The Power of Powerful Words

Posted on September 29, 2012 by Eric Gearey

            Sunday after Sunday I sit in my pew and listen, sometimes distantly, as the priest pronounces great truths and wisdom from the pulpit.  Nobody else speaks; nobody questions what is said; nobody challenges the Word.  According to O’Donnell (1999), my weekend rituals, as well as my sense of morality, are governed by the chance occurrence that early Christians transcribed their beliefs to avoid persecution.  The power of Words, whether they be written or spoken, is undeniable.  Words have the ability to build ideas and peoples up, or break them down and scatter them about.  Postman (1992), in discussing Thamus’ error of omission, states that “writing is not a neutral technology whose good or harm depends on the uses made of it.”  In reality, writing is the one true technology that has changed everything for humans: how we learn, how we remember, how we create, how we communicate, how we love and how we hate.  Words, simple words, have changed everything.

            As Ong (1982) writes, “sound cannot be sounding without the use of power.”  Everyone stops to listen to the person speaking; crowds are fearful of interrupting the powerful leader, sharing insight with the humble masses.  Of course, as Stan Lee (1962) put it so simply “With great power comes great responsibility.”  Those who command the Words on which the masses hang their hopes must be careful and vigilant to use their authority for positive gains, and not for selfish concerns.  As Postman (1992) points out, “the benefits and deficits of a new technology are not distributed equally.”  There will always be those in the inner circle, charged with distributing the Words to those on the outside.  The imbalance in power, wherein so much is given to so few, necessitates that those in control should be carefully and thoughtfully selected to ensure that they are indeed worthy of the role.  Salespeople, tour-guides, teachers, judges, priests, political leaders and countless other professions and occupations all carry the same weight and responsibility of doing what it morally and socially correct with the information at their disposal and authoritarian figure they hold in their respective arenas.

In the 2010 film The Book of Eli, Carnegie, played by Gary Oldman, is relentless in his pursuit of a book.  Set against the backdrop of a post-apocalyptic wasteland, the most invaluable tool, the most destructive and coercive weapon is a book: a Bible.  Realizing that, in a world wherein perhaps hope is the most valuable commodity, Carnegie states that “People will do whatever I tell them, if the words are from the Book.  It’s happened before, it’ll happen again.”  Powerful Words have the potential to uplift, motivate, even save those who have nothing else.  If those who claim to represent the Words are themselves untrustworthy, they may of course use the Words for their own repellant needs and wants.

If, as McLuhan (1964) coined that “the medium is the message, Thamus, as Postman (1992) explains, is correct in being “concerned not with what people will write; he is concerned that people will write.” (p.7) In this instance, I’m not sure I can agree.  While a bruise caused by a stone or stick will heal in time, Words, especially when written, can be much more damaging and hurtful.  As Ong discusses, spoken words exist for only a few seconds before they disappear out of existence.  Written words however, are committed to the page, existing in a physical form, to be preserved and saved for future generations.  While I do not refute that it’s important that we, as a literate society, are able to write, it is also equally important what is being written.  An elementary school students can get over being called a name much more quickly than a high school student being written about on a taunting website.  It is important, as an elementary school teacher that my students understand immediately the power of the Words they choose to use.  Our classroom project of creating Student Blogs will help to show the impact their Words can have on others as well as their permanence effect as their work will be available for, potentially, the entire planet to read.

As Ong (1982) so eloquently phrases, “writing was and is the most momentous of all human technological inventions.” (p. 84).  There is an interesting duality that exists with Words.  Spoken aloud, Words are much more easily questioned.  Written down, Words are regarded as unblemished truth and wisdom.  They are permanent, important, and meaningful.  People are very slow and wary to question what they read, but will quickly and easily dismiss conversations as gossip or hearsay.  When Words are printed on a medium, they become undeniable, permanent, and powerful.  They transcend thought and emotion to the realm of physical creation.

 

References:

Whitta, G. (Writter), & Hughes Brothers (Directors).  (2010).  The Book of Eli [Motion Picture].  United States, Warner Bros. Pictures Distribution

O’Donnell, J. & Engell, J. (1999).  From Paper to Papyrus.  Cambridge Forum

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

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

McLuhan, M. (1964).  Understanding Media: The extensions of man.  McGraw-Hill

Lee. S. (1962).  Amazing Fantasy 1(15) Marvel Comics.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

The Internet: Burden or Blessing?

Posted on September 29, 2012 by Deborah S

Postman (1992) suggested that technology is both a burden and a blessing. The Internet is a prime example of a technology that has benefits and drawbacks. While the Internet has vast amounts of information on any given topic, access is not universal or equitable, and its contents can be overwhelming to the uninformed user.

Information Overload

Today’s students have been labeled digital natives (Prensky, 2001), and Oblinger & Oblinger (2005) noted that those born after 1980 have attributes including increased digital aptitude and better multi-tasking abilities (as cited in Corrin, Lockyer & Bennett, 2010) which are the result of using computers, video games and the Internet for their entire lives (Prensky, 2001). Does this mean that digital natives are savvy at navigating the Internet?

The authors of a study on student technology use concluded that there was a “disparity between actual level[s] of technology ability and use” (Corrin, Lockyer & Bennett, 2010, p. 397). In another study, Paryek, Sachs and Schossböck (2011) noted that study participants had difficulty finding information on the Internet, and concluded that “measures to enhance the Internet competence of teenagers are crucial” (p. 170). Two researchers have even gone so far as to refer to this situation as a second digital divide that “includes differences in skills to use the Internet” (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2011, p. 908).

With approximately one trillion web pages (Farhan, D’Agostino & Worthington, 2012), an Internet user must discern what information is credible and what is not. Where does a user obtain the skills to differentiate between sites containing accurate information versus someone’s blog? The situation is akin to the suggestion by Thamus that a new invention, in this case the Internet, would create readers who “will receive a quantity of information without proper instruction” (as cited in Postman, 1992, p. 16). Students are usually somewhat successful in locating information on a particular topic, but many are not sure what to do with it or how to organize it, which can sometimes lead to plagiarism.

