Introduction
“Mrs. Holly,
it’s time you
got a screen name. I want to be able to talk to you on IM!”
Mandy
says as she walks into my office on a particularly frustrating and busy
afternoon. As preoccupied as I was, I tried my best to not be bothered
by her and the frivolous things that are important to a ninth-grader.
My phone rang with a call I needed to take – our publishing
deadline was two days away and we were under the gun to get curriculum
out the door – so I motioned to Mandy to get on my computer
and
do whatever it is she needed to do so that I could talk to her on
Instant Messenger.
Later that afternoon a
message pops up
in the bottom right-hand corner of my computer screen: “MRS.
HOLLY!!!!! J ” Knowing that had to be Mandy sending me my
first
instant message, I stumbled around the keyboard until I figured out how
to respond to her, and we then started a conversation. Who knew instant
messaging could be such a fun way to “talk” with
someone?
Since then, Mandy and I have been able to keep up with each other
through our instant messaging conversations. I used to be her
babysitter, starting when she was in kindergarten, and then I worked
for her parents as a curriculum editor at their small educational
company. But now that I’m back in school and a full-time
teacher,
I just don’t have the opportunity to catch up on those little
details of her life because I don’t see her as much. Instant
messaging has turned out to be one of the main ways we communicate.
It’s perfect for us since she’s always instant
messaging
all her friends and I’m always working at the computer.
The more comfortable I
became with
instant messaging, the more I started to notice how popular it was
among my own high school students. Not being a part of
“Generation Text” myself, I have always been
curious as to
the technological literacies of the students I teach. Some days I would
pick up Mandy from school and hang out with her in the afternoon. I
would watch her “talk” to ten people or more at a
time on
instant messaging – and they were all in her same area code!
Problem and
Research Questions
With over thirty names in
her
“buddy list,” I had a feeling that this new way of
communicating was more than just a passion between Mandy and her
friends. I was curious – why are these kids
“writing”
to one another when they could just as easily call each other on the
phone? And what about this shorthand that they use? Mandy introduced me
to some really unusual spellings and abbreviations to keep the
conversation flowing fast. For instance, when I told her on instant
messaging one day that I would “Be right back,” she
promptly told me that I didn’t have to spell that out.
“Mrs. Holly, all you have to say is
‘brb.’” As
an English major and editor, I must admit that it was difficult for me
to read and use these nontraditional spellings and abbreviations at
first, but I understood that they had their place in this type of
communication, just like the stilted sentences of the telegraph days.
But was this type of writing having an effect on students’
writing on the classroom? What were other teachers thinking about this
communication medium? This research project provided me with the chance
to find out.
In-depth research
articles on instant
messaging are hard to locate; the constantly changing world of
technology provides little time for exhaustive studies. I did find,
however, that some educational researchers and reporters seem to be
thinking about the same things I am. They found that teachers were
often troubled by the instant messaging shorthand type of writing they
found to be more and more common in their students’ writing,
and
they were handling it with varying degrees of acceptance in their
classrooms (Albright, Purohit & Walsh, 2002; Lee, 2002;
O’Connor, 2005; Regan, 2002; Winters, 2002). Confident in the
validity of my chosen topic of study, I continued my research, and
decided to proceed with examining the topic of instant messaging
practices of high school students. I desired to find out how this type
of writing affects writing for school purposes. I was also driven to
find out if there was a way that teachers could tap into this written
communication in their own writing classrooms in a positive and
productive way.
My first thought was to
re-read Ruth
Hubbard’s article about unofficial literacy practices
(Hubbard,
1989). She suggests that teachers should “build on the
knowledge
children display in their underground culture” (Hubbard,
1989,
p.306). Instant messaging definitely seems to fit into the category of
unofficial literacy – a literacy practice that is not
recognized
as such in an educational setting. Yet, so many educators complain that
students don’t write. Here, I thought, many students are
writing.
