Texting has become so popular that many have taken to calling todays teens generation text With the

proliferation of technology you realize how important it is to explore the effect of cell phone texting on learner literacy. Texting refers to the use of abbreviations and other techniques to craft messages sent through the cell phone. This form of writing known as Txtspk does not follow standard grammar or spelling conventions. It is popular because of the wide use of cell phones and instant messaging (IM). In some developed countries there are several million texts that are sent daily. For many years educators and parents have blamed texting for two ills: the corruption of language and a degradation in spelling. Teachers are even complaining about textisms creeping into schoolwork. This has led many to wonder if it is possible that texting can have any positive influence on learners language development. Before you write off texting as a corruption of this generation it is important to realize that many studies have found that teens through their texting, blogging and emailing are reading and writing more than any other generation. The bottom line is that texting is not going to go away; so it has become crucial to explore the opportunities for cell phone-assisted literacy development, as well as understand the risks. More research will have to be done to consider the full impact of texting and literacy. A recent study explored the relationship in 10- to 12-year-old children between the use of textisms and school literacy attainment. The researchers found no association between overall textism use and the childrens spelling scores. However there was a strong association between textism use and phonological awareness (for example, 2nite sounds the same as tonight). This is because although spelled incorrectly in a conventional sense, many textisms are phonologically acceptable forms of written English. There are decades of research that have demonstrated a consistent association between different forms of phonological awareness and reading attainment. Further research supports that sending frequent texts can actually help children to read and write because of the abbreviations that are used. Text style requires learners to write economically, inventively and playfully which are all good practice when learning to read and write. Some English teachers have even gone as far as to ban cell phones and texting believing there is a place for texting in the classroom. Below are some examples that teachers are using to incorporate texting into their teaching and classrooms-

Teachers are having students translate text-heavy pieces, (for example a MySpace

page), into Standard English. Or they are doing the reverse by having students translate passages from classic literature into text speak.

One English teacher has asked her students to summarize in the form of text

passages from Richard III to demonstrate succinctly their comprehension of the material.

Teachers are using text as a means to communicate with their students. This allows

teachers to discuss content with their students in the formal writing assignments. Because learners are communicating through so many channels these days, there is a need to educate them about writing for a particular audience: school writing is different to casual chat.

When writing first drafts some educators are allowing the quick, free-flowing style of

texting to spark their learners thinking processes. The students will then switch to standard language during editing and revising.

Texting is crossing over into math and applied sciences as well as teachers in those

areas use formal math problems based on the send rate and receive rate of texts. This type of creative problem solving appeals to todays heavy digital technology generation of teens.

http://www.surfnetkids.com/go/safety/672/lol-texting-and-literacy-in-todays-generationtext/

Textism helps literacy development

Just because textism doesnt yet have a 400-page Oxford Dictionary doesnt mean it's inferior to printed language. The fear of text messaging is a passing panic and anti-textism advocates have failed to understand how it can greatly influence literacy development.
SUBMITTED 9/03/2010 BY VUETOU VIEWS 1076 COMMENTS 1 UPDATED25/03/2010

Photographer : kiwanja @ flickr

'Textism' and 'TXT SP3EAK' are a couple of the labels given to mobile text messaging and internet communication. Some of the labellers advocate that textism is causing the demise of literacy skills and proper English because instead of using broad vocabulary and complex words, 'proper' English is replaced by abbreviations (gr8 for great), acronyms (LOL for laugh out loud), and emoticons (=) to show a smiley face) . Fear not, because textism and English can coexist; the former can actually help the latter. Textism should be hailed, not accused of being the devil's work. Some think Textism is creating havoc Textism was born because of the limited space and difficulty of writing words on numeric phone keypads, which means using single letters and symbols to replace vowels, consonants, and words. Brevity' is the name of the game. And for that reason, some teachers, parents, and linguists have blamed textism for two ills: the corruption of language and the poor spelling amongst young people. John Humphrys a prominent author, journalist, and radio and television presenter in the UK described textism as the work of 'vandals who are doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbours eight hundred years ago...pillaging our punctuation, savaging our sentences, and raping our vocabulary.' And the fear of text lingo has been further exacerbated because mobile phones can be so easily accessed. Textism and English can coexist The ability to creatively twist and turn the English language, depending on the audience and situation, is what makes it so beautiful. We use English differentlywith different people on different issues. This is known as code siwthing ' for example a businessman can switch between business writing and writing to his mum. He wouldn't start with Dear Valued Mother as he would in business with Dear Valued Customer, would he? Likewise, Textism enables a new way of communicating, as Veenal Raval, a speech and language therapist, claims: The fear that has been put across in the media is that children don't understand the need to code switch that is, switch between Standard English grammar for an exam or essay and

