The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society
- chi7777777
- Dec 1, 2010
- 2 min read
The study is aimed to discover the impact of mobile phone texts on literacy level of the Nigerian semi-literates (p.67), as the fact that mobile phones introduced in Nigeria in 2001. Before 2001, “Nigeria merely manages a 66.8% literacy rate” (p.67), which means the left 33.2% people were semi-literate or even below that level, however, after mobile phone became popular among their society, more and more people were able to read and write text messages. In the other word, the literacy rate of this country is improving.
The main method of this study is using questionnaire with few and easily-answering items in order to target semi-literate respondent (p.71).
According to the collecting data, text messages are cheaper, more efficient and easily monitor than phone calls, therefore, it became a trend in Nigeria in such a short time. O. Eshiet(2010) advocates that text messages plays a positive role in one’s literacy learning. He said: “The more exposure to the language of text messages, the greater the ability to understand, and the greater the possibility of applying the knowledge gained to reading other materials and the higher the possibility of acquiring writing skills” (p.77). That is to say, text-messaging can be really helpful for semi-literates in Nigerian to become literate.
Personally speaking, this study displays several good points and has reliable data. I think this study clears my mind for the relationship between text-messaging and literacy. I can take use of this results to support my research. Nevertheless, the only limitation of this study, as it mentioned, was that they just collect the data from" “urban centre and the commercial hub of the country” (p.72). Therefore, I’d better to combine it with other evidence to strengthen the point in my article.
Eshiet, O. (2010). Perceived Influence of Mobile Phone Text Messaging on the Literacy Level of Semi-literates in Nigeria. The International Journal of Technology, Knowledge and Society, 6(4), 67-78.
Comments