We frequently hear critics argue that U.S. students can’t write well and that there is a “literacy crisis” in the U.S. What is the origin of these discourses? What do they have to do with immigration, national security, and economics? How does the notion that Americans can’t write drive the national push to test writing? Here we explore the history of writing and testing in the U.S., the “science” and technology of testing approaches, and how the rhetoric of assessment impacts the lives of Americans today.

Thursday, May 5, 2011

funny video

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/1xHG5p/redux.com/stream/item/1831091/Dumb-English-Spelling

Sunday, May 1, 2011

Teachers and Wall Street

I just thought you would all enjoy this video, especially since we have so many future teachers in our class!


http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-march-3-2011/crisis-in-the-dairyland---for-richer-and-poorer---teachers-and-wall-street

An Interesting Study

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/17/books/review/excerpt-the-use-and-abuse-of-literature-by-marjorie-garber.html?_r=1&scp=5&sq=literacy&st=cse

This study shows an alarming decrease in the amount people read. The addiction to technology is beginning to negatively impact our lives.

A Humbling Video

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfQEC029caw

I'm amazed at how much I take for granted. I never stopped to think about my acquisition of literacy, but after this class and video I feel privileged and humbled to have the opportunities that I had.

Final Thoughts

I mentioned this in my voice thread for my Auto Ethnography, but I just wanted to place emphasis how much we rely on technology. I work for Penn Dot during the summer and when we had lunch breaks I always diverted to my phone or Ipod. The girl I was working with actually brought a book with her! I looked at her like she was crazy and then I realized: reading is a form of entertainment. Do I really need my cell phone or Ipod all the time to keep me entertained? It was at that point I started to get back into reading. When you make something fun it makes it easier to do, especially since I had that girl working with me. We made our own book club and exchanged different books throughout the weeks. I'm glad I had a chance to meet someone like her because she motivated me to read again.
My main point is that literacy comes in all forms. We are still going to rely on facebook and text messaging everyday to find out what's going on in the world and with the people around us. I just realize that there are more forms to literacy learning. I can't motivate everyone to read or write but my main goal, as a future educator, is to try my best to get students interested and to be creative. The first step is to understand why we write and how to write in a way that is clear and understandable to others. I, myself, am still learning and this class has really helped me to realize how literacy is an advancement in life--individuals need to make something out of it.

What I've learned

I've taken so many classes here from which I retain little to no knowledge that it is so refreshing to have actually learned some valuable information from this class. I can honestly say I have learned more from this class than from any other. It has taught me just how vital literacy is in our lives. Before this class I was ignorant to the ways that literacy affects individuals, different groups, and society as a whole. "Drafting U.S. Literacy" explored the ways that literacy can affect, dare I say, a nation at risk. The narrative of Frederick Douglas brought into perspective the ways that literacy was a tool for slaves who desperately wanted their freedom. Gilyard explained how literacy can divide and bring together different groups and how code switching was vital to his acceptance in two different subcultures. Fishman explored the ways that Amish literacy reflects their core values and how it is a tool for becoming closer to God. Brant, in LIAL, compiled a large study that shows how acquisition and development of literacy is different for everyone. Finally, Duffy showed how literacy, or the lack thereof, affected the Hmong people. Writing my ethnography paper, I learned how literacy has affected my own life from the early years up until now. It is something that I took for granted throughout most of my life but now I realize just how significant it is for me and everyone else.

Technology a scapegoat?

After reading the New York Times article on technology and how it is taking over and affecting student's lives, I thought of the main character Vishal Singh. Now I do believe there is such a thing as internet/technology addiction, but to try to say that it is the reason he hasn't read his Kurt Vonnegut's book is absolutely ridiculous. World famous chef Bobby Flay nearly flunked out of school and was always disinterested in subjects, was it because of technology? no! it was because his passion and expertise didn't fit in the cookie cutter public education system. Vishal seams the same way to me, he likes making movies, which although there are electives for that, it is not where the importance is stressed. I think that he was a poor example for the article to use in what they were trying to portray. What about kids that just want to work on cars all the time, all day every day? I knew a few kids like this in school, thy were intelligent guys who scraped by in school because it was of no interest to them. I think that there are more distractions than ever for students which may make it harder to focus or concentrate, but to try and place blame on technology, or to use it as an excuse seems a little bizarre to me, what high school kid wants to read Vonnegut anyways?

Friday, April 29, 2011

"And I was like totes magotes!"

So Paige's post got me thinking about one of the grammar quirks I've developed...and that would be the overuse of the word "like" in popularized American speech. When I was a freshman in high school, my Honors English teacher, in an effort to make us all more aware of our own dialect, had an assignment she created to help rid us all of these extra "likes." She passed out to each student 25 of these "like" cards and for the duration of the quarter, we were assigned to act as the "like police." At any point if we heard someone else use the word "like" incorrectly, then we could instantly call them out on it and demand the possession of one of their "like" cards. Whoever ended up with 25 cards at the end of the quarter received 100% for the assignment. If you happened to have more than 25, then they served as bonus points. I thought this was one of the most clever, most annoying activities ever. But, as it had to my peers, it made me so much more aware of how I spoke, and ultimately how other people spoke.

For a long while afterwards I would intrinsically pick up on when someone overused the word like, and it became incredibly annoying. I don't hear it so much anymore, but when somebody REALLY overuses the word I pick up on it pretty easily.

I found this funny video that attempts to justify and explain the "like" issue: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8fbrUjjivw

Even if it does have all these so-called justified uses, I still find it extremely annoying.

Here's some things to think about (that kind of go back to what we talked about earlier in the semester in class):
If modifiers and other language quirks characteristic of dialects are OK in moderation, when are they acceptable and when are they not?
Should there be some sort of "police system" between Standard English and spoken English?
Is it really only English majors, teachers, and grammar buffs that find these overuses annoying?!



Thursday, April 28, 2011

Grammar Nazi

I thought this video was funny. While correcting Hitler's grammar in a crisis situation may be a bit of an exaggeration, it made me think about how distracting poor grammar can be. When I am having a conversation with a friend, I sometimes find myself distracted if they choose to say "good" rather than "well." I know that no one can speak perfect English, and there are probably errors in this post. Although grammatical errors are unavoidable, they certainly are distracting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f8fbrUjjivw

Addicted or Adapted?

After reading the New York Times article on America's youth being "addicted" to technology, it made me stop to analyze my own device usage. In the article, ut discussed how students can multi-task with various devices but fail to push that same sort of attention and skill toward academics. While reading this article, I realized that since I was reading the article from my laptop, I was logged into my Facebook, Twitter, and Yammer account along with checking the weather and selecting songs on my iPod with my cell phone by my side. I checked each item periodically for any updates on the homepage while reading.

It's not that I have difficulty reading, it's just if I'm not intrigued with what I am reading, I think of all the possible tasks I can be doing. Honestly, while I was reading this article, I sidetracked and realized that I forgot to take my medicine for my strep and check for the weather forecast of tomorrow. And writing this blog, I am still checking for any recent updates on my accounts. By performing all these different tasks, I feel productive. If I sit to focus on one assignment, I keep thinking of the other assignments I can complete if I do them all at once.

The article discusses how this form of multitasking isn't good for any student, but in this generation of advanced technology, we need to be able to function with all of them. Watching television and playing video games are forms of distraction, separate from productiveness. Those are meant to distract us from reality. It may seem that way for a computer with Facebook and such, but at least the computer has the programs and files that can make one productive.

Maybe I'm just speaking for myself and not for all students, but when I'm operating technology, I feel like a hamster in a wheel. I can accomplish so much if I continue in a constant motion, but when I stop to take a breather, I lose track of what I need to get done. Every day I have a set schedule. With caffeine to assist me, I walk all over campus running errands and attending classes. But once I receive that one text message from a friend to meet up for lunch, I figure I deserve a break to sit down and relax for an hour or so. And within that hour of doing basically nothing, I become lazy and need to motivate myself to continue on with my day.

I probably look like a technology addict with my iPod and cell phone all in one hand and operating them with my other hand, while drinking coffee wearing my sunglasses and carrying my books on my way to class. And it's probably a very addict thing to say that I'm in a zone when I'm surrounded by technology. But the reason why I would seem this way is because of those adults who aren't fully adapted with the technology of today. My mom would complain of how much time I spend on my phone with texting but when she gets on the computer to check her mail, she looks like she has never maneuvered a keyboard before.

I remember taking computer classes in middle school and high school where they trained us how to successfully operate a computer and even how to type without looking at the keyboard. It was like that course was meant to make us one with the computer. So is really our fault as the youth of the nation to be consider addicts when we are practically forced by society to use these products in order to survive? I remember the good old days when I handed in a printed paper to my teacher when it was due. Now there's the Angel dropbox for that.

Sunday, April 24, 2011

How to Write Good

I found this article by some guy named Frank Visco as I was stumbling from site to site and it is probably one of the funniest things I have ever read. The best part about it is that it does not explicitly declare its comedic value, but relies on its subtle irony to provoke a laugh. I think it speaks strongly for the power of words to evoke emotion. One of my professors this year once said, "Never use a multisyllabic word when a big word will do." Here are some of Visco's words of advice.


