In her article, "The Need for Conceptualizing at all Levels of Writing Instruction,"Marilyn Sternglass argues that it is not enough to teach students in remedial classes the linguistic forms of Edited American English and the writing conventions, such as spelling, punctuation, capitalization, grammar, and paragraphing. She says, “These conventions need to be taught within a larger conceptual framework” (88). In order to be ready for college level work, Sternglass argues that remedial students need to be exposed to, and gain increasing mastery of, academic cognitive skills such as summary, compare/contrast, and analysis. A summary of this article which appears in the Journal of Basic Writing (8.2 (1989): 87-98) can be found in the link below:
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfNjVmbjI2bTZjdw&hl=en
Friday, April 23, 2010
Saturday, April 10, 2010
The Multilingual Self: Swimming the Depths With Lvovich
Something is missing in my way of functioning in English. Something substantial, important, which does not let me enjoy my linguistic performance. It is like I am floating on the surface of the ocean, giving curious glances into its depth. It’s like I am fishing for a deeper essence, and sometimes I get some fish, but they are separate fishes [sic], not the overall picture, with everything lying there, on the bottom. Frustrating….
I walk along New York streets—and they are prison to me. I want desperately to be back in Europe, to touch the old stones, to be lost in the nonparallel, noncrossing streets, to find familiarity in faces, clothes, and smells. I don’t like America. I hate New York. I hate my life (61).
Reading this passage, I abruptly entered Lvovich’s world and became a partner in her struggle not only to survive but also to succeed in America. With these words of angry desperation and candor, Lvovich shed her fantasy, threw wide the door to her multilingual self and pulled me in. Her story suddenly pulsed with life and resonated because I too have become angry and despairing while trying to acquire a new language and create a new identity.
In my case the new language is the professional language of linguistics and literacy, the language of SLA and linguistic researchers and theorists. But the deeper reality, the depths I fear and yet long to enter, is the new self I am building as graduate student and teacher of adult literacy. Until Lvovich came along, until I finally cracked open her book, I was one angry, isolated and despairing learner, “floating on the surface” and afraid of failure.
“I hate SLA!” I shouted one night flinging my “Ellis” across the room. My lament continued, “I will never get it; I am going to fail the class; I am too old for graduate school.” Fortunately, I didn’t give up. Instead I picked up Natasha Lvovich’s book, The Multilingual Self and began to read.
Here is a link to the remainder of the essay that I wrote for English B 8100 (SLA):
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfNjNmcDliNjIzOQ&hl=en
I walk along New York streets—and they are prison to me. I want desperately to be back in Europe, to touch the old stones, to be lost in the nonparallel, noncrossing streets, to find familiarity in faces, clothes, and smells. I don’t like America. I hate New York. I hate my life (61).
Reading this passage, I abruptly entered Lvovich’s world and became a partner in her struggle not only to survive but also to succeed in America. With these words of angry desperation and candor, Lvovich shed her fantasy, threw wide the door to her multilingual self and pulled me in. Her story suddenly pulsed with life and resonated because I too have become angry and despairing while trying to acquire a new language and create a new identity.
In my case the new language is the professional language of linguistics and literacy, the language of SLA and linguistic researchers and theorists. But the deeper reality, the depths I fear and yet long to enter, is the new self I am building as graduate student and teacher of adult literacy. Until Lvovich came along, until I finally cracked open her book, I was one angry, isolated and despairing learner, “floating on the surface” and afraid of failure.
“I hate SLA!” I shouted one night flinging my “Ellis” across the room. My lament continued, “I will never get it; I am going to fail the class; I am too old for graduate school.” Fortunately, I didn’t give up. Instead I picked up Natasha Lvovich’s book, The Multilingual Self and began to read.
Here is a link to the remainder of the essay that I wrote for English B 8100 (SLA):
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfNjNmcDliNjIzOQ&hl=en
Adult Language & Literacy Assignment: Midterm Paper, Braille Literacy
Braille literacy at its most basic is the ability of blind or vision-impaired individuals to read and write. But it is more than this. Braille allows the blind to know the structure of their language.
For the sighted, the syntax of language comes through seeing words, sentences and paragraphs displayed on the page. They can see as well as hear how sentences are formed. They see those endings that often don’t get sounded properly: the rascally regular past tense -ed and often neglected (especially in the Southern English dialect) present participle -ing for example.
