In Michaela Cullington’s essay titled, “Does Texting Affect Writing?” the author tests the ongoing question of how today’s youth handles the effects of texting in the education system. Using successful evidence from both sides of the argument as well as participating in her own experiment, Cullington is able to fully demonstrate how texting does not interfere with today’s students and their abilities to write formally in the classroom.
As texting has yet become a concern of many parents, teachers, and doctors because of the use of slang and Abbreviation is expanded especially in high schools and colleges. Michaela Cullington, who was a student at Marywood University in Pennsylvania and received a Masters degree in speech and language pathology from Marywood in 2014, discussed in “Does Texting Affect Writing?” about the problem above. In general, Cullington positively confirmed that texting does not have any significant effects on formal writing. Cullington also encourages the use of slang and abbreviations should be approved because of many benefits, or positive effects.
Michaela Cullington’s essay “Texting and Writing” explores the possible effect of teen texting on formal writing in school. Cullington lists three different hypotheses scholars pose about the cor- relation between the two: those who criticize texting for its negative impact on writing, those who believe texting is actually a beneficial exercise in writing, and those who see no relationship at all. Cullington begins her analysis with the first theory, quoting concerned teachers, citing the shock- ing statistic that “only 25% of high school seniors are ‘proficient’ writers” (90), and adding testi- mony from two of her former teachers. Cullington then explores the second take on texting and writing by providing contrasting testimony from other teachers who believe that texting is a bless- ing to their students’ writing. Cullington retrieves support for these two opposing views from inter- views and previous studies. To explore the theory that texting is irrelevant to formal writing, how- ever, she performs her own research, gathering results from seven students, two teachers, and an analysis of students’ written work. Despite the testimonial evidence against and in support of tex- ting, Cullington’s own results show that texting has “no effect, positive or negative, on [students’] writing as a result of texting” (95).
After reading Texting and Writing, by Michaela Cullington, I do not agree with many of her viewpoints. Cullington argues that texting does not affect a students writing. Textspeak, the abbreviation and shortening of words like used when writing a text message, does affect the way a student writes because they use the abbreviations, and their writings tend to lack punctuation. When a writer uses excessive abbreviations on a regular basis they can get stuck in the writer’s head causing them to use them in all of their writings. Cullington did make good points of her own opinion on texting and writing in her piece, but I disagree with her and believe that texting and
In Michaela Cullington’s article “Does Texting Affect Writing?” she addresses a superstition that the older generation of today believes to be a possible issue. This issue is the potential for texting via cell phones to negatively affect young peoples’ abilities to write correct, formal papers. In her writing, she logically dismissed these accusations by providing proof against this believe while presenting her defense in a persuasive manner.
“Does Texting Affect Writing” is about Michaela Cullington, the author, comparing two opposing perspectives. The perspective is whether texting hinders the formal writing skills of students or not. Millennials are a population that cannot go a day without looking at their phones so, due to the “increasing use of mobile phones, concerns have been raised about its influence on their literacy skills. No matter if it is sending or receiving a text or checking social media sites, technology has taken over the lives of the young generations. The essay “Does Texting Affect Writing?” in They Say, I say exposes how the significant action of texting and using textspeak, i.e. abbreviations and symbols, may be hindering the writing skills of teenaged students. People communicate using textese to “more quickly type what they are trying to say” (Cullington, 2017, p. 361). Textese is a “register that allows omission of words and the use or textisms: instances of non-standard written language such as 4ever” (Van Dijk, 2016). When these people use textese often, it can become habitual and transition into their school assignments. Michaela Cullington constantly repeats words and uses comparisons and abnormalities for the concerns about textspeak, the responses to the concerns, methods and the discussion of findings on the topic to be analyzed.
In recent discussion of, “Does Texting Affects Writing” by Michaela Cullington, one view is that texting has a negative impact on teens and their writing. Cullington shows both sides of what students, teachers, and professors have to say about the issue of texting; yet after research this belief may not prove to be true. Then she writes about personal experience regarding the issue.
