Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Education News Technology

Children Using Technology Have Better Literacy Skills 146

eldavojohn writes "A UK study of three thousand children aged nine to sixteen suggests something that may not come as a shock to geeks: using technology increases a child's core literary skills. As Researcher Obvious put it, 'The more forms of communications children use the stronger their core literary skills.' And for those of us worried about a world of 'tl;dr' and 'Y U H8n?' the research claims that 'text speech' does not damage literacy. The biggest shortcoming of this research is that it appears the children graded their own writing in that their methodology was an online survey designed to ask the children which technology they use and then follow up with asking them how well they write to determine which children have better literacy skills."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Children Using Technology Have Better Literacy Skills

Comments Filter:
  • Huge Fail (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Monkeedude1212 ( 1560403 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:05PM (#30317272) Journal

    I can say I'm amazing at intercourse, but it doesn't make it so.

  • Online Survey? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by MozeeToby ( 1163751 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:13PM (#30317396)

    An online survey isn't science, (If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane). The summary itself exposes the falacy right out ("...may not come as a shock to geeks"). The geeks are the ones more likely to be filling out an online survey in the first place. Not to mention the obvious class differences between those who have ready access to lots of technology vs those who don't and what that implies about their neighborhoods and schools. There's all kinds of variables that arent being controlled for.

  • by peter303 ( 12292 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:21PM (#30317570)
    I had a period of time between school and the rise of blogging where I didn't write as much. And I guess my writing skills languished. I think they've improved now. I probably dont write long essays or papers as well because I haven't been doing that in a long time.
  • by Red Flayer ( 890720 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:23PM (#30317588) Journal

    rofl omg i been usin tech 4 a looooooong time since i wuz a kid now i read good but my boss tellz me not to send emails and memos nemore cuz no1 can read em lol!!!1

    You laugh, but *I'm* the one stuck writing all the memos for admin, HR, and accounting... because out of those who speak English well, I'm the only damn person who can write.

    Last week HR submitted a trouble ticket for me to write the invitation to the office holiday party... and I'm not even part of IT! The IT head printed out the ticket and brought it to my office. We laughed, but deep down inside, I wanted to cry.

  • by ArbitraryDescriptor ( 1257752 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:29PM (#30317686)

    Of the children who neither blogged nor used social network sites, 47% rated their writing as "good" or "very good", while 61% of the bloggers and 56% of the social networkers said the same.

    It is baffling as to why anyone even bothered running this survey. Even if we assume that these kids are not intentionally lying, studies have shown that people generally tend to rate themselves as above average. To paraphrase these studies:

    Idiots do not realize they are stupid. (If you don't know there are 2 homophones of "there," then you won't know if you're using it wrong.)
    Exceptionally intelligent types underestimate how much smarter they are than Joe-average ("I can't be the only one who thought that was easy")
    And Joe-average tends to think he's Joe-average+1. (No one wants to be average.)

  • Re:Seriously? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by war4peace ( 1628283 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @06:42PM (#30317864)
    ...furthermore, if the survey was something like this:
    "Do you enjoy writing? Click on the appropriate checkmark: [ ]Yes | [ ]No"
    then all I can say is... "d00d, wtf".
    I self-taught to be so attentive when writing and always try to be as exact as possible (although English is not my native language). It's a matter of pride, I confess, but it helped me a lot in the past. My native language contains special characters (îâ) which are used by maybe 1-2% of people while writing on the Internet, mainly because localized keyboards are hard to find and unappealing to most. Even I don't use a localized keyboard but use the OS-defined layout for my native language as default. learning it was pretty difficult, because back when I made contact with computers localization was unavailable. So after years of using English alphabet it was a pain to switch. Nevertheless, I pulled it off and now I'm proficient (albeit not very fast) in writing correctly in both English and my native language.
    Why do I say that here? Well, I'm having difficulties understanding what some people write to me; they're using mangled words, numbers instead of letters, and even if in most mild cases of language mutilation I can get what they mean, the more extreme cases leave me perplexed. "I dn knw i r b @ hom 2morw" made no sense to me until properly translated :) - and most of that... can I say "crap"? comes from teenagers. Amazingly enough, this metalanguage has no secrets to them, but my petty attempts to understand them and respond back to them in the same style only amuses them.
    So please allow me to say that I seriously doubt this "study".
  • Re:Huge Fail (Score:2, Interesting)

    by YayaY ( 837729 ) on Thursday December 03, 2009 @08:59PM (#30319434)

    Dunning-Kruger effect :

    The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which "people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it". The unskilled therefore suffer from illusory superiority, rating their own ability as above average, much higher than actuality; by contrast the highly skilled underrate their abilities, suffering from illusory inferiority. This leads to a perverse result where less competent people will rate their own ability higher than more competent people. It also explains why actual competence may weaken self-confidence because competent individuals falsely assume that others have an equivalent understanding. "Thus, the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect [wikipedia.org]

  • Facts? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by TapeCutter ( 624760 ) * on Friday December 04, 2009 @03:14AM (#30321596) Journal
    "Most of the others are complaining about the fact that the results are self-selected."

    Is that really a fact? I pointed out in another post that the survey was not intended to measure literacy. Reading the abstract again I also doubt they were self selecting. Here is the relevant quote with highlights...

    The key objectives of this survey were therefore: to explore how much young people enjoy writing, what type of writing they engage in, how good at writing they think they are, what they think about writing and what the role of technology is in young people's writing. This report outlines the findings from 3001 pupils aged 9-16 from England and Scotland, who completed an online survey in May 2009.

    Now someone might want to dig into the pdf report and contradict me but the word "pupils" seems to indicate they were asked to fill this out in class time, ie: not self selected.

    I know that it's geek herasy not to burn social scientists at the stake but I'm a bit of a softy.

I find you lack of faith in the forth dithturbing. - Darse ("Darth") Vader

Working...