Eathompson314's List: Technology Has Weakened Literacy

• Although teachers see a number of advantages in young people's heavy use of digital media (especially in their ability to find information quickly and efficiently), it is the potentially harmful effects that have families, educators and policy makers worried. New York Times' Matt Richtel summarizes these concerns in an article about the studies: "There is a widespread belief among teachers that students' constant use of digital technology is hampering their attention spans and ability to persevere in the face of challenging tasks."

• Likewise, in the Pew online survey, which polled 2,462 middle and high school teachers, 87% report that these technologies are creating "an easily distracted generation with short attention spans," and 64% say that digital technologies "do more to distract students than to help them academically."

  It was the teachers who commented on the findings in the New York Times ' story who captured my attention.
• Hope Molina-Porter, an English teacher at Troy High School in Fullerton, California, who has taught for 14 years, says that she has had to become an entertainer. "I have to do a song and dance to capture their attention."
• doesn't pull back from the challenges of capturing her students' attention and of engaging them in school work, but she wonders if teachers are adding to the problems by altering their teaching styles to adjust to kids with shorter attention spans.
• "Are we contributing to this?" Ms. Molina-Porter asked. "What's going to happen when [children] don't have constant entertainment?"
• I agree with Ms. Molina-Porter that the answer is not mimicking the fast pace of digital media.
• The answer is to teach children to pay attention and to be persistent!
• • Give children a chance to explore and answer their own questions. Laura Schulz of MIT and one of her graduate students, Elizabeth Baraff Bonawitz, created a study to examine curiosity. They gave children jack-in-the-box toys and found that when children weren't told how the toy worked, they remained curious, they persevered and they continued to explore the toy to figure out how it worked, even when they had the opportunity to play with a new toy.
  • Give children active games to play that promote focused attention and self control. A group of researchers headed by Megan McClelland of Oregon State use a game to assess these skills -- the Head-to-Toes Task. In one study in the fall of their preschool year, more than 300 children were asked to do the opposite of what the experimenter told them -- if told to touch their heads, the children were to touch their toes; if told to touch their toes, the children were to touch their heads. The children thus had to pay attention to the directions, remember the rules and inhibit the tendency to go on automatic and follow the directions of the experimenter. The researchers found this game predicted the children's literacy, vocabulary and math skills in the spring of their preschool year. They also found that those children who improved their focused attention and self control skills made the greatest gains -- equivalent to having an extra month of prekindergarten in terms of their gains in literacy and math skills, and an extra 2.8 months in vocabulary skills.
• Use digital media to promote these skills. Michael Posner of University of Oregon and his colleagues used digital media to create engaging computer-based games that specifically teach children to pay attention. They gave 4-year-olds and 6-year-olds five days of training with these games and compared them to comparable groups of children with no training. They found that even with such a brief training, the children had less trouble controlling themselves. The researchers also found that when children's ability to pay attention improved, their reasoning and thinking skills also improved.

7 more annotations...

• Three-quarters of AP and NWP teachers say that the internet  and digital search tools have had a “mostly positive” impact on their students’ research habits, but 87% say these technologies are creating an “easily distracted generation with short attention spans” and 64% say today’s digital technologies “do more to distract students than to help them academically.”
• ) an online survey of more than 2,000 middle and high school teachers drawn from the Advanced Placement (AP) and National Writing Project (NWP) communities; and 2) a series of online and offline focus groups with middle and high school teachers and some of their students.
• The study was designed to explore teachers’ views of the ways today’s digital environment is shaping the research and writing habits of middle and high school students.  Building on the Pew Internet Project’s prior work about how people use the internet and, especially, the information-saturated digital lives of teens, this research looks at teachers’ experiences and observations about how the rise of digital material affects the research skills of today’s students.
• mostly positive, yet multi-faceted and not without drawbacks. 
• the best students access a greater depth and breadth of information on topics that interest them; students can take advantage of the availability of educational material in engaging multimedia formats; and many become more self-reliant researchers.
• overdependence on search engines; the difficulty many students have judging the quality of online information; the general level of literacy of today’s students; increasing distractions pulling at students and  poor time management skills; students’ potentially diminished critical thinking capacity; and the ease with which today’s students can borrow from the work of others.
• students rely mainly on search engines to conduct research, in lieu of other resources such as online databases, the news sites of respected news organizations, printed books, or reference librarians.
• “doing research” has shifted from a relatively slow process of intellectual curiosity and discovery to a fast-paced, short-term exercise aimed at locating just enough information to complete an assignment.
• • Google or other online search engine (94%)
   
  • Wikipedia or other online encyclopedia (75%)
   
  • YouTube or other social media sites (52%)
   
  • Their peers (42%)
   
  • Spark Notes, Cliff Notes, or other study guides (41%)
   
  • News sites of major news organizations (25%)
   
  • Print or electronic textbooks (18%)
   
  • Online databases such as EBSCO, JSTOR, or Grolier (17%)
   
  • A research librarian at their school or public library (16%)
   
  • Printed books other than textbooks (12%)
   
  • Student-oriented search engines such as Sweet Search (10%)

8 more annotations...

