The more I read course and personal material on the subject of literacy, the more it seems futile that there is any hope or answer to be aiding those who truely need. The myths, relationships, resources (that reach cultural, curriculum, and inclusive needs in the classroom), and government sanctions do not work in unison with each other. Everytime there seems to be a ray of light, a large ominous cloud seems to rain on that parade. And as soldiers in the field we are trying our best with what we have to complete the tasks given to us from above to best suit the needs of each student in our classroom. Frank Smith said it best to myself, we are "overselling literacy."
I am personally frustrated when I hear about the war against illiteracy and yet as a middle school teacher there are lots of children that can not read and adminstration and special education teachers and myself wonders what we can do? In large classes fewer programs that group like students how do we actually fight this battle. Everyday a child is lost in this battle because they just get pushed along, because of so many different factors. We want children to think critically about the texts they read, write and view, but first they must be able to read, write and view...shouldn't they?
I did like the view that we are only as literate as what we do. Many times eliteists think they are better then everyone; but give them a manual on how to fix a car engine and now it may be a new literacy that they would not be able to understand. Our literacy is located!
I guess what I'm really saying is students are not all the same, teachers are not all the same so one solution will never work. There should be a battle going on and that is one that is working on equity for all but not in just one small box. Solutions need to become more universaland flexible, not so cookie cutter. Its a shame that the people that sit in parliament and minitry positions consistently look at data and find out ways to improve data and they don't look at children or providing alterntive tests for those students whose literacies differ from the norm and the elite.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
Monday, December 14, 2009
Friday, October 30, 2009
October 31st: Response to Workshops 7 and 8
I think for the most part the readings for these two workshops really reiterated the fact we give language meaning depending on how we are situated and where we come from. There are many words in our language that can mean many things but depending on where we are situated to the conversation is how we gather information and decode the words that are presented to us. When reading the Gee articles in particular I was thinking about the high percentage of English Language Learners that attend the school I work at. How many things per day do I say or ask that their backgrounds may not allow for complete understanding. One article gave many examples of this, the light and the basketball shoes. I also think of many other words my class would struggle with; for example, touque or chair(head of a department instead of a place to sit).
I think the picture books chosen for this class illustrated that we as teachers need to be breaking down the discursive social practices for our students; this will allow them to try new things, as well as give them the tools and strategies needed to think in many different ways. This was the second course I've attend that has read "Winnie the Witch" for much of the same reasons. Within my Visual Arts specialist my professor would often connect picture books, to art and to literacy, which I have tried to take with me into my classes.
One of the most interesting parts of class would have to be the Halloween costume flyer. As adults in a critical environment we have no problem finding the horrors that lie in the flyer, but how often do we point these out to our students? I asked my class last year how often is there culture represented on T.V. or in advertising and the only answer that they could think of was the Sweet Chili Heat Dorito commercials and Kumar from Harold and Kumar. But besides that they rarely see themselves in "Canadian/American" programming. What can we do? Besides constantly challenging our students and ourselves to make change so that there is no such flyer that totally degrades women and minorities. Constantly ask if they are being represented whether male or female; young or old and culturally. Is this enough, I'm not sure but hopefully we can inspire them to change what they feel is wrong. And help them understand the language that is used.
I think the picture books chosen for this class illustrated that we as teachers need to be breaking down the discursive social practices for our students; this will allow them to try new things, as well as give them the tools and strategies needed to think in many different ways. This was the second course I've attend that has read "Winnie the Witch" for much of the same reasons. Within my Visual Arts specialist my professor would often connect picture books, to art and to literacy, which I have tried to take with me into my classes.
One of the most interesting parts of class would have to be the Halloween costume flyer. As adults in a critical environment we have no problem finding the horrors that lie in the flyer, but how often do we point these out to our students? I asked my class last year how often is there culture represented on T.V. or in advertising and the only answer that they could think of was the Sweet Chili Heat Dorito commercials and Kumar from Harold and Kumar. But besides that they rarely see themselves in "Canadian/American" programming. What can we do? Besides constantly challenging our students and ourselves to make change so that there is no such flyer that totally degrades women and minorities. Constantly ask if they are being represented whether male or female; young or old and culturally. Is this enough, I'm not sure but hopefully we can inspire them to change what they feel is wrong. And help them understand the language that is used.
