What experience do you have working with online social media or digital composition as a way to connect with others? As a way to promote social action? (e.g. blogging, Pinterest, video production, etc.)? Drawing on the readings for this week, describe the potentials and pitfalls you see for digital media in urban, English Language Arts (ELA) classrooms.
I think when people hear the words "digital composition", we think of some hifalutin ideas where it's something only people with technical experience can do, like making a VR video game that makes noises based on where your hands are, or a goofy video to share your knowledge. In reality, it's literally anything we do with a digital device. Like making talking on the phone or sharing pictures on snapchat. It's something that we've all done!
Digital composition, with it's ability to allow anyone to produce media, has drastically changed social activism. The ability to record video evidence has made it much easier to hold people accountable for wrongdoing. This isn't a recent development as well. In the 1990s, when Rodney King was assaulted by police officers, a video recording from an onlooker proved it happened. This eventually led to two police being imprisoned and King to receive millions of dollars in damages. While it is unfortunate that we have these same problems decades after, it is positive seeing people all over using digital media to continue to keep police accountable, share their locations during a protest, and share information that helps others learn more about the problems in our society.
Of course, schools don't see it this way. As Haddix and Sealey-Ruiz (2012) point out, "in many urban districts I work with, the same tools and practices get policed and censored. Students are prohibited from using them. Even further, the use of digital tools is sometimes viewed as “dumbing down” students’ literacy skills or practices (pg. 190). My school is no different. My students go through a metal detector each day and are forced to give their phones to the principal, who then lock it up. While this would not be a problem if there were ample opportunities for students to use technology. It is simply not the case. At my school, there is 1 active computer lab. That means, if one teacher wants it, they must gain it weeks in advance, hoping one of the veteran teachers hasn't grabbed it weeks in advance. When they get in the computer lab, it becomes obvious that there are only 22 computers, far below the class sizes, which means hoping students are absent, or always requiring students to work as partners. Once students get on the computers, it becomes obvious they are not powerful enough to run simple programs. What would take 1 minute on a phone would take 4 on the computers.
As Jenkins (2006) notes, "What a person can accomplish with an outdated machine in a public library with mandatory filtering software and no opportunity for storage or transmission pales in comparison to what person can accomplish with a home computer with unfettered Internet access, high band-width, and continuous connectivity" (pg.13). And Jenkins is right! I have been able to do so much more engaging projects with my students through virtual learning rather than in the actual classroom. If I wanted to change my plans and do a student-led research project about famous Black Milwaukeeans for a day, I can. If I was in the classroom, I can guarantee the lab would have been taken, and it would have taken more time to load information and find information.
Students in districts with less funding are falling behind their peers because the schools can't afford to get these supplies. This is why it is so essential that we fight against the technology gap in schools. We can't afford to leave our students behind where there's so much to gain from high quality technology in schools, and if we can't, maybe it's time to let students use their phones as a tool for learning.
