Complexities of Literacy

As I have been reading articles about literacy and how teachers define it, I have found that it is an extremely debatable topic. I partly knew this with the articles read at the beginning of the semester; however, I am beginning to realize the complexities of the term “literacy.” After reading seven different articles, ranging from elementary to postsecondary, literacy is more than just reading and writing. It is based on theory, content, curriculum, culture along with many other things.

My case study is looking at how a few English teachers at the high school level define literacy and contrasting their concept of literacy with the literacy in my classroom. The reason for reading these articles was to understand the struggles of defining literacy. I honestly don’t know if I understand the struggles, but it definitely showed that there seems to be this tug-of-war with literacy.

I decided to pull one quote from each article that I found essential and that highlight the different parts of literacy:

• “As teachers and teacher educators, it is imperative that we understand not only our own ideology toward literacy but that of the curriculum materials and processes that are utilized and promoted in our schools.” -Karen Cadeiro-Kaplan in “Literacy Ideologies: Critically Engaging Language Arts Curriculum” on page 372-373

• “[All] students must be allowed access to literacy. Without that access, they will not have what is needed for existence in our society…Our professional responsibility demands that we see beyond the limiting and arbitrary boundaries of how we have defined the world of reading and writing.” –Perry Gilmore in “Privilege, Privation, and the Ethnography of Literacy” on page 11

• “[We] have also learned that the way teachers shape classroom discourse can at times be limited in scope and not reflective of the diversity of student language and culture.” –Trevor H. Cairney in “The Construction of Literacy and Literacy Learners” on page 497

• “Teaching academic literacy becomes a process of constructing academic literacy, creating it anew in each class through the interaction of the professor’s and the students’ cultural resources.” –Patricia Bizzell in “Arguing about Literacy” on page 150

• “As English studies shifts from an Arnoldian view of literature to a more inclusive one that extends to a wider array of texts, learning about literacies can help students hone the critical skills that will enable them to become better readers and writers of academic texts and to function as effective citizens outside the academy.” –Deborah Williams Minter, Ann Ruggles Gere, and Deborah Keller-Cohen in “Learning Literacies” on page 684

• “If we are to be successful in restructuring high schools or reforming the nature of curriculum and instruction within secondary classrooms, we must sharpen our understanding of how the subject matters to secondary school teachers.” –Pamela L. Grossman and Susan S. Stodolsky in “Content as Context: The Role of School Subjects in Secondary School Teaching” on page 5

• “Literacy is a wonderfully ambivalent term, its meaning dependent upon the contexts in which it is used.” –Jay L. Robinson in “Literacy in the Department of English” on page 483

Writing = Autobiography

“I do not think we should move away from personal or reflective narrative in composition courses, but closer to it; I do not think we should limit reflective narrative to a single genre; I do not think we should make sure our students write on many different subjects, but that they write and rewrite in pursuit of those few subjects which obsess them.” (Murray, 73)

All writing is autobiographical—something I have to work on fully embracing that Donald Murray addresses in his article, “All Writing is Autobiography.” Through college and now teaching high school, I never really considered how much writing is autobiographical. Most of the writing and reflecting done both in and out of the classroom requires the students to ponder their experiences or consider how they were impacted.

The question is “why am I having a hard time accepting this fact?” The truth: my brain automatically jumps to memoir writing, which is not my favorite genre to write in. However, I DO know that personal writing is not only memoirs. It is journaling, writing a poem, updating a status on Facebook, along with millions of other things. My brain just has a hard time wrapping around the idea of personal writing being more than a memoir.

As I look at my own life, I realize how much my writing is autobiographical. This piece that I am writing, right now, for this blog is autobiographical. The comment I put on my friend’s Facebook wall was autobiographical. The text I sent to my mom was autobiographical. The e-mail I sent to a professor was autobiographical. The lesson I constructed and just taught my students was autobiographical. Autobiographical does not mean telling my whole life story; it is about using a personal experience as a form of expression.

So, after having an internal (yet public) discussion regarding Donald Murray’s argument that all writing is autobiography, I have found myself agreeing. Even though it will take some time getting used to this idea, I now realize how much it applies to my life and the lives of others around me.

Procedure vs. Practice

As I was reading "Writing Processes and Practices" from The Politics of Writing by Clark Romy and Roz Ivanic, I took a moment to consider my view on writing as a procedure or writing as a practice. I will start by saying that I do agree, entirely, with the viewpoint of Romy and Ivanic. However, I really had to consider "why?"

The first thing I realized is the negative connotation of "procedure." Procedure seems so military-like to me. It's a set order or a set way to doing something. So is writing a procedure? My argument is no. There are a million and one different styles/genres of writing. If writing were a procedure, what is the point of writing as creativity or writing as enjoyment? There would be none. Writing would be just walking through a set of rules or lessons in order to get to some climatic point. The problem I find with writing as a procedure is "what's the point?"

Writing as a practice is something to which I can definitely relate. When thinking of a soccer team (or any sport in general), they are always practicing for the game. Even if they win a game or a tournament, they still practice. Practice is the ability to grow and learn. So, in writing, it is the ability to be creative. It is the ability grow as a thinker, an analyzer. Instead of just following the rules and that being the end result (procedures), practice gives the writer a new experience each time he/she sits down to write.

"Good" Literature

What makes "good" literature? I think anything that gets a person reading could be classified as good literature. However, I look at all the books that are banned, such as To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee, which I would classify as a "good" books. So, where am I going with this?

When reading "Committee of Ten," I was quite taken back on the following statement: "to cultivate a taste for reading, to give the pupil some acquaintance with good literature" (86). Okay, I completely agree that one of the goals of teaching English is to challenge the students to read on their own. This is why many high schools do independent readings throughout the year, also known as DEAR (Drop Everything And Read). However, I wonder what classifies or who classifies literature as being "good"? Is there even such as thing as "bad" literature? I understand that sometimes there is appropriate and inappropriate literature (whether it is age, theme, etc), but even if it is inappropriate, does that mean it is bad? Even though I am not the one to have all the answers to the questions, my personal opinion is that there is no such thing as a "bad" book. So, I wonder what the people involved in the committee of ten where thinking when they placed the word "good" in that statement.