Composing, while an organic process, is affected by technology in a number of ways. Using computers alters not only the medium in which we compose, but also what we compose. The structure of our sentences is more complex. It also alters how we compose, our thinking process; with word processors, we think as we type, instead of thinking and then writing.
Because students now write in this way, it would be pointless to ignore technology in composition. Therefore, technology should definitely be present in English classrooms. This being said, it would be a shame to see handwriting and print medias disappear, so some exercises should definitely stay in place in order to preserve this medium.
Granted, the rhetorical triangle, the canons of rhetoric, and visual rhetoric are still evident in composition.
While I expanded my initial theory of composition to include visual rhetoric and design, I do not feel as compelled to forcibly incorporate technology.
I think that it is important to acknowledge technology and its increasing dominance over printed text and that students should be exposed to it in the classroom, but I think it is only necessary for the teacher to have access to technology in the classroom. As we've read in class, Yancey states that most teachers and students learn how to use technologies outside of school, so it is not imperative to have it in class- they will not have a disadvantage.
In my experience, most students are on social networking sites or clothes shopping when they are allowed to use their computers, and are not using them for composing purposes anyways. But teachers, on the other hand, can provide the technological enrichment according to how they see fit, and this way students are still exposed to various digital mediums, such as blogs, Youtube videos, Powerpoints, etc. When students do not have technology available they are able to concentrate better and often retain the information better by handwriting it, since composing on a word processor can be pretty mindless. There is more of a connection between the student and the material when technology is not accessible- except for the teacher- and that is why technology in the classroom will not play a huge role in my theory of composition.
So far in this class, my theory of composition has definitely expanded. Technology allows composition to grow into something else entirely. By writing in a word processing program, the author is able to edit their thoughts or argument. Easy edits allow the ideas to develop and become both more clear and more concise. Expression of the author’s self and thoughts benefit from the advancements and the different medium.
Composition in technology also allows an argument to be more appealing to an audience than it would in print. Through the use of a web page, an author can create something which appeals to a certain audience through the choices in style and genre available. Web pages also facilitate learning through the vast choices for organization and availability of other information (i.e. Links within text on Wikipedia pages). Audiences can be drawn in based on the genre the author chooses. For example, Prezi, Youtube, Tumblr, Facebook and other types of online mediums appeal to different crowds and can even create ethos.
For these reasons, I believe technology should be incorporated in the classroom. The possibilities for composition and expression are endless. It’s role in the classroom shouldn’t be placed above the content itself (unless the course calls for that), but I think it should work with the material to help the student learn how to express their ideas and argue effectively in a medium which will only continue to grow.
In my opinion, I believe that technology should definitely be incorporated into the theory of composition. Seeing as it is now a major part of visual rhetoric, It would seem ignorant to ignore it. However, I do not see it as absolutely necessary to make it a huge part of my rhetorical theory. I don’t think it would be wise to allow technology to seep into our “blind spot” but I also do not believe that it should be allowed to be in every facet our of theory of rhetoric. In my theory of composition I believe that ethos should still be the main pillar of the rhetorical triangle. I think that imagery should be a large part of rhetoric because the proper pairing of images and words can completely enhance a text or argument. However, I feel like adding technology to everything we do would take away from the point of “memory.” Instead, I would suggest that we slowly incorporate technology into rhetoric, while maintaining the integrity of the texts. We would accomplish this by not allowing technology to be the backbone of our rhetorical situations/ arguments.
My latest update to my theory of composition, included the importance of visual rhetoric, but I dont feel now that it is entirely required to add the importance of technology to it. Not to discredit the significant role that technology plays in our daily lives, but the fact that it is everywhere doesnt always mean that it has to be. Like Yancey said, both the teachers and students would use the technology outside of the classroom anyways, and Wootten adds that unless we have teachers teaching the technology before the students are using it, than there is no real need for it to be incorporated into the very basics of rhetorical composition.
I feel as though technology in the classroom, if used appropriately, can be beneficial (using videos or images on the screen to present to the class) but if used incorrectly, it can have quite the opposite effect. Even if one has the ability to bring their own laptop everyday to class, more often than not, they are not solely using it for the class materials. It is so easy to get distracted from the teacher and the lesson at hand when you have a computer and the internet to distract you. Then there is the issue of what to do if the ability to have a laptop in class is an issue. It's not fair to the students and schools who dont recieve adequate funding, to then demand that technology become integrated into the classroom. If it is not an option, then you would be putting them at a disadvantage which could have been avoided. So while there might be some pros to having the laptop, I see more cons to outweigh them.
