Context: Written for a graduate course, free-write on redefining literacy in American Classrooms.
Pre-read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/
Read:
There seems to be a reoccurring theme: redefining literature paradigms in the classroom in a global technological /digital shift in a society with shifting power structures. Glen writes, “Whatever texts these readers opt to consume, they ought to be able to read them with a critical eye… to call into question the images meant for admiration and imitation and to refuse to be manipulated by those seeking only to increase the bottom line.”
This is true, whatever text a student reads, they must be able to read it critically. Period. Creating globally engaged citizens through literacy is what I strive for as an educator and teacher. I am passionate about words, their meaning and the manner in which they display culture and power.
Is this too broad of a definition? Can literature really be something/anything that students just read critically? And in a world where objectivity is dead, (and maybe, even, according to Roland Barthes, the author itself See: http://evans-experientialism.
I don’t know yet. And, I believe many scholars in this field do not either. It's a clash of tradition (and the obvious power dynamics that follow) and new practices (and obvious power dynamics that follow). Move forward, out with the old and in with the new-
I keep addressing the same topic in a different lens, literacy in a postmodern, pluralistic age. In this sense, I guess I realize the classroom structure needs to shift, how this shift needs to occur I do not know. We could spend an entire class period speaking of an education system in need of literacy reform. Student’s needs and demographics are more diverse and there is an increasing change in the definition of literacy. In this theory, and to me, when you have a districts (ie-Austin Independent School District) that has one of the lowest retention and high school graduation rates in the nation, there is an obvious problem. And, specifically, in Language Arts and Literacy, the education systems in lower SES schools are not preparing our students and allowing them to reach their full potential. Right now, in America, Dropout rights are higher than they have ever been, testing scores are steadily declining and there is a broad, clear divide in college access. These are big problems. It's a prime example of institutionalized power dynamics and structures very hard at work. You and I, we will have to work within this system.
The question is: why is this happening? And how does this have to do with literacy in a classroom in a broader sense? As future teachers, we need to know what kind of teacher we want to be in a system that, I believe isn’t serving or preparing youth to their fullest potential. In that way, I believe the system is failing.
Taking a step back, in a more specific sense, in redefining the literacy paradigm, and readdressing Glenn, I do believe there are certain texts that contain more of a critical lens. For example, I would push students to read a variety of traditional literature like, Ralph Ellison “Invisible Man”, John Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath” but I would also try to incorporate graphic novels, like “Maus” (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I wouldn't let a student read, let's say, Maxim, or Sports Illustrated for project, solely, even if they understand the ideas critically. I would, however, have them identify the text/image in the advertisements and discuss the idea of marketing , capitalism and "free thought" in that magazine. The same ideas could be discussed with the novel "1984", but the student interacts with this everyday text differently. So, critical thinking can be applied in many facets. Should students read "1984"--or at least, parooz Sparknotes? Absolutely. But, as an introduction, why not get them interested in novels by applying these ideas to everyday literacy. This isn't' going to make us bad teachers. In fact, I argue, this might make us better teachers.
Realistically, students interact with text/image in a way like never before, and the same concepts can be addressed in both traditional novels and graphic novels. As long as the students are learning, understanding and thinking about global issues and come to my class and do work, I will be satisfied. Too liberal? Maybe. Working two years in low SES schools has allowed me to believe in “small victories." If a student comes to class and enjoys reading, and thinks about a larger issue, hey, that's the groundwork for something more. Always have high expectations, but realistic goals.
My worst fear is to be this kind of teacher:
Pre-read:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/
Read:
There seems to be a reoccurring theme: redefining literature paradigms in the classroom in a global technological /digital shift in a society with shifting power structures. Glen writes, “Whatever texts these readers opt to consume, they ought to be able to read them with a critical eye… to call into question the images meant for admiration and imitation and to refuse to be manipulated by those seeking only to increase the bottom line.”
This is true, whatever text a student reads, they must be able to read it critically. Period. Creating globally engaged citizens through literacy is what I strive for as an educator and teacher. I am passionate about words, their meaning and the manner in which they display culture and power.
Is this too broad of a definition? Can literature really be something/anything that students just read critically? And in a world where objectivity is dead, (and maybe, even, according to Roland Barthes, the author itself See: http://evans-experientialism.
I don’t know yet. And, I believe many scholars in this field do not either. It's a clash of tradition (and the obvious power dynamics that follow) and new practices (and obvious power dynamics that follow). Move forward, out with the old and in with the new-
I keep addressing the same topic in a different lens, literacy in a postmodern, pluralistic age. In this sense, I guess I realize the classroom structure needs to shift, how this shift needs to occur I do not know. We could spend an entire class period speaking of an education system in need of literacy reform. Student’s needs and demographics are more diverse and there is an increasing change in the definition of literacy. In this theory, and to me, when you have a districts (ie-Austin Independent School District) that has one of the lowest retention and high school graduation rates in the nation, there is an obvious problem. And, specifically, in Language Arts and Literacy, the education systems in lower SES schools are not preparing our students and allowing them to reach their full potential. Right now, in America, Dropout rights are higher than they have ever been, testing scores are steadily declining and there is a broad, clear divide in college access. These are big problems. It's a prime example of institutionalized power dynamics and structures very hard at work. You and I, we will have to work within this system.
The question is: why is this happening? And how does this have to do with literacy in a classroom in a broader sense? As future teachers, we need to know what kind of teacher we want to be in a system that, I believe isn’t serving or preparing youth to their fullest potential. In that way, I believe the system is failing.
Taking a step back, in a more specific sense, in redefining the literacy paradigm, and readdressing Glenn, I do believe there are certain texts that contain more of a critical lens. For example, I would push students to read a variety of traditional literature like, Ralph Ellison “Invisible Man”, John Steinbeck’s “The Grapes of Wrath” but I would also try to incorporate graphic novels, like “Maus” (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I wouldn't let a student read, let's say, Maxim, or Sports Illustrated for project, solely, even if they understand the ideas critically. I would, however, have them identify the text/image in the advertisements and discuss the idea of marketing , capitalism and "free thought" in that magazine. The same ideas could be discussed with the novel "1984", but the student interacts with this everyday text differently. So, critical thinking can be applied in many facets. Should students read "1984"--or at least, parooz Sparknotes? Absolutely. But, as an introduction, why not get them interested in novels by applying these ideas to everyday literacy. This isn't' going to make us bad teachers. In fact, I argue, this might make us better teachers.
Realistically, students interact with text/image in a way like never before, and the same concepts can be addressed in both traditional novels and graphic novels. As long as the students are learning, understanding and thinking about global issues and come to my class and do work, I will be satisfied. Too liberal? Maybe. Working two years in low SES schools has allowed me to believe in “small victories." If a student comes to class and enjoys reading, and thinks about a larger issue, hey, that's the groundwork for something more. Always have high expectations, but realistic goals.
My worst fear is to be this kind of teacher:
