I love this quote by Keri Franklin in her blog: “I needed to make mistakes, make corrections, and ask questions within the context of my own tweeting.” Just replace “tweeting” with writing and this will apply to our future students. It’s important for us to remember that mistakes are ok, but even more important than that is for us to teach our students that mistakes are ok. There is so much pressure on them to be really good at writing right off the bat. A lot of times, I’ve personally discovered, they weren’t previously taught that mistakes are ok and the way in which we learn. They are given a bunch of red marks and then a final grade. No wonder so many of them are discouraged!

Franklin also says, “Essentially, I was learning to write again on Twitter. This experience led me to feel like my students who learn something new; I felt unsteady, vulnerable, and scared.” I love that she relates her experience to those of her students. The students are learning a new skill and we need to keep this in mind when we are grading their papers. I was fortunate to have really good professors when I started college who took the time to help me to write better.

I am an older student attending college with people who are 10-15 years younger than I–some are even half my age. :-/ It was really friggin’ scary for me to start college at the age I was when I separated from my ex-husband. I had to learn a new literacy all over again. But, not just all over again, I had to learn a whole new way of writing. I’ve always excelled at English and with my writing and I’m in the process of writing two books, have written but not published two children’s books, and have a couple poems published. However, there was a TON I did not know prior to going to college. I definitely feel I’m a much more effective writer today than I was four years ago.

But, had I not ventured into the scary unknown world of college, I would not have learned what I’ve learned and I would not have had the opportunities for extending myself beyond my comfort zone like I’ve had in college.

College, in and of itself, is a literacy in its own right. For those of us who venture forth despite our fears of the unknown, we find that we grow and sometimes even have a new appreciation of things that we weren’t exposed to before.

As I end my time in college and begin the steps needed to venture into the world of teaching, I will leave a zone which has become comfortable and will enter yet another new form of literacy–the literacy of teaching my future students. I will need all four of Franklin’s necessities for entering this new “genre:” Support–I will need the support of more experienced teachers, my family, and even my future students so that I can be the best teacher I can be; Read Widely–I need to read profession related material, but also I need to read books that will (hopefully) interest my students.  Audience–I need to remember that my audience will be my students and I need to factor in their backgrounds, futures, and learning styles when I teach them; Learn the Language–I will need to know subject related terminology, but I also need to learn the slang students will use, and I need to learn the unspoken language of relating to my students, of making sure they know they can rely on me and I will help them in any way possible.

Franklin is right, “Experience the feelings that come with those beginning moments and experience the feelings of success. Share that with students.” She is encouraging us to step out of our comfort zones and learn something new so that we can relate once again to our students and how they might feel in our classrooms. We need to remember the uncertainty, the nervousness, the fear, and finally the exuberance we feel when we “get it.”

Deborah Brandt states, “my interest is in how the proliferation of print across the twentieth century affects the occasions and motivations for learning to read and write” (653). This caught my interest because even prior to the 20th century, the “proliferation of print” has been the driving force behind the motivation for reading and writing.

People would write books and whatnot in longhand. This made books expensive and out of reach for many people. As time went on, printing books became easier, faster, and cheaper. This opened up reading for many more people. Additionally, Benjamin Franklin (this guy was bad ass) worked to get libraries up so that people who couldn’t afford books could still have access to them.

So, with Johannes Gutenberg’s invention of the wooden block printing press, then Lord Charles Stanhope’s metal printing press invention, and Richard Hoe’s invention of the faster rotary press, reading became more common (e-book.com). But, reading became more common because of the advancements and “proliferation” of the printing press.

Even today, the invention of e-books had motivated reading and writing. Granted e-books aren’t on paper (some are and then converted to digital format–I know because I was hired for a one-time job to do just that very thing), but the digital format is an advancement of the “printing press,” so-to-speak. More people are reading now and people are reading more due to this advancement.

Personally, my siblings and I as well as our parents are writers. My older brother (Jerry) and sister (Michele) have a different dad than my younger brother (Charles) and I have. Our mother had wanted to be an English teacher–she never got to realize that dream. My dad is a short story writer–never published. I don’t know if Jerry and Michele’s dad wrote. Both of my brothers write lyrics and are musically inclined. My sister writes poetry and I write short stories. The interesting thing is that Jerry and Michele were raised in Indiana by their father. Charles and I were raised here in California by our mother (we left Indiana in ’79 when I was four-years-old).

