In the essay by Giroux titled, “Reading Texts, Literacy, and Textual Authority” he is enforcing the need that a change in the education of students is drastic. The old ways of students being “passive consumers” and teachers being “reduced to a dispenser of knowledge” needs to change (86). Teachers need to be able to adapt to the different discourses that surround students’ lives. He writes of the “Great Books approach” and how it represents a model in which students are not active in their learning (86). They read to only come to class and discover the “true” or only meaning of the text. This of course is not the case because there is always more than one interpretation of a novel. What students often think is that there is only one correct way to interpret a novel and it may not be till college level they feel comfortable or are even aware that other interpretations are available. This brings it back to the point that teachers need to stop allowing students to be passive learners and allow them to become active in their education.
When novels are interpreted there is also the problem that educators lead their students towards the direction of the popular interpretation. This is the one students will often find while scrolling through the SparkNotes website. Yes, these interpretations often have the most evidence to support them, but it does not mean there are absolutely no other ones. Teachers need to be aware that they educate their students on how important it is to provide solid textual evidence that supports their interpretation. This way, teachers are not hindering their students and taking away their creativity to explore the text for themselves. Of course, as an educator, it is important for teachers to make sure students are not going totally off course when giving their interpretation. This line between, what is the “correct” answer and what is deemed “wrong” is often blurred and may vary from teacher to teacher.
An important point Giroux focuses on in his essay, is the importance that teachers of English need to “employ textual authority as forms of social and political discourse that bear significantly on the ways in which knowledge and classroom social practices are constructed in the relations of domination and oppression” (87). Giroux claims that students are not able to benefit from learning because it is not placed within a context that is relatable to a student’s life. He argues, for example, that the lesson plans being set on student’s learning writing skills are being “devalued because it is falsely defined as a pedagogy of skill acquisition rather than a ‘creative and genuine’ form of cultural production” (88). Students are being taught elements of writing, but think it is only necessary to learn this skill to pass tests and pass the class. They need to be exposed to life events that incorporate the skills they are learning in the classroom to justify why they are learning what they are. This seems to be the missing link that Giroux is claiming teachers are lacking in their lesson plans.
Giroux is not simply stating that teachers need to implement everyday life into the skills students are learning, he is also writing this essay for a call for action by teachers. He wants teachers to be active members of their school and challenge the ways in which education is being conducted. Are teachers capable of this type of all-powering notion that they can surpass all? Even with teachers that have families and other responsibilities besides teaching, can this amount of “public intellectual” identity be carried out? Or is Giroux asking for a sacrificing of teacher’s lives in order to create his idealistic type of education system?
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Finding the voice inside the student
Class and gender are two large impactors when it comes to education. Pamela Hartman and Robert Yagelski are two people who have done research that directly support this claim. By taking a close look into the lives of students and their performance in their writing and in the classroom, it is clear to see a connection. Writers are in a constant process of trying to find their voice through their work and students are constantly looking for their own identity in the educational setting. These theories are important to investigate because if they are true, it is important to find an answer as to how this should be dealt with from the standpoint of a teacher.
Yagelski, in “Writing Roles for Ourselves”, tackles the idea of educational discourses bleeding into discourse that awaits each individual in their lifetime. He does so by discussing a couple of students’ writing that he dealt with in his time as a writing instructor. Beginning with an African-American female student, he was able to show the broadness of discourses that a student can deal with. She used her writing as an opportunity to communicate her own personal struggles with discourse as a member of a minority community. There is the discourse that is expected of African-Americans amongst each other and the discourse that is expected in the college classroom. While these two discourse communities are completely different, they exist all at once in her life. In her writing, Yagelski points out that she struggles with these internal issues while also concurrently discussing the issues that she is investigating. Another student Yagelski uses as an example is a middle-class, white male student. This student has self-esteem issues that he discusses in his discourse as a writer in Yagelski’s classroom. In writing dialogue that deals with a number of issues, some of which were meant to be personal, some of which weren’t, Yagelski noticed that the student was constantly dealing with his own esteem issues. The pattern that can be seen in these students is that their discourse is constantly self-inclusive. The writing that they do on various topics is also consisting of internal dialogue and finding a sense of self in the topic at hand. Yagelski appears to find that this includes even himself as he reads a flyer delivered on his doorstep about an upcoming construction project in his neighborhood. As a result of this literature he is influenced to go to meetings and vote about the topic and ultimately, as a result of the ruling, sell his home. All of these events included him investing the ‘self’ into his decision and discourse. Writing is in many ways self-expression and should not be detached from the self. This being so as a result of the impact that any topic at hand can have on the ‘self’.
Hartman, in “’Loud on the Inside’: Working-Class Gils, Gender, and Literacy”, similarly sees a strong connection between the individual and their performance in the classroom. She did a study of eleventh and twelve grade female students and studied how their social and societal backgrounds effected their performance in the classroom. She found a strong connection between the two. In one classroom, she broke the class into two separate lists: one consisting of working-class girls, and one the middle-class girls. Without knowing the information behind the list, the teacher of the class responded to it by pointing out that the girls on one side were much more vocal in class, while the other side tended to be quieter. The teacher was shocked when Hartman revealed the reasoning behind the separation on the list. She noted that all of the students are equally motivated, some just felt more comfortable taking part in the classroom interactions and discussions. Hartman theorizes that society has a strong role in this situation. She explains that society pushes their views on young influential minds through literature, movies, and working-class family structures. Women are often expected to be quiet and submit to the needs of males. She also points to many of these girls who are in quiet in the classroom being much more vocal in social circles outside of the classroom. This points to them being more concerned with how society views them than the academic world. Hartman sees some possible solutions to these problems. One way that there is help being given is through literature being introduced to the classroom that is less ‘romantic’ and less gender biased. Often women in the past have been forced to read primarily male narrated stories that force the woman to see the story through a man’s eyes. Women in these stories are placed in socially accepted roles. Hartman sees literature going in a better direction in schools as there is a place being given to women authors and books that bring diversity into the classroom. Her standpoint is that education should be ‘liberating’ and not ‘domesticating’. The long held view as the ‘good-girl’ being quiet in the classroom needs to be snuffed and there needs to be incentive and motivation for girls to participate in their academics.