My several years in the word game have learnt me several rules:

Avoid alliteration. Always.
Prepositions are not words to end sentences with.
Avoid cliches like the plague. (They're old hat.)
Employ the vernacular.
Eschew ampersands & abbreviations, etc.
Parenthetical remarks (however relevant) are unnecessary.
It is wrong to ever split an infinitive.
Contractions aren't necessary.
Foreign words and phrases are not apropos.
One should never generalize.
Eliminate quotations. As Ralph Waldo Emerson once said: "I hate quotations. Tell me what you know."
Comparisons are as bad as cliches.
Don't be redundant; don't use more words than necessary; it's highly superfluous.
Profanity sucks.
Be more or less specific.
Understatement is always best.
Exaggeration is a billion times worse than understatement.
One-word sentences? Eliminate.
Analogies in writing are like feathers on a snake.
The passive voice is to be avoided.
Go around the barn at high noon to avoid colloquialisms.
Even if a mixed metaphor sings, it should be derailed.
Who needs rhetorical questions?

Thursday, April 21, 2011

Writing System-A Savior to the Hmong?

In the beginning of Writing from these Roots, Duffy talks about literacy and rhetoric. He incorporates different definitions for each that really caught my attention. On the other hand, what surpirsed me, was that he is only concerned about thinking about literacy from a "writing system" viewpoint. Some of the authors we have studied before view literacy more than just the practice of pen and paper; it's something more complex. I did, however, connect the practice of memorization and copying to that of the Amish literacy. Yet, by Duffy viewing literacy the way he does (to some point) he limits readers to see the Hmong as "literate" people.
What I have learned so far is that the Hmong are literate. They were a functioning community and had ways of communication and transmitting messages even after the destruction of their books.

Here are some questions to think about..

So do you think the writing system for the Hmong could be the answer to all their problems?
Do you think it could be the great "savior" of all the people?
Do you think the writing system helped them to establish their own true Hmong identity?

Tuesday, April 19, 2011

The "Hoax"

I found this video on Stumbleupon and found it really interesting. It was produced by the creators of South Park, as the animation might imply. Regardless, I think it says a lot about the underlying emotional and psychological factors that drive us to succeed in the education system. The video describes the hoax of education which is that we are pushed through grade after grade, always looking forward, but never living in the moment. Looking forward to the end of the semester, I can't help but believe this "hoax." This year, along with my first two years at PSU have gone by so fast and I'm not quite sure how much I can say for it. Anyway, I hope the link works, Enjoy!

http://www.stumbleupon.com/su/2dOH8G/www.neticons.net/music_life/

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Facebook Illiteracy

Last night I was at a party where I was talking to this guy I had just met. As we were talking, I mentioned something I saw or read on Facebook, and he said he didn’t know what I was talking about since he didn’t have a Facebook. I looked at him like “What? You don’t have a Facebook?” as if this was the weirdest thing I’d ever heard. I usually just assume everyone of my generation has one or at least knows how to use one. After asking him why he didn’t have one, he just said he doesn’t feel like taking the time to learn how to use it.

This got me thinking…First, since I just assumed everyone has a Facebook, should the use of Facebook be considered as a source one needs to be literate in in today’s society, just like Microsoft Word or Excel? If this is the case, then the guy I was talking to clearly wasn’t literate in these social networking sites. What is to become of him if he ever needs to get a job that requires the use of Facebook or something similar? Second, taking a broader perspective, as society moves on, we have to keep updating what we are literate in while also retaining our old forms of literacy (most of the time). If I was an employer of a company and found out the guy from the party wasn’t literate in Facebook (or any other important site), I am not sure I would hire him; I would think of him as lazy, not wanting to learn a new literacy. I may be taking this a little too far as Facebook really isn’t that important to know how to use, but as new forms of literacy are being invented and as we grow older, I think it’s important that we move with the times and learn how to use whatever it is. I want to be literate in everything I can be, and if it means learning how to use a certain program or whatever, I’m going to learn it so I won’t be that old teacher someday who the class makes fun of because I can’t use a common program that they all know how to navigate easily.

Thursday, April 14, 2011

Hand Writing-The things people come up with

Well I thought this site was something interesting to share. I happened to stumble upon it and it amazes me how we can use technology to create stuff such as this! This is a really good way to learn and see what letters look like and be able to personalize it. This could be geared toward any age group-whether you are 5 or 20-if you need help with your hand writing this is a website that can help you. It just shows there are options and creative and neat things to use that the internet offers us. You create what word (s)/letter (s) you want to practice and print out the worksheet and write away! (I thought maybe this was something geared to a more personal reference. If you know someone who is struggling to write this could help. Just another way to practice.)

http://www.handwritingworksheets.com/

Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Private Writing

In class we have brought up numerous times the privatization of writing. I constantly go back to the fourth grade during these discussions when I was very much concerned with others reading my work. I used to write ridiculously small--for two reasons: first, I thought that my writing looked neater when it was smaller, and second, because by writing smaller, a reader had to be very close to read it. Printing small made writing private for me, it gave me a sense of ownership and control in who could and couldn't read my thoughts. Part of the reason for such concern over my writing was due to public scorn I experienced that year when my teacher used my essay as a bad example. She put my paper up anonymously and if I hadn't felt the need to brag about my work no one would have even known it was mine. This unfortunately was not the case and basically everyone in the class knew this "poor" example was mine--I was completely horrified and started writing small. I eventually got over this writing phobia and became proud of my writing and the ideas I described, but for awhile I was highly private in my writing. I felt like sharing this story and wondered if any of you have similar experiences be them public humiliation or just personal fears.

Literacy from Infancy

This is just a fun little story and I wanted to share it with the class--one of the themes for my auto-ethnography is sponsorship. I'm focusing mainly on my mom, so I emailed her and asked her to think of any stories about my youth that would be useful for my paper. She wrote back two stories:

1. This is a true story I wish I could do a study about it. When I was pregnant with you I had a 1st grade class that absolutely loved reading. They read anything in sight and I read to them every day before they went home, hence I was already reading to you. Now the classes that I had with Ryan and Eric (my older brothers) liked other things and I see how they are affected by that too. So you tell me does it make a difference that I was reading to you before you were born? I think so. -- It is true, I've loved to read since I was little. It's funny because, for the most part, my brothers absolutely hate reading, so I was the family exception. But even when I was in 1st grade I was reading chapter books before most of my peers. I found it interesting that my mom thinks this is because she read to me before I was born.
2. This one I still tell to my class and they laugh about it. The famous PHONE BOOK STORY. You were probably 6 months old when you pulled the huge phone book out of the cupboard and sat down on the floor and started to flip page after page. Of course your mouth was moving 60 miles an hour with baby babble but it was the beginning of reading. -- My mom's told me this story a thousand times and for some reason I still find it hilarious. Mostly because at that age the phone book probably weighed more than I did, so whenever I picture it I picture myself getting squished by a huge phone book. But it also makes me laugh because I can vaguely remember doing this multiple times throughout my youth, just because I wanted to "read".

I just thought these two stories were interesting and a little funny, so I figured I'd share. Does anyone else have a stories from their parents about childhood literacy?

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Maybe if you're stranded on an island...or something

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7274694n

I found this clip from CBS about handwriting and its pertinence in today's society. It's fairly interesting, though I think that most telling part comes at the very end when the fourth graders (I believe they're fourth graders) comment on the practicality of writing by hand and not with computers.
I also thought that the claim that children who learn to write on computers are better writers than those who learn to write by freehand first. I'm not sure I completely agree with that, or what the correlation is between a persons skill as a writer and what they used (keyboard or pencil) when learning to write. What are your thoughts?

Conflict Theory and How Much Schools Suck

To start off this post, I would like to quote Deborah Brandt from Literacy in American Lives: "Schools, they suggest, devise curriculum and assessment tools that protect society's pecking order and justify its reward system." The "they" in this quote refers to educational critics. These critics are applying a conflict theory perspective to their analysis. This perspective takes from Marxist theories, so if you have a basic grasp of Marxism then you can understand conflict theory.

The question to be answered here is whether schools actually provide equal opportunity and social mobility to everyone in America. In the past, racist beliefs had most citizens against social mobility for African Americans, but now our schools ideally provide equal opportunity. If Brandt's book and college in general has taught me one thing, it's that American schools are not perfect tools of social mobility. It's not as simple for someone coming from a low income SES family to go to school, go to college, and suddenly become middle-class.

Okay, so conflict theory tells us that American education has a long way to go before it truly provides equal opportunity. In general, I don't think Brandt or other critics believe school is bad for students. Enter John Gatto. Gatto retired from education after almost 30 years of teaching. After his career, Gatto left teaching with a highly critical stance on how schools are affecting students. I'll end this post with a link to some of his books and a clip of him speaking. What do you think about Gatto's beliefs?

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ogCc8ObiwQ

blog

I did a presentation on this blog comparing it to another blog/open forum I have in another class for my ENG 474 class, which is about problems with/ opening up public discourse. to sum up the presentation I basically compared how and why ours works as apposed to the other one in the class and would like to pinpoint my reasons as to why I think this blog works and whether or not you all agree.