• Text messaging and Twitter messaging are quickly replacing email and telephone calls as the favored form of communication, particularly among young people. Does the truncated form of communicating affect our language skills, particularly our use of grammar? Recent research seems to support this proposition.
• Drew Cingle and S. Shyam Sundar, who conducted research at Penn State University, and which was published in the professional journal, New Media and Society, argues that young people write in techspeak, using shortcuts, such as homophones, omissions, non-essential letters and initials, to quickly and efficiently compose a text message. They argue that the use of these shortcuts may actually hinder a person’s ability to switch between techspeak and the normal rules of grammar
• Cingle and Sundar based their findings on a survey of over 500 students in middle school.  They concluded “there is evidence of a decline in grammar scores.” Cingle cited a personal example from his two younger nieces, indicating that their text messages were “incomprehensible,” and that he had to call them and ask them what they were trying to tell him.
• In another study on the impact of texting on language skills, Joan Lee at the University of Calgary conducted a study for her Master’s thesis in linguistics, which showed that those who texted more were less open to new vocabulary, whereas those who read traditional media were more open to expanding their vocabulary. “Our assumption about texting is that it encourages unconstrained language,” Lee argues, “but the study found this to be a myth.” Lee contends that reading traditional print media exposes people to variety and creativity in language that is not found in colloquial peer-to-peer text messaging predominantly used among youth
• College students who frequently text message during class have difficulty staying attentive to classroom lectures and consequently are at risk of having poor results, according to a study by Fan-Yi Flora Wei, Ken Wang and Michael Klausner at the University of Pittsburgh, published in the journal Communication Education. They concluded that most college students believe they are capable of performing multitasking behaviors (such as texting) during their classroom learning, but research does not support that proposition.
• Laura M. Holson writing in The New York Times cites the research by IDC, a research company in Framington Massachusetts, which claims that as of 2010, 81 percent of Americans ages 5 to 24 own a cellphone. Holson also cites the arguments of Sherry Turkle at MIT who argues that “for kids it [smart phones] has become an identity-shaping and psyche-changing object.”  Holson argues that text messaging has become the younger generation’s version of pig Latin, citing the fact that AT&T offers a tutorial to parents that decodes acronyms meant to keep parents from prying into teens’ private conversations.
• According to a Pew Internet and American Life Project entitled “Writing, Technology and Teens,” texting abbreviations and acronyms are now showing up in formal writing. Out of a study of 700 youths aged 12-17, sixty percent don’t consider electronic communications such as messaging to be writing in the formal sense; 63 percent say it has no impact on the writing they do for school, and yet 64 percent report that they inadvertently use some form of shorthand in their formal writing.

5 more annotations...

• Teenagers’ lives are filled with writing. All teens write for school, and 93% of teens say they write for their own pleasure. Most notably, the vast majority of teens have eagerly embraced written communication with their peers as they share messages on their social network pages, in emails and instant messages online, and through fast-paced thumb choreography on their cell phones.  Parents believe that their children write more as teens than they did at that age.
• What, if anything, connects the formal writing teens do and the informal e-communication they exchange on digital screens? A considerable number of educators and children’s advocates worry that James Billington, the Librarian of Congress, was right when he recently suggested that young Americans’ electronic communication might be damaging “the basic unit of human thought – the sentence.”¹ They are concerned that the quality of writing by young Americans is being degraded by their electronic communication, with its carefree spelling, lax punctuation and grammar, and its acronym shortcuts. Others wonder if this return to text-driven communication is instead inspiring new appreciation for writing among teens.
• While the debate about the relationship between e-communication and formal writing is on-going, few have systematically talked to teens to see what they have to say about the state of writing in their lives. Responding to this information gap, the Pew Internet & American Life Project and National Commission on Writing conducted a national telephone survey and focus groups to see what teens and their parents say about the role and impact of technological writing on both in-school and out-of-school writing. The report that follows looks at teens’ basic definition of writing, explores the various kinds of writing they do, seeks their assessment about what impact e-communication has on their writing, and probes for their guidance about how writing instruction might be improved.
• At the core, the digital age presents a paradox. Most teenagers spend a considerable amount of their life composing texts, but they do not think that a lot of the material they create electronically is real writing. The act of exchanging emails, instant messages, texts, and social network posts is communication that carries the same weight to teens as phone calls and between-class hallway greetings.

• Even though teens are heavily embedded in a tech-rich world, they do not believe that communication over the internet or text messaging is writing.

   

  The main reason teens use the internet and cell phones is to exploit their communication features.^{2 3} Yet despite the nearly ubiquitous use of these tools by teens, they see an important distinction between the “writing” they do for school and outside of school for personal reasons, and the “communication” they enjoy via instant messaging, phone text messaging, email and social networking sites.
• • 85% of teens ages 12-17 engage at least occasionally in some form of electronic personal communication, which includes text messaging, sending email or instant messages, or posting comments on social networking sites.
   
  • 60% of teens do not think of these electronic texts as “writing.”

• Teens generally do not believe that technology negatively influences the quality of their writing, but they do acknowledge that the informal styles of writing that mark the use of these text-based technologies for many teens do occasionally filter into their school work. Overall, nearly two-thirds of teens (64%) say they incorporate some informal styles from their text-based communications into their writing at school.

   
   
  • 50% of teens say they sometimes use informal writing styles instead of proper capitalization and punctuation in their school assignments;
   
  • 38% say they have used text shortcuts in school work such as “LOL” (which stands for “laugh out loud”);
   
  • 25% have used emoticons (symbols like smiley faces ) in school work.
   
   

  For more information on teens and electronic communication, please see Part 4: Electronic Communication starting on page 21.

6 more annotations...