As seen through the work of these two researchers, there are clear connections between class, gender, and education. It is important for the student to find his or her voice in the academic world because it is vital once one takes the step out of the classroom and into the world. One important way to do this is seen in Hartman’s observations as she illustrates how the teacher makes it a point for the classroom to feel like a safe, comfortable place where the student is not being forced to do anything, but instead feels comfortable to do so. This teacher moves from one topic to another when she sees students not responding to one. The success of this method indicates just how important it is for the student to find his or her self in the literature being discussed. Students have voice and need to be encouraged to find that voice and not be silenced.
Wednesday, November 4, 2009
Discourse, Of Course, Of Course
David Barton provides insight in great detail about the link between literacy and language. Literacy embedded in language discusses the constructiveness of language which influences the discourse of literacy. Three key aspects Barton presents in his text are that “there are different forms of language, which can be referred to as discourses; that these result in written texts; and that these texts mediate people’s experiences” (Barton 73).
The idea that there are various forms of language is evidence that we are divided and connected by ways of registers and genres. According to Barton, registers are simply the uses of speech language in different situations. Depending on the context of the environment and audience, there is a sense of adaptation to the language used in order to best fit the conversation. When I’m around older people and young children, I do not use profanity. Around my friends, I can let slip a few expletives once in a while. Perhaps it is easier to think of it as the jargon shared between a particular group like lawyers, doctors, or even teenagers. While registers involve oral communication, genres shape the language, as Barton indicates, by using the form of writing. Such genres of the written language include poetry, news articles, novels, and even classified ads.
These two together contribute to a larger sphere of language called discourse. Because discourse is the combination of the two divisions, its definition results from how one uses the language shared by individuals of that particular community. New discourses are created by piecing together parts taken from a person’s existing registers and genres (Barton 75). The discourse is diversified by the modification of the user’s registers and genres in the changing environments. Barton discusses further that discourse is not limited only to social interaction but also to behavior and setting which is a person’s ‘way of being’ (Barton 75). It is the language of a community that influences and is influenced by the participants of that group.
“A discourse community is a group of people who have texts and practices in common” (Barton 75). Discourse communities intertwine depending on the intended audience, the actual audience, or the oral and textual participants. What you learn in one community can transfer or be useful in another community like having a behavior and using the language of professionalism on campus and in the work room. Using this definition, you can infer that there are tighter and looser communities. Not knowing the newest of slang words can alienate a person wishing to join a hipster group. The different uses of the text can include or exclude the reader through the uses of specific language. It can either be more accessible or more restrictive depending on the intention of the writer. However, the producer of the text is not the only one who can give meaning through the text. Reading, as well as writing, is an interactive activity that gives the reader an opportunity to extract meaning from the text. The interpretation can also rely on a person’s background or identity. An imaginative child reading Lewis Carroll’s’ Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass would approach it differently than a forty year old realist.
Having some form of communication is important to the survival of perhaps every single species. Language is an enormously important part of our lives as humans. Communication is healthy, encouraged, and necessary. Barton states that “language mediates our experiences…The view of language which we construct internally is influenced by the language we have available…Language mediates thought and it contains the metaphors we live by” (Barton 84). Everything is organized by language especially knowledge. Does how we speak reveal our identity? If I rhymed like a rapper, would you think I am one? I am not so sure; I’m just you asking a question.
James Gee’s Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction and What is Literacy? highlight some of Barton’s main points about discourse and language. In the first reading mentioned, Gee agrees with Barton when he says “It is not just what you say, but how you say it…It is not just how you say it, but what you are and do when you say it” (Gee 5). By agreeing with Gee, I could say that language is too limited in its function. It forgets the bodily reaction and beliefs of the speaker and audience which is significant to the discussion of literacy. Communication involves very much an appropriate behavior to the situation in which one is placed. However, that doesn’t make language is invaluable. There is just a sense of displacement of attention to what is truly considerable to the literacy discourse.
Gee discusses further his concept of Discourse which is defined by a thing much greater than language. The “saying (writing)-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations” make up Gee’s outline of Discourse (Gee 6). It involves much greater elements including that of a person’s attitude, diction, and philosophies. You can even consider the physical movements of a person while they are speaking. Gee calls this the ‘identity kit’ of a person which affects how someone thinks, talks, and acts (Gee 7).
Gee divides Discourse into separate degrees of socialization. First, there is the primary Discourse which is the foundation of an identity created by the early interactions of the self and the world. It is the identity of the home that is carried to different Discourses throughout our lives. The Discourses that are later acquired out in the social networks of the public sphere are known as secondary Discourses. These include developed Discourses ranging from places such as the jobsites to churches to bars. Each of these will have their own Discourse developed by the members of the community which can be passed on to future participants wishing to join.
There are also subgenres of Discourses known as dominant Discourse and nondominant Discourse defined by Gee on page eight:
Dominant Discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which, at a particular place and time, brings with it the (potential) acquisition of social “goods” (money, prestige, status, etc.). nondominant discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which often brings solidarity with a particular social network, but not wider status and social goods in the society at large.
Discourses can be developed through many different ways by many different people. Like Barton, Gee acknowledges the overlap and the possibility of exclusivity/inclusivity of the Discourses.
From this discussion, Gee defines literacy as “the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary Discourse” (Gee 9). This includes speech acts and writing competencies. The definition becomes problematic for teachers because of the misunderstanding of how secondary Discourses are acquired. On page twelve, Gee clarifies this standpoint: “even though Discourses cannot be overtly taught, and cannot readily be mastered late in the game, the University wants teachers to overtly teach and wants students to demonstrate master.” This leads to the ‘mushfake Discourse’ on page thirteen which is the “partial acquisition coupled with meta-knowledge and strategies to ‘make do.’” Because of the impossibility of instruction and learning of secondary Discourses, the attempt is a failed but almost successful quality of Discourse integration.
What is Literacy? discusses in depth the philosophies of discourse. Five notable elements to consider about discourse is 1) “Discourses are inherently ‘ideological’ 2) they are “resistant to internal criticism and self-scrutiny” 3) “Discourse-defined positions from which to speak and behave are not. However, just defined internal to a discourse, but also as standpoints taken up by the discourse in its relation to other, ultimately opposing, discourses” 4) “Any discourse concerns itself with certain objects and puts forward certain concepts, viewpoints, and values at the expense of other” thus marginalizing the opinions and beliefs of other discourses 5) They are “intimately related to the distribution of social power and hierarchical structure in society” (Gee 19).
Acquisition and learning is our means of survival, our ways of gaining knowledge in order to be able to function successfully in society. There is ultimately a struggle of power in the differing parts. Whereas “acquisition is good for performance, learning is good for meta-level knowledge” (Gee 21). Acquiring particular skills of a discourse only allows a person to perform the role but not actively engage in the community. Meta-knowledge provides a person with the comprehension important to literacy practices and the distinction of discourses that allows the person to be comfortably situated in a changing environment. The more social institutions are open for someone to learn this knowledge, the better the opportunity it is for someone to enter a discourse community.
Barton and Gee dive into interesting ideas of literacy and discourses. From Barton’s perspective, language is important to the contribution of discourses, registers, genres. Gee goes beyond that and considers the entirety of social interaction to include physical movements, intimate values, and personal beliefs. Gee also goes into further detail about acquisition, learning, and teaching and the contradiction of the educational system by discussing the concept of secondary discourses.
The idea that there are various forms of language is evidence that we are divided and connected by ways of registers and genres. According to Barton, registers are simply the uses of speech language in different situations. Depending on the context of the environment and audience, there is a sense of adaptation to the language used in order to best fit the conversation. When I’m around older people and young children, I do not use profanity. Around my friends, I can let slip a few expletives once in a while. Perhaps it is easier to think of it as the jargon shared between a particular group like lawyers, doctors, or even teenagers. While registers involve oral communication, genres shape the language, as Barton indicates, by using the form of writing. Such genres of the written language include poetry, news articles, novels, and even classified ads.
These two together contribute to a larger sphere of language called discourse. Because discourse is the combination of the two divisions, its definition results from how one uses the language shared by individuals of that particular community. New discourses are created by piecing together parts taken from a person’s existing registers and genres (Barton 75). The discourse is diversified by the modification of the user’s registers and genres in the changing environments. Barton discusses further that discourse is not limited only to social interaction but also to behavior and setting which is a person’s ‘way of being’ (Barton 75). It is the language of a community that influences and is influenced by the participants of that group.
“A discourse community is a group of people who have texts and practices in common” (Barton 75). Discourse communities intertwine depending on the intended audience, the actual audience, or the oral and textual participants. What you learn in one community can transfer or be useful in another community like having a behavior and using the language of professionalism on campus and in the work room. Using this definition, you can infer that there are tighter and looser communities. Not knowing the newest of slang words can alienate a person wishing to join a hipster group. The different uses of the text can include or exclude the reader through the uses of specific language. It can either be more accessible or more restrictive depending on the intention of the writer. However, the producer of the text is not the only one who can give meaning through the text. Reading, as well as writing, is an interactive activity that gives the reader an opportunity to extract meaning from the text. The interpretation can also rely on a person’s background or identity. An imaginative child reading Lewis Carroll’s’ Alice in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass would approach it differently than a forty year old realist.
Having some form of communication is important to the survival of perhaps every single species. Language is an enormously important part of our lives as humans. Communication is healthy, encouraged, and necessary. Barton states that “language mediates our experiences…The view of language which we construct internally is influenced by the language we have available…Language mediates thought and it contains the metaphors we live by” (Barton 84). Everything is organized by language especially knowledge. Does how we speak reveal our identity? If I rhymed like a rapper, would you think I am one? I am not so sure; I’m just you asking a question.
James Gee’s Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction and What is Literacy? highlight some of Barton’s main points about discourse and language. In the first reading mentioned, Gee agrees with Barton when he says “It is not just what you say, but how you say it…It is not just how you say it, but what you are and do when you say it” (Gee 5). By agreeing with Gee, I could say that language is too limited in its function. It forgets the bodily reaction and beliefs of the speaker and audience which is significant to the discussion of literacy. Communication involves very much an appropriate behavior to the situation in which one is placed. However, that doesn’t make language is invaluable. There is just a sense of displacement of attention to what is truly considerable to the literacy discourse.
Gee discusses further his concept of Discourse which is defined by a thing much greater than language. The “saying (writing)-doing-being-valuing-believing combinations” make up Gee’s outline of Discourse (Gee 6). It involves much greater elements including that of a person’s attitude, diction, and philosophies. You can even consider the physical movements of a person while they are speaking. Gee calls this the ‘identity kit’ of a person which affects how someone thinks, talks, and acts (Gee 7).
