The purpose of this study was to develop an understanding of adolescent use of instant messaging. Grounded in the New Literacy Studies stance that literacy is a social practice embedded in local contexts and informed by global ideologies (Street, 1995), I argue that participation in digital literacies such as instant messaging has implications for how wired youth are being prepared for participation in today's society. By using cultural historical activity theory and the activity system (Engeström, 1987a; Engeström & Middleton, 1996; University of Helsinki Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, n.d.) as the unit of analysis, I posit that instant messaging provides a space for participation in the roles of text producer, consumer, and distributor. Drawing on Gee's (2000a, 2000c, 2000d) descriptions of fast capitalism and shape-shifting portfolio people, I suggest that the 3 text roles contribute to the participant's portfolio or collection of attributes, achievements, and skills that can be rearranged to meet the demands of changing contexts.
References
1.
AggerB. (1989). Fast capitalism: A critical theory of significance.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
2.
AggerB. (2004). Speeding up fast capitalism: Culture, jobs, families, schools, bodies.Boulder, CO: Paradigm.
3.
AtkinsonJ. M.HeritageJ. (Eds.). (1984). Structures of social action.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
4.
AxtmanK. (2002, December 12). “r u online?”: The evolving lexicon of wired teens. Christian Science Monitor. Retrieved January 7, 2003, from http://www.csmonitor.com.
5.
BarileA. L.DursoF. T. (2002). Computer-mediated communication in collaborative writing. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 173–190.
6.
BaronN. (2004). See you online: Gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 397–423.
7.
BaronN.SquiresL.TenchS.ThompsonM. (2003). Tethered or mobile? Use of away messages in instant messaging by American college students. Retrieved January 6, 2004, from http://www.american.edu/tesol/Grimstad-Baron.pdf.
8.
BeachR.LundellD. (1998). Early adolescents' use of computer-mediated communication in writing and reading. In ReinkingD.McKennaM.LabboL.KiefferR. (Eds.), Handbook of literacy and technology: Transformations in a post-typographic world (pp. 93–114). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9.
BedellD. (2002, July 17). Messaging shapes language with a;) and a smile. Dallas Morning News. Retrieved July 18, 2002, from http://www.dallasnews.com.
10.
BogdanR.BiklenS. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods.Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
11.
CharmazK. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In DenzinN. K.LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
12.
CobbC. (2002, October 12). Kewl or 2 much. Orlando Sentinel, p. E.1.
13.
ColeM. (1990). Cognitive development and formal schooling: The evidence from cross-cultural research. In MollL. (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 89–110). New York: Cambridge University Press.
14.
ColeM. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
15.
de VosH.ter HofteH.de PootH. (2004, January). IM[@Work]: Adoption of instant messaging in a knowledge worker organisation. Paper presented at the Hawaii International Conference on Systems Sciences, Walkaloa, HI.
16.
DurantiA. (1997). Linguistic anthropology.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
FaircloughN. (1995). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language.London: Longman.
22.
FerraraK.BrunnerH.WhittemoreG. (1991). Interactive written discourse as an emergent register. Written Communication, 8(1), 8–34.
23.
FreebodyP.LukeA. (1990). Literacies programs: Debates and demands in cultural context. Prospect, 5(7), 7–16.
24.
FreebodyP.LukeA. (2003). Literacy as engaging with new forms of life: The “four roles” model. In BullG.AnsteyM. (Eds.), The literacy lexicon (2nd ed., pp. 52–57). Sydney, Australia: Prentice Hall.
25.
FriedmanT. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the twenty-first century.New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
GarciaA.JacobsJ. (1998). The interactional organization of computer mediated communication in the college classroom. Qualitative Sociology, 21, 299–317.
28.
GarciaA.JacobsJ. (1999). The eyes of the beholder: Understanding the turn-taking system in quasi-synchronous computer mediated communication. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 32, 337–367.
29.
GeeJ. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideologies in discourses.Philadelphia: Falmer.
30.
GeeJ. P. (2000a, December). The new capitalism: What's new? Paper presented at the University of Technology, Sydney Research Centre Vocational Education & Training Working Knowledge: Productive Learning at Work Conference, University of Technology, Sydney, Australia.
31.
GeeJ. P. (2000b). The new literacy studies: From “socially situated” to the work of the social. In BartonD.HamiltonM.IvanicR. (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 180–196). London: Routledge.
32.
GeeJ. P. (2000c). New people in new worlds: Networks, the new capitalism and schools. In CopeB.KalantzisM. (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 43–68). London: Routledge.
33.
GeeJ. P. (2000d). Teenagers in new times: A new literacy studies perspective. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43, 412–420.
34.
GeeJ. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about literacy and learning.New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
35.
GeeJ. P.HullG.LankshearC. (1996). The new work order: Behind the language of new capitalism.Boulder, CO: Westview.
36.
GeertzC. (1973). Interpretation of cultures.New York: Basic Books.
37.
GoffmanE. (1981). Forms of talk.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
38.
