Schoolhouse Blog?

We’ve talked about the future of reading here in the past.  But what about the future of writing?  Or more specifically, the future of writing abilities?

The Pew Internet & American Life Project released a new report today that demonstrates what it calls an “interesting paradox” in teen writing habits:

Teens are utilitarian in their approach to technology and writing, using both computers and longhand depending on circumstances. Their use of computers for school and personal writing is often tied to the convenience of being able to edit easily. And while they do not think their use of computers or their text-based communications with friends influences their formal writing, many do admit that the informal styles that characterize their e-communications do occasionally bleed into their schoolwork.

The study goes on to cite several interesting statistics gleaned from a phone survey last November of 700 teens and their parents.  Again, from the press release:

87% of youth ages 12-17 engage at least occasionally in some form of electronic personal communication, which includes text messaging, sending email or instant messages, or posting comments on social networking sites.

60% of teens do not think of these electronic texts as “writing.”

57% of teens say they revise and edit more when they write using a computer.

63% of teens say using computers to write makes no difference in the quality of the writing they produce.

73% of teens say their personal electronic communications (email, IM, text messaging) have no impact on the writing they do for school, and 77% said they have no impact on the writing they do for themselves.

64% of teens admit that they incorporate, often accidentally, at least some informal writing styles used in personal electronic communication into their writing for school. (Some 25% have used emoticons in their school writing; 50% have used informal punctuation and grammar; 38% have used text shortcuts such as “LOL” meaning “laugh out loud.”)

Richard Sterling, chair of the advisory board for the National Commission on Writing that co-sponsored the report, asks an interesting question: “How can we connect the enthusiasm of young people for informal, technology-based writing with classroom experiences that illuminate the power of well-organized, well-reasoned writing?”

My answer?  Blogging.

As opposed to text messaging or writing on someone’s Facebook Wall, blogging “done right” encourages research, focus, critical thought, and developed writing skills.  Why not have history students contribute to a class blog, where they are required to write a weekly post about a historical subject of their choice that falls in the material being studied in class?  Teachers can require students to link to all their sources, so that they can provide young writers with feedback about what to trust and what not to trust, how to quote/cite and how not to quote/cite, etc.  Students could also be required to comment on their classmates entries, and the resulting conversations could form a basis for classroom discussion.  The same idea could be applied to English, science, and maybe even foreign language courses.

One of my religion professors at Davidson embraced this idea.  We were required to answer a series of thought-provoking questions about sections or passages from the Bible on an internal message board each week.  We were required to read everyone’s entries and — if so inclined — comment on them.  The professor would also comment from time to time, and he’d use the ideas we discussed to jump start discussion in class the next day.  I loved it, namely because it provided a good balance of interaction and reflection.

Formal papers and handwritten assignments are still very much necessary for the successful student.  And bringing blogging into the classroom won’t really combat the intrusion of ”LOLs” and emoticons into formal writing.  But I think blogging answers the question of how to get students excited about, as Sterling puts it, “well-organized, well-reasoned writing.”  Do you?

Image used under a Creative Commons license courtesy of Flickr user MarkHaertl.