Gee divides Discourse into separate degrees of socialization. First, there is the primary Discourse which is the foundation of an identity created by the early interactions of the self and the world. It is the identity of the home that is carried to different Discourses throughout our lives. The Discourses that are later acquired out in the social networks of the public sphere are known as secondary Discourses. These include developed Discourses ranging from places such as the jobsites to churches to bars. Each of these will have their own Discourse developed by the members of the community which can be passed on to future participants wishing to join.
There are also subgenres of Discourses known as dominant Discourse and nondominant Discourse defined by Gee on page eight:
Dominant Discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which, at a particular place and time, brings with it the (potential) acquisition of social “goods” (money, prestige, status, etc.). nondominant discourses are secondary Discourses the mastery of which often brings solidarity with a particular social network, but not wider status and social goods in the society at large.
Discourses can be developed through many different ways by many different people. Like Barton, Gee acknowledges the overlap and the possibility of exclusivity/inclusivity of the Discourses.
From this discussion, Gee defines literacy as “the mastery of or fluent control over a secondary Discourse” (Gee 9). This includes speech acts and writing competencies. The definition becomes problematic for teachers because of the misunderstanding of how secondary Discourses are acquired. On page twelve, Gee clarifies this standpoint: “even though Discourses cannot be overtly taught, and cannot readily be mastered late in the game, the University wants teachers to overtly teach and wants students to demonstrate master.” This leads to the ‘mushfake Discourse’ on page thirteen which is the “partial acquisition coupled with meta-knowledge and strategies to ‘make do.’” Because of the impossibility of instruction and learning of secondary Discourses, the attempt is a failed but almost successful quality of Discourse integration.
What is Literacy? discusses in depth the philosophies of discourse. Five notable elements to consider about discourse is 1) “Discourses are inherently ‘ideological’ 2) they are “resistant to internal criticism and self-scrutiny” 3) “Discourse-defined positions from which to speak and behave are not. However, just defined internal to a discourse, but also as standpoints taken up by the discourse in its relation to other, ultimately opposing, discourses” 4) “Any discourse concerns itself with certain objects and puts forward certain concepts, viewpoints, and values at the expense of other” thus marginalizing the opinions and beliefs of other discourses 5) They are “intimately related to the distribution of social power and hierarchical structure in society” (Gee 19).
Acquisition and learning is our means of survival, our ways of gaining knowledge in order to be able to function successfully in society. There is ultimately a struggle of power in the differing parts. Whereas “acquisition is good for performance, learning is good for meta-level knowledge” (Gee 21). Acquiring particular skills of a discourse only allows a person to perform the role but not actively engage in the community. Meta-knowledge provides a person with the comprehension important to literacy practices and the distinction of discourses that allows the person to be comfortably situated in a changing environment. The more social institutions are open for someone to learn this knowledge, the better the opportunity it is for someone to enter a discourse community.
Barton and Gee dive into interesting ideas of literacy and discourses. From Barton’s perspective, language is important to the contribution of discourses, registers, genres. Gee goes beyond that and considers the entirety of social interaction to include physical movements, intimate values, and personal beliefs. Gee also goes into further detail about acquisition, learning, and teaching and the contradiction of the educational system by discussing the concept of secondary discourses.
Monday, October 26, 2009
Finding Connections in Everyday Life
In “Lessons from Research with Language Minority Children” written by Moll and Gonzalez, they bring forth new ways of teaching by promoting the usage of two languages in a classroom. They call for teachers to step inside their student’s households and pull ideas that their students are familiar with into their lesson plans. For example, one student went to Mexico a lot and would buy candy from there and come back home and sell it. The teacher then incorporated the idea of marketing and had students research the differences between candy from Mexico and the U.S. Another teacher visited a students’ home and found out that they were surrounded by many plants and herbs then incorporated this into their lesson plan. These are examples of Moll’s and Gonzalez’ term they use quite often in their essay—“the funds of knowledge.” This term refers to the “social networks family members obtain or share” and that are easily accessible to the students (160). The authors of this essay claim that is impossible for teachers to be able to connect their lesson plans to students directly unless they have information about their life at home and what they have been through.
The main reoccurring point throughout the entire essay is that lesson plans and activities that take place in the classroom need to be relatable to the students’ life at home in order for the students to comprehend and take interest. The students need to be able to see how the knowledge they learn will have an impact on their life. An example of this can be seen in the movie Freedom Writers when the teacher is placing all of the student’s letters in an envelope to send to the woman who hid Anne Frank in her attic. The teacher did not just give them an assignment that she would read, mark a grade on, and give back. She instead had them write letters to this woman and even though these letters were most likely graded for content and grammatical errors, the students were able to visually see how their writing made an impact. Their own writing was read by this woman and because of their writing and fundraising she was able to come and speak to them. This type of assignment strays from the traditional writing assignment that students do in classrooms. Many students do not understand the importance of why certain novels are assigned for reading and why they have to learn about certain topics. This different style of teaching by using the tools and knowledge that are accessible to students will of course be interesting for the students and accommodating for them, but I believe it misses out on necessary instruction.
Students will be able to learn grammar and events that are relatable to them and their community, but what about past history and novels that none of the students can relate to but will appear repeatedly throughout their education, such as The Odyssey? Since this way of teaching is not universally used throughout the education system and students may struggle adapting from one way to the other. Even if students do thrive in this type of classroom setting, it will be hard to place students in classrooms of this technique starting from kindergarten all the way to grade twelve. In the movie Freedom Writers, a close relationship formed between the students and teacher that was quite heartwarming, but also a type of bond that will be hard to form year after year with new students. In the movie, the teacher devoted so much of her personal time to her students that her own personal life fell apart. In the movie, this “fund of knowledge” technique proved to be extremely successful, but in order for this technique to have a chance of succeeding there needs to be a group effort by all teachers and school administration.