Texting is harming the ability for this current generation of children to write in a formal manner. “Digitalk” is what Kristen Hawley Turner of Fordham University calls, text-speak.For example, many teens will text “g2g” in replace of the actual words “got to go”.In my opinion, texting is ruining students’ abilities to write a formal essay,letter,etc.
In today’s society one would not be able to communicate effectively with the world if writing was not involved. People all around the world send emails, texts, and letter to numerous amounts of individuals each second. Talking on the phone is slowly becoming a thing of the past while the writing side of technology is taking over. The meaning of writing is changing in society. Writing used to be specifically for academics or the occasional letter to a loved one. As time has passed writing has taken more forms and more meanings. In the world we live in now writing is classified as texting, emailing, instant messaging, and even comments or tweets on social media. Although writing has these multiple new forms, it still holds its academic side strongly. Everything with meaning in turn affects a person’s day to day life. Writing has the effect of making one more intellectual. Writing has become a bridge between communication and the cultures and people of today’s society. It gives way for different options in stating sentences or phrases. (Olson). Each affect should change with age. As a person grows older, their writing styles should mature and take on a more professional aspect.
Since the technological phenomenon towards the end of the 20th century, text messaging has been widely used by cellphone users, specifically teenagers, in order to get their conversations across easier and quicker in a very convenient way. In the modern technology world, people have become so accustomed to the idea of
There has been claims that texting can adversely affect students’ formal writing skills. Michaela Cullington, author of “Does Texting Affect Writing”, responds to these claims by saying that texting does not affect students’ formal writing but helps them improve it. She mentions that texting teaches students’ how to write concisely, students’ know that textspeak is only appropriate when texting and not when writing formally, and that texting allows students’ to have a casual setting to practice their writing which help improve their formal writing. All of Cullington’s arguments are invalid; texting does harm students’ formal writing in multiple ways such as: writing texts “concisely” is not beneficial since students will forget how to expand
In Cullington’s views, she explains that “My research suggests that texting actually has a minimal effect on student writing. It showed that students do not believe textspeak is appropriate in formal writing they recognize the difference between texting friends and writing formally and know what’s is appropriate in eat situations.”(Cullington 367). She is demonstrating research to prove her point that people are smart enough to know the diffrence between formal and non-formal writing because they know the difference with the two types of technology texting on a phone and writing an essay on the computer. People knowing the difference between textspeak is what makes it so important to prove the point that technology is helping us. It shows that we can separate the fact that we are texting on our phone which is informal and writing a formal essay we do not feel the need to combine the way we text and the way we formally write. Which goes on to help support and clarifies the point Thompson was trying to make about technology helping us become smarter without knowing that it is.
Texting is a fairly new form of communication that has taken the world by storm. It became popular around 2001, and originally had its limitations, such as the 160-character limit. But now that technology has advanced, texting has followed along and is now a convenient, casual, and a more immediate way of communicating. So naturally, texting has evolved also in terms of the language used within it. We see this mostly in the form of abbreviations and short hand spelled words. Some people argue that texting has ruined the English language. Studies and observations have shown that the benefits of texting and cyber speak are much more broad then expected. Textisms have been shown to increase phonology skills, brain activity, creativity and provide a relatable outlet for students in education.
Clive Thompson’s “On the New Literacy” discusses the argument that technology is causing our youth’s writing skills to decline. He starts by mentioning a study that shows writing has actually improved and is having a re-birthing of sorts. Andrea Lunsford, A writing professor at Stanford University, ran the study, collecting nearly 15,000 student writings ranging from class assignments to blog posts. She discovered Stanford students were writing outside of the classroom 38 percent of the time and due to the internet, these writings had a bigger audience, which in effect made the students writing better. He states that Stanford students were less enthused about in-class writing because the only audience would be their teacher