You are on page 1of 9

Cameron Bolin Mr.

John Whicker English 151 March 5, 2012 The Connection: Literacy and Technology Throughout the history of language and literature, writers have progressed and adapted to the newest or latest version of literacy technologies available to them. Writing has nearly undergone a complete evolution with the multitude of changes it has experienced. Karen Bromley supports the idea of a complete evolution in her article, Picture a World Without Pens, Pencils, and Paper. She describes the process our ancestors used 100,000 years ago when they created drawings on cave walls, and she compares that to the numerous writing styles we have today, which include emails, blogs, twitter, and text messaging (98). The writing utensil that was used to sign the most important document in our nations history, the quill pen, was certainly an important writing technology, but it has been long forgotten since that era. Scholarly authors have had contradicting views on whether technological changes have helped or hindered people's writing; however they should understand that these changes are going to happen and should think more of how we can help people adapt to these changes, rather than worry about the pros and cons of this matter. Prior to adapting to these changes, teachers have been wondering whether these technologies will improve childrens literacy skills or take them forever away from traditional reading and writing (Bruce 289). These are some issues that need to be addressed. This 21st century media-based writing has changed how, why, where, and how much we write as students and the mass public; however we have experienced similar adaptations in the past so why should these technological changes be any different? According to Dennis Baron, the pencil was once the state-of-the-art technology, but most people would never consider it a form technology nowadays. (422). Today the main form of

communicating in literacy terms is done by means of a keyboard and screen instead of pencil and paper. Very few people agree that the pencil was a writing technology, so this same disagreement could happen when a new technology overrides the computer. I am only saying this to show that each form of writing should be known as a writing technology because I am sure most people agree that a computer is some form of a technological apparatus. Even though, writing is a lot easier with the use of computers, it is simpler to look for a text, such as Emily Dickinsons poetry that is stashed away in a box, than to attempt to find someones article on an outdated floppy disk that is not even applicable with our new computer systems (Bromley 100). When a new computer is invented, old inventions are forgotten, just like the example of the floppy disk. Being able to save a file or written text on a square shaped disk was a great innovation, but newer computers only have spaces to insert flash drives or CDs. As new products continue to rise, older ones will be pushed to the side. So no matter how different these writing technologies are, they were each designed for the same purpose and they have progressively helped writing become easier for us to do. Christina Haas described the similarities of these different literacy technologies in her article when she attempted to provide more interesting understandings about how old and new technologies coexist and influence one another in distinctly nonlinear ways (226). So do newer technologies influence different, less productive ways to write than the original pencil and paper? My plan is not to dwell too much on the issue of whether or not newer technologies influence peoples writing skills negatively, positively, or neutrally; however I think the argument should be addressed to help provide each point of view. Advancements in writing technologies happen all the time and how we adapt to it is very important. Scholarly authors opinions are nearly split right down the middle with some believing newer technologies are beneficial, while others are completely against the use of online sources, such as blogs and emails. Baron expresses his feelings of the invention of the

computer by stating that my contentionis a modest one: the computer is simply the latest step in a long line of writing technologies (425). Many authors and teachers believe that the invention of communicating through social networking sites, emails, and text messaging hinder their students ability to produce credible texts. A college professor described the normal college freshman as a student accustomed to writing in the unstructured, chatty style of e-mail discussions, but not in formal prose. Students submit essays that are longer but not better written than those in years past (Leibowitz 1). This debate consists of three major concerns for those who oppose writing becoming part of the electronic realm, according to Mark Warschauer. He believes that it is informal, it is graphic (rather than text) dominant, and it facilitates plagiarism (916). I am only going to expound on the first two issues since they fall into the discussion I am currently addressing. Electronic texts normally consist of poor grammatical uses that will never be acceptable in formal writing, such as repeated letters or extra punctuation marks for dramatic affects, the use of emoticons (), reduced capitalization, and a popular use: the abbreviation of acronyms (916). The use of computers as a writing technology also upraises the concern of fraud, in which we have to trust the mass public. The other side of this argument is full of optimistic authors and teachers who are delighted with the latest writing technologies that have become ever so popular to writers. The use of the computer and ability to post written texts online provides students with a much more time efficient way of finishing assignments and gives teachers the freedom to grade their pupils work online without having to haul home boxes full of papers that still need marked up. Some scholars believe that the new writing style is more engaged and more connected to an audience, and that colleges should encourage students to bring lessons from that writing into the classroom (Keller 597). Mr. Rogers, a professor Josh Keller interviewed, implied that the out of class writing that is normally done through instant messaging or texting, actually makes students more conscious of the things writing teachers want them to think

