Technology and our changing language: Does proper spelling still matter?

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/01/147741215/duz-prawper-speling-mader-nemor

Summary:

Wired columnist Anne Trubek and copy editor Lee Simmons debate over whether prescriptive spelling should change to accommodate our rapidly changing language. Both agree that technology is changing the way people communicate, and the language that they use. Short hand phrases, abbreviations, and acronyms like LOL have made their way into common language, and Trubek argues that these new variations of words should be accepted in written language. On the other hand, Simmons argues that we should not be changing prescriptive spelling to accept these variations because language needs to be standardized for the issue of clarity. He also notes, that language is changing too fast, and there are too many variations, that in making change we will quickly lose the rich etymology and common ground that language creates. Trubek argues that tech-speak is finding its way into common communication, and classrooms, and language is a constantly changing force that we need to accept.

Response:

I agree with Trubek here, we need to remember that we are the creators of language, and as we change culturally over time, so does language. At the same time, I am a lover of language, of words, and truly believe that words have power, so I certainly would not want to limit language or narrow our vocabulary. Simmons at one point compares tech-speak to the language in 1984, which was so limited that it disabled people’s ability to articulate their thoughts, and therefore to think. As a dystopian and science fiction fan, that fear hits home. But, I think that at the same time that technology is changing our oral and written language, it also provides new and various avenues for expression and communication. New avenues of communication, such as social media and easily accessible multimedia programs, are interactive and keep people engaged enough to potentially improve our ability to communicate. There is certainly a shift in how we communicate, and it may be changing the way we think, but if paired with critical thinking, certainly does not limit our thinking.

This debate is relevant to me as a future English teacher, because I need to decide how lenient to be in grading students who will inevitably integrate tech-speak into their work. This particular change in language is an accent, a dialect. And like any other dialect, I will need to evaluate when the language inhibits meaning, and when it does not.

The Khan Academy: How is technology flipping the classroom?

http://www.ted.com/talks/salman_khan_let_s_use_video_to_reinvent_education.html

 

Summary:

In this TED talk, Salman Khan shares how he came to create the Khan Academy, and a new model for education. Khan tutored his younger cousins, and decided to create online tutorials to supplement his tutoring. He made the videos public on YouTube, and got a huge response from others who found the tutorials useful. His initial response was that perhaps these videos would be helpful to motivated students as a learning supplement, but then as teachers began to respond he realized that this could be bigger than just supplemental learning. Teachers explained that they were integrating his videos into the curriculum by assigning the lectures as homework. This brought Khan to the idea of “Flipping the classroom”, in which the lectures are assigned before class, freeing up class time to do activities, what might otherwise be done at home. This changes the role of the teacher from lecturer, teaching to the whole class, to facilitator allow time in class for students to work together instead of just listen and take notes. 

After such a positive response to the videos, Khan created the Khan Academy, a non-profit organization that makes tutorials and exercises available for free online. Khan academy exercises replace traditional homework as an interactive program with hints, instruction, reminders. The program is designed to forward the student to more advanced modules as the student demonstrates mastery of content, always pushing students forward. In addition, the teachers have access to a dashboard that shows exactly where students are at in their exercises, how long they are taking, where they are stuck, what sections they keep repeating. This is an objective way to track student progress, and see what kids need help and what kids can give help in peer-to-peer tutoring. 

Response:

I find Khan to be a very engaging speaker, very enthusiastic about this project, and really excited about the idea of “flipping the classroom”. After reading responses from other viewers, this idea seems to be very well received. I watched some of the videos and think the way information is presented is really effective, combining videos of various images with audio in a media that the viewer can pause and rewind. It reminds me a lot of RSA animate videos that I have viewed on YouTube. 

I was thinking though, about what flipping the classroom would look like in an English class that is already very discussion based. In addition to reading the text in preparation for class, students could review videos covering background information on the historical, political, and cultural background of the text and/or author. If everyone came to class with the background knowledge, class discussion can be spent on discussing the implication of the context and how it helps us better understand the text. 