Some students are guilty of copying and pasting information directly from a website, adding some of their own words and submitting it as their own work. Plagiarism, however, is not a new problem. Ong (1982) noted that “with writing, resentment at plagiarism begins to develop” (p. 129) and the poet Martial, 38-41CE to 104 CE (Martial, 2003) used the Latin word plagiarius to describe an individual “who appropriates another’s writing” (Ong, 1982, p. 129). Perhaps the problem, as identified in a study by Power (2009), is that students “lack the ability to tell the difference between quoting, citing and paraphrasing” (p. 650) especially when dealing with the vast amount of electronic information available on the Internet. If this finding is indicative of all students, then educators must find new ways to ensure that all students receive “proper instruction” on how to gather and summarize resources obtained from the Internet (Postman, 1992, p. 16).

In his book, Postman (1992) postulated that “schools teach their children to operate computerized systems instead of teaching things that are more valuable” (p. 11). However, the Ontario curriculum advocates a more balanced approach than Postman suggested. For example, the Business Studies curriculum for senior high school students stipulates that “students develop critical thinking skills, and strategies required to conduct research and inquiry and communicate findings accurately, ethically and effectively” (Ontario Ministry of Education, 2006, p. 4). Proper use of the Internet requires students to apply their analytical skills in locating appropriate and relevant information.

Digital Divide

Postman (1992) asserted that “the benefits and deficits of a new technology are not distributed equally” (p. 9) and this reference can be applied to Internet access. Despite the fact that the number of Internet users in developing countries doubled between 2007 and 2011, only one-quarter of the developing world was online at the end of 2011 (International Telecommunication Union, 2012). In addition, 70% of households in the developed world had Internet access versus only 20% in the developing world (International Telecommunication Union, 2012).

This digital divide is also evident in Canada as the availability of quick and reliable Internet access is often dependent on whether you live in an urban or rural area. Marlow and McNish (2010) suggested that broadband access would result in an economic growth rate of 1.2% for every 10% increase in broadband availability. A research director at Harvard quipped that broadband is “essential infrastructure for competitive nations” and suggested that communities without such access would be at a competitive disadvantage (Marlow & McTish, 2010, para. 12). Evidently, the benefits of high-speed Internet access are being enjoyed by Canada’s urban population, while its rural residents struggle with slow and often unreliable access; a perfect illustration of Postman’s prediction about the inequitable distribution of a new technology’s benefits and drawbacks.

Conclusion

It is unlikely that Postman could have imagined the proliferation and worldwide acceptance of the Internet back in 1992, but his predictions about the unequal distribution of the advantages and disadvantages of this technology were accurate and are occurring within Canadian borders. In addition, the massive amount of information available on the Internet places an additional burden on educators to ensure that students are adequately equipped to navigate the complex world of the Internet. Hopefully educators can rise to the challenge.

References

Corrin, L., Lockyer, L., & Bennett, S. (2010). Technology diversity: An investigation of students’ technology use in everyday life and academic study. Learning Media and Technology, 35(4), 387-401. doi:10.1080/17439884.2010.531024

Farhan, H., D’Agostino, D., & Worthington, H. (2012, September 5). Web index 2012. Retrieved September 16, 2012 from http://thewebindex.org/2012/09/2012-Web-Index-Key-Findings.pdf

International Telecommunication Union. (2012, June). Key statistical highlights: ITU data release June 2012. Retrieved September 17, 2012 from http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/statistics/material/pdf/2011%20Statistical%20highlights_June_2012.pdf

Marlow, I. & McNish, J. (2010). Canada’s digital divide. Retrieved September 17, 2012 from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/canadas-digital-divide/article4313761/?page=1

Martial. (2003). Martial select epigrams. L. Watson & P. Watson (Ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

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

Ontario Ministry of Education. (2006). The Ontario curriculum grades 11 & 12 (revised): Business studies. Retrieved from http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/business1112currb.pdf

Paryek, P., Sachs, M., & Schossböck, J. (2011). Digital divide among youth: Socio-cultural factors and implications. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 8(3), 161-171. doi:10.1108/17415651111165393

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

Power, L. (2009). University students’ perceptions of plagiarism. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(6), 643-662. doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0073

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part I. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. doi:10.1108/10748120110424816

van Deursen, A. & van Dijk, J. (2011). Internet skills and the digital divide. New Media Society, 13(6), 893-911. doi:10.1177/1461444810386774

Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Technology and “Closure”

Posted on September 29, 2012 by dlclled

WALTER ONG  (2010) STATES in a very straightforward way that print “encourage the sense of closure” (p. 129). He does it in the context of a book that illustrate his categorical and binary (as Chandler called it) vision of information processing as oral or literate. And print, of course, is part of the literate “dimension”.

If it is true that I do not agree with his dichotomous vision, I do agree with his statement about the effect of printed media, at least partially.

Ong himself mentions letterpress and photolithography (p.130), but these are massive print reproduction devices, and I do not think that this “state of completion” (p.129) is exclusive of print mass media. In fact, I think that actually it comes from publication (“The action of making something publicly known” [OED a]) and the growing confidence in technology that seems to develop since the industrial revolution. This same feeling of “closure” might come from a voice recording, as neither publication or technology are exclusive of the print media. Nevertheless, it is easier (almost inevitable) to give this attribution to print from this already mentioned binary vision, given that mass printing media seems irremediably connected to technology since the invention letterpress.

This personal statement can be illustrated with the case of the use and misuse of the diacritics in Spanish since the invention of typewriter machine.

Overstated?

The manual of Spanish orthography of the Spanish Language Royal Academy (Real Academia de la Lengua Española), the maximum authority in the use and knowledge of the Spanish language, in its 4.10 subsection, states: “The uppercase letters must have tittle is its suitable according to the given rules[…] The (Spanish Language Royal) Academy had never established a rule contrary to this”. (RAE, 1999 pp. 31) It is easy to notice that the last part of the written rule is curious, or at least redundant. And there is a reason for that.

According to José Toribio Medina (1989), the letterpress arrive to America through Veracrúz, México, with the Spanish colonizers in 1539 (possibly 1535), almost 100 years before its invention and many years before its full adoption by Spain. Is logical to think that the printing arrived to Mexico and the rest of Latin America with the whole paraphernalia to print in proper Spanish, including complete sets of types.

From 1910 (100 years after its independence) and 1921 Mexico suffered an internal revolution, that had parts of the country virtually paralyzed, during this time many printing devices were destroyed but many others were used to print revolutionary fanzines. Simultaneously, in the U.S. the Underwood Typewriter Company started to produce the Underwood No. 5, and by 1920, the company has sold 2 million of typewriter machines and has achieved a standard design (Cortada, 2000).

