I really enjoyed this week’s reading, “Writing in the Wild: A Paradigm for Mobile Composition” by John Pedro Schwartz and Professor Bjork (and I promise, I’m not just saying that!). The article begins by introducing the concept of in situ writing, or researching a topic on location and then composing and publishing a written report while still present in that environment. Bjork and Schwartz encourage this journalistic approach for its informational value (some things you can’t learn from secondary sources), and also for the way it levels the field for writers of different backgrounds. I really appreciated the following statement and corresponding example:

“Similarly, instructors who teach writing as a cultural, situated act often craft assignments that presuppose a clean, well-lighted writing space such as the library or dorm room. The problem is that these spaces homogenize the sample material differences that instructors are trying to underscore. For example, an African American student writing at home is far more disembodied than if she were writing in the visible, public space of an art museum. Similarly, an affluent female student writing at a working-class, male-dominated bowling alley feels her status more acutely than she would feel it writing in the library or the dorm room. We argue that students can better perceive–and learn to challenge–their social, cultural, and historical locations when they research, write, and even publish on location […]This insight may lead to further realization that the material conditions shaping what students write and who they become through writing are fluid and changeable (225).”

This quote really made me understand how great an impact the writing environment has on the writing produced. To go into unfamiliar territory and expose yourself to novel situations and ideas through conversations, research, and observation is to be a good journalist. However, stepping away from this self-immersion to conduct the written report of what you saw and experienced can be a huge roadblock to becoming a great journalist. I like how early on, this article calls its readers to go above and beyond the norms of writing and to challenge the convenient habit of drafting publications in the comfort of home or work, away from outside distractions, or tangible reminders of what was observed, seen, or felt on location.

The article is then divided into three sections. The first discusses the ideas of “laboratory/classrooms” in which students are often given access to a computer and therefore are able to compose works while also being instructed by a teacher. There are also classrooms that follow a wired “cart model,” in which wireless laptops are distributed to students during class time and within classroom walls, but because they must remain there when students leave, they are essentially still “wired.” Finally, the “student-owned model,” in which students bring their personal laptops to class but also have the option of working on them outside the classroom walls, gives students both responsibility and the potential for inequality. Makes, models, and updated versions of laptops may create an unlevel playing field of technology in the classroom. The next section discusses methods of mobilizing composition for students. It explains that oftentimes the most mobile technologies are not necessarily the best for taking notes or composing pieces of writing (i.e. the iPod). However, laptops can be unwieldy and inconvenient in some research settings. For this reason, tablets are an attractive technology, allowing for both mobility and compositional ability. Other educational aspects of writing have also become mobilized in some ways, via WiFi connections, social networks, online journalism, and email. While advanced technologies may be most ideal for efficient onsite writing, Schwartz and Bjork stress that students without access to such tools can simply use a pencil and paper. Again, the writers emphasize the importance of mobile composition in order to “foster awareness of their social, cultural, and historical locations” (231). Finally, the third section investigates three types of mobile composition: discourse via smartphones, “sound-seeing” (essentially podcasts of visual events), and moblogs, or text/audio/video posted to blogs via a mobile device. Through these three types of mobile compositions, instructors are able to assign students a variety of approaches to “writing in the wild.”

One thing about this article that really resonated with me was the discussion of wired and wireless classrooms. I attended a “paperless” high school, where each student was given the same HP tablet PC at the start of their freshman year. This tablet replaced notebooks, textbooks, novels, pens, pencils–any “old school” learning tool. I read literary novels on my tablet screen and did my math homework using the monitor and stylus. I carried my tablet with me on field trips to the zoo and used it to conduct chemistry experiments. For the four years of high school, my tablet PC was my educational lifeline.

There are pros and cons to the paperless approach to learning. On one hand, the tablets facilitated learning by making us organized and accountable. Losing our notes or forgetting our homework wasn’t an issue–the only thing we had to bring to school every morning was our tablet. My backpack was never too heavy, and I was comfortable navigating internet tools and computer programs that my friends from other schools had never even heard of. In many ways, I think the paperless program prepared me for many aspects of college learning and my interests in working in journalism in the future.

On the other hand, depending on technology so heavily has its risks. Laptops are fragile, and many girls I knew accidentally damaged their tablets by dropping them, spilling on them, or even losing them. Furthermore, technology can be temperamental, and every student had her share of technological difficulties. These issues could create delays in learning and were very frustrating. Working solely on computers also made me nostalgic for past learning tools, like paperback books and felt-tip pens. However, on the whole, I really enjoyed my paperless high school experience. There were days when I wanted to throw my uncooperative tablet out the window, but for the most part, it served me well.