I remember when I was a sophomore in high school and I had an assignment where we worked in groups and researched an injustice in the world. The assignment was open to anything we chose. My group and I chose animal abuse and we wrote letters to local animal shelters and went in and volunteered at a shelter. We helped raise money for the animal shelter through fundraising and informing the community about the abuse that was taking place daily. This was a long and detailed assignment that required a lot of work. Now thinking back to this assignment, I do not remember how much work I had to do, but I remember how interesting and different this assignment was. Every group in my class was dedicated to their assignment because we saw that what we were doing through our writing and research really was making a difference in our community. Having assignments that allow students to see how they are incorporated into everyday life livens up the assignment and makes it important, rather than simply being another essay that will receive a letter grade. Yes the grade is important, but it is how that essay will function among society that has more meaning. Why do we learn to write in the first place? It is to be able to use it in our everyday lives and in our future careers. So why not incorporate our knowledge of writing into our everyday lives while still furthering our education? It will enhance the learning experience by demonstrating to students the reasons why they are given certain assignments.
The main reoccurring point throughout the entire essay is that lesson plans and activities that take place in the classroom need to be relatable to the students’ life at home in order for the students to comprehend and take interest. The students need to be able to see how the knowledge they learn will have an impact on their life. An example of this can be seen in the movie Freedom Writers when the teacher is placing all of the student’s letters in an envelope to send to the woman who hid Anne Frank in her attic. The teacher did not just give them an assignment that she would read, mark a grade on, and give back. She instead had them write letters to this woman and even though these letters were most likely graded for content and grammatical errors, the students were able to visually see how their writing made an impact. Their own writing was read by this woman and because of their writing and fundraising she was able to come and speak to them. This type of assignment strays from the traditional writing assignment that students do in classrooms. Many students do not understand the importance of why certain novels are assigned for reading and why they have to learn about certain topics. This different style of teaching by using the tools and knowledge that are accessible to students will of course be interesting for the students and accommodating for them, but I believe it misses out on necessary instruction.
Students will be able to learn grammar and events that are relatable to them and their community, but what about past history and novels that none of the students can relate to but will appear repeatedly throughout their education, such as The Odyssey? Since this way of teaching is not universally used throughout the education system and students may struggle adapting from one way to the other. Even if students do thrive in this type of classroom setting, it will be hard to place students in classrooms of this technique starting from kindergarten all the way to grade twelve. In the movie Freedom Writers, a close relationship formed between the students and teacher that was quite heartwarming, but also a type of bond that will be hard to form year after year with new students. In the movie, the teacher devoted so much of her personal time to her students that her own personal life fell apart. In the movie, this “fund of knowledge” technique proved to be extremely successful, but in order for this technique to have a chance of succeeding there needs to be a group effort by all teachers and school administration.
I remember when I was a sophomore in high school and I had an assignment where we worked in groups and researched an injustice in the world. The assignment was open to anything we chose. My group and I chose animal abuse and we wrote letters to local animal shelters and went in and volunteered at a shelter. We helped raise money for the animal shelter through fundraising and informing the community about the abuse that was taking place daily. This was a long and detailed assignment that required a lot of work. Now thinking back to this assignment, I do not remember how much work I had to do, but I remember how interesting and different this assignment was. Every group in my class was dedicated to their assignment because we saw that what we were doing through our writing and research really was making a difference in our community. Having assignments that allow students to see how they are incorporated into everyday life livens up the assignment and makes it important, rather than simply being another essay that will receive a letter grade. Yes the grade is important, but it is how that essay will function among society that has more meaning. Why do we learn to write in the first place? It is to be able to use it in our everyday lives and in our future careers. So why not incorporate our knowledge of writing into our everyday lives while still furthering our education? It will enhance the learning experience by demonstrating to students the reasons why they are given certain assignments.
Friday, October 16, 2009
The Necesity of Literacy
In the first article by Barton and Hamilton the authors discuss literacy as an activity within a social context as opposed to a tool that people use. “Like all human activity, literacy is essentially social, and it is located in the interaction between people” (Barton, 3). The article illustrates what people do with literacy: of the social activities, of the thoughts and meanings behind the activities, and of the texts utilized in such activities. It is about how a particular group of people use reading and writing in their day-today lives. Of necessity, the book is particular; it sets out from individual people's lives and particular literacy events at a certain point in history (Barton, 3). By doing so it illustrates to the reader literacy as a social event instead of a tool that we all use. These literacy events allows the reader to see society in that time that place, that location, that social context and see how literacy changes as time progresses.
The approach the article takes is “First [they] offer up a description and an investigation of literacy in one local community. Second, the book represents a contribution to the theoretical understanding of literacy, and more generally to the understanding of social practices and how people make sense of their lives through then everyday practices” (Barton, 4). By doing so the article focuses on the vernacular literacies and by doing so gives you an insight into everyday life and literacy in day to day use and how education affects the quality of life. This approach allows illiterates to be not be viewed as dumb because they do not possess the “tool” of literacy but to be seen as possessing another type of “tool” or another type of literacy a vernacular literacy which may not function outside of their region but inside their region is allows them to function in everyday life.
In the second article by Marsha Farr, she discusses literacy practices among the social network of Chicago Mexicans. Farr discusses “illiteracy” among a group of Mexicans living in the suburb of Chicago and by “illiteracy” it is what typical Americans would describe as reading and writing. Farr argues that by using this linguistic definition “can result in denigration or patronization, rather than a more egalitarian respect for differences that may exist. This is not to deny that literacy is used in particular ways of thinking, nor even to argue against instruction in Western literate behaviors, but to avoid labeling people who in fact have literacy skills as either ‘illiterate’ or ‘semi-literate’” (Farr, 7).
