{"content":{"sharePage":{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"52105202","dateCreated":"1332617491","smartDate":"Mar 24, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"Martin.mintz","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/Martin.mintz","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/52105202"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Martin's Post","description":"Hello-
\nThe text served as a great way to capture so many of the questions I have about literacy and address so many of the new ideas about "21st century literacy" that I have been thinking about since the start of school. As it has been mentioned before, we have been drilled that every teacher is a literacy teacher, and I definitely agree with that... but... what IS literacy? How does it influence our students and how can I, as a teacher, improve my students' literacy? What would that look like? These articles definitely helped me to continue to add to my own definitions of literacy and how it applies to my students. So many types of literacy exist, especially in this expanding world of information. New hurdles exist for our students. How do you know if a website is credible? Books can be easily examined and the fact that it even got published is a good sign in the first place (though not always true) but that is not the case with the internet!! The first step, though, is to identify these problems... how, exactly, to address them is the next one. I would start with the first step... "literacy" is too big to tackle, but, one step at a time, things can be addressed.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"50467378","dateCreated":"1329186292","smartDate":"Feb 13, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"coxjustin87","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/coxjustin87","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/50467378"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Justin's Post","description":"Christenbury, Bomer, and Smagronsky\u2019s questioning of the ability of standardized, multiple choice tests to gauge literacy really struck a chord with me. I can\u2019t remember how many times I argued with teachers in middle school and high school about the meanings of texts, asserting that such an analysis is informed not only by the intentions of the author, but by the background, values, etc. of the reader. Simply put, I felt different readers, with different life experiences and value structures, can come up with completely different yet completely tenable interpretations of a text. That said, I\u2019m curious after reading this about the potential of standardized tests with fewer questions but more written responses (so that readers can back up their claims) to evaluate \u201cliteracy.\u201d As the authors point out, the definition and purpose of literacy can vary across cultures, so this by no stretch could be a perfect gauge, but would such tests be more valuable than those more focused multiple choice, which offer a more rigid perspective on what a text means and leave less room for the varied background and experiences of test takers to inform their answers? I\u2019m still forming my opinion and would love to hear what others have to say.
\n
\n
\nAs for Leu\u2019s article, it forced me to confront and think about certain harsh realities I\u2019ve tended to neglect so far during my short career in education. Notably, it put me face-to-face with the importance of my students learning their way around the Internet and computers. Leu illustrates how everyday being computer and Internet literate is becoming a more essential tool for understanding the world, competing for jobs and basically being literate in the 21st century. That in mind, my concerns about my universally low-income students keeping pace with their better off peers in this regard are not few. Many of my students don\u2019t have access to computers and Internet at home. Many of my students\u2019 parents, regardless of whether or not there is a computer in the home, are not computer or Internet savvy. This being the situation, how can I help my students develop these essential skills on par with their more affluent peers when they don\u2019t have comparable resources? As Leu indicates, they won\u2019t be fully literate if they simply graduate with good standardized test scores anymore. They need to know how to function and flourish in an environment that demands the know how to digest Internet sources and utilize computers. Besides giving them time on the low-rent computers I can provide them with during class instruction, what other types of supports are out there? What are others doing?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[],"more":0}]},{"id":"49673972","dateCreated":"1327616641","smartDate":"Jan 26, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"senguptaishan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/senguptaishan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49673972"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Ishan's Reponse (1\/26)","description":"The two articles really enforced to me the importance of being a math literacy teacher. When asked, I often say I am a literacy teacher (TFA\u2019s pushing\u2026) but I don\u2019t consider it to be \u201ctextbook\u201d literacy. Leu\u2019s historical analysis on how literacy has affected people of different generations in different ways has changed my opinion though. While Leu emphasizes how \u201cnew age\u201d literacy still requires deep foundational skills and word knowledge, he also discusses how the ability to critically analyze and determine a text\u2019s importance is more valuable today. In high school and upper level math in general, the ability to analyze a situation and determine the most efficient way to move forward is extremely useful. With the internet and the abundance of reading material, the ability to find and choose proper sources has become essential. There are multiple ways to solve problems, but there is only one right answer \u2013 and getting to the right answer in more effective methods save the student time and effort. I think this process ties along nicely in Leu\u2019s take on literacy as well. Leu states that literacy is a way for students to operate and function successfully in the world they live in. Math and Science subject areas and becoming more and more important in jobs and