I don't like the term "computer literacy"

[HungryMan]

Many people claim that their school should be the best because they make their students prepared. Prepared to solve many problems, prepared to work in different environments. But one thing has been bugging me lately, the guarantee that sounds like:"we will make your children computer literate"

I'm not complaining, I just think the term is very vague. Most of the schools I've attended have promoted computer literacy. The taught us drawing in MS Paint, writing documents in MS Word, flowcharting programs, programming in QBASIC, writing HTML, using Javascript, using Macromedia (it still was owned by Macromedia at that time) Flash, using mySQL, Very funny curriculum, isn't it? Well, the funniest part is, I attended a technical school.

Here come my rant, what the heck is computer literacy supposed to mean? Many employers require a prospective employee to be computer literate. By judging the job offering, I can guess they require knowledge of using Microsoft Word, and the ability to type about 100WPM. I look at the people around me who most likely claim to be "computer literate" and remember, that's the guy who asked me how to change the printer's ink cartridge, that's the guy who asked me what i386 is supposed to mean, and that's the guy who has no idea how to work without OS X's dock. Yes, they really aren't that important in using a computer, but some people include those things as a requirement for being "computer literate".

I just really don't like the term. For example, if I was trained to work exclusively in Windows, what would happen when I move to a company that uses Linux exclusively (or to be more alienating, OS X). I know people who are studying computer science, who have absolutely no idea what an ISP is, but know how to use emacs well. They know how to program, but when an employer (albeit one who has a vague description of "computer literacy") asks them basic questions like these and they fail to answer, will they get hired?

Main point is: Stop claiming you will shape the youth to be "computer literate" when all you teach then is a one-sided approach that involves studying MS Paint.

If I were computer illiterate because I used Linux (and don't know anymore how to use Windows), I'm a proud idiot.

[igknighted]

Sounds like you are more against people/schools who claim to help you be computer literate, but really verse you in the use of certain apps. I'd say that is much different than the term as a whole.

At some point, either you understand some fundamental concepts about computers or you don't, and I think literacy is as good a term as any.

[MikeTheC]

Hmm... How to respond to this... Well...

The problem is that many of the people out there who are allegedly "computer literate" are not technology enthusiasts. They are single-task-oriented folk who have little-to-no interest in any of the connected aspects of technology. Now, whether this is good or bad can be debated, I suppose (though I do have my own opinions), but nevertheless it is a factor.

Computers, computer technology, and indeed most of the tech industry is so commercialized and commoditized that working for many of these companies is little more than a somewhat higher-tech version of working for Wal-Mart. There is an unbelievable amount of schlock permitted, accepted and even expected in the tech industry, to the point where it is a practically unrecognizable field for those of us who started as technology enthusiasts and hobbyists back in the 80s (or earlier).

In addition, you're also looking at a tremendous cross-section of people who have all kinds of learning and personality traits, quirks, and other characteristics. On balance, the "user base" out there is also largely comprised of people who are surprisingly uninterested in C-T, and simply use what they've bought for multiple end-use purposes, and are simply task-driven. Examples of this are people who bought (and presumably use) a computer to "surf the web", or "to do my email", or to "chat", or to "do gaming". The rest of what goes on, and how it works, and what it can be used for lie beyond their inclinations, their aspirations, or (to put it bluntly) their cognitive limits.

My take on it is that I agree with many others who feel the average person shouldn't have a computer. It's been suggested (humorously thus far) that one should have to have a license to own a computer, and should be required to pass some tests to be able to buy one. While this obviously flies in the face of what the present commercialized computer world is all about, clearly it would eliminate (or even preclude) a bevy of problems in and out of the industry.

Frankly, anyone who can write code but can't tell you what an ISP is (and I've met people of this nature, if not of these specifics) probably shouldn't be allowed near a computer, and quite probably need to have their I.Q. re-evaluated.

[HungryMan]

well yes, majority of the people who use computers do not need and do not want to know how computers operate. they just care that it works. I don't even think that some genius computer user knows the computer inside out, from every function of each resistor, transistor and capacitor, to the high level stuff like getting that damn paper clip out of his or her sight.

it's just that having a vague standard of competency involving computers doesn't seem to be the right criteria to look for in a prospective employee.

on the other hand, I have seen resumes that explicitly state that they need: "someone who knows how to use emacs", "someone who knows their way around a GNOME-based Linux environment", or "someone who knows Linux-based programming"

and yes, partly I am bashing the people who have formally educated me in using Microsoft Paint. I mostly learned to use the computer when I saw my dad, it made me say, "this computer stuff looks interesting. how'd you do that?" Eventually, I learned how to get around because of others and because of first-hand experience

[samjh]

"Computer literate" just means being able to use a computer for day-to-day tasks, like producing letters and reports, use a web browser, email client, etc. A lot of people still don't know how to do those relatively simple tasks. 10 years ago, most people didn't.

Being literate doesn't mean you have to be an expert in grammar or classic literature. Being computer literate doesn't mean you have to know how to program software or configure a LAN.