1. we have an in depth rubric that states what the teacher is looking for. even to do the minimum to pass this assignment we must post often and critically think about our posts, not just regurgitate what the last person stated
2. There is an incentive/grade attached to it.
3 Though given a strict rubric based on mechanics, amount of postings, and other things we are given a lot of freedom on what we can post, from personal stories to Simpson clips.
4. most of us have a vested interest in this topic because of our major, because of this it makes us want to know more and contribute from other sources ( as apposed to a gen ed class where many of the pupils could care less about what is going on)
5. We have a small class where we must sign in and be accountable for our posts.

Some of the reasons why my other blog didn't work well in creating discourse, or even barely getting basic participation is because it is in a large class, where people don't know each other so they don't care to leave meaningful comments, or even original posts worth commenting on. It is also set up in angel showing that the teacher doesn't have the time to care about it, and also with such a large class there is no way the teacher can keep up with all of them.

I feel as though our class is a set up for "the perfect situation" and my other class is more of the reality that is faced for educators, big classrooms with kids that aren't motivated. But how can you spend time motivating a class of 80 (or more) kids when you have to grade them too?

handwriting

I think this sums up our generation's handwriting.

Monday, April 11, 2011

Have I Learned Anything?

We've talked a lot about how we value literacy as a culture, so I thought I'd share a little anecdote. This morning I was reading the Collegian and came across the following letter to the editor.

In response to the March 16 article, “Activist speaks out against West Virginia mountaintop removal,” I live in an area of Mercer County where the blasting has severely damaged wells.

Like a lot of communities, we had a meeting and spoke with the company doing the removal.

Low and behold, afterward they rushed to the strip mine.

Today’s blast jarred my grandparents’ hearth from the fire place.

Yet, this is small compared to the countless wells lost, sunk and caved in.

Now these are blasts that they claim we can’t fill.

I’m looking for activist who can help us with our problem.


My initial reaction was "Wow, this guy writes like a 5th grader." After that split-second, initial judgment was passed, I realized not only what I had just thought, but also the implications of those thoughts and their relation to the letter. Scotty Jones of West Virginia finds himself in a situation where he and his community are completely helpless at the hands of a large and apparently uncaring mining company, but my first thought passed judgment on his grammar and stylistic choices.

Needless to say, I was a bit disgusted with myself. The meaning and purpose of the text is clear– a concerned community seeks the help of students. Why then, did I respond to the inadequacies of the text rather than to its call for action? The simple and unfortunate truth is that we have been taught, especially as we progress through academia, to judge people based on their writing. We have been assigned value for years based on our writing skills, and the judgment that I passed was simply an automatic reflection of that fact. Unfortunately, this mindset caused me to miss the bigger picture. Aside from the destruction of a community, I completely disregarded secondary questions such as "What is Scotty Jones' primary use of literacy?" Clearly, it is not primarily used for writing academic essays. Nevertheless, Mr. Jones realizes that the practice of literacy can be used to help his community. I feel angry at myself for judging him based on his poor stylistic choices.

Has anyone else had an experience like this? It's a bit of a shock to realize that even when we claim to value content and meaning over form and structure, all of these aspects contribute to our overall understanding and assessment of writing.

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Stability & Value

Brandt's text Literacy in American Lives, makes a case for stability as a driving force of literacy contrasting Raymond Branch's rise to computer literacy and Dora Lopez's struggles with Spanish literacy. Even though both individual's grew up in the same area and had father's working for a University, their circumstances were quite different. Raymond's father was a professor and Dora's a shipping clerk. Additionally, computer literacy was on the rise and interest in accumulating it was growing. Spanish literacy on the other hand was not as necessary nor largely sought to attain. Due to these differences, acquiring literacy proved much easier when presented with a need for it. This made me think about my experience with Spanish literacy. I took four years of Spanish in high school and one semester here at college. Furthermore my mother teaches Spanish to eighth graders as a living. Despite this, I never mastered the language, would never claim to be bilingual, and become extremely anxious at the thought of having to speak Spanish. Part of the reason I never mastered the language was the lack of necessity. It was always something extra, something to fluff up my academic record but not something that I had to excel at. My future did not require becoming literate in Spanish, and so I didn't. Though I would not claim to be technologically savvy, I do know how to use the web, Word Processor, and other applications related to my studies. My experiences largely support Brandt's findings. How does your own literacy acquisition correspond to the need/value relation? Besides familial influences, as illustrated with Dora, what else drives an individual to acquire a literacy not currently popular or necessary?

Friday, April 8, 2011

Handwriting

When I first read about the May who was deterred from writing by a authority figure telling him that his handwriting has terrible, I thought, that's absurd. Handwriting has nothing to do with the quality of what is said.
Then I thought back to my experiences in elementary school. I was always complimented on my handwriting. I can remember asking my mother to buy me those workbooks that has the three lines and you have to trace the letters printed in the lines and then write them free hand. I loved doing those activities because I knew that I was good at them and that I would get more positive reinforcement after completion. This is what started my love for writing.
That said, I was told in third grade that I had a speech impediment; that I couldn't speak correctly. This news made me want to avoid talking, and marks that time when I stopped verbally voluntarily participating in class. I didn't want to speak incorrectly and get chastised for it.
So maybe it is not so absurd that the May abhorred writing so much, with his awful handwriting being the starting point. It's amazing really how much influence such comments can have on our development. It took me years to get over the belief that "I can't speak right" and actually participate in classes, and it is something that still affects me today.

Literacy-just an "Indiviual good?"

Brandt's book, "Literacy in American Lives" gives me a new outlook on what literacy can be to different people. In an article we read prior to this there was a quote/idea that really stood out to me,
"In the old ideology, literacy was a value added. It was suppose to turn people into something. in the new ideology, literacy (like other human skills) figures as a cost of production. People are suppose to turn it into something." (Brandt U. S. Literacy)

So what are some thoughts about that passage? Do you think it's to better ourselves or for the benefit of someone else?

The value that we have on literacy changes from person to person. I think we are losing touch with what we learn and take away; we are too worried about how to advance for others. Literacy is now a means of production. . .what value is there left?

Thursday, April 7, 2011

Online Courses

The subject of technology in literacy has come up frequently on this blog and in our class. And while the majority of us may tend to believe that technology is synonymous with higher levels or greater expectations of literacy, this article definitely opposes that notion.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/06/education/06online.html?_r=1&ref=education

After reading the second paragraph, where Hamilton copied and pasted Wikipedia entries into his paper, the first thought that went through my head was: "Finally they are acknowledging the truths of online coursework." I mean really, adults can't be THAT dumb. Although plagiarism repercussions exist at almost any educational institution, that clearly did not stop this kid. As many of you probably know, online classes are offered here at Penn State just like they are at a variety of other colleges and universities. The difference is that for the most part we can choose to take an online class or opt for a regular classroom experience. However, it seems like according this article, as online coursework filters down to high schools, it poses problems for the students, and in Hamilton's case it is not only a disciplinary problem but a motivation problem.
This article reiterated a lot of the points we've also brought up in class, like, what do you do with sub-par kids who aren't learning or don't have the desire to learn? Well, as the sources in this article so lovingly point out: you stick them in a classroom with the absence of an adult to teach them that plagiarizing is wrong, because the production imperative of literacy argues that since these students didn't invest the effort or desire to learn the first time (e.g. in English 3), you can find an alternative avenue to push them through the system, and at a much cheaper cost.
One final thought: Although this is unrelated to anything I said above, I thought that it was interesting all of the students featured in the photograph for the article were African American. Who is this article portraying to benefit from online coursework, and what are their levels of literacy?

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

old teachers illiterate?

I was sitting in my wilderness literature class last night painfully watching my 60+ year old teacher struggle to figure out how to do something on the new Microsoft Word in front of the entire class. After a few minutes of everyone watching him flounder around, a boy in my class shouted out what we’d all been thinking of how my professor could correct the “problem.” Still not understanding, my teacher just closed out the entire Microsoft Word and moved on with his lesson clearly frustrated and distraught.

What does this remind you of? To me, this was a real-life example like Deborah Brandt’s claim that higher standards of literacy are needed as the economy ages. Brandt writes, “Fierce economic conditions, including the changes in communication they stimulate, can destabilize the public meanings and social worth of people’s literate skills” (26). When my professor got hired to teach maybe 30 years ago, there was obviously no need to be computer literate; knowing how to use Microsoft Word was definitely not in his job requirements. Today, however, knowing how to use core programs on a computer is a must in most professional jobs. For my generation, this is not an issue as we grew up with computers and understand them easily. For my teacher’s generation though, computers are like a foreign object; working with them doesn’t come naturally and as a result, the “social worth of their literate skills” is lowered if they can’t handle this new form of literacy.

Therefore, the standard of literacy that is required to get a job today is much different than it was a couple decades ago. However, is “literacy” becoming more complex as society changes, or are new forms of literacy simply replacing old forms and more knowledge isn’t really being expected out of the newer generations?