This research has the potential to bridge a gap between teachers who
did not grow up with computers and the Internet, and the current
“Generation Text,” a generation of students who
began using
computers before they could read. By investigating and coming to
understand this type of literacy practice, teachers may be able to
incorporate instant messaging language into their classrooms in
appropriate ways, building on what students already know and find
personal so as to scaffold them into higher-level, more creative
writing. So, I want to understand the type of writing associated with
instant messaging and combine that with knowledge of my students as
people – a desire to hear their true voices – to
create a
successful writing classroom in my own practice and perhaps represent
that to others as well. I want to explore how instant messaging might
tap into a space where students already feel successful, and use that
to bridge the gap that exists between the writing teacher and students.
As a language arts teacher I should be ecstatic that students are
writing more than ever before. However, much of the writing they enjoy
comes in the form of instant messaging online or text messaging on
their cell phones. I am seeking to understand how the current
phenomenon of instant and text messaging affects writing in the
classroom. With all these questions, these thoughts, and these notions,
I began my work.
Assumptions
and Limitations
The first assumption in
this research
project is that written technologies will continue to be popular
through the next decade or more, and will become increasingly popular
with the pre-teen and teenage crowd. The second assumption is that
students in middle to upper middle class societies will have access to
these technologies outside of the school building. The limitations of
this study include the age group of the participants, 14-15, which may
or may not reflect the technological habits of older high school
students. The participant group is also part of a population identified
as gifted, and most have an upper middle class background. This
information, thus, may be specific to this dynamic and not to high
school students in general.
Literature Review
As a teacher of language
arts, I
believe it is important to study what types of language use and
communication means the students in our classes are using outside of
school – the language they find personal. Kirby and Liner
(1988,
p.39) state: “Personal writing…is the natural
place for
students to begin their experience with putting words on
paper.”
I agree, even if they are using electronic means rather than paper.
Perhaps by tapping into these places, we can build on what they know
and further encourage their writing abilities, language use, and
creativity in the classroom.
Technological research is
composed at
a frenetic pace; publishing must happen before technology advances and
outdates the research. As such, the research regarding instant/text
messaging consists mostly of short articles about the burgeoning
instant messaging phenomenon and the shorthand language that
accompanies this form of communication. However, of late, researchers
have started to study this topic with increasing interest and depth.
Much of this literature is still focused on the opinions of educators
about the effects of instant messaging lingo in the writing classroom
and the trends experienced teachers have seen over their careers.
The conversations taking
place in
these articles acknowledge the effects of instant messaging on the
writing classroom and validate both the phenomenon and the concerns of
educators. Many articles describe the negative and the positive effects
on students and their education in connection with instant messaging
(Albright, Purohit & Walsh, 2002; DeGennaro & Texley,
2005;
Goldstein, 2005; Hauck, 2003; Lee, 2002; O’Connor, 2005;
Regan,
2002; Winters, 2002). For example, as soon as this latest technological
way of communicating became popular, teachers became distressed when
students would use IM language in formal compositions (Cobbs, 2002).
One teacher commented, “This use of slang might be OK for
notes
to their friends and Internet buddies, but not for school
compositions” (Cobbs, 2002, para. 8). Other teachers complain
of
weak voices in writing, blaming the abbreviations of email and instant
messaging for leading to writing that lacks development (Cobbs, 2002;
Goldstein 2005). One teacher even went so far as to say, “
It’s very rude, and it’s very careless,”
(Lee, 2002,
para. 33).
IM critics also say that
students are
getting sloppy and are consistently forgetting to proof their writing
– bad habits that some teachers are afraid might stick
(Cobbs,
2002; Goldstein, 2005; Lee, 2002; O’Connor, 2005 ). Teachers
have
resorted to taking off one point for every IM shortcut in papers, and
some insist on a rewrite if too many errors are present (Cobbs 2002;
Lee, 2002). Some teachers even comment that penmanship is suffering,
believing that the old paper type of notes at least had students
practicing their handwriting (Cobbs, 2002).
On the other hand, there
are some
positive things being said about instant messaging and how to use it as
a means of encouraging student writing, rather than battling against it
(Cobbs, 2002). Research shows that more than 13 million American
teenagers use instant messaging, and 70% of them use instant messaging
several times a week (Hotu, 2002; Lenhart, Lewis, & Rainie,
2001).
