I admit when I started to hear reports about text speak being allowed in classrooms I considered it further evidence of the declining literacy skills of the youth of today. I love the English language when it is used 'properly' and effectively and balked at the idea of encouraging the use of what I perceived as a bastardised form of it. However, the ironic thing is I am in fact guilty of using abbreviated forms in text messages (although I prefer to retain proper punctuation and grammar whenever possible) and in chat programs such as MSN where it is in fact often necessary in order to keep up the conversation. I taught my mother how to text message a few years ago and it is still a bit clunky and time-consuming for her so she abbreviates as much as possible, often to the point where it takes me a while to comprehend the message.
However, my opinion has well and truly been swayed by the more reports I read on studies being conducted in the area. A study by Plester, Wood and Joshi in 2009 found a positive correlation between the use of text speak and reading ability. The ability to effectively abbreviate shows evidence of phonological awareness and knowledge of phonetics. Additionally, exposure to mispellings does not adversely affect a child's ability to learn the correct spelling. They also argue that the positive correlation could be an indicator of the benefits of increased exposure to text through mobile phone use in aiding reading ability. Additionally, text speak can be engaging to students, shows their ability to manipulate the English language and can be a strong motivator for children to develop sufficient literacy skills in order to effectively communicate with others via mobile phone. These are ideas that I had not considered before.
In terms of how this could be transferred to the classroom, perhaps txt speak could be used to reinforce grapheme-phoneme correspondences, and to allow children to play around to find other orthographic representations that still convey appropriate meaning for the reader. Any method that encourages a child's literacy development and understanding of the writer-audience relationship and how best to convey meaning efficiently can only be a benefit IMHO.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Based on the positive findings of the study you have cited above and the arguments made by David Crystal I would be open to using text speak in the classroom for certain purposes, including code breaking skills, the need to understand your audience, and also rapid expression of thoughts (for those who find it faster). However, it's use would still be fairly limited, which begs the question what is all the fuss. For those still getting flustered by it I would be inclined to argue that it seems to have the same advantages for literacy as being multilingual.
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree. It would have limited use in the classroom. I think all the fuss is that the uninformed public (myself included) get all up in arms when it's brought to their attention that it is being used in schools. In fact they were going to talk about it on Sunrise this morning but I missed it as I had to leave for uni. I'll do some research, but my guess is that it would have been an inflammatory, sensationalist report.
ReplyDeleteWell turns out they didn't really talk about it much at all but have included the video above anyway. I think it was just a hook to get people to watch.
ReplyDeleteYes, you'll probably find that textspeak is not something you want to use too often - much less teach - in mainstream classrooms, but it could provide a good starting point for codeswitching tasks where you are helping students perceive the boundaries of appropriateness and teaching them how, when, where and why to switch into more standard forms of language. Beyond that, it might well have some role in raising awareness of missing sounds and letters in carefully structured activities.
ReplyDelete