In this article Farr interviews men who did not learn how to formally read and write but taught themselves due to necessity and because they wanted to learn. Farr also illustrates that reading or writing does not come in any specific order. “These differing accounts tell us that neither learning reading first nor writing first is more "natural" Both, however, can be acquired without schooling as a spontaneous part of daily life, when people perceive a need for these skills” (Farr, 14). The method that these men used Farr describes as lirico or “is to learn informally, without books, and purely with spoken language” (Farr, 16). These men had the motivation to want to learn therefore they developed a method to learn what they needed. The factors that motivated these men, as Farr describes, are “first, those with whom they wanted to communicate were in another country; second, they felt a personal obligation to maintain these relationships and to maintain them personally; third, a cultural tool, writing, was available for this purpose; and fourth, others were able and willing to share their knowledge of this cultural too!” (Farr, 20).
Both these articles argue that one may be considered illiterate in one context and literate in another. While the men in Farr’s article where literate because they could not read and write according to Americas standards they were literate in that they were able to communicate with their families. As Barton explained these men had vernacular literacies, which functions in their region but not outside of it. These men used their form literacy in day to day life thus showing that one may be illiterate by one standard but still have some form of literacy. This knowledge in valuable to the future educator in that it will free the mind of the educator to try and understand the literacy of their student and their parents to better communicate with them. By one being more accepting of various types of literacies one can adapt their teaching methods to try and “reach out” to these various literacies and educate the child thought their type of literacy. However this does propose a problem because now education is more child specific causing more trouble for the teacher but if you consider that most schools are located in regions where most of the students share the same regional vernacular literacy the job now falls on the educator to learn the vernacular literacy which would be easier than the other way around.
Now based on these articles I invite to consider this: Should we have a universal literacy or should we try and adapt to the need of the students and adapt out methods to their literacies? Do you consider vernacular literacy a literacy at all? Or is it just “slang” and has no value. If you do is “slang” a vernacular literacy, why?
The approach the article takes is “First [they] offer up a description and an investigation of literacy in one local community. Second, the book represents a contribution to the theoretical understanding of literacy, and more generally to the understanding of social practices and how people make sense of their lives through then everyday practices” (Barton, 4). By doing so the article focuses on the vernacular literacies and by doing so gives you an insight into everyday life and literacy in day to day use and how education affects the quality of life. This approach allows illiterates to be not be viewed as dumb because they do not possess the “tool” of literacy but to be seen as possessing another type of “tool” or another type of literacy a vernacular literacy which may not function outside of their region but inside their region is allows them to function in everyday life.
In the second article by Marsha Farr, she discusses literacy practices among the social network of Chicago Mexicans. Farr discusses “illiteracy” among a group of Mexicans living in the suburb of Chicago and by “illiteracy” it is what typical Americans would describe as reading and writing. Farr argues that by using this linguistic definition “can result in denigration or patronization, rather than a more egalitarian respect for differences that may exist. This is not to deny that literacy is used in particular ways of thinking, nor even to argue against instruction in Western literate behaviors, but to avoid labeling people who in fact have literacy skills as either ‘illiterate’ or ‘semi-literate’” (Farr, 7).
In this article Farr interviews men who did not learn how to formally read and write but taught themselves due to necessity and because they wanted to learn. Farr also illustrates that reading or writing does not come in any specific order. “These differing accounts tell us that neither learning reading first nor writing first is more "natural" Both, however, can be acquired without schooling as a spontaneous part of daily life, when people perceive a need for these skills” (Farr, 14). The method that these men used Farr describes as lirico or “is to learn informally, without books, and purely with spoken language” (Farr, 16). These men had the motivation to want to learn therefore they developed a method to learn what they needed. The factors that motivated these men, as Farr describes, are “first, those with whom they wanted to communicate were in another country; second, they felt a personal obligation to maintain these relationships and to maintain them personally; third, a cultural tool, writing, was available for this purpose; and fourth, others were able and willing to share their knowledge of this cultural too!” (Farr, 20).
Both these articles argue that one may be considered illiterate in one context and literate in another. While the men in Farr’s article where literate because they could not read and write according to Americas standards they were literate in that they were able to communicate with their families. As Barton explained these men had vernacular literacies, which functions in their region but not outside of it. These men used their form literacy in day to day life thus showing that one may be illiterate by one standard but still have some form of literacy. This knowledge in valuable to the future educator in that it will free the mind of the educator to try and understand the literacy of their student and their parents to better communicate with them. By one being more accepting of various types of literacies one can adapt their teaching methods to try and “reach out” to these various literacies and educate the child thought their type of literacy. However this does propose a problem because now education is more child specific causing more trouble for the teacher but if you consider that most schools are located in regions where most of the students share the same regional vernacular literacy the job now falls on the educator to learn the vernacular literacy which would be easier than the other way around.
Now based on these articles I invite to consider this: Should we have a universal literacy or should we try and adapt to the need of the students and adapt out methods to their literacies? Do you consider vernacular literacy a literacy at all? Or is it just “slang” and has no value. If you do is “slang” a vernacular literacy, why?
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
What is Literacy to Me
I have always thought about literacy as the ability to read and write. I never thought about it as any other way. I came to this conclusion by just hearing people use it in everyday life. I hear about the literacy rate in certain countries being low. I hear about how literacy and how everyone should be able to read and write. I hear the terms illiterate and literate be thrown around in the same context as literacy. I hear the president talk about the literacy rate in America and how it’s on the rise. I have just come to associate literacy with the ability of reading and writing. However as I progress in my college career I come to learn that it’s a little more than just reading and writing, how much more? I don’t know yet what I do know is that it also entails comprehension because it serves no purpose if kids can’t comprehend what they are reading. So not only do children have to have the ability to read and write but only the ability to comprehend what they are reading and apply the lessons learned to everyday life.