We would be naive to ignore the fact that technology has assumed such a huge role in our daily lives, but I dont feel as though it is required to become part of the foundation of composition.
By reading my past posts on composition, I notice that my theory is reforming and also expanding. While I still believe that rhetoric is the key point to successful composition, it is through different genres that composition takes true form. Composition used to be regarded as the success of writing. While initially I believed composition did refer to the use of text, I have noticed how rhetoric can take form in the skin of visuals and technology. Composition does not just deal with the structure and design of a text, but rather the set up of presentations, articles, texts, pictures and so one. With a new century came new technology, which has reshaped the way composition is being taught. Because technology is such a revolution in many career fields, it has become necessary in the college-level education. It has even become prominent in high school level classes, as well. Though technology is imperative to unfortunately move forward in today's society, "being successful", I believe it has also taken away from the true form of the art of imagination. While it has offered new ways for information to be presented, such as graphics, it has also focused mainly on those attributes, such as graphics, rather than showing a broad range. It is similar to what Yancey discussed: She spoke of a one-eyed hobby horse. We often only focus on just one aspect of the field, rather than taking a look around, which leads us to forget other important areas, and most important the basis of our understanding of composition. As my theory has developed, I still believe that composition deals with the basics of rhetoric, but can also expand through different genres, including texts, visuals, and technology. We just need to remember the basics to keep a focus on the true art form.
My theory of rhetoric and composition has been changing and expanding greatly. However, I’m not entirely sure I would need to modify my whole theory to include technology; it just does not fit neatly into it. Still, in this day and age, I cannot ignore the fact that technology has invaded every aspect of life, and has greatly altered the manner in which we compose forms of rhetoric. Perhaps, rather than trying to fit technology into my existing theory, I can list its obvious consequences as an addendum.
Technology can have a great influence on the style and quality of a composition. New technologies and programs can allow for more impressive digital and visual media pieces, and make them more successful forms of rhetoric. However, other forms of rhetoric may lack quality because of technology and it’s inclusion in education. It has been said that technology has influenced the way we write, in fact, completely changed it, and not for the better in most cases. Our days of writing, revising, and perfecting long, sophisticated sentences by hand are gone; now, we’re prone to typing shorter sentences, while the younger generation has no knowledge of proper grammar and spelling. Our penchants for instant information, vapid entertainment, and all around ease we have when using technology have sapped our creativity and drive for excellence; the result is sub-par rhetorical composition, a result students are learning, and incorporating into their writing styles. Moreover, we are told we need to continue integrating technology into education to keep up with the rapid pace of today’s world and that the students’ future success depends on this.
That being said, I’d like to minimize the use of technology in some classrooms, particularly in basic composition classes. Like Wootten and Baurlein, I feel a slower process is needed to lay the foundation for proper writing and composition. I would not say that technology should be entirely banned from classrooms. Minimized perhaps, and in some cases, not even that. In higher level classes, and those in other fields, technology can be very beneficial. As previously stated, it can help create better forms of visual rhetoric. Unfortunate as it may be, it is an enormous part of today’s world, and it would be foolish to completely ignore it, as Yancey emphasizes. Students can benefit immensely from learning how to use it for their future careers.
Technology is an ever-present force driving our understanding and interest in the field of rhetoric. First was the development of language, then writing, then classrooms, and then new technologies in the classroom. All, at first, must have seemed daunting and, in some ways, intriguing.
I believe that the development of computers and word processors makes the field of composing more stream of consciousness, because people can now write down ideas and revisit them later to create a sentence. Entire articles can be distorted, moved around, or edited in the blink of an eye. A simple sentence can be moved around, experimenting with design and structure, until it appeals to the composer’s senses. While the new developments in technology are assumed to bring literacy to the masses, it is evident that capital is a constraint- the more money buys the better computer. For people with less funds, this can be a bad thing (however, the government is working to fund this.) It is always changing, and it’s necessary to never turn a blind eye to any part of the field. Even the time tested cannons are subject to change. People spend too much time trying to analyze and predict how the changing technologies affects the field of rhetoric, when the changes are going to happen anyways. This is why it's important to include technology into classrooms, because as our world changes, so do our methods of learning.
