ETEC540: Text, Technologies – Community Weblog

Neil Postman’s chapter on “The Judgment of Thamus” from his book Technopoly was a thought-provoking piece that called into question society’s acceptance of new technologies and their benefits and drawbacks.

Specifically, “The Judgment of Thamus” looks at Thamus’ reaction to Theus’ invention of writing as a discovery that will “create forgetfulness in the learners’ souls, because they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external written characters and not remember of themselves” (Plato in Postman, p. 4, 1992). Reading this excerpt brought to my mind a spiritual question that I have often grappled with, which has as much to do with the history of orality and literacy as with the history of my religion, Islam.

Muslim’s have a holy book called the Quran, which contains one hundred and fourteen surahs or chapters. The writing of the Quran is a point of controversy in the religion as it is recognized to be the word of God, however, with the loss of the oral culture among Muslims, the book was written and re-written which calls its authenticity into question. The Holy Prophet, Mohammad was similar to Luria’s illiterates in the sense that he could not read or write (Qara’i p. 23, 1997). The Holy Quran was revealed to the Prophet surah by surah over a period of several years. “After a surah or ayah was revealed, the Prophet (S), having memorized it himself, would communicate it to the people and recite it to the worthy among those who enjoyed his company. He would also ask them to memorize it” (Qara’i p. 23, 1997). Thus, the culture of orality was prominent in the times of the Prophet and served to immortalize the true word of God.

In Walter Ong’s text, Orality and Literacy, he discusses Lord’s discovery that singers are aware they can never sing the same song exactly alike, but will still protest that they are able to do so, word for word, line by line. “’Word for word, and line by line’ as Lord interprets (1960, p. 28), is simply an emphatic way of saying ‘like’” (Ong p. 59, 2002).  Ong discusses that the reason for this is because in the oral culture the word or line does not exist as the entity that we understand it to be in the literate culture. This idea was a point of contention in the history of the Quran’s development as well, because as it was taught by memory from the Prophet to chosen scholars, they too would substitute words that meant the same as other words but were not the words taught by the Prophet or those then that were committed to his memory by God himself. Like the singers who were aware they could not sing the same song exactly alike, the Prophet too was aware that his disciples may not be able to memorize the words exactly, so when confronted with a dispute between two oral scholars of the Quran, “the Prophet (S) ordered each of them to read; he listened to their reading and approved their different ways of reading” (Qara’i p. 26, 1997). This answer established that there were seven accepted memorizations of the Quran.

It was actually during Prophet Mohammad’s time that the writing of the Quran started to take place however it was done on pieces of palm wood and camel scapulae but not compiled together into a book. Following the death of the Prophet there was a war in which a group of qurra’, individuals who had memorized the entire Quran, were slain in battle (Qara’i p. 40, 1997). This caused many to fear the loss of the Quranic verse and so ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, a younger disciple of the Prophet pressed the need to collect and compile the Quran. This was met with much resistance from the Caliph of the Muslims at the time, Abu Bakr (Qara’i p. 41, 1997). The conversation that passed between them greatly resembled that between Thamus and Theus in that it highlighted the benefits of memorization versus the disadvantages of writing – the art of remembering God’s word and it being a part of your being, rather than recalling his words from a text. The Islamic world thus experienced a shift from the world of orality to a world of literacy with the compiling of the Quran into a codex and this shift created a divide between Muslims.

It was mentioned earlier that the Prophet, due to the nature of the oral culture itself, permitted different readings of the Quran to exist simultaneously so long as they had a common meaning. Ong relates in his text that some methods of memorization include rhythm, repetition and subjectivism, that is to say associated with personal experience or the human lifeworld. Therefore once the Quran was compiled there came to exist more than one version of the written text, which created cause for concern and alarm in the Muslim world.  To settle the matter the Caliph Uthman ordered that a standardized version of the Quran be written in the language in which it was delivered to the Prophet and that only the last version of the Quran that was recited by the Prophet be codified and the rest should be left out (Qara’i p. 43, 1997).

