ISSN:2229-6093
Lindsay Noel et al ,Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 4 (1),104-107
Word Processors Negatively Affect Writing Quality:
A Comparison with Transgenic Crops
Lindsay Noël
University of British Columbia
Abstract
Zhao and Frank demonstrated “an ecological
perspective can provide a powerful analytical framework
for understanding technology uses in schools” [1]. This
essay employs an ecological metaphor to illustrate the
impact of using word processing to teach writing. This
paper will compare the affects of planting genetically
modified crops to the impacts of using word processors
in education. Although their contexts are particularly
different, scientists and consumers consider both
revolutionary in their fields, but their use has
particularly adverse consequences. This paper discusses
similarities regarding their advantages, followed by
parallels in their disadvantages. Consequently, this
comparison establishes the need to moderate use of word
processing software in schools.
1. Context
Transgenic crops currently account for over 200
million acres of agricultural land [2]. In the mid-1990s,
scientists believed them to be an advantageous
technological advancement [3]. Genetically modified
crops are plants used in agriculture that scientists
genetically altered to incorporate advantageous
characteristics in their DNA [4]. These genes enable the
crops to resist destructive insects and plants, increase
agricultural yields and provide nutritional enhancements
[4, 5, 6]. However, research has now demonstrated that
they have significant negative impacts, particularly
adverse health effects, herbicide-resistance and loss of
biodiversity. Given their abundance, dispersing
capabilities and persistence, their negative affects have
been especially difficult to mitigate.
Similar to genetically modified crops, researchers
thought word processors were a benign technological
development. Word processors, such as Microsoft Word,
Corel WordPerfect and Pages, are computer software
applications used to create, revise, format and print text
documents [7]. Consumers perceive them as an
innovative solution to writing constraints. People use
word processors in a variety of contexts, including
IJCTA | Jan-Feb 2013
Available [email protected]
educational settings. This is because they eliminate the
need to recopy text, facilitate the development of longer
documents and produce aesthetically pleasing hardcopies
[8]. However, their use decreases revision, increases
spelling errors and reduces handwriting use [9, 10, 11]. It
is, therefore, imperative that teachers moderate use of
word processors. Otherwise, their impact on student
writing capabilities will be extensive and unmanageable,
similar to the repercussions of genetically modified
crops.
2. Positive effects
New technologies can offer a variety of benefits that
improve current practices. In their respective domains,
genetically modified crops and word processors decrease
process requirements, increase production and improve
outcome quality.
2.1. Process reduction
Advancements in genetic engineering enabled the
development of transgenic crops that are resistant to
undesirable insects and plants. This, thereby, reduces the
need for pesticides and herbicides. “GM soybean, oil
seed rape, cotton and maize varieties modified for
herbicide tolerance and insect protected GM varieties of
cotton reduced pesticide use by a total of 22.3 million
kg” [12]. There are health benefits to decreasing the
application of chemicals. The World Health Organization
demonstrated there are 500,000 pesticide-related
poisonings annually and approximately 5,000 of these
are fatal [4, 12]. There are also economic advantages.
Farmers not only save the direct costs of purchasing
chemicals, but also their application costs. Every 75
hectors of agricultural land requires 205 liters of diesel
for spraying [12]. This is equivalent to C$5 million in
savings for farmers annually [13]. Carbon sequestration
also has environmental benefits because the machinery
used for chemical application does not emit carbon
dioxide into the atmosphere [4]. Moreover, agricultural
practices do not require raw materials and resources for
manufacturing pesticides and herbicides, thereby
increasing sustainability [4].
104
ISSN:2229-6093
Lindsay Noel et al ,Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 4 (1),104-107
Similar to transgenic crops reducing the application
of chemicals, word processors decrease the need to
recopy text. Instead of manually rewriting an entire
document to make changes, editing can easily be
accomplished [7]. Once users enter information into the
computer, it can be simply manipulated. Content can
easily be added, changed and rearranged [14]. Writers do
not need to create numerous drafts, but rather, one
version that can be reworked. This significantly
decreases the time required to edit a written document,
compared to pen and paper methods. Formatting and
layout can also be easily changed with word processing
[14]. Students commonly forget to double-space
documents. It can take hours for students to rewrite their
work by hand in order to correct formatting problems,
but it can be completed within minutes using a word
processor.