Monday, June 22, 2009
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Elite's repression of the rest of us!
Synthesis Paper: Repression of the Lower Class
Throughout my life one thing I have always noticed is how the elite manage to repress those that are in classes below them. This is no different in the realm of education or literacy. The way the government distributes funds for resources and types of resources illustrates this elitist view that exists within our educational community. For instance, teaching with technology is a board initiative; but not all school have access to the technology which is necessary for such a program to run; whereas some schools mostly in affluent neighborhoods have access and technology coaches that come to their schools and help with programing and IT help. I'm sure if we were to ask around our class what technology is made available to each teacher and their students we would have varying results based on the financial access of the area we all teach in.
Therefore the theme I have been noticing throughout the readings in both Finn's novel and previous readings for this class is the theme of the elite repressing the lower class. Since our first class' reading we have looked at the “underclass” and tried to examine why they just can't move up. We have read in many chapters about the different types of literacy, and the history of the “Corresponding Societies” becoming outlawed because; surprise surprise, the elite did not like the fact that the underclass were thinking and talking, and my goodness they even had ideas! The elite's view of how they teach literacy using it “to understand and control.” (Finn 125). Should we not worry about that definition, the word “control”? We have also discussed the difference of those that live in “Mainville” and the domesticated literacy that has kept the people of “Roadville” repressed.
We all come from a position in life, and maybe not just one, we have a cultural position, a literacy position and our power position in society. The most powerful are the elite, or rather they would have us all think they are powerful. I mean even their level of literacy is called “powerful” literacy, whereas middle-class literacy has been deemed as domesticated or functional at best. At best it seems as though the working-class are working toward the third stage of literacy which is the informational literacy but no where did it make reference that they had reached this level of literacy. Once again keeping the middle-class two lengths away from the elite. And who coined these terms? Someone that came from an elite language background no doubt. Even the words used to describe at what level they read at has very negative undertones. I know we should all aspire to reach beyond what we have now, does that mean if all we have now is a functional level of literacy to complete our daily jobs and routines that we are less in society? Once again someone has given the power to in their language and literature repress others.
When looking at those people in “Roadville” the author has what seems to be a negative approach to their level of literacy. And at first I seemed to be placing the same negativity towards their way of life. But we need to think we all can't be the prime minister, so why don't we look at why it is necessary for everyone to achieve the same literacy level? Who are we to look down on their society which functions and people are able to live and contribute to their society. I think it is a matter of what people want and need.
Language and literacy can be seen as a commodity, some people are willing to want it and pay for it, while others just don't see the value. It is unfortunate that so many people who wish to attain higher levels of literacy can not attain their goal, something that is quite reminiscent of our past. “Corresponding Societies” wished to discuss literature critically, and even though many recognized literacy's ability to be potentially powerful, the elite took this power away from them by stating that those that participated in these groups would be charged with treason. Or of those that lived in Milwaukee and couldn't afford to attend school to provide themselves with chances to better themselves for better jobs.
There is always the question what can we do to change this ability for the elite to repress the under and middle-classes and their rights to an education which is as rich in critical thought as those and their elite counter-parts? Business Week briefly attempts to answer the question of how the upper and elite classes can help but then merely places the blame on the poor people themselves for not doing better. I as well do not have the answer to that question! If I did I'm sure someone a part of the educational elite realm would find a way to keep me quiet! I think that recognizing the problems and discussing them and moving forward in our teaching of critical literacy skills is one way to start the change, and I think we have come a long way from our histories of literacy in many ways. But I think it is also important to recognize that not all people strive to reach the same level of literacy and using terminology that puts down particular levels of literacy may make certain societies look down upon themselves and perpetuate the idea that the elite is better. But we all can't be elite!