[HungryMan]

@samjh - you made my day with your avatar XD

day to day tasks=does not include mysql, flash, javascript, qbasic and frigging ms paint. but I'm grateful they taught us the first 4 at school. :)

i don't think I mentioned it before, but I'd like to respond to what you said.


produce letters and reports = Microsoft Word. Though OpenOffice is similar from the interface down to the hotkeys, some people look down on it, or worse... won't qualify you because you use something unheard off.
web browser = Internet Explorer or (fortunately) Firefox. No argument there (except with Lynx >.<)


I have been taught to use Microsoft Office (luckily, when I transferred to a different school, OpenOffice too). My friends also have been taught Microsoft Office. It instilled in us that Microsoft Office is the only office suite, if you don't know how to use Microsoft Office you are "illiterate". But this little predicament could be avoided by telling a white lie by substituting Microsoft Office with the office suite of your choice.

Think about it (Richard Stallman also proved the fact)... how many of you have made powerpoint, word, outlook and excel generic nouns? I for one have been forced to do so.

[Bölvaður]

"Computer literate" just means being able to use a computer for day-to-day tasks.

yes that is the new meaning... the old meaning was more tech savvy and indicated understanding on one's own actions on the computer. Today the term is often used about very limited knowledge of anything at all and qualifies even people that have vague idea what they are doing as computer literate people.

The term computer literate is very good one, but the new meaning is just.... horrific.

[HungryMan]

yes that is the new meaning... the old meaning was more tech savvy and indicated understanding on one's own actions on the computer. Today the term is often used about very limited knowledge of anything at all and qualifies even people that have vague idea what they are doing as computer literate people.

The term computer literate is very good one, but the new meaning is just.... horrific.

care to share more? that was interesting.

[tarps87]

I'm studying computer science and I know that ISP stands for Instant Sausage Pan :)
IMO the term "computer literate" should mean you know enough about computers to workout how to do new things. By this I mean not knowing everything but if you were told to use a Linux disto instead of windows you could workout how to use it and the same with different programs.
Really it's knowing how to use a computer rather than how to use the applications on the computer.

I like the term just not the meaning.

Also would someone who uses windows and Linux but plugged his phone charge into the speaker socket be "computer literate" :)

[Icehuck]

"Computer literate" just means being able to use a computer for day-to-day tasks, like producing letters and reports, use a web browser, email client, etc. A lot of people still don't know how to do those relatively simple tasks. 10 years ago, most people didn't.


Bingo! Even way back in 1984 when we talked about being "computer literate" it just meant you could navigate the file system, launch the needed application, and produce the desired results. The only thing changed is the interface for the end user.

If you wrote programs then you were a programmer, engineer for designing hardware, and b**ch if you did support(still true). Maybe it was just us, but tech jobs were always separate area of computer use.

[gn2]

I don't like the term "computer literacy"

So don't use it.

[samjh]

yes that is the new meaning... the old meaning was more tech savvy and indicated understanding on one's own actions on the computer. Today the term is often used about very limited knowledge of anything at all and qualifies even people that have vague idea what they are doing as computer literate people.

The term computer literate is very good one, but the new meaning is just.... horrific.

New meaning? Even 20 years ago - when I first learned about computers - it only meant basic knowledge of computer usage, nothing more.

Of course, you'd need to be more savvy to manage the files system using MS DOS than on Windows XP, but the meaning of the term "computer literate" remains the same.

[richg]

Thanks for the Rant, I guess.

Rich

[Bölvaður]

New meaning? Even 20 years ago - when I first learned about computers - it only meant basic knowledge of computer usage, nothing more.

Of course, you'd need to be more savvy to manage the files system using MS DOS than on Windows XP, but the meaning of the term "computer literate" remains the same.

Could be. But I do not recall anyone before 1995-2000 that was considered computer literate that used 2-3 programs for work but had no idea how to manage it.
In my experience if people know basic usage of 4 programs (writer, browser, minesweeper and IM) then they can be considered computer literate by some.

It could just be that either I or the people around me had higher standars.. I never thought I was computer literate, until about 5 years after I made my first vb program. And I still dont think so... I got my old Hyundai super 386S next to me and... what an idiot I must have been.. its a mess:lolflag: to phrase it in a children friendly fashion.

[macogw]

100WPM? 40WPM is considered "fast" typing nowadays. It's appalling. Secretaries that worked in the 1920s are rolling in their graves.

[HungryMan]

Well, anyway, the point is I don't like the term because it's being abused and distorted. That's it.

Perhaps the culprit is the weird computer curriculum here in the Philippines. My cousin was taught PASCAL, but she wasn't taught office. I was taught office IIRC, but only restricted to very little practical skills like saving, typing and loading, and most of our curriculum involved textbook material that involved things that could be changed like the positions of the menubars. Even, one of our major tests in computer had 40 items involving the position of the menu bars and that test's max score was 90. See the point? I don't think people really know what to teach to make us "computer literate."

What's worse is where these "computer literate" people go. As I said before, I know people who are studying Computer Science who don't know what ISP means. There are also those "computer literate" people run three anti-virii at the same time and wonder why their system is slow. I am no computer genius myself, but I don't like it when we are taught inappropriate things, and are given certificates for it.

merry christmas to you all!

[pp.]

40WPM is considered "fast" typing nowadays.

That would be quite fast for writing with hot coal on wood in Morse, I suppose.

[sanderella]

"Computer literate" just means being able to use a computer for day-to-day tasks, like producing letters and reports, use a web browser, email client, etc. A lot of people still don't know how to do those relatively simple tasks. 10 years ago, most people didn't.

Being literate doesn't mean you have to be an expert in grammar or classic literature. Being computer literate doesn't mean you have to know how to program software or configure a LAN.

I don't know where computer literacy begins or ends, but this is a cool definition for me.:KS
(I didn't vote.)