Asklemmy

I don't know anything about it from a scientific ground but I know about myself. I am what ai consum. I'm also a big fan of boredom because it activates creativity. The more I leave my phone in my pocket when I've got nothing to do, the more creative I get. I believe that this also plays into having longer attention spans. But not completly sure how. Maybe somebody else has an idea?

I think it's not the attention. Too little time has gone since the computational revolution of the 70s for us to see any evolutionary changes. The way we communicate and process info had changed very dramatically though. Information travels faster, spreads wider, all the feedback cycles that used to be weeks long have now tightened down to milliseconds. Or culture requires faster reaction, processing and production times of everyone involved.

I dare you to watch this whole video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Edx9D2yaOGs

I'm very impatient and I don't do that. I think people checking their phones when they are supposed to be watching something is a sign that whatever they're watching doesn't interest them as much.

The only reason I don't switch to my phone is because if realise that's the case, I'd rather do something else entirely instead- imo if it doesn't grab my attention 100% then the time I dedicate to the rest of it feels wasted. But I know people who enjoy series that have a lot of filler and fluff, and they will be multitasking while watching.

No

As a teacher: Essays written in exam conditions have become shorter over time. The exam is not shorter in length. A successful art, history, or English HSC exam would be completed with 6, 8 or 12 pages or more in the 1990s, and now likely has half those pages. Still 1.5 or 2 hours or three hours long, as it was back in the 90s.

Maths? "Brain breaks" are in vogue. 20 years ago, a high level senior student (age 16-18) would be expected to do calculus for a two hour "double" lesson. Now if they work on calculus for half an hour, they expect to have a ten minute break and start work again. Does this make the student more productive? No, they complete less pages of the same textbook. Newer textbooks, correspondingly, have far less physical work in them than textbooks written 20 years ago.

The "non academic" track? There are less apprenticeships available, and students get rejected from the few that exist. 40 years ago the NSW trains had 200 apprenticeships a year. Now they have four a year. We have had apprentices sent back to us two weeks in with the (fail level) complaint "won't put his phone away." The teen is then put back in the academic track, as education opportunities are compulsory, and they learn nothing as the accusation is true.

Yes, with this evidence, you might be right about this lot.

I can barely watch a movie to the end