Before we expanded our definition of rhetoric to include visuals and design, now we must look further and incorporate technology. We think about writing on a keyboard instead of a piece of paper with a pen. Is there much of a difference between writing with technology and paper? I don’t believe so. I think that when brainstorming, technology works to your advantage because typing is so quick, thoughts come out at light speed and small fragments of your argument come together to create a powerful rhetoric. Writing with a pen and a piece of paper is a much slower process. I think deep thought and reflection occur because of the mulling over everything you are writing. But in the end, I believe the same argument is created. It is just at different speeds.
Truthfully, I think that writing without technology is more effective. Technology comes with many distractions such as facebook and games. I think that technology should be used but in a very minimal matter. With no option for distraction, this way students can focus solely on their writing.
Whether individuals agree with it or not or whether they like it or not, technology is a greater influence now then a printed item. My theory of composition thus indeed includes technology. Many believe a pen a paper require time, thinking, etc. but so does something done on a word processor. Only difference now is, it is easier to edit without having to rewrite, revisit easily, and all documents are held on a device. I believe technology has a prominent part in class rooms as it is visually available for the students and easier for a teacher to keep things in order rather than having a million papers to keep a hold of.
I believe technology plays a huge part on the future for the upcoming generations and i also believe one day everything will go from paper to technology. Without learning how to use it in classrooms while learning the course material individuals wouldn't open up their options for future opportunities. Although we only use technology for the basics, i do believe we need in depth lessons so that it could help us out hence why they should be in classrooms.
Including the role technology plays in composition changes my definition slightly. While you still go through the same steps you would use while composing on pen and paper, using technology when composing changes the development of your ideas. When composing on pen and paper you normally take your time trying to develop it and make it flow, while composing with technology you try bang your ideas out no matter how simple then go back and develop it. Using technology also lets your ideas become more complicated or more understated (whichever is necessary for the situation), especially when it comes to visual rhetoric.
Technology should have a role in the classroom. So much of what we do today involves the use of technology especially when it comes to school work or the work place. Teachers should be trained to use the technology appropriately and efficiently in order to teach the students how to use the technology also. Students should be taught to be creative and use the technology to their benefit. They should learn to be original and not just be able to plug information into templates. If we do not teach with technology in the classroom, future generations as well as our generation will never know how to use technology to the fullest and to their advantage. Granted there are some detriments to using technology, for example it is easier to retain information when using pen and paper, but that only applies to when we are taking notes which should be up to the student to choose which way benefits them. When it comes to actually using technology we need to have the technology in the classroom to learn to use it correctly. If we do not have the technology present in the classroom we will not learn how to use it properly.
Technology changes how individuals compose in all aspects of English and literature. Before my knowledge of composing was based the mental process of the individual. There were steps that an individual had to follow in order compose successfully. Technology takes composing a few steps back because computers help the individual composing. The way computers help the individual composing is by making the brainstorming process a non-factor, this is because search engines like Bing makes this very easy. Also, writing the information down is a lot easier with Microsoft Word, before technology and literature were linked the only way to gather information was by writing it down. Technology takes away from the composing process because there is no distinct method used to do research when using a computer. There are so many different tools used to research info on a computer. Technology is used differently by students and instructors, I feel like instructors use computers to compose thoughts they have already done their own research on. Students use computers to do everything in order to compose, they don’t do their own research. Computers and other types of technology should be used in the classroom because students identify with this tool better than textbooks. The only provision I would make with computers in the class room is having a cable that overrides the student’s computer when plugged in. This would prevent students from surfing the web while in class. Computers would also eliminate the use of paper. Now a day’s most rhetorical discourse in a class room setting is based off of things on the web or technology in class so this would be a good tool for teachers as well.
Technology has been apart of composition for many years. Even the printing press was an advanced technology of its time and lead to many theories of rhetoric. In many ways digital technology does the same, There are prose and cons as there were to the printing press. The pros are that everyone can do it and everyone can share their opinion and the cons are that their maybe some really bed ideas and a lot of junk because everyone can do it, but that is to be expected. My theories of composition stay the same because of its basic ideas, but I do believe that digital technology can be used in my methods of composition.
As Johnson says, digital technology has "changed our thinking", I am able to agree to some extent. I do believe that composing on a computer people tend to not use steps they take when composing on paper. With digital technology we can skip steps and that maybe bad or good to some people, but I tend to believe whatever makes the composer most happy they should stick with what they believe. So I do believe in bringing in digital media to my composition theory, but only if the composer believes it will help them. I don't think it will change any of my ideas because my theory was already pretty basic.
