Modern Literacy
As I progress through the readings in this course, it is becoming increasingly evident just how important the invention of the printing press was and how it revolutionized the movement of information and knowledge. Prior to its invention, books had to be copied by hand, a long and drawn out process, thereby limiting the amount of books produced and its readers. The ease, cost and rate at which printed books could be produced significantly improved knowledge and education as they became readily available to all people and were no longer restricted to the upper class (Clement, 1997). Therefore, mechanized writing was monumental as it made mass literacy possible.
It can be argued that, in recent years, the advent of the Internet has given rise to a new form of mass literacy. In today’s modern world, people have come to rely on the Internet and other media as a means to communicate with each other and acquire information. In addition, there is a growing desire to develop the technical skills required to create multimedia productions, thus more people are become creators and no longer merely consumers of information. Similar to how the printing press enabled more writers to publish their works and reach new audiences (Bolter, 2001), current technologies allow just about anyone to share their knowledge, ideas and creations with the general public on a larger scale. As a result, different ideas, values, attitudes and behaviours are shared and expressed in society, which has led to cultural, educational and communicative transformations. New forms of writing spaces have also reintroduced some social aspects that were once associated with reading prior to print. Reading platforms, such as Social Book, have created digital environments where people can have discourses and exchange their thoughts and insights.
When comparing Bolter’s (2001) and Ong’s (1982) articles, it was interesting to note the difference in their perceptions of writing. While Bolter (2001) described digital writing as fluid and flexible, allowing the writer to alter his or her text with the touch of a button, Ong suggested that print constrains the author due to rigid and specific rules, thereby causing thoughts to be written and processed in a linear sequence. The adoption of electronic technology has undoubtedly changed and refashioned the writing space in many ways such that writers and readers are now able to step away from the linearity that exist in the conventional idea of writing. While reading The Electronic Labyrinth (Keep et al., 1995), I became aware of how valuable hypertext-based environments can be in an educational context. Given its non-linear form of textuality, hypertext can be viewed as a supportive tool when using constructivist approaches, as it allows the students to construct their own unique learning pathways, thereby given them a sense of ownership in their learning experiences. Because the same information can be access regardless of the paths chosen, students are able to construct their knowledge from multiple perspectives, which is less likely to occur when reading a traditional textbook. In my opinion, this allows learners to gain a deeper and richer understanding of the content as it provides additional opportunities to make connections among concepts. However, I will say that I initially experienced a sense of disorientation when reading The Electronic Labyrinth and felt overwhelmed when I clicked on the first link, which brought me to a page with four new links. While I understand the potential benefits hypertext and agree that it is far more fluid than conventional print, part of me still appreciates the sense of closure and coherence maintained in traditional books.
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext, and the Remediation of Print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Clement, R. W. (1997). Medieval and Renaissance book production. Library Faculty & Staff Publications. Paper 10. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.usu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1010&context=lib_pubs
India7 Network (2014). Link Building Guide and Strategy [Image]. Used under license Attribution 2.0 Generic (CC BY 2.0)
Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., & Parmar, R. (1995). The Electronic Labyrinth. Retrieved from http://www2.iath.virginia.edu/elab/
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy. New York, NY: Routledge.as
Hi Rachel,
The overwhelming nature of hypertext can be jarring, as you mentioned in your post. I wonder if we, as readers who learned literacy skills via texts that took after Ong’s (1982) view of finite writing, maintain our comfort of strict, linear writing because we learned it that way. It wouldn’t be surprising to me that such a preference is ingrained within us; I even preview the length of linear texts (let alone hypertexts) so I know how much time I can expect to read in a single sitting. I wonder how our comfort levels would contrast with today’s youth, who may be learning to read a myriad of text styles: some print, some hypertext, along with video and digital imagery mixed in there, too. I also become overwhelmed or uncomfortable when I see extensively deep online documents in our coursework/modules; it simply reminds me of the daunting and long to do list ahead… and that I can’t accurately predict the time it will take to consume them!
This week, I wrote about how most digital texts maintain a linear style despite having the ability to diverge onto other learning paths through hypertext. If you think about it, the Keep, McLaughlin, and Parmar (1995) articles still follow a linear tone, much like Chandler’s (1994) site, but you could choose to take alternate paths to extend or deepen understandings as you consume it. So perhaps, to rephrase my thinking in that post, our foci are required to remain linear, despite the opportunities (or distractions; however you see them) along the way. It should be noted that a mindful focus is a contextual need, too, necessary for assigned coursework such as in our case, but for the curious scholar or internet user, not required at all. However, even if not required by an authority, some users may choose to hold a linear focus in some cases, such as when curiosity is piqued.
Victoria
Oops! I forgot my reference list 🙂
References:
Chandler, D. (1994). “Technological or Media Determinism”. Retrieved from http://visual-memory.co.uk/daniel/Documents/tecdet/tdet01.html
Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., & Parmar, R. (1995). The electronic labyrinth. Retrieved from http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/elab/hfl0261.html
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy. New York, NY: Routledge.