what is acceptable when you are communicating on a social level. In fact, they are capable of that switch, just as bi- or tri-lingual children might speak English at school and a mother or father tongue at home Plus, text messaging isn't an uncontrollable machine annihilating our ability to spellif it were, then why would there be a 'dictionary' in-built into mobiles, also known as 'predictive text input', that gives immediate feedback to users about the appropriateness and correctness of their spelling?. Indeed mobiles have the power to educate. Another Stage of Evolution According to Dr. C. George Boeree, a former psychology professor at Shippensburg University who's written extensively on psycholinguistics,resistance to textism arises because we want it rich yet concise, in which it is Englishs richness against textisms conciseness.'It is this battle that has made many believe textism will reduce English to rubble. But a languages evolve, and a reason is because they interact with other languages. If a small but powerful language subdues a larger one, the larger one adopts certain vocabulary and speaking styles from the powerful one. For example, because of textisms flexibility in spelling, people are now able to use English with comfort, creativity, and versatility - ate becomes 8, at the moment becomes atm, and tomorrow becomes 2mro. Users understand these single digits, letters, and combinations because they know the equivalent forms in proper English. Even the linguist David Crystal named his book, Txtng: the Gr8 Db8! If textism was totally banned and forever banished, English would be a one-dimensional, monotonous language. Even Shakespeare experimented with the language, writing his masterpieces before formal spelling was standardised, and inventing new words in the process! It makes one wonder if the reverse is true: exceptional writing happens when unlimited flexibility and spelling however you like replaces rigidity and rules of a language. Textism: renewing literacy development Textism also plays a role in literacy development. The texter is required to write economically, inventively, and playfully this is good practice when learning to read and write, and are 'ways that benefit literacy,' according to David Crystal, professor of linguistics at the University of Wales. A 2008 Australian study also found a similar result: proficient texters are usually better at reading and using traditional spelling and grammar. Ttextism also contributes to reading and vocabulary development and better awareness of speech sounds. Some educators use the quick, free-flowing style of texting to spark pupils' learning to encourage writing frequently so that their language skills develops But of course, editing and revising by students would need to be in proper English because formal education still requires it as the 'end product'. An activity used by English teachers, like Cindi Rigbee, is to translate text-drenched pieces into Standard English, or literature into text speak creating better comprehension and a form of multilingual focus. So taking a broader view of literacy assists in one's formal and informal education Textism has redefined literacy and English. It cannot be shunned anymore; it must be embraced. English has been evolving over a long period, beginning with the Anglo-Saxons to Frenchified English, to todays version - a blend of many languages, which has shown to be harmless. Although textism has come about through technology, and not from other countries, it still has the power to influence the next stage of Englishs evolution because its only helping literacy development.

http://www.actnow.com.au/Opinion/Textism_helps_literacy_development.aspx

The War on Textism

by P AT RI CK SI MA S on JANUARY 25, 2011

It must be a great feeling for a parent when their child has received a medal for his/her school spelling bee. All those years of vocabulary tests and oral spelling quizzes in elementary school finally paid off. Along the way, their child goes through another right of passage: cellphones and texting. Suddenly all those years of Hooked on Phonics are thrown out the window with a bastardized version of communication known as textisms. So their childs excellent grammar, superb vocabulary, and communication skills are doomed, right? Think Again. There seems to be a general view that texting and the use of textisms, which are abbreviated phrases and words used in Short Message System (SMS), can diminish a childs speech and literacy skills. With the use of phrases like brb, omg, or ttyl, it appears that people are getting lazier and ignorant of grammar. When a child, or anyone who engages in text-speak, contracts phrases and words to symbols used in textisms, they actually display a keen sense of how to use appropriate words. Researchers from Coventry University in England have attempted to tackle this issue by conducting a study.