Missing tittles

In Spanish the acute accent (´) is very usual and less frequently, the dieresis (¨). The accent is crucial for semantics between similarly written words, either with related or unrelated meanings (secretaria=secretary, secretaría=secretariat; ingles=groin, inglés=english) or to recognize articles or tenses within a sentence (El paso= The passage, Él pasó= He passed).

As the Underwood typewriter was developed for the U.S. market mostly, and English is one of the few languages with no diacritics, the invention arrived to Mexico with the technical impossibility to print accents in the uppercase letters. Presumably, the same occur between England and Spain.

Photo by Rakka_pl

This impossibility to put diacritics in the uppercase letters derived in an anonymous thumb rule: “Uppercase letters should (instead of can) not be tittled (atildar, in spanish)”. And this thumb rule eventually became an informal norm. Many billboards and advertising in Mexico, printed or handmade since 1930 had no diacritics in the uppercase letters and this extends to official dependencies. Many people started to write just in majuscules to avoid the effort to remember the orthographic rules for the use of accents.

Right spelling: LA PURÍSIMA; PERIFÉRICO; FELÍZ; SECRETARÍA, GOBERNACIÓN, MIGRACIÓN.
Photos (Descending, left to right): La purisima, by Wonderlane; Periferico Gandhi, by Mathew Rutledge; Feliz Viaje by Scazon; Secretaria de Gobernacion: instituto Nacional de Migracion bu Tricia Wong.

Within few years, this phenomenon extended to formal education and to editorial industry. Books without diacritics in the uppercase letters started to be seen and can be seen until now; road signs and even official or federal official representatives. A very recent and notorious example of this, is the response of the leaders of the London 2012 Mexican Olympic Delegation about the absence of accent in México: “It is written in uppercases”. (EFE, 2012)

The final frontier was reached when people started to use an nonexistent new RAE rule on their arguments. As a response, In the previous version of the Manual of Orthography, the RAE add that apparently unnecessary sentence.

It is important to address that typewriter was not a mass publication, but a self-publication device, as the personal computer was when it was first introduced. In the mass printing process (linotype, developed at the ends of the XIX century [OED b]), the typewriter was between the author itself and the linotype typist, the very first step of the production line.

Nowadays, with the integration of computers to mass media production, the almost unmediated pass from the creation of a document to its unprinted publication abled by the internet, and the use of the computer as a reading device; the possibility for a new discussion about “closure” seems to be opened.

References

Chandler, D. (1994). Biases of the ear and eye: “Great divide” theories, phonocentrism, graphocentrism & logocentrism [Online]. Retrieved from http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/litoral/litoral.html in Sept 28, 2012

Cortada, James W. (2000): Before the Computer: IBM, NCR, Burroughs, and Remington Rand and the industry they created, 1865-1956. Princeton University Press

EBF (1947): Making Books. Enciclopaedia Brittanica Films, Retrived from <http://archive.org/details/MakingBo1947> in Sept 28, 2012

EFE (Jul 24, 2012): “Falta de ortografía en uniforme mexicano” in El Universal. Retrieved from: <http://www.eluniversal.com.mx/notas/860721.html> in Sept 28, 2012

Mumford, Lewis (1963) Technics & Civilization. Hardcourt Brace & Compan

OED: Publication in Oxford English Dictionary, Retrieved from <http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/154060?redirectedFrom=publication#eid> in Sept 28, 2012

—-: Linotype in Oxford English Dictionary, Retrieved from <http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/108768?redirectedFrom=linotype#eid> in Sept 28, 2012

RAE (1999): Ortografía de la Lengua Española. Real Academia Española

Toribio Medina, José (1989): La imprenta en México. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

UNAM: Bibliografía Mexicana: La imprenta en México. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México. Retrieved from: <http://mmh.ahaw.net/imprenta/index.php> in Sept 28, 2012

Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Memorization: A Shift from Oral to Literate Cultures

Posted on September 29, 2012 by troos

Memorization has long been a tool for retaining new knowledge.  Oral cultures of the past depended heavily on memorization to pass what was meaningful on to the next generation (Olick & Robbins, 1998).  Current learning theories such as cognitive information processing, meaningful learning, situated cognition and constructivism all focus on the human capacity of memory to enact learning (Driscoll, 2005).  To learn, the learner senses new information, stores the information briefly in the sensory memory, shifts what is deemed important into working memory and integrates the information in long-term memory.  So why is memorization as a learning activity frowned on by some?  In response, I propose that the focus of memorization as practiced in oral cultures has shifted in the transition to literate cultures, resulting in some forms of memorization becoming ineffective for learning.

In his book, Orality and Literacy, Walter Ong (2002) describes his perception of memorization in oral cultures.  He indicates that memorization in these cultures was approximate and flexible.  Ong implicates the lack of a permanent record to test the ‘perfection’ of memory as we have in written form for literate cultures.  Memorizers followed certain formulae and rules to help the memorization and presentation process but the presenter could use them in idiosyncratic ways.  These presenters could even tailor their presentations to a specific audience.  This indicates a memorization of ideas rather than words.  The ideas would be presented according to the overarching formulae.  Ong relates how oral bards from Yugoslavia ask to wait a day or more after first hearing a memorable story before relating it.  This allowed the bard time to think about the story to develop a good understanding.  Clearly, the intent was not verbatim or rote memorization.

The term, rote learning, was popularized by David Ausubel (as described in Driscoll ( 2005)) who contrasted it with meaningful learning.  Ausubel suggested that rote-learning usually involved verbatim memorization of information.  Since there was no expectation to understand the information and connect it to prior knowledge, learners never assimilate the information into long-term memory and they forget it.  It may be from this view that memorization has received a bad reputation and, consequently, equated with rote learning.  It was not the intent, however, to denigrate memorization entirely but to clarify that memorization without understanding is a poor form of learning.  Studies on memorization have verified this.

