Slashdot Mirror


"L33T" Speak Invades Schools

Masem writes "NYTimes reports on how common chat room/IM shortcuts (such as 'u' for you, 'r' for are, etc) are creeping into the classroom and homework assignments from those teenage kids that spend a significant amount of time in chat programs. This is giving the teachers headaches in trying to grade the assignments, much less understand them because of the techno-generation gap, and to try to prevent further abuse of the language, have begun penalizing students for using the net slang. Students sometimes don't even realize they use the chat room shorthand until it's pointed out to them, because that method of chatting has become second nature to them."

13 of 1,081 comments (clear)

  1. Kids these days... by nitefallz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they can't differentiate between being online and writing on paper for school on which they'll be graded on, what hope is there left for the world?

    1. Re:Kids these days... by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 5, Insightful



      * kids started using calculators instead of slide rules

      * kids started typing homework on PCs with spell checkers

      * kids started using the 'net as their research source, rather than the library


      All of these things have degraded the efficacy of educating our children. Shouldn't teachers do their best to discourage netspeak in assignments?

      --
      www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
    2. Re:Kids these days... by jpt.d · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I support the use of calculators for complex operations as long as you know how to do it for smaller operations. You should be able to do 40339 * 49392 without a calculator, but it would not be evil to after you already know how to do it.

      Spell checkers are not bad if they do not have to rely on them.

      Same with the net sources, must be a 'reliable' source.

      One thing that wasn't mentioned - contractions weren't allowed at one point, but now they most definately are.

      I do not think that netspeak should be allowed in assignments, but like it or not they will probably get into the language just like contractions have.

      --
      What we see depends on mainly what we look for. -- John Lubbock Now search for that bug slave!
    3. Re:Kids these days... by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problems come not from the tools themselves, but the misuse.

      If a calculator is used in place of learning, instead of in place of unneeded repetition, it harms the education. There were 8th grade students in my Middle School who couldn't multiply on paper because they were provided with calculators, as to not slow down the rest of the class.

      If a spell-checker is used to correct the mistakes without the user realizing they are mistakes (this is why AutoCorrect is evil) then the user never learns, never corrects the behaviour. A student may rely on spell check instead of learning to proof-read. "John the ate hamburger alter noon non Sunday whiff Jane." This sentance is full of real words but means nothing.

      The Internet as a reasearch tool is both good and bad. If the student has been taught how to identify good sources, then it speeds the research process, and does not hinder the report. If they have not been taught, they will take "Crazy Al's House of Historical Info" word for the "fact" that Paul Revere was a cross-dressing minister. The Internet has no Dewey Decimal system, and students have to be more alert when performing research online.

      "L33T" speak, as the article calls it, has no such beneficial effects within the classroom. Shakespeare, Mark Twain, even Plato probably used local vernacular when talking with others and in their writings, but this is lazy short-hand. To compensate for the inability to type quickly, the unwillingness to practive, an impetuous attitude toward learning basic activities such as spelling, and an overall disinterest in anything but the moment, "L33T" is as pathetic a waste of time as in AlTeRnAtE CaPiTaLiZaTiOn. Further more, the failure to recognize the difference between social and structured situations shows a degredation in the quality of our "social graces" for which many fingers have already been pointed, not least at education and parenting.

      Some chat typing can be considered onomatopoeic, such as "kewl" and "schweet", where the spelling more accurately describes the pronunciation of the word. This should still not be used outside of social chatting/dialogue, but it is a slightly different facet of the problem.

      --
      I'm too young to be this jaded.

      --
      That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  2. Good for teachers by Amazing+Quantum+Man · · Score: 5, Insightful

    teachers... have begun penalizing students for using the net slang

    Good! More power to them! School assignments should be written in grammatically correct English, using proper spelling. This requirement might be lifted for certain creative writing assignments, but in general, this is what schools should be doing.

    --
    Fascism starts when the efficiency of the government becomes more important than the rights of the people.
    1. Re:Good for teachers by foobar104 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Well, actually, no. Languages do evolve, yes, but the purpose of things like schools is to limit that evolution. If a language evolves too quickly, it fractures into dialects that eventually become mutually incomprehensible. Suddenly what were once dialects become completely separate languages sharing only their immediate ancestor. Think French, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese here.

      And language serves a far more important purpose than to merely allow us to communicate with each other. Language allows us to communicate with our past. (Okay, it's strictly a one-way communication, but communication nonetheless.) I can go back and read things that were written five hundred years ago because the modern English language hasn't changed too much in that time. But going back much further than that, things get difficult.

