In reading both Ong and Baron, they both draw on the words of Plato's Socrates. Socrates remarks that writing is simply a thing, something to be manipulated, something inhuman, artificial, a manufactured product, is unresponsive, destroys memory, cannot defend itself as the spoken word can. Socrates sounds much like the modern day educators who see evil in the way that any new mode of technology interrupts their comfort zone.

This simple thing of writing in Plato's time was the technology that would eventually rule over the oral/spoken word. In the aristocratic Greek society of poets, poets were like politicians. The words they spoke were so well articulated and charasmatically delivered that speaker and audience were connected as one. The fear of writing taking away that power is only natural as a politician fears losing his core political base by becoming out of touch with his/her audience.

The prefix meta has two meanings. 1. to change or transpose. 2. after, beyond or higher. When Gee speaks of meta-knowledge (or knowledge about knowledge), intellectuals defy change and there is no knowledge higher than the knowledge they have.

Trying to find a good mix of technology, reading and writing is not an easy task. Technology is complicated in its concept, but easy in its application. I do not know how to make a computer, but the use of one to me is easy. Writing is easy in its concept, yet hard in its application. Reading involves word comprehension and cognitive learning skills that combine both technology and writing. You rarely find a person that can read and not write or vice versa. The skills go hand in hand. In my case, technology has been a godsend. I have always exhibited strong reading and writing skills as a youth and adult. Spending long hours (sometimes 8-10), at the local library reading while my youthful counterparts would be playing basketball or enjoying other activities. Technology has actually made me a better reader and writer. The time element can be stressful when searching ardously through library periodicals. The travel time to destinations (home and library), can be uncomfortable depending on what mode of transportation you have. I am a private person so taking the bus is uncomfortable to me. What technology has done for me in the area of reading and writing is give me focus and access to more material. Many times i would go to the library for a certain book and it would be checked out and i would have to wait for the person to bring it back. With the internet i can access any material i want without waiting.

It would be remiss of me not to think that i do not feel the effects that the access to pop up knowledge has on meta-knowledge. Quick letter access involves little thought, even less concentration. There are times where i find myself drifting in thought when i read a book. This would have never happened in the past. I was like Rodriguez reading every chance i got and every place i could. My reasoning and rationale has been effected to a degree because we don't calculate as human beings when we access computer information. The subject is typed in and we wait for the computer to do work that we have become to lazy to do. This doesn't require a lot of knowledge, just the word in question to be looked up. Knowledge in its concept and application require the ability to separate and mentally process information. My cognitive skills sometimes take a back seat to easily available information.

Blogging is more spontaneous than writing. When i am writing i take pauses, analyze what i am going to say, go over it more than once and proof read the life out of it. I find blogging more useful because i like spontaneity. I get a rush when i am typing and without much thought the words seem to flow right along. Blogging involves much less structure. Sure we do use the basics of writing, but paragraph structure and overall organization are not as detailed as in formal writing. This isn't bad because if you understand the principles and processes of basic writing you will not stray too far from them. In retrospect maybe Plato's Socrates was accurate when he said that those who use writing will become forgetful. They would rely on an external source for what they lack in internal resources. You can apply this to the technology of computers versus writing. We have made computers our external sources for our lacking of writing as an internal resource.

Experiences

My experiences with on-line texts has been pleasant as compared to some other stories i have heard. I have accessed sites where the proported author or writer of the text made me wonder if they have ever taken a writing course. The information was so vague that most of the information i was looking for was left up to my imagination. I've followed links of texts that were no longer in existence, the site would give an explanation of why this site wasn't operating anymore and it sounded more like something criminal had happened than practical. But overall my experiences have been good. I choose the information that i access now as carefully as possible. There is no 100 per cent foolproof concept of picking the right site. Just trust your instincts and the information that you recieve and hope it is true and concrete.

Format

What i find enhancing about this article/essay is the volume of concern for the internet as a learning tool. Coming from an era earlier in life of the electric typewriter and other technology that was modern in its time but not as efficient as today's computers, I welcome the advantage of easier and quicker access to material. I remember the drudgery of really doing a ten page research paper. Long hours of labor in the library, looking through countless books for one sentence of information. The internet has made that task much easier and enjoyable.

