Saturday, March 31, 2007

Multiple-Choice Text

I realized that I hadn't yet blogged about text-messaging and instant-messaging's effects on writing, so I decided to search Google and I found this article written by a graduate student.http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/literacy/oconnor.htm#a

While the writing was so sophomoric I wanted to jump through the screen and write the article myself, the author did make some interesting observations that re-affirmed some thoughts I had already considered and made me consider some new ideas as well.

The first point that I felt compelled to discuss was the need for teachers to teach different contexts for writing. Though many English teachers cringe at the thought or sight of IM and text-message writing, it is not going away any time soon. Thus, it is a new and different context of writing that members of the academic world can no longer ignore. Teachers could, as the writer suggests, use IM and text-messaging to teach students the importance of understanding audience. Another way teachers could use this new form of writing to their advantage is to allow students to write in the abbreviated style of IMs and text-messages when preparing to write longer, formal pieces. Such a strategy might be more motivating for students in that it might make the process of writing formal compositions seem less daunting. If this is the case, however, teachers must take steps to explicitly teach their students how to shift from one mode of writing to the next.

Equally interesting was the fact that, love or hate the new literacy created by IMs and text-messages, this generation of school-aged children is writing more than any generation since before widespread use of the telephone. A positive side-effect that I had not yet thought of, even if the writing itself isn't scholarly -- which certainly not all writing should be -- it still affords students an opportunity to transfer thoughts to written form. One other aspect that just occurred to me is the need to be able to multi-task while navigating the internet. Children and adults alike now intrinsically learn how to separate different cognitive tasks they are performing simultaneously. I think this skill, in part, contributed to the success of most of my AP students, to whom I assigned two books to read at the same time. Many of my colleagues (and most of my students) thought I was crazy, but something told me this generation, perhaps more than any previous generation, would be able to handle such a task. Imagine carrying on three different conversations at the same time in a face-to-face setting. I have a hard time remembering when my wife tells me to take out the trash, and that's just paying attention to one person.

So, we can either see all the bad habits that IMs and text-messages potentially create, or we can extract the positives from it to make our students achieve to their fullest potential through this new literacy.

4 comments:

Crystal Crozier said...

First of all, when I read "the writing was so sophomoric I wanted to jump through the screen", I chuckled. You always seem to make me laugh. It keeps this blogging interesting. I look forward to reading your thoughts.

Now, for the meat and potatoes...

"So, we can either see all the bad habits that IMs and text-messages potentially create, or we can extract the positives from it to make our students achieve to their fullest potential..." Richard, I couldn't agree more. I think this is a concept we could widely apply to all facets of technology, or anything for that matter. Motivation due to student interest is a key factor in getting students to perform.

I found this site: http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20060731/
1938242.shtml and thought you might be interested. There are a lot of hyperlinks to support the author's statements.

Take the time and read the comments. Apparently, this is a BIG issue. Many teens have even responded. I found this comment very intriguing: "The problem with studies about kids who are texting is that it always assumes that the variable factor is text messaging, and not something more prevalent, like amphetamines, Spongebob Squarepants episodes, or other mind-altering products". Hmmm....

Laine said...

While first reading your post, Richard, I must say I found myself cringing at the idea of IM lingo being used in the classroom. Yuck! After finished both your post and the article, I might have become a bit desensitized but I'm still not a fan of the idea.

Knowing your audience is an important factor in writing. I have no problem with students using this quick-write style with their friends but I don't get the idea of using it in academic settings. When I was in college, I always found myself zipping back and forth between my short, to-the-point journalistic style of writing for broadcasting classes and the more verbose academic style for the remainder. Would I have preferred to use stick with one style and reduce the effort? Sure. Was I forced to acknowledge that there are certain settings for different styles of writing and I had to use the proper form? Yes.

As far as informal communication goes, I fondly remember my junior high days of passing notes that started with "Wuz ↑." That was likely the start of this symbol rage even though the focus was handwritten notes. We would also abbreviate the tag "For your eyes only" with a 4, a drawing of an eye, and the word only. I thought we were just being cute. Are today's computer savvy teens just being cute or is this an evolution of language? I'm not sure. What I do know is that there's a time and a place for most things and while I'm all for taking the quickest path to reach an endpoint, I can't understand the point in letting kids use IM lingo if they're going to change it for a final copy. To me that's like saying "sure you can cheat on this test but you're not allowed to do it on the final."
That may be an extreme comparison but you get the point.

Motivating kids is one thing, but letting hormonal teens rule the English world with their u's, 4's, b's, and gtg's, is a different story.

I guess I'm old-fashioned at 25. Am I out of my mind on this?

Ann V. said...

Richard-

This is a very intriguing topic. As I mentioned in one of my other posts, I had come across a "blurb" mentioning that "IMing" was actually building literacy skills. This led me to see what else people were saying about the topic and I came across some links you might find helpful:

"Instant Messaging-The Language of Youth Literacy"-the author (honorable mention for a 2003 Boothe award for writing and rhetoric from Stanford) argues, with an emphasis on a theory of multiple literacies, that "iming" has had no deleterious effects on traditional literacy.

http://pwr.stanford.edu/publications/Boothe_0203/PWR%20Boothe-Craig.pdf

This is a pretty lengthy article, but has a wealth of information on this topic as it looks at the IM practices of 7 youths and how their "social identities" have been shaped through this use.
Published in the Reading Research Quarterly in 2005, "Instant Messaging, Literacies and Social Identities", can be found at:

http://www.reading.org/Library/Retrieve.cfm?D=10.1598/RRQ.40.4.5&F=RRQ-40-4-Lewis_4.html.

Ann

Laine said...

Hi again,

Jeff Utecht has his own blog which is COMPLETELY relevant to what you have been discussing as far as the evolution of the written word. Check it out. I've also referred him to your blog so he can respond to your post.

http://www.thethinkingstick.com/