Tuesday, April 5, 2011

Don't Insist on English



This presentation by Patricia Ryan exemplifies only a few ways that adherence to a certain language or dialect can create barriers for literacy learning. As we talked about in class today, confining one's self to a certain literacy ideology can restrict the types of literacy that one can develop.

Friday, April 1, 2011

Sponsors

In Brandt's introduction to her book she mentioned that a sponsor of literacy does more than just help another person, he/she can also help him/herself. This got my thinking about class I took last semester, English 443 The English Renaissance. We talked a lot about the patronage system, how rich lords and ladies would sponsor writers so that the writer could write and not have to worry about living expenses. This created better writing and a thriving literacy environment, which we can all agree is good for the writers. The sponsors benefited because the writers would dedicate their work to them, in these long complimentary poems at the beginning of their work. These poems were usually slightly ridiculous because each writer was trying to out-compliment their sponsor. So one writer would write that his sponsor was the most beautiful woman (sponsors of art were often woman) in all of England, another writer would say that his sponsor was the most beautiful in all the world, and another writer would say that his sponsor rivaled the gods in her beauty. Each writer wanted to portray their sponsor or patron as the best so that person would continue to sponsor him. From this you can also see a pitfall, these poems were pretty bad sometimes. Writers felt so pressured by the sponsors to write something great and complimentary that the actual writing was poor or too weighed down by praise (that doesn't always seem sincere) to be good.
I think that some of these pitfalls can be applied to us today. I know that in some of my papers I wanted very much to please a teacher or parent (my sponsors) that the paper ended up falling flat. Or sometimes I would read a book just because I thought it was the book that I thought my sponsors would want me to read, but I wouldn't really be taking anything from the book, just reading it for appearances. Both of these result in poor literacy. The paper didn't display those aspects of writing that it should of, and there was absolutely no analysis or understanding that went along with my reading of the book (or really even appreciation).
Yes, it is good to have someone that is pushing you to read and write at your best level, someone who encourages you. But we can put so much weight in what these sponsors think that it can negatively effect literacy, I think.

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

My Thoughts Exactly

Whenever I think of standardized testing, my mind always goes back to this and thinking this was going to happen:

PA Budget Cuts = Loss of Hope

In a discussion I had with a grad student in my English 471 class of the proposed budget cuts, I realized how much damage this proposal will cause in the long run. Not only will jobs be lost and college drop outs will increase, but the lack of creative arts courses will damage future generations' contribution to a creative society. Art, whether it be painting, writing, playing an instrument, is a way to express oneself and draw emotions from others. With no opportunities that were given to us as kids, it would be more of a challenge for people to be creative. With no creativity, no one will have his or her own voice.

One specific effect from the budget cut would be the transformation of creative writing courses and English courses from a small classroom environment to a large lecture hall. Peer review and critique is important in the whole writing process. It is the way one gets feedback on how others perceive his or her work. In a lecture hall, the professor cannot recognize each students' unique voice in his or her work. Like exams in a lecture hall, every student is a number, not a person.

How can anyone view this budget cut in a positive light? What is the point to raising money for more building when there are no students or teachers to fill them? Literacy will decrease due to unaffordable education. Creativity would become lost. I can only view students in matching uniforms, in organized rows, writing in the same exact style, taught the same way, like soldiers being trained to be commanded by a higher authority.
(I apologize ahead of time for a lack of the letter E in this, it keeps sticking and I might not catch all of missing ones)

I read another article that Diane Ravitch wrote on Obama's race to the top campaign. You can read it in the link here , but I will also summarize.

Her article compared that made the same points as her other one for class about hunger, homelessness and other factors bing why students arent doing well but Obama's plan only accentuation some of the worst parts of NCLB, such as basing performance on standardized testing, and firing staff for poor production, and also rewarding top scorers with more government money. which only leads to states to lower standards so they pass, and teachers prepping students on how to pass the tests, not to actually learn.

In my opinion I feel that we almost don't care about the students anymore. We don't care if the students pass or fail anymore, it is if the teachers pass or fail. I don't know if I have a solution to the problem that will work, nor does anyone else I think. The issue is that all of these policies put into plac is that they are getting solved because they are not tackling the right issues. for example: the issue is that the kids aren't scoring high enough on tests, so we will give you more money if they score higher on tests. Now what would be the easiest solution to this problem? Lower the test scores, problem solved. This needs to be solved, but how? in almost every other job or profession it is hailed has genius if you come up with the easiest most efficient way to make more money, yet education has a much harder task is left up to the people up top but affects the teachers who are the most influential, but I feel have the least say in the matter.

When it is all said and done the government will always be in control of the public school systems because well... they are public. The government will also always be full of people that have no idea what they are talking about, yet think they deserve to. So although I don't like to be pessimistic I feel that to at least some degree teacher's and experts on education will always feel that they are not getting the help they need and the steps to helping the kids are not going the right way.

Monday, March 28, 2011

Human Tetris

I think a problem with higher education these days can be associated to college and universities trying to maintain demographics instead of better students. In another English class I have, a student raised concern on her recent application to law school. She indicated that she was unsure whether or not to put down that she was Hispanic or Caucasian. She didn't want to be lumped into a collective and obtain acceptance because she filled a key demographic for the school. I didn't have to realization until she explained her situation that most colleges and universities do this. For example, I've worked several jobs within the university. I've seen first-hand the university hire people of certain ethnicity or race because they were trying to file a quota. Ultimately, this has led to under-qualified people obtaining jobs that they should not have had to begin with. Because of this, the university has jeopardized the integrity of programs and jobs on-campus. Therefore, I am willing to say that if this is the mentality given to jobs within Penn State, more than likely this is the mentality of those in-control educationally.

I understand completely the university's stance on diversity. I mean, honestly businesses and institutions around the whole country have the same mindset. But I think my main problem is the fact that we're failing to educate or to teach people sufficiently to begin with. And due to that, we are setting people up for failure later in life. If we simply acknowledge and give people certain opportunities based on ethnicity and race, than we are continually going to have issues. Especially if we are willing to accept or hire a person to fulfill a statistic and not because they are the best and brightest.

I know that this is somewhat of a sensitive subject, but has anyone seen this where they work or even here at PSU?

Amish Schools

I came across this article "Amish one-room schools are plain, traditional, unguarded" by Caitlin Cleary. I thought that some interesting facts about Amish schooling were covered that could build upon our discussions from our Amish literacy unit. I was aware that the educational system differed from the one that we're familiar with, but I was still shocked by their standards and processes. "They have no teacher or standardized testing requirements." On top of that, students are only required to attend school until the eighth grade. The article continues to go into a little bit more detail. The main thing that I took away from this article is the difference in the values of our society and in the values of the Amish community. In our society, I feel that we care more about getting ahead and having a successful career. Meanwhile, the Amish focus heavily on the community aspect.

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06276/727000-85.stm

Short Ex-Amish Video

I just thought this was funny! They do a pro/con list in this short video of why they shouldn't or should stay Amish. It's just another view to think about as we move away from the Amish onto another topic in class!

Video Link:

http://tv.gawker.com/#!5489321/true-life-im-ex+amish-+-the-eternal-rumspringa

Standardize Testing in America

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/28/obama-standardized-tests_n_841464.html

This was an article that I recently stumbled upon on the Huffington Post. Personally, seeing that I am not an expert and do not know both sides of standardized testing, I cannot agree or disagree with the President's plan. But I do know, as a student who had them shoved down their throat, I strongly dislike them. Hours upon testing that declared me a "number" and ahead or behind a numerical curve, didn't really help me (I think). It didn't put another teacher in my classroom or change the way I was being taught to help me. Granted, I understand that the statistical value would help kids after me, but it still didn't address the issues that were present at the time.

If hourly testing sessions each marking period were changed to extended study habits, reading or vocabulary help, I feel I would have a different mindset on this subject. Specifically, I know that my county was close enough to Washington D.C. and Baltimore, where this initiative was quite huge. Therefore, we had them as a disruption all the time.

Did anybody else have normal standardized testing as frequently? Or does anybody have built resentment towards it like me?

"Blame the Teacher For Everything"

In a recent segment on The Daily Show with John Stewart on March 3, 2011, Diane Ravitch made a guest appearance speaking about her change on standardized testing. At one point she stands up for teachers stating how America seems to, "blame the teachers for everything," yet looking at issues more closely it's not bad teachers that are the problem but a bad economy; poverty is to blame, not teachers. John Stewart responds by explaining how there are bad individuals in every profession, using fast food employees as his example, but the point is that whereas a few shaky employees are okay in other fields, the education field gets slammed for every "bad" teacher and furthermore every teacher becomes scrutinized for a single individual's lacking skills. Obviously this is not fair as one teacher's performance does not necessarily equate to another teacher's. Additionally, due to the importance placed upon standardized testing a teacher may be perceived as "bad" when her students scores come in, but she or he may in reality be a brilliant instructor with a group of students from low socio-economic backgrounds facing added difficulties like hunger that prevent them from reaching higher scores. Yet, as Ravitch recently realized, as long as standardized testing exists this problem will not be resolved. Is there a way to separate "bad" teachers from bad test scores? As future educators, who will be entering the field terrifyingly soon, what happens if you get placed in a low SES community? Your students' scores will most probably be low and thus your skills will be questioned, how will you justify your abilities?