Dahlin and Watkins (2000) in comparing views of Chinese and German secondary school students found that individuals from the Chinese culture place much heavier emphasis on memorization as a form of learning. This focus may be a product of the individual culture’s  method of codifying their language (Logan, 2004). When analyzing the intent in memorization, Dahlin and Watkins found the Chinese students had a strong dual intent to both memorize and understand.  These students in repeating readings would look for what they did not understand rather than ensure that what they are reading matched with what they already understood.  These researchers conclude that understanding not only helped the memorization process, it also ensured long-term memory.  In a similar study, Mugler and Landbeck (2000) found that distance learners in the South Pacific, without direct prompting, described two kinds of memorization.  The first included understanding and was beneficial to learning and the other that disregarded understanding and had no long-term learning effects.  These studies show that memorization with understanding as described by Ausubel as meaningful learning, is still an effective method of learning.

In closing his analysis on memorization in oral cultures, Ong (2002) relates that oral memorization “has a highly semantic component” such as gestures, beats, dances, or other body movements.  Ong writes, “Bodily activity beyond mere vocalization is not adventitious or contrived in oral communication, but is natural and even inevitable”(p. 67).  Studies provide examples that encourage understanding through the memorization process.  Tonya Perry (2005) used drama to help her students analyze and remember various aspects of a novel study.  In teaching spelling, Shane Templeton (2002)  found that creating a context of understanding in spelling by categorizing words significantly helps the required memorization of words.  Similarly, Stephanie and Marvin Smith (2006) found that deemphasizing rote memorization of multiplication facts and focusing on an understanding of the process of multiplication led to a greater retention of the facts.  In analyzing several sections of a test, Cori Fata-Hartley (2011) found that students in an introductory cell biology course understood material significantly better on sections where they had learned the material through active learning activities compared to sections learned by rote memorization after lectured instruction.  What happens around the memorization process clearly influences the effectiveness of memorization because of increased understanding.

Without a doubt, memorization with understanding, as practiced in oral cultures, is an effective practice to promote learning.  This begs the question regarding the origin of rote or word-for-word memorization.  Ong (2002) relates that the best examples of verbatim memorization in oral cultures took place in rituals and religious activity.  Select people from the community performed this service and community members likely admired them for their abilities.  The advent of text in a transition to literate culture made verbatim memorization a possibility for a greater number of people since testing of perfection could now take place by comparison to the written record.  If this was the case, then verbatim memorization of text may have been highly valued and become entrenched as a valuable part of learning.  Thamus eloquently expressed the fear of this to Theuth in Plato’s Phaedrus (as quoted in Postman (1993, pp. 3-4)).  Theuth recommends his invention of writing, saying, “I have discovered a sure receipt for memory and wisdom”.  Thamus replies, “Those who acquire it will cease to exercise their memory and become forgetful; they will rely on writing to bring things to their remembrance by external signs instead of by their own internal resources”.  I think what Thamus and those who use rote memorization in learning failed to recognize is Theuth’s promotion of writing as a ‘receipt’ for memory and not memory itself.

References

Dahlin, B., & Watkins, D. (2000). The role of repetition in the processes of memorising and understanding: a comparison of the views of German and Chinese secondary school students in Hong Kong. The British journal of educational psychology, 70 ( Pt 1), 65–84. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10765567

Driscoll, M. P. (2005). Psychology of Learning for Instruction (3rd ed.). Toronto, Ont: Pearson Education.

Fata-Hartley, C. (2011). Resisting Rote: The Importance of Active Learning for All Course Learning Objectives. Journal of College Science Teaching, 40(3), 36–39. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=EJ921520

Logan, R. K. (2004). The Alphabet Effect: A Media Ecology Understanding of the Making of Western Civilization. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, Inc.

Mugler, F., & Landbeck, R. (2000). Learning, memorisation and understanding among distance learners in the South Pacific. Learning and Instruction, 10(2), 179–202. doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(99)00026-2

Olick, J., & Robbins, J. (1998). Social memory studies: From“ collective memory” to the historical sociology of mnemonic practices. Annual Review of sociology, 24(1998), 105–140. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/223476

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

Perry, T. (2005). Taking Time: Beyond Memorization: Using Drama to Promote Thinking. The English Journal, 95(1), 120–123. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047413

Postman, N. (1993). Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology. New York, NY: Vintage Books.

Smith, S. Z., & Smith, M. E. (2006). Assessing Elementary Understanding of Multiplication Concepts. School Science and Mathematics, 106(3), 140–149. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18171.x

Templeton, S. (2002). Effective spelling instruction in the middle grades: It’s a lot more than memorization. Voices from the Middle, 9(3), 8–14. Retrieved from http://www.ncte.org/journals/vm/issues/v9-3

Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Commentary #1: Digitalization of everything

Posted on September 28, 2012 by Rocky Lam

The road to digitalization
As humans, adaptation has been a key part in ensuring the survival of our species. Over centuries, our ability to meet our basic necessities, such as hunting animals with spears and creating fire to cook, has evolved into mechanized world of slaughterhouses and electronic ovens. Our understanding in how we preserve language continually changes as well, as we evolve and adapt from the oral modes of thought and expression to written modes (Ong, 1982, p. 6). When Ong (1982) explores the differences between oral and literate cultures, he identifies that we can use both sound and written words as a mode of expression and thought process to communicate effectively (Ong, 1982, p. 33). As we continue to adapt in the digital era, we must to move forward from our once oral to literate culture, and into the digital world. Our breakdown of the physical barriers in a library will allow text and information to conglomerate in the virtual world and sorted as a centralized filing system. This way, our goal to educate and promote our cultural heritage is strengthened, creating a sense of global citizenship in all learners.

Possible dream?
Since the introduction of text, we have developed an obsession to copy, reproduce, and organize books in a centralized location, such as the Great Library of Alexandria, for people to share and consume knowledge (O’Donnell, 1994). The development of the printing press allowed easier access of printed materials, and thus, create an enlightened, literate society. However, as we now enter into the digital era, our definition in understanding text continues to evolve. The integration of computer and the internet has transformed our perception of reading dramatically, where the development of the Google Book Search attempts to scan, capture and reproduce all texts electronically (Kelly, 2006). Although technological advances there are plus and minuses to every technology, we must adapt and become familiar so we can ensure the continuity in preserving our culture.

