Sunday, September 27, 2009

Two Heads Are Better Than One, Rough Draft 1

This is more of a really long, involved free-writing episode than anything planned and thought-out. We've got a long way to go!


The UNESCO Institute for Education, based out of Hamburg, Germany, said, "Literacy arouses hopes, not only in society as a whole but also in the individual who is striving for fulfillment, happiness and personal benefit by learning how to read and write. Literacy... means far more than learning how to read and write... The aim is to transmit... knowledge and promote social participation." This quote backs my personal thinking on literacy. Many seem to assume that literacy is the simple ability to read and write, yet it encompasses so much more. While that is a working, everyday definition, it doesn't include the aspects that actually make up literacy, and that is the ability to UNDERSTAND and INTERPRET. UNESCO agrees that literacy is not only the ability to read and write, but that it also encompasses the ideas of indentifying, understanding, interpreting, creating, and communicating ideas not only in a written medium, but via any medium society may demand. (Wikipedia)Literacy inherently involves the assumption of "able to function". Now, granted, if you can read this, you are more than likely literate. Note the phrase, "more than likely". A child may very well be able to sit down and puzzle their way through the sounds of the words themselves, hence, "reading" this, but that doesn't make the child "literate." It makes them "able to read." In order to become truly literate, this child must be able to draw upon his knowledge quickly, and without fail, in order to be able to function as a citizen of today's society.

Throughout this class, we have puzzled our way through many interpretations of literacy, and through many thoughts concerning literacy in regard to technology. The main question seems to be, "Does technology help or hinder literacy?" As is with every debate, we seem to have split cleanly into two camps. I've yet to notice a "fuzzy" area that says, "Well, it helps here, but hinders over here." No, it's either the hell-fire and brimstone of Hedges, or the slobbering appreciation of Thompson. I find myself standing with both feet firmly planted in Thompson's camp. I have a great appreciation and need for technology in my life, and believe it helps me, and others, far more than it hinders.

I'm finding that the more time people dabble in the digital sphere, the more open they're willing to become. Public speaking is the number one fear of the average American, and when asked why, that person will often note, "I'm afraid to share my ideas. I'm afraid of being thought stupid, or judged for my thoughts." While posting something online isn't exactly public speaking in the traditional sense, it is, nonetheless, a venue for sharing one's personal thoughts, ideas, and opinions. Ever noticed that people take on a "group mentality" no matter where they are? Think about the time you spent at camp as a child. . . . When asked for volunteers, everything froze for one brief second until one brave soul raised their hand, then hands started popping up everywhere. The same holds true online. We notice others who are not afraid of the societal norms, and who are wiling to voice themselves. The more time we spend online, the braver we become. We become outspoken, opinionated, and willing to share our thoughts. Not only are we more wiling to open ourselves up for criticism, but we are far more willing to question someone else's thoughts, as well. No longer do we hide within our head, bowing down to a few strong personalities who override us with their loudness, forwardness, and strength. No, we, too have the ability to be ourselves and speak out! We are finding that we have a "niche" in this world, and that it is ours to claim!

Now, the true question is. . . . does this help us or hinder us? What makes someone a "good writer?" Is it the ability to communicate with perfect grammar? Perhaps it's the ability to capture, with photographic clarity, a visual or emotional moment in words. Perhaps, more to the point, it's simple the ability to put thoughts on paper with clarity. Now, more than ever, we are learning to share our thoughts simply and concisely. Via a medium such as Facebook, or Twitter, we write all day long. Not only do we write, but we perfect the art of writing in an extremely understandable and attention-grabbing way. Gone are the days of flowery, long, obnoxious prose, and in are the days of the haiku! Andrea Lundsford, a professor of writing and rhetoric at Stanford University, very strongly believes that technology is pushing literacy in bold new directions, and that we're "in the midst of a literary revolution." (New Literacy) She goes on to note that we college-aged students write more than ANY generation before us! Clive Thompson agrees with Ludsford that this "life writing" is helping enhance literacy. Because we are constantly catering to an audience, and attempting to better maintain their attention, we must constantly re-address and re-learn our writing style. Our statuses must be cooler than the next one, our description of the day that much more captivating, and our blog post have better and newer ideas!

Thompson's main belief centers around the fact that online writing is teaching us to address our audience in a form that teachers have never been successful in doing. Whether we are attempting to persuade a peer group towards a particular pizza joint, or we're addressing societal issues on an online forum, we adapt in a fashion that academic writing precludes. Academic writing takes on a life of it's own, especially in relation to the "liveliness" of the online sphere. With our new-found ability to examine, process, and expound upon other's ideas, we become more able, and more willing, to put our own thoughts out for examination. In the National Forensics League, there's a saying that abounds during tournaments. "Your only goal is to convince the judge. If your judge is a moron, then you've gotta learn how to convince a moron." Our constant give and take of information online teaches us how to do just that.