Numbers like that can be hard for some teachers to ignore, especially
when they see instant messaging shorthand showing up in their
students’ papers. Teachers have incorporated instant
messaging
into their classrooms with great success by assigning students study
buddies who communicate via instant messaging every night (Regan,
2002). Some teachers are adding words like “b4,”
“cuz,” “2,”
“r,” and
“u,” to their study of the most often misspelled
words
(Lee, 2002). They do this in order to call students’
attention to
the fact that these are slang spellings and are not appropriate for
formal papers, but they can be appropriate for informal writings and
journals (Lee, 2002). Many teachers allow for students to use this type
of writing in rough drafts, but expect more formalized writing in final
drafts (Cobbs, 2002, Lee 2002; O’Connor, 2005). Still other
teachers use instances of instant messaging lingo in papers as
“teachable moments” – during which they
take an
author’s poem or story and translate it into IM language
(Lee,
2002).
And students seem to be
grateful for
these conciliatory allowances in their writing. After all, some
students are so used to instant messaging lingo that they
don’t
even realize their errors when they proof their papers (Cobbs, 2002,
Hauck, 2003; Lee, 2002; O’Connor, 2005). In fact, perhaps
they
don’t even see it as necessarily wrong;
they just see
it as their language (Lee, 2002). Timed, in-class writings seem to be
where IM shorthand appears most frequently, with students claiming that
they want to write as much as possible in a short period of time, so
naturally they opt for the shorthand – again, often without
knowing it (Lee, 2002).
Many linguists and
experts in the
field of English education aren’t worried about the
degradation
of the English language like some teachers are (Cobbs, 2002; Gardner,
2005; Hauck, 2003; Lee, 2002; O’Connor, 2005). Shorthand
forms of
the English language have been around before, thanks to stenographers,
reporters, and telegraph operators (Cobbs, 2002). English language
purists panicked when the telegraph became faster than the Pony
Express, causing prepositions and articles to drop out of sentences
because customers were charged by the word (Cobbs, 2002). But one can
even go back as far as Latin and the Middle Ages to find abbreviations
and versions of shorthand (Cobbs, 2002). However, prepositions and
articles have survived regardless of these changes in society.
Linguists are quick to
point out that
the English language is constantly changing and adapting to meet the
communication needs of its speakers (Cobbs, 2002; Gardner 2005; Lee,
2002; O’Connor, 2005). As Jesse Sheidlower, the North
American
editor of the Oxford English Dictionary, says, “There is no
official English language. Language is spread not because anyone
dictates any one thing to happen. The decisions are made by the
language and the people who use the language” (Lee, 2002,
para.
31).
Leila Christenbury,
former president
of the National Council of Teachers of English and an English professor
at Virginia Commonwealth University, is often quoted regarding this
issue of instant messaging and its effects on the writing classroom.
She believes that English teachers should embrace this new writing
medium for exactly what it is doing – getting kids to write
(Cobbs, 2002; Lee, 2002). She says, “ We should be encouraged
to
see a generation of youngsters tapping away at the keyboard instead of
fingering a TV remote. My gosh, this is an English teacher’s
dream” (Cobbs, 2002, para. 10). In the Winters article, she
states, “It just doesn't alarm me. I don’t
understand all
the fuss. This type of use of the Internet means people are reading and
writing more than they have before” (2002, para. 30).
Yesterday students were
passing notes;
today they are instant messaging each other on their computers and
phones. Typed communication makes up a large part of their social life
(Lee, 2002). It’s all a part of their “unofficial
literacy,” as Ruth Hubbard described it in her article about
sixth-graders’ literacy practices (1989). She suggests that
teachers should “build on the knowledge children display in
their
underground culture” (Hubbard, 1989, p.306). However, she
also
provides a caveat to this statement in saying that students’
underground culture, their language, should also remain theirs
(Hubbard, 1989). The trick is finding the balance, especially when
student’s unofficial literacy practices can be so unfamiliar
to
older generations. With technology advancing at such a rapid rate, a
majority of teachers who weren’t raised with email and the
Internet are struggling to keep up (Wetzel, 2001).