The transition of the Quran from orality to literacy has called into question the word of God. Some Muslims are perplexed at the re-writing of the Quran, which occurred at the time of the Caliph Uthman and consider it to be an adulterated version of the original verses. The standardization of the Quran resulted in the burning of the prior versions, which can be considered a loss of the original text, the exact thing the writing of the Quran was meant to avoid. Has writing then been beneficial or detrimental to spreading the message of God? Today Uthman’s version of the Quran is the only version and Muslims must learn to read the holy book in this Arabic form with the same rhythm and repetition that was used in the oral world. Children are still taught to commit the Quranic verses to memory. This preservation of the oral culture in the world of literacy is a sign of its importance.

References:

Ong, W. (2002). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. New York: Routledge.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage books.

Qara’i, M. (1997). The History of the Qur’an. Al-Tawheed, Journal of Islamic Thought and Culture. Vol IV, No. 3, Vol. V No. 1, 2, 3. Retrieved from http://playandlearn.org/reader.asp?Type=Articles&fn=114

Oral storytelling is a powerful tool for verbalizing experience and transferring knowledge within a culture and across generations. Within education, teachers have used oral storytelling to expose their students to ideas while modeling engaging ways to interact with an audience. Oral storytelling has also been used as a form of student assessment within education. As Walter J. Ong explains in his book, Orality and Literacy, verbatim memorization from a text has been commonly done in literate cultures to perfect and test verbatim mastery (Ong, 1982). Literates have long assumed that oral memorization in oral cultures followed the same goal of absolute verbatim repetition that we are familiar with today, for example reciting a poem or a passage (Ong, 1982). However Ong refers to the work of Milman Parry and Albert Lord who suggest that members of oral cultures not only internalized and presented stories in different ways than literate cultures, but also recited lengthy narratives without verbatim memorization (Ong, 1982).  These facts raise questions about the extent of human memory and oral culture’s possible influence upon storytelling education in literate societies.

Parry and Lord’s discovery about the nature of verbal memory in primary oral cultures came from their analysis of Homeric poems. They found that these oral creations, eventually recorded on paper, were strictly metrical (Ong, 1982). Such a patterned structure could somewhat help someone memorize thousands of lines of dactylic hexameter word for word from a text. However, Parry and Lord believe that these lengthy texts could be orally produced without the use of verbatim memorization. Hexameters are made up of formulas, not simply word-units, where groups of words deal with traditional materials (Ong, 1982). An oral poet could have an extensive vocabulary of hexameterized phrases that could be shaped to fit into countless correct metrical lines (Ong, 1982). For example, certain epithets and verbs would be used regularly in Homeric poems, not just to describe characters but to ensure their words fit into the meter. Poets could have thousands of metrical formulas that would fit into the situations, characters, objects, or actions that the story required (Ong, 1982). What Parry and Lord demonstrated is that these metrically tailored formulas controlled ancient epic’s compositions and could be shifted skillfully without interfering with the story line or tone.

Evidence to support Parry and Lord’s claims regarding Homeric poets, who lived over two thousand years ago, is currently unavailable. But direct evidence from living narrative poets in modern (former) Yugoslavia is available. Parry and Lord found that these modern poets could compose oral epic narratives without the aid of any text (Ong, 1982). The narratives of these illiterate poets followed a metric formula, similar to the ancient Greeks’. Parry and Lord found that learning to read and write disabled an oral poets since introducing the controlling concept of text into the poet’s mind interfered with the oral composing process (Ong, 1982). These poets’ memories of songs were agile. Comparisons revealed that songs would be sung metrically, but never the same way twice. The same formulas and themes reoccurred, but they would be composed differently in each rendition, even by the same poet, depending on the audiences’ reaction, the mood of the poet or occasion, and other social factors (Ong, 1982).

