Skip to main content

Home/ The Governing Gathering Team Research/ Contents contributed and discussions participated by Janelle Taylor

Contents contributed and discussions participated by Janelle Taylor

Simple Middle Filter: All | Bookmarks | Topics
Janelle Taylor

UK Literacy Trust - 1 views

started by Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14 no follow-up yet
  • Janelle Taylor
    #1 Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14
     
    Link to article: http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0001/9245/Young_people_s_writing_2012.pdf

    Background info: "We are a national charity dedicated to raising literacy levels in the UK. Our research and analysis make us the leading authority on literacy. We run projects in the poorest communities, campaign to make literacy a priority for politicians and parents, and support schools." -taken from the 2nd page of their article

    In 2012 they conducted research in several different schools in the UK (34,910 students aged 8-16) to determine if the students were reading and writing at the expected level for their age. They were asked if they enjoyed reading and writing, how often they did it outside of class, and if they use "txt" speak in the class room.

    The results were that if a child was at or above their reading/writing level they were less likely to use "txt" speak. If they were below their reading/writing level they were MORE likely to use "txt" speak.

    I have a couple screenshots from the article that I took of tables with percentages on them. I will post them to the google doc instead of here.
Janelle Taylor

Children's text messaging: abbreviations, input methods and links with literacy - 4 views

started by Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14 1 follow-up, last by Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14
  • Janelle Taylor
    #1 Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14
     
    Notes taken from the article. I was not able to annotate with Diigo.
    Link to article: http://search.ebscohost.com.oclc.fullsail.edu:81/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=57291996&site=ehost-live

    2008 statistics:
    8-11 y/o: 19% have mobile phones
    12-14 y/0: 76% have mobile phones
    14+ y/o: 69% text
    Grades 7-12: 90% avg. 11 texts per week

    Multipress Entry Experiments:
    British girls age 11-16 experiment conducted in 2003 by Neville:
    i. type two passages into a mobile phone- one traditional English the other textese
    ii. read two messages aloud- one in standard English the other textese
    iii. RESULTS: Writing time faster for textese & faster reading times for standard English methods
    2010 Australian experiment by Kemp w/ same parameters except the group was 22 y/o adults
    i. RESULTS were the same as above with more reading errors with messages written in textese


    "These findings converge on the important conclusion that while the use of textisms makes writing more efficient for the message sender, it costs the receiver more time to read it."

    The use of text prediction leads to phonological awareness increase, but spelling suffers

    Word prediction texters faster at reading and sending text messages
    Multipress Entry texters slower at reading and sending text messages
    "This suggests that exposure to textese does not improve reading fluency, either overall, or specifically for textese."


    APA format: Kemp, N. N., & Bushnell, C. C. (2011). Children's text messaging: abbreviations, input methods and links with literacy. Journal Of Computer Assisted Learning, 27(1), 18-27. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2729.2010.00400.x
  • Janelle Taylor
    #2 Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14
     
    Screenshot of the 12 ways to categorize textisms via Kemp's research. We can add it to the presentation if the group wants to.

    http://s1368.photobucket.com/user/jetaylor89/media/12textismclassificationcategories_zpsee9db46a.png.html

    APA Format: De Jonge, S., & Kemp, N. (2012). Text-message abbreviations and language skills in high school and university students. Journal Of Research In Reading, 35(1), 49-68. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01466.x
Janelle Taylor

Team A's Citation Page - 0 views

started by Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14 no follow-up yet
jastadelman

Cohesive Thesis Statement - 17 views

started by jastadelman on 19 Jul 14 3 follow-ups, last by kcwenzel on 20 Jul 14
  • Janelle Taylor
    #2 Janelle Taylor on 19 Jul 14
     
    I'd say based on the presentations alone, without any bias, Team B did a better job of getting their points across. With that being said, I think our thesis should be "The use of texting and cyber slang in today's modern world, as a whole, does not promote the growth of literacy."
  • ...1 more comments...
  • Janelle Taylor
    #4 Janelle Taylor on 19 Jul 14
     
    That sounds fair to me. So it would read "The use of texting in today's modern world, as a whole, does not promote the growth of literacy."
  • Janelle Taylor
    #7 Janelle Taylor on 19 Jul 14
     
    I've reviewed all the information for Team B. Some of their sources were credible, others were not. Do I need to do some of my own research now to support our thesis? OR Is our presentation only based on what we find within Team B's sources?

    Also, I have posted a few slides to our presentation. If they need to be deleted, by all means do so, but I needed another way to organize my thoughts for the initial research. I like using Diigo, but all the information can seem disorganized and over whelming to me from time to time.
  • Janelle Taylor
    #9 Janelle Taylor on 20 Jul 14
     
    I was thinking we should do something funny like autocorrect fails or texts that are filled with short hand. For example, the James Earl Jones and Malcolm McDowell "totes magotes" Sprint commercial
jastadelman

Team B - 12 views

started by jastadelman on 19 Jul 14 no follow-up yet
  • Janelle Taylor
    #2 Janelle Taylor on 19 Jul 14
     
    I felt that team B was more knowledgable than team A and utilized their presentation better. I used this system of categories to rank their presentations:

    Professionalism/Professional Sound: 10/10
    Knowledgeability: 9/10
    Research/Citations: 10/10 because they had a citation at the bottom of EVERY slide
    Slide Quality: 8/10 because they were a bit wordy
    Verbatim Reading of Slides: 6/10 because they read every slide word for word, but also threw in a few thoughts that were not scripted on the slide
    Unique Attribute to the Presentation: 7/10 because each slide seemed like it was made specifically for the info on the slide
    Overall Score: 50/60

    I felt like they focused more on texting affecting written literacy than any other kind. They showed that texting can cause poor grammar and spelling skills.
jastadelman

Team A - 8 views

started by jastadelman on 19 Jul 14 no follow-up yet
  • Janelle Taylor
    #2 Janelle Taylor on 19 Jul 14
     
    I felt that team A was not as knowledgeable about their subject compared to team B. I used this list of categories to rate their performances:

    Professionalism/Professional Speaking: 8/10
    Knowledgeability: 6/10 because they read every slide and didn't add anything that wasn't scripted on the screen
    Research/Citations: 8/10 because there were many citations, but they were almost too small to read
    Slide Quality: 8/10 because it was prepared with a generic Prezi guide
    Verbatim Reading of Slides: 1/10 because they READ EVERY WORD ON THE SCREEN
    Unique Aspect to the presentation: 3/10 because there was no personal touch to the presentation, but it was neat and orderly
    Overall Score: 35/60

    I felt the only convincing part of their presentation was the bit about Afghanistan using texting to teach girls to read. That, to me at this point, seems to be the only bit of info that can be proved or disproved with research.
1 - 6 of 6
Showing 20▼ items per page