|
|
Post by ariellegetz on May 17, 2016 11:37:26 GMT
When I came into this class I had a pretty broad definition of literacy. The easiest way I can describe my personal definition of literacy is the second definition google proves when you type in "literacy": competence or knowledge in a specified area. I read Materializing Literacy in Communities: The Uses of Literacy Revisited, and an insight that really struck me is that certain literacies are often ignored in school spaces (page 132). I found that interesting because as individuals in the educational field, part of our job is making sure students are provided the best education we can give them. If we alienate students based on how they learn or communicate they are not going to benefit from our instruction. That is not to say students should not know how to read and write, but recognizing less common forms of literacy may really affect a student's success. The chapter included the same study the video talked about conducted by Shirley Heath where the three different communities, all with different styles of literacy, had different success rates in school. The community with the literacy form most similar to a "school space" found the most successful students. I think this shows that some literacies are valued over others, even though that can short-change some students. I agree with Jessica when she said bridging the gap between our definitions of literacy would be the best way to help all students succeed.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamestgardiner on May 17, 2016 17:11:48 GMT
After class today, Jessica's point of bridging the gap between our definitions of literacies popped to mind. But, also, after today I can see the relationship between traditional definitions of literacies and our broader definitions. One thing my group talked about was how teachers, at least from my personal experience, did not teach literacy skills. We were fed facts and and asked to regurgitate information. Even in English and history classes, we simply restated what the teacher taught. Regardless of content areas, it seems important for us to discuss things to make meaning.
|
|
|
|
Post by stephaniep on May 17, 2016 20:16:16 GMT
I honestly know very little about literacy practices, but I now know each word has two different meanings. I agree with my classmates; the content in this class is very confusing. My initial definition of literacy was being able to read and write in America. As a history major, I know that there are so many different cultures and ways to communicate so being "literate" can mean something completely different in other places. My belief is that being literate is associated with being educated, so you would have to know the basics to be considered literate, right? However, I think that the reason the definition of literacy is evolving is because we as "literate" Americans are realizing that reading and writing is not the only way to effectively communicate.
|
|
|
|
Post by george on May 18, 2016 11:55:44 GMT
These contributions add a lot of weight. I just re-read them this morning and I'm excited about the way you guys are listening to and learning from each other. Cool that you guys caught the Shirley Heath piece in the video. That study was truly groundbreaking: Reading and writing means different things among different people groups. That idea really caught on as people realized that content areas, professions, recreational communities, and so forth could be looked at in similar ways. Jay's point about school experiences not being really intentional about developing specialized literacies is pretty key (not the only key point here, lol). This course is about helping teachers and other professionals become intentional about developing relevant literacies among students. That means not stopping with the ability to read, speak, write, and listen but investing in students' capacities to participate effectively in the settings for which school is intended to prepare them.
|
|
|
|
Post by crystalpiroozy on May 18, 2016 20:50:43 GMT
After class today, Jessica's point of bridging the gap between our definitions of literacies popped to mind. But, also, after today I can see the relationship between traditional definitions of literacies and our broader definitions. One thing my group talked about was how teachers, at least from my personal experience, did not teach literacy skills. We were fed facts and and asked to regurgitate information. Even in English and history classes, we simply restated what the teacher taught. Regardless of content areas, it seems important for us to discuss things to make meaning. I completely agree with this idea. I too am a victim of the regurgitate generation where we were also forced to memorize and not actually understand the concepts we were suppose to know. The result of this for me at least is once I started taking AP classes or even my classes in college, it was impossible to use the techniques they taught me in primary and secondary school with the memorize and regurgitate norm. Not only was it a burden to come up with a better learning strategy in college but the feeling of frustration combined with the stress of everything else in college really affected me and my studies. Concluding to this, I feel like the norms we are use to like stated earlier (memorize and regurgitate) is due to the pressure on standardized testing. I have always heard teachers through out my life time complain about the time limits they have and how they are so tied down into teaching a certain manner in order to "get things done in time" for testing. In reality, the majority of them wanted their students to actually understand the concepts and critically think about how to actually use them outside of the classroom. Its sad that our system is so focused on testing instead of understanding. |
|
|
|
Post by aholcomb on May 19, 2016 0:21:58 GMT
The fact that there are more than one digital literacy makes sense when you think about how big the internet is. While the internet may have been a small niche community in the 1990s, if someone is on the internet it could just mean that they are checking Facebook on their phone. There are several communities within the internet, and whether someone spends all of their time on YouTube, Tumblr, or Reddit, those are three entirely different communities that even have sub-communities. After thinking about all of that for a little while, the digital literacies concept presented by Knobel and Lankshear only makes sense.