about when attempting to write correctly and for the right audience (599). Technology provides more sources, for students, as well as authors who need support for their claims, whether through databases or online blogs. Bertram Bruce has a positive view on the latest writing technologies as he thinks technology provides marvelous new tools for teaching and learning that can improve literacy education (290). Adopting the right stance toward technology can be difficulty, but there is always the possibility of staying neutral on the argument. Many people dislike computers as technological writing tools, while others support this new form of literacy completely. What about those who cannot decide? Well they usually see a complete separation between technology and literacy. Bruce describes it perfectly in his article when he expands on the neutral stance regarding this issue: Neutrality: Some say no stance toward technology is needed, thus arguing for neutrality. They stress that literacy is about feelings and ideas; technology is about things. Texts and objects are separate realms. This stance accepts technologies as potentially valuable, and technology as a valid area of study, but it does not connect either specific technologies or technology studies to its primary concerns about the life of texts. (Bruce 290) This attitude is not very straightforward, as it leaves room for either side to seem correct; however I do see a little truth in this opinion because whether we are writing on paper or typing on a screen, our thought process is the same in both cases. The process of composition has greatly changed with the use of computers. This argument has both positive and negative effects, therefore why I am introducing it with the neutral point of views. When writers use a pen or typewriter, they normally think of their entire sentence before committing it to their paper; on the other hand, people writing on a computer hardly ever think of the entire sentence and they often go back and move the text around because our computer screens are elastic (Leibowitz 2). Computers are helpful because we can correct errors and fix the sentence structure without making a mess, but then again they might prevent writers from actually

thinking things through when they write. Staying neutral is always an option when discussing an argument. Regardless of the pros and cons of the latest writing technologies, we need to adapt to the new styles of writing because the writing process will continue to change. Typewriters were a popular literacy tool in the late 1880s through most of the 20th century, but how often do we use them today? Some people may have continued to write everything out, but if an author refuses to post his articles online, he/she will most likely not get as many readers or responses to his work. Historically when people have changed the process they use to write, it has been beneficial. This is comparable to animals in the wild. If they do not adapt to their surroundings, they usually do not survive. A writer will not succeed without adapting to the latest literacy technology. Bruce describes in his article a person that goes beyond those who support writing technologies and is on a completely different spectrum from those who oppose technologies. They will replace or radically transform the basic definition of literacy the task is to understand and guide the transformation to a new literacy technology (291). This means that by guiding the shift from one writing style to another, writers will be able to control the transformation and make sure it is valuable to all writers. Adaption is crucial. By accepting the changes that are being made when new writing technologies are invented, we usually change how, why, where, and how much we write. The new styles of writing have greatly changed since the Internet became such an important part of our everyday lives. High school and college classes have adopted new ways for their students to write, usually through blogs, emails, or other electronic spaces. When students publish their work on the Web, they are exposed to various different opinions that might help them realize what they should do to improve their paper more so than when a professor grades it (Leibowitz 1). Feedback from more than one person has always been a great way to edit papers, even if it is just peer editing within a classroom. Also, when their work was published, students tend to work harderthey pay more attention to how they can best express their

ideas, and they worry about how poorly written prose may look to their readers (Leibowitz 2). Emails have become popular means of communication within classrooms lately. Warschauer discovered the motivational benefits of e-mail communication when he did an international survey of a variety of students in different language universities. He came away with three factors that demonstrated the extra motivation due to the conversation through e-mails: their enjoyment of international communication, their sense of empowerment due to the development of new technological skills, and their belief that communication via e-mail assisted their language learning (914). The desire to write and communicate has always been present, dating back to when our ancestors would converse through pictures. The latest writing technologies have not really changed why we write, but helped us want to write more than ever before. Another beneficial factor with the computer is the freedom to write wherever we want to, instead of having to sit down at a desk with a pen and paper. Where we write has changed and Baron had an interesting example of this in his article. He always had his laptop close at hand so he could write whenever he needed to finish something. In this case, he did not have his laptop and he had a memo that was due before lunchtime, but he was in a meeting. Normally he would be able to finish his work at the meeting, but the physical effort of handwriting, crossing out, revising, cutting, and pasting was nearly impossible to do without showing that he wasnt paying attention. Before the invention of computers, he would not be able to finish his work at the last minute. The places we write have greatly changed through these new literacy technologies. Another factor is how much people write since the progression of newer writing technologies. Younger people, such as teenagers and young adults, write more than they used to with the invention of text messaging and social networking sites. Their grammatical usage is normally incorrect; however students do write more out of the classroom than in the past. But when it comes to how much people write for journal articles, the results are pretty surprising. James Hartley, Michael Howe, and Wilbert