“Generation
Text,” as one teacher aptly named the current middle and high
school generation, is a tough bunch to keep up with (Lee, 2002, para.
14).
We must remember,
however, that this
“Generation Text” consumes information and learns
differently from even the previous generation (Albright, Purohit
&
Walsh, 2002). McLaren, in Albright et al. (2002, para. 3), states,
“Each school day students are ripped out of this
techno-cocoon
and placed in a 19th century world of linear time and print
technology.” Applebee (1996, pp. 1-3) would characterize the
vast
differences between students’ lives and their schooling as a
curriculum that supports “knowledge-out-of-context”
–
the traditions of the past. Rather, he proposes, we should pursue
“knowledge-in-action,” a curriculum that builds on
the
voices of students, their current needs, issues, and literacies.
(Applebee, 1996, pp. 1-3). These days, it appears that validating and
incorporating instant messaging in the classroom is one way to do just
that.
One place to start
building on these
literacies is the writing classroom. Building confidence is one of the
greatest goals a writing teacher can have (Kirby & Liner,
1988).
Teachers, however, sometimes correct too early, too thoroughly, too
indistinctly, too painfully. As such, students take the challenge to
write exactly what the teacher wants (Kirby & Liner, 1988). As
Kirby…states: “Academic writing too often is Engfish,
Ken Macorie’s word for lifeless, inhibited prose too often
expected in English classes and read only by English teachers.
It’s pedantic and phony – and it’s
bad” (Kirby
& Liner, 1988, p. 40). Perhaps part of building confidence in
this
newest generation of young writers, in building their voices, and their
abilities to take risks with language, is to honor the instant
messaging phenomenon as a space to play with language. Allowing
students to use their preferred medium – the computer
–
might also encourage burgeoning writers (Goldstein, 2005).
To summarize, the
majority of the
literature on instant messaging and its effects in the classroom
suggest that tapping into this language can be a gateway into getting
kids more interested in academic writing – and writing with
voice
and creativity. Utilizing this unofficial literacy in the classroom can
have positive effects; to ignore or condemn this writing style is to
ignore or condemn students’ personalities and identities.
This
can only serve to shut down dialogue and put students on the defensive.
By acknowledging, embracing, and raising instant messaging language to
the creative status it deserves, teachers can tap into creative writing
abilities in their students.
Methods
Overview
The main components of
this study were
an investigation of students’ technological habits outside of
school through questionnaires, interviews, and copies of online chats,
as well as an examination of typical assignments during a study of
Harper Lee’s To Kill a Mockingbird.
These assignments
included both handwritten and computer-typed coursework, and were
examined for instances of shorthand as used in their own online chats
and online lingo as defined by NetLingo.com.
Participants
The participants in this
study were
five students from two ninth grade gifted language arts classes. They
attend a large high school in suburban area in the southeastern United
States. This school was named a School of Excellence in 2001. Most
students in this area come from middle or upper middle class families
and typically have access to personal computers and cell phones on a
regular basis. Many have also communicated with their teachers via
email regarding assignments or grades.
Of the five participants,
four are
fourteen years old and one is fifteen. Three are female and two are
male. All come from middle to upper middle class families, where they
have access to a family or personal computer in the home. Each have
access to the internet at home, as well as cell phones with text
messaging capabilities.
Each student in all three
of my gifted
ninth grade classes was given a five-question survey about their
technological habits. Students were chosen based on how frequently they
used online communication, as well as how comfortable and useful they
deemed it to be. These five students also expressed an interest and
willingness to participate in the study.
Instruments
The instruments used in
this study
were a blend of those designed specifically for this study and typical
assignments given during our study of Harper Lee’s To
Kill a Mockingbird.
