According to recent research conducted by Booked, a magazine for UK schools, 70% of headteachers believe that Facebook and Twitter has adversely affected the literacy of young people. To be fair to them, the examples that are used to back up this claim are not without merit:
“I wont to work wiv you’re company.”
Another example the research cites is applicants deeming it appropriate to put xs (as in kisses) at the end of their applications when applying for jobs.
While the last example is something that is blatantly inappropriate, the first one throws up several interesting points. Firstly “wont,” though outdated now, is an example of a word that is in itself correct, but lacking the right context, which would be something like the following:
It was Harry’s wont to go for a run before breakfast.
This is the case as wont is another word for habit, practice or custom. Similarly, although “you’re” is correct when used as a contraction of you are, the company to which the person in the above sentence is referring will belong to someone and so your would be the correct word to use here. Crucially, these are examples of two errors that would not be picked up by a spellchecker.
While some young people (actually people in general) may just use text speak to be lazy (something that “wiv” is but one example of), this research makes no mention of either the benefits literacy can attribute to social media or those who have genuine difficulties with spelling, reading and writing.
Given that literacy problems are such a big part of what it means to have dyslexia, it does the pupil/teacher relationship no favours when accusations of idleness are thrown about with no consideration for those that may have a significant and undeniable problem in this area through no fault of their own. By not acknowledging people with dyslexia (or those that may be struggling on undiagnosed), such research risks stigmatising faultless young people.
Another error that was singled out was the difference between to, too, and two. But there is also the difference between affect and effect, practice and practise, of and off, elicit and illicit, there, their and they’re…I could go on. The point is, so much of the English language has two (or sometimes more!) words that sound the same and yet mean completely different things. Therefore, not only can people with dyslexia have great difficulty learning to read, write and spell words, but they also sometimes encounter problems learning the correct context in which to use them.
The research made no allowances for simply being human either. Yes, people should proof-read what they write and not rely on spellcheckers or other people to point inaccuracies out to them, but we all make mistakes, no-one can ever be perfect. While I can understand the importance of presenting yourself in the best light when it comes to applying for jobs, why does an individual’s Facebook account have to be word perfect and grammatically sound 100% of the time?
As I have stated previously, nothing is mentioned with regards to technology advancing literacy. Facebook now has a built-in spellchecker that will alert you to an error in the same way Microsoft Word does. I obviously can’t speak for everyone, but being made aware of a mistake encourages me to correct it – to ensure I am easily understood by those with whom I am conversing if nothing else. If Facebook does this, is it not a good thing?
What’s happening while that’s going on? It could be anything at all; recommending great reads, finding an informative link, helping someone out with an academic quandary, offering a frustrated individual the chance to vent when things go wrong and a platform to shout from the rooftops when something great has happened. I’ve seen all these things occur as a Facebook user, probably because it is the most accessible platform to use in order to say something to people we know en masse. When this can be so much more problematic for individuals who have dyslexia, the last thing they need is for social media to be vilified.
It also seems a tad convenient to blame social media – a faceless entity that can’t answer back – for falling literacy standards when it is also considered that England is the only developed nation where children are deemed to be worse at mathematics and reading than their grandparents. When such a bold and distressing claim is made, it is too simplistic to besmirch social media and not make other correlations. What about the constantly changing curriculum? A possible over-reliance on certain authors and texts? Class sizes? Teacher education and standards of teaching?
In short, while social media may have its faults, it is not fair to blame it for falling literacy standards without also acknowledging all the good it does. Social media has its place in teaching literacy just as books do and there is no reason why they can’t harmoniously co-exist.
The article about the research in question can be found here: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2507642/Facebook-Twitter-harm-pupils-literacy-claim-headmasters.html