What is distracting to me is the access of the internet being limited as an educational tool. What would we be doing today without powerpoint? I remember in the days of doing a presentation. The class would bring their projects and we would have so much material in the room that it was very uncomfortable. With powerpoint that eliminates a lot of material bulk and it has a constant flow to the presentation.

The most helpful idea that i recieved from this article/essay was the learning curve could possibly be shortened for the disabled. The internet does not distinguish between normal and abnormal. That is a human distinction. The internet gives equal access to the brilliant, average, and idiot alike.

I find it very confusing that educators with heavily weighted titles can reduce themselves to mental midgets when it comes to the best interests of children. Everyone does not learn alike and the problem with the American education system is that everyone is expected to learn the same way, but are not treated the same way. There are no cultural values expounded for students who may have language barriers except English as a second language. In this new millineum era has just the time changed and not our dominant ways? The dominant discourse of the U.S. and the world must allow " the plain and average folks" of this world to have access to the same resources if you want them to learn the same. That may sound like a political statement but isn't life wrangled around the politics of who you know to get what you want?

Qoute

The emphasis on books and reading is " Learning is not to be found on a print out " (pg. 2). Learning has taken on so many new forms that this statement may soon be obsolete. Books and reading are being challenged by computer technology, and computer technology may have the same complaint in the future by whatever technology that is positioned to take its place. When we go back to Ong's essay that the pencil is a technology, then what stops the computer from asserting the same claim. The same books that are required to be read by children can be accessed on the internet. Does that make the book non effective because it was retrieved from the internet. It is in the written form still though it may be retrieved from the internet. So does the statement that "learning is not to be found on a print out" have the same value if i buy the book online. The same book that i would go to the library and get, i would get online, print it out word for word, and i would not learn because it is a print out? Wall street and many businesses that are the lifeline of the U.S. uses print outs to do their daily business. Are they less effective because they do not use books to read profit and analysis statements? This statement can be relegated to just an opinion as quick as my personal opinion can in the eyes of whoever deems it not relevant or important.

Overall Response

Books and teenagers are not as intertwined with each other as teenagers and the Internet. This concerns the educational policy makers in the U.S. and abroad. The inspiration of teenagers to spend endless hours on the internet as compared to reading and writing has these policy makers pondering what to do. The best interest of the children concerned may not be the issue, as people who are in authorative educational positions do not always have the best interest of children at heart. The pawns in this game of chess get to decide in a changing technological world, what methods of learning best benefit a child regardless if the child has a high efficiency of internet ability and is more comfortable with digital learning as compared to traditional learning.

Concentrated line learning of the old stalwarts is still the educational standard that tests are measured on. Many of these standardized tests have obvious proof of biases concerning cultural and racial applications in their administration. They also have proven biases of children with disabilities and other learning difficulties. Children with disabilities find it more comfortable to browse and read on-line as compared to possibly engaging in a classroom and being scrutinized by their peers for not being on the same reading level or aptitude scholastically. The worry or concern of the electronic media destroying reading skills does have validity to it. It doesn't take the same cognitive skills to browse and read on the internet as it does to read a long and enduring book! Just as parents and educators have complained about since the concept of formal schooling was instituted, do outside influences have control over my child or do I? To many in the educational field the internet is an outside influence that has the youth of America in eternal brainlock.

In comparison of reading books for fun, many youth browse the internet for fun. The concern of traditional education is that the internet distracts more than strengthens reading. The internet teaches many students who are not fluent readers better ways to recieve information. Many internet endorsers believe that strong readers on the Web eventually surpass those who read print only. In the time that it takes to read a book, it would take a student less time to browse the internet, and cover many topics from many points of view.

The internet allows low income students to be on a level of participation educationally that the printed/written text does not allow. Their are no biased tests, no reading of non-related subjects or subjects of limited interest, and no teacher who does not have the enthusiam to teach students who society has deemed as unteachable and incorrigible. Children can percieve these things and they know who has their best interest at heart.

The major concern of all involved is the trustworthyness of the many modes of information that can be accessed by youth. Many sites are not monitored for accuracy of information. To use the information from some sites is at the risk and peril of each individual.