The first instrument was given to all three of my gifted ninth grade
class to determine who uses instant messaging and/or text messaging
regularly and to find out which student would be willing to participate
in the study (see Appendix A). The second instrument was an interview
guide I used when interviewing the students for a little more
information regarding their habits with communicative technologies (see
Appendix B). The next instrument was an assignment used in conjunction
with To Kill a Mockingbird and was given to all
of my ninth
grade classes. For the participants in the study, I used their
handwritten responses to gage use of the shorthand typical in
communicative technologies (see Appendix C). The following assignment
was also used in conjunction with To Kill a Mockingbird,
but
responses could either be typed or handwritten (see Appendix D). Again,
I used this assignment to gage instances of communicative technology
shorthand. The final assignment used in conjunction with To
Kill a Mockingbird
was an in-class essay (see Appendix E). However, rather than
handwriting this essay, students used laptops from mobile labs to write
their essay. This assignment was also used to gage instances of
communicative technology shorthand. Lastly, I used an interview guide
to conference with students once the project was complete (see Appendix
F).
In addition to these
teacher-created
materials, each student brought in copies of one or more of their
online chats. These were used to create a dictionary of shorthand
specific to the students I studied.
Results and Discussion
Of the five students used
in this
study, instant messaging and email were the two most popular types of
online communication; these were reportedly used daily from 10 minutes
to 2 hours or more. Text messaging on cell phones was also reported in
two instances. Students reported using these types of communication for
a varied number of reasons: to keep in touch, because it’s
easier
than the phone, less awkward silences than the phone, time to think
before responding, etc. According to the students, shorthand accounts
for about half of the words they type in these forums; the shorthand is
learned either through example or “common sense, like you =
u.” No student reported a situation involving bullying or
threatening behavior via communicative technologies, although all
students reported having their meaning misconstrued in this
environment.
The data from each
student’s
online chats confirmed the students’ reports that about half
of
the language used was an abbreviation or form of shorthand. Very little
to no capitalization was used in these chats. Oftentimes capital
letters were used for emphasis, as in a whole word being capitalized,
rather than correct capitalization.
Three assignments were
used to judge
whether or not students’ use of communicative technologies
were
affecting their writing for school purposes. In the first assignment
(see Appendix C), students were asked to respond to two questions in a
paragraph for each response. This could be done on the back of the
handout or a separate sheet of paper, and could be handwritten or
typed. Four students handwrote the assignment, and one student typed
it. In all five student responses, no instances of shorthand were
found.
In the second assignment,
students were asked to respond to three questions out of a possible
twelve after we finished reading To Kill a Mockingbird
(see Appendix D). Students were allowed to either handwrite or type
their responses. Again, four students handwrote their responses and one
typed the response. No instances of shorthand were found.
In the third assignment,
students
chose one question out of three to respond to in one class period in an
essay (see Appendix E). Students did not know the three questions prior
to class that day, although the general topics had been discussed in
class before. Each student received a laptop and had to print their
essay before the end of the period. Once again, no instances of
shorthand were found.
Conclusions
As a researcher and
teacher, my
expectations were that I would find some, but not many, instances of
shorthand in student papers. This comes from prior experience with
noticing an increase in the number of shorthand occurrences in student
papers over the past few years. This was informal research, just a
glimpse of a trend, in my role as an English teacher. So, you may say I
was a little stunned by the findings in this research. No
examples of shorthand? Definitely surprising.
Once this information was
first
gleaned, I thought the best thing to do was conduct the post-study
interview with each student. At this point I fully explained my
research; prior to this point I just told them it was about the
language used in communicative technologies. I thought this would be
advantageous to the research, so students wouldn’t be overly
aware of the shorthand they used in writing for school purposes. In
this interview, I learned that the students enjoyed talking about
communicative technologies and shorthand in English class. Four of the
five said that they felt that recognizing that type of communication as
a viable type of writing with a specific audience helped them realize
when they were using it inappropriately at school. They enjoyed helping
me learn some of the lingo that I wasn’t familiar with. In
fact,
one said that the format we used for that class – them
creating
an “Online Lingo Quiz” for Mrs. Frilot to take
– was
one of their favorite classes. All five students reported using
shorthand in their writing for my class and other classes, but changing
it during the editing phase. All five of these students also reported
that writing in-class essays on computer was a much better and more
satisfactory experience than writing them by hand.