I have thus far addressed writing, but have yet to touch reading. There's a reason for that. . . . I'm not exactly sure what to say. It stands to reason that if we're writing more, we're reading more, too. However, we're not reading nearly as "in depth" as we once were. We constantly scan and "fish" for new information. As Carr beautifully noted , "Once I was a scuba diver in the sea of words. Now I zip along the surface like a guy on a Jet Ski." He couldn't have said it any better. Years past, when one wanted information, one had to go on a deep sea exploration mission. Now, any conceivable bit of information is shimmering on the surface, there for the taking, and for the finding. Not only that, but it is CONSTANTLY being expounded and added to by our brave, literate minions, just waiting to take over the world! *evil laugh* Ok, so I'm totally kidding there. . . . but the information super-high IS molding the way we expect to find information. The more we dabble, the more impatient we become. I wanted my information, and I wanted it YESTERDAY, darn it! Since we are learning to express ourselves shortly and succinctly, we are also allowing our thoughts to follow the same pattern. We want things to get to the point, quickly and without error. Don't bother me with all that background and superfluous jazz. . . . just tell me what I need to know, in one sentence, and starting with a being verb. Carr worries that we are becoming stupid because of this new-found need for brevity. I disagree. We are functioning on just as a high a level as we were BEFORE the net, but we are functioning under a whole new skill base. No longer do we have to dig and sweat and strain to find our information, nor to share it. No, it's a simple matter to have it served on a silver platter, and that is what we've come to expect. We're not stupid; we're spoiled.

Long story short, what kind of readers and writers have we become? The answer is easy. . . . different ones. We're no longer the prosaic lawyers of years past, and we're no longer willing to go on deep-sea expeditions when we can find bigger and better fish "zipping along the surface." (Carr) An old saying says, "Two heads are better than one", and when it comes to the communication of ideas and thoughts, that couldn't be more true. The more we expound and share our ideas and thoughts, the more willing we are to put ourselves out. The internet provides us with the perfect medium to learn and grow, and without it, our ability to adapt to varying factions of society would definitely be stunted.

4 comments:

  1. Keagen, very nice opener you have here. It always seems fitting to start with a quote or some type of question, whether it be thought provoking or rhetorical. The way you stated that literacy isn't just reading or writing, though these components are very important, it's being able to understand and interpret what you read and write. Your first paragraph has a nice tone and your words and ideas seem to be flowing very well in your opener.

    It’s nice that you state your opinion about the helpfulness of technology but you may want to expound on that a bit more. You state that technology helps you and you have a great need for it and it helps you, but how? Why doesn’t he use of technology affect you the same way it affects others in a negative aspect? (2nd paragraph)

    The way you slid the Stanford Study with Andrea Lunsford was done very, very well. Kind of like “this is my opinion, BUT, let me just slide in a bit of proof to back up my beliefs.

    Though it may be little, in your second to last paragraph you state, “I have thus far addressed writing, but have yet to touch reading. There's a reason for that. . . . I'm not exactly sure what to say.” When a writer addresses a point and they, in a sense, show readers that they don’t have opinions about everything, the writer comes across unbiased. So, I really like this. Also, it seems to give a more personal vibe to your writing. I feel like you’re speaking to me.

    Providing that sense of personal writing to your authors is great but maybe it was a bit too much. I guess it’s all based on preference, but in the second to last paragraph you capitalize many words and that may be just a bit too personal for essay type writing.

    Overall Keagen, great job! You’re an excellent writer and you really put who you are in your writing. I thought you brought out many great points, especially when you stated, “The internet provides us with the perfect medium to learn and grow, and without it, our ability to adapt to varying factions of society would definitely be stunted.”

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thank you very much, Issac, for the wonderful feedback. Once you pointed out my "caps" quirk, I started noticing it everywhere. While I can write academically, I tend to avoid it, more out of "boycott" of the American education system than anything else. So, my writing tends to reflect my thoughts, and when I emphasize something non-verbally, it tends to come out in my writing via caps. Thanks for pointing it out, and allowing me the opportunity to "academize" it up.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I like the beginning, the definition of literacy is a great lead-in to the rest of your paper

    The part of the paper about writing on the internet is great, can't find much to critique there.

    The part where you quote Carr almost seems like you are quoting him out of context. In his article, he uses the sea metaphor as a way to talk about how he misses the deep reading, you may want to add something along the lines of 'Carr uses this to say this, but...'

    Towards the end you get really really informal, probably too informal for this paper. It's nothing too hard to fix, just try taking out things like the 'evil laugh'

    ReplyDelete
  4. Thanks a million, Christian! I will definitely "formal" my paper up. :-) I wrote it very quickly, and in a bit of a panic, because I thought it was several hours late.

    Good idea with Carr. . . . I will definitely have to revisit that.

    ReplyDelete