My theory of composing has not changed at all. I still believe we should stick to Aristotle’s theory of composing using the five stages of composing while incorporating human thought and expression and how an audience might respond. What has been changed or is now being considered is the medium in which I compose. As a child in school I used a pen and paper to write and a book to research but now, as an adult, I use a computer. I really don’t know anyone who does not use a computer to compose. Whether it be just to write or to research for the composition, we all use technology.In the reading by Bauerlein, the effectiveness of technology in the classroom comes into question. But it cannot be denied that technology is here and it cannot be avoided.
My theory of composition has changed so radically since our last blog on the subject. I used to think that in order to compose a good piece of literature, you had to either include written (textual) or visual (some form of aesthetic media) rhetoric in your work. I completely forgot to mention things such as genre, and technology. But that’s because I was entirely unaware of the crucial role that both play in the theory of composition. The written and typed word has two completely different effects on the reader. So much so that they, meaning the word, have been placed into their own genre. We spent a good deal of time talking about technology and its effect on the student. And as for the question of the role that technology should or should not play in the classroom, I completely believe that they currently do play, and should continue to play a huge role in the learning environment. However some conditions do need to be met if technology is going to continue to be taught at such an increasing level. I’ve learned that in order to teach something you need to completely understand it, and that’s not something that all teachers know how to do, at least not as well as the generation that they are instructing.
Like I stated in my last “theories of composition blog,” audience, collaboration, form, style, memory, process, delivery and rhetoric is necessary in composing. I then came to the conclusion that visual rhetoric was equally apart of composition since rhetoric is “all language,” which brings me to technology. Technology has expanded so much over the years. Last night I was watching a rerun of a show that I use to watch when I was younger and the mother just bought their first computer for their son because the mother felt it would help her son’s education. On the other hand the father disagreed and thought it would only bring trouble, he believed that the son would not use the computer for educational purposes. In the end of the show the father came to terms with the mother and decided to let their son keep the computer because he realized how great technology really is. Technology is a major part of composition. Word processors on computers provide a more effective essay, article, research paper etc. It does not matter if you have sloppy had writing when typing on a keyboard; you can choose whatever professional or unprofessional font that you desire. If you are typing a paper and looking for a more interesting word to use all you have to do is click the word and a bar will come up for you to choose a synonym, a more efficient way to boost tour writing. Technology also plays a part in composition because it deals a lot with visual rhetoric. Everything digital, plus any genre that is print took technology to make it. It is important to use technology in the classroom because like I said earlier on that it expanded so much over the years and will only continue to expand more rapid and with more genres. I do not think that the classroom should be all technology all the time, but there needs to be a balance because with the way technology is growing if we do not use it in education we will be left behind.
As with before, my previous theory of rhetoric lacked the new information as I was ignorant to its applicability to rhetoric. In this case, technology stakes a place in my personal theory of rhetoric. The genre by which rhetoric exists is one of the numerous important aspects of rhetoric. Technology covers seemingly all of the genres through which one can compose rhetorically. My general theory of rhetoric remains essentially the same regardless. Meeting the five canons of rhetoric is still immensely necessary, and kairos is still understressed compared to the importance placed on other parts of rhetoric. The use of technology in classrooms is a widely debated topic of rhetoric, and in my theory is considered essential. Technology use needs to be taught, and as with English, is best taught through application. Requiring technology use for a grade improves technological literacy, which should always be considered highly important given its roles in the vast majority of career fields.
Technology has extended Rhetoric across and ever-expanding ocean of information that we call the internet. Digital implementations of rhetoric and what it stands for manifest as a new genre for rhetoric, a new avenue for its distribution. But to me, rhetoric and composing remains the same. It is fundamentally identical at its core (with the 5 canons and the 3 rhetorical appeals). Technology is just another way to implement rhetoric and composition into our world. In regards to the classroom, the implementation of technology and its criticisms, in a sense, is a Catch-22. To constantly develop our educational system, it becomes necessary to use technology to teach old concepts for the digital generation that is arising from the 1990s and the 2000s. However, with the advent of any new technology or concept, there is ALWAYS room for abuse. People undoubtedly go on Facebook and text in class, but one can argue that it's not technology that creates these abuses, it is the people themselves. Before texting people passed notes in class...
Composing, while an organic process, is affected by technology in a number of ways. Using computers alters not only the medium in which we compose, but also what we compose. The structure of our sentences is more complex. It also alters how we compose, our thinking process; with word processors, we think as we type, instead of thinking and then writing.
