightforward texts on familiar topics accurately and independently, and obtain information from everyday sources, but reading information from unfamiliar sources, or on unfamiliar topics, could cause problems
> Many areas of employment would not be open to them with this level of literacy and they may also struggle to support their children with reading and homework, or perform other everyday tasks.
That's not "at the level expected of a smart 11 year old", but the average 11 year old.
It's just one of those Telegraph/Times/Daily Mail articles that are specifically engineered to elicit an anger boner in Middle England.
"Anger boner". My vocabulary's latest addition. Ta!
Illiteracy is hard to really pin down, as other commenters say. I'll provide another anecdata point too:
Wife is a public HS teacher. Many of her native English speaking kids are illiterate yet use their phones like they were air to breathe. This may seem contradictory, but it hinges on the definition of illiteracy. They can read a word, yes, even type them out with a speed unmatched by anyone over 25, but they do not type more than 7 words at a time (again anecdata). That 7 word number is about the same as your working memory limit, and there seems to be a causation there, though it may be correlation. The kids just cannot read a sentence of any real length, like many of the ones posted on HN. Imagine trying to read Aztec Hieroglyphs. You have to decipher each word from the drawings on a stone fresco and it is not easy work to do this. By the time you reach the end of a line of these strange drawings, you have forgotten what the first word was. That is how the kids see reading, they try to decipher the word, and then about halfway through the sentence they have forgotten the first word. The meaning of the article is totally lost in the exertion of translating the symbols. That is how many of her kids are illiterate in the age of the Web.
Wife is a public HS teacher. Many of her native English speaking kids are illiterate yet use their phones like they were air to breathe. This may seem contradictory, but it hinges on the definition of illiteracy. They can read a word, yes, even type them out with a speed unmatched by anyone over 25, but they do not type more than 7 words at a time (again anecdata). That 7 word number is about the same as your working memory limit, and there seems to be a causation there, though it may be correlation. The kids just cannot read a sentence of any real length, like many of the ones posted on HN. Imagine trying to read Aztec Hieroglyphs. You have to decipher each word from the drawings on a stone fresco and it is not easy work to do this. By the time you reach the end of a line of these strange drawings, you have forgotten what the first word was. That is how the kids see reading, they try to decipher the word, and then about halfway through the sentence they have forgotten the first word. The meaning of the article is totally lost in the exertion of translating the symbols. That is how many of her kids are illiterate in the age of the Web.
Jesus. You just described how my son reads. He's 5. My condolences to your poor wife.
I am prepared to accept that I'm wrong on this one. Perhaps I've been giving all the kids in my community too much credit, or maybe I live in a community of outliers. Whatever the case, their ability to converse with me in conceptual English is still impressive, and the schools here are shit.
I am prepared to accept that I'm wrong on this one. Perhaps I've been giving all the kids in my community too much credit, or maybe I live in a community of outliers. Whatever the case, their ability to converse with me in conceptual English is still impressive, and the schools here are shit.
Sounds like a good place then!
Her kids can talk just fine, well sort of, there are a lot of SpEd kids and non-English speakers in those 40 kid classes. But the 'median' kids talk without issues. It's mostly limited to reading and writing. As for maths? Fuggeddaboutit. The mean SAT score was a 325 in math, and that's when you take out the kids that started fights during the SAT.
Her kids can talk just fine, well sort of, there are a lot of SpEd kids and non-English speakers in those 40 kid classes. But the 'median' kids talk without issues. It's mostly limited to reading and writing. As for maths? Fuggeddaboutit. The mean SAT score was a 325 in math, and that's when you take out the kids that started fights during the SAT.
It's reasonable to assume that international students browse the web in their own language and not just in English.
Sure, but I think it's too easy to underestimate the omnipresence of English on the Web. Perhaps students originating from populous, insulated countries might be able to avoid it, but certainly not most international students. I live in Croatia and, even here, most of the media -- online and off -- is overwhelmingly English. The younger generation is almost entirely bilingual as a direct result.
That's just my perception, though. I have no data to back any of this up, so take it with a grain of salt.
That's just my perception, though. I have no data to back any of this up, so take it with a grain of salt.
My own feeling, also without data to back it up besides my own experience (I'm french), is that your claim is absolutely false.
They know basic english (because they have english class at school and indeed because of internet), there are more and more "almost bilingual" people, but to say that most of them are proficient (not even almost bilingual, just advanced comprehension) in english is absurd.
At least in France and the asian countries I've visited. Some european countries like Iceland or Norway speak much better english. but I doubt it's because of the internet. I think they just have a better education system in certain areas.
