What is Cullington responding to?
Cullington’s response is directed to the idea of whether texting affects writing or rather has an academic impact on students’ writing and spelling in formal essays and papers. She accomplished this by referencing different sources on whether texting affects writing or it does not. In addition, she proceeds to conduct an experiment to gain insights into the notion. The author consistently found that texting or abbreviation was common in students’ dialogue however she did not see a relationship between texting and students’ academic performance. She effectively defended the point in a short, neatly organized paper.
What is Cullington’s view?
Cullington’s view is that there is little or no relationship between a student’s academic performance and texting based on the data she gathered and judged in her experiences. In the paragraph where she discusses her findings, it says that her research discovered that texting affects writing insignificantly. She even proceeds to allude to reliable sources in opposing the claim that texting affects students writing. Thus, doing so confirms her point about how texting has a minimal impact on student writing.
How would you describe Cullington’s tone? Is it formal, informal, or mixed? How do you know (provide two examples)?
Cullington’s tone remains mixed up over this essay. At the start of the essay, she explains the increasing concern on how texting affects writing, referencing numerous and citing data in a formal manner by not bringing herself in the initial pages. She says, “… according to the national center of educational statistics, 25% of high school students are proficient in writing” (Cullington, 2010). She then proceeds to conduct an experiment, using “I” and “Me” numerous times. This shows that she is talking about herself and the findings that she gets from her experiment.
What evidence does she offer to support her view?
The evidence she uses to support her view is the survey of college and high school children, which mentioned that texting abbreviations are unsuitable for formal writing. She still cites the professor at Illinois University that had accomplished research and had a finding she had in her experiment (Cullington, 2010). Furthermore, she proceeds to speak on herself and how she split up her texting from her formal writing behaviors.
Is her response persuasive? If so, why? If not, why not?
Her response is persuasive. The reason why her response is persuasive is that she raises other individuals’ findings on a subject as well as they also align with her results. Cullington still needs to accomplish this; however, she still generates her personal life and how she texts against how she writes in formal writing in papers like this one. The text brings up personal skills, and the research that she accomplished makes me feel that texting does not impact formal writing.
Reference
Cullington. M. (2010). Does Texting Affect Writing? https://d1lexza0zk46za.cloudfront.net/composition/write/modelstudentpapers/pdf/cullingt on2015.pdf
