Computers and Writing, Technological Literacy, and Social Software

Since the early 1980s, with the rise of the personal computer, electronic technology has become an increasingly researched area of composition studies. This is evident with the advent of scholarly journals, such as Computers and Composition and Kairos, and in educational initiatives such as Writing Across the Curriculum (WAC), which has most recently been linked to the Electronic Communication Across the Curriculum (ECAC) movement. Scholars in the field of composition can be credited with fostering interest in and assuming control of the use of these technologies early in their development, with evidence in early scholarship reviewing initial uses of computers and their word processing applications, and in the development of more recent scholarship focusing on implications of the web and social networking applications.

But while composition scholars can be credited with integrating technologies into writing instruction, and doing so in a way that considers the pedagogical and practical implications of this integration, arguably educators within other fields have not been as willing to explore or experiment with their use. Technologists have detailed the resistance to technologies and writing for years. And this resistance is justifiable when considered in light of the long history of literacy movements in the America's educational system, especially in consideration of the "technological literacy" movement. Cynthia Selfe links this movement to the Clinton Administration in her article "Technology and Literacy: A Story about the Perils of Not Paying Attention.” According to Selfe, technological literacy was an answer to the development of the global “wired” economy, which was the result of increasing development of the web throughout the '90s. This movement sought to develop "computer skills and the ability to use computer and other technology to improve learning, productivity and performance" (qtd. in Selfe 411) by not only educating students how to use the applications these technologies offered but also teaching these students how to read, write, and communicate with them (Selfe 417). As this movement relates to resistance, Selfe suggests throughout her argument that it promotes a somewhat reductive notion of literacy, which scholars should--and do--question, and that the movement's integration has been ill-supported, in several ways, since its inception.  

Paralleling the increased presence of technologies in educational institutions in America has been the expansion of technology's capabilities and applications, which the web alone has largely made possible. As one can imagine when reflecting on the various capabilities and uses of the web today, the technological possibilities that the web's applications have made possible are closely associated with the social, with collaboration (Alexander; Garza and Hern; Lamb), and are praised because they "connect people in order to boost their knowledge and their ability to learn" (Alexander 33). These applications offer a variety of new capabilities to user, are distinguished because of they are free of cost, and are referred to by technologists as Web 2.0 applications, which suggests a second, more advanced phase in web applications.

It is likely that these social technologies have been embraced in the field of computers and composition because of the social-epistemic ideology that grounds modern composition theory. This ideology suggests that writing is imbricated in a network of shifting political, economic, and social contexts. As most contemporary compositionists are firmly grounded in this theory, today's techno-scholars suggest that technologies are significantly impacting our notions of composing. Christopher Thaiss states, while "traditional concerns have kept the definitions of 'writing'. . . somewhat narrow. . . the force of technological advancement is expanding those definitions and will not doubt continue to do so" (304-305) Likewise, Barb Blakely Duffelmeyer and Anthony Ellertson, in "Critical Visual Literacy: Multimodal Communication Across the Curriculum," claim that "multimodal composing more meaningfully reflects the environment in which students receive and generate texts today [in other social contexts]." In short, more scholars are considering the effects that technologies have on our reading, writing, and other communication processes. As a result, scholars both explicitly and implicitly allude to a necessary, renewed focus on the pedagogical implications of these technologies (Anson; Hawisher and Moran; Palmquist 2003, 2005; Porter; Selfe). Chris Anson states, ""the key to sustaining our pedagogical advances in the teaching of writing...[is] to take control of these technologies, using them in effective ways" (263).

In response to the fusion of technologies and writing, the increased focus on technological literacy, and the consequent call for a renewed focus on the pedagogical implications of the electronic applications that have developed as a result of these events, I discuss in this article the possibilities of one Web 2.0 application—the wiki—in the context of first-year writing courses at Colorado State University (CSU). These courses are grounded in a modern rhetorical theory that highlights the social context situating our writing and our writing processes. But despite this theory, as I discuss in the next section, our traditional writing pedagogies and practices—like those found in many classes today—are fraught with complications and limitations that do not fully develop students' understanding of the social processes and dynamics of writing that we seek to illuminate in courses such as these. Therefore, I will extend the work of scholars Garza and Hern, in their online collaboration entitled "Using wikis as collaborative learning tools: something wiki this way comes--or not!" in which they suggest that what are becoming "traditional" tools for composing such as closed-source software (my argument) "rarely mirrors the real process[es] of writing, [because] the students end up writing for the teacher," (WikiComposition) and thus their writing exists in what we liken to a vacuum. In addition, but contrarily, they claim that open-source software such as the Web 2.0 applications mentioned previously "better serve[s] the needs of writers because writing [with this software] is not done in isolation" (WikiComposition). And finally, they argue that the social "nature of wikis more aptly mirrors the dynamic nature of writing" (WikiComposition) by "help[ing] students see the social processes of writing more effectively" (WikiStory). By considering these claims in the context of first-year writing classes such as those taught at CSU, I will argue that challenges, complications, and limitations of teaching students about audience theory and collaborative and revision processes of writing can be alleviated through the use of applications such as the wiki. Furthermore, I argue that though "traditional" classroom pedagogies are at odds with writing instruction grounded in social-epistemic ideology, they maintain value, and that pedagogical tools such as the wiki should not replace, but expand, possibilities for writing instruction.

In the next sections, Composition, Theory, and the Classroom, The Limitations of Tradition, A Wikified Landscape and New Possibilities, and Is There a Conclusion Here? I will explore my experience as a writing instructor grounded in a modern rhetorical theory of social-epistemic rhetoric and then discuss the complications that "traditional" classrooms--the physical spaces, the technologies, and the pedagogies employed in these classrooms--present for writing instructors fostering a theory of writing grounded in the social. In this discussion I will focus on the "traditional" textual landscapes we privilege within these classrooms and the limitations of dialogue, collaboration, and revision that students experience as a result. Then, I will introduce the wiki, offering a brief description of the application and exploring suggested possibilities this application offers in the context of the challenges of the "traditional." In doing so, I intend to illuminate the pedagogical implications of the wiki and to argue that it can help overcome traditional challenges of teaching students the significance of audience recognition and understanding, of collaboration and dialogue, and of revision in writing instruction.