They know basic english (because they have english class at school and indeed because of internet), there are more and more "almost bilingual" people, but to say that most of them are proficient (not even almost bilingual, just advanced comprehension) in english is absurd.
At least in France and the asian countries I've visited. Some european countries like Iceland or Norway speak much better english. but I doubt it's because of the internet. I think they just have a better education system in certain areas.
The most interesting point in the article is the plan to shift university ratings away from research and towards student satisfaction. I can't see how they can do that without taking away responsibility for grading.
Do we still have grading in university? Since we started removing marks in middle school, should we keep going in adulthood by keeping students away from being evaluated? so universities don't have to make students unhappy.
The same headlines in Italy, last time a couple of weeks ago. And still the European Union calls for a higher percentage of university students.
I have come to the conclusion that not everyone is fit for higher education, unless we lower the bar.
I have come to the conclusion that not everyone is fit for higher education, unless we lower the bar.
I've come to the conclusion that much of "higher" education isn't. More a mediocre patch on nearly nonexistent secondary school.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
Perhaps universities have overlooked a simple solution to illiterate students: don't admit them!
But of course, that won't look good on the bottom line, so in they come.
But of course, that won't look good on the bottom line, so in they come.
While living in China I've met several postgrads who studied in the UK or US but speak only pidgin English at best. How did they get through it? With money and copious amounts of cheating, probably.
While criticizing someone else's English it's almost guaranteed you'll make an error of your own. It's 'pidgin English', not 'pigeon'.
Fixed, thanks. To be clear I'm actually criticising their ability to get a point across in a language they claim to speak and have studied with at degree level.
Sometimes known as "Skitt's Law". http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/skitt-s-law
No no it's pinyin English :-)
I upvoted you, but the comma after 'pidgin English' should really go inside the quote. i.e.
http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/08/punctuating-around...
It's 'pidgin English,' not 'pigeon'.
http://blog.apastyle.org/apastyle/2011/08/punctuating-around...
That's a style choice, and one that's largely rejected by this audience because we're used to logically nested programming languages.
We're also used, I hope, to juggling multiple types of syntax in the same project. This is no different.
Yes, and if the person you replied to were writing an academic article for the American Psychological Association they would be wise to follow their style guide in that context.
APA style is used far beyond psychology, and is one of the three most common styles of writing, the other two being MLA and Chicago.
That is correct, but I believe you meant 'e.g.' rather than 'i.e.': http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/education/grammar/ie-versus...
(If someone can spot an error I've made, this can go on forever. Wheee!) ;-)
(If someone can spot an error I've made, this can go on forever. Wheee!) ;-)
No, their use of 'i.e.' was correct.
Your source mentions that there are several punctuation styles and 'single quotes' + 'comma outside' corresponds to the British style.
I sometimes work with a PM in China who studied (recently!) four years in the UK. His English is so bad that I have to disect a sentence I utter to him completely and test every part every time to know if he even understood. How does that work indeed? How did he surive there? I cannot ask him for obvious reasons.
I actually had the opposite experience. Whereby, I as a non-native english speaker was surprised at the level of english of born and bred english speakers. It was disastrous at times.
Most did not go over a single sentence without using auto-correct or other tools. I've seen some copy text from the internet and put it through an article spinner, then paste it to their assignments. Not just because of laziness or the desire to cheat, but because they couldn't spell or form appropriate sentences.
Most did not go over a single sentence without using auto-correct or other tools. I've seen some copy text from the internet and put it through an article spinner, then paste it to their assignments. Not just because of laziness or the desire to cheat, but because they couldn't spell or form appropriate sentences.
Additionally, just because your english isn't so good doesn't mean you don't know the subject you are writing about. Unless your thesis is about English Literature, then I agree with the article.
I had a colleague who could barely write anything, but he was so outstanding in Math, that the professor asked him politely not to attend the classes anymore. His thesis was impossible to read but he still got the best marks.
Your intelligence and abilities to understand and master a subject have nothing to do with how well you write/speak.
It is however crucial to learn to write and speak properly in the longterm, especially if you decide to work/live in that country.
I had a colleague who could barely write anything, but he was so outstanding in Math, that the professor asked him politely not to attend the classes anymore. His thesis was impossible to read but he still got the best marks.
Your intelligence and abilities to understand and master a subject have nothing to do with how well you write/speak.
It is however crucial to learn to write and speak properly in the longterm, especially if you decide to work/live in that country.
There's still a strong myth that there is a causal effect between how well you can write, and how well you can think, conduct a logical reasoning or w/e... And of course most people who say that believe to know better than linguists/psychology researchers on the matter.
