I posted the following last evening to Kairosnews:

'Deborah Coxwell-Teague, our First Year Writing Director at Florida State University, and great mentor to me, is exploring why teachers resist using technology as a presentation for the Florida College English Association Conference. Deborah is focusing on teachers' attitudes by collecting statements from teachers who do resist, looking closely at their feelings about why they feel it unnecessary to embrace technology in their teaching.

As part of her research, she also asked me, "When you have a few minutes, could you help me by writing a paragraph or so for me in which you explore some of what you think I'm missing out on by not embracing technology as I could." So I thought I'd post my response here and see if anyone else has something they'd like to add:

On the one hand, I like using technology, and so it's easy for me to say "yes, adopt it." But I've noticed this semester, as I teach two sections, that I feel as if I'm accomplishing more in my computer classroom than in the traditional face-to-face class that I teach. Could this be my enthusiasm for using the technology seeping through to my students? Maybe. Could it be that it's my expertise that makes me feel more comfortable and thus creating the illusion that the class is going better? Possibly so.

Nevertheless, and I know that I've said some of this before, when we teach with technology by having students join in discussions online and bring computers into the classroom, we juxtapose their English class with their "fun": email, IM, reading on the Internet, and using a computer. We capitalize on their understanding, through previous use, of electronic discourse as a social medium where they have experience already writing for real-world audiences of friend and family, in an environment where more student-centered, collaborative learning is a necessity. Given what we know about "process," I've often wondered what then is the argument that this is not a more effective way to teach composition?

But more importantly, I think, is that we help students to prepare for the future by helping them to engage in and understand online discourse, what mostly likely will be the predominant mode for them of writing, and maybe even reading, over the course of their lives. The alternative is that we could teach with minimal use of digital technology, without reflecting on electronic discourse, meanwhile letting students continue to develop digital literacies which involve electronic writing spaces without our influence.

So I guess for me it ultimately comes down to this. In "Invitations to a Writer's Life: Guidelines for Designing Small-Group Writing Classes" (1994), Robert Brooke quotes Elbow who says that "The best test of a writing course is whether it makes students more likely to use writing in their lives." If we are to give students "an invitation to a writer's life," why can't it be part of the writer's life that the future holds for almost all of them and that they are already choosing for themselves?