Ong describes how, using similar methods, twentieth-century bards listened for months and years to other bards sing renditions of narrative that may include different words, but always used standard formulas in connection with standard themes (Ong, 1982). Originality did not involve adding new material, but fitting traditional material effectively to entertain an audience. Often bards would only hear a narrative once and would spend a day or more to internalize the story and form their own formulas before retelling it (Ong, 1982). Such a memorization methods would appear quite different to that of a traditional literate who may rather recite a narrative soon after hearing it, especially after one hearing, rather than postponing.

Today, effective oral storytelling shares the same characteristics as in the past. Adapting the delivery of your story to suit your audience and learning a story as a whole rather than in fragments remains ever important (McWilliams, 1998). However in storytelling preparation, literate societies still recommend reading a story repeatedly before presenting. Verbatim memorization is not recommended however, except perhaps the first and last line (McWilliams, 1998).  Some oral storytellers state that storytelling has become more difficult in recent years (McWilliams, 1998). Attention spans have become shorter, more demanding, and more sophisticated. Today’s audience appears less able to independently imagine or visualize, and consequently require more visual stimulation (McWilliams, 1998). Do these assertions suggest that the practices of oral storytelling traditions that date back to ancient Greece have finally become obsolete? Have technological innovations overtaken the need for oral storytelling?

Jason Ohler, author of Digital Storytelling in the Classroom: New Media Pathways to Literacy, Learning and Creativity, believes that the traditions of oral storytelling remain an essential part of today’s modern exchanges, like digital storytelling. Jason feels that oral storytelling will endure as a primary and powerful form of communication, and will remain a valuable skill in the workplace, communities, and schools (Ohler, 2012). He feels the skills set within oral storytelling transfers well into creating effective digital stories (Ohler, 2012). Though videos of people telling oral stories has been rare recently, due to expense and complexity, Jason states that this will change as digital video equipment continues to become less expensive, more user friendly, and accessible (Ohler, 2012). Jason sees future students, and others, telling stories with media accompaniment, for example with a PowerPoint presentation. Today’s audience expects a blend of media and oral presentation, so perhaps education should shift its teaching focus towards a blended approach to ensure storytelling remains a powerful tool for communicating knowledge.

References

McWilliams, Barry. (1998). Effective Storytelling A manual for beginners. Retrieved September 27^th, 2012 from http://www.eldrbarry.net/roos/eest.htm

Ohler, Jason. (2012). Storytelling and new media narrative Part I – Storytelling, literacy and learning. Retrieved September 27^th, 2012 from http://www.jasonohler.com/storytelling/storyeducation.cfm

Ong, Walter. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.

In “The Judgement of Thamus”, Postman discusses the impact that new technologies have on society’s way of thinking (Postman, 1992). He claims that there are always costs and benefits to every new technology. Postman also believes that there must always be winners and losers within the technology realm. Postman argues that we must not accept new technologies blindly, but instead need to consider how technology is altering our conception of learning.

Postman states, “every technology is both a burden and a blessing; not either-or, but this-and-that” (p.4-5). Although this argument does seem valid at first glance, it must be dissected further. Freud’s opinion on this matter is drawn to our attention as he describes a few scenarios where technology has both helped and hindered humankind. As an example, Freud uses the improvement of modern medicine that helps to decrease infant mortality and increase the human lifespan. While this seems to be a technological advancement that brings with it inherent benefits, Freud sees living longer as not necessarily a positive thing if life is full of misery and suffering. Postman cautions us to not get caught up into only the burdens or only the benefits, as he ensures there are always both. While there can definitely be two sides to almost any story, it is an inaccurate assumption to think that all new technologies will be equally beneficial as they are costly. It is perilous to claim that there will always be detrimental costs to all new technologies. The benefit of increasing human lifespan and improving health of people is far more important than the costs that can occur due to these increases. Conversely, the nuclear bomb is a form of technology where the cost would far outweigh the benefit.

It is odd to think that writing was a new form of technology at one point in time. In Ong’s “Orality and Literacy”, he states “Plato was thinking of writing as an external, alien technology, as many people today think of the computer” (Ong, 1982, p.81). Looking at writing as a technology, we see that our memory formation and ways of thinking have indeed evolved from a primarily oral culture.