If I were to continue
this research, I
would probably choose a cross-section of ninth and tenth grade language
arts classes and would choose students from all levels of study. The
findings of this small study are only representative of the gifted
population of students, and hence may be different from a study using
all levels of students.
Recommendations
What I recommend most
strongly as a
result of this study is a dialogue about this type of communication and
writing between English teachers and their students. I think to ignore
this situation, or simply mark online shorthand as incorrect, is a
losing battle. Once my students engaged in a discussion about audience,
including the appropriate times for shorthand, they seemed less
reticent to edit their writing for school purposes for this type of
“incorrect” grammar. I also recommend that teachers
who see
this type of language used frequently in student writing take the
opportunity to create a “shorthand dictionary.”
This has
the students taking ownership of their communicative technology
shorthand and gives them the opportunity to teach the teacher
–
something many students enjoy. Incorporate students using their lingo
into a few assignments, but then remind them of audience when it comes
to other types of writing. Perhaps this distinction, this discussion of
audience, will help English teachers create better writers in these
generations so influenced by communicative technologies.
I also recommend using
laptop or
desktop computers for formal writings. I found that the in-class essays
students crafted on computers were of higher quality, showed greater
analysis and insight, had fewer grammatical errors, and received higher
grades. As a teacher, I also found that typed in-class essays were a
lot easier to read, and hence faster to grade. Now, this population of
students is also very familiar with computers and 90% believe they type
faster than they write, so that has an influence on those higher
grades. If the population is similar, it could prove to be an
interesting trial in English classrooms. If the population is
dissimilar, it would also be interesting to see the results.
References
Albright, J., Purohit,
K., & Walsh, C. (2002). Louise Rosenblatt seeks
QtAznBoi@aol.com for LTR:
Using chat
rooms in interdisciplinary middle school classrooms. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy 45(8), 692-705.
Applebee, A. N. (1996).
Curriculum as
conversation: Transforming traditions of teaching and learning.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Cobbs, C. (2002). Kewl or
2 much?. Orlando Sentinel. Retrieved April 7,
2005, from http://www.orlandosentinel.com/features/lifestyle/orl-
livinstant12101202.story
DeGennaro, D., &
Texley, S.
(2005). Should we ban instant messaging in school?. Learning &
Leading with Technology, 32 (7), 6-8.
Gardner, C. R. (2005).
Does technology
hurt student writing? It allows better expression of ideas. American
Teacher, 89 (6), 4.
Goldstein, N. (2005).
Does technology hurt student writing? Speed kills good writing skills.
American Teacher, 89 (6), 4.
Hauck, D. (2003).
Linguists mixed on effects of text messaging. USA Today.
Retrieved April 7, 2005, from
http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/2003-02-14-messaging- linguists_x.htm
HotU. (2002). College
Students Find
Value in Instant Messaging. Retrieved April 10, 2005 , from
http://www.hotu.com/employer/im.jsp
Hubbard, R. (1989). Notes
from the
underground: Unofficial literacy in one sixth grade classroom.
Anthropology and Education Quarterly 20, 291-307.
Kirby, D. &
Liner, T. (1988). Inside out: developmental strategies for teaching
writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lenhart, A., Lewis, O.,
and Rainie, L.
(2001). Teenage life online: The rise of the instant- message
generation and the internet’s impact on friendships and
family
relationships.Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Retrieved April 7, 2005, from
http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Report.pdf
Lee, J. (2002). Nu
Shortcuts in School R 2 Much 4 Teachers. New York Times.
Retrieved April 7, 2005 , from
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/19/technology/circuits/19MESS.html
O’Connor, A.
(2005). Instant Messaging: Friend or Foe of Student Writing? New
Horizons for Learning .
Retrieved April 7, 2005, from
http://www.newhorizons.org/strategies/literacy/oconnor.htm
Regan, T. (2002). Net
savvy students to teachers: You just don't get it!.
Christian Science Monitor . Retrieved
April 10, 2005 from http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/0815/p25s01-cogn.html
Spandel, V. (2001).