culture \u2013 and the ability to understand and analyze math texts has become just as important as analyzing reading texts. Leu\u2019s emphasis on a teacher\u2019s value in imparting to students how to learn to read more complex and variable literacies shows how important a teacher\u2019s role is in literacy throughout a student\u2019s career. Overall, literacy has shifted from an ability to read and write to an ability to communicate effectively with those around us \u2013 and the world is becoming more complex and inundated with math and science. Getting students to operate effectively in the global economy through writing and technology is essential and so literacy goals for teachers also need to adapt. Literacy is more interdisciplinary than ever and the ability to navigate vast amounts of information on the internet, analyze language and math texts, and write meaningful responses is what literacy stands for today. This makes math teachers like me just as responsible to teach students literacy skills.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49803968","body":"Ishan, I really appreciate your application of this new conception of literacy to your work as a math teacher. I hadn't thought of it in this way before, but I think you're right to assert that the information age and the world of new literacy only exacerbates the demands on indisciplinarity. The literacy of the internet is now more than ever interdisciplinary comprehension and communication.","dateCreated":"1327947587","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49637456","dateCreated":"1327559393","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"AvaMarron","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/AvaMarron","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49637456"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Ava's Response","description":"These readings widened my understanding of literacy. I still think of the word literacy in regards to words and writing but now I'm understanding that a new definition of literacy has emerged. One that means an interdisciplinary understanding and navigating certain intellectual pursuits either, verbal, on the internet, written, or read. I think there needs to be a separate word for this. Inter-literacy? Cross-tiers of understanding?
\nLeu focuses on new technologies giving the educational field new perspectives and forms of literacy. He says "We believe that we are on the cusp of a new era in literacy research, one in which the nature of reading, writing, and communication is being fundamentally transformed."
\nI think this is very true in its most optimistic form.
\nI twitter regularly. I would say I am "twitter literate". It has almost changed the way I think of jokes. I now think of short witty turns or phrase or situations that are amusing. It jams complicated experiences or thoughts into 160 characters. This seems like a terrible thing but once you acculturate yourself into the world and become literate in the tweeting lingo it doesn't seem flippant or curt but funny, cutting edge, and smart. If I want to learn more on a news article I just click the link in the tweet. It almost acts like a RSS feed but it makes the "headlines" much more important.
\nLeu was not necessarily referring to "twitter" as the new way that people will learn to read or navigate their world, but as he does allude to, new technologies shape our thinking and comprehension of our world.
\nMy big push back comes from his scarce reference to poverty. Many of my students do not own a computer at home. Will these new technologies now make the rich smarter and poor more disadvantaged to these opportunities? Will not only the economic gap increase but also the literacy gap?","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49802748","body":"Great point, Ava, about the limited attention to poverty on this issue. All of these authors are encouraging us to view literacy as context-driven. And yet, if that is the case, then all the more attention needs to be given to the high-poverty environments many students experience.","dateCreated":"1327946327","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49637068","dateCreated":"1327556238","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jmiller76","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jmiller76","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49637068"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Jason Miller's Response","description":"One of the main points of departure for me in the New Literacies piece was how the new skills required for twenty-first century literacy depend on mastering the basic skills of literacy. That is, we cannot gloss over the foundational literacy skills of literacy namely : phonemic awareness, word recognition, decoding knowledge, vocabulary knowledge, comprehension, inferential reasoning, the writing process, spelling, response to literature. Liu posits that the range of skills necessary to function as a literate individual in the twenty-first century are an added layer on top of foundational skills. I wonder whether sometimes my students, many of whom are struggling readers, are simply overloaded with sensory and textual information that they struggle cracking the foundational skills level that they fail to make the jump to the next critical thinking juncture. Or perhaps, a more integrative theory is necessary where the two divisions are not as obvious and the skills work in concert together to comprehend Internet text. Essentially when reading a wikipedia entry, assuming a student can access a text, are students decoding and not analyzing simultaneously ?
\n
\nI was also the struck by the argument how critical literacy speed is in a new 'literacy' world. Liu asserts that the winners of this new world will be those readers who can critically analyze text and determine which texts are more or less important. She continues to argue that we need to think of creative solutions so that our slower readers do not get left in the dust. I agree with her well meaning intentions, however I wonder whether by seeking these new strategies we will effectively undermine our literacy instruction in other ways. Granted most internet and hyperlinked texts are not as obtuse as Faulkner, however we still need to enable our students to not only read any text regardless of the difficulty level for speed, but also for deeper meaning.
