Communication has been altered throughout generations by becoming easier and more efficient each time. From face-to-face interactions to phone calls to texting, conversing with one another has been reformed for good. It explains why humans have prioritized their cell phones and use them in their daily activities. For teenagers, texting each other is a routine. However, the consistency of teen texting raises the question, ‘does teenage texting reduce the literacy of teens?’ Multiple studies and articles that have been conducted will be analyzed to provide some form of explanation.

In the magazine, “Proliferation of Text Messaging and its Effects on Language”, by Afsheen Yusaf, Tenzila Khan, and Saleha Nazeer, a study is conducted to determine if teenagers or students adapt the informality of texting etiquette in their formal writing. To determine if teenagers who text daily struggle to convey their words in school for this study, different sampling groups of students and teachers were taken from three high school populations as well as the students’ formal writing and SMS data. The overall results revealed that while students were communicating with their peers through texting, they began “incorporating elements of texting in their formal writing tasks”. The authors then elaborate on the multiple punctuations, grammatical, and spelling errors made in formal writing which is associated with the sloppiness of their text messaging. The sole purpose of the International Journal of Arts and Humanities is in its name to provide information on the arts and humanities. The authors decided to publish this journal because it dwells in their area of research, to analyze the behaviors of society. By conducting their study for their headline, and researching many past studies to help their hypothesis, this content caters to the arts and human aspect. The authors direct the information to teenagers and school educators. Using students and teachers in their study to provide a solid solution to the topic question helps attract an audience of other teenagers and educators who may relate or agree. The authors’ tone of the magazine is informative and neutral to decrease any bias in their study. Yusaf, Khan, and Nazeer most likely do not want to give the reader any reason to doubt the credibility of their research and findings, so the tone of the journal remains impartial. They conduct the study just like a scientist would experiment by listing the objectives, researching background information, formulating a hypothesis, presenting the data from the study, analyzing, and providing a conclusion. The purpose of the magazine is to determine whether texting is harming or improving students’ literacy. Yusaf, Khan, and Nazeer are sure to clarify that “The proposed study will investigate the truth of different views of the linguists about effects of texting on language. Furthermore, it will investigate the reality of skeptics’ views that texting is devoid of richness of language as it gives limited vocabulary to express viewpoints to individuals. With that, this study will investigate, whether in school while writing ‘texters’ experience any sort of difficulty in expressing themselves or not”. By managing the study and researching multiple sources that have also conducted similar studies, the authors are fulfilling the purpose of determining the effects teenage text messaging has on their writing and language skills. The genre is a magazine/journal based on arts and humanities. The authors document their research and data like a journal and provide lengthy accounts of each step of the process. Although Yusaf, Khan, and Nazeer remain unbiased toward the study, their stance is that “if the students adopt the habits of frequent texting, their formal writing will be affected by it negatively”. They believe that teens who text one another consistently will see similar writing patterns in their schoolwork. The diction used reveals this stance, however, they do not use any language to create any bias or changes in the tone. This art and humanities-based journal is directed towards students and teachers with the intent to inform the public of the effects text messaging can have on writing skills for teenagers. By using an unbiased and informative tone, the authors Yusaf, Khan, and Nazeer can present the findings of the study they conducted, proving their hypothesis that frequent texting informality can be adopted.