Throughout my life one thing I have always noticed is how the elite manage to repress those that are in classes below them. This is no different in the realm of education or literacy. The way the government distributes funds for resources and types of resources illustrates this elitist view that exists within our educational community. For instance, teaching with technology is a board initiative; but not all school have access to the technology which is necessary for such a program to run; whereas some schools mostly in affluent neighborhoods have access and technology coaches that come to their schools and help with programing and IT help. I'm sure if we were to ask around our class what technology is made available to each teacher and their students we would have varying results based on the financial access of the area we all teach in.
Therefore the theme I have been noticing throughout the readings in both Finn's novel and previous readings for this class is the theme of the elite repressing the lower class. Since our first class' reading we have looked at the “underclass” and tried to examine why they just can't move up. We have read in many chapters about the different types of literacy, and the history of the “Corresponding Societies” becoming outlawed because; surprise surprise, the elite did not like the fact that the underclass were thinking and talking, and my goodness they even had ideas! The elite's view of how they teach literacy using it “to understand and control.” (Finn 125). Should we not worry about that definition, the word “control”? We have also discussed the difference of those that live in “Mainville” and the domesticated literacy that has kept the people of “Roadville” repressed.
We all come from a position in life, and maybe not just one, we have a cultural position, a literacy position and our power position in society. The most powerful are the elite, or rather they would have us all think they are powerful. I mean even their level of literacy is called “powerful” literacy, whereas middle-class literacy has been deemed as domesticated or functional at best. At best it seems as though the working-class are working toward the third stage of literacy which is the informational literacy but no where did it make reference that they had reached this level of literacy. Once again keeping the middle-class two lengths away from the elite. And who coined these terms? Someone that came from an elite language background no doubt. Even the words used to describe at what level they read at has very negative undertones. I know we should all aspire to reach beyond what we have now, does that mean if all we have now is a functional level of literacy to complete our daily jobs and routines that we are less in society? Once again someone has given the power to in their language and literature repress others.
When looking at those people in “Roadville” the author has what seems to be a negative approach to their level of literacy. And at first I seemed to be placing the same negativity towards their way of life. But we need to think we all can't be the prime minister, so why don't we look at why it is necessary for everyone to achieve the same literacy level? Who are we to look down on their society which functions and people are able to live and contribute to their society. I think it is a matter of what people want and need.
Language and literacy can be seen as a commodity, some people are willing to want it and pay for it, while others just don't see the value. It is unfortunate that so many people who wish to attain higher levels of literacy can not attain their goal, something that is quite reminiscent of our past. “Corresponding Societies” wished to discuss literature critically, and even though many recognized literacy's ability to be potentially powerful, the elite took this power away from them by stating that those that participated in these groups would be charged with treason. Or of those that lived in Milwaukee and couldn't afford to attend school to provide themselves with chances to better themselves for better jobs.
There is always the question what can we do to change this ability for the elite to repress the under and middle-classes and their rights to an education which is as rich in critical thought as those and their elite counter-parts? Business Week briefly attempts to answer the question of how the upper and elite classes can help but then merely places the blame on the poor people themselves for not doing better. I as well do not have the answer to that question! If I did I'm sure someone a part of the educational elite realm would find a way to keep me quiet! I think that recognizing the problems and discussing them and moving forward in our teaching of critical literacy skills is one way to start the change, and I think we have come a long way from our histories of literacy in many ways. But I think it is also important to recognize that not all people strive to reach the same level of literacy and using terminology that puts down particular levels of literacy may make certain societies look down upon themselves and perpetuate the idea that the elite is better. But we all can't be elite!
Monday, May 25, 2009
Literary Where I'm From
I am from reading in the backseat during excruciatingly long road trips.
Vying for space to be comfortable.
I am from a place where anything I could get my hands on to read was good enough;
Peter Benchley, Christopher Pike, Batman and Robin.
I am from Seuss's magic worlds and words, Oh where will be all the places I will go?
The Very Hungry Caterpillar, its mesmerizing metamorphosis to a beautiful butterfly
and all it ate along the way.
I am from Chris Van Allsburg
his words and vibrant pictures
From The Polar Express, Just a Dream, Two Bad Ants
I am from anthologies of poetry and plays
satire and drama
comedy and horror
Waiting for Godot...are you sure this is it?
And Death of a Salesman...poor Mr. Loman.
And how can I forget Shel Silverstein!