Postman describes Thamus’ speech in Plato’s “Phaedrus”, at the beginning of his paper to show that Thamus had an error in highlighting only the downfalls of writing. Thamus stated that pupils “will receive a quantity of information without instruction, and in consequence be thought very knowledgeable when they are for the most part quite ignorant” (Postman, 1992, p.4). Postman is trying to convey the message here that writing will (and has) changed the way we think, memorize, and create wisdom. Thamus thought that writing would only be a burden and there would be no gain. Postman states that we have learnt that it is never as one-sided as Thamus believed. Writing is definitely not burdensome considering the great change it has made for education and learning. Daniel Chandler claims that “those in non-literate societies do not necessarily think in fundamentally different ways from those in literate societies, as is commonly assumed” (1994). Literacy has helped us access, process, create and adapt information so much more than orality could do.

Another aim of Postman’s paper is to convey the message that there are winners and losers with the onset of new technology. “Those that cultivate competence in the use of a new technology become an elite group that are granted undeserved authority and prestige by those who have no such competence,” (Postman, 1992, p. 9). Postman claims that the benefits of a new technology do not get distributed evenly and the deficits fall into the laps of the disadvantaged. Claiming that computer technology only helps large-scale organizations, such as the armed forces and banks, is erroneous. Computer technology has aided many individuals and the “masses” more than Postman could have predicted in 1992. Individuals have benefited greatly from the Internet and computer usage, not just large monopolies. In fact, computers and the Internet have provided a platform for small-scale businesses or individuals to become recognized and to benefit from. For example, YouTube has provided many resources for individuals to access, as well as a stage to showcase talent, knowledge, and entertainment. Nearly all people with access to the technology can feel some of the benefits of computers and the Internet.

Technology undoubtedly has an impact on our learning and warrants careful consideration. However, we do not need to always look for the drawbacks of each tool or a hidden conspiracy in the media. We must assess the technology in order to discover the educational benefits to using certain new technologies, but for the most part, we cannot escape many technologies. Writing, computers, the Internet, Web 2.0, and mobile phone technology are all here to stay. Even though there are costs and downfalls for each, the benefits of this open communication and widespread amount of information needs to be appreciated and embraced.

References:

Chandler, D. (1994). Biases of the Ear and Eye: “Great Divide” Theories, Phonocentrism, Graphocentrism & Logocentrism [Online]. Retrieved, 22 September, 2012 from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/litoral/litoral.html

Ong, W. J. (1982). Writing restructures consciousness. Orality and literacy (pp. 77–114). Routledge.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.

Authors such as Walter Ong, Daniel Chandler, Martin Oliver, Jay Bolter and Neil Postman have written extensive works on the implications of introducing new technology on society. These writings serve to discuss the notion of a technological determinism and the implications this has on human thoughts and conscious understanding. Daniel Chandler (1995) defines two levels of technological determinism. The highest level of determinism called “hard determinism” (p. 1) is the result of only one catalyst causing some form of radical change. The second level of technological determinism, according the Chandler (1995), is “soft determinism” where the “presence of a particular technology is an enabling or facilitating factor” (Chandler, 1995). In response to soft determinism, the change in society and human consciousness is a result not only of the new technology, but a collection of all factors that are acting upon and within a culture to create this change. A third possibility exists when there is no function of determinism at play in deciding society’s reaction to the inclusion of new technology. This commentary will explore some of the literature available to discuss these three levels of determinism.

Ong (1982) supports the idea of hard determinism in his exploration of writing and its effects on human cognition. Ong (1982) defines two types of people; non-literate (oral) and literate (p. 50). These categories support the idea of hard determinism as those that are of the non-literate (oral) group have not gained the knowledge that those within the literate culture have (p. 50). Ong (1982) claims that “writing has transformed human consciousness” (p. 77), suggesting that writing has caused a drastic change in society’s thinking. This supports the notion that the outcome was predetermined when the technology was introduced to society.