      Here's a version of the Lord's Prayer published in 1611.

      Our father which art in heauen, hallowed be thy name.Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth as it is in heauen.Giue us this day our daily bread.And forgiue us our debts as we forgiue our debters.And lead us not into temptation, but deliuer us from euill. Amen.

      The most notable difference is the use of the letter "u" where we would use "v." Other than that, this passage is totally legible. It's slightly under 400 years old.

      Here's the same prayer in Middle English, dated around 1384. (Apologies to anybody whose computer doesn't display the thorn, the eth, or the ae dipthong correctly. If somebody wants to go through there and add HTML entities, be my guest.)

      Oure fadir at art in heuenes halwid be i name;i reume or kyngdom come to be. Be i wille don in here as it is doun in heuene.yeue to us today oure eche dayes bred.And foryeue to us oure dettis at is oure synnys as we foryeuen to oure dettouris at is to men at han synned in us.
      And lede us not into temptacion but delyuere us from euyl.


      This version is pretty radically different in spelling some word choice, but it's fundamentally recognizable. But look at the same prayer dated circa 1000.

      Fæder ure u e eart on heofonumsi in nama gehalgod tobecume in rice gewure in willa on eorðan swa swa on heofonumurne gedæghwamlican hlaf syle us to dægand forgyf us ure gyltas swa swa we forgyfað urum gyltendumand ne gelæd u us on costnunge ac alys us of yfele solice.

      Pretty much incomprehensible.

      I would say that your typical "1337-speak" version of the Lord's Prayer would resemble the 600-year-old version more than the other two: it would be fundamentally comprehensible, but only after certain letter substitutions are made by the reader. A more exotic rendering using constructions like "sux0r" (although I know "sucks" doesn't appear in the Lord's Prayer; bear with me) would quickly start to resemble the 1000-year-old version.

      So there's a good argument to be made that the kind of writing we're talking about here is surprisingly close to becoming another language entirely.

  3. Grade appropriately! by Boone^ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A few low grades will certainly help them remember the difference between chatrooms and book reports!

    I hate to sound like I'm trying to protect the "King's English", but chatroom slang became such in an effort to be able to convey ideas through typing at the rate of talking, and it should be kept to chatrooms. The last thing we need is a generation (gee, I'm sounding old at 26) of kids hitting the Universities thinking "ur" is a valid re-contraction of "you're", and "u" can easily replace "you".

  4. Maybe teach typing... by alexhmit01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess I'm too old (at 23), but I find that the abbreviations are pointless. When I send IMs, I often send phrases instead of sentances, but I don't abbreviate words. However, I do abbreviate phrases that have been used as such for over a decade. BRB for "be right back" predates IM, but "u" for you is just silly. It's harder to read, and learning to type would make it immaterial.

    Additionally, the traditional abbreviations were for "online phrases." When wat the last time you used "away from keyboard - AFK", "be right back - BRB", "laughing out loud" - LOL, "rolling on the floor laughing - ROTFL", etc., in a real life conversation?

    These abbreviations are more reasonable for phrases that would only be used in an online conversation. By that logic, "oic" is an acceptable abbreviation for "oh, I see", given that you only use it to convey an online emotion.

    I feel like the best thing would be for teachers to penalize, penalize heavy, and encourage students to STOP using online conventions online as well. If people would write in more reasonable English, communication would be easier.

    I find people nitpicking over typos, spelling errors, and grammatical errors strange. However, none of us (unless we are slashdot editors *grin*) should STRIVE to butcher the language.

    Better command of the standard language improves communication. Has anyone whose ever held a job or been in an adult relationship ever thought "communication skills are over rated?" Most business and interpersonal problems stem from miscommunications, anything that helps that is a Good Thing.

    Alex

  5. My Wife is a High School Teacher by DaytonCIM · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This is giving the teachers headaches in trying to grade the assignments, much less understand them because of the techno-generation gap

    I disagree. My wife has no trouble marking down anyone who uses "U" instead of You or "R" instead of Are. Teachers face no dilemma here; students do.

    If you as a student cannot use proper grammar and spelling, then you are transferred to a remedial course. If you are still unable to use proper grammar and spelling, then further testing is completed in order to determine if you have a "learning disability."

    If you're lazy and refuse to use anything but your "chat-speak," then you'll fail English and High School... then no more chat room, because the only jobs open to you won't pay enough for you to afford an Internet connection.

