I keep getting all the readings mixed up so forgive me if this and Fosen's readings cross over. I always intend to blog sooner, but I get overwhelmed with my notes that by the time it comes to blogging, I have no idea what to say and I feel like the blogs I give need to be "correct" but I have no idea what "correct" is because I need to discuss the readings before I can write about them, if that makes any sense at all? I feel like reading and blogging then discussing feels completely backwards to me because I have all these thoughts, but putting them in a blog that is posted for all the class to see makes me feel dumb because I know I probably didn't read the readings right or got a whole different idea from them. Anyway, my current distaste for blogging is purely my own insecurities. I am not sure how last semester I felt I had a really great grasp, but this semester, I feel like I am just not getting the material...I feel like I am purely regurgitating information but not actually utilizing it, if that makes any sense.
Anyway, aside from my random side note, this last weeks readings. The London Group was a dense one for me last semester and I feel like trying to sum it up briefly will not do it justice, but I feel like I have to because it hits education right on the nose. The 10 authors are trying to solve an almost unsolvable problem, but they do really have something with their concept of Multiculturalism where they are trying to optimize education with an understanding of the complex realities of schools and education as a whole. Here at Chico State we talk a lot about multiliteracy which is, “...the multiplicity of communications channels and media, and the increasing saliency of cultural and linguistic diversity” (63).In other words, how can we do all the things? And that is where there are so many issues. How DO we do all the things using all the things for all the people. It is a heavy concept knowing what it is we are trying to achieve and yet knowing all the things we need to achieve it. All things are possible, right?
“A pedagogy of multiliteracies...focuses on the modes of representation much broader than language alone” (64). This is actually covered in the reading we are doing for Fosen's class, "Made Not Only in Words" and "The Available Means of Persuasion: Mapping a Theory and Pedagogy of Multimodal Public Rhetoric". The idea that literacy is more than just words on a page. It is a film, it is a photo, it is a thing that is not just a thing, but a form of literacy, so why do some insist that only pen on paper is considered literacy? Any how can we fix that? Good luck with that answer!
Which then brings us to New Literacy Studies “...the concept of a “continuum” is inadequate because spoken and written activities and products do not in fact line up along a continuum but differ from one another in a complex, multidimensional way both within speech communities and across them” (431).
Take a breath and reread that. I had to. But then when you get it, you nod and go, well, "duh!" But yet, at the same time we end up falling back on what we know, are comfortable with and what we were taught. Or then again, we want to break free of that "continuum" and see the reality of literacy, like in the readings I did in Fosen's class. (Again, all of this has become a big blur, so I hope I am getting it all right). Which, brings us to this, “Literacy can no longer be addressed as a neutral technology (autonomous model)... but is already a social and ideological practice involving fundamental aspects of epistemology, power, and politics: the acquisition of literacy involves challenges to dominant discourse, shifts in what constitutes the agenda of proper literacy, and struggles for power and position” (435).
Which we can go back to our last weeks reading and before hand about the "power" of literacy, etc. The idea that literacy has power, but how are we finding ways to use it. Like in Jim Ridolfo's documentary about free trade. Was his statement via still camera not more impacting than had he written an article? Multiliteracies create a big impact overall for literacy in general. As we have seen in our readings, given the opportunity to use the tools, we should. Literacy is more than just pen and paper...it is all the things
Blogs, Syndicated
It is Literally All the Things…
by LunchTimeRandom •
I keep getting all the readings mixed up so forgive me if this and Fosen's readings cross over. I always intend to blog sooner, but I get overwhelmed with my notes that by the time it comes to blogging, I have no idea what to say and I feel like the blogs I give need to be "correct" but I have no idea what "correct" is because I need to discuss the readings before I can write about them, if that makes any sense at all? I feel like reading and blogging then discussing feels completely backwards to me because I have all these thoughts, but putting them in a blog that is posted for all the class to see makes me feel dumb because I know I probably didn't read the readings right or got a whole different idea from them. Anyway, my current distaste for blogging is purely my own insecurities. I am not sure how last semester I felt I had a really great grasp, but this semester, I feel like I am just not getting the material...I feel like I am purely regurgitating information but not actually utilizing it, if that makes any sense.
