Jus bc s'ok to tlk in txt, It Doesn't Mean You Should
from the choices dept
For some time now, people have been worried about the influence that text-messaging is having on children -- in particular, their adoption of certain sayings and abbreviations (sometimes known as "txt spk") and how that influences their written academic work. Most of these concerns appear to be overblown, but the debate's getting kicked up a notch in New Zealand, where officials have approved the use of txt spk on exams (via Textually). A representative of the national school qualifications agency says that students will get credit on their exams for answers written that "clearly shows the required understanding" -- but that in subjects such as English, where proper use of language is one of the grading criteria, use of abbreviations and slang would be penalized. The crux of the whole argument surrounding txt spk in schools has been that students need to know when it's acceptable to use, and when they need to communicate more formally. Obviously when writing an English essay, texting shorthand probably isn't a great idea; for many people, any sort of exam or academic work isn't the proper place to use this sort of language, if for no other reason than because answers written in it may not be clear to the person grading them. Students should understand this, just like they should understand they probably shouldn't write a resume or university application in txt spk. So in that regard, perhaps saying that using the abbreviations is acceptable is a decent idea, because it then puts the onus on students to exercise good judgment (like they'd have to do outside the classroom), and becomes a test of more than just their academic knowledge.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
not good
That's not true in text speak. Example: POS can mean "piece of shiat" or "parent over shoulder" depending upon who's using it. That's why it shouldn't be ok to use.
As somebody who runs an internet slang translator(noslang.com) I am still against this..
There's a time and a place for slang and text speak, and school isn't the place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: not good
It's not like English where there's a universal standard. Each word only has one meaning.
That's not true in text speak. Example: POS can mean "piece of shiat" or "parent over shoulder" depending upon who's using it. That's why it shouldn't be ok to use.
//
English has almost no universal standards and context is valuable in any language. I consider your comment mentally retarded via the DSM-IV.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
just jargon
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: just jargon
The point of the article is that there is a time and place for txttlk (slang, jargon, etc...). School papers and such is not one of those times or places, and telling students it's ok to will send them the wrong message.
I think anyone who is against this should write a letter/email, written entirely in text-talk, to the board of education (or whoever is concidering this) praising the idea and talking about how wonderful of an idea it is. Once they try to read it, and can't, the motion will probably be thrown out.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Easy Way Out
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
heh
1 point for writing an answer that relates to the question
1 point if the answer completly addresses the question
1 point if it's a true statement.
1 point if it's the answer he was looking for.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
uh, no. English is chock full of words called homographs. when i say "dough" do you think baking or money? when i say bow do i mean on top of a gift, on a ship, or bending at the waist?
slang has always been around, and always will be. it will go the way of other slang terms (i don't think anyone still says "no problemo" or "hasta la vista" or "oh snap" seriously anymore), or it will be incorporated into the language.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Tell me to STFU if you want to. I won't do it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
because it's acceptable for people in English slang to pronounce the H whereas a Spanish-speaking person never would. so even if you can argue that the English "slang" isn't slang because it's used in the exact same context, albeit perhaps often more flippantly, it's STILL slang simply because the spoken H is acceptable... BECAUSE IT'S SLANG. Same thing with Cockney dialect in England. And yeah Cockney is SLANG.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I live in NZ
He was also quick to point out that any student using text speak is running a big risk, because as ryan pointed out definitions are not clear.
His summary was:
If the examiner can read it, they'll mark it.
But his advice was:
Make it easy for the examiner to read
My feeling is that this is much like the real world, if you know something, and manage to communicate the idea it dosn't matter much how, but if you can't communicate it, you may as well no know it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
text
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not true
I'm talking about thinks like "cll" does that mean call or cell?
what about bck? is that buck? or back? The problem with text talk is that I can abbreviate the same words the same way, and in many contexts it's hard to tell.
Homonyms are at least spelled differently.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
text me and get nothing back
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'Old-school' shorthand...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 'Old-school' shorthand...
Come on, secretaries and assistants. How many of you have had to type up your boss's notes, only to have to call/visit them numerous times during the process because you just can't understand what they meant by those initials and that arrow pointing to a little box thing?
The point is that txt tlk isn't easy for the average grader of assignments to understand, and no matter what subject you're in, an incomprehensible or undecipherable answer won't get you very far. I can imagine fighting a test grade with a math teacher saying, "Oh yeah, the little squiggly over there, that was supposed to be a 3. So I get the points, right?"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
idiot.