\n
\nAs we progress through the course, I hope to further explore this burgeoning field and question how to best address the issue of technology and literacy. As Liu highlights towards the end of the article, currently high stakes state assessments do not test new literacy skills. Moreover, no state permits students to use a word processor for state exams unless it is written in an IEP. I know from my own experience in college that most of my finals were still taken with pen and paper, despite the fact that most of my peers would submit higher quality work if given the opportunity to write on a computer. This burning issue requires serious thought and innovations to ensure that we meet the needs of our students.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49802314","body":"Jason, your point about speed is an important one. If we begin to emphasize and reward the speedy, skimmer readers, are we really encouraging the right set of skills?
\n
\nAlso, I think your questions in the 1st paragraph are great. You've pinpointed this tension between whether to focus on foundational literacy first and then address complex layers of multiliteracies or to do both in conjunction. I think there are pros and cons to both those approaches. I will say, however, that research shows that when teachers tend to focus on the 'fundamentals' with 'struggling' students, neither the teacher nor the students make it to the higher level tasks they are working towards. Especially with adolescents, how long can we wait before we start modeling and practice the complex literacy tasks required for the real world?","dateCreated":"1327945699","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49637058","dateCreated":"1327556213","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"terrencekumar","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/terrencekumar","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49637058"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Terrence's response","description":" Reading the two of these articles caused me to feel ignorant. I must be missing something, because I still do not understand the commotion around the word literacy. The Leu et al. article seeks to define completely the word literacy. The author\u2019s motivation is to clarify any discrepancies between different researchers\u2019 understandings, so that the researchers will be able to analyze each other\u2019s work without missing the point or slipping off topic.
\n I find that this sort of research is fruitless. Ambiguous words like literacy carry far too many understandings to attempt to list or defeat. Instead, research should see past this step of development and find more direct ways to achieve the end goal. If need be, a substitute for the word literacy may be invented and its definition stipulated so understanding can be easily. For examples, the ultimate goal may be to improve assessment, improve communication between teachers\/expert and students, or improve students\u2019 critical thinking skills. If the topic is one or all of these, then research should pursue these directly and overlook the overarching literacy.
\n This approach would resolve issues such as the disagreement explained in the Smagorinsky et al. article. (pg 6) The authors write that researchers cannot agree on what kind of evidence should suggest that a person can read. This is an unnecessary concern. They are all testing different but not exclusive skills. Instead of testing whether or not a student can read, test whether or not that same student can extract and retain memory of a certain point from a piece of literature.
\n It is possible that I missed the point entirely, but I was unable to move past this issue.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49801642","body":"Terrence, I appreciate your struggle, and trust me, it's a common frustration. For me, the idea of multiliteracies actually addresses the struggle you're experiencing. I don't think the Leu or the Smagorinsky articles would want us to take on a bloated, umbrella-term for literacy that encompasses all tasks of communication, meaning, critical thinking, etc. Instead, I think they'd advocate for the idea of these different types of literacies that we use. Critical literacy, foundational literacy, visual literacy, etc. are different processes with different mental tasks involved. In some ways, if I understand your opposition correctly, this resolves some of the tensions you describe. These specific, narrower forms of literacy allow us to talk in detail and nuance about exactly the expectations for literacy we have for students in a particular context and task.
\nInstead of just blanketing everything as literacy, these terms allow us to be more specific about our expectations. Does that resolve any issues for you, or am I playing yet another semantic game?","dateCreated":"1327944983","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49636386","dateCreated":"1327554550","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"emilylynnmiller","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/emilylynnmiller","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49636386"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Emily Miller's Response","description":"After our conversation last week when I realized I had never stopped to actually think about what "literacy" really means, this readings seem particularly relevant. While reading both articles, but particularly Leu, et. all, I realized that before we can really push our students to "achieve literacy," we not only need to determine what that means, but what exactly we want students to be able to do.
\n
\nThe Christenbury, Bomer, and Smagorinsky article focuses on the cultural context of students and what "adolescence" means. I am starting to realize how nearly impossible it is for a nation-wide, state-wide, or system-wide initiative to be merely, "we want our kids to read" or "we want our kids to have literacy." Leu, et. all, discusses different skills 21st century students should acquire as far as literacy is concerned, even looking at the internet. So that brings us back to the question: "what IS literacy?" How do we move forward if we don't know what it is? And once we do know what it is, if the kids are coming from different contexts, how can a system address deciding what is needed to move forward?
