Reading Notes 1: Wikipedia Discussion

The readings assignments for last week addressed two different view points on how the new world of technology is affecting or could possibly change the English classroom. The first reading, “Made Not Only in Words: Composition in New Key,” was from a speech that Kathleen Blake Yancey gave at CCCC. Yancey compared the emergence of this new technological era to that of 19^th century Britain and the invention of a new, cheaper printing press that allowed more people to read novels. At that time, people became excited about reading and often read together in groups. Yancey believes that composition classes need to embrace new “media” of writing and communication, such as blogs, in order to get students excited about composition. She often praises new technology because it constantly evolves and promotes more depth in composition.

The second reading, “Rhetorics Fast and Slow,” which was written by Lester L. Faigley, addresses the negative aspects of using new technology in the classroom. Faigley often compares “slow rhetoric,” which he describes as “lengthy exposition, explicit logical relations, sobriety, and order,” to “fast rhetoric,” which includes all of the new forms of communication we now use in the 21^st century (Faigley 4). While reading his essay, I felt that Faigley was very antagonistic to fast rhetoric. Instead of seeing the flood of information that is easily attainable today as a good thing, he basically states that it is the cause of war, famine, and environmental problems. He states that this new, fast-paced technology “brings risks” and society needs to learn how to slow down (Faigley 5). I was also surprised to learn from his reading that there exists a Rhetoric Society of America.

In discussion, we read an article describing how professors at Middlebury College have banned students from using Wikipedia. The class discussed how Yancey and Faigley would view the ban. I felt that Faigley would support the ban because Wikipedia is another example of fast rhetoric: anyone can obtain whatever information they want but there is a risk that it is not correct. However, someone is the class (sorry, I don’t have all the names down yet) brought up that Wikipedia was proven to be more correct than Britannica and other encyclopedias. I initially thought that Yancey would not support the ban because she was very supportive of embracing new technologies in the classroom. But someone else brought up a good point that Yancey would probably encourage teaching students to make more “rhetorical choices” and how to properly use a site like Wikipedia, without cutting them off from anything.

The end of the discussion shifted more towards what will happen if some students do not have access to these new technologies. Faigley mentioned that digital technologies are available to people with “disposable income.” If they are the only ones with access, then students in low-income areas will not be exposed and an even larger divide in society will exist. I was very interested in many people’s experiences in inner-city schools. Before reading the assignments and listening to the discussion, I never really thought about how much technology has become so important in my education and how, unfortunately, some are not able to have access to the resources that I have all the time. I feel that it is important to expose students to all of the new forms of technology, but something needs to be done so that every student has the same opportunities.