Anyway, aside from my random side note, this last weeks readings. The London Group was a dense one for me last semester and I feel like trying to sum it up briefly will not do it justice, but I feel like I have to because it hits education right on the nose. The 10 authors are trying to solve an almost unsolvable problem, but they do really have something with their concept of Multiculturalism where they are trying to optimize education with an understanding of the complex realities of schools and education as a whole. Here at Chico State we talk a lot about multiliteracy which is, “...the multiplicity of communications channels and media, and the increasing saliency of cultural and linguistic diversity” (63).In other words, how can we do all the things? And that is where there are so many issues. How DO we do all the things using all the things for all the people. It is a heavy concept knowing what it is we are trying to achieve and yet knowing all the things we need to achieve it. All things are possible, right?
“A pedagogy of multiliteracies...focuses on the modes of representation much broader than language alone” (64). This is actually covered in the reading we are doing for Fosen's class, "Made Not Only in Words" and "The Available Means of Persuasion: Mapping a Theory and Pedagogy of Multimodal Public Rhetoric". The idea that literacy is more than just words on a page. It is a film, it is a photo, it is a thing that is not just a thing, but a form of literacy, so why do some insist that only pen on paper is considered literacy? Any how can we fix that? Good luck with that answer!
Which then brings us to New Literacy Studies “...the concept of a “continuum” is inadequate because spoken and written activities and products do not in fact line up along a continuum but differ from one another in a complex, multidimensional way both within speech communities and across them” (431).
Take a breath and reread that. I had to. But then when you get it, you nod and go, well, "duh!" But yet, at the same time we end up falling back on what we know, are comfortable with and what we were taught. Or then again, we want to break free of that "continuum" and see the reality of literacy, like in the readings I did in Fosen's class. (Again, all of this has become a big blur, so I hope I am getting it all right). Which, brings us to this, “Literacy can no longer be addressed as a neutral technology (autonomous model)... but is already a social and ideological practice involving fundamental aspects of epistemology, power, and politics: the acquisition of literacy involves challenges to dominant discourse, shifts in what constitutes the agenda of proper literacy, and struggles for power and position” (435).
Which we can go back to our last weeks reading and before hand about the "power" of literacy, etc. The idea that literacy has power, but how are we finding ways to use it. Like in Jim Ridolfo's documentary about free trade. Was his statement via still camera not more impacting than had he written an article? Multiliteracies create a big impact overall for literacy in general. As we have seen in our readings, given the opportunity to use the tools, we should. Literacy is more than just pen and paper...it is all the things
Anyway, aside from my random side note, this last weeks readings. The London Group was a dense one for me last semester and I feel like trying to sum it up briefly will not do it justice, but I feel like I have to because it hits education right on the nose. The 10 authors are trying to solve an almost unsolvable problem, but they do really have something with their concept of Multiculturalism where they are trying to optimize education with an understanding of the complex realities of schools and education as a whole. Here at Chico State we talk a lot about multiliteracy which is, “...the multiplicity of communications channels and media, and the increasing saliency of cultural and linguistic diversity” (63).In other words, how can we do all the things? And that is where there are so many issues. How DO we do all the things using all the things for all the people. It is a heavy concept knowing what it is we are trying to achieve and yet knowing all the things we need to achieve it. All things are possible, right?
“A pedagogy of multiliteracies...focuses on the modes of representation much broader than language alone” (64). This is actually covered in the reading we are doing for Fosen's class, "Made Not Only in Words" and "The Available Means of Persuasion: Mapping a Theory and Pedagogy of Multimodal Public Rhetoric". The idea that literacy is more than just words on a page. It is a film, it is a photo, it is a thing that is not just a thing, but a form of literacy, so why do some insist that only pen on paper is considered literacy? Any how can we fix that? Good luck with that answer!