For the visually impaired, this ability to know and understand the shape and structure of language is not available – unless they learn to read through braille. Thus, a richer definition of braille[1] literacy encompasses the ability to know through touch how letters, words and sentences appear on the page.
For many sighted individuals braille is a mystery. Is it a special language? What does it look like? When and where did braille originate and how is it used today? These are questions this essay will attempt to explore.
[1] The Braille Authority of North America recommends capitalizing Braille when it refers to Louis Braille but lower case when referring to the braille code (National Braille Press).
Here is a link to the rest of the essay for ENGL C0831 Adult Language & Literacy.
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfMmNrdzI3dGZq&hl=en
For the sighted, the syntax of language comes through seeing words, sentences and paragraphs displayed on the page. They can see as well as hear how sentences are formed. They see those endings that often don’t get sounded properly: the rascally regular past tense -ed and often neglected (especially in the Southern English dialect) present participle -ing for example.
For the visually impaired, this ability to know and understand the shape and structure of language is not available – unless they learn to read through braille. Thus, a richer definition of braille[1] literacy encompasses the ability to know through touch how letters, words and sentences appear on the page.
For many sighted individuals braille is a mystery. Is it a special language? What does it look like? When and where did braille originate and how is it used today? These are questions this essay will attempt to explore.
[1] The Braille Authority of North America recommends capitalizing Braille when it refers to Louis Braille but lower case when referring to the braille code (National Braille Press).
Here is a link to the rest of the essay for ENGL C0831 Adult Language & Literacy.
https://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfMmNrdzI3dGZq&hl=en
Monday, December 14, 2009
Ong Speaks to Me
Final paper is in and yet I struggle still with Walter J. Ong, S.J. His language calls to mind the opening lines of the Gospel of John, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God." (John 1:1, RSV)
We were assigned to read two essays or book chapters written by him: "The Orality of Language" contained in his book, Orality and Literacy, published in 1982 and "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" published in Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook in 2001. I read them first as assigned, as educational theory. Especially in his later writing, "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" Ong was considered taking up the battle on behalf of literacy in the Great Cognitive Divide debate.
And yet, Ong spoke to me on a spiritual level as well. And speaks still. It is no wonder, for he was a Jesuit priest. The language of the Gospel of John was as much a part of his inner being as it is mine.
It is my sense from these two articles that Ong is writing through his own personal great divide. Torn between writing, which he equates with literacy, and orality he almost demonizes literacy while reserving warm approving language for orality. (See quotes in Words for the Journey in this blog.) Writing separates and distances us and yet writing, literacy, allows humans to think abstractly and objectively. Due to the technology of writing we have science, philosophy, history and so on. And yet, I feel him longing for a time before all writing, for the spoken world "oral, mobile, warm, personally interactive (you needed people to produce spoken words)" ("Writing" 22).
In the Bible God does not write, God speaks. God speaks to humankind through words or the Word, and through actions. God loves, protects, punishes, pardons, shelters, cares for but God does not write. Writing separates and distances our emotions from our intellect so that we can think abstractly and objectively, yes. But also distances us from those qualities that make us human and make us God like.
This is stuff of the spirit and much to ponder upon. I must read more of Ong.
We were assigned to read two essays or book chapters written by him: "The Orality of Language" contained in his book, Orality and Literacy, published in 1982 and "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" published in Literacy: A Critical Sourcebook in 2001. I read them first as assigned, as educational theory. Especially in his later writing, "Writing is a Technology that Restructures Thought" Ong was considered taking up the battle on behalf of literacy in the Great Cognitive Divide debate.
And yet, Ong spoke to me on a spiritual level as well. And speaks still. It is no wonder, for he was a Jesuit priest. The language of the Gospel of John was as much a part of his inner being as it is mine.
It is my sense from these two articles that Ong is writing through his own personal great divide. Torn between writing, which he equates with literacy, and orality he almost demonizes literacy while reserving warm approving language for orality. (See quotes in Words for the Journey in this blog.) Writing separates and distances us and yet writing, literacy, allows humans to think abstractly and objectively. Due to the technology of writing we have science, philosophy, history and so on. And yet, I feel him longing for a time before all writing, for the spoken world "oral, mobile, warm, personally interactive (you needed people to produce spoken words)" ("Writing" 22).