So out of curiosity I went to the Khan Academy website. They have a plethora of videos and exercises in Mathematics, and a fair amount in the Sciences, and only have three topics in the Humanities—Art History, American Civics, and History. There was no section for English/Language Arts. I suppose that some of the videos in history, civics, and arts may provide context for discussions of text. But I think this system would work really well in studying language, both English and foreign language, especially grammar. So I would like to see some activities in these areas.  

Connecting technoloy, expression, and activism: How can technology empower under-represented groups?

Corriero, J. (2011, February 11). Adobe youth voices: Empowering youth through technology. Retrieved from http://edtechdigest.wordpress.com/2011/02/11/adobe-youth-voices-empowering-youth-through-technology/

Summary:

This article examines a non-profit group through the Adobe Foundation called Adobe Youth Voices. During its pilot cycle, Adobe Youth Voices has partnered with 24 organizations in 6 different countries, and has included 48 teachers and over 1,000 youth. The group uses Adobe Elements software to facilitate workshops and create artwork with a focus on critical inquiry into global issues. The program is best summarized in the article, “. Adobe Youth Voices provides access to tools, resources, and platforms for youth to creatively share their perspectives, ideas and experiences and to assert themselves as agents of change.”

Response:

I really love the mission of this program, to make technology more accessible to under-served youth with to share their experiences. But I think the underlying idea of linking technology with creative expression, and creative expression with activism, is the truly brilliant part of this model. Youth understand the world through social media. Facebook, youtube, twitter, these are the venues for youth communication and this is where youth go to get their news. I think we need to start taking these venues seriously, and to help students see the potential in it, to zone out of the seemingly self-centered media and see how it connects us globally. I think this shift in perspective should empower students, to show that they have a voice in a global community, and that they can use that voice to express themselves and engage in larger issues. To me, this all falls under the category of “media literacy”, which has its place in the Language Arts classroom.

Podcasts:Where's the learning? And who's learning it?

Deubel, P. (2007). Podcasts: Where’s the Learning. THE Journal. Retrieved 11/27/2011 from http://thejournal.com/Articles/2007/06/07/Podcasts-Wheres-the-Learning.aspx?Page=1

Summary:

In this article, Patricia Deubel discusses podcast’s role in learning, and what might be done to improve the quality and accessibility. In her introduction she points out that when podcasts are used as a learning experience with no text equivalent provided, it can be an unfair inaccessibly assignment for the deaf and hearing impaired. In discussing the podcasts potential in student learning she explains that students can develop literacy and communication skills as they create podcasts. And that the easily publishable medium engages students with its real life application.

Response:

I appreciate the new perspective that Deubel brings when she notes the inaccessibility of podcasts such as hearing impairments, learning disabilities, and/or insufficient technology at home. I think teachers should certainly be aware of who their students are, and their specific needs, when designing any assignment, podcasts are no different. Also, I like the idea that podcasts can help student’s oral presentation and communication skills. For the shy or nervous students, I can see this as a welcomed alternative to creating a video or doing a live presentation. But many of the examples in this article of podcasts in learning, I think might be more effective if completed in other forms such as creating a video, multimedia presentation, or some kind of interactive presentation. So, though I do love listening to podcasts and can see the potential in learning, teachers should be mindful of the variety of media available, and be sure that podcast is the best media to meet certain learning goals.

A new literacy: How has technology changed the skills necesary for literacy?

Armstrong, S and Warlick, D. (2009) The new literacy. Tech and Learning. Retrieved from http://www.techlearning.com/printableArticle.aspx?articleID=47102021

Summary:

This article explains that as information has changed in appearance, location, accessibility, application, and communication with the growth of technology, teachers are faced with the challenge of following the shift in literacy needs. While in the past literacy may have meant that one could read a text book, today requires different skills, namely: Finding information, decoding information, evaluating information, and organizing information into personal digital libraries. The authors also list basic mathematical skills, computer-aided processing of numbers, and processing media as necessary skills. Finally, the authors claim that :Writing will continue to be a core skill for all students, because some information is simply communicated most effectively in text.” But they acknowledge that other information may be expressed using multimedia.