Chandler (1994) also refers to a division between people, however; he focuses on those who have benefited and those who have not benefited from the introduction of a technology (p. 1). He refers to this as the “Great Divide” (p. 1) and continues to draw examples from opposites in societies (e.g ‘primitive vs. civilized’, ‘simple vs. advanced’, etc.). In summary, a divide is created between groups when people either adapt to the introduced technology or not. This divide also creates different modes of thinking and understanding. To support this, Ong (1982) recalls a research experiment conducted by A. R. Luria during the years 1931-1932 (p. 49). In this experiment, the researcher found significant differences between the thought processes of individuals that were classified as literate and those classified as non-literate (Ong, 1982). This adds credibility to Chandler’s “Great Divide” explanation of differences (1994) and shows Ong’s (1982) support for a hard deterministic explanation.

Postman (1992) introduces us to the story of Thamus (p. 1). The story of Thamus explains concerns over the divide that happens between people when a new technology is introduced. In Postman’s (1992) writing we see that there is clearly a hierarchy created between those fluent in technology’s use and those that are not (p. 9). Accordingly, this supports the “Great Divide” theory discussed by Chandler (1994) and the divide which separates oral from literate as discussed by Ong (1982). However, this hierarchy between people forms from gradual societal adaptation (p. 12) and therefore supports the notion of “soft determinism” (Chandler 1994) as the technology is not working singularly to produce societal change, but rather acting as one factor from within society to bring about change.

As Oliver (2011) notes, when studying the effect of technology on learning, conclusions about the technologies direct effect on individuals is difficult to measure (p. 377). This supports the idea that society is not in fact responding to a predetermined path in response to the introduction of technology, but rather reacting to its inclusion in society along with other elements within the environment. Technology therefore does not have a straightforward impact on an individual’s learning (Oliver, 2011). Oliver (2011) also discusses the introduction of technology in terms of Vygotsky’s “Activity Theory” (p.377), which studies learning in terms of interactions with individuals within a social setting. Accordingly, individuals learn from interactions with others thereby integrating and using the technology within their own relative setting. This idea of interactions between individuals determining the success or failure of a technology’s integration supports a non-deterministic theory. Individuals are acting their will upon the technology to integrate, rather than technology forcing itself on individuals to achieve change.

Bolter (2001) also addresses the issue of technological determinism and argues that “technologies do not determine the course of culture or society, because they are not separate agents that can act on culture from the outside” (p. 19). This supports the idea that the technology is an integral part of the culture and not an outside force. In this argument, Bolter (2001), attempts to show that technological determinism is non-existent, and that technologies are not agents of change (p. 19). This is a contradictory stance to the “hard technological determinism” Chandler (1995) and Ong (1982) provide. However, Bolter (2001) does concede that “it is possible to understand print technology is an agent of change without insisting it works in isolation or in opposition to other aspects of culture” (p. 19). This stance then supports the idea of a “soft determinism” as described by Chandler (1995), where print technology is one of several possible factors that have brought about a change in human thoughts and understanding.

Technology has the ability to influence all spheres of human interactions. Whether or not this influence is predetermined, partially predetermined or completely random, we must understand that there will be changes in society in response to new technologies. Whether these are for the better or worse will not be easily determined, however; it will be society that must adapt.

References:

Bolter, J. D. (2001) Writing Space: Computers, hypertext and the remediation of print. New York, NY: Routledge.

Chandler, D. (1994). Biases of the Ear and Eye: “Great Divide” theories, phonocentrism, graphocentrism and logocentrism [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/litoral/litoral.html

Chandler, D. (1995). Technological or media determinism [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/tecdet/tecdet.html

Ong, W.J. (1982). Orality and literacy. London: Routledge.

Oliver, M. M. (2011). Technological Determinism in Educational Technology Research: Some Alternative Ways of Thinking about the Relationship between Learning and Technology. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(5), 373-384.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.