Dr. Beverly Plester, an Honorary Research Fellow of the University, states: So far, our research has suggested that there is no evidence to link a poor ability in standard English to those children who send text messages. In fact, the children who were the best at using textisms were also found to be the better spellers and writers. A child couldnt fully understand any kind of textism without any explanation leading to the actual source of the meaningwhich is the English language! By creating this kind of Short Messaging System (SMS), children are actually following the rules of speech, and also increasing the speed which information is sent and received. When used effectively, SMS and textisms are a fast, efficient way to communicate with peers.

Think of texting and textisms as another language. Just like how all the romance languages are derived from Latin, textisms are derived from English. If one is a master of the Latin language, though not presently used, then they can understand or display some sort of foundation with the derivative languages. As for textisms, those who use the contracting devices and shorten phrases must have some grasp of the English language to even use it. Now is this kind of speech found in the academic work of their children? I believe it isnt, and it shouldnt even be a concern for parents. A child wouldnt speak French in a Spanish class and expect to pass because they are two different languages. Likewise, text-speak shouldnt be in academic work because it is not appropriate to the class. There is a specific time and place to use such advances, and a classroom isnt one of them.

Its 2010. With new technological advances surfacing, it really does look like the older generation is ignorant for not fully understanding texting lingos. Its a system of symbols and contracted phrases that mirror the English language when decoded. Texting is not a threat to a childs learning capabilities, it only enhances it. What are your thoughts about textisms and how it affects childrens spelling and speech? Do you have a younger sibling who uses SMS? How are their spelling and speaking skills? Tweet This Post
Tagged as: Bridgewater State University, cell phones, college life, college students, Coventry University, speaking skills, spelling, texting

cialis February 8, 2011 at 7:55 am

Many thanks for blogging. I fully agree with your thoughts.

Leave a Comment

Related Articles America's Failure to Dream The Tepid Pool? -- Choices We Make in Connecting with Nature Show Some Class The Other Part of Student Choice: Advising The Myth of Higher Education

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:

Acupuncturists Chiropractors Massage Therapists Dentists and more!

This is where I introduce the concept of a "knowledge broker." A knowledge broker is someone who has three characteristics. First, he or she is up to date with technology, not only in the educational arena, but across the board. Second, your knowledge broker must be able to have the interest in finding resources for any class content. Third, and perhaps most important, the knowledge broker must be able to transfer his/her knowledge to a teacher who is most likely not all that excited about technology or at best a bit skeptical - in a calm, jargon-free style. The knowledge broker must be patient, willing to tolerate numerous questions, and available for help at any time. Although this is not a new concept, it seems that it is not widely understood in the educational arena. Teachers are being pushed from all sides. The state government tells the administrators that in order to get a good school rating they must teach specific content and have their students obtain high test scores on that material. At the other end, our teachers are educating students who spend their day absorbed with multiple media at all times of the day and night. They are little sponges that gleefully try any new technology and individualize it to their tastes and needs. But when they step into the classroom they are faced with a unitasking" environment where the teacher provides a wealth of content - information - mostly using the old fashioned lecture technique. Oh sure, teachers have, for the most part, mastered PowerPoint to make their presentations more jazzy, but behind their backs the students call it "Death by PowerPoint." Some teachers get whiteboards and dazzle themselves, while the students, for the most part, crave the media-rich environments in which they live when they are not in class. It is a conundrum to say the least. The worst part is that most administrators realize that technology is critical to engaging and educating our youth but they have little or no money for equipment and once that budget is exhausted there is nothing left for allowing the teachers to develop an interesting, appealing course content that will grab the students' attention. It is a Catch-22 to say the least. This is where the knowledge broker comes into play. In my latest book, Rewired: Understanding the iGeneration and the Way They Learn, I discussed an interesting article by Dr. Sandra Kay Plair, an educational technologist at Michigan State University. In 2008, Dr. Plair, in a forward thinking article in The Clearing House, wrote about knowledge brokers as a way to revamp professional development in order to introduce and integrate technology into the classroom. Here is just a sampling of Dr. Plair's thoughts: "Changes in the contour of technology-related professional development, as with most reforms, will not be simple. Policymakers and school administrators need to appreciate the difficulties many veteran teachers experience with integrating technology into comfortable, existing pedagogy. This change can also be a costly endeavor that creates avoidance rather than acceptance. Allowing teachers to fumble along implementing technology experiences haphazardly is no longer productive or effective. Brokering knowledge with a different kind of professional development resource can ensure that technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge are intersected and merged to alter the way teachers teach and students learn. The potential for these knowledge brokers to support all teachers can only lead to successful learning, and that is what it is all about."