Other than debating about the internet as a liability to the learning of our children we should look at the other side of this debate. Children did not create text-messaging. This is an adult invention that is marketed at the youth. Text messaging encourages spelling and grammatical errors due to its limited use of characters on some phones. Do we blame the corporate pimps who profit off of the youth and encourage bad grammar to sell phones? No, we give them a free pass because it is easier to attack someone who doesn't have a slew of lawyers to protect them from cause and effect. Did children invent the internet? Again we have an adult invention that is geared toward the youth of America and the world. The youth of the world visit sites daily that are promoted by adults who profit off of their participation. With no monitoring specifics or checks of individuals who run these sites, we find it easier to blame the youth than accept that as adults and parents we are lacking in our responsibilities to protect the youth. Online predators, predatory advertisement, and computer viruses cannot be blamed on the youth.

Though there will continue to be a debate of standardized testing and the properness of internet literacy, we must understand that kids need all these types of learning in a competitive world. Things change constantly and learning has new concepts introduced daily. Do we as adults and educators adapt to change or will someone later in history find us fossilized with a book in our hand with a note stressing "reading or death".

Summary

I have to admit, if i had the choice of writing a ten page research paper, or typing it on a computer, which do you think i would chose? Which would you chose? For many of us who are of the post baby-boomer age we are on the cusp of technology. A few years earlier of that period are the life-time resisters. Change is not always a welcome endeavor. Nostalgic memories of their first correct alphabet letter keeps many in pencil mode only. There should not be any fear though because technology can be a good friend. Old technologies have to be replaced by new ones. The necessity of progress dictates that we reinvent old technologies into new ones. The fears that our students in America would not learn efficiently due to technlogy is an example of the old guard not wanting to relinquish to the new guard.

The new millenium American must know how to read, write, and use technology toward the furtherance of society and the world as a whole. Many hand written documents are time sensitive and with security issues at hand, technology allows us to recieve and store more documents than a file cabinet could ever hold. Whether computers and technology influence us negatively or positively does not negate the fact that they are an important function in our lives. That doesn't leave writing as a lost art though. If your electricity stalls for any reason you still we be able to write. The old number 2 probably can survive a nuclear blast like an infamous insect i will not name. Through the finger pains and hand cramps of writing it is then that you realize how much you really need technology. A perfect example would be when we (UWM) recently had our computer outage. As an academic community we were paralyzed! Technology allows us to do something in seconds, minutes, or even hours that would take days or weeks in writing. I like writing, but i love the ease that computers and technology have made my academic and personal life a higher quality of life.

Qoute #2

The average reader is not equipped to detect many kinds of document falsification, and a lot of text is still accepted on trust.

Without question or thought we enthusiastically ask a fellow book lover or reader, did you read the latest book by this writer, or did you read the newspaper article by the journalist? A reply of yes may follow that question with a vivid insight into how much the article or book was enjoyed. History has taught us that journalists who have won awards for their stories have made them up, authors who have wrote resounding books have been charged and proven to have used plagarism. Computer technology has allowed the honest, true, irrascible, and dastardly the same acess to vie for your attention. Without so much as any background information we delve into searching websites and take what is said as gospel without meeting the "anointed" ones who give us the information we request. With websites as Wickipedia bordering on hyperbolic in definitions and explanations of materials we must research with care. If we haven't learned from "Craig's List", we will ever be sojourned to idiocy. Print sources are more verifiable and are usually not written by a novice who goes online to sound important, and probably has true knowledge of the subject that is being talked about. Online authenticity is like shooting an arrow in the air and hoping it stays there until you ask it to come down. Wishful thinking aside, its a matter of you as an individual trusting yourself with the article you choose whether it is written text or computer.

Qoute #1

The technology expands beyond this "priestly" class when it is adapted to familiar functions often associated with an older accepted form of communication (71).

The target audience for new literary technology is normally a very small and selective audience and starts with a very limited communications base. With the high price of new technology and consumer frugalness, many inventors keep new technology to themselves and their target audience first before mass marketing. When the first VCR was produced, it could be purchased at the cost of a house and car note combined. The first high definition television was astronomical in cost. As competitors copied/invented their own brands of these products that were cheaper/cost effective, the price became affordable to the general public. Though pricing made these items marketable and affordable to the general public, one marketing strategy that no one can predict is attitude/aptitude. People do not like to give up their comfort zones. New technology has stiffened the stand of old stalwarts.