Hi Rachel,
I really enjoyed reading your post as you made some good comparisons between Ong and Bolter. I appreciated the reiteration, as I found Ong really hard to read, and felt the style of writing was as antiquated as the content (of course this is just me being opinionated). Bolter on the other hand was dynamic in approach and much more palatable for me to read. Particularly, being able to add to the text in social book kept me engaged in the reading and participating in the activity of it.
To get to your post, you said:
I initially experienced a sense of disorientation when reading The Electronic Labyrinth and felt overwhelmed when I clicked on the first link, which brought me to a page with four new links. While I understand the potential benefits hypertext and agree that it is far more fluid than conventional print, part of me still appreciates the sense of closure and coherence maintained in traditional books.
I found myself nodding in agreement through this part as I had a similar reaction to hypertext. I always feel slightly violated, like the Pied Piper appeared and led me down a path that at first seemed familiar, but which soon got me lost. I think reading hypertext is an actual skill that needs to be taught (i.e how to stay on track). The frenetic pace of the electronic age has given us all Attention Deficit Disorder of some sort and hypertext is just and electronic form of it. I say this tongue in cheek, but really, I am just conveying my sense of discomfort with it overall.
Resources
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext, and the Remediation of Print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Ong, W. (1982). Orality and Literacy. New York, NY: Routledge.as
Hi Rachel,
I enjoyed reading your post as I found many similarities with my own feelings and beliefs. I too have realized just how incredibly important a role the printing press played in the development of the distribution of information and knowledge, just as computers and the internet have done in our modern society. The most interesting point I have noticed when making this comparison, is that the printing press and paper-based print have allowed all literate people access to information – in being literate, they must have access to some form of print. In contrast, while the internet is, of course, widely accessible, I would argue that it does limit who can access the information stored on it, leading to a discrepancy we now face regarding the ability of different areas of the world to access information and knowledge equally. Even in a highly developed area of the world, like North America, a household computer is not a given. In more remote, or poorer areas, people are less likely to have access to a computer or internet service. Within our own country, there is a deepening divide being created by the same technology that creates such amazing opportunities for many.
Along with this idea, your point that hypertext created a feeling of disorientation and of being overwhelmed when you were initially faced with it when reading The Electronic Labyrinth emphasizes the fact that technology does not support all people equally. I too have felt both overwhelmed and disorientated (many times!) by the technological components of this course. If we, as graduate program students in a technology-based program, are overwhelmed by the technology we are being faced with, how does the general public deal with the technology they are faced with on a daily basis? I suppose people use technology as they need to and learn new skills as required; however, one of the wonderful things about reading a book is that once you can read proficiently, you can read any book. I am not limited to a certain style or genre of book; there is a whole world of books I am able to access. Having said that, without the internet, or this internet-based course, I would never be exposed to the reading materials I am now choosing/required to read. There is certainly a new ‘literacy’ in our modern society that will continue to develop as we do.
References:
Keep, C., McLaughlin, T., and Parmar, R. (1995). The electronic labyrinth. Retrieved 18, October, 2015 from: http://www3.iath.virginia.edu/elab/hfl0261.html
Great post Rachel! I like that you brought up the potential for hypertext to act as a supportive tool for constructivism. While I agree that there is something comforting about the concealed and straight-forward nature of a traditional book, I find hypertext seems to increase the learning potential of my “quests” for knowledge, particularly when I go into them with no set destination in mind.
Sometimes I am amazed by where I end up online. What starts as an innocent glance at an interesting article becomes an hour-long ordeal of following link after link to more articles, videos, and blogs. By the time I come up for air, I not only have a better understanding of the initial topic of interest, but a number of related and overlapping topics as well. Of course, this same pattern applies to less substantial content as well – I’m sure everybody has fallen victim to the Youtube vortex at one point or another.
I think that hypertext both creates and satisfies a thirst for more – more content, knowledge, and connections. I really like the point made by Bolter (2001) that, unlike written works where pagination is used by the author in order to create a linear progression for the reader to follow, hypertext allows the consumer of knowledge to essentially create their own path. Bolter (2001) also goes on to state that hypertext is made up of paths of meaning for both the author and the reader, which really took my train of thought into a different direction. When we publish our work online, perhaps through a blog post, we may include links to external sources that helped shape our work. Readers will take unique routes to arrive at said post, and will likely continue on in a similar fashion, following the links provided. Hypertext links seemingly represent moments of intersection between the author and the reader, where two separate and unique journeys through the World Wide Web overlap and support one another.
A great example I can think of where hypertext links ultimately guided a personal learning experience for me occurred when I was seeking out options for further schooling and potential career paths, toward the end of my undergrad. I started out with a general search for careers related to curriculum and course design, which linked me to a wealth of information on instructional design. I noticed the name Tony Bates repeatedly turned up, so naturally, I followed a link to his blog. Lo and behold, he discussed and recommended the MET program in one of his blog posts, and we all know where that led me! My decision to follow along with each hypertext link brought me to this program, which has been one of the most profound learning experiences of my life!
Here is the blog post that led me to this program:
http://www.tonybates.ca/resources/recommended-graduate-programs-in-e-learning/
References:
Bolter, Jay David. (2001). Writing Space: Computers, Hypertext, and the Remediation of Print. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.