Anyways, it's totally ridiuclous that they'd consider allowing this in schools. While it's true homographs exist with english words, they're commonly used in a context where you can understand. If you say "Bow down to me," only the insanely stupid will think you're referring to a bow and arrow. Whereas GG for example, isn't used in context. It's usualy on it's own like many other txtspk homographs. GG could mean "Good Game" or "Gotta Go" but will almost always just be "gg" in its own message. I've used computers for years now, always online, and to this very day i read little txtspk bits that leave me dumbfounded. And whoever mentioned it above has a valid point too. While txtspk does convey the proper meaning (if used in good enough context) the answer to an exam question could be right, but now all we're doing is teaching kids they can be lazy as hell and leave out letters. It's suppose to be like that on a phone because of limited message space, my phone only allows 144 characters. On an exam you dont have a character limit so I dont see why people have to be so damn lazy. Personally, when i read a txtspk-ridden post, article, or comment, i wonder if the author had been sniffing paint or something. It makes people seem SO STUPID. I can read something like that and imagine the author wearing a football helmer with his name scribbled on many times with a crayon, while wearing a white shirt that has a three-year-old-style pigeon drawn on it, while also wearing a beach towel for a superhero cape. Use all the letters and spell something right for a damn change (and no, i dont mean typos, i mean spelling the word..the WHOLE word). Makes me sick. lazy idiots.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:ihatelazypeoplewhocan'ttypefullwords
Kinda like when someone who obviously knows enough html to put in break tags is too lazy to divide their post into paragraphs. It makes the whole thing lack readability.
but now all we're doing is teaching kids they can be lazy as hell and leave out letters.
It's not teaching kids anything.. it's just not punishing them during exam conditions. It's not allowing text speak in assignments, or regular work. Only in exams.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
RE: text me and get nothing back
There you go, insult the people who buy the newspapers from the people who pay you for your column. There is no hint of arrogance there...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Missing the point
They are saying they will not mark you down, for bad grammar or spelling. and that abbreviations are allowable. (unless spelling/grammar are part of the marking schedule)
If you use an abbreviation you are hoping the examiner knows what you mean, and if he/she does they will accept it. It's the student's risk to use an abbreviation.
Those arguing for "standard English" only should take a quick look in the mirror here. I ran the comments 1-16 through word's spelling and grammar checker, the only one that came up clean (excluding deliberate txt examples and so forth) was comment 8. Would you feel hard done by if you had been marked down for the responses you've given for grammatical errors?
I don't know about you, but if I'm doing an exam that is not centered around English I don't want to spend the 50 percent of the time proofreading. Nor would I want to be hiring someone on exam results that held the English language higher than the knowledge tested
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missing the point
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Get Over It
I remember in 6th grade arguing with my teacher over the 3 hours a week we had to spend on 'penmanship' and how awful my cursive writing was, even though my grammar and spelling were very good. I preferred to use block type and I still do to this day. That wasted time learning how to write in pretty little squiggles that were all connected together did nothing for me. I have yet to use it since 6th grade other than to sign my name. Txt spk is no different and it looks like New Zealand has figured that out. As long as a student can communicate and understand the subject, it should not matter how they do it.
I wonder how much more I could have learned in 6th grade with those 540 wasted hours of penmanship...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
miss the point/get nothing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
correction...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Same Diff
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
idiotic to expect anything but the best
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crikey!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is boon for those who sneer.
However, this rule actually makes it easier for someone to make it harder on the text-speaker. If someone writes (for example) "bcnu" when they really mean "Will call tomorrow" (and note that I am not opposed to elision), as a grader of work, I can show that "bcnu" is inadequate and gleefully use its terseness against it. It is also very hard to defend against such an attack.
The irony is that by accepting text-speak, a hard-ass teacher has far more ammunition to grade a paper sternly. Far from being a boon to the student, it is a license for the teachers to use judo.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
While we're on the subject of pedantry
It should say, "... It will appear presently." Presently means "real soon now." Momentarily means "for a moment." If your submission appears and then a moment later disappears, it has appeared momentarily.
Yes, yes, I know that airlines say all the time, "we will be taking off momentarily." This is because the most dangerous moment in air travel is the take-off. If they say, "we will be taking off momentarily" and you actually safely fly to your destination, then while they are wrong, no one's going to sue them. On the other hand, if they crash during take-off, you can't say they didn't warn you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: While we're on the subject of pedantry
momentarily
Main Entry: mo·men·tar·i·ly
Pronunciation: "mO-m&n-'ter-&-lE
Function: adverb
1 : for a moment
2 archaic : INSTANTLY
3 : at any moment : in a moment
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
All the report seems to be saying to me is that if a student can make their point, whether it be in full and correct English or by using "text speak", diagrams or any other form of written communication they will still receive marks as long as the marker can understand what the student is trying to communicate and believes it to be correct.
Sounds like a great idea to me. Yes, of course we shouldn't be encouraging the use of "text speak" in inappropriate situations but should the students grammar and punctuation be a little ropey it means they wont be punished for it - unless of course the exam is on written English !!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]