Don't Turn a Blind Eye to Humanity or Technology

As an pre-service ELA educator, my days are spent focusing on two-thirds of the infamous "Three R's": reading and writing. Of all the different skills students gain during their education, these seem to be paramount. Being able to produce quality writing, have strong reading comprehension, and acquire an overall sense of literacy are the markers to students' success or failure in life. Their lives are in my hands, the thought of which makes me turn into screaming Kevin in all those Home Alone posters. It's a tall order, one not lacking in stress and sleepless nights contemplating the big question: Is what I'm doing serving my students the best I can? Now that I'm only two semesters away from student teaching (yikes!), I've come to realize I can't avoid looking at the big picture any more. 

I am lucky to live in a time of great technological advancement.Whether at school, home, or the library, I've been able to utilize all sorts of technology throughout my education, making me, for the most part, digitally literate. It's easy to take something like that for granted. But, for every student who was as fortunate as I was, there are two others than have limited or no access at all. Especially if I end up teaching in a rural or urban area, students could have almost no digital literacy when they  reach my class. The school or district resources could also limit the quality and amount of technology I expose students to. With issues like this to deal with, it can be easy to say Just cut out the problem. Reading and writing can be taught without fancy technology. Focus on teaching them traditional literacy, and the rest will come naturally. But that's so not the case, which Cynthia Selfe clearly articulates in "Technology and Literacy: A Story About the Perils of Not Paying Attention." The cycle that a technology-centric culture has created is something I had never thought about before. Those who have the money to purchase and use technology will do so. In doing that, they recognize its significance in today's culture, leading to a greater push in the community for education and access. In places where money is available, donations will come in to ensure their children have even more opportunities in school to increase their digital literacies and subsequently improve their chances for future success. Simply put, those who can afford the technology will grow, and those who can't, or who don't understand the importance, will remain stuck near the bottom. One of the most striking quotes for me was when Selfe talked about how we convince ourselves technology will make everything turn out fine:

As a result we take comfort when the linkage between literacy and computer technology is portrayed as a socially progressive movement, one that will benefit American citizens generally and without regard for their circumstances or backgrounds. Such a belief releases from the responsibility to pay attention (416).

We like to believe that technology can circumvent situations, that the most downtrodden and unfortunate of people can make their mark. It's the American dream. But, what if those circumstances prevent you from even getting to that point to use the technology to escape the circumstances? Technology isn't the Mr. Pirelli's Miracle Elixir to life "success." Some people have touted technology as the solution to illiteracy. But, like the article pointed out, all technology has done is "changed the official criteria for both 'literate' and 'illiterate'" (423). It's made more requirements. Now, instead of having to simply catch up in traditional literacy, disadvantaged students have to catch up in two major areas. This almost seems like it's making even more impossible to escape the cycle we've built in our society. 

Something I've never understood, especially after information like this comes to light, why more successful students are rewarded for their success by receive the best technology, while students who are disadvantaged and struggling are punished for their shortcomings by not being provided with technology. How do we expect students to get better without giving them the tools needed to get better? It's like telling a painter "We want to you repaint the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, but you only three jars of paint and a stick with some bristles tied on the end." If we truly want to help "all of our children(416)" become technologically literate, like former Secretary of Education Richard Riley claims, we've got to provide them with the tools to do so. This has made it clear to me that I can't avoid technology because it's going to be too difficult, because I can't get everyone on the same level. If I really want to give the best for my students, I have to fight to get all of them the access to technology necessary to accomplish everything they can in life. 

I've always been obsessed with the human element of literature. That's part of the reason I chose to become an English teacher, something I suppose is not too rare of a reason. Because of this, I tend to be okay with ignoring the mechanical, the technological, and doing things the old-fashioned way. However, I can do this only because I also technologically literate; when the need arises, I can whip out my skills. However, I can't be this caviler with my students. Today's human is closely intertwined with technology; the two can't be separated any more. If I want to teach all of my students about humanity, I also have to teach all of them about technology. 

And now, for something a little less intense, but still very important for me to consider. 

In my Teaching Writing class this semester, we've talked over and over again about the importance of teaching writing as a process rather than a product. So often, students are graded on the achievement, or lack thereof, of certain standards, rather than the growth witnessed from one point to another. Once a grade is slapped on the front page, students aren't encouraged to review and revise; the piece becomes dead, so to speak. This system makes it so easy for students to throw some words up on the screen and call it a day. I'm guilty of this as well, thinking, "As long as I can get through this and get it done, I never have to touch it again." But learning is never finished. So, how can we encourage students to work hard without getting discouraged while still tracking achievement of standards? The use of badges as a means of grading writing, explored by Mascle in both "Students Respect the Badge" and "Why Gamification?", is an intriguing concept. It's seems kind of like any scouting group: the goal is to collect all the badges, but people are able to collect them at their own pace and it any order that works best for them. I really appreciated Mascle's statement of "Writing is a recursive process and gamification allows you to recognize work as well as progress without sending a signal that the piece of writing is 'done'" (Why Gamification?). The concept behind this is amazing, but I'm not so sure I think it would a good idea to do with every student writing grade. Wouldn't you still have to report traditional grades to the school and district anyway? I feel like this would still create a lot of work for the teacher. But, I could see this being successful in a smaller scale within a course. 

Personally, I think the grading badges fits much better within classroom blogs, which Mascle delves into in "Students Respect the Badge." Blogs are a great way to get students articulating their thoughts freely, which naturally leads to a lot of writing. Even though you want to read through all that students have written, it's not physically possible to give everyone feedback. The creation of a peer-based audience is a really simple way to make students' writings matter; no longer are their musing and ideas private channels between them and the teacher. Their thoughts are now public, and it is expected that they will be read by many of their friends and classmates. For some students, it could that extra boost of motivation to put some genuine thinking into their process, knowing that real people who matter to them will actually see and vote on it. "Hand[ing] that responsibility off to the class" (Students Respect), making the real audience of the blog writing the judge is logic. Who better to judge the success of a piece than the person or people the piece is written for? I like this because it validates student opinions. Because they're trying to appeal to all their peers and not just you, students will start to write about what they believe matters, not simply the answers they think you'll like. I also loved how students had to cite evidence for why a person should receive a particular badge. Not only is it good practice for backing up their statements and claims, but it also could help alleviate some (but not all) of the expected popularity contests that may come out of a system like this. 

Though many positives could come out of the badge system, there are several things that I'm a little wary about. The lack of teacher assessment with this system would mean that struggling students wouldn't get the explicit feedback they need to grow. Though students are often very honest when it comes to the quality of something, they may not have the ability or desire to help their peers on their posts or any misconceptions they might have. If there are some issues deeper than simply lack of attention or effort, they might only be solved by a teacher. And so, it seems that we come back to square one: the teacher still has to read through all the blogs to ensure students are being successful. But, I think that's how I would approach using something like this. It wouldn't reduce my workload, but it would help to incorporate more real-world application into writing and critical analysis assessment. I think I might explore the use of badges as a grading/encouragement system with something more informal, like these blogs, in my own classroom. 

I'm only at the beginning of my teaching career, and I know I'll have a lot more "screaming Kevin" moments before I feel even slightly confident that I'm teaching students the right things. I suppose the key is constant reflection: looking at data, reading articles, observing techniques, and deciding for myself how I can use or alter this information to my, and my students', best advantage.