The purpose of libraries
As Grafton (2007) suggests that with the development of electronic virtual libraries, it threatens to destroy the very essence of a traditional library. He describes the importance of a physical library, to fully experience the library to inspire authors. His implications of a digital universal library suggest that users will go through informational overload, where they cannot process excessive information. This being said, the point of a centralized library is to provide a space for people to access information accurately and efficiently. Thus, the switch from a literal space of a library into a virtual space of digital essence encourages an active flow of information, in which text is more accessible than ever before (Sendov, 1997, p. 418). This, in fact, would encourage the essence of what we have tried to do in the past, to preserve language throughout the next generation. With the physical barriers of libraries removed, new information and communication technologies can supply learners with information to make informed decisions (Sendov, 1997, p. 416). Students will not be limited to searching from their local library, which may not have original images, and with a click of a button, have remote access to informational archives, such as researching online collection and documents of the Vatican library.

With new technologies
New technologies from the past, such as the microphotography, were meant to deal with the excessive amounts of books that would overflow in the library in the past. However, initiatives such as film- and reprint- based libraries failed it were unprofitable (Grafton, 2007). With the development of Google Books, more comprehensive scanning and being able to generate revenue by searching books, allows them to remain in business and to continue scanning. Grafton further questions the contents that go up into these virtual libraries, their copyright issues, and how they will be managed and made available to users. As there are so many different platforms to choose from, different companies have different ways to present their information. Although there are issues with copyright, Google attempts to scan books that are no long copyrighted (Kelly, 2006). If authors would like their books not be public, they can request for Google to remove their books from the scanned pages. Although there are some occasional errors in scanning book pages, the attempt by the company unifies millions of books consolidated into one server is a huge effort to upkeep and maintain. As Kelly (2006) suggests, our dream to have all documents, all books, and all works in all language is an old one, and we must embrace new technologies that has the possibility in becoming the library of libraries.

Conclusion
In many ways, the development of a virtual library encourages globalization, where we understand the connections and links formed online. By fostering global awareness of the world, we would be able to share our world’s cultural heritage, which may be sometimes unavailable to local places in the world, due to the inaccessibly of print throughout the world. Bao (2006) supports this argument, and continues that our digital era will create a global ethics environment, allowing for cultural exchange and integration among different nations through one virtual space (Bao, 2006, p. 41). Since the beginning, our invention of text, as defined by Gelb, from limited writing systems of pictograph, to hieroglyphs that represents sounds to words, calls upon an organization of writing (Gelb, 1952, p. 27). The digital space is now an extension of text and technology, and we, as humans, will continue to adapt to ensure the preservation of our cultural heritage.

Bao Z. and Xiang K. (2006) Digitalization and global ethics. Ethics and Informational Technology (8), 41-47.

Gelb, I.J. (1952). A study of writing: The foundations of grammatology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Kelly, K. (2006, May 14). Scan This Book! The New York Times. Retrieved from: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14publishing.html?pagewanted=all

O’Donnell, J.J. (1998). Avatars of the word: From papyrus to cyberspace. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

O’Donnell, J.J. The virtual library: An Idea Whose Time Has Passed. Retrieved from Lecture Notes Online Web site: http://web.archive.org/web/20070204034556/http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/jod/virtual.html

Ong, W.J. (2002). Orality and Literacy: The technologizing of the word. London:
Routledge.

Sendov, B. (1997). In the era of digitalization and communication. Prospects, 27(3), 415-426.

Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

The Winners are The Wealthy

Posted on September 28, 2012 by cmck

Introduction

In Technopoly, Postman (1992) urged his readers to think about both the benefits and detriments of technology. However, he also admitted that the mysterious nature of technology once released into society makes the benefits and detriments difficult to predict. Nonetheless, Postman told his readers that all technology creates winners and losers.

While I do not think it is possible to determine who the individual winners are, I think it is possible to figure out a general characteristic of the winners. By looking at the digital divide, the environmental impact of technology, and corporation-owned educational technology, I will argue that the winners are often the wealthy.

Digital Divide

Despite Postman’s assertion that teaching students how to use computers is not a valuable use of their time (1992), computer technology, when used for pedagogically sound purposes, can be used to enhance learning. For instance, asynchronous communication software encourages higher quality participation from a larger amount of students than in a face-to-face setting (English, 2007; McLoughlin & Mynard, 2009). As well, Wikis facilitate knowledge-building and collaboration (Beasley-Murray, 2008; Bruns & Humphreys, 2005; Scardamalia & Bereiter, 1994). Additionally, using concept map software is much easier than drawing concept maps by hand, and it aids students’ metacognition of their learning (Novak, 1998).

Unfortunately, the students are not benefiting equally. In what has been called the “digital divide”, the students from wealthier schools and school districts are benefiting more than those from poorer districts (Mccollum, 2011; Morriss, 2011). Even when schools from poorer districts have access to technology, many of the students don’t have access to, and thus cannot benefit from, computers at home (Mccollum).  Wealthier schools can afford more computers and software, and better professional development for teachers to use those computers (Mccollum). Also, Reinhart, Thomas, and Toriskie (2011) found that students from wealthier social economic areas tend to use internet communication technology to support higher-order thinking and to produce information, whereas students from poorer areas tend to use the technology for basic, remedial thinking and to consume information. Reinhart, et al. attributed this to the wealthier districts’ and schools’ ability to hire technology facilitators to train teachers to use technology to enhance teaching and learning.

Environmental Impact

The poor are not losing out only in our own countries, but in other countries as well. Electronic waste (e-waste) from educational technology is often shipped to developing Asian and African countries where the environmental laws are less strict and the workers are cheaper to pay (Terada, 2012). In fact, in the Western United States, anywhere from 50% to 80% of e-waste is exported (Terada). This e-waste, whether put in a landfill or disguised as being recycled, creates a pileup of materials, such as mercury and lead, in the developing countries that accept the waste (Terada). The result is a toxic environment that is dangerous to the workers who take apart the waste, to the people living in the surrounding area, and to the environment as a whole (Terada).

For now the winners are the affluent countries that purchase the electronics and benefit from their educational use. However, with the downsides mentioned above, it is hard to say that the affluent countries will remain winners forever. Damage to the environment and mistreatment of people has a way of affecting all of us eventually.