ReplyDeleteBecause students now write in this way, it would be pointless to ignore technology in composition. Therefore, technology should definitely be present in English classrooms. This being said, it would be a shame to see handwriting and print medias disappear, so some exercises should definitely stay in place in order to preserve this medium.
Granted, the rhetorical triangle, the canons of rhetoric, and visual rhetoric are still evident in composition.
While I expanded my initial theory of composition to include visual rhetoric and design, I do not feel as compelled to forcibly incorporate technology.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is important to acknowledge technology and its increasing dominance over printed text and that students should be exposed to it in the classroom, but I think it is only necessary for the teacher to have access to technology in the classroom. As we've read in class, Yancey states that most teachers and students learn how to use technologies outside of school, so it is not imperative to have it in class- they will not have a disadvantage.
In my experience, most students are on social networking sites or clothes shopping when they are allowed to use their computers, and are not using them for composing purposes anyways. But teachers, on the other hand, can provide the technological enrichment according to how they see fit, and this way students are still exposed to various digital mediums, such as blogs, Youtube videos, Powerpoints, etc. When students do not have technology available they are able to concentrate better and often retain the information better by handwriting it, since composing on a word processor can be pretty mindless. There is more of a connection between the student and the material when technology is not accessible- except for the teacher- and that is why technology in the classroom will not play a huge role in my theory of composition.
So far in this class, my theory of composition has definitely expanded. Technology allows composition to grow into something else entirely. By writing in a word processing program, the author is able to edit their thoughts or argument. Easy edits allow the ideas to develop and become both more clear and more concise. Expression of the author’s self and thoughts benefit from the advancements and the different medium.
ReplyDeleteComposition in technology also allows an argument to be more appealing to an audience than it would in print. Through the use of a web page, an author can create something which appeals to a certain audience through the choices in style and genre available. Web pages also facilitate learning through the vast choices for organization and availability of other information (i.e. Links within text on Wikipedia pages). Audiences can be drawn in based on the genre the author chooses. For example, Prezi, Youtube, Tumblr, Facebook and other types of online mediums appeal to different crowds and can even create ethos.
For these reasons, I believe technology should be incorporated in the classroom. The possibilities for composition and expression are endless. It’s role in the classroom shouldn’t be placed above the content itself (unless the course calls for that), but I think it should work with the material to help the student learn how to express their ideas and argue effectively in a medium which will only continue to grow.
In my opinion, I believe that technology should definitely be incorporated into the theory of composition. Seeing as it is now a major part of visual rhetoric, It would seem ignorant to ignore it. However, I do not see it as absolutely necessary to make it a huge part of my rhetorical theory. I don’t think it would be wise to allow technology to seep into our “blind spot” but I also do not believe that it should be allowed to be in every facet our of theory of rhetoric. In my theory of composition I believe that ethos should still be the main pillar of the rhetorical triangle. I think that imagery should be a large part of rhetoric because the proper pairing of images and words can completely enhance a text or argument. However, I feel like adding technology to everything we do would take away from the point of “memory.”
ReplyDeleteInstead, I would suggest that we slowly incorporate technology into rhetoric, while maintaining the integrity of the texts. We would accomplish this by not allowing technology to be the backbone of our rhetorical situations/ arguments.
My latest update to my theory of composition, included the importance of visual rhetoric, but I dont feel now that it is entirely required to add the importance of technology to it. Not to discredit the significant role that technology plays in our daily lives, but the fact that it is everywhere doesnt always mean that it has to be. Like Yancey said, both the teachers and students would use the technology outside of the classroom anyways, and Wootten adds that unless we have teachers teaching the technology before the students are using it, than there is no real need for it to be incorporated into the very basics of rhetorical composition.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though technology in the classroom, if used appropriately, can be beneficial (using videos or images on the screen to present to the class) but if used incorrectly, it can have quite the opposite effect. Even if one has the ability to bring their own laptop everyday to class, more often than not, they are not solely using it for the class materials. It is so easy to get distracted from the teacher and the lesson at hand when you have a computer and the internet to distract you. Then there is the issue of what to do if the ability to have a laptop in class is an issue. It's not fair to the students and schools who dont recieve adequate funding, to then demand that technology become integrated into the classroom. If it is not an option, then you would be putting them at a disadvantage which could have been avoided. So while there might be some pros to having the laptop, I see more cons to outweigh them.