I came to this realization after becoming a tutor for autistic children. I realized that these kids can read and write reasonably well but when it came to comprehension the kids were lost. I would have one of my kids, Joseph, who would read a short story all by himself with no problems but when it came to answering some simple questions about the story he would have no idea what to do. It was as if he didn’t read the story at all. I attributed this to the autism and found was to get around this mostly by just rewording the question to a simpler way that he would understand. However later on I began tutoring children with no mental problems and found that after these kids would finish reading a story and try to answer the questions at the end they would come up with their own answer that would be remotely related to the story it was if they read the story a week ago and were trying to recall what happened. These kids were about half right in their answer. When it came down to it, it was all about the kids and their ability to comprehend what they are reading. Not just read the words on the page but to really understand what they are reading.
For these reasons when I become a teacher I will not only hold my students responsible for attaining the ability to read but also to comprehend what they are reading. It really serves no purpose to have a student read a book and not understand what he or she just read. The reason why I would want my students to understand what they are reading is so that we can discuss what we are reading. However, even if they don’t completely understand what we are reading I want them to be thinking about it. By them merely thinking about the reading it shows me that they are trying to comprehend the reading.
A typical day in my English class would start out with a discussion of the assigned reading. I would give them a simple question to prompt them to start to think about what they read. The simplest would be “What do you think about it so far?” Then I would ask if anybody is lost; this would open the room to anybody who doesn’t understand the reading or has just been reading without paying attention to what they are reading. After that I would try and relate the main themes of the story to things they already know and understand, thereby giving them a new way of looking at the story and a new way of trying to understand it. Overall it would be more of a way of trying to tap into each students “channel” of learning to help them better understand what we are reading and by providing a different ways of viewing and relating to the reading I will try and achieve this, because even if they can read that doesn’t mean the understand what they are reading my goal will be for them to comprehend and apply the lesson, if there is one, that the reading provides. If I can’t tap into the students “channel” of learning I will at least give them the tools so that they can figure it out for themselves. I don’t want to leave anybody behind because I myself have been in that situation and that’s when a student gives up and just “rolls with the punches” and merely tries to get along. Instead of them giving up I would want them to ask questions and interact in discussion. I want them to at least try and figure out what we are doing and why we are doing it. I know this is all in a perfect world and in a perfect classroom but we’ll see how it goes.
I came to this realization after becoming a tutor for autistic children. I realized that these kids can read and write reasonably well but when it came to comprehension the kids were lost. I would have one of my kids, Joseph, who would read a short story all by himself with no problems but when it came to answering some simple questions about the story he would have no idea what to do. It was as if he didn’t read the story at all. I attributed this to the autism and found was to get around this mostly by just rewording the question to a simpler way that he would understand. However later on I began tutoring children with no mental problems and found that after these kids would finish reading a story and try to answer the questions at the end they would come up with their own answer that would be remotely related to the story it was if they read the story a week ago and were trying to recall what happened. These kids were about half right in their answer. When it came down to it, it was all about the kids and their ability to comprehend what they are reading. Not just read the words on the page but to really understand what they are reading.
For these reasons when I become a teacher I will not only hold my students responsible for attaining the ability to read but also to comprehend what they are reading. It really serves no purpose to have a student read a book and not understand what he or she just read. The reason why I would want my students to understand what they are reading is so that we can discuss what we are reading. However, even if they don’t completely understand what we are reading I want them to be thinking about it. By them merely thinking about the reading it shows me that they are trying to comprehend the reading.
A typical day in my English class would start out with a discussion of the assigned reading. I would give them a simple question to prompt them to start to think about what they read. The simplest would be “What do you think about it so far?” Then I would ask if anybody is lost; this would open the room to anybody who doesn’t understand the reading or has just been reading without paying attention to what they are reading. After that I would try and relate the main themes of the story to things they already know and understand, thereby giving them a new way of looking at the story and a new way of trying to understand it. Overall it would be more of a way of trying to tap into each students “channel” of learning to help them better understand what we are reading and by providing a different ways of viewing and relating to the reading I will try and achieve this, because even if they can read that doesn’t mean the understand what they are reading my goal will be for them to comprehend and apply the lesson, if there is one, that the reading provides. If I can’t tap into the students “channel” of learning I will at least give them the tools so that they can figure it out for themselves. I don’t want to leave anybody behind because I myself have been in that situation and that’s when a student gives up and just “rolls with the punches” and merely tries to get along. Instead of them giving up I would want them to ask questions and interact in discussion. I want them to at least try and figure out what we are doing and why we are doing it. I know this is all in a perfect world and in a perfect classroom but we’ll see how it goes.
Defining Literacy in “Literate” Terms
Coming from Hispanic heritage where Spanish is my father’s native language, he often has difficult times phrasing his word choice in English through letters, emails, etc. I help proofread his writing and explain to him the mistakes he is making. Over time I have noticed that these mistakes are minimal, an awkward pause here and a missing comma there seem to be the most dire cases; yet he still claims he is not fully literate in the English language. What is this term literate? We incorporate our literacy of books, common sense, and knowledge into our everyday lives either through one language or multiple. Literacy occurs in all languages and one person may be able to read and write in different languages, but does that mean they are literate in all of them?
A person’s native language represents part of their identity and they associate themselves largely around it. They not only become affixed to their native language through learning new words, but they are able to fully immerse themselves into the language that they have an innate ability to shift their tone depending on their audience and backchannels that represent “cue-phrases” during dialogue—such as yeah and uh-huh. When speaking his native language, my father possesses this innate ability to manipulate his tone depending on the situation; such as when to pause to allow someone to finish their statement or to sound polite. However, it is when
my father tries to adjust his tone when speaking English that he seems to run into difficulties.
