Thinking Out of the Pro-Verbal Response

“…if our goal as writing teachers is to produce…students equipped with literacy skills, then we need…to re-examine our role as teachers of ‘literacy.’”

I am very much liberal with the practices implemented to better teach our children, but I am not interested in the idea of “writing” as becoming an umbrella term designated to the understanding of the world around us, digital, viasual, “dumbed down” for the consumer at all. Such a suggestion that “writing” courses should begin teaching students survival in the modern digital age is absurd. Making a student literate, as its root (“lit”) suggests, should strive to make a student cognizant of her (by the way, for simplicity, I will be using “her” to designate the “his/her” herein with my posts) literary world (past, present, and personal). Making a student digitally literate, technologically savvy, visually aware should be the duty of a separate class—maybe digital comp, or tech studies, or visual lit. It should not be the responsibility of the lit/comp teacher to instill these understandings. These courses should be added to the curriculum if they are of such importance in the “real” world. If literacy and writing are redefined under the umbrella of necessity to understand the upgraded digital world in which we currently live, then we are already beginning to suggest that literature and writing are obsolete. Such a supposition leads one to take note of the current status of such “extra-curriculars” as art and music, both once (though long ago) heralded professions. Is literature and thus writing on the same track? Technology and a consumer-driven society have simplified the necessity for intellectual depth and/or artistic need. Thus, we must modernize lit/comp within the curriculum to mean “read” images, connect sounds, and push buttons?

Also, consider the current availability of “technology” to students. Technology is exactly what it is called—technology. It is always in a changing state, always being upgraded, and therefore always being pulled out of the reach of the lower classes. How are they to be benefited if the lit/comp teacher educates them on how to use something that is perpetually beyond their grasp? One of the greatest values of writing abilities is the affordability of a pencil and any slice of paper, toilet tissue, poster board, or even walls. Thus, the value of written language is always within reach of every student, regardless of socioeconomic class.

I am quite aware that much of what is written above will be both difficult to follow and arguable, but it is the frustration of a lit/comp scholar who feels insulted by the notion of personal futility that brings forth such commentary. In the end, however, I do believe that much of what I said has strong grounds on which to argue for itself and for me.

“…text is linear and visuals are rational.” Uuuuggghhh! To be discussed in class, hopefully.