A big part of the problem here is over-emphasis on academic degrees, and under-appreciation of the value of vocational qualifications. This pushes people into degree courses because that's the only way they can get into the job they want to do, even if that degree education isn't necessarily the best way for them to gain skills and knowledge needed.
> Another senior lecturer in nursing at a university in northern England, said: “We can now see a whole generation of registered nurses who cannot read critically or write coherently but who have somehow passed a degree – this is worrying”.
There's surely a role for both here - the academic nursing degree for nurses who want to move into management or nurse-practictioner or nurse-prescriber or other specialised nursing roles (intensive care; eating disorder), and a vocational degree for nurses who just want to nurse.
> Another senior lecturer in nursing at a university in northern England, said: “We can now see a whole generation of registered nurses who cannot read critically or write coherently but who have somehow passed a degree – this is worrying”.
There's surely a role for both here - the academic nursing degree for nurses who want to move into management or nurse-practictioner or nurse-prescriber or other specialised nursing roles (intensive care; eating disorder), and a vocational degree for nurses who just want to nurse.
A big part of the problem here is over-emphasis on academic degrees, and under-appreciation of the value of vocational qualifications
I disagree. I think that universities should focus on academic degrees, and leave the vocational training to other shools and/or businesses. You even say so in the rest of your post: the problem is that businesses tend to overvalue academic titles and undervalue vocational titles, which leads to people pursuing academic titles even though they have no use for them.
I disagree. I think that universities should focus on academic degrees, and leave the vocational training to other shools and/or businesses. You even say so in the rest of your post: the problem is that businesses tend to overvalue academic titles and undervalue vocational titles, which leads to people pursuing academic titles even though they have no use for them.
I'd love to see some data behind this. It's too easy to view this incorrectly from the point of view of an educator.
In the US, about 40% of students who enter college do not graduate [0]. This has many surprising implications.
- Graduating from college, any college, does mean something because many of the people who try can't hack it.
- Big state schools seem to be "of the people" while elite private schools are, well, elite. But they are not so different. Elite private schools have low admission rates but also near-zero dropout rates. Big public schools have high admission rates but also dropout rates in the 40-60% range. They just apply their filters at different parts of the funnel.
- The way to a more educated population is probably not to expand college access. Already, far more people access college than can complete it. More interesting questions are about how we best serve the people at risk of dropping out. The answer might be to make state schools more selective, not less, so that we aren't wasting people's time (and money!) with programs they'll never complete.
[0] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40
- Graduating from college, any college, does mean something because many of the people who try can't hack it.
- Big state schools seem to be "of the people" while elite private schools are, well, elite. But they are not so different. Elite private schools have low admission rates but also near-zero dropout rates. Big public schools have high admission rates but also dropout rates in the 40-60% range. They just apply their filters at different parts of the funnel.
- The way to a more educated population is probably not to expand college access. Already, far more people access college than can complete it. More interesting questions are about how we best serve the people at risk of dropping out. The answer might be to make state schools more selective, not less, so that we aren't wasting people's time (and money!) with programs they'll never complete.
[0] https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=40
You can still learn a lot even if you don't graduate.
Sure, but the possession of a real university degree pretty much guarantees you can at least read, write & reason. Most Americans without a University degree can read, write & reason, of course, often better than a University grad, but the University degree proves you can do it at least minimally. It used to be that a grade 8 certificate would provide that guarantee, then it used to be that a grade 12 certificate would do it too.
There are far cheaper ways of proving somebody can read, write & reason but for some reason employers seem to be stuck on that University diploma. I guess it's easy for them.
There are far cheaper ways of proving somebody can read, write & reason but for some reason employers seem to be stuck on that University diploma. I guess it's easy for them.
At the company where I work there is a written test of language/logic/math that applicants for jobs have to take. This has had the effect that almost nobody at this company is stupid or incompetent. They are also easy to work with - I would guess partly because social ability is correlated to intelligence.
I suspect this test is the single biggest reason for the success of the company.
I suspect this test is the single biggest reason for the success of the company.
Is this something your company came up with itself? Is it available publicly?
I think the test was provided by some company. There was nothing magical about it though - part of it looked mostly like an IQ test, and there were math questions and short reading comprehension tasks. It was fairly easy and the biggest difficulty I thought was the short amount of time we had to complete it.
I suspect any reasonable test in that general direction would do the job. I don't think they use it to specifically hire the people who achieve the very best scores, but rather to not hire the ones who perform poorly.
I suspect any reasonable test in that general direction would do the job. I don't think they use it to specifically hire the people who achieve the very best scores, but rather to not hire the ones who perform poorly.
