A topic that interests me the most incorporates what students use a lot from day to day, social media and texting. My interest in this topic comes from working with middle school students and seeing firsthand how much of their social world now takes place in group chats. Conflicts, friendships, misunderstandings, inside jokes, and even academic collaboration often begin in digital spaces before they show up in the classroom. I’ve noticed that students make choices about tone, word choice, and humor. They are doing so without much guidance as well. For many students, their friendships and identities are shaped more through iMessage, Discord, or Snapchat rather than in face-to-face conversations. Adults often dismiss these conversations as trivial or disruptive, but to students, they are meaningful and emotionally significant. Personally, I find my colleagues and I doing the same thing.
Understanding how students use language in group chats can help educators support both academic literacy and social emotional development. I want to better understand how these group chat interactions shape students’ social and emotional development, and how educators can support students in learning to communicate and navigate relationships in healthy, thoughtful ways online. Students use these digital means of communication and literacy in positive ways, but there are times I wish we had a class that addressed digital citizenship. These ways of communicating aren’t going away as much as I find educators and adults saying what happened to calling people or talking face to face. I want to explore how group chats can be understood as learning environments as an educator, and how to support students in building healthy online communication skills.
Ouellette, G., & Michaud, M. (2016). Generation text: Relations among undergraduates’ use of text messaging, textese, and language and literacy skills. Reading and Writing, 29(3), 499–521. https://doi-org.sunyempire.idm.oclc.org/10.1037/cbs0000046
Ouellette and Michaud (2016) investigated the relationship between college students’ frequency of texting, their use of “textese” (abbreviated or nonstandard texting language), and their overall literacy skills. The researchers found that frequent texting and the use of textese were not associated with weaker language skills. In some cases, use of textese even correlated with stronger phonological awareness, because students who creatively manipulated language showed an understanding of sound–symbol relationships. Rather than demonstrating linguistic decline, texting appeared to function as a parallel mode of communication with its own rules and structures. The study argues that digital communication practices can coexist with, and may even support, literacy development.
Semingson, P. (2017). Digital Literacies for Young Readers and Writers .Literacy Today, 35(3), 30-31. https://sunyempire.idm.oclc.org/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Ftrade-journals%2Fdigital-literacies-young-readers-writers%2Fdocview%2F1966005551%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D8067
Semingson (2017) emphasizes that in today’s digital-rich environment, young readers and writers engage with varied literacies beyond print — including video, blogs, games, and social media. She argues that educators should build classroom practices that acknowledge and integrate these new literacies by providing opportunities to “read, write, view, and represent” in digital formats. Semingson suggests that by doing so, teachers not only make learning relevant but also help students develop critical skills to navigate multimodal texts and the digital communication landscape.
Vanek , J. (2019). Digital Literacy . The Skills That Matter in Adult Education. https://www.air.org/sites/default/files/TSTMDigitalLiteracyBrief-508.pdf
In this brief article, Vanek defines digital literacy as the set of skills needed to “find, evaluate, organize, create, and communicate information” using technology and including digital citizenship (2019). Vanek also discusses why digital literacy is important in education and how to implement it: integrate digital literacy into instruction rather than teaching it separately, provide scaffolded tasks for students, make sure students have access and understand relevance, and teach the vocabulary of digital skills (2019). When students communicate through text, incorporating these skills is relevant and important. The article gives a strong definition and taxonomy of digital literacy and how it can adapt this taxonomy to group chats and digital communication among middle schoolers (ex. tone, group norms, conflicts, and identity).
Wray, D. (2015). An exploration of the views of teachers concerning the effects of texting on children’s literacy development. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 14, 271–282. https://doi.org/10.28945/2272
Wray conducted a study exploring teachers’ perceptions of how texting influences children’s literacy development (2015). Many teachers in the study expressed concern that text messaging encourages informal spelling, abbreviated language, and reduced attention to grammatical conventions. However, Wray also found that these concerns were often based on assumptions rather than evidence: teachers acknowledged that students could switch between texting language and standard academic English when required (2015). There were 7 overall themes that they found through the study. The study suggested that texting represents a distinct register rather than a sign of declining literacy. Wray concludes that educators need a more nuanced understanding of how young people use language across different contexts and modalities (2015). Students are capable of code-switching between informal and formal language. Digital writing doesn’t necessarily harm literacy, but it adds another layer of literacy practice.
Zebroff, D., & Kaufman, D. (2016). Texting, reading, and other daily habits associated with adolescents’ literacy levels. Education and Information Technologies, 22(5), 2197–2216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-016-9544-3
In this correlational quantitative study, Zebroff & Kaufman (2017) examined a large sample of adolescents to explore their habits with texting and reading and if they were associated with literacy outcomes (such as word decoding and reading comprehension). The key findings were the number of text messages sent were not significantly a negative impact on literacy levels, there were cases where more texting had a correlation with a higher reading comprehension, time spent talking on the phone showed a slightly negative correlation with word decoding, but the effect size was small, reading traditional print has a stronger positive link with literacy practices and skills, and that there is a family/socioeconomic status impact on literacy skills (2017). Texting is not clearly harmful to adolescent literacy, and may even be positively related to certain reading skills; the bigger picture is more complex than the “texting ruins writing” narrative.