I have yet to not see one of my peers walking with their eyes glued to their cell phones. They quickly type the day’s events on a tiny screen that they use almost all day, every day. Teenagers today use texting as a primary source of communication. Although texting is an efficient and quick way of communication, texting is reducing teen literacy due to lack of face to face communication, abbreviated spelling, and meaningless conversation. Teen literacy today is at a low. According to author Anne Lewis, “more than eight million students in grades 4-12 are reading at "below basic" levels” (Education Digest 51). Because of the simplicity of most ways of communication, it deprives the teens of communicating effectively. They become so used to …show more content…
looking at such a tiny, bright screen that they have forgotten what it is like to have a regular in-person conversation. Text messaging has become a phenomenon ever since the very first text message was sent in the year 1993 by a student who was working for the Nokia Corporation (Drouin and Davis 49). Teenagers have reported an average of receiving 46 and sending 45 messages in a day (Cingel and Sundar 310). Texting is thought to have both negative and positive effects on students’ literacy. When asked their opinion, educators said that they believe that texting has more of a negative effect on students’ writing skills (Verheijen 595). This belief is a result of teachers having mentioned receiving work that contained text language (Powell and Dixon 58). Although there are studies that show that texting have positive effects on teen literacy, there is also evidence that points to there being negative effects for this action as well. Eighty-two percent of twelve to fifteen-year-olds and forty-nine percent of eight to eleven-year-olds have a cellular device in which texting is their primary form of communication (Plester, Wood, Bell 137). When texting friends, they tend to ignore punctuation and capitalization methods while texting (Cingel and Sundar 306). An observation was created, and participants were placed in a normal classroom setting so that the researchers could observe the effects of cell phone use on the classroom experience. Participants in a survey prior to the test, expected to perform thirty percent lower than normal. They performed very closely to what they had predicted. During the survey, students also stated that they believed they would have performed better had they not been texting (Chacon et. al 326). Students may have agreed on the survey that using phones are distracting, however they still continue to use cell phones in class (Chacon et. al 323). In the observation, the students were given a passage to read. The passage took much longer to read for those who engaged in texting while reading (Chacon et. al 324). They were then given an assessment on the material that they had read. Students that engaged in texting scored lower than the control group students who did not engage in texting (Chacon et. al 325). Those who texted while reading had a twenty-seven percent loss than those who did not text while reading (Chacon et.al 328). It was hypothesized that the time spent texting was negatively correlated to quiz scores (Chacon et. al 328). This information suggests that the presence of texting in the classroom is not conducive to learning the material that is presented to students. Results do support the idea of negative effects of texting in a classroom setting (Chacon et. al 328), but the results from this experiment also suggest that texting in itself may not be the reason for lower scores on literacy test. The time and place that a person chooses to text message may be part of the problem. The ringing of phones during the study may have distracted the other students, and, in turn, made them perform poorer on the test as well as those who were texting during the study. Perhaps after more studies like this are conducted, methods can be developed that may possibly lower the amount of distractions in the classroom. Texting continues to have an impact in the education department and the literacy skills of students. There has been an large amount of occasions where students have turned in work with text language included (Verheijen 587). It has been studied that using text language has negative effects on literacy (Plester, Wood, Bell 137). In a study, participants were asked to transcribe back and forth between English and texisms. Mistakes made in transcription to English included missed words, punctuation, untranslated textisms, and misspellings (Plester et al. 139). It was also observed that those who texted more often, tended to have worse results in non-verbal measures (Plester, Wood, Bell 140). Some students do not seem to have the ability to alternate between text-speak and English in a classroom setting. Adaptations, abbreviations, letter omissions, and homophones tend to negatively predict grammar scores (Cingel and Sundar 316). This may be a reason why educators have a negative outlook on student testing habits. Teens that were surveyed reported sending more than three texts a day.