There have been countless times where he is having a conversation with someone who’s native language is English and they believe that my father is talking down to them simply because of his Spanish accent. It is not that my father is doing this on purpose; it is simply because he may not feel fully confident when speaking English or his accent is hindering him and making his English sound stern. When I analyze my father’s claim that he is not literate in English I not only look at this statement from his point of view, but from how native English speakers perceive him. My father views himself as not being literate in the English language, but I disagree with him. He is well-knowledgeable of how to read, write, and converse in English. It
is his slight misuse of the language that he believes is evidence for being illiterate. From a native English speaker they may claim that my father is illiterate due to his accent, but once again I disagree because a person’s accent does not need to meet the standard in order for them to be regarded as literate.
When I become an English teacher at the high school level I want to be able to convey to my students that being literate does not mean that a person has to speak the standard of English—the more favored dialect among English speakers. My goal throughout the year would be to create exercises that will allow them to feel confident in reading, writing, and conversing in the language. Public high schools currently contain several different ethnicities in a single class. This could make it difficult to create activities that are suitable for everyone, but I would
acknowledge each culture’s differences and use this as a starting off point.
To begin with, I want the students to first write about a time they may have experienced a feeling of inferiority. I want them to concentrate on a time where there may have been a language barrier or they did not feel confident to express their ideas because they felt their usage of English was not up to par of those around them. Since I want to utilize this type of activity in the beginning of the school year, students may feel shy and not want to express their thoughts openly for the class to hear. This is fine; at this point of the school year I just the students to start to have a different outlook on the term literacy, one that is created not entirely from the norm. We will defer our thoughts of the standard of English and concentrate on a person’s individual aspects that make them literate.
The next type of activity I would incorporate into my class would be to read short stories by authors of different ethnicities such as Sandra Cisneros and Zora Neale Hurston. This will provide students with the knowledge that others are also facing hardships and putdowns because of the way they speak English. When it comes down to it, all of us have accents. My future students will learn through reading and writing that this statement is true. I will have them keep a journal that they can write in when they experience an incident relating to their manner of speaking and also to write down their thoughts after they have read a short story. Towards the end of the school year, I will have the students compose a poem about their stance on literacy and what it means to them. It will be written on a poster board along with an illustration either hand-drawn or a collage of photos. They will present it to the class and it will be posted on a wall in the classroom.
Though there may be one dictionary definition of the term literacy, every person will create different definitions of this term. I have realized that mostly everyone is literate—they have the ability to read, write, and converse fluently in their native language, but it is when they transition to another language that their confidence level is lowered and they feel that they arehindered by the accent that originates from their native language. This does not prove they are illiterate because a person’s accent should not define them as being illiterate.
A person’s native language represents part of their identity and they associate themselves largely around it. They not only become affixed to their native language through learning new words, but they are able to fully immerse themselves into the language that they have an innate ability to shift their tone depending on their audience and backchannels that represent “cue-phrases” during dialogue—such as yeah and uh-huh. When speaking his native language, my father possesses this innate ability to manipulate his tone depending on the situation; such as when to pause to allow someone to finish their statement or to sound polite. However, it is when
my father tries to adjust his tone when speaking English that he seems to run into difficulties.
There have been countless times where he is having a conversation with someone who’s native language is English and they believe that my father is talking down to them simply because of his Spanish accent. It is not that my father is doing this on purpose; it is simply because he may not feel fully confident when speaking English or his accent is hindering him and making his English sound stern. When I analyze my father’s claim that he is not literate in English I not only look at this statement from his point of view, but from how native English speakers perceive him. My father views himself as not being literate in the English language, but I disagree with him. He is well-knowledgeable of how to read, write, and converse in English. It
is his slight misuse of the language that he believes is evidence for being illiterate. From a native English speaker they may claim that my father is illiterate due to his accent, but once again I disagree because a person’s accent does not need to meet the standard in order for them to be regarded as literate.
When I become an English teacher at the high school level I want to be able to convey to my students that being literate does not mean that a person has to speak the standard of English—the more favored dialect among English speakers. My goal throughout the year would be to create exercises that will allow them to feel confident in reading, writing, and conversing in the language. Public high schools currently contain several different ethnicities in a single class. This could make it difficult to create activities that are suitable for everyone, but I would
acknowledge each culture’s differences and use this as a starting off point.
To begin with, I want the students to first write about a time they may have experienced a feeling of inferiority. I want them to concentrate on a time where there may have been a language barrier or they did not feel confident to express their ideas because they felt their usage of English was not up to par of those around them. Since I want to utilize this type of activity in the beginning of the school year, students may feel shy and not want to express their thoughts openly for the class to hear. This is fine; at this point of the school year I just the students to start to have a different outlook on the term literacy, one that is created not entirely from the norm. We will defer our thoughts of the standard of English and concentrate on a person’s individual aspects that make them literate.
The next type of activity I would incorporate into my class would be to read short stories by authors of different ethnicities such as Sandra Cisneros and Zora Neale Hurston. This will provide students with the knowledge that others are also facing hardships and putdowns because of the way they speak English. When it comes down to it, all of us have accents. My future students will learn through reading and writing that this statement is true. I will have them keep a journal that they can write in when they experience an incident relating to their manner of speaking and also to write down their thoughts after they have read a short story. Towards the end of the school year, I will have the students compose a poem about their stance on literacy and what it means to them. It will be written on a poster board along with an illustration either hand-drawn or a collage of photos. They will present it to the class and it will be posted on a wall in the classroom.
Though there may be one dictionary definition of the term literacy, every person will create different definitions of this term. I have realized that mostly everyone is literate—they have the ability to read, write, and converse fluently in their native language, but it is when they transition to another language that their confidence level is lowered and they feel that they arehindered by the accent that originates from their native language. This does not prove they are illiterate because a person’s accent should not define them as being illiterate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)