Elish-Piper, L., Wold, L.S., & Schwingendorf, K. (2014). Scaffolding high school students’ reading of complex texts using linked text sets. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 57(7), 565-574.
It seems like only yesterday that small electronic devices and teenagers’ use of them to access social media was viewed as a worrisome trend that would cause literacy skills to decline. We heard about teachers struggling to remove these distractions from classrooms, with tales of students covertly accessing social media during class and devices having to be confiscated. We worried about the consequences of misspelled text messages, “tweets” that would reduce deep ideas to the least number of characters, and social media that facilitated bullying on a scale that was mind-boggling. Many of us still are worrying about these things, but the classroom practices described in this article clearly indicate that what was seen only as a distraction at best and a danger at worst not so long ago is now being embraced and integrated by some teachers within high school classrooms.
What changed the perspective here? Did somebody decide that “if you can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em?” Or is the teaching force becoming increasingly populated with “digital natives” for whom devices and social media are as central to daily living as they are for their students? Is our view of what literacy is, and what literacy instruction looks and sounds like, being changed by technological innovation, just as our lives outside school are being changed?
I must confess that I have never twittered, texted, or visited Facebook. I do e-mail a lot, and I access books, movies, periodicals, and other kinds of texts online using Apps on my tablet. I am not reading as many print texts as I used to, but I am an avid user of an e-reader, and I believe I actually read more words per day on the e-reader than I used to read in print texts. My courses are entirely paperless, and an online course shell is an integral part of those courses, even the face-to-face courses. I have been part of online discussion forums, and I maintain a blog (obviously). I don’t have anything against social media beyond what I am now using, but I’ve never felt the need for being more connected than I already am. If I need to get in touch with someone immediately, I just pick up my cell phone. I may not be a “digital native”, but I think I am a fairly well-assimilated “digital immigrant”. Still, this article at times made me feel like I've been left behind in the dust.
There is no question that technology has reshaped the way we read, write, and communicate today, and it is no surprise that the way English Language Arts classes look and sound has changed as well. Elish-Piper et al present a detailed account of how one high school English teacher attempted to make his classes more relevant to his students by building “text sets” that included multiple media (called “polymedia” in the article).
Text sets are not a new idea, of course. Those of us who began teaching in those “ancient” times before the Internet may have built sets of texts on themes, often with the help of the person who was then the English teacher’s best friend, the librarian, who was usually delighted to search for and “pull” various kinds of written texts for us. Librarians I have worked with have sometimes performed these services in semi-heroic fashion, communicating with the librarian network at times (they all seemed to know each other), and working the magic of inter-library loan.
Using a combination of various text types, from books to periodical articles to web sites to videos, is hardly a new idea either. For at least twenty years, teachers have been able to access and share all kinds of texts in order to engage 21st century students. Interesting text sets like the one we see here from “Mr. Johnson” on the theme of Unfairness have been created by many teachers, and other examples could probably be found online. It can be an effective approach when done well, but it is certainly nothing we haven’t heard about before.
What is new and different in the example described here, and is, I must admit, a little unsettling to me, is “Mr. Johnson’s” heavy incorporation of social media as a way of having students respond to texts. Instruction as described here includes “twittering” concise (or at least brief) comments and posting to a (secure) social networking site. These are presented as required assignments, not as options, though "Mr. Johnson" does provide some choices in the types of projects students complete.
So, why does all this required use of social media in the high school classroom unsettle me? I think it is because I have always had a healthy respect for the Internet and what it is capable of. Whenever I post anything, I am acutely aware that the document I have posted has become public (worldwide) and that my words are now eternal. Even if I think I’ve deleted something, it may still exist somewhere. Furthermore, that document is now out of my control. Others can send it anywhere, and even alter it or perhaps plagiarize it, with only a few clicks. Even the most routine of e-mails can become public and eternal. If I am not careful enough with what I say in those e-mails, my carelessness could come back to me or even be published in places where I do not want it to be. Even a document on a so-called “safe” site could still be easily copied and pasted and sent anywhere by someone who has access to it.
The relevant question here is, do I want to require teenagers who are exploring ideas to post those still-developing thoughts on Twitter? Do we really want them to respond on such a public and eternal medium when they are still learning to think and communicate? Can we trust them to always use good judgment about what they post and how they use the documents they find online? Even adults do not always display that good judgment, but teenagers may not always consider the consequences of what they do with online texts. Yes, they are already connected outside of the classroom, but making it a required assignment to post something online takes it to a different level. If I require something of students, I am required to make sure it is developmentally and instructionally appropriate, and above all, safe. Online safety is as important as making sure students wear safety goggles in the science lab. It may be harder to control than that, though.
I have expressed my discomfort about all this to younger colleagues in the education field. Some share my concerns, though they often say it's just a part of the current age, and students will be using these skills, and dealing with the risks and decisions, in both their work and personal lives. Others look at me as if I am completely out of date and just don't "get it" about social media. I do recognize the need to be relevant, and to build the skills our students will actually need for the future. How, though, do we do it in the most supportive, safe, and wise ways? Maybe I am hopelessly behind the times, but I still worry.
No comments:
Post a Comment