Dr. Plair is spot on. We cannot keep hoping that our teachers implement classroom technology without giving them some assistance. That's where the knowledge broker fits into the equation. According to Dr. Plair, the knowledge broker needs to have fivev different "skills" or roles to play. First, in Dr. Plair's words, the knowledge broker needs to be a "harbinger of innovation" meaning someone who keeps up with new educational technologies by attending conferences and staying connected with other knowledge brokers. Second, he/she must have time to develop classroom (or outside of classroom) technologyrelated activities. This means that they are the ones who learn about new, cool, engaging tools and these are the people who have the time to do all this learning and experimenting. Third, these select individuals must be excellent teachers and know how to explain complicated technology to digital immigrants. I will talk about this part later. Fourth, knowledge brokers have to be available to help the teacher learn the technology, help introduce it to the students (or stand by while the teacher does the introduction to help with the expected problems), and be willing to return calls - shouts - for help immediately. Finally, knowledge brokers need to be catalysts for change in the school environment which means that they have to be able to assume all four roles PLUS coordinating all the present and future technology integration. In other words, they have to love it and embrace it and get the teachers to feel the same way. What should the knowledge broker teach? This is where I come from a different place than many educators. I see these iGeneration students gleefully using their technology to access Whatever, Wherever, Whenever - the new WWW. They are all on Facebook and all access YouTube with regularity. They have an iPod, a smartphone and a computer with Internet access. [Note to teachers who say that their students are among the "have nots" who are too poor to have these technologies. In general, I would agree with you if the data didn't show that social networking is shared by all, regardless of socio-economic status. These students find ways to get online including at the library, friends' houses, and anywhere they can.]

My argument has always been to take advantage of the omnipresence of technology after school hours and provide assignments that use technology to push the content of the

course. For example, if you are teaching about Ronald Reagan's presidency have your knowledge broker find a variety of sources that disseminate the content you need to teach via podcast, vodcast (YouTube is a great source) or other means. Then you, the teacher, can use the time that would have been spent presenting those wonderful PowerPoints in class to talk to the students about what they learned. You can help them understand the material, assimilate it and synthesize it with all the other material in the course. In essence you become a "teacher" again rather than simply a content delivered. The best part of this model is that if the students don't seem to understand the material after your in-class synthesis experience, you can send them back to the same online source or even one using a different format or modality.

In TechnoStress, a book that I co-wrote way back in 1998, Dr. Michelle Weil and I proposed a set of 13 rules for introducing technology to any system. These rules were intended to fit in aworkplace, a school, and even a family system. Here are those rules 1. Limit session time of training or support: short and focused. 2. Teach single concepts at a time. 3. Avoid jargon at all costs. 4. Use humor: technology does not have to be a serious business. It can be fun. 5. Use hands-on training - the teacher's hands, not yours. 6. Teach on the same equipment that the teacher will use. 7. Show a variety of sources for help if you are not available. 8. Match your teaching style to the teacher's learning style: auditory, visual, or tactile are all styles that can be used to teach and support technology. 9. Don't assume any pre-existing knowledge. 10. Start by understanding what the teacher knows, not what she doesn't know. 11. Model actions first and then step back and let the teacher make mistakes. Often more learning happens when you make a mistake then when you do it correctly. 12. Summarize often: Repetition and summarizing are good teaching/support tools. 13. Start early: Don't start the teaching or support after the first catastrophe. Who should serve as your knowledge broker? In a recent article that I wrote for EducationalLeadership I suggested that the knowledge broker could be a tech-savvy older student who has already taken the course and knows the content that needs to be transmitted, a local community college student perhaps for internship credit, or even a parent. I missed two important categories of potential knowledge brokers and have heard