No Simple Solution

The article by Diane Ravitch that we read over the weekend was really intriguing to me. We have talked a lot about the points made in the article already, such as No Child Left Behind, lowering/raising standards, and what defines literacy proficiency. Ravitch says, “the law permitted every state to define ‘proficiency’ as it chose” and as a result “many states announced impressive gains” under NCLB. This seems ludicrous to me because it gives the state the power to manipulate the public’s perception of its school performance, much in the same way that the Federal Reserve can manipulate the value of a dollar (I think it applies). Even though the states were reporting “80-90%” proficiency, the numbers according to federal testing were much less. The “hundreds of millions of dollars” that went into test preparation, are seemingly wasted. “Dumbing down” standards does not make students smarter or more prepared but instead only gives the illusion of academic improvement.
Something that I am not so familiar with is the charter schools that are mentioned in the article. According to USCharterSchools.org, “Charter schools are innovative public schools providing choices for families and greater accountability for results.” Despite the claims of charter schools, Ravitch asserts that “there is very little performance difference between” charter and public schools. Similar to the manipulation of standards and results, charter schools “represent tinkering around the edges of the system.” Regardless of the potential success of charter schools, they “do nothing to improve the system that enrolls the other 97%” of students. I suppose the question then is, assuming that there is no feasible solution, are the efforts already made worth the investment or should the money for education reform be spent elsewhere?
One thing that I think Ravitch could restate or claim in a different way is her assertion that “What we need is…a coherent curriculum that prepares all students.” As we have learned, this is nearly impossible because every student is different and most come from vastly differing backgrounds. Such a curriculum would bring us right back to where we began with some students performing exceptionally well in a system that suits them and others performing poorly. Maybe there is no solution that fits everyone. In that case, we will have to drastically change our approach to finding an education solution. More departments would have to be put in place to more properly micromanage different areas where students need help. For a complicated problem, there is usually no simple solution.

Nonconformity to the World

As my title says, nonconformity, I give this notion to the Amish. When taking Linguistic 100 last semester, we had a guest speaker come into class. He actually spoke a little about the Amish and talked about a few points. The separation of Mennonites and Amish began around the 16th Century with a religious movement in Switzerland. Then this lead to Adult baptisms, Pacifists, and nonconformity to the world. This is how the Amish branched out and are now located in Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio...ect.
I brought up just a little of what the guest speaker said because it touches upon how Amish are somewhat separated from the world. They have their own communities but are lead a certain way; Amish have a very structured lifestyle.

Just for a general interest: Would you be able to live like the Amish for a day?
What do you think you would have the most trouble with? This can be in regards to both reading and writing and home life.

The Ghost of English Classes Past

Over spring break, I went through a large folder containing sample of my writing since 1st grade. My mom has saved everything she could get her hands since my siblings and I started school, and though she contemplated throwing it away one summer while trying to get rid of the "stuff" that somehow accumulates in our house, she couldn't. I'm thankful for this, not only because it will help me write my autoethnography, but also because the experience of reading something I wrote long ago was surreal and exciting.

One piece of writing stood out to me:
ENGLISH IS
Boring,
Worthless,
Pointless,
Mind-numbing,
Dull,
Glum,
Sleep-enforcing,
Unproductive,
Dead-raising,
A Drag!!!!

As a future English teacher, this minimalistic, angsty poem really took me by surprise. The only reason I can think of for my apparent disdain for English is that my school tended to split literacy learning into a Literacy Arts class, which included reading and writing, and an English class, which in earlier grades was phonics and by 5th grade was a prescriptive grammar course. Even as a young student, I was unhappy with a class that told me what I could and couldn't do with my writing. The strangest part about all of this is that I remember 5th grade Literacy Arts as the first class in which I actually enjoyed the material we read. This poem emerged out of that LA class, along with a sample of a fictional narrative about a nerdy kid who becomes cool with the help of an Eastern European wizard (complete with an attempt at writing a character who speaks in a dialect) and a research paper on ancient Rome. As much as I apparently hated English class, I'm thankful that I had a literacy arts class in which multiple genres of writing were used.

As we've discussed all semester long, teaching Standard English is appropriate because it allows students to develop the writing skills that will help them in the academic world. At the same time, however, we must take careful steps to make sure that students realize that the five-paragraph essay written in SE is only one tool in the shed of literacy. As a teacher, I hope to teach the importance of SE, but also its limitations. Hopefully I'll do a good enough job of emphasizing a variety of genres that my students will never refer to my classes as "Dead-raising."


Saturday, March 26, 2011

My first impressions of the Amish

Just in case you don't think that there are Amish stereotypes out there, here's an episode of one of my favorite cartoons growing up. This is basically what constructed my early thoughts on the Amish, though I think I was old enough to know that not everything was true due to the satirical nature of the cartoon.



http://video.alege.net/filme-animatii-ro-1364-Dexters-Laboratory-Ol-McDexter.html

Friday, March 25, 2011

An Inspirational School

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/education/28school.htm?_r=2

This article discusses a struggling school fitting the stereotypes of an inner city institution, low income, high drop out rates and low test scores and expectations. However, the attitude changed drastically and the school now outperforms 90% of school in its state. This inspirational story shows that all children can learn and that no school is beyond redemption. I liked how the article said that the teachers were encourage to say "when you go to college..." everyday. This inspires the students to perform well and continue their education. We all know schools that we would not like to work at, because of the dangers the children pose, the sub par test scores and the low expectations the children have as a result of their community and their own attitudes. This article inspired me to consider these schools as potential places of employment because it fits the goals I have for myself as a teacher.

Grading

After viewing and commenting on the Taylor Mali video, I felt the need to post a separate entry regarding grading. Mali says he can make a C+ feel like a congressional medal of honor and an A- seem like a slap in the face. I feel like this is an area that most teachers are severely lacking, at least from my experiences. During my educational career I never used to exert much effort, I would coast through and still receive high grades. My teachers knew this but were pleased with my grades so they never commented on it, except for my 6th grade science teacher who told me, "I know you're not trying and I hope it comes back to bite you in the ass one day." This malicious statement made me chuckle at the time and severely lowered my opinion of her. I think trying to prompt student effort should take the form of constructive criticism and not hoping for student failure. My senior year in high school my English teacher was undoubtedly the most hated teacher in the school. He ran a strict classroom, graded harshly and pushed his students to their breaking point. Ironically, I enjoyed the class and tried harder in it than in my others. I believe that a balance must be found to push the students to perform but not pushing them to the point that they break. Furthermore, I found that teachers I like or respect and who push their students inspire me to try harder (clearly not my 6th grade science teacher). As a future teacher I will expect nothing but the best from my students, pushing them to try their best while maintaining a respectful attitude and a comfortable classroom setting.

Rescinding Some of my Anti-Video Game Rants

I was reading my classmates posts when I saw this link on the side, How video games can make you smarter.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/01/31/video.games.smarter.steinberg/index.html?iref=allsearch

At first I chuckled at the sight of this but I like to think I have an open mind so I decided to read it. The first thing I noticed before the article mentioned it is that the titles of the sections correspond to teaching goals and practices. This initially peaked my interest and encouraged me to give the topic serious thought. The article brings up very valid points but I disagree in one major area. The article cites the benefits of having medical students practicing in a game format instead of on actual people. While granted this is safer for the patient I would much rather have a doctor who has practiced on people operate on me than the chief of medicine who has only performed in a digital version of the game Operation. This being said I think that a very small amount of video games, used appropriately, could support a lesson in an interesting and effective manner.

The Amish Are Full Of Frauds!!!!!



I found this video after watching the Amish Vocabulary lesson. Though it doesn't have anything to do with Amish literacy, I think it hits some stereotypes that the "English" have of the Amish. It is so important to not let oneself judge the Amish based on our society. Their culture is completely different. It has its pros and cons, and so does our culture.

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Individual Voices

I noticed in the Amish video we watched today that the teens who stepped away from the Amish culture had difficulty speaking and expressing themselves when asked direct questions. To me, they spoke as if they were uneducated and maybe even illiterate. When it came time to speak up about personal matters, they were unable to formulate their opinions because perhaps they were not used to having a voice in which to do so. Could this be attributed to the low-quality Amish schools they attended like the one Fishman studied?

Something that stuck out from the Amish reading was the conformity of each student. There was no time during the day for creative activities that aids the development of the individual. Something that I value highly is individuality. I want my students to take pride in their individual differences and develop as much as they can into who they want to be in the future.

In my CI 280 class, we discuss diversity in the classroom a lot. It is important to remember that each student brings different experiences to the classroom that the entire class can learn from. Whether it is their family culture or places they’ve visited, each student has different perspectives on life that everyone in the class can benefit from hearing about. Especially in a language arts class where creativity is vital, I am going to encourage my students to take pride in their differences and not suppress their individuality as the Amish seemed to do. (Although I understand that the Amish obviously share the same culture).

Do you value individuality and creativity in a classroom? How will you encourage students not to succumb the pressure of conformity within peers but instead, take pride in who they are and develop their individual voice?

