Standing Ovation: Reading Response #1

Wednesday, January 12, 2011

Reading Response #1

"Be ready to hear pundits fretting once again about how kids today can't write and technology is to blame." Clive Thompson had said that texting has "dehydrated" languauge. That means that people don't write as well as they had used to. It has made our writing "bleak, bald and shorthand." On the other hand, Andrea Lunsford disagrees. She had put together a massive project called the Standford Study of Writing. She basically collected 14,672 student writing samples-from formal essays, in-class assignments and journal entries to emails, blog posts, and chat sessions. That had proved that technology hadn't killed our ability to write, but instead it's revived it. It had made our writing even better. I strictly do agree with this essay. Not only is it refreshing to hear someone say that our generation isn't "stupid" but it's also nice to know that there is at least one person in the world who is actually willing to prove to the world that technology isn't ruining our writing.
One implication of Thompson's treatment is how kids today can't write. Thompson apparently assumes that "Facebook encourages narcissistic blabbering, video and PowerPoint has replaced carefully crafted essays, and texting has dehydrated language into "bleak, bald, sad and shorthand." He is trying to say that technology isn't a good thing whn it comes to writing. Agree or Disagree?
My own view is that I agree with Andrea Lunsford. Technology isn't making kids worse writers, it's improving them. It's been proven that our generation writes more than the last generation. I think this is because now days many people have Facebook and MySpace or any other online site. Though i concede that texting and Facebook aren't the best choice to spend our time, it still has us read and write even if we may not want to. I still maintain that Andrea Lunsford is correct. For example, when she had examined the work of first-year students, she didn't find a single example of texting speak in an academic paper. This proves that texting does not affect our writing skills, but instead increases them. Although some might object that technology isn't a good thing, I reply that it is. It has proved to be a great source for many students using it. The issue is important because many people think that technolody is making people worse writers when in fact it isn't. It is helping our writing out as well as our reading. We might not even notice that we are reading or writing when in fact we actually are. "Those Twitter updates and lists of 25 things about you adds up." Therefore, technology is a great way to improve on our writing and even reading skills.
Andrea Lunsford had also stated that knowing who you're writing for and why you're writing might be the most crucial factor. In my understanding she is basically trying to say that, knowing the purpose of your writing is extremely important. It's good to know that there is a purpose for your writing and it could make a difference, maybe not your life, but in those who take the time to read your work. Therefore, I strongly agree with Andrea Lunsford and think it's a very important issue for everyone to realize.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Welcome

Welcome to our Eng 100 Blog “Standing Ovation”! The title of this blog refers to the audience of active readers we are creating by sharing our academic writing for Eng 100 with a larger group of students, instructors, academics, and just about anybody who chooses to follow our blog! When you write and post your reader responses here (and, later, as you write your essays for the course), I encourage you to use this audience to conceptualize who you are writing for and, most important, how to communicate your ideas so that this group of academic readers and writers can easily follow your line of thinking. Think about it this way: What do you need to explain and articulate in order for the other bloggers to understand your response to the essays we’ve read in class? What does your audience need to know about those essays and the authors who wrote them? And how can you show your readers, in writing, which ideas you add to these “conversations” that take place in the texts we study?
As students of Eng 100, you will use this blog to begin conversations with other academic writers on campus (students and instructors alike). We become active readers of each other’s writing when we comment on posts here. And, best of all, we are using this space to share ideas! I encourage you to use this blog to further think through the topics and writing strategies you will be introduced to this quarter. As always, be sure to give credit to those people whose ideas you borrow for your own thinking and writing (you should do this in the blog by commenting on their post, but you will also be required to cite what you borrow from your peers/instructors if and when it winds up in your essays. More details on that later).
Finally, keep in mind that writing to and for this audience is a good way to prepare for the panel of readers (faculty at WCC) who will be reading and assessing your writing portfolio at the end of the quarter. I hope that as a large group of active readers, we can better prepare each other for this experience. But, in the meantime, let’s have fun with it!