Using 21st century technology to discuss 20th century technology

Isn't there a single word that expresses the use of a thing while discussing it? If anyone knows, please share. Of course, this may all be in my imagination and the word doesn't really exist. If not, we should make one up and submit it to Oxford and Webster's. Anyway, I have to be honest here--I really ended up chuckling a bit to myself when reading Moran's "Technology and the Teaching of Writing" and a smaller bit with Anson's "Distant Voices: Teaching and Writing in a Culture of Technology." Not that there wasn't something to learn here. By all means, there was a great deal to ponder, the foremost (in my mind) being the gap and marginalization as well as the mindless automation that technology can promote. No, I was just amused by the fact that almost by the time a book comes out in print, any essay contained therein dealing with technology is bound to be outdated. Poor Charles even knew what he was getting himself into by apologizing upfront about his taxonomy--he made no assumptions here that his essay would be timeless, and it wasn't. Which brings me to my point--although Chuck effectively points out the role technology plays in the higher visibility of our society's wealth gap, so much of the content is ridiculously outdated through no fault of his. He could not have foreseen the cell phone craze and the infiltration of social networking sites. As crazy as this sounds, many high school students (at least the ones I come into contact with daily) do not use a personal email account anymore--they have no need with the advent of Facebook and text messaging. And, even if most still use email accounts, the English only thing is passe. As far as online research, I am apt to think this is the norm in most colleges and universities with the easy access to a host of databases. Many high school libraries now have their own webpages with links to various databases that students can access on and off campus. Doesn't this encourage online research? Again, even this little snippet on page 220 puts this essay into the archives.

Now I know Chuckie means well, but I must disagree with him when he says he distrusts Susan Stan and Terence G. Collins when they posit "that if basic writing programs could only get access to enough technology, their students' transitions into the academic world would be easier and faster" (217). I truly believe that computers do promote a faster and easier transition, especially for reluctant student writers. I say this because this was me--I was that reluctant student writer with little confidence. When I first returned to those hallowed halls at HACC after a 13-year hiatus, technology was my friend and savior. Perhaps some would say technology did me a disservice--I can compose in a number of places, but I must be in front of a computer when I write.

So back to his concern with access--this remains a concern I think for most educators, at least those of us at the secondary level. We may want to incorporate technology into our curriculum and may even be encouraged to do so, but even within a more privileged school district there are students who do not have access at home. Some might say this is not an issue--that student can use the resources at school. True, but what if this student does not have study hall at all or at least not every day and must leave for work when school lets out? Can a teacher then expect the same from all students when there is this huge gap? Although I am fortunate to be employed by a district heavily committed to using technology, I know there are schools that don't even have adequate ventilation and lavatories, let alone access to technology. What happens to those students who do manage to graduate? Will they need technology "remediation" so that they can function as expected at institutes of higher learning? I do agree that although writers have been advantaged by technology, access has disadvantaged.

Chris flippantly provides a futuristic scenario that's not so futuristic. Jennifer would be all over YouTube for those rock vids! Again, the outdatedness of this article tended to overshadow the true message. I, too, am concerned about where the quality of education is heading, but mostly in what I see as the automation of teaching, not the access to technology. I can see where financial concerns drive education, and unfortunately that means students may become mere products on an assembly line, with no engagement with those who are responsible for positioning the parts or adding the upgrades. Yes, I have taken those online courses because they were more flexible to fit my schedule, literature included, but I would not recommend them. Nothing can take the place of a flesh and blood teacher or professor with whom a student can converse and build a relationship. With a math course, I don't see this as being so crucial, but the humanities do not lend themselves well to this type of teaching and learning. Community is important, and learning without community is a form of automation. We need to discuss and share ideas and perspectives. We are not merely empty vessels ready for filling in the assembly line. The question is: Are we interested in producing robots or students who can be integral to the proper functioning of a democratic society?

P.S. Maybe I'm a little senstive here, but did anyone sense the snobbery by his inclusion of these journal entries? Couldn't this message have been conveyed using a more down to earth scenario rather than Switzerland?