2.2. Increases in quantity
Transgenic plants produce considerably greater crop
yields, compared to natural varieties [4, 5]. This is
significant given food scarcity problems, particularly in
developing countries [4]. Since farmers in third-world
countries are unable to apply herbicides and pesticides
due to economic constraints, pests substantially reduce
their crop sizes. With the invention of herbicide tolerant
and insect protected plants, however, crop yields have
increased dramatically [15]. The minimum increase in
harvest size is approximately 50% with genetically
altered crops, but it is frequently higher; for instance, the
use of Bt cotton in Indian showed an increase of 80% in
harvest size [15].
Likewise, word processors increase yields in terms of
document length [8, 10]. A study conducted by Hass
demonstrated that word processing enables students to
write longer papers [16]. Test subjects wrote an average
of 595.7 words using pen and paper, but 767.1 with a
word processor [16]. This is primarily because word
processing can produce written documents significantly
faster than pen and paper methods. An increasing
number of children have access to a computer outside of
school and use it on a regular basis. As a result, most
children are faster at typing than writing manually.
Another reason students tend to produce longer
documents using word processors is their apparent
continuity [7]. When using pen and paper mediums,
students typically conclude their work at the end of a
page, in order to avoid beginning a new sheet [7].
Although word processors also divide documents into
pages, a new sheet does not need to be used in order to
start a different page.
2.3. Quality enhancements
Genetically modified plants also have quality
improvements, particularly in terms of their nutritional
IJCTA | Jan-Feb 2013
Available [email protected]
value [2]. Over 40% of people worldwide suffer from
malnutrition [17]. This is largely because the most
common crops varieties do not have sufficient
micronutrients to meet human needs [17]. As a result,
humanitarian organizations have advocated for
transgenic plants with a higher nutritional value than
their natural counterparts [2] They developed Golden
Rice that has a beta-carotene supplement because there
are approximately 2 million cases of vitamin A
deficiency annually [2]. Genetic enhancements can also
help prevent cancer and cardiovascular disease [17].
Research demonstrates a positive relationship between
antioxidants and reduced chronic illness [17]. Plants can
be modified to have greater levels of lycopene, which is
an exceptionally strong antioxidant, and this may
decrease the potential for chronic health problems [17].
Similar to genetically modified crops, word
processors have quality enhancements. They enable the
creation of neat hardcopies that are aesthetically pleasing
[8, 18]. Students with substandard penmanship can create
documents that are not only legible, but resemble
published material [19]. This inspires students to make a
greater effort in order to create documents that resemble
published works in quality as well as appearance [7, 19].
As a result, students are more likely to take pride in their
finished product [7, 19]. Also, students who have special
needs that impact their writing abilities benefit from text
software. To use word processors, students do not require
sequencing abilities or spatial organization skills [20].
This is because the computer automatically moves from
left to right and spaces writing [20].
3. Adverse impacts
Because of their advantages, technologies are often
mass distributed before researchers conduct thorough
studies on their affects. Research now shows that
genetically modified food has negative consequences,
much like the use of word processors. Both products
have a deficiency in evaluation, cause unwanted
alterations and decrease vital elements in their
environment.
3.1. Lack of examination
The government conducted insufficient research
regarding the impacts of transgenic crops prior to their
use, specifically with respect to human health affects
[21]. Although genetically modified food has to pass
tests in order to be sold to consumers, the government
does not require long-term studies or clinical trials [21].
Unfortunately, now that transgenic foods are on the
market, there is evidence they cause adverse health
effects [4, 5]. Research demonstrates that genetically
modified food can cause antibiotic resistant bacteria in
the digestive system, stimulate the development of
cancerous cells and cause allergic reactions [2, 21].
105
ISSN:2229-6093
Lindsay Noel et al ,Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 4 (1),104-107
Because of these consequences, it is essential that
transgenic crops undergo more rigorous evaluation prior
to distribution [21].
Unlike transgenic crops, word processors do not
require additional examination before distribution.
Rather, it is their use that causes a decrease in analysis.
Studies demonstrate the extent of preparation and
revision students conduct is significantly less when they
use word processors compared to manual methods. Hass’
research on the writing process proved electronic
mediums impede revision [16]. She demonstrated that
students conducted considerably less preparation before
starting to write and substantially reduced conceptual
planning with the use of word processors [16]. Hass
argued this is because word processors are not conducive
to taking notes and, therefore, students spend less time
organizing their thoughts and structuring their arguments
[16]. Writers also do not need to reread and rewrite their
documents in order to make changes [10, 22]. Dall’Alba
& Barnacle indicated the fact that modifications can be
easily made to written documents causes reduced
revision [23]. Consequently, decisiveness is not
necessary during the planning phase [23].
