If anyone had told me two years ago that I would be using a word processor today, I would have laughed. In fact, if anyone had told me that I would be using the word processor and teaching my students how to use the same technology, I would not have believed it. Me and the word processor? Me, a hater of machines? Me, who during undergraduate college days took an audio-visual course and had a hard time threading a 16 millimeter projector? Never!
How quickly attitudes change.
Now, after a year and a half and through a combination of self-instruction,
hands-on experience and some workshops on the subject, I am a believer. In fact, I have become
a crusader for the merits of word processing in teaching composition! And if I can become a user
and a believer, anyone can.
Less than two years ago, the Dean of the College
of Business Administration, then in the process of establishing a computer center for business students,
invited me to explore the application of the computer for teaching composition in the English
Department. The practically irresistible part of the invitation was his generous offer to share
Business Department computers on an experimental basis for use in several composition classes.
When I reported the invitation to colleagues in the English Department, the overall reaction was less than enthusiastic. Computers represented "high-tech." Although we had a writing lab where students could use self-paced instructional materials on tape players, and although colleagues occasionally used tapes, records and films in the classroom, we essentially regarded the chalkboard and the text as the main components in our teaching. However, two or three, myself included, of the thirty-two members in the department bravely volunteered to investigate the dean's offer.
That summer three or four of my colleagues and I used the dean's key and entered that foreign world--to us, at least--of high-tech. Such terms as "hardware," "software," "bytes," "files," and "user-friendly" became a common part of our vocabularies. Not all, but most, of our small group became excited about computers, word processing and the possibilities of applying this technology in teaching composition.
Initially, of course, we were intimidated by these machines. Yes, we were frustrated by the simplest tasks connected with the hardware: locating the "On" and "Off" buttons, aligning the paper in the printers, loading the machine, etc. However, those discoveries were less formidable than actually learning the software for our word processing program. But we persevered!
After study and evaluation, we chose the highly acclaimed Volkswriter word processing program for our self-instruction, and we started with the tutorials, working at our own pace. We had trouble at first saving files, retrieving files and printing files. However, little by little we gained confidence, and by the end of the summer, one colleague from our group felt confident enough to offer one section of freshman composition in which students would use the word processor.
By the second semester, I was ready to plunge
in, so I volunteered to use the word processor in teaching a newly designed course in our writing
minor: Writing in the Professions, Public Relations and Management. Seniors, many of them in their
last semester of academic work, elected this course, and word processing would be a common part of
their working experience. In fact, according to Faigley and Miller, 25 per cent of the respondents
in the 1982 survey indicated they already used word processing on the job.
Because of the projected 55 million people in "information employment"
by 1990, many more of our graduates will be using word processing in the future.
I wanted to prepare my students to enter that world.
Now, teaching the course for the third time and still using the word processor, I have learned along with my students. More than ever, I am convinced of the merits of word processing in teaching composition. Each semester, besides evaluating the writing course, my students have evaluated the use of the word processor as well: each semester the feedback has been positive. In fact, the feedback has been so positive that I have restructured the course and the placement of word processing in it.
Perhaps because of my own inexperience and caution, the first time I taught the class I offered only a mini-unit in word processing rather late in the semester. In their evaluations that first time, students asked for additional opportunities to use word processing. They asked, furthermore, that the opportunity come earlier in the semester. Consequently, the second time I taught the class we were using word processors shortly before mid-term. Again, students asked for more exposure even earlier in the semester.
The possibility for more extensive student use of word processing in the classroom had become a reality during the second time I offered the course when the University Computer Center discovered a word processing program--PC-Write--in the public domain. Even better, PC-Write was compatible with IBM PC's, the kind the university used.
This semester, then, I announced to my students the first day of class that we would be using the word processor, and I requested that they bring with them to the second class meeting a disk to be formatted. Although not all students were enthusiastic, not a single one dropped the class, and every student came to the second class with a disk to be formatted with PC-Write.