We would be naive to ignore the fact that technology has assumed such a huge role in our daily lives, but I dont feel as though it is required to become part of the foundation of composition.
By reading my past posts on composition, I notice that my theory is reforming and also expanding. While I still believe that rhetoric is the key point to successful composition, it is through different genres that composition takes true form.
ReplyDeleteComposition used to be regarded as the success of writing. While initially I believed composition did refer to the use of text, I have noticed how rhetoric can take form in the skin of visuals and technology. Composition does not just deal with the structure and design of a text, but rather the set up of presentations, articles, texts, pictures and so one.
With a new century came new technology, which has reshaped the way composition is being taught. Because technology is such a revolution in many career fields, it has become necessary in the college-level education. It has even become prominent in high school level classes, as well. Though technology is imperative to unfortunately move forward in today's society, "being successful", I believe it has also taken away from the true form of the art of imagination. While it has offered new ways for information to be presented, such as graphics, it has also focused mainly on those attributes, such as graphics, rather than showing a broad range. It is similar to what Yancey discussed: She spoke of a one-eyed hobby horse. We often only focus on just one aspect of the field, rather than taking a look around, which leads us to forget other important areas, and most important the basis of our understanding of composition.
As my theory has developed, I still believe that composition deals with the basics of rhetoric, but can also expand through different genres, including texts, visuals, and technology. We just need to remember the basics to keep a focus on the true art form.
My theory of rhetoric and composition has been changing and expanding greatly. However, I’m not entirely sure I would need to modify my whole theory to include technology; it just does not fit neatly into it. Still, in this day and age, I cannot ignore the fact that technology has invaded every aspect of life, and has greatly altered the manner in which we compose forms of rhetoric. Perhaps, rather than trying to fit technology into my existing theory, I can list its obvious consequences as an addendum.
ReplyDeleteTechnology can have a great influence on the style and quality of a composition. New technologies and programs can allow for more impressive digital and visual media pieces, and make them more successful forms of rhetoric. However, other forms of rhetoric may lack quality because of technology and it’s inclusion in education. It has been said that technology has influenced the way we write, in fact, completely changed it, and not for the better in most cases. Our days of writing, revising, and perfecting long, sophisticated sentences by hand are gone; now, we’re prone to typing shorter sentences, while the younger generation has no knowledge of proper grammar and spelling. Our penchants for instant information, vapid entertainment, and all around ease we have when using technology have sapped our creativity and drive for excellence; the result is sub-par rhetorical composition, a result students are learning, and incorporating into their writing styles. Moreover, we are told we need to continue integrating technology into education to keep up with the rapid pace of today’s world and that the students’ future success depends on this.
That being said, I’d like to minimize the use of technology in some classrooms, particularly in basic composition classes. Like Wootten and Baurlein, I feel a slower process is needed to lay the foundation for proper writing and composition. I would not say that technology should be entirely banned from classrooms. Minimized perhaps, and in some cases, not even that. In higher level classes, and those in other fields, technology can be very beneficial. As previously stated, it can help create better forms of visual rhetoric. Unfortunate as it may be, it is an enormous part of today’s world, and it would be foolish to completely ignore it, as Yancey emphasizes. Students can benefit immensely from learning how to use it for their future careers.
Technology is an ever-present force driving our understanding and interest in the field of rhetoric. First was the development of language, then writing, then classrooms, and then new technologies in the classroom. All, at first, must have seemed daunting and, in some ways, intriguing.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the development of computers and word processors makes the field of composing more stream of consciousness, because people can now write down ideas and revisit them later to create a sentence. Entire articles can be distorted, moved around, or edited in the blink of an eye. A simple sentence can be moved around, experimenting with design and structure, until it appeals to the composer’s senses. While the new developments in technology are assumed to bring literacy to the masses, it is evident that capital is a constraint- the more money buys the better computer. For people with less funds, this can be a bad thing (however, the government is working to fund this.)
It is always changing, and it’s necessary to never turn a blind eye to any part of the field. Even the time tested cannons are subject to change. People spend too much time trying to analyze and predict how the changing technologies affects the field of rhetoric, when the changes are going to happen anyways. This is why it's important to include technology into classrooms, because as our world changes, so do our methods of learning.
