A 21st-Century Report: Much to Do About Nothing
In today’s world, 21st-century skills are all the talk. We heard it first from business leaders who apparently have been disappointed by the quality of recent graduates, not because they aren’t intelligent or eager to do a good job, but because they don’t take enough initiative or they don’t seem creative enough to meet the ever-changing demands of the new business world.
Now we are hearing the same from educators. We are told from all corners that our students need to be tech-savvy communicators, innovators, problem solvers, critical thinkers, and on and on. Numerous educational reports, studies, online chats, and conferences focus on this subject. Essentially, 21st-century skills have become the siren call in education.
As we all know, this call is inextricably linked with the current innovations in technology that offer young people opportunities, especially in the areas of communication and collaboration, that are truly remarkable. The fact that many students are taking advantage of these opportunities on their own has people within schools nervous. Educators see themselves as being in catch-up mode: “We’ve got to incorporate the best of this new technology into our instruction to make it relevant and in line with the 21st century—and we’ve got to do it now!”
With this background in mind, I read “A Call to Support 21st Century,” an NCTE report by Kathleen Blake Yancey. The gist of the report is that we need new models of writing and a new writing curriculum that more effectively addresses communication opportunities offered by the latest technology. These points were made at the beginning and the end of the report. What these new models might be and what this new curriculum might look like (other than it will be impacted by the technology—offering a wider audience, more writing options, etc.) wasn’t made clear, unless I missed something, or perhaps that wasn’t the intention of the report. Whatever the case, I found the contents of the report curious, at best.
Yancey attempts to put writing into historical perspective, as if that will help us understand the need for these new models today. She notes how early on writing was not treated with the same respect as reading in the schools or by the public. She also stated that, historically, writing was linked to testing, and instruction was not backed up by a sound, proven curriculum. She also mentions other developments including the teaching of writing using the writing process.
Along the way, Yancey provides asides that remind us that people have written outside of school throughout our history. Orders from Sears catalogs, diaries, letters, Ford’s pardon, and Korean and Vietnam war memoirs were some of the examples cited. Now is it a surprise to anyone that people have always written outside of school? Before phones or the Internet, pray tell, how else would people have communicated if not by writing letters? So what is the point? People have always written when there has been a need or desire to write—with or without the help of school. And in regard to her examples…ordering from a Sears catalogue is not writing; it is ordering. And Ford’s pardon! What is that all about?
The author also shares two examples from the new age of writing. The first one tells the story of a young lady who sent out an e-mail calling for help during a flood. (I can only assume that her phone was out of order.) The other story explains that some clever AP students had their fellow students write “This is Sparta” and “This is Madness” somewhere within their exam responses. Apparently, the idea caught on with students and test evaluators alike. Good fun, I guess. Yancey shares these examples as if they hold some significance. I say, what do they have to do with writing?
Near the end of the report, the author says, “Outside of school, writing is ubiquitous, and through writing, we participate, and through writing, we are.” These remarks may sound good, but what do they really say? Next to nothing. To close a report about the importance of 21st-century writing with platitudes like these certainly doesn’t do much for the cause.
Now I’m all for rethinking the way our schools approach writing, and, by all means, let’s incorporate the best that technology has to offer into writing instruction. But don’t expect me to be enlightened, inspired, or convinced of anything by this report, which, by the way, is sanctioned by NCTE.
—Dave
Leave a Reply