Wednesday, March 23, 2011

"Things Seen on a Farm"

I happened to stumble upon this on the web as I was searching to find some additional information on Amish newspapers. Sadly, I thought this was a bit interesting, in a funny way.

Tuesday, March 22, 2011

Home & School

Andrea Fishman's piece opened my eyes to the various types of literacy there are in today's society. As an outsider to the Amish community and Old Order practices, I can't help but compare and contrast their views to my own, as Fishman does in her concluding chapters. One of the most interesting differences she touches on was the difference between ones composure at home versus at school. Our society too has this difference but what struck me was her idea that "children [in the Amish community] may feel little need to speak up (or act up) in school, therefore, because they have an outlet for such behavior at home (155)." One of the most terrifying issues to think about as a future teacher is student behavior, especially in today's society with drugs, alcohol, and abuse. A teacher can never fully understand the home life a student has and the toll it takes on them. Fishman brings up a smart idea that when children are able to express themselves at home, they can then be the attentive and calm students teacher's dream of. However, when home is a mess and they feel like they have to hide emotions or behaviors, it weighs on them and must be released somewhere else-usually that ends up being school. Do you think that there is a correlation between a broken home and disruptive students? Furthermore, do you think that broken homes are becoming more and more common due to teen behaviors influenced by media, like teen mom and skins? (a problem worth noting that the Amish don't face, and possibly the reason for such tight homes and expressive environments)

21st century Students in the Amish Classroom

At the end of class today a very interesting question was raised. We had been talking about how the Amish would succeed (or fail) in our public school systems, when it was asked how we would fare in an Amish School System.
First, I think that our ability to adjust is more fully developed than that of the Amish students. For eight years the Amish sit in one classroom, with one teacher (even if this teacher changes, the method of the next teacher is the same as the previous). In our public schools, however, we are exposed to several different teachers with several different approaches to teaching. We may feel stifled in the strict and rigid setting of the Amish schoolhouse, but the process of adjusting to new things is not, well, new to us.
Also, in our society there is an emphasis on accepting other cultures (which makes "our society" hard to define, being made up of so many differing and at times conflicting cultures). I think it would therefore be easier for us to go to an Amish school without having the psychic cost that an Amish student may feel in a public school. By this I mean that the Amish student could feel as though he/she were being split in two by the conflicting cultures, whereas English students would be better at compartmentalizing the information. We are better at being able to say when something is the opinion of the teacher or the society, and then being able to pick out what is most important to us/our education. That was a really complicated way of saying we would probably be able to separate the Amish culture from the education we were receiving with out a major effect on our psyches or English lives. In the Amish schools, the connection between homelife and school-life is extremely strong (the transition between the two being almost seamless). Our society has more of a disconnect between the two. (The connection between school and home is different than the connection between individual and literacy. When talking about the latter, the Amish have a disconnect. From the reading it appears that the Amish do not bring their personal lives into their readings, however who the individual is and the ethics/rules of society are the same in both the house and school.)
I also think that English students would have an easier times adjusting because we did learn how to draw information from texts. We could answer correctly that questions that Verna was asking of her Amish students (our education builds upon this skill into analytical/critical thinking, which the Amish do not).
The trouble for us would be thriving in the rigid setting of the Amish classroom. Our society puts emphasis on the individual, singling people out when they do something good or bad. It would be hard for us to work well in a situation where we would be seen as just one of the group. With the individual praise and attention (our positive reinforcement), I wonder if we would even have the drive to do the work.
That is just my opinion, however. I firmly believe in the flexibility of the human state. When put into situations where we are forced to adjust, we do. The concept of sink or swim is drilled into our heads. That being, I feel that an English student could adjust to the Amish schoolhouse, though their success would not be based in Amish principles. Instead, a think that a successful English student in the Amish schoolroom would be successful because they don't want to sink, or fail. Individual failure would be a huge drive for us in such a situation, which actually goes back to the notion of competition. In English society we don't like to lose. Therefore, I think that we could adjust (we just wouldn't like it).

An Amish "1984"

Taking in from the perspective of a student who knows very little of the Amish community, my impression on the Amish lifestyle is similar to that of a cult. Even though citizens of the Amish community wouldn't think of anything negative of their lifestyle, I'm curious if anyone has ever questioned their authority's logic? With a schooling system that treats everyone as equals, with no room for creativity or imagination, it appears to those who live outside the community that the Amish are bred to benefit the community.

This discussion reminded me a lot of this book I was assigned to read in high school called "1984" by George Orwell. The book is about a man who decides that he does not like the organized system that he is forced to exist in created by the government. Once he attempts to break the system, the government breaks him with fear to return to his original state of contributing to the community. The book influenced other books and movies as well, such as "V for Vendetta," of the government in control of people's lives and using them as workers.

We discussed in class the chances of Amish teens successfully branching out into modern society and there were comments stating that many end up returning back to the Amish lifestyle. There were theories that they prefer the lifestyle but my theory is that they panicked due to the lack of knowledge they have of, say, an urban setting. It's like the teens are set out to fail and the adults make sure of it by not preparing them. It's not necessarily that the teens want to go back, but probably more as they feel safe. They don't know how to enter the world where intelligence determines your status in society since they were all treated equal with limited knowledge that probably the other adults only knew. So basically, their education is a continuous process of limiting knowledge with no opportunity to expand. It's like a test to see how faithful the young adults are to the community, like a communion of entering the Amish community for life.

That's my initial thought if the Amish community. We may agree that they are comfortable to live that way, but I'm not entirely convinced. It may seem they accept their lifestyle but I view it as they are forced to. They aren't notified of the lifestyle that they could possibly have that we take for granted. If they provided a better educational system, I wouldn't be as judgmental.

Monday, March 21, 2011

Quick-Read Gimmicks = Weight Loss Gimmicks?

I was just reading Conor's post with the YouTube links to Hooked on Phonics and Your Baby Can Read!, and I remembered another similar commercial most of you have probably heard of:


And after watching this and the other commercials, it really struck me how similar the advertising techniques in these commercials were to the weight loss gimmicks we have all seen a million times over. Part of it could just be the advertising itself, but it really makes me wonder what these products really say about American society in the context of education. Granted, we all know we're a culture fascinated and propelled by speed: e.g. It's my money and I NEED IT NOW!!! But does literacy and education transcend into this culture? Like weight loss gimmicks, people share their testimonies for success and encourage you to "jump on the bandwagon." And then they try to sell you with free gifts and put a time limit on the time you can call to receive free shipping.

Obviously these programs and products haven't moved to replace the educational system, but I am sure that with time, as culture and society becomes more and more obsessed with speed and effectivity, literacy could fall victim to the system.

So if literacy can be ordered via a 1-800 number or clicked into your virtual shopping cart, arrive on your doorstep in a pre-packaged, tested and proven product, what does this say about the future of education, of teaching, and of literacy in general?

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Amish Literacy







Here's some pictures of me and a few other cast members in the musical.

I really like the Amish Literacy Article we read. In turn, I could actually relate to it. This is just a recap of what I said in class the other day:

During last summer I played an Amish women. The writer spent over a year researching and observing Amish men and women. He wrote notes whenever he could about what he saw and learned. He then ended up writing a feature length musical! When I was first asked to do this I was a bit skeptical. After I thought about it and accepted the role I couldn't believe I was playing an Amish women who was going through rumpspringa. Better yet an Amish women singing and dancing. All laughs aside I learned from the experience. It is that experience that has helped me to relate to the article. Though Fishman doesn't really touch on the personality aspect of Amish, they do all have unique personalities that define them.
Amish women do not live by just the confines of their strict household. In the musical, my character Esther, had experiences people might not assert to Amish. Esther shaved her legs, read magazines, and fell in love. It was interesting at the end of the musical because my character stayed with the Amish even though the audience was lead to believe she was going to leave. I think when the Amish experience rumspringa it's a chance for them to step outside of their uniform and structured life and let loose and be free!

Does anyone else think differently about the Amish now than they did? (also in regards to the video we watched today as well).

Saturday, March 19, 2011

For Prospective Teachers and Everyone Else.



Found this video of slam poet Taylor Mali. We've probably all had a teacher like this at some point who pushed us to the limits of our patience and ability and who made us hate school. In the end I believe those teachers are the ones who inspire and educate us the most. This guy's one of them.

Thursday, March 17, 2011

CSI Pittsburgh

I know we have moved on from dialects, but I have been meaning to post this for a while and know all the Pittsburgh people will really like this

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

interpreting literature our own way

Postman put into words everything that I’ve been questioning in my English classes since high school. She wrote, “Our job as teachers, then, is not to decide what things should mean to our students but to help them deepen and strengthen their individual readings of texts and, at the same time, to show them that other equally valid readings exist” (166).

Countless times I’ve said to my English teachers in high school, “but how do you KNOW that was what the author wanted to say?” And every time I’d asked, I’d get a vague or snippy answer to my ignorant question. Postman, in this chapter, finally answers my question! She writes that even if we did get an explanation from the author himself about what he meant in his text, it still shouldn’t matter! As times change, interpretations of the text will too. Readers should be able to get out of the text what they want, and teachers should only be there to open up their minds to other interpretations. There should be no wrong interpretations, only ones that differ from each other. Ultimately, it is up to the reader to decide which interpretation they feel is most right.