Which then brings us to New Literacy Studies “...the concept of a “continuum” is inadequate because spoken and written activities and products do not in fact line up along a continuum but differ from one another in a complex, multidimensional way both within speech communities and across them” (431).
Take a breath and reread that. I had to. But then when you get it, you nod and go, well, "duh!" But yet, at the same time we end up falling back on what we know, are comfortable with and what we were taught. Or then again, we want to break free of that "continuum" and see the reality of literacy, like in the readings I did in Fosen's class. (Again, all of this has become a big blur, so I hope I am getting it all right). Which, brings us to this, “Literacy can no longer be addressed as a neutral technology (autonomous model)... but is already a social and ideological practice involving fundamental aspects of epistemology, power, and politics: the acquisition of literacy involves challenges to dominant discourse, shifts in what constitutes the agenda of proper literacy, and struggles for power and position” (435).
Which we can go back to our last weeks reading and before hand about the "power" of literacy, etc. The idea that literacy has power, but how are we finding ways to use it. Like in Jim Ridolfo's documentary about free trade. Was his statement via still camera not more impacting than had he written an article? Multiliteracies create a big impact overall for literacy in general. As we have seen in our readings, given the opportunity to use the tools, we should. Literacy is more than just pen and paper...it is all the things
Blogs, Syndicated
Linking Literacy and Linguistics
by ahaydon1 •
Street’s article “The New Literacy Studies” “[challenges] the great divide in favour of an oral/literate ‘mix'” through an autonomous “ideological” model of literacy (436). Street defines this new ideology as “the role of literacy practices in reproducing or challenging structures of power and domination” (434). He also notes that a crucial part of literacy that has been overlooked in previous articles is that literacy is not a singular, definable concept, but is instead a collection of different literacies that are mixed together and used in various contexts. Similar to other articles that we have read thus far, Street re-emphasizes that when analyzing the ideological model and “cognitive aspects of reading and writing” one must understand that “they are encapsulated within cultural wholes and within structures of power” (435).
When reading this article, there were two key points that really struck me. The first was the fact that Street actually sought to abandon the notion of the great divide by acknowledging the multitude of literacies that go into literacy, while also connecting linguistic theory with literacy theory. As someone who has dabbled in linguistics, I have found it frustrating that previous authors have mentioned the social, cultural, economic, etc. factors that play into literacy practices and theory, but haven’t connected this with the cognitive developments of language acquisition, especially when looking at second language learners. Street clearly states that “I would like to argue that the analysis of the relationship between orality and literacy requires attention to the ‘wider parameters’ of ‘context’ largely underemphasised in Anglo-American linguistics” (440). Culture, social perceptions, privilege, power structures, economics, etc. all play a crucial role in how one acquires language. However, all of these separate contexts hold within them literacies that must be understood in order for one to build a cognitive understanding of how to use language. This is such an important idea. Other, let’s say “social literacies”, play a huge role in our “institutional/professional/academic/whatever literacies”. And this does not exclude oral practices.
For me, Street has shifted the priority of “defining literacy” with what are the factors that play into literacy practices. How do we cognitively interpret or develop these practices? What defines the context in which we utilize these practices? Is it really language that builds literacy? Or do literacy practices ripple into one another to create other literacies?
Blogs, Syndicated
The New London Group
by nathansandoval89 •
This is quiet the read. Through the note taking process, I was finding it difficult to summarize. However the material was easy to relate to teaching as well as my history as a student.
Google Doc NOTES
Blogs, Syndicated
My Least Successful Mind Map (as of yet…)
by danifernandez8 •
The New London Group piece was difficult and felt too big too mind map effectively….I’m working on it, but here are some reading notes on a google doc in case I don’t finish in time!