Corporation-Owned Educational Technology

Corporations that supply educational technology are also emerging as winners. Both Google and Microsoft offer a suite of educational apps that are free for K-12 schools (Dessoff, 2010). Among other things, they offer e-mail clients, calendars, and synchronous and asynchronous communication and writing software. Blackboard is another big name in educational technology. Blackboard offers course management systems (CMS) that are especially useful for distance education courses (Caplow, 2006). Blackboard’s CMSs offer everything that Google and Microsoft offer as well as a wide range of additional features used for such things as grading, assignment submission, and administration of courses. Of course there are many other businesses invested in educational technology as well.

However, often these businesses are not invested solely for the good of education. Blackboard charges for the use of its CMS, and, thus, profits whenever schools purchase it. As well, Google Apps’ education manager makes it quite clear that Google is providing its free services to K-12 schools because it wants the students be become used to Google and turn into lifelong Google users (Dessoff, 2010).

The appropriateness of corporate involvement in schools is an ethical debate that has extended for almost 100 years (Johnson, 2010), so the debate about whether schools and students are winners or losers is best left for another essay. Nonetheless, businesses and corporations are benefiting from educational technology and, therefore, are winners.

Conclusion

Postman (1992) said that technology’s winners and losers cannot be predicted. To a degree, he is right. It would be difficult to predict exactly which business or individual would benefit the most. Yet, on a more general level, as a look into the digital divide, environmental impacts, and corporation-owned educational technology shows, the winners tend to be those who are wealthier.

References

Beasley-Murray, J. (2008). Was introducing Wikipedia to the classroom an act of madness leading only to mayhem if not murder? Retrieved: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jbmurray/Madness

Bruns, A. and Humphreys, S. (2005). Wikis in teaching and assessment -The M/Cyclopedia project. Proceedings of the 2005 International Symposium on Wikis.

Caplow, J. (2006). Where do I put my course materials?. Quarterly Review of Distance Education, 7(2), 165-173.

Dessoff, A. (2010). Google and Microsoft Go to School. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed For Quick Review, 76(4), 4-7.

English, C. (2007). Finding a voice in a threaded discussion group: Talking about literature online. National Council of Teachers of English, (97)1, 56-61. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/30047209

Johnson, B. (2010). The Ethics of Corporatization: Competing Visions for University Leadership. Philosophical Studies In Education, 4195-105.

McCollum, S. (2011). Getting Past the “Digital Divide”. Education Digest: Essential Readings Condensed for Quick Review, 77(2), 52-55.

McLoughlin, D., & Mynard, J. (2009). An analysis of higher order thinking in online discussions. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, (46)2, 147-60. doi: 10.1080/14703290902843778

Morris, J. (2011). Digital Bridge or Digital Divide? A Case Study Review of the Implementation of the “Computers for Pupils Programme” in a Birmingham Secondary School. Journal Of Information Technology Education, 10IIP.

Novak, J. D. (1998). Learning, Creating, and Using Knowledge: Concept Maps as Facilitative Tools in Schools and Corporations (pp. 49-78; ch 5 – Ausubel’s Assimilation Learning Theory). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books.Reinhart, J. M., Thomas, E., & Toriskie, J. M. (2011). K-12 Teachers: Technology Use and the Second Level Digital Divide. Journal Of Instructional Psychology, 38(3), 181-193.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (1994). Computer support for knowledge-building communities. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3(3), 265-283.

Terada, C. (2012). Recycling Electronic Wastes in Nigeria: Putting Environmental and Human Rights at Risk. Journal Of International Human Rights, 10(3), 154-172.

 

Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Great Divide or Gentle Drift?

Posted on September 28, 2012 by joypenner

Great Divide or Gentle Drift?

In his work Orality and Literacy, Ong (2002) suggests a number of distinctive characteristics that define ways of thinking for both oral and literate cultures. He uses these contrasting aspects to prove his bold theory that, “More than any other single invention, writing has transformed human consciousness” (Ong, 2002, p. 78). As a technological determinist, Ong (2002) seems comfortable creating sharp dichotomies between the two cultures, however there are several reasons to view his “Great Divide theory” (Chandler, 1994, para. 4) with caution. He is far removed from oral cultures, his thesis is viewed through the philosophical lens of the technology of literacy, which “codifies the world” (Postman, 1998, para. 15) in a certain way; but human development rarely happens in such a dichotomous fashion. In defining the characteristics of both groups Ong (2002) provides some useful tools for thinking about the topic, however his strong assertions are problematic for what they leave unexplored.

Researchers know that all variables must be isolated before a hypothesis can be confirmed reliable. Ong (2002) acknowledges that the shift from orality to literacy does interact with “social, economic, political, religious, and other structures,” yet, he has chosen to only deal with these issues indirectly in favor of focusing on “the differences in mentality between oral and writing cultures” (p.3). In so doing, he has sidelined a number of variables that could have also contributed to the perceived shift in thinking between oral and literate cultures.

The Influence of Organic Societal Change

“Great Divide” theories” (Chandler, 1994) attempt to define the “differences between modes of thinking in non-literate and literate societies” (para. 4). Ironically, although seeking to develop theories of “social organization and development,” (para. 4) the theorists may in fact be overlooking important societal changes that could have affected the development of thinking. “New technologies are generally invented to fill a perceived need that comes about as a result of modifications in social practice” (ETEC540 course notes). As ancient oral societies transitioned from hunter-gatherer to “highly developed forms of agriculture” (Gernet, 1972/1982, p.14) populations grew, spawning organized states. With the increase of wealth, some members of society could be spared to devote their time to developing the arts. Increased wealth and trade necessitated a system that could keep up with the development and changes in thinking and lifestyle that was already naturally occurring in society. Writing then, was a natural development to a perceived need. Ong (2002) asserts that in contrast to oral thinking, writing enables “new speculation” (p.41). However it seems evident that new speculation was already present in society, precipitating the need for record keeping, followed by the development of increasingly elaborate methods of communication.

The Influence of Schooling

Ong, (2002) dealing with the dichotomy of situational versus abstract thinking, cites numerous anecdotes from Luria’s study conducted in remote areas of the former Soviet Union. Luria found that a student who had two years of schooling was capable of abstract thought, whereas illiterates always returned to situational thinking even after some instruction on the “principals of abstract classification” (p. 51). Ong (2002) implies that literacy is the reason for the difference in thinking between a two-year student and one who receives less instruction. However, what he fails to explore is the influence of the instruction and not the literacy.