about this from many educators. The first is the campus computer technology or IT coordinator. This is a person who may very well fit the bill and fulfill all five of Dr. Phair's criteria. The second is a librarian or media specialist, sometimes referred to as a teacher librarian or media specialist. Cristen Harden, a library media specialist in Colorado Springs, wrote "One of my biggest roles is to gather online resources for the teachers in my school as we collaboratively write lesson plans. I spend a large part of my day searching for resources and showing teachers how to use them." Another, Rachel Kellerman, a teacher librarian in Palo Alto, wrote "We are the only professionals who are explicitly trained to teach information literacy and 21st Century skills."Both Cristen and Rachel (plus several others who wrote me) are absolutely correct in identifying another excellent source for your knowledge broker. Tap those resources! Find a knowledge broker, or two, or even three, and set them loose on showing you how to integrate technologies that students already find engaging and use almost 24/7/365. Related Articles America's Failure to Dream The Tepid Pool? -- Choices We Make in Connecting with Nature Show Some Class The Other Part of Student Choice: Advising The Myth of Higher Education

Find a Therapist
Search for a mental health professional near you.

Find Local:

Acupuncturists Chiropractors Massage Therapists Dentists and more!

Postscript: I was just about ready to send this live on PT blogs and realized that I had not given you any resources. Here are a few:

International Society for Technology in Education (www.iste.org) DiscoveryEducation's Lesson Plan Library (http://school.discoveryeducation.com/lessonplans) Teachers Helping Teachers (http://www.pacificnet.net/~mandel/index.html) TeachersFirst.com (www.teachersfirst.com/index.cfm) ThinkFinity (www.thinkfinity.org/lesson-plans

Textism the Next Evolution of the English Language? By Ashley Oxley With the advancement of text messaging as a common form of communication, it is no surprise that it has developed in essence its own language. Text messaging or texting as it is more commonly known is a more relaxed, colloquial version of the English language, with rare use of grammar, increased use of abbreviations and the use of emoticons. Texting has been widely pinpointed as the factor behind a fall in literacy skills in young people. In extreme texting, and the text generation, has even been referred to as vandals who are doing to our language what Genghis Khan did to his neighbours eight hundred years ago pillaging our punctuation; savaging our sentences; raping our vocabulary (Humphreys, 2007, online). As educators we have two options, to either, incorporate textisms into the classroom and watch as our language evolves once again, or to take a hard stance and combat the impact that texting is having on academic writing. Recent statistics from The Pew Internet & American Life Writing, Technology and Teens Project (2008, online) indicates that 85% of teens ages 12-17 engage at least occasionally in some form of electronic personal communication for example, texting. The same study also indicates that of teenagers who do text Half send 50 or more text messages a day, or 1,500 texts a month, and one in three send more than 100 texts a day, or more than 3,000 texts a month. What this shows is that the majority of teenagers are utilising text messaging, and not only this but most of them are using it as their main form of communication. With the instant nature of text messaging Beasley (2009, online) remarks that to the text messager, closing expressions are inefficient, long-form dialog is uneconomical, and correct spelling and grammar are impractical in short texting is an attractive option to teenagers as it is short, quick and easy means of communication, of which they know and understand. Commonplace Abbreviations have become commonplace in texting, an example of some popular abbreviations are, lol (laugh out loud), nm (not much), omg (oh my god), btw (by the way), haha (amusement), ttyl (talk to you later), U (you), B4 (before), gf (girlfriend), bf (boyfriend), BFF (best friends forever). Texting also highly utilises emoticons, to express the authors feelings without saying so explicitly, .e.g. J (happy), L (sad), :s (confused), :p (cheeky). The emergence of texting can be in ways related to the concept presented in Prenskys paper Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. That, those who have grown up with this means of communication are comfortable with its language and can speak and interpret it fluently, whereas those who have not had texting as a commonplace for means of communication will not always be able to confidently interpret and utilise the language as the natives do, and/or as immigrants will always have an accent to the way in which they utilise texting. With the relaxed nature of texting it is no surprise that it is finding its way into the academic writing of teenagers who speak textisms almost as bilinguals, are infusing formal writing with the conventions of texting. The Pew Internet & American Life Writing, Technology and Teens Project (2008, online) discovered that 50% of teens say they sometimes use improper capitalization and punctuation in their school assignments,