These teens tended to score lower on literacy tests than those that did not (Plester, Wood, Bell 143). It was also observed that high texters scored lower on verbal and non-verbal reasoning than those who do not text and minimal texters (Plester, Wood, Bell 140). Results from studies on texting indicated an overall negative effect on literacy test results (Verheijen 595). It has been suggested that students are not distinguishing between informal and formal environments and are texting at the wrong times and places (Verheijen 587). The general message that the media sends about the effects of texting tend to be rather negative overall. For example, texting and driving is considered very dangerous due to a distracted driver. Many teens are involved in accidents due texting and driving. It was elicited during a study that participants took longer and made more errors when they had to read text messages as opposed to reading Standard English (Kemp and Bushnell 18). Thurlow is quoted saying that texting “signals the slow death of language” and is “a threat to social progress” (qtd. in Verheijen 586). Texting has more of a negative effect on teens’ literacy and could possibly cause the English we use today could become
obsolete. Even though there are possible negative effects that texting can possibly have on their literacy, children still continue to use texting as a primary source of communication. There are many reasons why people prefer to use textisms in their messages. Textisms are used as shortcuts to make messages shorter since there is a limited amount of characters that a phone is programed to allow in a text message (Verheijen 583). Since text is mostly sound based, or phonological, they are often used as a way to save time (Kemp and Bushnell 19). By using textisms, the person may feel like they are “cool” among their peers (Verheijen 583). They are more likely to use this form of writing when quickness and efficiency is needed (Cingel and Sundar 309). This is an example of how children are more likely to use methods that they see as helpful (Cingel and Sundar 308). The youth are likely to use text-speak when interacting amongst peers (Cingel and Sundar 307). Many students have confessed to using mobile phones for social networking as well, which may also be an instance where textisms are being used (Chacon 323). As the years have gone by, the amount of seven to ten year olds that own a cell phone has increased (Plester, Wood, Bell 137). By using textisms, those who have difficulty spelling may use them as a way to keep them feeling inferior (Kemp and Bushnell 19). This can help them to hide a weakness they have so they may be accepted into their desired social crowd. Although much of the media attention at the effects of texting has been negative, some studies argue that texting may actually have a positive effect on the literacy skills of teens. In one observation, results showed that the greater amount of abbreviated words that were used warranted higher verbal reasoning scores, which points to a clear positive correlation between texting and verbal reasoning (Plester, Wood, Bell 139-140). Another study was conducted using British children suggested that more proficient literacy skills were associated to determining textisms, which supports the idea that using textisms are improving the development of literacy skills (Kemp and Bushnell 20, 23). A textism is “a largely sound-based, or phonological, form of spelling that can reduce the time of texting” (Kemp and Bushnell 18). Textisms are often associated with acronyms, emoticons, and the removal of extra parts of spelling and grammar (Drouin and Davis 50). Almost every source that I have acquired for my research has determined that further research should be conducted in this topic. Drouin and Davis mentioned that long term studies should be conducted on the same group of individuals for more than just a studies (64). It would take years to obtain the true effect of texting on teen literacy. They argued that it would be beneficial to conduct a long-term study over several years to get a better theory of the effects of texting on literacy. It may be easier to observe if texting over the years has any effect on teen literacy rather than if participants are able to remember how to spell certain words that they do not use on a day-to-day basis (Drouin and Davis 64). A study that spans several years would have the potential to present more concrete evidence that could either support or negate the question on whether texting has negative effects on literacy. I believed before actually beginning my research that texting may have had a negative effect on my literacy skills since I have been exposed to texting in my adolescence. I also believe that my involvement in texting my friends who use textisms may have played a negative role as well. I find myself using abbreviations and shortcuts in my writing due to overexposure and force of habit. With all of the information that has been gathered from all of the studies, there seems to be some conflicting results. Some studies suggest that participating in text messaging has a negative effect on one’s literacy skills, while others suggest that texting does not have any effect whatsoever. I believe that texting has a more negative effect on teens because of the results that have been given. The use of textisms in ritual, or habit, causes difficulty in switching between both English and text-speak. Texting has become an everyday task that many teenagers participate in on a daily basis. Many of those text messages that are sent often contain abbreviations. The use of abbreviations is starting to become more accepted among the younger generation. There have been suggestions from both media sources and educators that texting may have a negative effect on the literacy skills of students. Perhaps that biggest problem is that students do not distinguish between times when they need to write formally without using textisms. As well as when they are writing informally and the use of textisms is acceptable. With more long term studies on the same group of individuals, it may be possible for researchers to determine if texting does have negative effects on teen literacy. It may also be possible to see if individuals carry the textisms that they use in their personal circumstances into their formal writing in a workplace environment. Until the time that concrete results are attained to prove that texting has degenerating effects, it may be wise to encourage students to lessen their use of textisms, and instead use proper grammar and spelling while they are using texting as a form of communication.