Based on evaluations from previous semesters and student enthusiasm for word processing, I did not think I had to dangle carrots in front of my students. Nonetheless, during our first class meeting this semester, I told the class that the software word processing program I would copy on their disks would probably cost each of them approximately $50.00 if they purchased it at Computerland. For whatever reason, when I came to the third class with their copies of PC-Write, they were eager for the "hands-on" experience.
In addition to formatting their disks with PC-W rite, I also copied onto each disk several files for editing purposes as well as a file copy of a manual for PC-Write, written by a computer science student the second time I taught the class. Students could refer to this manual in their free time. Before we had the "hands-on" experience in the Business Department Computer Lab, I used the chalkboard in the classroom to explain the function keys, the monitor, the printer and some essential commands.
In fact, for demonstration purposes I brought a portable unit, one with a stretchable cord attached to the keyboard, and gave students an opportunity to compose and do minor editing. Although students had opportunity for individual editing and composing that session, the monitor was large enough to provide a group experience. Since the keyboard passed from student to student, we soon discovered we were creating a class journal, complete with complaints about technology and word processing. In truth, however, students had fun!
Not to overwhelm them at first but to provide adequate information to get them started, I handed the students a one-page sheet of introductory instructions as they filed to the computer lab. My instructions were deliberately elementary: how to create a file, how to save and exit a file, how to call up a file, how to use some basic commands--deleting letters and words, deleting and adding lines, etc. Because students' familiarity with computers and word processing ranged from sophisticated knowledge to total ignorance, my primary objective in this first meeting was to offer a positive experience.
Indeed, that experience proved to be positive: the students asked for another hands-on session in the computer lab. Now, before the second experience, I used the chalkboard again, this time to explain somewhat more sophisticated but important and practical word processing functions: how to set margins and how to move and copy text. I requested that all students master these techniques during their computer time in this session. As they filed to the computer lab this time, I handed each of them a detailed pamphlet of more sophisticated instructions for the word processor.
How do I assess the experiment of the current semester? Without question, for both me and the students, the experience has been good. I confidently make such an evaluation on the basis of their use of the word processor for their written work in my class. Although I did not demand that their work be done on the word processor, I urged them to use it. For their third writing assignment 80 to 90 per cent of the students were turning in assignments that had been written on the word processor. In addition, the quality of the work can be attributed to their editing on the word processor. No longer are the copies of their papers drafts. Instead, evidence of editing and revising is readily apparent: punctuation, grammatical and particularly spelling errors have vanished. Without question, the mechanical aspects of their writing have improved. And the papers are neat; they look professional. Students still need to work on more sophisticated aspects of writing--style, sentence variety, expression of ideas, and so forth; however, attention can be focused on these aspects of writing at an earlier point in the semester because of the rapid progress in handling the mechanics.
Since students have demonstrated mastery of such basic word processing functions as adding and deleting words and letters, correcting punctuation and spelling, and other important editing skills, they are now ready to use other functions: marking, copying and moving words or sentences or whole blocks within their text for purposes of organization, emphasis and more effective communication. Because ours is a course in professional writing, students can also copy complete files of well written application letters that they might want to edit, revise slightly, and personalize before sending to a number of firms or prospective employers. Or they might wish to revise and update their resumes. Perhaps through research, they have discovered new information that should be included in the report they are submitting; such changes and additions can easily be made in their files.
Essentially, I am suggesting that the potential for
word processing in composition is only as limited as we make it. I have learned, in
admittedly frustrating situations, to begin with the most elementary procedures.
Do not frustrate your students by giving them excessive initial information or by
expecting them to do in their first hands-on session what took us weeks and months to master.
Whet their appetites and then offer more challenging applications for word processing.
And since it is new technology for many of them, do not let the technology intimidate them.
I always remind them of my frustrating experience as an undergraduate with the movie projector and then go on to tell them
that if I can use high tech, anyone can. They are almost certain to be as excited as I am about the
potential of word processing.
Work Cited
Faigley, Lester and Thomas P. Miller. "What We Learn From Writing on the Job."
College English 44 (1982): n. pag.