Response:

One thing I do like about this article is how it clearly outlines the skills necessary for today’s information literacy. It explains that literacy is more than just reading something, it is knowing how to navigate various online resources, to understand multimedia presentations, to organize and store that information, and most importantly, it’s about critically evaluating that information. After reading and responding to Prensky’s article, “Teaching the Right Stuff” I can’t help to think that this article on the New Literacy might already be outdated. Prensky’s article emphasizes the need to see beyond the skills needed to catch up to today’s literacy needs, and to anticipate the needs of tomorrow. “The New Literacy” does a decent job of summarizing some basic skills for, perhaps, research literacy but does not delve far into communication literacy. I think that there has been a huge shift in how we communicate, and that we may need to learn more than multimedia presentations to keep up with the times.

Inspired Writing and Inquiry: How does the tool shape the production and product?

http://www.fno.org/dec05/writing.html

Summary:

This article first points out that student writing at a national level is below standard. The author explains that while schools are “dumping” money into new technology, the writing isn’t improving because writing is more than just the recording of sentences. It is about the processing and relaying of ideas. The author then outlines the important elements of writing and makes the point that classes should focus more on ideas than conventions, and that writing should be a way for students to explore their own reasoning skills and opinions. Next, the author asks, now what is the difference between handwriting, typewriting, and word processing? How does the word processing effect the idea processing? The author concludes that with technology come many possibilities for exploring and recording ideas, such as various graphic organizers for brainstorming and outlining. tunless the teacher knows how to use the programs and gives adequate instruction and support to the students, a computer is just a glorified type writer and loses its potential.

Response:

This article makes a valid point, that technology in classrooms has potential to help students develop as writers so long as the teacher provides adequate support. But this seems obvious to me. Technology isn’t necessarily intuitive (though I would argue that it is becoming more and more so, and students becoming more and more fluent by the time they reach secondary education), and writing is hardly about the actual act of putting words to paper, so why would one assume that new computers alone will improve test scores? Beyond the technology there is a list of factors effecting test scores, such as the actual teaching, curricula, the student’s experiences, the community, and socio-economic welfare of the school, student, and community.

Teaching tomorrow's literate person: Is it enough to teach to today?

http://marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-TheRightStuff-EdTech-May-Jun2012.pdf

This is another article by Marc Prensky that extends his general message in the previous reviewed article, “A Back-up Education”, which is that schools need to change the curriculum to meet the needs of a technologically evolving culture. In this article, Prensky gets specific about the kinds of skills that students will need to succeed in the world today, and more importantly, in the future.
Prensky summarizes the changing literacy needs:

Yesterday’s literate person can 1) write a letter, 2) write a report, 3)write an essay

Today’s literate person can 1) write an email, 2) make a power point, 3)write a blog post

Tomorrow’s literate person can 1) work in a virtual community, 2) make a video, 3)write a program

According to Prensky, even schools who are teaching today’s literacy needs are setting their students “behind the technological learning curve.” And, though elements are the future are always unknown, based on observing current trends we can make the assumption that students will need the three basic skills to succeed in the future workforce.

Response:

I think the key thing to take away from this article is that the goal of literacy is to effectively communicate—to be able to process and evaluate input, and to articulate a response. Literacy is to take information, evaluate it, and respond to it. The way in which we choose to transfer ideas, whether in a letter, email, or Skype conversation is only the method. Some methods are generally seen as more professional or effective, but I think as technology changes the way we communicate in our everyday lives, it is also changing the way we communicate professionally. That is just the way it is. So I agree with Prensky that we, as teachers, need to be aware of this shift in communication.

Student Blogging: How can blogging be used as an effect educational tool?

Reynard, R. Instructional Strategies for Blogging.Retrieved from http://campustechnology.com/Articles/2008/10/Avoiding-the-5-Most-Common-Mistakes-in-Using-Blogs-with-Students.aspx?Page=4

Backup Education: Is fear for the future making teachers teach to the past?

 http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky-Backup_Education-EdTech-1-08.pdf

Summary:

In this article Marc Prensky explores the common discomfort among teachers in integrating technology in instruction and curricula.  Prensky boils the discomfort down to a misunderstanding of the “basics” (the essential skills) that schools teach. Prensky argues that the basics are the best methods of doing things, and change throughout time. For example, cursive was once considered a basic skill, a necessary building block for continuing education because it is a necessary skill for recording and communicating ideas. But there is a distinction between the skill, and the method. The skill is penmanship, as a method for communicating. So penmanship was considered a basic to communicating. But as our world and methods for communicating change, so do the basics. Now is more useful to learn how to type than write script because it is a quicker and more effective form of recording ideas and communicating.