Yes, this makes grading on tests multiple choice tests difficult as there is no right or wrong interpretation, but tests can easily be remade to accommodate this idea, perhaps with the use of essay tests.

I think reading critically and for individual interpretation is one of the most important elements of literacy. Don’t we take the time to read something so that we can understand the material and not have someone just give us the interpretations? Shouldn’t we want our students to read and interpret it their own way, use our guidance if they want, chose what they want to believe, and retain what they read because it makes sense to them?

Observations

1. Moral Imperative: Education was used to eradicate the "heathen". Brandt mentions this in her article, De Witt Clinton mentions it in his speech "Address to the Free School Society of New York" in 1809, and various others make good use of the moral imperative.

2.The World Wars: Education is being implemented on bigger and better scales to help protect our free Democracy from the flourishing Axis powers by training our soldiers and developing testing.

3. N.D.E.A.: In the Cold War and through the fear of superior Russian technology (i.e. Sputnik) education gets overhauled in the fields of Science, Mathematics, and funding to is increased to promote more secondary education.

4. The Production Imperative & Economic Crisis: After the slight recession in the early 80's (after Stagflation and before Reaganomics kicks in) we fear the Japanese takeover of the predominantly U.S. fueled automotive market. Reagan is ready to kill the freshly born Department of Education and in their defense "Nation At Risk" is published in April 1983.


********THE DOUBLE EDGE SWORD*********


"Nation" as we read, makes some pretty bold claims and uses some pretty ridiculous rhetoric to prove a point. I feel in doing so, the Department of Education has created the new "Other" we will single out.

Using rhetoric like, and I quote:
"If an unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed it as an act of war."
The E.D. takes full responsibility for not allowing this "act of war" to happen, but when the sh*t goes down, will they take the blame.... probably not, they're a Government Agency. They'll push the blame somewhere else.

As we've seen these literacy "crisis" come in waves, and I believe we are building up to one. Good jobs have disappeared to India and China in the last decade, this will undoubtedly bring on another "crisis" such as the Japanese car scare of the early 80's. Someone will have to take the blame, and chances are it will be the U.S. education system.

Bush tries to move the blame around by dusting off and renaming (as his predecessors did) the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which now makes the teachers accountable... not heathens, Sputnik, or the Japanese.

In Wisconsin crazy things are happening. The heat is on the teachers. Union's are dissolving, tenures are being
suspended, and the fire will come down on the teacher's heads; they will become the "other".

Teacher's will be forced to say one of two things: Yes, Public Education works! or No, Public Education doesn't work without the right teachers/funding! Either way they are going to take the brunt of this wave. It doesn't matter if other factors get overlooked: Socioeconomic background is sadly a great predictor of how we will turn out, A child's home life will shape his study and learning habits more than any amount of schooling, et cetera.

It's a lose/lose situation when educators are the enemy. I wonder how this will play out? Thoughts?

Die botschaft: Status Updates

While I was reading the excerpts from the Die Botschaft paper in Fishman's I couldn't help but be reminded of Twitter and Facebook. With constant updates such as "doing laundry" or "riding the bus lol" the triviality is one of the main arguments against these social networks. However, I saw the same thing in the Amish newspaper. Some scribes contributions involving lines like "would write more but getting ready for church" or "didn't write last week, cleaning" (these are not exact quotes, just the gist). One man even complained that some scribes were writing information that no one really cared about. Reading these excerpts gave me an insight into what are lives would be like with out Twitter or Facebook status updates: the same. Even in these two radically different cultures, people still feel the need to inform others about their everyday chores. To me, this says a lot about human nature.

Tuesday, March 15, 2011

genopsycholinguisticide*

coined by Kemp... extrapolated further by Gilyard... still vague.

Dialect.

Usually we view dialect as a negative thing, or at least, a creation detrimental to our understanding and ability to test the notion of "Standard English". I believe we all can agree that dialect is a salient part of our code-switching experience and in fact, a huge part of our life.

One aspect of dialect we have not explored deeply yet: What is dialect doing? What is it doing REALLY?

In post-colonial studies we view the language of the oppressor/occupier as destructive to the natural voice of those being oppressed. Through the act of renaming, the oppressor creates new meaning and destroys what existed (the Assiwikales of the Pittsburgh region in Pennsylvania surely had different names for many things), the colonizers/occupiers/thieves would change the name of some living part of Native culture, hence, with time destroying it. Somethings of unadulterated beauty have kept their original name: Susquehanna, Lackawanna, et cetera. Our words claim something (Lackawanna = The forks of a stream). Through our renaming we lay claim to the object described.

In Gilyard's Let's Flip the Script he quotes Kemp's extreme example of oppressive naming deemed "genopsycholinguisticide":

"You are the victim of... of, let's see, we need a new
word for it... How about: genopsycholinguisticide.
Sure, why not: 'first there was the word... and the
word was nigger,' and you became -nigger. And
that, dear nigger, dear lost, blown -up bleeding,
stumbling, raggedy nigger, that is genopsycholin-
guisticide." -Arnold Kemp, Eat of me: I am the savior

The idea of a word being forced on humans and it having a self fulfilling prophecy effect has been written about by everyone from Master Raymond Gilyard to Bill Ashcroft.

My view of dialect is an opposition to the ridged occupancy of the "Standard English" reign. The production imperative introduced by Brandt, forces all Americans to adopt the "Standard" as means of providing equal and upward mobility. We strive to produce in the global world of gears too huge to see; here is where our sentient primate sounds out - in the dialect of our tribe.

We employ the very tools of the "Standard" reign to reassure our selves and the world around that our tribe is real and not too huge to see; survivalinguistices, if you will. Our dialect -much like "pittsburghese" and others- claims things known specifically to our native culture. It can be used as a tool to find out who doesn't belong on our "turf" at the utterance of a single word. It is an exclusive key into a club... maybe it's ethnic, geocentric, or age related... I bet it's all of these. If we loved this notion of "Standard English" so much, why have poetry? Why so much deviation in language?

How do you feel about Dialect? Do you think is exists solely to oppose the "Standard"?

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Family Guy

I thought that it was really interesting thinking about the dialect in Family Guy during class today. The brief discussion on the Rhode Island accents\dialects caught my attention and had me thinking the rest of the day. As I said in class, my whole family lives in Rhode Island so I'm pretty used to hearing their accents and the different sayings and words they like to use. There are a couple of points I want to bring up about this particular New England dialect.
One thing that I find to be so interesting about Rhode Island is that it's the smallest state, but the state has so many different dialects and accents. In class we talked about the difference between Peter and Lois's accents... and the way that they're depicted on the show really isn't an exaggeration. The Cranston accent and dialect is a lot rougher and more dramatic than what you would find if you stopped by Newport.
In our class we've been talking about the effect of dialect in the classroom. We specifically talked about the attitude of teachers towards certain dialects. Teachers don't really appreciate what these dialects are bringing to the classroom. They think that certain dialects sound less intelligent than others and try to phase them out and suppress them. I think that this is definitely in effect in Rhode Island. My younger cousins are in elementary and middle school and they barely have any kind of accent. There are a few words here and there that they say differently than me, but their accents are no where near the thickness of my parents and grandparents. I feel like this has to do something with the way some kids are schooled in New England.
Has anyone found themselves up at four in the morning watching infomercials and come across your babe can read!! The fact that it is an infomercial already leads me to be skeptical but I was wondering if anyone knows anyone that has used this or if it really works or studies on it. Also I remember when I was younger there was hooked on phonics, and remember thinking it was totally cool. Did anyone's parents get them that or use it ?





1-800-ABCDEFG!!!!

Public discourse on public discourse

I have been learning about public discourse in education reform in my 474 class and it led me to think about math education specifically. There is much debate, especially communities with high ELL student populations, about the change of math education from the old school version that most of us went through of learning what how to do something with the teacher telling us how to do it, and we practice it (times table cards is a great example) and how there is not too much emphasis on two way communication and discourse. I am sure there are studies on both sides saying one is better than the other, but I personally read a professional journal study that when a teachers ask more questions, and engages the class more the students perform better than teachers who involve less two-way communication. My personal position is that if you are using public discourse to come to a solution to a problem regarding math curriculum, than using it in the actual curriculum would also help to find the solutions to math problems (not to say practice and repetition isn't necessary). So I am wondering what everyone else thinks

Old school repetitive one-way communication in math or the newer discourse way?

Wednesday, March 2, 2011

Dialects Close to Home - "Pittsburghese"

All of our readings and discussions about dialects hit close to home for me. I'm not sure home many people are familiar with the Pittsburgh area, but over the years Pittsburghers have developed a unique dialect, fondly referred to as "Pittsburghese." There's even a book you can buy to learn to "speak like a Pittsburgher," using words like "yinz," "dahntahn," "S'Liberty," and more.

