-tictech message:
It is perfectly reasonable to compare spellcheckers with other types of
software. They are all sophisticated tools. Spellcheckers rely on
machine intelligence (such as alignment algorithms) and simpler
lexicographical order analysis to do their work. The fact that you are
introducing machine intelligence into a test that is supposed to be
driven by human intelligence only increases the likelihood that they
would poison the probative value of the test.
"functions, etymologies meanings, and syntactical and idiomatic uses"
These all are directly applicable to spelling and none of them are part
of a spellchecker. In his message, Kurt Sahl presented evidence that
spellcheckers inhibit writing. Spellcheckers are a shortcut that
cause students to skip analysis of "functions, etymologies meanings,
and syntactical and idiomatic uses," couldn't this shortcut be partly
responsible for their diminishing of writing ability?
I also cannot agree with the contention that digital divide issues are
null. Elizabeth Sims pointed out that to use spellchecking tools
requires training:
"I certainly teach the students in my computer lab how to use
spellcheck and
insist that they do use it, but I also hammer into them that using only
spellcheck results in lazy, bad writing."
This training takes time in a computer lab. Lab time requires regular
access to technology; this is exactly what the concept of the digital
divide addresses.
Graham Ford
Network Administrator
Highland Park Elementary
fordgj@u.washington.edu
On Friday, March 14, 2003, at 01:51 PM, Fisher, Devin wrote:
> -tictech message:
>
> My last thoughts on this subject.
>
> I think some people consider spell checking to be an option. It is
> only an
> option if you turn it off. There is no equitability between using a
> program
> responsible for figuring out mathematic functions that require
> programming
> and more than likely a degree, and using spell checker to correct
> simple
> mistakes, and less obvious ones. The only digital divide that exists
> for the
> present argument is access to a computer. What kind of natural skill or
> training is needed to learn to right click on a word that has a red
> line
> under it? I know some people do not have the inherent knowledge of said
> procedure, but it can be taught along the same lines as looking up a
> word in
> a dictionary.
>
> The digital divide in this argument is a null point. It has no
> bearing. I do
> not know the parameters of this test, whether it is timed or what, but
> if
> they gave students enough time to use a dictionary, then you should
> have a
> choice whether to use one or not. In fact, dictionaries are not the
> best way
> to learn how to spell words. Let's define dictionary:
>
> ----
> Main Entry: dic·tio·nary
> Pronunciation: 'dik-sh&-"ner-E
> Function: noun
> Inflected Form(s): plural -nar·ies
> Etymology: Medieval Latin dictionarium, from Late Latin diction-,
> dictio
> word, from Latin, speaking
> Date: 1526
> 1 : a reference book containing words usually alphabetically arranged
> along
> with information about their forms, pronunciations, functions,
> etymologies,
> meanings, and syntactical and idiomatic uses. (Merriam Webster online:
> www.m-w.com)
> ----
>
> It does not say once that it is intended as a tool to spell check with.
> Supposedly you are supposed to learn how to spell in school using
> phonetics
> and general guidelines. Spell checker's purpose, on the other hand, is
> quite
> straight forward: to assist in correcting someone's spelling. Now
> anyone who
> leaves spell checker alone in it's onslaught of corrected words will be
> embarrased at some point. To Two Too. Bare Bear Bar. Sun Son.
>
> My point is that holding back a tool like spell checker is like
> holding back
> use of a dictionary when they first were made accessible to most
> people. You
> could use the same argument. Dictionaries are technology as well. I
> think I
> know more people who own Word than own actual honest-to-goodness
> dictionaries.
>
> Using that statistic, why don't we just pat them on the head and say
> good
> luck?
>
> Devin Fisher
> Tichnoligee Kansultint
> Ban Vassilt Alameanterie
> (mailto:dmfisher@seattleschools.org)
>
> -end tictech message. To join, leave, or visit
> the message archive, go to tictech on the Web:
> http://www.earthdaybags.org/tictech/
-end tictech message. To join, leave, or visit
the message archive, go to tictech on the Web:
http://www.earthdaybags.org/tictech/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Mar 14 2003 - 17:18:19 PST