Before we expanded our definition of rhetoric to include visuals and design, now we must look further and incorporate technology. We think about writing on a keyboard instead of a piece of paper with a pen. Is there much of a difference between writing with technology and paper? I don’t believe so. I think that when brainstorming, technology works to your advantage because typing is so quick, thoughts come out at light speed and small fragments of your argument come together to create a powerful rhetoric. Writing with a pen and a piece of paper is a much slower process. I think deep thought and reflection occur because of the mulling over everything you are writing. But in the end, I believe the same argument is created. It is just at different speeds.
ReplyDeleteTruthfully, I think that writing without technology is more effective. Technology comes with many distractions such as facebook and games. I think that technology should be used but in a very minimal matter. With no option for distraction, this way students can focus solely on their writing.
Whether individuals agree with it or not or whether they like it or not, technology is a greater influence now then a printed item. My theory of composition thus indeed includes technology. Many believe a pen a paper require time, thinking, etc. but so does something done on a word processor. Only difference now is, it is easier to edit without having to rewrite, revisit easily, and all documents are held on a device. I believe technology has a prominent part in class rooms as it is visually available for the students and easier for a teacher to keep things in order rather than having a million papers to keep a hold of.
ReplyDeleteI believe technology plays a huge part on the future for the upcoming generations and i also believe one day everything will go from paper to technology. Without learning how to use it in classrooms while learning the course material individuals wouldn't open up their options for future opportunities. Although we only use technology for the basics, i do believe we need in depth lessons so that it could help us out hence why they should be in classrooms.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIncluding the role technology plays in composition changes my definition slightly. While you still go through the same steps you would use while composing on pen and paper, using technology when composing changes the development of your ideas. When composing on pen and paper you normally take your time trying to develop it and make it flow, while composing with technology you try bang your ideas out no matter how simple then go back and develop it. Using technology also lets your ideas become more complicated or more understated (whichever is necessary for the situation), especially when it comes to visual rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteTechnology should have a role in the classroom. So much of what we do today involves the use of technology especially when it comes to school work or the work place. Teachers should be trained to use the technology appropriately and efficiently in order to teach the students how to use the technology also. Students should be taught to be creative and use the technology to their benefit. They should learn to be original and not just be able to plug information into templates. If we do not teach with technology in the classroom, future generations as well as our generation will never know how to use technology to the fullest and to their advantage. Granted there are some detriments to using technology, for example it is easier to retain information when using pen and paper, but that only applies to when we are taking notes which should be up to the student to choose which way benefits them. When it comes to actually using technology we need to have the technology in the classroom to learn to use it correctly. If we do not have the technology present in the classroom we will not learn how to use it properly.
Technology changes how individuals compose in all aspects of English and literature. Before my knowledge of composing was based the mental process of the individual. There were steps that an individual had to follow in order compose successfully. Technology takes composing a few steps back because computers help the individual composing. The way computers help the individual composing is by making the brainstorming process a non-factor, this is because search engines like Bing makes this very easy. Also, writing the information down is a lot easier with Microsoft Word, before technology and literature were linked the only way to gather information was by writing it down. Technology takes away from the composing process because there is no distinct method used to do research when using a computer. There are so many different tools used to research info on a computer. Technology is used differently by students and instructors, I feel like instructors use computers to compose thoughts they have already done their own research on. Students use computers to do everything in order to compose, they don’t do their own research. Computers and other types of technology should be used in the classroom because students identify with this tool better than textbooks. The only provision I would make with computers in the class room is having a cable that overrides the student’s computer when plugged in. This would prevent students from surfing the web while in class. Computers would also eliminate the use of paper. Now a day’s most rhetorical discourse in a class room setting is based off of things on the web or technology in class so this would be a good tool for teachers as well.
ReplyDeleteTechnology has been apart of composition for many years. Even the printing press was an advanced technology of its time and lead to many theories of rhetoric. In many ways digital technology does the same, There are prose and cons as there were to the printing press. The pros are that everyone can do it and everyone can share their opinion and the cons are that their maybe some really bed ideas and a lot of junk because everyone can do it, but that is to be expected. My theories of composition stay the same because of its basic ideas, but I do believe that digital technology can be used in my methods of composition.
ReplyDeleteAs Johnson says, digital technology has "changed our thinking", I am able to agree to some extent. I do believe that composing on a computer people tend to not use steps they take when composing on paper. With digital technology we can skip steps and that maybe bad or good to some people, but I tend to believe whatever makes the composer most happy they should stick with what they believe. So I do believe in bringing in digital media to my composition theory, but only if the composer believes it will help them. I don't think it will change any of my ideas because my theory was already pretty basic.