Some people (believe it or not), still have dial phones over touch or push button phones. Some people do not own or even want a cell phone. You would think that the majority of these people are elderly, but many yuoth today resist technology either because of illiteracy or no interest. Many elderly resent cell phones because it seperates them from a by gone era they refuse to relinquish. They are the evil neccesities of invention to them. So technology in its greatest aspirations is geared toward age appropriateness and discourse appropriation. Those who have the means enjoy technology at ease in their private spaces (home, business, etc.), while those who lack the means may have limited access (school, library, etc.).

With the potential fear and harm that may come from computer technology/usage as evidenced in modern day computer piracy, identity theft, people spreading computer viruse to make political statements or whatever, the distrust of modern technology can be understood. Yet progress cannot be afraid of the abusers of technology. A nation that promotes the best in civilized applications must have the best for all of its citizens. I advocate that fear should not be a proponent of viewing the worst of technology, but at it advantages.

The discourse proponent of technology has an obligation to train the best future leaders for the American people. That is the paradox of discourse with the duty to train the best in the proposed dominant discourse, but the best aren't trained in the discourse that is not dominant. New technology does cost, and minority persons who cannot afford such cost will not be included in its initial usage. The computer labs in Glendale, Waukesha, New Berlin, and other well off communities do not resemble the computers they have in the labs at MPS. The technology is quite different in cost and efficiency.

Do writing and computer literacy go hand in hand? As technologies yes, as equals no! You cannot research the internet through your pencil ( at least not as of yet). A computer cannot write in cursive letters (again, at least not as of yet). So the concepts of writing as a technology and computers as a technology works well together. This stands upright until someone invents something else in the future where we will all have to leave our comforts and start learning again!

Separations

Ong says that writing separates interpretation from data. Writing is concrete as opposed to oral translation. In an oral conversation one can give information to someone and when passed on to two other people you probably will get two other interpretations of the same spoken word. What is written stands as said and cannot be changed unless the writer himself/herself changes what is written in their drafting of the article. It will stand through history and time. Oral interpretations change by embelishment or imagination. This isn't always a bad thing in that some cultures use this to inspire and encourage non-writing individuals to preserve their oral traditions.

Separations

One way that writing seperates past from present is the forms of speech used. When the early settlers came to America, they wrote and spoke what was known as King's English. When we read books that use this type of english we humor ourselves with the pronunciations but we wouldn't and couldn't use this as an effective form of communication in English 201. Historically, in oral communications, whether past or present words are excluded to get a point across or that do not fit the explanation you are trying to relay. This can depend on who you are talking to. In African American culture some words are changed that may not be proper english in a conversation, but the person who you are talking to can relate to what you are talking about whereas someone from outside the culture may not.

Quote

Writing can divide society -high language usage and low language usage. This relates to dominant discourses in its application as the higher language being that of those who were in control. Women have worked their way into the mainstream of higher language due to achieving academic success. Yet, the disparity in high language theory and application is still one of those who safeguard, or are the gatekeepers to screen and disallow those who are not qualified to share their goods. Gee stated that they are very protective of their goods, those who are of the dominant discourses. It is demeaning in one sense to say that women have the lower rung of language. It takes a high venacular to instruct and raise a child, carry on functionally in running a household, and dabble socially. It may not be Latin or Greek, but would most women use that in the course of their day anyway.

Ong: Writing as Artificial

Ong presents an interesting commentary on the premise of writing as an aid to oral understanding. The paradox that writing as a dead form of interpretation, removed from the living world, amid its rigidity, and thus assuring it of an everlasting life is quite thought provoking when you think of words as life in the spoken form. When someone orally explains something to you, they may use certain mannerisms that give you a vivid interpretation, or the words can conjure up thoughts and insight through their deep peircing enthusiasm and vocal tone. The written word has the opposite effect in that it has no life as an inanimate object, except the life that you can visualize and take your imagination to places that only you can navigate.