Skip to main content

Home/ DGL 2.4 Debate Team C/ This is what I have let me know what you think.
Amber Linnemeyer Thompson

This is what I have let me know what you think. - 31 views

Debate DGL Team C

started by Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #1 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    David is finishing up a closing statement so this is a draft and incomplete. Let me know your thoughts before I turn it in. I add in some of the links we didn't really talk about for team that were good for supporting their side. So please read those thoroughly so I don't misrepresent the teams views. It still subject to change if you would like. I did try to encompass everyone's views into the document and made direct references to what was stated here.
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #2 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    2.4 Disinformation Debate
    "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills
    Team C Conclusion

    Our job as team C was to review two separate arguments debating the following statement and decide whose argument was best. "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the internet), has contributed to an increase in literacy skills." In addition to reading Team A's(support) and Team B's(refute) statements, we also looked over each teams research. Although we feel both teams did an incredible job with their statements and their research we could only choose one winner. But before we get to that, here are some things we took into consideration when making our final decision.
    For Team A, some of the links sources we really felt had good support for their statement were as follows. First "Videos, Games Help Preschool Literacy, Study Says", this article talks about various ways you can utilize and harness learning through hands on experience with different games. Helping kids learn a variety of learning styles while strengthen basic skills. Second "Has Social Media Improved Child Literacy" the majority of the 3000 children in the study had good or better than good literacy skills due to their text messaging, online blogs, and other technological interactions. Third "Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children's literacy attainment?" students who used more abbreviated texts had higher verbal reasoning scores, then it seems like it may help. Phonetically speaking, that is what text-isms do, phonetically spell words increasing literacy in terms of letter sound comprehension. Fourth "Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies", which speaks of several ways the internet can be used and the way we interact with technology in meaningful ways. It cites multiple pieces of literature supporting it material from the past few years.
    For Team B there are also several good articles. First," What Are the Positive & Negative Effects of Using Technology to Communicate?", in this article it talks about several well used technologies we all use listing how poor communication in written form can lead to misunderstanding and confusion. The second article, "Negative Effect of Texting in the Classroom", students are often putting short hand words, improper punctuation and capitalizations in their writings showing poor literacy. This was also shown in "Texting, Twitter contributing to student's poor grammar skills". Another for the fourth, "The Internet's Damaging Effects on Literacy" this article show the decline in reading comprehension and students inability to be able to tell what is good information or bad. Lastly, "Is Technology Producing a Decline in Critical Thinking and Analysis", for this article shows that students are more visual and less print literate and without taking the time to read print, critical thinking, analysis, imagination and reflection are not engaged or developed.
    All of these articles we all felt really strengthened their arguments. But there were some things that we felt weakened their argument or were really not showing literacy skills. Team A used "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect", we didn't like this source because it was incomplete referencing a book but without the complete text we could really see all the information. For Team B we all felt like some of the sources speaking of social behaviors or what happens when technology is not used properly, such as an "addiction", threw their presentation off track. They did not really relate to literacy.
    Our conclusion, after researching both sides and everything they presented we decided that Team A had the better argument. Both teams did amazing presentations and great write ups. Team A just had a clearer representation of "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills".
  • Jeff Massery
    #3 Jeff Massery on 22 Apr 13
     
    One line seems a little off to me.
    Team A used "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect", we didn't like this source because it was incomplete referencing a book but without the complete text we could really see all the information.

    I think it should say "an incomplete referencing of a book". Or you could put a period so the sentence isn't so long so it reads something like this:
    Team A used "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect", we didn't like this source because it was incomplete. The link references a book but without the complete text we could really see all the information.

    The only other thing is I would use the video game violence somewhere. Maybe sneak it in to a sentence to already have like "For Team B we all felt like some of the sources speaking of social behaviors or what happens when technology is not used properly, such as an "addiction" and video game violence," .

    I just feel like that was the main point they tried to make in the second half of their paper and that's what seemed to throw us all off.

    Let me know what you guys think. My grammar isn't the best so if I am just making up nonsense then let me know. Other than those two things I think the paper is great.
  • Jeff Massery
    #4 Jeff Massery on 22 Apr 13
     
    Whoops one of my sentences got cut off.
    "For Team B we all felt like some of the sources speaking of social behaviors or what happens when technology is not used properly, such as an "addiction" and video game violence, threw their presentation off track. They did not really relate to literacy."
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #6 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    I fixed that sentence, and I did add video game violence, here is the amended version. Let me know if it reads better. I also added all the participants to the end so speak up if I missed someone.