3.2. Undesired modifications
Transgenic crops cause undesirable changes to DNA
sequences [5]. They cross-pollinate with natural
varieties, resulting in a hybrid of the two species [5].
Because of this, plants genetically modified for herbicide
and pesticide tolerance are able to transfer this DNA
coding to their wild counterparts. After successive crosspollination with wild species, native plants can become
multi-resistant to various pesticides and herbicides [24].
In Alberta, scientists found weeds that are triple-resistant
to three different herbicides [24]. This limits the
chemicals that can affect these plants [25]. It also means
their populations are especially difficult for farmers to
control [25].
Word processors also cause unwanted modifications.
In this case, however, they increase the likelihood of
certain spelling errors. The majority of students falsely
believe that word processors correct all spelling
mistakes. While the spellchecking tool enables some
errors to be corrected, it also creates others. This teaches
students incorrect spellings. A study presented by Linke
demonstrated that word processors automatically change
unrecognized vocabulary to similar, known words; for
example, the amino acid “proline” changes to “praline”
in Microsoft Word [11]. Moreover, the default setting for
spellcheck is United States English. When Canadian
students use this tool, they often fail to change the
language setting. As a result, their documents frequently
include American spellings; for instance, the Canadian
spelling of “behaviour” automatically changes to
IJCTA | Jan-Feb 2013
Available [email protected]
“behavior”. This leads students to assume the correct,
Canadian spelling is “behavior”.
3.3. Component elimination
As discussed with respect to herbicide resistance,
transgenic crops produce hybrids with native organisms
[4, 25]. By cross-pollinating with non-target species, they
can eliminate natural gene sequences and cause loss of
genetic biodiversity in plants [5]. In addition to
procreation, genetically modified plants also reduce
biodiversity by harming other species [3]. The toxins
released by transgenic plants, which enable them to resist
pests, affect non-target organisms; for instance, Bt corn
releases Cry toxins designed to protect against the corn
root-worm, which are also poisonous to Monarch
butterflies [3]. Furthermore, Cry toxins reduce
maturation and reproduction in caddisflies, which is
particularly devastating because they are an essential
food source in stream ecosystems [3].
Text software also decreases elements in its
environment. Specifically, it reduces or eliminates
handwriting practice in schools. Educators often bypass
cursive writing in favour of word processing.
Consequently, the quality of student script has declined
dramatically and, in some cases, students do not know
how to handwrite. Technology advocates argue that
manually written documents are no longer needed in
Western society’s technology-driven culture. However,
there are many advantages to handwriting; for example,
Berninger et al. demonstrated that some students write
longer essays in less time when writing manually [9].
Studies also prove that students use more advanced
vocabulary and sophisticated sentence structure when
using pen and paper methods [9].
4. Conclusion
Scientists thought genetically modified plants would
transform the nature of agriculture by eliminating the
need for pesticides and herbicides, increasing harvest
size and providing additional nutrients. After use on a
large scale and for an extended time, scientists realized
they have significant disadvantages. However, at this
point, it is nearly impossible to control their adverse
effects. Similar to transgenic crops, word processors
offer numerous advantages and their use also has
negative consequences. The example of genetically
modified plants and their hazardous affects should be
taken into consideration when planning the use of word
processing software. It is imperative that educators be
careful of the degree to which they use typing
applications. As demonstrated, overusing word
processors is to the detriment of student writing
capabilities. It is, therefore, essential that teachers are
mindful of word processor limitations and consider them
106
ISSN:2229-6093
Lindsay Noel et al ,Int.J.Computer Technology & Applications,Vol 4 (1),104-107
as one of many tools that assist students with writing,
instead of as a universal writing method.
5. References
[1] Y. Zhao and K.A. Frank, “Factors Affecting Technology
Uses in Schools: An Ecological Perspective”, American
Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 2003, pp. 807-840.
[2] C.W. Schmidt, “Genetically Modified Foods: Breeding
Uncertainty”, Environmental Health Perspectives, 113(8),
2005.