 

Ok, admittedly, I’ve had a tough time getting in gear this semester (last semester nearly killed me–literally. Ok, maybe not literally, but it sure felt like it) and getting a handle on things with my classes. I’m determined to fix this and not be late on my subsequent posts.

I think the authors, collectively, are saying that literacy is very social. Meaning, literacy is something that evolves with time as our world advances forward, backwar (I know–advance backward??? HA!) , upward, downward, and to the side. Whatever direction our world moves, literacy also moves.

Deborah Brandt states, “the current climate is not so much a demand for literacy .  .  . but rather the challenges faced by all literacy learners in a society whose rapid changes are themselves tied up so centrally with literacy and its enterprises” (Accumulating Literacy 651). Brandt acknowledges that literacy is an ever changing, vital component that is constantly “challeng[ing]” society.

In her article “Sponsors of Literacy,” Brandt states, “these developments should be seen more specifically, as outcomes of ongoing transformation in the history of literacy as it has been wielded as part of economic and political conflict” (176). Again, Brandt argues that literacy is always changing, morphing.

Bronwyn T. Williams states that some people, when arguing about the lack of literacy among today’s youth, use the standardized test scores to prove their point (Why Johnny 179). The problem with these standardized tests are that they are standardized. Standardized equals inflexible. However, literacy equals malleability. So, how can something that is malleable be standardized?

Williams goes on to say, “more comprehensive and complex ways of assessing literacy, which cover a range of students’ literacy practices .  .  . are usually too expensive to implement and are criticized for their very complexity and nuance .  .  .” (Why Johnny 179). Is the fact that money is the bottom line for altering a known-to-be poorly constructed test a surprise to anyone? And, those sticklers for “standards” are probably also those who refuse to acknowledge new words which are added to the dictionary.

My mother is one such person. My mother believes that we should only be using words that are in the dictionary. What she and others like her fail to recognize is that many of the words used in daily communication were created after the first dictionary was produced–which was in 1604 (dictionary.com). Benjamin Franklin was born almost 100 years after the first dictionary. He is a well-known inventor and discoverer who had also created words that we use regularly–battery, brush, charged, condense, conductor, plus and minus, positively and negatively (franklinbusybody.com). According to Franklinbusybody.com, Franklin created these words during his work with electricity. So, if those sticklers had their way, we would not be able to use any of those words because they weren’t in the original dictionary.

Maybe I got off course here, but I’m just trying to demonstrate that literacy is very social and very dynamic and the authors have effectively pointed this out. I’m wondering though, do we need to now define social?

In every aspect of human life, literacy is something that we notice to be non-static. In the world of literature, “literacy” would be the dynamic, round, main character. Literacy is central to our existence, yet, we don’t even know what it really is. We know it’s social. We know it’s dynamic. We also know that we don’t know.

 

I am Alicia Bates and I am an English Ed major. I want to teach either junior high or high school. Honestly, the choice will be made based on where I’m offered a job at first. :) I won’t be picky considering I’ll really need the job. I am a single mother with two kids and I work two part-time jobs. I live in Marysville and yes, I do commute two hours round-trip each day that I am in Chico. It sucks. The nice thing is that I absolutely love this school and have loved (with two exceptions-no, I won’t say who) all of my professors–specifically, my English professors. I love the teaching philosophy that I have been exposed to here. I have worked really hard to get through school within four years; it should have taken me six years. It’s been stressful and exhausting, but also rewarding and I’m so excited to get to the point where I can start putting all I have learned into practice and teach students in a way that (I hope) will get them excited and believing in themselves.

In regard to Szwed, he said, “We might here also postulate the possibility of a difference between public and private literacy .  .  .” (425). I think this is the ultimate categorization of literacy. I think all types of literacy can be divided into one of these two categories.

I think that as far as public literacy goes, there should be some kind of a universal definition. What that should be, I do not know. But, I believe it should be universal so that there is a balance of comprehension.

However, in regard to private literacy, I think that this can be whatever it wants to be. And, this, of course, will vary from person-to-person, family-to-family, community-to-community. Each individual has their own level (if there can even be levels in private literacy) and their own idea of “literate.”

I think that it’s important to allow for individualism, but at the same time, have a standard for communicating world-wide. But, again, I don’t have the answer as to what the standard should be.