Introduction:
In the book Orality and Literacy by Walter J. Ong (2002), Ong delves into the rich history of the development of literate cultures. Ong (2002) argues that “in all the wonderful worlds that writing opens, the spoken word still resides and lives” (p. 8). In my reading of this book I began to think about what sorts of characteristics of a primary oral culture still exist today in the literate culture I reside in. I was also interested to look at what types of strategies were used in oral cultures for memorization and learning and how many literate people and literate cultures still use similar strategies today.

Mnemonics and Formulas
The strategy of using formulas and mnemonic patterns in order to recall information was very popular in oral cultures. Oral cultures had to have a way to recall information as it was not recorded in writing to be able look at in the future. In many literate cultures we continue to use formulas and mnemonic patterns and in the area of education this strategy works for many students to remember certain pieces of information. Often students can demonstrate anxiety over having to memorize the order or pattern of a certain concept so using a formula or mnemonic device gives them an easier way to commit this concept to memory. The example that came to my mind was the use of mnemonic patterns when teaching classification. In the area of classification we use a mnemonic device for the proper ordering of the biological groupings used in taxonomy: Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Specie. There are a great number of mnemonics out there to help students such as “King Phillip Came Over For Good Spaghetti”. Students not only find a phrase such as this amusing and motivating, but for the most part they also have a much easier time remembering this concept by using a mnemonic device such as the one above. As Ong (2002) states “rhythm aids recall” (p. 34) and this type of mnemonic device creates a rhythm for students to work with.

Concrete Versus Abstract
Ong (2002) also speaks of another famous psychologist Alexander Luria who found in his studies that illiterate oral subjects “identified geometrical figures by assigning them the names of objects, never abstractly as circles, squares etc” (p.50). I related this back to my own teaching and teacher education where we were taught how important it is to relate the concepts we want our students to learn to real life and to previous experiences that they have encountered. In explaining to a small child what a circle is we do often relate the concept of a circle to something that is the same shape, a plate or a round table, for example. Oral cultures “identified the designs as representations of real things that they knew” (p. 50). With many concepts, teachers will try to represent these new ideas with a real life setting using real life examples. This is when students learn best as they can retain information that means something to them much better then information that seems to play no importance in their everyday life. As Ong (2002) states “why define, when a real-life setting is infinitely more satisfactory than a definition” (p. 53).

Somatics
One last area that Ong (2002) touches on is the idea that “oral memory has a highly somatic component “ (p.66), where one engages the body when taking part in oral communication. Ong discuses both the use of gestures as well as the movements that occur by some people while praying. It was interesting to see that gestures were a strategy used by oral cultures. As a French teacher one of the most popular programs over the last few years has been the AIM (Accelerative Integrated Methodology) approach. In this second language teaching approach one of the main focuses is the use of gestures to teach students vocabulary and grammar concepts. Teachers who use this program have been amazed at how much, and how quickly, their students can learn a new language. The other area that Ong discusses is the movement of the body during prayer by some Jewish people. Working at a Jewish school I have seen firsthand that as many Jewish people pray, you will often see them doing a backward and forward rocking motion. In the Jewish faith it is believed that prayer should involve your entire body and not just your mind. This rocking movement is a way to move with the rhythm of the prayers and to feel closer to God at that moment. In the field of education it is also becoming more common for students to need to involve their entire body, and not just their mind, in their learning. It is becoming more and more common in classrooms to see students that need to exhibit movements in order to focus and be able to concentrate deeply on a task. It is not uncommon to see students who like to stand up while working or sit on special cushion like object or even a large exercise ball while completing tasks. This allows them to direct their need for movement in a positive way as they have to move their body to maintain balance. Since their body is constantly in movement their brain is able to focus on the task at hand.

Conclusion:
One of the obstacles that I have had to overcome was my own personal struggle to understand what a primary oral culture was. Ong notes that “fully literate persons can only with great difficulty imagine what a primary oral culture is like” (p.31). Through looking at the similarities that still exist between a primary oral culture and a literate culture I have been able to better understand what an oral culture entails. It is fascinating to see that many of the strategies and characteristics of an oral culture still exist today in the literate culture that I am living.

References:

Ong, W.J. (2002). Orality and Literacy. London: Routledge.