Creating writers through 6-trait writing assessment and instruction.
New York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Van Horn, R. (2002).
Disruptive technology. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(7), 492-494.
Winters, J. (2002). RU
ready 2 learn?. The Sun Chronicle. Retrieved
April 7, 2005, from
http://www.thesunchronicle.com/display/inn_feature/feature80.txt
Appendices
Appendix A
Instant Messaging Survey
Projects and research
papers certainly
do not end with your high school career! I am requesting your help with
a research project of mine. Please complete the short survey below.
Thank you!
- Do you use written communication, such as
instant messaging, email, or text messaging regularly?
- If so, why do you use it? (social stuff,
homework help, meeting people, etc.)
- How often do you communicate via email,
instant
messaging, and/or text messaging? (once a week, once a day, several
hours a day, etc.)
- Would you
feel comfortable
participating in a study about instant messaging? It would involve
providing me with scripts of your online communication and an
interview. (You will be anonymous in the study and any
reports. You can choose your own pseudonym if you want, although it
must be clean!)
Appendix
B
Preliminary Interview
This interview is to be
conducted after
choosing a participant pool using the surveys, but prior to determining
the final participants in the study. It will help me determine how
often and how much the students use both communicative technologies and
how much “shorthand” they use.
- Which types of
communication do you use – text messaging, instant messaging,
or email?
- Which do you use the
most?
- Why do you use these
types of communication?
- How often do you use
them?
- If you use instant
messaging, how
long do you use it at a time? Are you doing anything else at the same
time? (surfing the internet, talking on the phone, etc.)
- Approximately how much
“shorthand” do you think you use? Are most words
abbreviated, about half, or only a few?
- How did you learn the
shorthand?
- Why do you choose to
use these types of communication versus the phone?
- Have you ever had a
situation where your meaning was misconstrued or someone was being
bullied?
- Would you be willing to
submit one or two scripts of you online communications? (Go over ground
rules for topics.)
Appendix
C
To
Kill a Mockingbird Questionnaire
Please answer the
questions below as honestly as possible. They concern issues that will
come up during our reading of To Kill a Mockingbird.
- All men are created equal.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- Girls should act like girls.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- It's okay to be different.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- No one is all bad or all good.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- Some words are so offensive
that they should never be stated or written.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- Under our justice system, all
citizens are treated fairly in our courts of law.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- The old adage, "Sticks and
stones may break your bones, but words will never hurt you," is true.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- Speaking standard grammar
proves that a person is smart.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- A hero is born, not made.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- Education is the great
equalizer.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
- When the law does not succeed
in punishing criminals, citizens should do so.
Strongly agree Agree
Disagree Strongly Disagree
Choose TWO
of the
statements from the questionnaire to respond to in a paragraph or more.
Explain why you agreed or disagreed with the statement. Think about
class discussion and what you might want to bring up.
Appendix
D
Questions
that TKAM begs us to ponder…
Choose
THREE of the questions to respond to in a good, solid
PARAGRAPH or more. Incorporate QUOTES
whenever possible. We will use these as fodder for discussion on
Wednesday. (Part of your grade will come from this response,
and part will come from participation in discussion.)
- The title of the book
comes from
an old proverb: “it’s a sin to kill a
mockingbird.”
Respond to the title with these questions in mind: 1) What does the
title mean? 2) How does Harper Lee illustrate it throughout the story?
- Often children see
things in
distinct categories – black/white, good/evil, and so forth.
As we
get older, we notice that there is a lot more middle ground. How is
this process exemplified in Jem OR Scout?
- Define courage in your
own terms.
Who would you describe as a courageous person? Define courage from both
Atticus’ and Scount’s point of view as well. How
are the
definitions different? What is Harper Lee trying to say about courage?
- Why would Harper Lee
have Scout and Jem go to Calpurnia’s church when they do?
Respond thoughtfully.
- Respond to the trial
– the outcome, the prejudice, its effects on Scout or Jem,
Mr. Ewell’s reaction, etc.
