The so-called “Digital Revolution” has permeated every part of life and transformed all facets of our society, education included. It is a common belief that pairing institutions with technology will make them better, and that to succeed in today’s world, to keep up with the rapidly changing times, we must become tech-savvy and integrate technology at every opportunity. There are some clear benefits to pairing technology with education. Students and teachers alike can locate information on virtually any topic imaginable. Sophisticated graphics programs foster creativity and turn out stunning forms of rhetoric and presentations. However, we would be naïve to only choose to see the positive aspects of technology and gloss over the ill effects and the potential for misuse in the Composition classroom. Technology can be advantageous, but I believe the use of technology should be minimized, or at least significantly changed in rhetoric and composition classrooms.
Thursday, October 20, 2011
Technology Changes the Way We Write
Technology has changed virtually every aspect of the human existence. We can do almost anything faster and seemingly better using technology. Along this line of reasoning, we have turned to computers and word-processing software to help us compose various forms of rhetoric. Once a slow and foreign process to most, it now comes as second nature. In Interface Culture, Steven A. Johnson cites an anecdote from his own life similar to many others that illustrates this phenomenon. Through this experience, Johnson derives an important observation; technology changes the way we write. Johnson finds that because he uses a word processor, he composes fragments and incomplete ideas, not full sentences; moreover, he realizes that grammar is no longer a concern because of automatic corrections and software features (144). I believe this poses other consequences. While word processing software is undoubtedly here to stay, and likely the most harmless of all learning technologies, I believe it would be wise to pay attention to the lapse in attention to grammar. In order to educate well-spoken, articulate rhetoricians, proper grammar should be more strenuously taught in composition classes to compensate for this change.
Technology Changes the Way We Read (and Think)
Technology changes much more than the way we write; it changes the way we read, and by changing the way we read, it changes the way we think. By using technology in the classroom, (i.e. using e-learning software, requiring the use of certain programs, and overusing online content etc.) we allow for students to adopt the same reading style they use when using technology for personal use. Mark Bauerlein, citing a study by Jakkob Nielsen, reports that most readers of web content hardly “read” the words on the page at all, but merely skim them. This skim reading becomes habitual. Content becomes mindlessly surveyed out of obligation rather than truly learned, mastered, and appreciated. This pattern does not stop in an academic setting. Bauerlein says that “screen reading is a mind-set, and we should accept its variance from academic thinking,” and “it conspires against certain intellectual habits requisite to liberal-arts learning.” These habits including, but not limited to, the true desire to read and ponder a large novel, the urge to study poetry, history, and philosophy, and the need to question and observe the world around us, atrophy with any screen reading, be it reading a Facebook profile, or a class webpage. “Students see only the chance to extend long-established postures toward the screen” continues Bauerlein. If this is true, technology in the composition classroom could potentially cause problems, particularly in introductory level classes, where students begin to form collegiate reading, writing, and studying habits. I agree with Bauerlein; we must recognize that the laziness with which students read entertainment content will carry over into their reading of educational content and create bad intellectual habits. In a larger context, if students inevitably spend their time outside of class engaging in technological leisure activities, to preserve the desire to read a large novel, or question the world at large, we must provide a place where they are asked to perform intellectually. It is up to English educators, dubbed “stewards of literacy” by Bauerlein, to provide such a place.
Technology Changes the Way we Relate to One Another
A common complaint of technology is that although it can connect the user to people halfway around the world, it creates more distance than it seems. Many in the field believe that communication through technology can facilitate a more “social” practice of composition. By using technology, students can share their work with each other and a larger network. Making writing more social and having students make their writing available for critique from a wider audience is thought to make the writing process more genuine (Yancey 311). Teachers are making use of email communication and discussion board to answer questions and review student compositions and even allowing students to do the same for their peers (Anson 271) However, we must consider the possible drawbacks of using social technologies, especially for the mere sake of convenience. Chris M. Anson, of the National Council of Teachers of English states that this can potentially create a sort of “detachment” between teachers and their students and students with each other (274). This is not unlike the “detachment” feared by critics of technology in general. I believe there is a quality to face-to-face instruction, and spoken, rather than written instructions that can be beneficial to students. Meeting with teachers and peers one-on-one creates a more personal and positive environment that will reflect in the students' attitudes towards writing and overall compositions. In an effort to make writing “social,” we may over-digitize the writing process and overlook the benefits of interaction. Having someone critique a blog post is relevant to creating an understanding of the writing process, and online communication among classmates and teachers can be beneficial, but convenience should not result in detachment.
We Need to Change
When technology can be introduced, we must make greater efforts to instruct teachers to use technology and to use it well as opposed to just using it. A classroom can be full of tech-savvy students and state of the art equipment, but without knowledgeable staff, it will not produce desirable results. It is the teacher’s job to ensure that the students use technology properly and develop good intellectual habits, and they cannot do this without first being familiar with the programs they are using. Too often we use technology “just because it’s there” and because we feel we must to keep up in this digital age, but we are not intentional about how we use it in education (Wootten 242). Cynthia Selfe asserts that there is a stark distinction between “paying attention” to technology and merely using it. Instructing students to do coursework on a laptop computer, but leaving them to their own devices to Facebook and Tweet is not a desirable outcome.
We need to instruct students how to use technology to better their lives and advance in their field in specific and direct ways. We can teach them how to use design software for forms of visual rhetoric. We can teach them how to design or compose forms of rhetoric effectively and use technology to do so. We can create more captivating presentations with software and classroom equipment. We can do all of these things, but we must be specific, intentional, and direct and avoid using technology just for the sake of having it. Mere use of technology will not open any doors for students, but careful instruction can.