One of the parts of the introduction that clicked with me was the part where they discussed the fact that the literacies are not just being able to read the script, but to also apply and use it. This reminded me a lot of information literacy, because information literacy involves not only finding information but also being able to use that information once it has been located. One specific article can be exactly what the user is looking for, but if they do not know how to read it so that they are absorbing the relevant content, it is not of much practical use. Likewise, if a user can read the information that is presented in a chosen online community but they cannot take the information and apply it somehow, they are not fully digitally literate in that environment.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamestgardiner on May 19, 2016 0:28:16 GMT
The Digital Literacies intro helped me solidify the need for the educational definition of literacy as being able to read and write, but also to develop that definition further. An educational foundation can lead to many more avenues of intelligence development. Many different types of literary practices have an educational foundation. Of course not all do, but many start with that definition or can at least benefit from that type of literacy. I think using other literacies, such as digital literacies, can help us expand on our educational literacy as well as normal literacy practice. Using different literary practices helps us expand on our general literacy. By learning more about different literacy practices, we can better relate to different types of people. Therefore, I feel that this gives us an avenue into helping and impacting others.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelmartin1 on May 19, 2016 2:05:02 GMT
I liked what Crystal was saying about how we are too focused on testing kids. Just an hour ago I was talking with a friend who is an ESE teacher at a middle school and she was telling me she lost a full 18 instructional days due to testing. When I was in school, I had great teachers who fostered a love for learning in me. I also don't remember having testing for three weeks during the school year. It makes me sad that students (of course not all of them) are not being instilled with the love of the process of learning and instead are learning just so they can pass standardized tests and move on to the next grade. It was interesting hearing it from a teacher's perspective, since I am learning everything from a school psychology perspective. It would be great to hear what other people in our class who are going to be teachers think about all of this testing and how it is affecting students.
I found the Digital Literacies introduction interesting because I never thought of the variety of ways, outside of reading and writing, that people can be "literate." Our generation has grown up with computers, iPhones, and tablets and know how to work technology fairly easily. However, if you asked my grandmother to use my iPhone, she would get frustrated quickly and tell me how her flip phone is better. So does that mean I am literate in this area and she is not? I also found it interesting that research has found that young people can be trapped in literacy remediation schools but are recognized in the virtual world as fan fiction writers or successful gamers. I wonder how someone can write popular fan fiction but have to take classes to remediate their literacy skills. This also adds another layer to the definition of literacy because technology is important for most careers. This is troublesome because there is a digital literacy inequality between poorer children and richer children, and this might impact their ability to get a job. However, technology in the schools can also pose a problem. For example, when we visited Second Chance, we talked about how they can cheat on the quizzes and tests and there are not a lot of literacy practices involved in the credit recovery system.
|
|
|
|
Post by jessicadiazr on May 19, 2016 3:57:46 GMT
I like how the video on health literacy demonstrated that we can be literate in some areas but not in others. It reminded me of the point that J made about his mechanic friend. There was a master craftsman that didn't know what hypertension was. However, according to his title, he is quite literate in his craft. It shows how Rachel is literate with technology but her grandmother is not.
Rachel, I also found it interesting how students could be recognized in the virtual world as successful writers/gamers but are in literacy remediation schools. I supposed it could go back to the narrow definition of literacy as being able to read and write.
|
|
|
|
Post by ataylor617 on May 19, 2016 4:43:48 GMT
According to the Wisconsin Department of Public Schools Disciplinary Literacy is defined as the "confluence of content knowledge experiences and skills merged with the ability to read, write, listen, speak, think critically, and perform in a way that is meaningful within the context of a given field." This definition sounds similar to what we have discussed in class and made me think about the activity we did in groups at the Ghazvini Learning Center. My group and I chose art history as our specific discipline. The main "confluence" in art history is the ability to identify certain motifs and themes in a piece of art and then critically analyzing it.
I briefly skimmed Shanahan and Shanahan's article about teaching disciplinary literacy. They noted that high literary ability at a young age did not necessarily mean that students would be literate in specific disciplines at an older age. They recognized a dire need for training in specific disciplinary literacies. Moje criticized textbooks, and advocated more hands-on material. In her history class she provided her students with first person narratives that they could interpret and analyze.
I think an important point that Knobel and Lankshear make is about enculturation into different literacies. In order to understand a literacy it must be engrained into one's brain. In the example of digital literacies it seems that our generation has been fully enculturated into this type of literacy. We interact using this type of literacy and derive meaning from it. Knobel and Lackshear found that being situated in a literacy allows students to enhance their skill in that literacy. Knbole and Lackshear discuss a girl named Nananko who wrote fan fiction on a website. She used her digital literacy to increase her English-writing capabilities. I'm excited to think of some creative ways to situate students into disciplinary literacies when I am teaching. I still find it fascinating that one can be encultured in several different literacies. While everyone in this time is mostly digitally literate, people have expertise in other literacies that span a variety of disciplines.