- How does Harper Lee
create suspense in a trial that most feel had been decided before they
walked into the courtroom?
- Scout ages two years
– from
six to eight – over the course of the novel, which is
narrated
from her perspective as an adult. Did you find the account her
narration provides believable? Were there incidents or observations in
the book that seemed unusually knowing for such a young child? What
event or episode in Scout’s story do you truly feel captures
her
personality?
- Jem describes to Scout
the four
“folks” or classes of people in Maycomb county:
“…our kind of folks don’t like the
Cunninghams, the
Cunninghams, don’t like the Ewells, and the Ewells hate and
despise the colored folks.” What do you think of the ways in
which Lee explores race and class in 1930s America? What significance,
if any do you think these characterizations have for people living in
other parts of the world?
- One of the chief
criticisms of
this novel is that the two central storylines – Scout, Jem,
and
Dill’s fascination with Boo Radley and the trial between
Mayella
Ewell and Tom Robinson – are not sufficiently connected in
the
novel. Do you think that Lee is successful in incorporating these
different stories? Were you surprised at the way in which these
storylines were resolved? Why or why not?
- By the end of To
Kill a Mockingbird,
the book’s first sentence, “When he was thirteen,
my
brother Jem got his arm badly broken at the elbow,” has been
explained and resolved. What did you think of the events that followed
the Halloween pageant? Did you think that Bob Ewell was capable of
injuring Scout or Jem? How did you feel about Boo Radley’s
last-minute intervention?
- Respond to one of the
two handouts
I gave you: “The Scottsboro Boys” or
“Looking for
Harper Lee.” What did you learn? How does this information
inform
your thinking about TKAM and the issues it brings to light?
- Go back to the
questionnaire we
completed and discussed before reading and respond to one of the
original statements after having read the book. Has your thinking
changed? How was the statement explored in the book?
Appendix
E
To Kill a
Mockingbird In-Class Essay
Gifted
Language Arts
Directions:
Choose one
of the following questions and develop it into a multi-paragraphed
essay. Use the proper guidelines for essay writing and paragraph
development. You may use your To Kill a Mockingbird
text, but no other sources, including internet sources. Cite your
sources (Lee 45).
- Trace the development of Jem’s (or
Scout’s) physical, social and moral boundaries, and connect
this
to the theme of “Growing Up.” Use supporting
quotes.
- How is courage related to character
development?
Define courage, and choose a character from To Kill a Mockingbird you
consider courageous and discuss his or her courageous traits. Show
examples of these traits by incorporating evidence from the work. (Be
sure to address ALL questions.)
- In the novel To Kill a Mockingbird, explain
the
symbolism of the mockingbird as seen in both Tom Robinson and Boo
Radley. Use details from the story in your discussion.
REMEMBER
- Provide specific
examples from the story to support your ideas.
- Opening a program
other than Word constitutes cheating and severe grade penalties.
- Do not simply give
plot summary. Analyze – tell me why.
- You may only use your
memory – not your book, notes, classmates, me, etc.
- This is worth a test
grade, so please take this seriously and do your best work. Let me know
if you have questions.
- You only have to write
one draft.
Begin by planning your essay, then write your draft, then make sure you
have enough time to edit.
Appendix
F
Post Interview
The purpose of this
interview is to
provide closure to the study for the participants, for participants to
learn about their writing style, for participants to be aware of the
influence of technology on writing, and to add validity to my
interpretations. Interviews will vary based on each
participant’s
outcomes, so this is a general interview guide.
- What did you perceive
to be the purpose of this study?
- Did any aspect of the
study make you uncomfortable?
- Did you become more
conscious of your word choices in either your online communications or
your writing for school?
- Do you think there are
times in school that it is appropriate to use IM-style shorthand? If
so, when and why? If not, why?
- Show participants the
comparisons
of their different writings and explain my conclusions. Do you agree
with these findings? What would you add or take away from the findings?
- What conclusions, if
any, do you draw from this study?
- Based on this
information, do you
think language arts teachers should utilize either computer labs or
laptops for in-class writings? Why or why not?