Contrary to the magazine, The Washington Post newspaper, “Text-messaging isn’t actually ruining young people’s grammar”, Nenagh Kemp reports that literacy skills are not ruined by teen texting. Kemp states that although mixing up short abbreviations like ‘i’ for ‘I’ and ‘u’ for ‘you’ is plausible in some cases, these “’ textisms’ (the abbreviated spellings of text messages) are associated with better literacy skills”. She reveals that she works with her “colleagues at Coventry University in Britain, Clare Wood and Sam Waldron” to analyze the text messaging and literacy of “243 participants from primary school, high school and university in the Coventry area”. They received copies of text messaging from the participants and then had the students complete a set of tasks to test their literary skills. The results showed that while many students had multiple writing errors in their texts, they “found no evidence that the use of grammatical violations in text messages is consistently related to poorer grammatical or spelling skills in school students”. The Washington Post is a major U.S. newspaper that covers any local, national, or global news. Kemp may have felt inclined to conduct their study and publish this newspaper to cover a subject that applies to the general public. Newspaper firms will go to many extents to hook viewers, listeners, and readers in for content, so it is possible that Kemp was advocating for a young audience. To hear that teenage screen time with their phones and text messaging does not negatively impact their literacy is a new concept for many young people who have always been told the opposite. The intended audience seems to be targeted towards young people, mainly students of any grade, who are constant texters. Kemp’s tone is also casual and laid-back, almost as if this newspaper is attempting to draw in young viewers by any means. Throughout the newspaper, multiple unconventional writing styles are being made to further a point, seeming as if they are writing in a way for mainly younger people to understand. The purpose of this published post was to inform the public of the misunderstandings of the effects of texting. To fulfill this purpose, the author conducts a study themself with their colleagues to report their findings. As a popular news source, the Washington Post is known as a newspaper dedicated to reporting general news for the public. This leads to the idea that not much of a stance can be made by the authors and publishers as reliable, impartial information should be documented and reported. However, the results of the study that the author conducts raise some concerns. After working “with 243 participants from primary school, high school and university in the Coventry area”, the author concludes that “overall, we found no evidence that the use of grammatical violations in text messages is consistently related to poorer grammatical or spelling skills in school students” and uses any oppositions to this conclusion within their research to be “explained simply by individual differences in general ability level, rather than anything specific about texting”. The study does not come off as reliable for many reasons like willingly volunteers are being used rather than randomly sampled students, the results are based upon the literacy skills a year later (giving time for students to work on their language and writing), and confounding factors are titled as “individual differences”. The diction being used makes it evident that the intended audience is young people as the author uses phrases like “duznt look quite lyk it shld” and encouraging “trying out unconventional ways of combining words (you is the best), saving space while maintaining meaning (I going now), or adding emotion to a message (yay!!! )”. This general newspaper post has been directed towards younger generations, perhaps in an attempt to hook a young audience to its newspapers, by purposefully using the language understood by teenage texters, conducting a study that surprisingly works in the favor of texting, and encouraging informal texting.

In the peer-reviewed article, “CONCERNS OF SOCIALLY INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES’ INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS: DIGITAL IMMIGRANT TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES”, by Robert Williams, a phenomenological study is conducted to project the concerns some teachers may have of the effects that socially interactive technology has on students at specific high schools in Alabama. The study is conducted by taking ten high school teachers and giving them a platform to voice their perspectives on the influence of SITs (socially interactive technology) on the learning development of students. The author believes that regarding this phenomenon, digital immigrant teachers have not been given the opportunity to voice their opinions and believes that “as digital immigrant teachers will continue to be educating students for years to come, the concerns and perceptions of those teachers need to be addressed”. To further the reliability of this study, the author describes the conditions that took place to ensure trustworthy data and results. The ten high school teachers selected were a combination of male and female educators from private and public high schools that had has at least 10 years of teaching experience. The data collected was derived from “interviews, observations, and focus groups” that were recorded and transcribed in the article for analysis. The author states that the overall theme from the data collection method is that “writing and spelling skills have decreased” as well as other detrimental effects that SITs have had. The Education peer-reviewed journal is known to document education and social sciences which is most likely why the author decided to conduct this phenomenological study. The authors and publishers decided to publish this article because this content caters to the main objective of the journal itself. The Education journal is sure to report and be well informed of any situation regarding educators and students. The intended audience would be school educators and officials to provide an insight into digital immigrant teachers’ perspectives on SITs. The only group who would know how teenage texting has affected literacy would-be teachers with experience to witness how writing and language skills have changed over time, so the author voices their thoughts. Williams’ tone remains fair and unprejudiced as their background research simply assumes there is some causation between SIT and student literacy, however, it never assumes that this relation is negative or positive. “The implications are that SITs have a multi-layered influence on the socialization and learning context of students”, allowing the reader to hypothesize their ideas rather than feeding into a certain side. The purpose of this article is to inform and voice the opinions of immigrant teachers who are witnessing the aftermath effects of SITs upon student literacy. Williams includes the abstract by stating that “the purpose of this transcendental phenomenological study is to describe concerns of digital immigrant teachers concerning socially interactive technologies’ influence on students at three high schools in Alabama”. The genre is a social science/education-based professional journal that aims to present “studies and theoretical papers on all areas of teaching and learning in both school and university settings. Issues focus on school psychology, the prevention of delinquency through high school programs, curriculum, instructional procedures, and practices in education”. Like the tone, the stance is also neutral to ensure reliability and unbiased data and results. This is a professional journal which means that Williams must contain any personal preference or ideas to themself. The diction of this article is very similar to the magazine mentioned earlier by Afsheen Yusaf, Tenzila Khan, and Saleha Nazeer, as it sets up the study with the clear intent to highlight the purpose, background information, data, and analysis while remaining informative and neutral all at once. Williams seemed to be effective in creating an account of an unbiased phenomenological study that can determine whether SITs have affected student literacy from the perspective of digital immigrant high school teachers.