I am from Canadian Fiction
The Handsmaid Tale, Cat's Eye
Richler, Ondaatje, and Findley
Small Ceremonies, Not wanted on the Journey
Mowat, and Monroe
I am from listening to great stories as my father read,
crawled up on the floor
waiting to hear what comes next.
I am from reading shampoo Bottles
“Wash and repeat, if necessary”
I am from crosswords and newspapers and gossip magazines
and novels.
Never dog ear a page when I can find some treasure to save my spot
until the next adventure.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
Literacy Response #1
The idea of literacy and living in a literate society is an extremely "loaded" concept. I think for many of us we take our literacies for granted, and this hits home more so when reading through the articles. As a teacher there are so many hats to be worn; but how many of them can we wear successfully? Often I find that one of these hats is as guardian to our students. But very rarely in the readings do we ever hear about the parent or from the parent of students. It seems as though all aspects of a students up bringing is put on our shoulders. But with so many students revolving through our doors how can we help each student equally?
As well one idea that resonated from the readings was the idea of equity...or rather inequity. We live in a classist society, which divides the education that children receive. As society we create cycles in which the lower class is unable to break free from. As the rich get richer, the poor are getting poorer and less educated. As society we see that certain groups of people make up the “underclass” and we know that it is difficult to break the cycle yet we do nothing. The underclass has become a group of exiles which the elite turn a blind eye to or rather believe that the underclass can help themselves, even though the elite have set up “aide” which promotes the illiterate, jobless cycle. This idea of social change is very overwhelming and we switch from hat to hat and try our best to win in the battle ground of education.
Yes, I call it a battle ground because we are in constant crisis. Whether it be fabricated or not we are made to believe that education is constantly at its worst stage yet. Test scores are always declining and we so rarely hear any positives about our educational system. In some ways the fabricated crisis can sometimes drop our spirits and make us feel that we are losing the battle and not making any gains. We often hear about going "back to the basics" but how is this relevant to today? How can we focus on "basics" when our professional development and leadership teams want us to focus on test scores and data walls?
In essence the reading and discussions we had in class made me ask myself more questions. I hope that I am doing the best that I can with the students that sit in their desks in my room each year. And despite the negative tone that this paper may sound like, I do believe we have come along way. There were times when reading when I said to myself "that really happened?" or "thank goodness we still don't do that!" Which made me quite positive as my role as an educator. But it would be interesting to see statistics that are not so outdated. Hopefully, we have come along way from where education was at in the 80's. Although we still have some societal similarities there are also many differences that have arisen with a new generation and differently located youth.
As well one idea that resonated from the readings was the idea of equity...or rather inequity. We live in a classist society, which divides the education that children receive. As society we create cycles in which the lower class is unable to break free from. As the rich get richer, the poor are getting poorer and less educated. As society we see that certain groups of people make up the “underclass” and we know that it is difficult to break the cycle yet we do nothing. The underclass has become a group of exiles which the elite turn a blind eye to or rather believe that the underclass can help themselves, even though the elite have set up “aide” which promotes the illiterate, jobless cycle. This idea of social change is very overwhelming and we switch from hat to hat and try our best to win in the battle ground of education.
Yes, I call it a battle ground because we are in constant crisis. Whether it be fabricated or not we are made to believe that education is constantly at its worst stage yet. Test scores are always declining and we so rarely hear any positives about our educational system. In some ways the fabricated crisis can sometimes drop our spirits and make us feel that we are losing the battle and not making any gains. We often hear about going "back to the basics" but how is this relevant to today? How can we focus on "basics" when our professional development and leadership teams want us to focus on test scores and data walls?
In essence the reading and discussions we had in class made me ask myself more questions. I hope that I am doing the best that I can with the students that sit in their desks in my room each year. And despite the negative tone that this paper may sound like, I do believe we have come along way. There were times when reading when I said to myself "that really happened?" or "thank goodness we still don't do that!" Which made me quite positive as my role as an educator. But it would be interesting to see statistics that are not so outdated. Hopefully, we have come along way from where education was at in the 80's. Although we still have some societal similarities there are also many differences that have arisen with a new generation and differently located youth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)