In the Bible God does not write, God speaks. God speaks to humankind through words or the Word, and through actions. God loves, protects, punishes, pardons, shelters, cares for but God does not write. Writing separates and distances our emotions from our intellect so that we can think abstractly and objectively, yes. But also distances us from those qualities that make us human and make us God like.
This is stuff of the spirit and much to ponder upon. I must read more of Ong.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Final Essay for: ENGL B6400 Theories & Models of Literacy
Final Essay: Reflections on Selected Theories and Models of Literacy
On the first evening that we met, our class was asked to define literacy. We came up with many and varied answers but all of our definitions contained the basic three: ability to read, write and comprehend what was read or written. I am not sure that this basic understanding has changed, or should change. Yet I hope my work this semester has broadened my thinking and expanded the borders of my concept of literacy.
Through the semester we have read, discussed and written about literacy in its many aspects and definitions. I have selected three of the many approaches to literacy to explore in this paper. They each in their own way challenged me to expand my concept of literacy and hopefully supported my growth as a graduate student and a teacher.
[View the rest of my final essay through the link below.]
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfMWNwamg4aGRt&hl=en
On the first evening that we met, our class was asked to define literacy. We came up with many and varied answers but all of our definitions contained the basic three: ability to read, write and comprehend what was read or written. I am not sure that this basic understanding has changed, or should change. Yet I hope my work this semester has broadened my thinking and expanded the borders of my concept of literacy.
Through the semester we have read, discussed and written about literacy in its many aspects and definitions. I have selected three of the many approaches to literacy to explore in this paper. They each in their own way challenged me to expand my concept of literacy and hopefully supported my growth as a graduate student and a teacher.
[View the rest of my final essay through the link below.]
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AejvYXPv3HOaZGY5N2RucXBfMWNwamg4aGRt&hl=en
Saturday, December 12, 2009
"Everyone Gets a Say"- Discussion Flyer for Nov 18
Discussion Flyer for Nov 18, by Jane Parkerton
Williams, Bronwyn T. “Everyone Gets a Say: Changes in Audience.” Shimmering Literacies: Popular Culture & Reading & Writing Online. New York: Peter Lang, 2009. 29-61. Print.
In Chapter Two of his book, “Everyone Gets a Say: Changes in Audience,” Bronwyn Williams argues that online technologies have changed the definition of audience to a more interactive and participatory model which “changes both the experience of watching the show and the act of making meaning” (37). Popular culture, at least as practiced through online technologies, is no longer an isolating and passive event.
In this chapter Williams explores the literacy practices of young adult college students as they read and write in online technologies. He focuses primarily on fan forums as he explores the students’ changing concepts of audience through their online technology practices. Fan forums, he says, are “online spaces where individuals can discuss a program, film, band, computer game, or any other element of popular culture such as a particular celebrity” (37). Some examples are Television Without Pity, Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings.
Williams describes the students’ growing awareness of and competence in their literacy practices as they negotiate online audiences and develop a sense of ownership of text and authority, and a regard for credibility. Through reading and posting (writing) students become adept at writing for different audiences, “real” audiences with the potential and the expectation that readers will write back. He quotes student Ashley as she talks about analyzing fellow fan comments, “Everybody gets a say and you expect everyone to get a say” (40).
For discussion:
1. Williams argues that the students’ participation in fan forums produces communal making of meaning through collective intelligence. Collective intelligence is made possible through the ability to share knowledge and ideas online and make meaning through community effort.
My first question is, how might this collective intelligence and communal participatory nature of the students’ online literacy practices be compared to the reading and literacy practices of the people of Trackton? Remember the letter read on the porch by Lillie Mae (see page 197 of Heath's Ways With Words). Heath says, "The question 'What does this mean?' was answered not only from the information in print, but from the group's joint bringing of experience to the text" (197).
2. Williams says, “What young people learn about audience from writing about popular culture online has a number of implications for literary research and teaching. Whether on fan forums or lists or personal WebPages, it is clear that students are gaining real understandings of the role of audience awareness in writing and the consequences of misjudging an audience” (61).
My second question is, after reading this article, have you gained a new understanding and respect for young adults’ literacy practices and abilities. I am remembering our discussion in class last week on cultural literacy. Many of us were bemoaning the lack of cultural knowledge of young adults. Does it now seem possible that we have misjudged these young people?
Williams, Bronwyn T. “Everyone Gets a Say: Changes in Audience.” Shimmering Literacies: Popular Culture & Reading & Writing Online. New York: Peter Lang, 2009. 29-61. Print.