McKeachie studied their methods of writing over a thirty year period and documented their results, which included the number of words sampled, average number of sentences, and a few other stats. Each writer wrote their texts out by hand in the first decade, which was up to and including the 1980s. The next decade they slowly began using typewriters and in the 1990-2000 timespan, they did the majority of their work on the computer. The results of this study showed that even though they used different writing methods throughout the years, the average number of words sampled was within one hundred words of each other and the number of sentences was within 10 sentences of each other (145148). This study demonstrated that the newer writing technologies have surprisingly not altered how much people write, yet there is evidence that our younger generation does write more with the use of cellphones and computers. Ever since the days when students wrote in chalk on slates, or dipped quills into ink pots, technology and writing have been closely connected (Leibowitz 1). People may view technology as merely a tool, but without this tool there would not be the possibility of expressing ones ideas through writing. Bruce constructed a figure in his article that demonstrated the connection, yet also the distinction between literacy and technology. He had two circles with the words literacy in one and technology in the other. There was an arrow pointing from technology to literacy, but it had to bend around a wall that divided the two (292). As time moves on, the distinction between literacy and technology is becoming smaller and smaller because the new technological advances include the computer and other media-based forms of communication, which are starting to become the main forms of literacy. Writing technologies have continued to change year in and year out, yet people still have to go through the same thought process they would have gone through 50 years ago before there was any electronic devices available. Our literacy history proves that the technologies will change, but the most important thing we can do as writers, is adapt to the latest modifications without altering our styles of

writing. How people write today, as well as why, where, and how much we write has changed to an extent with the advancement in computers. The majority of writing today is done via computer, whether it is a student, teacher, author, or just a businessman writing an e-mail. However, we should continue to consider the pencil as a technology of the past. Baron described the process the engineer made when developing the pencil; having to find the correct blend of graphite and clay so that the lead is not too soft or too brittle (426). The invention of the pencil was a great breakthrough for our literacy history, and we should continue to adapt each time a new writing technology is developed because the evolution of technologies have proven beneficial to writers.

Works Cited Baron, Dennis. From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technologies. Passions, Pedagogies, and 21st Century Technologies. Ed. Gail Hawisher and Cynthia Selfe. Logan: Utah State UP, 1999. 15-33. Print. Bertram, Bruce. "Critical Issues, Literacy Technologies: What Stance Should We Take?." Journal of Literacy Research. 29.2 (1997): 289-309. Print. Bromley, Karen. Picture a World Without Pens, Pencils, and Paper: The Unanticipated Future of Reading and Writing. Journal of College Reading and Writing, 41.1 (Fall 2010): 97-108, Print. Haas, Christina. "On the Relationship Between Old and New Technologies." Computers and Composition. 16.2 (1999): 209-228. Print. Hartley, James, Michael Howe, and Wilbert McKeachie. "Writing Through Time: Longitudinal Studies of the Effects of New Technology on Writing." British Journal Of Educational Technology 32.2 (2001): 141-151. 1 Mar. 2012. Web. Hawisher, Gail E. and Selfe, Cynthia L. The Rhetoric of Technology and the Electronic Writing Class. College of Composition and Communication, 42.1(Feb., 1991), pp.55-65. Print. Keller, Josh. Studies Explore Whether the Internet Makes Students Better Writers. The Chronicle of Higher Education.Chronicle.com, 15 June 2009. 29 Feb 2012. Web. Leibowitz, Wendy R. "Technology Transforms Writing And The Teaching Of Writing." Chronicle Of Higher Education 46.14 (1999): A67. Academic Search Complete. 28 Feb 2012. Web. Pearson, A. Fiona. "Real Problems, Virtual Solutions: Engaging Students Online." Teaching Sociology 38.3 (2010): 207-214. Education Full Text (H.W. Wilson). 2 Mar. 2012. Web. Warschauer Mark. Technology and Writing. International Handbook of English Language Teaching. Springer US. 15. (2007): 907-919. Print.

You might also like