Michaela Cullington, a student, wrote a paper “Does Texting Affect Writing?” in 2010 for an English class. The paper is an examination of texting and the belief that it negative effective student’s writing. Cullington goes into detail about textspeak- “language created by these abbreviations”- and their use in formal writings. She organizes the paper in a way that is confusing to understand at first (pg. 1). At the end of the paper, she discusses her finding in her own research which comes to show that texting does not affect writing. But this is contradicting to the information she received from the teachers. The students and the teachers were seeing differences in the use of textspeak in formal writing. Cullington has good support for her
A recent outbreak in teen texting is taking a toll on their daily lives. Many teenagers have cell phones. Their parents get them phones for their safety and well-being, but is that what teens really use them for? I for one know that I rarely call my parents or use my phone for important reasons. Most of the time, I’m scrolling through Instagram and snapchat, to keep up with everyone that I will see in less than a day. The editorial from The Jersey Journal, called Teens are going to extremes with texting, informs the common people of the statistics of teen texting. The editorials main argument is communicating the excessiveness of teen texting. The author develops this point through expert uses of word choice, but also extreme examples and statistics.
The fastest growing form of communication in America’s society is texting. David Mercer brings up a valid argument about how the appearance of texting was not a slow process, parents never had an opportunity to experience texting so they have no way of teaching their children how to use it responsibly (Carter). Texting is so common it carries over into our everyday lives easily and at times becomes controlling. America’s society thrives on the conveniences texting provides us. While texting is fast and convenient it has numerous faults that affect our society mentally and socially. Texting can be beneficial as it simplifies our lives at times; however, there are numerous negative effects texting has on our society.
Although writing and speech are commonly both considered as language, both are categorized very differently. In today’s society, writing is much more formal compared to speech. Texting is a mixture of both using informal speech in writing. Texting is often criticized due to the informal nature and improper vocabulary. In John McWhorter’s speech “Txting is killing language. JK!!” the author convinces readers that texting language is not as harmful to society as many would assume while adding his own professional and personal experiences as evidence.
Is it right for adolescent American students to text so profoundly? In my opinion, it is a very pessimistic thing and is having a negative effect on the students writing abilities and grammar. As it says in both passages ,“Text-Speak Is Harming Teens’ writing Skills,” and ,“Text-Speak Can Help Students,” recent studies have shown that an average teen sends about sixty texts per day. The use of informal language and slang takes place which can cause illness in academic work.
As stated in the article, “2b or Not 2b” by David Crystal, people believe that texting is not a natural form of communication and that it is wrecking our language. Although some people may agree with this idea, studies have challenged this opinion. Rather than fearing the consequences of texting, people should embrace this evolution and understand that this new form of communication may actually provide benefits to literacy. This author once stated, “there is no evidence that texting teaches people to spell badly: rather, research shows that those kids who text frequently are more likely to be the most literate and the best spellers, because you have to know how to manipulate language” (David Crystal Quotes). The moral panic created by this form of socialization should be diminished, as people have the power and ability to shape our future.
Language is a form of verbal communication via words and its pronunciation that is used and comprehended by various people of the same nation, culture, or geographical background. It has been said to be dated back as far as one thousand years ago before writing. Like culture, language is passed on through the process of enculturation. Meaning that it is something that is learned (Kottak, 101). In the video, “TED TALK: Texting is killing language,” Ted starts off the video by saying that “The idea is that texting spells the decline and fall of any kind of serious literacy, or at least writing ability, among young people in the United States and now the whole world today (Ted, 2013). Throughout the film discussion, what stuck out to me the most was how drastic language has changed via technology. Although Ted disagrees with the above statement, in my opinion, I believe that a language can be altered if it is changed by enough speakers and writers. With the constant use of various forms of technology, communication via texting has become a very popular leisure activity for people all o...
