Since Rhetorical Computer Literacy builds on and utilizes both Functional and Critical Literacy, this is clearly Selber's crown jewel of technological literacy, so to speak. The key distinction between Rhetorical and Critical Literacy is that the former entails thoughtful production in addition to thoughtful observation and/or utilization. To produce interface systems, however, requires a great deal of technical knowledge that many Humanities and English faculty may not be able to obtain. If Humanities teachers were technologically inclined, they probably wouldn't be humanities teachers. Of course, many Humanities teachers can and do master advanced technology. However, I think it will take a great deal of education and effort to teach students to be Rhetorically Literate if we must first learn and then teach how to produce computer interfaces. At the least, one would have to take programming classes to learn to create software, a task for which many very smart people get paid very big bucks.
Of course, the above critique assumes that teachers and students are aiming to produce interfaces from scratch. Google, in its democratizing philosophy, has made it incredibly easy for the average computer user to construct a website. Yet the structure, content, and dissemination of a Google site are all influenced by Google's software design, if we accept Selber's arguments. To truly break free of any influence, we need to create our own interfaces, putting us back at the conundrum of mastering advanced uses of technology without extensive technical training and knowledge. It seems to me that Computer Science/Engineering students should be reading Selber along with English and Humanities students, who could potentially help Computer Science/Engineering students to recognize the political, social, and rhetorical influences of their work.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that computer and engineering students should join us in considering this. However, my experience is tech people don't want to consider "should we" because their mindset is that all tools are neutral at base. I think there should be a place for consideration of the probable effects of a new technology in society
Isn't it funny how English teachers are being pulled into the twenty-first century kicking and screaming when we have relied on the tried and true written text that has been around for centuries.
I foresee a future when computer science and teaching English are going to meld. Heck, they already have.
Post a Comment