Blogs, Syndicated
Racism in “A Question of Power” by Bessie Head
by cati312 •
As of yet I am not sure what to think of this novel, I like it, it is interesting, and moves through the text as if the writer/narrator is aimlessly walking taking each little divergent path that comes along and then they slowly find their way back to the main road. A few major ideas that seem to keep catching my attention is the idea of race, culture, mental stability, and belief systems based around ideas of religion and/or good and evil. Right now thought the only idea I believe I have a grasp on is the idea of race. There are many moments in the text when a person is simply referred to by the race or culture identification, such as German or English. And, there is an evident conflict for Elizabeth as she is dark skinned by the world standards but born of a white woman. As a baby and a child they did not know what to with her, she did not seem to fit into their classification systems, “The woman on the committee said: ‘What can we do with this child? It’s mother is white'” (pg 14 Nook Edition). She was born of a white mother and a black father, she seemed like a culture-less child one that would struggle to find her identity solely in either her mother’s or her farther’s country, nonetheless, she is forced to chose or have the choice made for her. Which is strongly outlined by this quote above where the child welfare committee does not what to do with her because she does not fit into the given classification system, she is different and new. With the character Elizabeth being so aware of this confusion I find it interesting that our narrator refers to people by generic racial classifications yet is unable to place to Elizabeth in one. Perhaps this is the point to show the uniqueness of an individual and the destruction that a generic classification system can take on a person, culture, and race. As a reader I would think that it would make our narrator more sensitive to the unique identities of those from “Asia” or “Germany”, just like Africa these countries have specific parts that make the inhabitants of those areas different from their countrymen. When Elizabeth goes to Botswana we see racism come out in yet a different as she is not “dark” enough once again showing the stark difference between her mother and her father. There are some interesting movements going on with this idea of race in this first part and these are just some observations as I am moving through the text.
Blogs, Syndicated
First Year Composition and Writing in Genre
by cati312 •
Teaching in genre is an interesting approach to teaching first year composition and I think on a basic level you have to work with in genre to help students develop their writing. In Elizabeth Wardle’s “‘Mutt Genres’ and the Goal of FYC: Can We Help Students Write the Genres of the University?” and Barwashi and Reiff “Chapter 11: Rhetorical Genre Studies Approaches to Teaching Writing” they discuss the possible pros and cons to teaching a first year composition with genre as its focus. However, one constant theme that comes up between the two articles is the complexity that comes with working within different genres. It is difficult to make that complexity transfer over especially when the class is not able to work specifically with in the genre but through example only. While working with in different genres the students gain the opportunity to see how these genres work they still fail to experience the genre with in its context and in turn do not have the opportunity to see how it functions with in its own rules and exceptions. It seems like teaching in genre would be like teaching a survey of writing, giving students a sample of the different ways in which writing can take shape. However, it doesn’t seem that, that would help them develop as writers who can learn to translate their skill across genres and life. They would be learning to write in genre to pass the class but not be able to take any as a transferable skill that they could learn to apply outside of this classroom environment. In looking at this perspective it then leads me to question as well, where does the idea of inquiry come in to play and their skills as individual researchers and writers. I don’t want to discredit the idea of learning to write in a genre but I think for a first year composition class that specifically teaching to develop writing in this sense is not going to set the students up for success. I don’t think that they need formulas on how different disciplines write but rather guidance how develop critical thinking and how to ask questions about those disciplines.
Blogs, Syndicated
This is Getting Deep
by jwallace18 •
The thing I grabbed from the Scribner essay, Unpackaging Literacy, was the idea that literacy may not make you more advanced than the next person or that different levels of literacy exist and function in the world with or without each other, but what they didn’t find in the Vai community were poetic or transactional writings; ones that reflected on feelings or emotions, or others that presented persuasive arguments.
I go back to our discussions around Plato and Aristotle and think about the ideas they were promoting and how writing allowed an individual the chance to document and reflect on what it is that he or she was mulling over, in turn promoting a more in depth analysis of self and the relationship of self to that world.
This reflective quality of writing is definitely something I’ve taken notice of more since thinking about literacy and why it is looked at like “magic bananas”.