[3] C. Lundmark, “Modified Maize”, BioScience, 57(11), 2007,
pp. 996.
[4] M. Qaim, “The Economics of Genetically Modified Crops”,
Annual Review of Resource Economics, 1(1), 2009, pp. 665694.
[5] J.V. Boskovic, V.V. Isajev, Z.S. Prijic, V.M. Zecevic, Z.M.
Hojka, and G.K. Dozet, “Assessing Ecological Risks and
Benefits of Genetically Modified Crops”, Journal of
Agricultural Sciences, 55(1), 2010, pp. 89-101.
[6] G. Conko and H.I. Miller, “The Rush to Condemn
Genetically Modified Crops”, Policy Review, 165, 2011, pp.
69-82.
[7] S.M. Zvacek, “Word Processing and the Teaching of
Writing”, Computers in Human Behavior, 4, 1988, pp. 29-35.
[8] M. Cochran-Smith, “Word Processing and Writing in
Elementary Classrooms: A Critical Review of Related
Literature”, Review of Educational Research, 61(1), 1991, pp.
107-155.
[9] V.W. Berninger, R.D. Abbott, A. Augsburger, and N.
Garcia, “Comparison of Pen and Keyboard Transcription
Modes in Children with and without Learning Disabilities”,
Learning Disability Quarterly, 32, 2009, pp. 123-140.
[10] J. Li and A. Cumming, “Word Processing and Second
Language Writing: A Longitudinal Case Study”, International
Journal of English Studies, 1(2), 2001, pp. 127-152.
[11] D. Linke, “Commentary: Never Trust your Word
Processor”, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education,
37(6), 2009, pp. 377.
[12] R.H. Phipps and J.R. Park, “Environmental Benefits of
Genetically Modified Crops: Global and European Perspectives
on their Ability to Reduce Pesticide Use”, Journal of Animal
and Feed Sciences, 11, 2002, pp. 1-18.
[13] S.J. Smyth, M. Gusta, K. Belcher, P.W.B. Phillips, and D.
Castle, “Environmental Impacts from Herbicide Tolerant
Canola Production in Western Canada”, Agricultural Systems,
104, 2011, pp. 403-410.
[14] G. Mason, “The Word Processor and Teaching Reading”,
The Reading Teacher, 37(6), 1984, pp. 552-553.
[15] M. Qaim, and D. Zilberman, “Yield Effects of Genetically
Modified Crops in Developing Countries”, Science, 299(5608),
2003, pp. 900-902.
[16] C. Haas, “ How the Writing Medium Shapes the Writing
Process: Effects of Word Processing on Planning”, Research in
the Teaching of English, 23(2), 1989, pp. 181-207.
[17] G. Tucker, “Nutritional Enhancements of Plants”, Current
Opinion in Biotechnology, 14, 2003, pp. 221-225.
[18] E.W. Wolfe, S. Bolton, B. Feltovich, and D.M. Niday,
“The Influence of Student Experience with Word Processors on
the Quality of Essays Written for a Direct Writing
Assignment”, Assessing Writing, 3(2), 1996, pp. 123-147.
[19] R.D. Owston, S. Murphy, and H.H. Wideman, “The
IJCTA | Jan-Feb 2013
Available [email protected]
Effects of Word Processing on Students’ Writing Quality and
Revision Strategies”, Research in the Teaching of English,
26(3), 1992, pp. 249-276.
[20] L. Outhred, “Word Processing: Its Impact on Children’s
Writing”, Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22(4), 1989, 262264.
[21] A. Dona and I.S. Arvanitoyannis, “Health Risks of
Genetically Modified Foods”, Critical Reviews in Food Science
and Nutrition, 49, 2009, pp. 164-175.
[22] G.E. Hawisher, “ The Effects of Word Processing on the
Revision Strategies of College Freshmen”, Research in the
Teaching English, 21(2), 1987, pp. 145-159.
[23] G. Dall’Alba and R. Barnacle, “Embodied Knowing in
Online Environments”, Educational Philosophy and Theory,
37(5), 2005, pp. 719-744.
[24] A. Raybould, “Gene Flow from Genetically Modified
Crops”, Pesticide Outlook, 12(5), 2001, pp. 177-180.
[25] G.E. De Vries, “Triple-Resistant Canola Weeds”, Trends
in Plant Science, 5(5), 2000, pp. 189.
107