In Chapter Two of his book, “Everyone Gets a Say: Changes in Audience,” Bronwyn Williams argues that online technologies have changed the definition of audience to a more interactive and participatory model which “changes both the experience of watching the show and the act of making meaning” (37). Popular culture, at least as practiced through online technologies, is no longer an isolating and passive event.
In this chapter Williams explores the literacy practices of young adult college students as they read and write in online technologies. He focuses primarily on fan forums as he explores the students’ changing concepts of audience through their online technology practices. Fan forums, he says, are “online spaces where individuals can discuss a program, film, band, computer game, or any other element of popular culture such as a particular celebrity” (37). Some examples are Television Without Pity, Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings.
Williams describes the students’ growing awareness of and competence in their literacy practices as they negotiate online audiences and develop a sense of ownership of text and authority, and a regard for credibility. Through reading and posting (writing) students become adept at writing for different audiences, “real” audiences with the potential and the expectation that readers will write back. He quotes student Ashley as she talks about analyzing fellow fan comments, “Everybody gets a say and you expect everyone to get a say” (40).
For discussion:
1. Williams argues that the students’ participation in fan forums produces communal making of meaning through collective intelligence. Collective intelligence is made possible through the ability to share knowledge and ideas online and make meaning through community effort.
My first question is, how might this collective intelligence and communal participatory nature of the students’ online literacy practices be compared to the reading and literacy practices of the people of Trackton? Remember the letter read on the porch by Lillie Mae (see page 197 of Heath's Ways With Words). Heath says, "The question 'What does this mean?' was answered not only from the information in print, but from the group's joint bringing of experience to the text" (197).
2. Williams says, “What young people learn about audience from writing about popular culture online has a number of implications for literary research and teaching. Whether on fan forums or lists or personal WebPages, it is clear that students are gaining real understandings of the role of audience awareness in writing and the consequences of misjudging an audience” (61).
My second question is, after reading this article, have you gained a new understanding and respect for young adults’ literacy practices and abilities. I am remembering our discussion in class last week on cultural literacy. Many of us were bemoaning the lack of cultural knowledge of young adults. Does it now seem possible that we have misjudged these young people?
Sunday, November 8, 2009
This I Believe: My Teaching Philosophy
Although still evolving, my teaching philosophy is beginning to crystalize. Here is something I recently wrote in a class at LAC (Literacy Assistance Center).
My ABE students have very practical goals, getting a job, becoming a citizen, securing their piece of the "American Dream." So I do suscribe to a certain extent to the Vocational perspective as a teaching philosophy. I do feel it is one of my roles as teacher of adult learners to help them acquire literacy for job preparation and financial independence. I also as an INFP(J) am a humanist and actively seek to support my students in their personal growth and build self esteem. And I must admit and confess that Cultural Literacy has taken a fall in my teaching arsenal since my recent encounter with JD Hersh. His list of things every American should know smacks too much of elitism.
However, I think I fall most completely in the "Liberatory" camp in terms of my teaching philosophy. I am strongly drawn to Paulo Freire and his teaching philosophy. I believe that education has the power to transform us as individuals and as a society but only if we become a more informed, thinking, critically questioning people. Thus I feel challenged to challenge my students to THINK, to QUESTION, to POSE PROBLEMS. Then, and only then, does education become truly transformative in their lives, in my life, and in our society as a whole.
My ABE students have very practical goals, getting a job, becoming a citizen, securing their piece of the "American Dream." So I do suscribe to a certain extent to the Vocational perspective as a teaching philosophy. I do feel it is one of my roles as teacher of adult learners to help them acquire literacy for job preparation and financial independence. I also as an INFP(J) am a humanist and actively seek to support my students in their personal growth and build self esteem. And I must admit and confess that Cultural Literacy has taken a fall in my teaching arsenal since my recent encounter with JD Hersh. His list of things every American should know smacks too much of elitism.
However, I think I fall most completely in the "Liberatory" camp in terms of my teaching philosophy. I am strongly drawn to Paulo Freire and his teaching philosophy. I believe that education has the power to transform us as individuals and as a society but only if we become a more informed, thinking, critically questioning people. Thus I feel challenged to challenge my students to THINK, to QUESTION, to POSE PROBLEMS. Then, and only then, does education become truly transformative in their lives, in my life, and in our society as a whole.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)