My theory of composing has not changed at all. I still believe we should stick to Aristotle’s theory of composing using the five stages of composing while incorporating human thought and expression and how an audience might respond. What has been changed or is now being considered is the medium in which I compose.
ReplyDeleteAs a child in school I used a pen and paper to write and a book to research but now, as an adult, I use a computer. I really don’t know anyone who does not use a computer to compose. Whether it be just to write or to research for the composition, we all use technology.In the reading by Bauerlein, the effectiveness of technology in the classroom comes into question. But it cannot be denied that technology is here and it cannot be avoided.
My theory of composition has changed so radically since our last blog on the subject. I used to think that in order to compose a good piece of literature, you had to either include written (textual) or visual (some form of aesthetic media) rhetoric in your work. I completely forgot to mention things such as genre, and technology. But that’s because I was entirely unaware of the crucial role that both play in the theory of composition. The written and typed word has two completely different effects on the reader. So much so that they, meaning the word, have been placed into their own genre. We spent a good deal of time talking about technology and its effect on the student. And as for the question of the role that technology should or should not play in the classroom, I completely believe that they currently do play, and should continue to play a huge role in the learning environment. However some conditions do need to be met if technology is going to continue to be taught at such an increasing level. I’ve learned that in order to teach something you need to completely understand it, and that’s not something that all teachers know how to do, at least not as well as the generation that they are instructing.
ReplyDeleteLike I stated in my last “theories of composition blog,” audience, collaboration, form, style, memory, process, delivery and rhetoric is necessary in composing. I then came to the conclusion that visual rhetoric was equally apart of composition since rhetoric is “all language,” which brings me to technology. Technology has expanded so much over the years. Last night I was watching a rerun of a show that I use to watch when I was younger and the mother just bought their first computer for their son because the mother felt it would help her son’s education. On the other hand the father disagreed and thought it would only bring trouble, he believed that the son would not use the computer for educational purposes. In the end of the show the father came to terms with the mother and decided to let their son keep the computer because he realized how great technology really is. Technology is a major part of composition. Word processors on computers provide a more effective essay, article, research paper etc. It does not matter if you have sloppy had writing when typing on a keyboard; you can choose whatever professional or unprofessional font that you desire. If you are typing a paper and looking for a more interesting word to use all you have to do is click the word and a bar will come up for you to choose a synonym, a more efficient way to boost tour writing. Technology also plays a part in composition because it deals a lot with visual rhetoric. Everything digital, plus any genre that is print took technology to make it. It is important to use technology in the classroom because like I said earlier on that it expanded so much over the years and will only continue to expand more rapid and with more genres. I do not think that the classroom should be all technology all the time, but there needs to be a balance because with the way technology is growing if we do not use it in education we will be left behind.
ReplyDeleteAs with before, my previous theory of rhetoric lacked the new information as I was ignorant to its applicability to rhetoric. In this case, technology stakes a place in my personal theory of rhetoric.
ReplyDeleteThe genre by which rhetoric exists is one of the numerous important aspects of rhetoric. Technology covers seemingly all of the genres through which one can compose rhetorically. My general theory of rhetoric remains essentially the same regardless. Meeting the five canons of rhetoric is still immensely necessary, and kairos is still understressed compared to the importance placed on other parts of rhetoric.
The use of technology in classrooms is a widely debated topic of rhetoric, and in my theory is considered essential. Technology use needs to be taught, and as with English, is best taught through application. Requiring technology use for a grade improves technological literacy, which should always be considered highly important given its roles in the vast majority of career fields.
Technology has extended Rhetoric across and ever-expanding ocean of information that we call the internet. Digital implementations of rhetoric and what it stands for manifest as a new genre for rhetoric, a new avenue for its distribution. But to me, rhetoric and composing remains the same. It is fundamentally identical at its core (with the 5 canons and the 3 rhetorical appeals). Technology is just another way to implement rhetoric and composition into our world.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to the classroom, the implementation of technology and its criticisms, in a sense, is a Catch-22. To constantly develop our educational system, it becomes necessary to use technology to teach old concepts for the digital generation that is arising from the 1990s and the 2000s. However, with the advent of any new technology or concept, there is ALWAYS room for abuse. People undoubtedly go on Facebook and text in class, but one can argue that it's not technology that creates these abuses, it is the people themselves. Before texting people passed notes in class...