Technology in the Composition Classroom Credo

“Access to technology is not the liberating or empowering thing that we expect it to be. As composition teachers, deciding whether or not to use technology in our classes is simply not the point – we have to pay attention to technology. When we fail to do so, we share in the responsibility for sustaining and reproducing an unfair system that enacts social violence and ensures continuing illiteracy under the aegis of education.” –Cynthia Selfe

I believe:

1: That our notions of digital native and digital immigrant are problematic; as students today, in the various parts of the United States and the world, still lack access to technologies and to teachers who know how to effectively use them. That by assuming all students have access to technologies, we do a disservice to students and further perpetuate the dominant power structures already in play in society.

2: That literacy entails socially constructed practices; that is, what determines a person to be literate is socially constructed. That we have a responsibility, as composition instructors, to ensure that students are literate in writing across various social situations. Those situations may be dependent on the specific context of both the teacher and students in question; some students will engage in different social situations than others. Just as one should not only teach digital literacy, one should not only teach print literacy.

3: That composition teachers have a responsibility to ensure that all students have access to literacy practices; that teachers not let their personal prejudices and biases affect the types of literacy they engage in and teach in the composition classroom.

A basic understanding of literacy is pretty simple: can someone comprehend and complete a fairly simple task like reading? Literacy scholars, however, define literacy as more than just knowing the skill. Literacy is socially constructed and situated. Literacy means knowing and understanding the specific values, beliefs, and skills that make up socially constructed knowledge. Consider the idea of digital literacy and the idea of the digital native/digital immigrant. Many teachers (and society, in general) have the idea that because students today have grown up surrounded by technology, that because most of them live in homes with computers or own smart phones, that they are "digitally literate". Most are surprised to learn that students may not know how to compose an appropriate email, or as one online teacher friend succinctly put it "My students today can't google their way out of a paper bag." Digital literacy is more than just knowing how to turn a computer on. It's also knowing and understanding why we might choose to email someone over call them or how we might construct an email differently to a professor than to a friend. It's a question of understanding when texting is appropriate or when google is a perfectly adequate source.

Literacy is important for any number of reasons, though, I might argue that the most important element of being literate is the ability to function successfully in society. Being literate is more than the ability to read or to write. Being literate allows one to engage in society successfully. There's a reason that literacy has so many different modifiers - print literacy, financial literacy, digital literacy - and those are just a few. 

Technology is, to me, synonymous with distraction. Sometimes distraction is good; other times distraction is less good. Students today talk of multitasking - of writing essays, IMing their friends, watching YouTube videos - all simultaneously. I do this myself. Earlier last week, I read essays while streaming MidWest BrewHaHa, a roller derby tournament, and listening to Doctor Who for background noise. I'll do it again in two weeks when ECDX is happening in Philly. When I consider why I engage in such behavior, it stems to a need for distraction for me. Being away from friends/family and the things and activities that I love means that I am frequently lonely and even frustrated, at times. Over this past weekend, I missed attending BFD (a music festival) with friends, the very first international boot camp put on by BAD and London Brawling, the local Pride parade with my derby league, PePe's going away party, and my daughter's first ballet recital. I've missed practice for two weeks now. I'm missing hugs and kisses from my kids, meeting Rav and Enya at the hot tub after practice,, checks in with my wife every few days. I can do most of that digitally, but not all of it. Technology gives me the opportunity to 1)contact the people that I want to when I want to and 2)distract myself from how I'm feeling. Perhaps that's the not the most healthy way to deal with such feelings, but it works for me. 

• How successful were you at going Tech/Literacy free for a day?

I do believe I was successful in going tech free for about half of the time I was awake. The first few hours were the easiest as I had other things to do. The harder part was not being able to double check some things, like the timing of the bus schedule. I'm pretty sure I wound up missing one bus because I couldn't remember what time it actually showed up. I made it tech free from about 9 am-ish to 4 pm-ish. 

• What was the hardest thing about trying to go Tech/Literacy free?

The hardest part was not having distractions as the day went on. Being here at IUP means I'm away from my family and the vast majority of my friends. It means I'm lonely a good chunk of the time and missing the things I love the most. Being able to access technology means having something to distract my mind from missing those people and things. I know I've missed out on a great deal already by being gone this summer, and yesterday, I missed my daughter's first ballet recital. The hardest part of the day was knowing that I was missing such a major event for her, yet not being able to even do much to distract myself from that fact. 

• How did your friends/family respond to you do the task?

Well, they were the primary cause of my breaking the tech fast. As I mentioned, my daughter had her first ballet recital yesterday. Shortly before it was scheduled to begin, though, my husband sent several texts that needed to be answered as they impacted her recital. Ultimately, he remembered that I was tech free, but by then, I had already broken the tech fast. 

• Did going Tech/Literacy free cause you to get more physically active or less? Why?

I would say not. I am already a fairly physically active person. I would actually wonder if the tech free caused me to be active less. Weekends are typically my skating days, and it's a lot harder for me to keep going without music. I went about five miles without music, but the last half were a lot easier as I had something to keep rhythm with. In addition, I am confident I took more naps yesterday than I would have without trying to go tech free.  

• What did you miss the most while you were going Tech/Literacy free?

I missed not having ready access to family/friends. I missed the ambient noise that streaming music provides for me. At home, going tech free is easier. There's people, activities, things that need to be done. At my current place, there's only so many times I can do laundry or dishes or clean a room to pass the time. There's only so many books that I have (not on a computer or kindle) that I can access. There's few people just sitting around to have conversations with. Even finding people to have conversations with is dependent upon technology, to a degree. 

Overall, what did you think of this experience?

Primary Blog Question
When compared, the two film clips help illuminate a key question for this course: How has our relationship to technology changed over time?

The films demonstrate that, over the course of the 20th century, technology has become insidious to our culture. The 60's version of "The Time Machine" show that people within the film mock the main character's fascination with technology and with inventions while in the second version his interest in technology is less pronounced than his relationship with Emma. One could potentially argue that because we assume a fascination with technology, a version produced in the early 2000's could not necessarily need to show the protagonist's interest or fascination with technology. Honestly, the two clips we viewed almost seemed like different movies. The first version was pretty clearly focused on the notion of time, introducing the protagonist as a man of science, an inventor, someone who is motivated and driven by curiosity. It highlights the actual time machine and the focus/interest in evolving technologies much more than clearly than the later version. The later version, instead, focuses almost solely on the relationship between the protagonist and his lady love, Emma. It almost positions the plot as entirely motivated by Emma's death. Without her death, would the main character even have created the time machine? Rather than being motivated by intellectual curiosity, the protagonist is motivated by love and despair.

This is my first entry...

and I am so excited. Ok, so that was specifically for Summer.