CRISTOBAL S.

CONDUCTO MEMORIAL INTEGRATED NATIONAL HIGH

SCHOOL RIZAL, LAGUNA

HOW IS TEXT MESSAGING AFFECTING TEEN LITERACY?

SUBMITTED TO MRS. LERNIE A. CALICA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR ENGLISH IV

ABIA, HANZ CHRISTIAN ARSEN C.

IRLANDA, JOHN LLOYD E.
SUBIDA, JEAN LEANARD V.

FEBRUARY 9, 2018
 1

INTRODUCTION

A. Background of the Study

Text messaging is one of the fastest growing modes of communication, especially

in the Philippines. With 30 million text messages transmitted daily, the Philippines has

been the text messaging capital of the world, where SMS (Short Message Service) has

given rise to a subculture with its own lingo, folklore and etiquette. Examples are words

like LOL, BTW and phrases like EAT RIGHT 4 YOUR TYPE and r u ready.

Texting has become any every day task that many teenagers engage in on a day to

day basis. Many of those text messages that are sent often contain textisms. The use of

textisms is starting to become more accepted among the younger generation. There have

been suggestions from both media sources and educators that texting may have a negative

effect on the literacy skills of students. Perhaps that biggest problem is that students do

not distinguish between times when they need to write formally without using textisms,

and when they are writing informally and the use of textisms is acceptable. With more

long-term studies on the same group of individuals, it may be possible for researchers to

determine if the use of textisms does indeed have negative effects on literacy. With long

term studies, it may be possible to see if individuals carry the textisms that they use in

their personal correspondences into their formal writing in a workplace environment.

Until the time that concrete results are acquired to suggest that texting has deleterious

effects, it may be wise to encourage students to lessen their use of textisms, and to instead
 2

use proper grammar and spelling while they are using texting as a form of

communication.

With children’s increasing use of mobile phones, concerns have been raised about

its influence on their literacy skills. One well-known feature of children’s text messages

is that they do not always adhere to conventional written language rules and use a register

that is called textese. In this register, children make use of phonetic replacements, such as

ur instead of your and acronyms, such as lol and drop words. This has led to the

assumption that characteristics of textese may leak into children’s general writing,

ultimately resulting in language deterioration. However, this is in sharp contrast to

findings from several studies showing that children who used textese frequently did not

perform poorly on spelling and tasks measuring literacy abilities. More recently, this

research has been expanded to the effect of textese on children’s grammar abilities in

written language. Outcomes of some studies suggest a negative influence of textese on

grammar. Nevertheless, variability in coding of textese between studies and use of

written tasks, which do not strictly represent grammar, may have masked the effect of

textese on children’s grammar abilities. Therefore, the main aim of the present study is to

ascertain whether use of textese influences children’s grammar performance in spoken

language.

Yet another understudied area is the connection between use of textese and

children’s cognitive development. Previous studies have shown that young people who

often switch between different media types and non-media (e.g. watching television

while doing homework), have lower executive functions. As many young children
 3

nowadays, own a (smart)phone they may also be prone to this effect. On the other hand,

children who are proficient in textese, might have similar advantages as bilingual

children have, as they might be considered a special type of bilinguals—in a different

modality—having to switch between formal written language and textese. This is so

because numerous studies have shown superior performance on executive function tasks

by bilingual children over monolingual children. Thus, the second aim of this study is to

determine whether proficient texters have better-developed executive functions than non-

proficient texters, like proficient bilingual children.

B. Objectives of the Study

To answer the question how text messaging affects teen literacy, the researchers

had set the following objectives:

1. To know how much of the teen population uses text messaging shortcuts.

2. To determine if the use of text messaging abbreviations influences the grammar

and writing skills of teens.

C. Significance of the Study

This study was conducted to know if text messaging shortcuts and abbreviations

affects the literacy of teens especially in a technology and media-dependent

generation. Through this study, the researchers may come up with conclusions and

recommendations that will be a resolution for this issue. The findings at the end of
 4

this research will be an element for improvement of teen literacy today even with the

advent of technology.

D. Related Literature

The primary motivation for the creation and use of SMS language was to convey

a comprehensible message using the fewest number of characters possible. This was

for two reasons; one, telecommunication companies limited the number of characters

per SMS, and charged the user per SMS sent. To keep costs down, users had to find a

way of being concise while still communicating the desired message. Two, typing on

a phone is normally slower than with a keyboard, and capitalization is even slower.

As a result, punctuation, grammar, and capitalization are largely ignored. In many

countries, people now have access to unlimited text options in their monthly plan,

although this varies widely from country to country, and operator to operator.

However, screens are still small, and the input problem persists, so SMS language is

still widely used for brevity.

Although they are by no means exhaustive, some of these marked properties

involve the use of initializations (acronyms and abbreviations composed of initials),

reductions and shortenings, and omission of parts of speech, pragmatics and context

in interpretation of ambiguous shortenings, reactive tokens, pictograms and

 5

logograms (rebus abbreviation) , paralinguistic and prosodic features, capitalization,

emoticons, variations in spelling and punctuation, or lack thereof. (Morris,2010)

SMS language, textese or texting language is the abbreviated language and slang

commonly used with mobile phone text messaging, or other Internet-based

communication such as email and instant messaging.