In Postman’s book, Technopoly, he warns us of the dangers of technology. He begins chapter one with the story of Thamus speaking to Theuth about the invention of writing. Thamus feared that writing would cause people to rely on it to remember things and that society would be overrun with individuals with a quantity of information,”without proper training”. Postman(1992) does acknowledge that technology has provided many new opportunities. However, he cautions that we should keep in mind that it is both a “blessing and a burden” and that new technology should be brought into society with our “eyes wide open”.

The focus of this commentary is on the blessings of technology and how they might outweigh the burdens. Postman(1992) mentions that with any new technology there are winners and there are losers. However, there are winners and losers in all areas of society, not just in the area of technology. In order for one sporting team to win a game, the other team must lose. If one person wins a job placement, others have lost that position. One must question why it would be any different in the world of technology.

Postman(1992) also mentions that those that become competent in this new technology become the ‘elite” and have power over those that do not possess this competency. The winners will encourage enthusiasm for the technology that they are benefiting from. The losers might even cheer on the winners of this new technology, unaware that they are the losers. He uses an example of how the invention of the television and computers could bring about the end of school teachers and yet, teachers are excited about these new technologies. Will the schoolteacher become obsolete? There may be a shift in their roles as a teacher and they may need to learn how to use the new technology, but they still will be necessary to facilitate learning. An example of this can be found with e-learning. Learning can now occur without face to face instruction and the need to physically attend a university. However, a trained educator is still necessary to create courses and monitor learning. The designers of the Learning Management Systems may be the ultimate winner, but the teacher and student benefit greatly from this technology and are somewhat winners in their own right.

Another example Postman(1992) uses is the invention of the clock. It was originally invented to provide a standard for monks to complete their regular devotions to God. However, it eventually developed into a way to regulate a work week and provide business owners a way to get the most out of their employer’s time. It is true that workers are now bound by a clock, but the blessings from having this type of technology benefit the losers, as well. It is used for much more than keeping track of work hours. We also use time to for many recreational events , such as: celebrate important dates, meet others for social events, etc. Without clocks, it would be challenging organizing our daily life. Again, the invention of the clock may have caused the worker’s day to be defined for the employer, but the benefits of being able to keep track of the hours benefits us all.

In this chapter, Postman(1992) also states that, “new technologies compete with old ones – for time, for attention, for money, for prestige, but mostly for dominance of their world-view” (p.16) He uses the previous examples of televisions and computers in schools. First, children come to school with the television already a huge part of their lives. Postman(1992) says that because of this, they are unable to focus on the printed word and have difficulty writing, etc. These students may be labelled as “stupid” or “failures” , but it is not their fault. They are on the losing side of the television vs the print media war. Secondly, the introduction of computers has broken the truce between print and orality that has existed in the classroom. Will the computer eventually cause the defeat of oral presentations in the classroom? Computers can only enhance what is already present in schools. Speaking and listening are still important outcomes in the curriculum. In the Atlantic Canada English Language Arts K-3 Curriculum Guide, one of the specific outcomes is as follows, “Students will speak and listen to explore, extend, clarify and reflect on their thoughts, ideas, feelings and experiences” ( p. 54). Computers have helped children prepare projects, understand concepts and explore the world around them. However, oral presentations and teacher questioning are still necessary and are a part of the classroom daily.

The benefits of technology are tremendous. Technology makes our daily life easier and more efficient, makes communication across the globe possible, assists those with disabilities, allows individuals with illnesses to live a better quality of life and longer. Does that make us losers? Are users of technology the house dog in Postman’s(1992) analogy and technology the burglar? The users may be “munching peacefully on the meat while the house is looted” (p.19). However, those dogs are watch dogs and know what is going on. They may be excited about the meat and choose to eat it because of it’s benefits. The burglar may even get some loot from the house because of their choice to eat the meat, but not without a bite and growl from the dog on their way out the door. If all house dogs were to do the same, that burglar might think twice before looting again.

Reference:

Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, Department of Education (1999). A curriculum guide.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.