|
|
linda
New Member
Posts: 30 
|
Post by linda on May 19, 2016 11:21:20 GMT
Crystal is right about the system and how it hinders both students and teachers with its expectations and demands. James mentions that literacy skills were not taught by his teachers even in reading/writing heavy subjects like English and History. I can see that happening in classrooms easily, as teachers are being pulled in so many directions and have to concentrate on getting their students to show they are at grade level by passing state tests. Is it possible that literacy can be taught before a child even reaches school? I don't mean a parent teaching a child to read or anything formal but by reading to them and asking questions when they watch a tv commercial together, for example. I was read to and pretended to read to my sisters before I even knew what school was. It makes for such an easy transition for children when they are exposed to and think and talk about everyday things in their lives, before they are school aged and after. I love to read and feels like that alone helped me in school so much. (Yes, i drank the kool aid). This literacy in the content area is about that, just in a school setting to me. Our readings have shown that there is literacy in families occurring all of the time (like the embroidery in the British family). I think this type of literacy needs to be encouraged. It all builds on itself, scaffolds, and validates children and their heritage. Working as mentor is sometimes frustrating. Some days I don't feel like I am making any headway. Not sure if this makes much sense and I don't want it to be an opinion of mine, I meant it as an observation of children and what they bring to a classroom.
|
|
|
|
Post by rachelmartin1 on May 19, 2016 11:39:46 GMT
When I was looking around for disciplinary literacy, I kept seeing the term content area literacy and was getting the two confused. Content area literacy focuses on study skills and learning from subject matter specific texts. This type of literacy assumes that what it takes to read any kind of text is the same no matter the subject area and that the difference between the subject areas is simply the content. When studying for math, you would use the same study skills as when you study for science. However, disciplinary literacy is the knowledge possessed by those who create and communicate within the discipline. In other terms, the tools that experts of a specific discipline use to participate in that specific discipline. So my understanding is that you start with content area literacy and as you specialize in a discipline, you have disciplinary literacy? This is an interesting concept to me. So in K-12 schools, it seems like we are striving for students to have content area literacy overall and then as they move into college and pick a major, student acquire disciplinary literacy. I could be totally wrong about this but that was what I gathered when hunting for disciplinary literacy and Shanahan and Shanahan.
|
|
|
|
Post by ariellegetz on May 19, 2016 12:02:46 GMT
I was also a little confused by the difference between content area literacy and disciplinary literacy. As I was researching I came across this great article that provides some examples of how to teach both both and it also explains their differences (http://www.sedl.org/insights/3-1/teaching_content_area_literacy_and_disciplinary_literacy.pdf). I agree with Rachel, that schools are more focused on providing children with content-area literacy; the reading and writing aspects of learning a subject. I also think that disciplinary literacy is neglected in k-12 schools. In our small groups on Wednesday my group discussed how history classes often neglect to teach students the simple skills that could make someone more successful in a history class. For example, reading a map is a pretty simple task, but it is more than just recognizing borders or reading a key, students should be taught why those things are important. So, bouncing off of Rachel again, things like map reading or using a timeline for analysis would be the tools that one uses to operate within a specific discipline. I think teachers should emphasize reading and writing practices that fit their subject, as well as encouraging analysis, critical thinking, and collaboration in order to help students master both types of literacies.
|
|
linda
New Member
Posts: 30
|
Post by linda on May 20, 2016 12:08:30 GMT
Autumn pointed out a really important piece of digital literacy, not only does a person need to be able to read the information but also apply and use the information found or desired. The internet has made literacy more interactive, instead of absorbing a book, students can create and build original ideas with a computer/smart phone.
I looked at Elizabeth Birr Moje and her article 'The Complex World of Adolescent Literacy" and she mentions how when adolescents use the internet they are building social capital. I took this to mean that it is 'cool' to be followed on Twitter or have lots of friends on Facebook-is this how it sounds to you? If this is true, it seems to be a positive tool for teachers to use to encourage literacy in their classrooms, especially for students who don't want to read written text (book) and appear 'uncool'.
I also thought it was interesting that she said that students reading novels on a regular basis outside of their school setting equates to a positive relationship to their academic achievement. Throwback literacy?
|
|
|
|
Post by tom56omara on May 21, 2016 14:41:28 GMT
Adding on to this discussion about digital literacy. You will find in the Reading #3 on page 35 a whole set of statistics about what people are doing on the Internet. Keep in mind that all of these statistics are from the year 2004 and 2005. The one that I thought was most interesting was that more people used the internet as a messaging or chat platform than a searching info platform. 57% of internet use is messaging (communication) and 43% of internet use is searching for answers or directions. Obviously there are many other specific examples of what people are searching for such as medical answers or just knowledge based answers for school. I know the Internet has changed so much since the year 2005, so my question is "what is considered as a messaging platform?" Many people can confirm that they only go on twitter or tumblr for entertainment reasons. I always get a good laugh looking around for funny memes on these so called messaging platforms. Overall I think Facebook and Twitter are the opposite of you 2005 messaging platform because in 2005 we were actually messaging specific people. I can post some nonsense on my Facebook page and 200 people will see it, but in my mind that is the farthest thing from communication. The only literacy involved was me typing words on my Facebook. So does posting random things such as "going to the gym #swole patrol" do any benefit to your communication aspect of literacy. You're not conveying or directing these posts to anyone, but does it still count as improving communication skills. In my opinion these random postings do not help your communication aspect of literacy, but it sure can help your ego.
|
|