Three features of early mobile phone messaging encouraged users to use

abbreviations, text entry was difficult, requiring multiple key presses on a small

keypad to generate each letter, messages were limited to 160 characters, and it made

texting faster.

Once it became popular it took on a life of its own and was often used outside its

original context. (Uchiyama,2012)

Teen literacy refers to the ability of adolescents, aged between age 12 and 20, to

read and write. Adolescence is a period of rapid psychological and neurological

development, during which children develop morally (truly understanding the

consequences of their actions), cognitively (problem-solving, reasoning,

remembering), and socially (responding to feelings, interacting, cooperating). All

these three types of development have influence—to varying degrees—on the

development of literacy skills. (Stavrinos,2011)

 6

BODY

This part of the study presents the data and information gathered by the

researchers about the how text messaging affects teen literacy. Notes, summaries,

paraphrases and direct quotations are also included here.

A. Results and Findings

The researchers conducted a survey on the CSCMINHS students on how text

messaging affects their literacy. The population of the students surveyed was only

thirty, all were junior high students and randomly selected with the use of Simple

Random Sampling Method. The data gathered were tallied in the bar graph below.

The data gathered were tallied in the bar graph below. A sample of the questionnaire
 7

given can be also seen below.

Response of Students to the Questions asked in the

Survey about Text Messaging and Teen Literacy
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

Yes No Often Sometimes Never

Figure 1. Response of Students to the Questions asked in the Survey about Text Messaging and Teen Literacy
 8

Name:

Grade & Section:

Direction: Put a () mark to the box that corresponds

to your answer

1. Do you own a smart phone?

Yes No

2. How often do you use text messaging on your cellphone?

Often Sometimes Never

3. How often do you read books?

Often Sometimes Never

4. Do you use text abbreviations?

Yes No

5. Does texting affect your academic performance like in writing essays or poems?

Yes No

Figure 2. Sample of the Survey given to the CSCMINHS students

 9

B. Data Analysis

The results and information collected will be discussed in this section. All the data

gathered were from the survey conducted by the researchers. The findings were

arranged in a bar graph to have a clearer interpretation on the information gathered

from the CSCMINHS students about the effects of text messaging on their literacy.

Figure 1 shows that almost all the population surveyed were into the technology

trend and uses smartphones. It also shows that more than half of the students

surveyed were into text messaging but never used SMS shortcuts and abbreviations.

According to the graph, there are more students who own a smartphone than students

who reads books. And finally, the opinion of the students on the effect of text

messaging specifically the use of textese was split, with more of the population

claiming that text messaging does not influence their language, writing skills, and

teen literacy.
 10

CONCLUSION

This part illustrates the research ending. Wherein, the researchers demonstrate the

summary and the outcomes, may it be positive or not. Also, they advocate possible

proposals for the solutions to help improve teen literacy even in the advent of technology.

A. Summary

This study was conducted to know if text messaging shortcuts and abbreviations

affects the literacy of teens especially in a technology and media-dependent generation.

The researchers conducted a survey on the CSCMINHS students on how text messaging

affects their literacy. The findings were arranged in a bar graph to have a clearer

interpretation on the information gathered from the CSCMINHS students about the

effects of text messaging on their literacy.

B. Conclusion

The opinion of the students on the effect of text messaging specifically the use of

textese was split, with more of the population claiming that text messaging does not

influence their language, writing skills, and teen literacy. This only implies that the teens

don’t think that text messaging doesn’t influence their literacy and language skills. Also,

most of the students surveyed who owned a smartphone excelled on their respective

classes in literary works. The researchers therefore conclude that text messaging does not

significantly affect teen literacy. The researchers also thought that technologies do affect

the vocabularies of the students as teens rather use gadgets than read books as they had

observed in the conducted research.

 11

LITERATURES CITED

Lily Huang (2008-08-01). "Technology: Textese May Be the Death of English".

Newsweek. Retrieved 2011-12-20.

"History of Short Message Service (SMS)". Reviews and Ratings of SMS Marketing

Services. Best Text Marketing. Retrieved 18 March 2012.

Radnedge, Aidan (2011-08-16). "The stripped-down form of writing that goes with

texting has been with us for more than 120 years, research has uncovered".

www.metro.co.uk. Retrieved 2011-12-20.

Dabhoiwala, Faramerz (2 April 2016). "How English Became English by Simon Horobin

review – 'OMG' was first used 100 years ago". The Guardian (Review section).

London. p. 7. Retrieved 8 April 2016.

Fisher, John Arbuthnot (1919). Memories. London: Hodder and Stoughton. p. 78.

Beverly, Plester; Wood, Clare; Joshi, Puja (23 March 2009). "Exploring the relationship

between children's knowledge of text message abbreviations and school literacy

outcomes". British Journal of Developmental Psychology.