Amanda's notes were great! I actually had to reread the article because her notes changed the way I read it.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
Author: LunchTimeRandom
Blogs, Syndicated
The "Right" to be Literate…?
by LunchTimeRandom •
Amanda's notes were great! I actually had to reread the article because her notes changed the way I read it.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
Blogs, Syndicated
The "Right" to be Literate…?
by LunchTimeRandom •
Amanda's notes were great! I actually had to reread the article because her notes changed the way I read it.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
Blogs, Syndicated
The "Right" to be Literate…?
by LunchTimeRandom •
Amanda's notes were great! I actually had to reread the article because her notes changed the way I read it.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
So, right now I am actually reading, "The Literacy Myth" book and it has been great in helping me look more into our readings, though I also get them confused, so hopefully I am getting this all straight.
BTW, I have been working on this post for 3 days and I keep coming to this. I have notes upon notes, but aside from that, this is what I keep coming to...
"Literacy is a fundamental human right." Why does this stick out to me so much? I have been staring at the notes and the readings and this, this statement screams at me and I have this incredible urge to focus on it. I guess it all comes down to the words, "the right". To have a right would mean that there is a possibility to take it away. You have a right to something, but to have a "right" would also mean that "we can also take that right from you". An opportunity for punishment and power, even when we feel that statement is intended to be good. I feel like "rights" are also considered a "privilege" in America. You cannot take away literacy from someone. Once they are literate, they are literate unless you change what literacy is or aspects to become more literate.
So, to have the human right to be literate would mean that everyone should be given the necessary tools for said literacy. But the issue, as we are seeing in our readings, the issue is not just giving that right, but understanding what it is we are giving. The issue of "uniformity" comes into play and what/whose culture is considered and in doing that, do we then make other cultures feel "less" because their "literary norms" are not what the "whole" consider to be a norm. Then we bring up the power of what literacy both has and what issues it causes in group and community advancements. Is literacy being used for good or evil? And are we being fair? And then we bring up the last point in "Literacy in Three Metaphors", using literacy as a sort of "saving grace" and an opportunity to become cultured. But what kind of culture is it if is only focuses on one culture (old dead white men).
I just have so many questions about this "right" we feel everyone should have. I don't like that word, "right". It seems too easy to take away. It also doesn't take into account that I don;t think it is something that we "give". I think literacy is what we as humans are born with. Yes, I know you are then going to throw in the argument of literacy at what level? Are we talking about books by Faulkner, or communicating through quilts. Are those not all valuable and as a human, are we not born with the need to communicate in some way and do we not always revert back to literacy as a basic need? Can a human, one never given the "right to literacy" then not ever have the chance to succeed? As stated in the reading, "literacy is not a necessity for personal survival" pg 22. So, the "right" then becomes almost unnecessary because we will always have the potential to become literate and a person will become literate if not for a want, but out of sheer necessity.
Ok, and in saying that, we have to ask why literacy is important. Then, after a long convo with Nate, we come back to power. So then literacy is power, which is why we make it a "right" so that we can create the power and the ability to take that power away......?
Just some thoughts.
Blogs, Syndicated
The Myth of the Myth…is it a myth?
by LunchTimeRandom •
" Rates of literacy in the United States depend on which of the various definitions of literacy is used."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
Blogs, Syndicated
The Myth of the Myth…is it a myth?
by LunchTimeRandom •
" Rates of literacy in the United States depend on which of the various definitions of literacy is used."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
Blogs, Syndicated
The Myth of the Myth…is it a myth?
by LunchTimeRandom •
" Rates of literacy in the United States depend on which of the various definitions of literacy is used."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
Blogs, Syndicated
The Myth of the Myth…is it a myth?
by LunchTimeRandom •
" Rates of literacy in the United States depend on which of the various definitions of literacy is used."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_in_the_United_States
"According to a study conducted in late April by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute of Literacy, 32 million adults in the U.S. can't read. That's 14 percent of the population. 21 percent of adults in the U.S. read below a 5th grade level, and 19 percent of high school graduates can't read."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/06/illiteracy-rate_n_3880355.html
"Millions of adults living in the United States struggle with basic literacy skills. Literacy Partners believes that literacy is more than just reading and writing: literacy encompasses technological skills, as well as knowledge of health and personal finances."
http://www.literacypartners.org/literacy-in-america