We've talked a lot about code switching, and this is something I've seen students do firsthand. When I was at my branch campus, Greater Allegheny, I tutored at a nearby school district, McKeesport. McKeesport is a very diverse area about 12 miles outside of the city. Most kids in this area speak with the dialect that is rooted in Pittsburgh. I worked with students who wouldn't speak SE when they talked to me or their friends. However, when I would read over their assignments, they were able to eloquently structure their ideas and get their points across using SE. I think that, as a nation, we simply need to accept dialects and, instead of cramming SE down our students' throats, we should show them how to code switch and teach them that there's a time for dialects and a time for a more sophisticated form of speaking.
Has anyone else had a similar experience with dialects? How do you think we should treat them in schools? Should we embrace them or erase them?

Linguistic Discrimination in School AfricanAmerican English

Dialogue Between Two Pedagogies

In class on Tuesday we were asked to write a conversation between an eradicationist and a pluralist. I decided to stereotype both of them to absurdity and to see where it would lead. I think it turned out interesting.

Mr. Erad & Mr. Plura

Mr.E - Why hello there my good sir. How are you this morning?

Mr.P - Yo fat sick nasty slickin' grease off my belly.

Mr.E - Gehzundthight! You speak very poorly sir. You should take lessons

Mr.P - Shove it Charlie Brown. I spit the saliva I like to drool, fool.

Mr.E - Oh pish posh! You speak with the tongue of a heathen. You don't want people to think you're a heathen now do you?

Mr.P - I want people to think I'm breathin'. Speakin' yo wrinkly tongue skibbity scat would kill me. I'll stick alive wid mah words.

Mr.E - How rude of you! I'm trying to help you!

Mr.P - That's what Moms said to mah lil sis when she shaved her head thinkin' it would come back thick. Yo love ain't appreciated here cuz cuz it'd make me bald.

Mr. E - You certainly don't know what you're talking about. You must not have been educated.

Mr.P - I got a Master's Degree in beat downs and a Doctorate in ass whoopin'.

Mr. E - I see! You want this to come to fisticuffs! Well let's step outside old chap and I'll show you a thing or two.

Mr.P - Chizzle my rizzle. We bout to see our kids grizzle. There's my baby givin' the valedictorian speech.

Mr. E - Oh bother!

Fighting illiteracy

I sometimes wonder what is out there for people who aren't literate. I have come to realize that there are organizations that are a source of hope and help. I have found a group called Literacy Incorporated. It's a non-profit organization on a mission to fight illiteracy across America. It reaches out to high school students all across the United States. From the Literacy Incorporated website, "Deborah LeBlanc, the founder of Literacy Inc., decided in 2005 to create an incentive-based program that would encourage America’s students to read—the LeBlanc Literacy Challenge. To participate in this annual Challenge, students must read two books, take an on-line quiz and submit a short essay." On the site is also a video with Deborah LeBlanc with more information about her goal to fight illiteracy in the United States. I just thought it would be interesting to point out that groups like these exist.

This is the website's link:

http://www.literacyinc.com/about.html

Also Literacy Incorporated Mission Statement:

"
Literacy Inc.’s mission is to fight the growing rate of illiteracy in America’s teens. The tools we use to accomplish that mission are motivational speeches, free books, and the opportunity to win a college education and other prizes."

What is your take on this organization? Have you done anything like this?
Do you think we should adapt the ideas and strive to be volunteers to help students achieve all they can?

Tuesday, March 1, 2011

E Pluribus Pluribus: Is Multiculturalism Fragmentary to Society?

In light of our recent discussion of Gilyard's exploration of sociolinguistic theories such as eradicationalism, bidialectalism, and pluralism, I have been thinking about the implications of multiculturalism in the classroom. How do we reconcile the multiple backgrounds of students– including langauge, culture, ethnicity, political mindset, religious views, etc– with the fact that schools in our country are generally desired to promote communal understanding and harmony?



While philosophizing (see above) and pondering these mysteries, I remembered an essay I stumbled upon last semester while browsing some political blogs. In Diane Ravitch's essay "E Pluribus Pluribus," the merits and drawbacks of multiculturalism are explored. (For those who don't know Latin, or who believe that referencing Latin is an example of entrenched Eurocentrism, the title is a playful jest at the famous "E Pluribus Unum" (From many, one). Ravitch's title means "From many, many," pointing to the fragmentary effects of unchecked, exclusive multiculturalism.)

The article itself is rather long, and while I think it's an interesting read, I wouldn't hold it against you if you didn't read it. Rather, I'm going to pull out some claims and talk about how they relate to our class discussion.

1. "For many years, the public schools attempted to neutralize controversies over race, religion, and ethnicity by ignoring them." I think this is largely true. Ravitch goes on to state that during the 1960s, academics and the public began calling for schools to recognize those differences rather than ignoring them. Gilyard talks about something similar when he reminds us that student's own prior knowledge should not be ignored in the classroom– each student brings a diverse and wonderful mindset that can help other students gain a more rounded sense of their own beliefs and their own selves.

2. "The ethnic revival of the 1960's demonstrated that many groups did not want to be assimilated" as had been the predominant model of intercultural relations in the US prior to the 1960s. Rather than striving to inculcate minority students into the values of white middle-class America, we should attempt to include all values in the classroom. Personally, I think that the idea of a "white, middle-class" ideal is bogus– it is impossible to suggest that every white, middle-class American has the same values, or hopes, or goals. No, every individual has their own set of values and expectations for themselves, others, and societies, and all views should be considered.

3. In our time, multiculturalism– cultural pluralism– is believed to be "the norm of a free society; the differences between groups are a national resource rather than a problem to be solved." While I think that this claim is a bit optimistic and fails to address some of the deep-seeded racial divides that exist within our country, it does address the reality of various cultural identities in the correct light. We need to use the variety of student backgrounds that are available to us to gain deeper understanding of others, rather than attempting to force students to adhere to the norms and values of the mythic "white middle-class." Whether we are teaching literacy skills or analyzing historical texts, we should realize that every person will interpret information in a way that is consistent with their experience. We should use differing views to gain a more complete view of a topic, even if we don't necessarily agree with the conclusions of others.

4. Ravitch also makes a distinction between pluralistic multiculturalism and particularistic multiculturalism. (I think she made up the word "particularistic) Nevertheless, the distinction she raises is important and enlightening. Pluralistic multiculturalism, much like Gilyard's linguistic pluralism, is the notion that our own individual cultural experiences and identities do not have to be sacrificed in the interests of a "common" culture. Rather, our common culture is pluralism, the existence of multiple norms and values. This creates a richer common culture that is more welcoming to the vast wealth of differing cultural experiences that our country offers. Particularistic multiculturalism, on the other hand, claims that no common culture is possible, and that a common culture is certainly not desirable. While this might sound peachy on the surface, it suggests that no deep understanding can be made between members of different cultures. I think Gilyard's experiences of friendship with Marty serves as a strong rebuttal to this – though they came from very different cultures, they were still able to recognize and protect that dignity and humanity of the other. Ravitch suggests that particularist multiculturalism leads to ethnocentric curricula. Her problem with ethnocentrism is that it assumes children will only learn when presented with content that is specific to their culture. She argues that one does not need to be black to appreciate Langston Hughes' poetry, just as Gilyard did not need to be white to appreciate the poetry of Ogden Nash. Ravitch cites, in particular, Afro-centric and Mexican-centric curricula that have emerged in efforts to make content "meaningful" for ethnic minorities. While it is certainly important to recognize the achievements of people of all cultures, creating culture-specific curricula is just as dangerous as promoting a curricula that only propagates the values of white, middle-class America. Ethnocentric curricula, she argues, is deterministic, in essence telling students that the range of possible achievements they can reach is dependent on their culture or ethnicity. I think she would agree with Gilyard when he writes that education is much more of a transactional process than a deterministic one– the outcome of an educational situation is largely determined by the student taking responsibility for their own destiny.

5. "When genuine controversies exist, they should be taught and debated in the classroom." This is, I think, on of Ravitch's best points. Sadly, it's a bit of common sense that shouldn't even need to be said. Nevertheless, I rarely heard of contrasting opinions in the academic world until I entered college. Image how different the world would be if children were taught from a young age to consider multiple possibilities before reaching their own conclusions, rather than simply being taught that one indisputable truth exists. If Gilyard had the opportunity to engage in actual discussion with his classmates about desegregation of schools, rather than just writing a paper about it, some real understanding might have been reached, and the alienation and suppressed hatred that he felt for some of his classmates may have never occurred. Likewise, issues of eradicationalism, bidialectalism, and pluralism should be discussed in literacy classes– the fact that scholars fight over whether or not they should establish a standard English speaks to the awesome power of literacy, a power that students should be made aware of. Certainly, understanding the views of others is better than hating someone because of their beliefs without knowing just why it is that they hold those beliefs.

Ravitch makes many more claims, some of which I think could be supported by evidence or might need to be explored more deeply, but I think that the overall gist of her article is very much in line with what we have been talking about in class. The reality of the modern world is that many incredibly different cultural identities exist in society. Our job is to decide how we will use them. Will we embrace those of other cultures and seek to learn about their own cultural understanding and experiences in an attempt to better enrich and enlighten our common culture, or will we allow particularistic thinking to reinforce de facto racism and propagate the idea that cultures might be able to live with one another, but they will never understand each other?