Author: brinakathryn

One of the topics of discussion this past week was whether texting and instant messaging are in fact abominations of the English language and have no place in schools or whether they are valuable forms of literacy. While I don’t think the articles by Carrington and Baron intended to completely disregard instant messaging culture, they made it very clear that this type of literacy is not the dominant form and should not be the dominant form. I would argue, however, that texting, messaging and even some form of e-mails are already the dominant way of communicating for young adults and adolescents. Baron references a traditional ideology stating, “if some traditionalists are correct, we must take swift action now, before these children are reduced to marginal literacy” (pg. 29). I do not feel that the author agrees with this sentiment entirely but there still is anxiety surrounding the possible loss of traditional literacy. There is also the suggestion that adolescent literature, which consists of these instant forms of communication and perhaps the genre of YA fiction, is not formal enough (pg. 31).

My question then is who makes the rules about language? Who says a text is not formal enough and why does it have to be formal? We know that language is always changing with new words being created daily. Some of them fall into habit (twerking, irregardless, selfie etc.) and some don’t. Not one person, or small group of people, control the use or misuse of English. Today perhaps more so than any other time in history, evolution of language is happening at a faster and more prolific pace simply because of the tools of instant communication we have so readily available to us. Those who are afraid of this change in language should be reminded of the changes English has undergone throughout its history. We are very far away from English as it was spoken in Shakespeare’s time and we will continue to evolve in the near future.

Finally, to return to the idea that texting is already the dominant form of written language for many young individuals my point is confirmed by the fear that “recreational use of texting may ultimately lead to addictions and a lowering of an individual’s ability to shift between text types according to social context—that increasing mastery and use of text ipso facto lead to withering skills around other text forms embraced within the parameters of Standard English (Carrington pg. 167) If we are concerned with individuals becoming addicted to this form of writing does that not mean that it is heavily influencing young minds and is a dominant force in their consciousness? I do know young individuals that struggle with the difference between conversational register and formal register just like many young people did before the instant messaging revolution. This does not mean that the bright minds of the next generation will confuse texting with academic work.

Resources:
Carrington, V. (2005). Txting: The end of civilization (again)? Cambridge Journal of Education, 35(2), 161-175. doi:10.1080/03057640500146799

Baron, N. (2005). Instant messaging and the future of language. NEW YORK: ACM. doi:10.1145/1070838.1070860

After presenting the other day on blogging as a form of classroom learning I was reflecting on the discussion aspect that focused on the prevalence of blogging and digital media in the classroom. I wanted to particularly contemplate the point of how students are already so immersed in the digital world outside of the classroom that they want to take a break from it during class time. In my personal experience and in my preference I can understand both sides of the argument. On one hand, students should be able to use and participate in building online resources and materials in an academic and elevated way. On the other hand students should not have to participate in an activity that mimic their own Internet practices at home. I find activities that attempt to be “cool” or very relevant actually dissuade me from wanting to participate. These “cool” assignments sometimes blur the lines between school and home, a distinction I would like to keep separate.
In Lankshear and Knobel’s article Blogging as Participation: The Active Sociality of a New Literacy I was interested to see the emphasis on “collective intelligence” and with the Internet space “as open, continuous and fluid” (pg. 1). Collective intelligence and open, fluid space definitely bring certain benefits to the production of knowledge but it again blurs the lines for myself in terms of who is actually responsible for the creation of certain pieces of the puzzle. It also begs the question, where does the Internet space stop and where does reality begin? I could go into an extremely philosophical discussion about what is real and what is not but I will refrain from doing so! I also know that many people experience the Internet as a reality but for myself I do not feel like what I do on the web is part of my existence in the material world.
That being said, these blurred lines (to quote Robin Thicke) are only made more so by the accessibility of the Internet for all. Internet blogging tools have “made it relatively easy for internet users who were unfamiliar or uncomfortable with using hypertext markup language and the principles of web design for coding and designing their own weblogs” (pg. 3). Now everyone can contribute to online knowledge as well as us and our students. I wonder, however, whether students, like myself, find the nature of online intelligence and the accessibility we are now afforded, almost an uncomfortable fusing of realities and worlds. Would it be better almost to give students class time to complete their blogs like we would give them time for exit slips? To what extent are we expected to maintain our classroom life at home? Perhaps I am too antiquated in my perspective of how one should be consciously involved in the spaces around them but I would prefer to keep my worlds separate. I want my school life and my home life to be distinct as well as the line between my Internet activity and my physical reality.

resources:
Lankshear,C.and Knobel, M.(2006).Blogging as Participation:The Active Sociality of a New Literacy. American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, US.