Step onto any college campus and take a look around. You will find clumps of students standing around in circles, phones in hand, typing away. What is it they are doing? Texting. Ever since the first text message was sent in 1993, the use of text messaging as a means of communication has spread like wild fire, especially amongst the adolescent generation. And with this new form of communication a new language has appeared; text-speak, the shortening of common words into abbreviations and acronyms (Drouin 49). While texting and the text-speak language seem to have been welcomed by many, what affect is this new technology having on the way we communicate? Is it possible that texting is negatively affecting our ability to use formal written communication, or is this idea just a myth perpetuated by negative media attention? And what changes has texting brought to the way we communicate person-to person? Are these changes positive, negative, or perhaps a mixture of both?
Texting, and sending messages have a major negative impact on American teens’ writing skills. The American teenager sends about sixty text messages a day. Teens are often using slang while texting someone, for example lol means “laugh out loud”. While teens are texting like this, it is causing the effects of their academic work such as writing.
Texting, techspeak, and tweens: The relationship between text messaging and English grammar skills by Drew P. Cingel and S. Shyam Sundar (2012), is an article that discusses the connection between text messaging in adolescents and poor English grammar skills (Cingel & Sundar, 2012). Cingel started the study as a student investigating the effect of texting on grammar skills, after receiving text messages from his nieces, which were incomprehensible. (2012, July 26). Cingel combined with S. Shyam Sundar, a distinguished Professor of Communication and Co-director of the Penn State Media Effects Research Laboratory. The journal is ranked internationally and peer-reviewed, and is a seminal source that has contributed strongly to its’ field. These findings contribute significantly to the body of knowledge in terms of data and practical application. Demonstrated within this journal is a suitable methodology, a strong argument with reliable evidence, and a relevant writing style and structure.
We spend on average two hours a day texting and usually the texts are no more than 180 characters, because we want to fit as much information as possible into as small a space by pressing the least amount of buttons. We are the generation that communicates through technology but we have also become the laziest generation, because we claim to not have enough energy or time to put a period at the end of our mainly abbreviated sentence. Basically, we have trained our eyes and brains to read very limited, so when it comes to reading big books we skim through them resulting in not being the best readers. Texting also causes lousy grammar, even with autocorrect we do not improve our vocabulary. Not to mention, the effect it has on our speaking and listening, as young people increasingly become connected to phone screens and avoid not face-to-face contact. As a result, we have become so acquainted to texting language we sometimes mistakenly say the abbreviation out loud, as I am sure everyone has heard the terms OMG, WTF, and LOL; speaking that gibberish out loud and causing other bigger picture issues like communication gaps between generations. Also, listening is another essential tool for learning but since most of the young people today text even during class we end up missing the important information. For these reasons, I think that texting does have a negative effect on
Marywood University’s student Michael Cullington did a research on, if texting affects writing. Texting is an easy and common way to communicate these days, from businesses to teenagers. Everybody uses abbreviation of some words or sentences in texts to quicker the communication. Texting escapes people from making calls. “Textspeak” (130) is a term used for the new language of abbreviations, symbols and acronyms. People argue on the positive and negative affects on students writing skills due to this new language of texting. Truth is that texting does not harm the students writing abilities in anyway.
Many articles today suggest that texting has become standard communication for teens. We rely on it too often, and is now more common than ever. All around the world, people are texting more and talking less daily. We may think that it has no effect on us, but in reality, it is killing our communication and writing skills.
The feedback I received in Module One was helpful it showed that there was more interest in one topic over the other one. Our professor pointed out that teenager are not having much physical interaction with others; which, made me look at my topic of teenage literacy being affected by texting and realizing that texting might be affecting teenagers in so many other ways. This has helped me develop a stronger thesis statement that in turn will make for a good persuasive paper. Some of the key words that were helpful were Teens and texting and teenage literacy and texting. Articles on the Hoffington post, Globalpost, The New York Times and the Shapiro Library have been a great resource for my first stages of my topic search and paper development.
Socializing is not just talking face to face, it’s our ability to interact, learn, and create original thoughts. Technology is hindering today’s youth and their ability to socialize is affecting their capacity to read, write, and communicate. Today’s youth depend on careful considerations for the implementation of technology. Our youth do not have the capability to convey their emotions through the use of technology, understand sadness, happiness or joy through simple text or emails. Communicating through the use of text, chat, and social network sites is lost using abbreviations and slang, inhibiting the use of the Standard English language.