In their study of the Vai of Liberia, Cole and Scribner (as cited in Chandler, 1994) “found that schooling rather than literacy appeared to be the significant cause of some changes in cognitive skills involved in the logical functions of language” (para. 8). Schools provide “practice in treating individual learning problems as instances of general classes of problems” which would explain differences in the thinking skills that Luria encountered. Practice and instruction could also account for Ong’s (2002) “additive rather than subordinative” (p. 37) dichotomy. Young children naturally write in an additive manner. As they receive instruction and gain practice, their writing slowly changes. One cannot say it is the writing that is changing their thinking, but rather the internalization of the instruction and practice.

In considering the role of schooling on thinking, we may also consider developmental theories and their influence on the evolution of thinking. Vygotsky believed that “the development of mind is the interweaving of biological development of the human body” (Cole & Wertsch, 1996, para. 9) coupled with cultural influences. Piaget too recognized maturation and experience to be significant in the development of thinking. Although his theory does delineate prescribed age spans for each stage, he did concede that they vary depending on the culture in which the studies were conducted (Piaget, 1964 in Gauvain & Cole, eds, 1997). Luria’s illiterate subject’s thinking was categorized as “operational thinking” (Ong, 2002, p.52). In Piagetian terms, they had not yet reached formal-operational thought. And while Piaget himself, acknowledged that it is possible that a person may never reach this stage of thinking, with the encouragement of the culture and environment, such as a school, it seems far more plausible that a person’s thought processes would develop as a result of maturation and environment rather than through one single technology.

The Influence of Culture

Ong used Luria’s study to prove that analogous thinking is a result of literacy. However, cultural-historical psychologists, including Luria, assume a connection between “special environment that human beings inhabit and the fundamental, distinguishing, qualities of human psychological processes” (Cole & Wertsch, 1996, para. 6). Different cultures, whether literate or illiterate classify things according to their cultural perspective. By way of example, two years in a row I had students protesting the “correct sample answer” on a standardized test. Given a list of animals, students were to decide which one did not fit. The answer was that the squirrel did not fit because it was not a pet. My Asian students were categorically upset because for them a squirrel can be, and often is a pet. All my students were literate, however their own cultural practices had defined the norms for categorical thinking.

In reference to Scribner and Cole’s more moderate study, Patricia Greenfield (as cited in Chandler, 1994) declared in no uncertain terms that Great Divide theories are “ethnocentric” and “arrogant” in thinking “that a single technology suffices to create in its users a distinct, let alone superior, set of cognitive processes” (para. 8). While Ong (2002) does not appear arrogant in his work, by leaving out discussions surrounding other variables as they relate to development in thinking processes, he has delivered a one-sided argument, devoid of rigorous testing. His characteristics of oral and literate thinking remain helpful, but must be viewed with balance.

References:

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

Cole, M., & Wertsch, J. V. (1996). Beyond the individual-social antinomy in discussions
of Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 250-56. Retrieved from http://www.massey.ac.nz/~alock/virtual/colevyg.htm

Critiquing Ong: The problem with technological determinism. [Course notes].
Retrieved from Lecture Notes Online Web site: https://www.vista.ubc.ca/webct/urw/tp9275170934161.lc9275170913161/cobaltMainFrame.dowebct

Gernet, J. (1982). A history of Chinese civilizaton. (J.R Foster & C.
Hartman, Trans.). (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1972).

Ong, W.J. (2002). Orality and Literacy: The technologizing of the word. London:
Routledge.

Piaget. J. (1964). Development and learning. In M. Gauvain & M. Cole. (Eds.),
Readings on the development of children (pp. 19-28). (2nd Ed.). New York, NY:
Freeman and Company. Retrieved from http://www.psy.cmu.edu/~siegler/35piaget64.pdf

Postman, N. (March 28, 1998). Five things we need to know about
technological change. [PDF document]. (Talk delivered in Denver, Colorado). Retrieved from http://www.cs.ucdavis.edu/~rogaway/classes/188/materials/postman.pdf

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Digital Dis-integration

Posted on September 26, 2012 by smyers

In his 1999 article, “Escaping the digital dark age” Stewart Brand rigorously condemns the growing trend towards the digitization of information. “There has never been a time of such drastic and irretrievable information loss as right now” (46). He rejects the digital format as a viable storage alternative to that of traditional modes of information preservation, and believes that by putting everything in digital format we are creating a critical “loss of cultural memory” (46). In contrast, Kevin Kelly’s article, “Scan this book” praises the potential of digitization. He believes the creation of a universal, digitized library will help define our cultural identity, “pushing us rapidly towards that Eden of everything, and away from the paradigm of the physical paper tome” (2006, 2).

Why digital?
The shift to digital is mounting; books, essays, music, videos, films, anything that has been “published” is being given a digital facelift. The book industry is not the only one caught up in this transition, “Nearly 100 percent of all contemporary recorded music has already been digitized” (Kelly, 2). In the 2012 documentary, Side by Side, cinematographers and directors of photography are asked the compelling question – traditional or digital? As in the book world, film makers stand equally divided. Yet, regardless of which side of the divide one stands, everyone seems to agree on one undeniable benefit of going digital – storage becomes limitless.

Kelly notes the abundance of existing texts: 32 million books, 750 million articles and essays, 25 million songs, 500 million images, 500,000 movies, 3 million videos, TV shows and short films and 100 billion public web pages. He goes on to say that, “When fully digitalized, the whole lot could be compressed (at current technological rates) onto 50 petabyte hard disks. Today you need a building about the size of a small-town library to house 50 petabytes. With tomorrow’s technology, it will all fit onto your iPod” (2). Portability is a selling feature for film makers as well, and shooting on digital means never having to say, “Cut,” to change the film magazine; actors and directors are no longer bound to a 10 minute shoot. In addition to the limitless amount of storage, the directors of photography who have “gone digital” love the immediacy and adaptability that digital affords. These same points prove paramount in Kelly’s argument for digitization as well.