  6. What some people... by MattC413 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    fail to understand, is that what you write, and how you write it, reflects very strongly upon one's self.

    For example, in a 'chat room' for Asheron's Call, where people would meet up when the server was not working, there would be many people using this 'leet speak', asking repeatedly for information. By simply using correct capitalization, punctuation, and spelling, I could often get many of the people there to heed my words as if I was a person of authority. Some went so far as to ask how I became employed at Microsoft - I was just a regular user like them, but my choice to use English correctly made them assume that I was someone who knew what they were talking about.

    I try to encourage people to use the best spelling and grammar as they can when online. I just cannot 'respect' someone who can't be bothered to type "are" ('r') or "you" ('u') because they want to save themselves from typing two characters.

    Try the above sometime. Use your best grammar and spelling and notice how others react to you.

    (NOTE: I don't recommend this during intense-gaming situations.. "Help! I am currently in coordinates N7 being att... Uh oh, they have shot me with the... Aw, crap..")

  7. Of Course They're Penalizing Them by ReadParse · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There should have been no headaches for teachers or hesitation in penalizing the students for using misspellings or "net slang". There is a difference between casual conversation and formal usage of your language, and schoolwork is of the latter category.

    Some of us don't even use that kind of slang on the internet. The truth is that it was created by people who either cannot type well or who type lazily. Those of us who understand that effective communication is important realize that typing in complete, correctly spelled, and well formed sentences with correct puncuation gets our ideas across in a more accurate way.

    Of course, that doesn't mean that we have no spelling or grammatical errors -- it simply means that we try to communicate our ideas using grammar that is correct. It also creates less confusion for us, because we don't have to remember in what context we're writing and "turn on" or "turn off" our grammar rules.

    RP

  8. Re:It might be second nature... by Chiasmus_ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So we should start replacing words in our dictionaries?

    Replacing words in dictionaries is a constant, ongoing process. The word "D'oh!" was completely unknown to the English language five years ago; today it can be found in most major dictionaries.

    Spellings, historically, have changed slowly but steadily; it's interesting to read a little Chaucer and wonder just how many steps it took for "soute" to become "sweet".

    Meanings tend to change a little faster. For example, there's an early-20th-century piece of literature (whose name escapes me today) that includes the sentence "He fagged his way down the road until he was knocked up." meaning "He walked until very tired." Obviously, connotative meanings of those terms have rendered that sentence completely obselete.

    It's an inevitability that text-messaging will make an extremely rapid impact on the English language. It would not surprise me in the slightest if, 150 years from now, the correct spelling of "you" actually is "u".

    --
    "Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he deems himself your master."
  9. Language Migration by peatbakke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Disclaimer: I'm a big fan of the English language, and I think that it is a good idea to limit severe language deviations, particularly in a formal academic setting. I'm not going to endorse the substitution of 'r' and 'u' for 'are' and 'you', but simply make a point of the roll such things play in the evolution of a language.

    I'm an American, and I'm studying linguistics (amongst other things) in New Zealand. It's an interesting place to study linguistics, because New Zealand is one of the very few places (if not the only place) where there is a fairly complete aural record of the evolution from it's roots in the United Kingdom to it's modern form.

    Language is a hard target to pin down. Even in countries that try to limit linguistic migration (such as France) can't slow it down significantly, even in times without huge revolutions in communication. English is one of the fastest changing, and most diverse languages on the planet, and it only takes the space of about two generations for the "proper" high culture forms of the language to change significantly.

    A major shift in communication technology makes the changes occur much, much faster. The advent of radio made western urban American English the "proper" form of American English in the span of about five years. National broadcasters go through an enormous amount of training to develop that accent, as do politicians and other public figures. Listen to Clinton's speeches at the beginning and end of his term, or even how George Bush's (much ridiculed) accent has started to change.

    It's expected that the Internet will have the same effect on written languages that the radio had on spoken languages. Interestingly enough, it wasn't until the advent of the newspaper that English spelling (both American and British) became more or less standardized across large geographic regions.

    Ironically, the first place to hear about a significant change in language is in the editorial / opinion sections of news papers ... and it's never good news! Furthermore, it's always about primary and secondary school kids.

    Anyhow, I suspect that the practice of using 'oic' and 'l8r' in written English will expand dramatically over the next decade. Distasteful? Perhaps. But keep in mind that there's only one standard for language: the de facto standard.