38% of teens say they have used text shortcuts like LOL in their school assignments, and 25% of teens say they have used emoticons in their school writing. There is no denying that teens are incorporating textism into their academic writing, however there is wide spread debate between scholars, teachers, parents and students, about whether or not the use of textism in the classroom is a positive learning tool or not. Despite the widely held idea that texting has a negative impact on childrens literacy skills, the impact of childrens use of textisms on their reading and writing development is not well understood (Wood, Plester and Bowyer, 2008) perhaps due to a lack of comprehensive long term research into the issue. Teachers are perhaps the best at embracing the incorporation of textism into academic writing, using it as a building block for academic writing, such as Trisha Fogarty, a teacher in the USA: When my children are writing first drafts, I dont care how they spell anything, as long as they are writing. If this lingo gets their thoughts and ideas onto paper quicker, the more power to them (Lee, 2002, online). Even though there seems to be positives in allowing students to incorporate textism into their academic writing there are still advocates petitioning strongly against textism, with it even being described as a continuing assault of technology on formal written English (Lee, 2002). It is perhaps still the age old tale of progress versus status quo, and as history shows us it tends to be progress that prevails. The reality is that texting and the language it brings (textism) is a large part of the way we socially interact with each other, therefore it is no surprise that at times it finds its way into a scholarly context, where it perhaps does not belong. There is no way to abolish texting in our social context and hence it is hard to keep textisms from slowly finding its way into acceptable academic writing. Evolution is a part of human existence and literacy is not immune to the reality of evolution. As educators it is our job to educate people on context and audience, show where and when textism or academic writing is acceptable and where at times it may meet. The youth of today are the future, and it seems that despite mass protest textism just may be the next evolution of our language. References Humphreys, J. (2007). I h8 txt msgs: How texting is wrecking our language online, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-483511/I-h8-txt-msgs-How-texting-wreckinglanguage.html (accessed 14 July 2010) Lee, J. (2002). I Think, Therefore IM. New York Times, September 19, online, http://www.nytimes.com/2002/09/19/technology/i-think-therefore-im.html? sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all (accessed 17 July 2010) Prensky, M. 2001. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants On the Horizon Vol. 9 No. 5, October, http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20%20Digital%20Natives, %20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf (accessed online on the 18 July 2010) The Pew Internet & American Life Writing, Technology and Teens Project. (2008) Writing, Technology and Teens online,

http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2008/Writing-Technology-and-Teens.aspx?r=1 ( accessed 13 July 2010) The Pew Internet & American Life Writing, Technology and Teens Project. (2010) Teens and Mobile Phones online, http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/Teensand-Mobile-Phones.aspx?r=1 (accessed 16 July 2010) Vosloo, S. (2009) The effects of texting on literacy: Modern scourge or opportunity? online, http://www.scribd.com/doc/34421573/The-Effects-of-Texting-on-Literacy, (accessed 11 July 2010)

Text messaging can boost literacy among pupils, research suggests 24 Jan 2011 According to new research the use of textisms can improve literacy among pupils by giving them extra exposure to word composition outside the school day, it was claimed. Often critics have suggested that text messaging can blur the boundaries between colloquialisms and standard English, with some teachers claiming that slang is now found in childrens school work. However academics from Coventry University said there was no evidence that access to mobile phones harmed childrens literacy skills and could even have a positive impact on spelling.

In the latest study, researchers recruited 114 children aged nine and 10 from primary schools in the Midlands. The research, to be published in the Journal of Computer Assisted Learning next month, found evidence of a significant contribution of textism use to the childrens spelling development during the study. This study, which took account of individual differences in IQ, found higher results in test scores recorded by children using mobile phones after 10 weeks compared with the start of the study. According to the report, the association between spelling and text messaging may be explained by the highly phonetic nature of the abbreviations used by children and the alphabetic awareness required for successfully decoding the words. The report, funded by Becta, the government's education technology agency stated: It is also possible that textism use adds value because of the indirect way in which mobile phone use may be increasing childrens exposure to print outside of school. Prof Clare Wood, senior lecturer in the universitys psychology department, said: We are now starting to see consistent evidence that childrens use of text message abbreviations has a positive impact on their spelling skills. There is no evidence that childrens language play when using mobile phones is damaging literacy development.