For Kelly, the Google Books Search team, and the 20,000+ publishers frantically scanning texts around the globe it is this potential to have all information accessible at the click of a button that drives their work. In Paul Martin’s CBC podcast, The great library 2.0, Adam Smith, Product Manager for Google insists, “Google never set out to become the world’s uber librarian, they just wanted to scan all of the millions of books to make them searchable.” But why is the ability to search all texts so important? Kelly believes that by connecting the world’s data in an overlapping, seamless stream of information we will have a better idea of what we know and what we do not know as a civilization. “Once text is digital, books seep out of their bindings and weave themselves together. The collective intelligence of a library allows us to see things we can’t see in a single, isolated book” (Kelly, 6). For those immersed in digitization, the power lies in harnessing today’s technological tools to cultivate information – past and present – to create a “new culture of interaction and participation” (7). An worthy endeavour to be sure. But who is thinking about tomorrow?

Digital dis-integration
In his opposing article Brand acknowledges both the unlimited storage potential and the “searchability” that digitization affords. “We can now store, search, and cross-correlate literally everything…There is more room to store stuff than there is stuff to store” (46-47). But what preoccupies Brand is not what digital media can do for us now, but rather what no one seems to be thinking about for the future. “Digital storage is easy, digital preservation is not.” (47)

When it comes to successful preservation, the problems with digital artifacts are numerous. Firstly, digital has a limited lifespan. When Brand’s article was first published the half-life of digital data was five years. While current figures are much more promising, they still lack the permanency that the antiquated storage tools provide. Things like clay tablets, parchment, microfilm, and books, survive for 500 to 1000 years, more in the right conditions. In contrast, digital longevity seems to cap at 200 years.

In his article on preservation practices in a digital age, Marshall Breeding notes that beyond the undeniable problem of durability with CDs, DVDs, magnetic tape, and the like, is the even greater issue of compatibility. “If one were to assume that current data did survive, and did remain intact for 200 years, the real question is whether or not there would be hardware and/or software available to read it.” Compatibility is a colossal crisis in the digital era. To access a book, we need only open it, but digital data requires a device to store it, a program to identify and read it, and an operating system to run it. Programs and systems are changing more rapidly than ever before, and there are significantly more of them. If we add the web as an alternative for digital storage we then bring interrelationship problems into the mix – websites that lead to dead links, search engines like Google that limit access to only their scanned texts, and on and on the problems grow.

Kelly, the great proponent of digitization, acknowledges this fatal flaw; “Libraries aren’t eager to relinquish ink-on-paper editions, because the printed book is by far the most durable and reliable backup technology we have. Printed books require no mediating device to read and thus are immune to technological obsolescence. Paper is also extremely stable, compared with say, hard drives or even disks” (6).
Perhaps this is best summed up by a quote from Side by Side, “Nobody takes archiving seriously. Film is a capture medium and a storage medium. It will last a hundred years, digital will not….There have been 80 versions of video since the 50’s, most cannot be played now. 200 years from now there will be nothing of us left; we are fucked!”

Works Cited
Brand, Stewart. “Escaping the digital dark age.” Library Journal. 123. 2. 1999: 46-49. Web. 18 Sept. 2012. http://rense.com/general38/escap.htm

Breeding, Marshall. “Digital preservation: Building digital collections that will outlast current technologies.” Information Today. May. 2002. Web.
18 Sept. 2012. http://www.librarytechnology.org/ltg-displaytext.pl?RC=9718

Kelly, Kevin. “Scan this book.” New York Times. May 2006. Web. 15 Sept. 2012.
www.nytimes.com/2006/05/14/magazine/14publishing.html?pagewanted=print

Kennedy, Paul. “The great library – 2.0.” Prod. Sean Prpick. CBC: IDEAS. 28 Feb. 2011. CBC Radio Broadcast. 18 Sept. 2012. http://www.cbc.ca/player/Radio/Ideas/Full+Episodes/2011/ID/1826242021/?page=7

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

Side by side: Can film survive our digital future? Dir. Chris Kennealey. Prod. Keanu Reeves. Perf. George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, James Cameron. Company Films. August 2012. Film.

Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Text and Technology

Posted on September 23, 2012 by kymfrancis

As a Language Arts teacher, and a person loves to geek it up with the curriculum, I instantly think of the ridiculous wording of the LA curriculum. It is a thing of beauty. It seems that the curriculum associated with the other core subject areas is so logical and sequential. Then, the Language Arts curriculum arrives to the party, and it appears that someone threw up a random assortment of ideas, with no clear sequence.

In a strange case of Stockholm Syndrome, I have come to identify with my curriculum, and I love the freedom it allows. I am also fortunate that I work in a school that pushes collaborative teams, so each year we start off by going through, outcome by outcome, discussing the importance of each and rephrasing them into a language that makes sense to students and staff.

I have come to love that process, as well as breaking down the text presented to find meaning. So, when thinking about text and technology, I immediately think of the definition presented in the Alberta Program of Studies – which specifically stresses the importance of broadening the definition of “text”.

In the Language Arts classroom, text includes oral, print, visual, and multimedia forms. This relates to both the “reading” (finding understanding) and creation of various forms and media. Oral texts can include storytelling, discussion, and speech making. Print texts encompass what we read for pleasure and what we read for knowledge acquisition: books, short stories, magazines, newspapers, and more. In creating these texts, students practice expository, narrative, persuasive, and imaginative writing. Visual text involves images, collages, diagrams, and other forms of non-verbal communication that reach broad audiences. Lastly, multimedia texts include films, graphic novels, cartoons, web sites, and presentations. Any text that involves a combination of oral, visual, and/or print becomes multimedia.

Technology, in my mind, is the tools we use to create, edit, share, and “read” these texts. Often we think of technology as those tools that require a power supply, but as my understanding grows, I realize that technology includes tools like pencils and pens. These too are tools that help us create and share our ideas through text.

Three interpretations of hairiness; readers - Bangkok, city of angels

Alberta Program of Studies for Language Arts

Posted in Technology, Text | 1 Comment

Auto-corrects

Posted on September 23, 2012 by learle

While I was doing my daily web-browsing habits this morning, I came across a pin on Pinterest that brought a new thought to the word TEXT and its power. Yes, text or texting has power over each and every one of us. The pin, which is slightly inappropriate, shows how texting changes what we want to say. It is as if the device wants to purposely make us look illiterate by auto-correcting what we really want to say. The odd thing is, that most auto-corrects, or as it seems, find a way to make fun of us, to make us look stupid, to embarrass us. It makes me almost want to call and actually speak to someone rather than text. On the positive side, auto-correct helps me with punctuation, which can be an onerous task in the world of texting.

Posted in Text | Tagged , , | 2 Comments