GoldmanR.PapsonS.KerseyN. (2005). Speed: Through, across, and in—The landscapes of capital. Fast Capitalism, 1(1). Retrieved September 15, 2005, from http://www.fastcapitalism.com.
39.
GoodwinM. H. (1990). He-said-she-said: Talk as social organization among Black children.Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
40.
GutierrezK.RogoffB. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19–25.
41.
HanksW. (1992). The indexical ground of deictic reference. In DurantiA.GoodwinC. (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 43–79). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
42.
HarveyD. (1989). The condition of postmodernity.Cambridge, MA: Basil Blackwell.
43.
HeathS. B. (1982). What no bedtime story means: Narrative skills at home and school. Language in Society, 11, 49–76.
44.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words.New York: Cambridge University Press.
45.
HeldermanR. (2003, May 20). Click by click, teens polish writing. Washington Post, p. 1.
HolmesD. R. (2000). Integral Europe: Fast-capitalism, multiculturalism, neofascism.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
48.
HultC.RichinsR. (2005). The changing rhetoric and discourse of online writing. Unpublished manuscript.
49.
JacobsG. E. (2003, October). Fast times and cyber space: Understanding the relationship between fast capitalism and instant messaging. Paper presented at the meeting of the Association of Internet Researchers, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
50.
JacobsG. E. (2004a). Complicating contexts: Issues of methodology in researching the language and literacies of instant messaging. Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 394–406.
51.
JacobsG. E. (2004b, April). An interpenetration of discourses: Adolescents negotiating the tensions between instant messaging practices and in-school writing. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
52.
JacobsG. E. (2005). “ur part of it”: Portfolio people and adolescent use of instant messaging. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.
53.
JacobsonD. (1996). Contexts and cues in cyberspace: The pragmatics of naming in text-based virtual realities. Journal of Anthropological Research, 52, 461–479.
54.
KincheloeJ. (2000). Cultural studies and democratically aware teacher education: Post-fordism, civics, and the worker citizen. In HurshD.RossW. (Eds.), Democratic social education: Social studies for social change (pp. 97–120). New York: Falmer.
55.
KressG. (2003). Literacy in the new media age.London: Routledge.
56.
KressG.Van LeeuwenT. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication.London: Arnold.
57.
LamW. S. E. (2000). Literacy and the design of the self: A case study of a teenage writing on the Internet. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 457–482.
LenhartA.MaddenM.HitlenP. (2005). Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Retrieved August 4, 2005, from http://www.pewinternet.org.
60.
LevinsonS. (1983). Pragmatics.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
61.
LewisC.FabosB. (2000). But will it work in the heartland? A response and illustration. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43, 462–469.
62.
LouderbackJ. (2003, March 2). Online chats today, 3-D hangouts tomorrow. USA Weekend, p. 4.
63.
LukeA.ElkinsJ. (1998). Reinventing literacy in “New Times.”Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 42, 4–7.
NeilsenL. (1998). Playing for real: Performative texts and adolescent identities. In AlvermannD.HinchmanK.MooreD.PhelpsS.WaffD. (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the literacies in adolescents' lives (pp. 3–26). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
66.
New London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66, 60–92.
67.
OchsE. (1992). Indexing gender. In DurantiA.GoodwinC. (Eds.), Rethinking context: Language as an interactive phenomenon (pp. 335–358). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
68.
OchsE.SchieffelinB. (2001). Language acquisition and socialization: Three developmental stories and their implications. In DurantiA. (Ed.), Linguistic anthropology: A reader (pp. 263–301). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
69.
RintelE. S. (2001). First things first: Internet relay chat openings. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 6(3). Retrieved February 18, 2002, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue3/rintel.html.
70.
RintelE. S.PittamJ. (1997). Document strangers in a strange land: Interaction management on Internet relay chat. Human Communication Research, 23, 507–534.
71.
RobertsonS. (2000). A class act: Changing teachers' work, the state, and globalization.New York: Falmer.
72.
RogoffB. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking.New York: Oxford University Press.
73.
RogoffB. (2003). The cultural nature of human development.New York: Oxford University Press.
74.
SassenbergK. (2002). Common bond and common identity groups on the Internet: Attachment and normative behavior in on-topic and off-topic chats. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 6(1), 27–37.
75.
SmithM.CadizJ. J.BurkhalterB. (2000, December). Conversation trees and threaded chats. Paper presented at the Computer Supported Cooperative Work Conference, Philadelphia.
76.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
77.
StreetB. V. (1995). Social literacies.London: Longman.
78.
StreetB. V. (2003). What's “new” in New Literacy Studies? Critical approaches to literacy in theory and practice. Current Issues in Comparative Education, 5(2), 1–15.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
83.
WaltherJ. D. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43.
84.
WerryC. (1996). Linguistic and interactional features of Internet relay chat. In HerringS. (Ed.), Computer-mediated communication: Linguistic, social, and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 47–63). Philadelphia: Benjamins.
85.
WertschJ. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