They are usually called "Psychotechnical tests", and their use is standard in many industries. Though judging for some people I've seen passing them, I'd say that most of them are borderline useless, or not really used.
In the US, about 40% of students who enter college do not graduate
That has nothing to do with the topic at hand though. Or are you saying that colleges have zero influence on their students' education, and the only thing that determines if a student fails or succeeds is whether they really met the course requirements at enrollment time?
That has nothing to do with the topic at hand though. Or are you saying that colleges have zero influence on their students' education, and the only thing that determines if a student fails or succeeds is whether they really met the course requirements at enrollment time?
To be fair, this is also a concern here in Denmark.
Quite a few University professors have complained that students do not have adequate skills in mathematics, as the bar has been lowered over a number of years in the high school system.
My opinion is, the wish for a higher percentage of university graduates in a generation has lead to an inappropriate lowering of standards.
(even if I am part of it....)
Natural sciences are a disaster nowadays. I also see this trend whilst talking to people interested working for my startup.
Among its statistics, the article presents that "60 percent of lecturers have caught some student cheating". This is so unusable and misleading that I'm tempted to call the whole article bogus.
I think the statistic to look for (where?) would be the percentage of students caught cheating who are not subsequently expelled. My guess is that this figure has risen, as a result of the profit motive.
If you start searching, you will find the data. There is a decent body of work on the attention span issues and cognitive abilities. The most of it in the context of "social media" revolution.
It's not my area of expertise, though. My personal experience at Cambridge and Groningen University was always very good with students. Yet, these are peculiar places.
It's not my area of expertise, though. My personal experience at Cambridge and Groningen University was always very good with students. Yet, these are peculiar places.
This is probably a result of New Public Management (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_public_management) in education governance.
When the pupil is modeled as a "customer" something has to take the place of "revenue" when measuring the relative success of different management- and educational strategies and comparing them to cost. There are different quantifiable "revenues" in education like student-hours, grade averages, diplomas etc. But the focus is on diplomas, passing grades and standardized tests (as opposed to teaching hours or other measures of undefinable value to the "customer").
To cover cost, teaching institutions rely on funding, and funding is tied to "revenue" e.g. test-results and diplomas. This causes a misalignment of incentives that reveals the real customer of teaching institutions: The funding agencies (department of education, local state government etc.). Students, or more specifically diplomas, are the product. And demand is growing. The only rational response is to produce more diplomas and test results. The supply of students who will thrive in a given educational environment, now defined implicitly as "that which produces the desired diplomas and test results" is fixed. Lower standards or lose funding. The NPM-ethos is "run it like a business" so the choice is obvious.
When the pupil is modeled as a "customer" something has to take the place of "revenue" when measuring the relative success of different management- and educational strategies and comparing them to cost. There are different quantifiable "revenues" in education like student-hours, grade averages, diplomas etc. But the focus is on diplomas, passing grades and standardized tests (as opposed to teaching hours or other measures of undefinable value to the "customer").
To cover cost, teaching institutions rely on funding, and funding is tied to "revenue" e.g. test-results and diplomas. This causes a misalignment of incentives that reveals the real customer of teaching institutions: The funding agencies (department of education, local state government etc.). Students, or more specifically diplomas, are the product. And demand is growing. The only rational response is to produce more diplomas and test results. The supply of students who will thrive in a given educational environment, now defined implicitly as "that which produces the desired diplomas and test results" is fixed. Lower standards or lose funding. The NPM-ethos is "run it like a business" so the choice is obvious.
Well they can't go back to highschool, and clearly even if they did they wouldn't get a better education. What do you recommend they do? They are willing to take out loans to learn, we should have classes which handle less educated students.
Something tells me that this is more a reflection of the rapidly changing state of our language -- and the mounting generation gap therein -- than some sort of universal dumbing down. The Boomers' parents had a similar reaction to all the groovy new lingo and loosening linguistic conventions. When they said "illiterate", they really meant "nearly unintelligible to me", or had a negative reaction to being called "man" instead of "sir".
The definitions of literacy are changing. They're always changing. Without a quantitative measure to back up the claims, I'm inclined to think this is just reactionary garbage masquerading as fact.
* I'd absolutely believe that critical thinking skills are on the decline, however. I blame the balkanization/insularity of internet communities and the industrial commodification of higher education. Teaching critical thinking requires individual attention that is increasingly scarce in the rush to get everybody "educated". Simultaneously, the web has allowed and encouraged people to choose increasingly niche communities in which to spend their time, reducing their contact with different or challenging ideas, cultures, and experiences.