    2.4 Disinformation Debate
    "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills
    Team C Conclusion

    Our job as team C was to review two separate arguments debating the following statement and decide whose argument was best. "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the internet), has contributed to an increase in literacy skills." In addition to reading Team A's(support) and Team B's(refute) statements, we also looked over each teams research. Although we feel both teams did an incredible job with their statements and their research we could only choose one winner. But before we get to that, here are some things we took into consideration when making our final decision.
    For Team A, some of the links sources we really felt had good support for their statement were as follows. First "Videos, Games Help Preschool Literacy, Study Says", this article talks about various ways you can utilize and harness learning through hands on experience with different games. Helping kids learn a variety of learning styles while strengthen basic skills. Second "Has Social Media Improved Child Literacy" the majority of the 3000 children in the study had good or better than good literacy skills due to their text messaging, online blogs, and other technological interactions. Third "Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children's literacy attainment?" students who used more abbreviated texts had higher verbal reasoning scores, then it seems like it may help. Phonetically speaking, that is what text-isms do, phonetically spell words increasing literacy in terms of letter sound comprehension. Fourth "Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies", which speaks of several ways the internet can be used and the way we interact with technology in meaningful ways. It cites multiple pieces of literature supporting it material from the past few years.
    For Team B there are also several good articles. First," What Are the Positive & Negative Effects of Using Technology to Communicate?", in this article it talks about several well used technologies we all use listing how poor communication in written form can lead to misunderstanding and confusion. The second article, "Negative Effect of Texting in the Classroom", students are often putting short hand words, improper punctuation and capitalizations in their writings showing poor literacy. This was also shown in "Texting, Twitter contributing to student's poor grammar skills". Another for the fourth, "The Internet's Damaging Effects on Literacy" this article show the decline in reading comprehension and students inability to be able to tell what is good information or bad. Lastly, "Is Technology Producing a Decline in Critical Thinking and Analysis", for this article shows that students are more visual and less print literate and without taking the time to read print, critical thinking, analysis, imagination and reflection are not engaged or developed.
    All of these articles we all felt really strengthened their arguments. But there were some things that we felt weakened their argument or were really not showing literacy skills. Team A used "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect", we didn't like this source because it was incomplete referencing a book. Without the complete text we couldn't see all the information. For Team B we all felt like some of the sources speaking of social behaviors or what happens when technology is not used properly, such as an "addiction" and video game violence, threw their presentation off track. They did not really relate to literacy.
    Our conclusion, after researching both sides and everything they presented we decided that Team A had the better argument. Both teams did amazing presentations and great write ups. Team A just had a clearer representation of "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills".



    Participants of Team C
    Ju-Lia Dukes
    David Gerard
    Shamel Joe
    Jeffery Massery
    Brian Turner
    Amber Linnemeyer
  • david gerard
    #7 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    I will need the links that support the best case, also the diigo link, and who contributed to the work. I will then send it off to Kris. I am in the process of writing the final statement.
  • david gerard
    #8 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    Here is my final statement;

    In closing, both teams have provided sufficient information to present their cases, however Team B really did not find any hard evidence to fully support their case. We strongly felt that Team B went off track with their refute; With the evidence they found about the negative aspects of what their topic was, instead they focused on another area, other than "Literacy", as opposed to what they had discussed. So with this conclusion it is with our best interest that Team A had won the debate as they stayed on track with their topic. The ways in which children these days have new ways of "Literacy" communications in everyday life, using games, videos and television as a learning tool.

    Let me know if I hit or missed the subject(s).

    Thanks,

    Dave
  • david gerard
    #9 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    I did paste that re-edit in a format, separating the paragraphs, also added a section for the links supporting each case.
  • Brian Turner
    #10 Brian Turner on 22 Apr 13
     
    The one sentence "It cites multiple pieces of literature supporting it material from the past few years." Their should be an S after it. The rest of it looks good. Thanks for putting this together.
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #11 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    Do you need me to put in reference numbers and then reference links at the bottom?
  • david gerard
    #12 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    I spoke to Kris on AIM, and we must include the resource links of both teams, also our diigo link. Do you think my final note is good enough?
  • david gerard
    #13 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    also include links that we found to support teams A & B, also the diigo link?


    " knewtoncsi
    yes, that is correct "
  • Brian Turner
    #14 Brian Turner on 22 Apr 13
     
    David I think it looks good.
  • Jeff Massery
    #15 Jeff Massery on 22 Apr 13
     
    I had posted what I liked and didn't like about each group. We could use those links and any others you guys liked/disliked.
  • david gerard
    #16 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    Okay, that sounds good, those should be sufficient enough to support our case, so that should do then.

    Thanks
  • Jeff Massery
    #18 Jeff Massery on 22 Apr 13
     
    Both David and Amber have said they will submit this. Did you two work out who is going to be sending the email?
  • david gerard
    #19 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    Lol, good question huh.. I will let Amber go ahead and shoot it over to Kris.
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #20 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    Does this look right then? To David and Jeff I am okay with whoever emails it. This is only the copy and paste version from a word document. It is properly formatted there.