In the journal, “Txting 2 Lrn: two recent studies show texting improves spelling”, by Anne Trubek, an analysis of texting is provided using the reference of multiple past studies. Trubek claims that “no negative association has been made between texting and reading skills” and “texting increases literacy, and it improves, of all things, spelling”. The monthly Instructor magazine/journal subjects itself to education, which is why Trubek is creating an analysis of texting’s effects on education. Trubek decided to write this article to depict how education has improved with texting because this publication dedicates information specifically for education. The audience is referenced to teachers as the author rhetorically asks, “How should teachers respond?” and provides advice “to openly embrace the platform in your classroom as a tool for learning”. The tone of the journal is very direct as Trubek talks to the reader and bluntly assumes that no negative association was made between texting and literacy. Although she uses multiple sources and studies to support her claims, the purpose of this article appears to persuade rather than to inform the reader. Trubek uses subheadings like “FACT:” to state her claims which do not allow the reader to think for themselves. She also provides activities for the teachers reading the journal to sell the idea that texting is beneficial. Instead of letting the reader create their perspective based on the given analysis, she pushes these “FACT” and activities to sell her point. The genre is an education-based journal/magazine that presents “a professional publication featuring a variety of articles on topics for the elementary school teacher. Subject matter includes computer applications for teaching techniques, educational software, and children’s book reviews”. Despite being an elementary teacher, Trubek is generalizing the idea that texting improves spelling for all students by attempting to persuade teachers. The stance of this journal is audibly in favor of teenage texting improving teen literacy. The language of the journal is clear enough to reveal the one-sided stance while revealing some bias in the tone. This journal was made with the intent of persuasion to advocate for texting for all students, prohibiting the reader or the intended audience, school educators, to think for themself.

Based on the research and analyses provided, it has become apparent that teenage texting reduces the literacy of teens. In most of the sources, the authors conducted a study to determine for themselves if literacy was affected in any way by text messaging. The magazine, “Proliferation of Text Messaging and its Effects on Language”, by Afsheen Yusaf, Tenzila Khan and Saleha Nazeer, and the peer-reviewed article, “CONCERNS OF SOCIALLY INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES’ INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS: DIGITAL IMMIGRANT TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES”, by Robert Williams both provided negative effects of teen texting on teen literacy while remaining reliable, credible, and unbiased. The studies were also taken under conditions that limited as many confounding factors as possible. The Washington Post newspaper, “Text-messaging isn’t actually ruining young people’s grammar”, by Nenagh Kemp and the journal, “Txting 2 Lrn: two recent studies show texting improves spelling”, by Anne Trubek, were untrustworthy and had little to no proper evidence to support their claims. Overall, the abbreviations, slang, common misspelling, and the distraction of texting all point to a common trend of negative impacts on reading and writing skills. As a teenager myself, I can confidently speak on behalf of many teenagers and say that texting, if anything, has lessened my ability to provide a proper extent of formal writing.

References

“Proliferation of Text Messaging and its Effects on Language.” International Journal of Arts and Humanities, vol. 43, no. 43, 31 Dec. 2015, p. 101. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A454709454/ITOF?u=nysl_oweb&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=7c0104cf. Accessed 3 Nov. 2021.

Kemp, Nenagh. “Text-messaging isn’t actually ruining young people’s grammar.” Washington Post, 25 June 2014. Gale General OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A372787407/ITOF?u=nysl_oweb&sid=bookmark-ITOF&xid=870e88ab. Accessed 3 Nov. 2021.

Williams, Robert. “CONCERNS OF SOCIALLY INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES’ INFLUENCE ON STUDENTS: DIGITAL IMMIGRANT TEACHERS’ PERSPECTIVES.” Education, vol. 141, no. 3, spring 2021, pp. 109+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A668270543/AONE?u=nysl_oweb&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=365a1c09. Accessed 3 Nov. 2021.

Trubek, Anne. “Txting 2 Lrn: two recent studies show texting improves spelling.” Instructor [1990], vol. 121, no. 5, spring 2012, pp. 49+. Gale Academic OneFile, link.gale.com/apps/doc/A287751231/AONE?u=nysl_oweb&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=8760a28c. Accessed 3 Nov. 2021.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.