Teachers are attached to teaching the basics as they know them for fear that students will become too dependent on technology and won’t be able to function if it ever fails. Prensky believes that these fears are unfounded, and that teachers are basically saying,  “We don’t trust the technology of today, or the future. We don’t trust the world in which you kids are going to live. We believe the way we did it in our time was the “real” way, the only reliable way, and that’s what we want to teach you kids – “the basics” (1). Even further, Prensky states that this attitude towards change and integration of technology is a problem because it teaches to the past, and teachers should be teaching towards the future with all the resources we have in the present.

Response:

I admit it, sometimes technology scares me. Maybe this fear is from all the science fiction and dystopian literature I’ve read, or maybe it’s from the fact that I am human and humans tend to fear change. But I see technology evolving right before my eyes, and realize that it’s not fear of robots taking over the world or even worse, people turning into drones with little information feeds installed in their brains, my fear is that I won’t be able to keep up—that I won’t be able to navigate the ever-changing technological landscape let alone give my students the tools to do so themselves. I see my parents struggling to adapt and understand the way my generation uses technology for education and communication. Then I go into a sixth grade classroom with students born post 9/11 who can’t believe that I didn’t get a cell phone until high school and that I still don’t have a smart phone and I can suddenly empathize with my parents. This fear is fleeting, but sneaks up and proceeds to stress me out every now and then.

I think Prensky has a point, the worst science fiction case scenarios are highly unlikely, and resisting change is also resisting possibility. So I go into teaching with an open and optimistic mind. As I better understand technological resources and accept that the way we communicate and learn is changing, I am beginning to see the many ways that technology can actually boost rather than stifle creativity, communication, and collaboration. And as far as the technological apocalypse is concerned, I will teach my students critical and creative thinking skills and hope for the best.

Ipads in schools: Is technology changing the art of story-telling?

http://www.ipadsforeducation.vic.edu.au/ipad-education-case-studies/5-ringwood-north-primary-school

Summary:

This article describes one way in which Ringwood North Primary School, in Melbourne Australia, used ipads as an educational tool. The school participated in “The Epic Citadel Challenge”, a global challenge for students to use the Citadel app to create a story based in the Citadel fictional world. Students would also give reflections and feedback to other students around the world participating in the challenge. The challenge guidelines are:

• create a digital story utilizing photos from the app Epic Citadel
• the digital story may include text, or it may not. It may be a collage, a poem. It is entirely up to you, as long as it tells some sort of story
• use any apps you like to create your story
• your story must be no more than 3 minutes
• all finished stories must include a short reflection by the student before being uploaded

In addition, students created tutorials for how to use their favorite apps. In summary, by using technological resources students practiced technological literacy, creativity, story construction, reflection, collaboration, and leadership.

Response:

Traditionally, we are taught that a story has a beginning, middle, and an end, and we tend to read and process stories in a linear fashion.  But when one moves from reader to writer, they often fall into the trap of thinking that writing is also linear, when in fact it is a recursive act. We brainstorm at all stages of the process, revise as we write, and when we finish the story we go back and make changes to the plot. But I think that the way we use technology is changing the way we process information. We used to look at a page in a book, start at the top, and work our way down reading left to right. But not we take a glance at a website and deconstruct it, we scan it, compartmentalize, and prioritize. I think this newer way of processing information can change the way we take in and tell stories. 

One thing that I liked in particular about the challenge is that the challenge itself re-imagines story telling. The story can contain text, pictures, be a collage, a poem, and can use any apps to make the story as linear or interactive as they want. As a future writing teacher, I love the idea that there is no one way to tell a story. It seems that the seemingly infinite applications make story telling a more creative and individualized process than ever.