    2.4 Disinformation Debate
    "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills
    Team C Conclusion

    Our job as team C was to review two separate arguments debating the following statement and decide whose argument was best. "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the internet), has contributed to an increase in literacy skills." In addition to reading Team A's (support) and Team B's(refute) statements, we also looked over each teams research. Although we feel both teams did an incredible job with their statements and their research we could only choose one winner. But before we get to that, here are some things we took into consideration when making our final decision.
    For Team A, some of the links sources we really felt had good support for their statement were as follows. First "Videos, Games Help Preschool Literacy, Study Says",(ref1) this article talks about various ways you can utilize and harness learning through hands on experience with different games. Helping kids learn a variety of learning styles while strengthen basic skills. Second "Has Social Media Improved Child Literacy" (ref2) the majority of the 3000 children in the study had good or better than good literacy skills due to their text messaging, online blogs, and other technological interactions. Third "Txt msg n school literacy: does texting and knowledge of text abbreviations adversely affect children's literacy attainment?" (ref3) students who used more abbreviated texts had higher verbal reasoning scores, then it seems like it may help. Phonetically speaking, that is what text-isms do, phonetically spell words increasing literacy in terms of letter sound comprehension. Fourth "Reading comprehension on the Internet: Expanding our understanding of reading comprehension to encompass new literacies" (ref4), which speaks of several ways the internet can be used and the way we interact with technology in meaningful ways. It cites multiple pieces of literature supporting it material from the past few years.
    For Team B there are also several good articles. First," What Are the Positive & Negative Effects of Using Technology to Communicate?"(ref5), in this article it talks about several well used technologies we all use listing how poor communication in written form can lead to misunderstanding and confusion. The second article, "Negative Effect of Texting in the Classroom" (ref6), students are often putting short hand words, improper punctuation and capitalizations in their writings showing poor literacy. This was also shown in "Texting, Twitter contributing to student's poor grammar skills" (ref7). Another for the fourth, "The Internet's Damaging Effects on Literacy" (ref8) this article show the decline in reading comprehension and students inability to be able to tell what is good information or bad. Lastly, "Is Technology Producing a Decline in Critical Thinking and Analysis" (ref9), for this article shows that students are more visual and less print literate and without taking the time to read print, critical thinking, analysis, imagination and reflection are not engaged or developed.
    All of these articles we all felt really strengthened their arguments. But there were some things that we felt weakened their argument or were really not showing literacy skills. Team A used "Literacy in the Television Age: The Myth of the TV Effect" (10), we didn't like this source because it was incomplete referencing a book. Without the complete text we couldn't see all the information. For Team B we all felt like some of the sources speaking of social behaviors or what happens when technology is not used properly, such as an "addiction" and video game violence, threw their presentation off track. They did not really relate to literacy.
    Our conclusion, after researching both sides and everything they presented we decided that Team A had the better argument. Both teams did amazing presentations and great write ups. Team A just had a clearer representation of "Technology (through television, texting, social networks posting, and the Internet) has contributed to an increase in literacy skills".
    In closing, both teams have provided sufficient information to present their cases, however Team B really did not find any hard evidence to fully support their case. We strongly felt that Team B went off track with their refute; With the evidence they found about the negative aspects of what their topic was, instead they focused on another area, other than "Literacy", as opposed to what they had discussed. So with this conclusion it is with our best interest that Team A had won the debate as they stayed on track with their topic. The ways in which children these days have new ways of "Literacy" communications in everyday life, using games, videos, the Internet and television as a learning tool.



    Participants of Team C
    Ju-Lia Dukes
    David Gerard
    Shamel Joe
    Jeffery Massery
    Brian Turner
    Amber Linnemeyer
    Team C Diigo Link
    https://groups.diigo.com/group/dgl-24-debate-team-c
    References
    1. www.schoollibraryjournal.com/...CA6709333.html
    2. http://schoolboardnews.nsba.org/2010/01/has-social-media-improved-child-literacy/
    3. http://search.ebscohost.com.oclc.fullsail.edu:81/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=34933695&site=ehost-live
    4. http://search.ebscohost.com.oclc.fullsail.edu:81/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=9463424&site=ehost-live
    5. www.diigo.com/...-impact-on-social-interactions
    6. 56wrtg1150.wikidot.com/ts-of-texting-in-the-classroom
    7. www.theglobeandmail.com/...article4304193
    8. suite101.com/...ng-effects-on-literacy-a319958
    9. newsroom.ucla.edu/...producing-a-decline-79127.aspx
    10. books.google.com/...acy_in_the_Television_Age.html
    Team A Diigo Link
    https://groups.diigo.com/group/fsu-disinformation-debate-team-a
    Team B Diigo Link
    https://groups.diigo.com/group/disinformation-debate-team-group-b-2013
  • Jeff Massery
    #22 Jeff Massery on 22 Apr 13
     
    That looks great! Thanks for putting it together. I would say since you already have it all set to go on your computer Amber, you should just submit it.
  • david gerard
    #24 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    You can go ahead and shoot it over to Kris, Amber.
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #25 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 22 Apr 13
     
    I do have to leave in about an hour to take my son to his baseball game. So if I don't hear anything different between now and then I will send this as the final version. Is everyone good?
  • david gerard
    #26 david gerard on 22 Apr 13
     
    Yup, I'm good.
  • david gerard
    #28 david gerard on 23 Apr 13
     
    Did you submit that to Kris?
  • Amber Linnemeyer Thompson
    #30 Amber Linnemeyer Thompson on 23 Apr 13
     
    My email does show that it went and the attachment shows up perfect. Sorry I just got home.

To Top

Start a New Topic » « Back to the DGL 2.4 Debate Team C group