\n
\nAdmittedly, before last week, I never stopped to think about what literacy means, but reading these articles makes me realize how imperative it is to first define it, for myself, if nothing else at all.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49801132","body":"These are good questions to begin your thinking, Emily. I'd like to encourage you in your postings to explore your own answers and ideas rather than just provoking questions. Hopefully your first paper this week will provide a medium for you to explore your own answers.","dateCreated":"1327944520","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49636134","dateCreated":"1327553892","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"sdeuitch","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/sdeuitch","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49636134"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Sarah's Response","description":"Leaving class last week, I was a bit overwhelmed and confused about how to define literacy. I suppose my auditory literacy (if one would accept the validity of that type of literacy) was not up to par that evening. Reading this articles actually helped me a lot. The Leu article was very interesting, as I had never previously considered the differences between technological literacy and "book" literacy. I actually encountered difficulties with my students working in the computer lab on projects just a few weeks ago, because I assumed they would know what to do when I wrote the direction "Do a web search on the myth you have chosen" on their worksheet. After my initial misunderstanding that they did not know what the direction meant, I realized that though almost all of my students have access to computers and the internet, very few of them knew what steps they needed to go through to conduct research. Directing certain students to Google, then telling them to click through the websites, was not even sufficient instruction for my students. A task that should have taken about 5 minutes (just finding a copy of a myth) took many students the entire period. They got very distracted by other webpages, pictures, and videos, and did not know how to differentiate between useful and un-useful information. I am hoping to find lesson plans through different resource centers to help me understand how to teach the students to use computers for research. Leu did mention that sometimes students and teachers exchange roles due to the rise of new technology -- though that is not currently the case with my students, I have already noticed that I am behind other individuals and colleagues regarding technological literacy (Skedula blew my mind and took me forever to figure out!). Difficulties with something that someone else assumes to be easy are very irritating for me, so I can only imagine how frustrated my students were when I just kept repeating the same instructions, assuming they weren't listening, not that they did not know how to search.
\n
\nTo be perfectly honest, though I did find the Leu article valuable, a lot of it went over my head - partially because of the length and extreme detail and analysis of the topic. Again, a personal example of a literacy difficulty or deficit. The Christenbury, Bomer, & Smagorinsky article was the most useful for me in formulating my own ideas about the definition of literacy. The general idea I came out of it with is that literacy is relative: it depends on the culture, the community, the school, even the classroom. Plato apparently "opposed writing because it reduced the demands on the memory and so, he believed, weakened the mind." But I hardly think anyone would call such a brilliant thinker and "writer" as Plato "illiterate." I also just taught my students about the importance of stained glass windows to the Middle Ages and the spread of religion to the illiterate (non-reading\/writing) masses. One could say that from looking at the images in stained glass windows and determining what is depicted and what the religion lesson is, that Medieval people had the "analysis stage" of literacy (Resnick and Resnick (1977)) down pat. I think one must separate literacy into countless categories and skills in order to truly understand how one person can "read," recite, comprehend and analyze material, whether that be text, song, video, or image.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49800694","body":"Sarah, this is a thoughtful, personal reflection on your expanding conception of literacy. I think your final takeaway is right. These articles aren't necessarily about one, enormous umbrella-term of literacy but are instead supposed to have us recognize the many, distinct literacies our students need.","dateCreated":"1327944044","smartDate":"Jan 30, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49628270","dateCreated":"1327541941","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"robyn55","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/robyn55","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49628270"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Robyn Clarke's Response","description":"Much of the reading for this week resonated with me for various reasons. The Christenbury, Bomer, and Smagorinsky hit on the point that adolescence is defined by cultural context. Many of my students have had life experiences that other adolescents have not had which have made them mature much more quickly than an adolescent who has not had those experiences. I have students who were taking care of younger siblings for days on end at the age of ten. This thrust my students out of what most people would consider \u201cadolescence\u201d and into adulthood. I was also very moved by the passage that explained that true comprehension could not be defined by a student\u2019s answers on multiple choice questions. Each student derives a different sort of meaning from a text when they truly comprehend it, so judging that by a single standard or diluting their understanding into a multiple choice questions belittles the whole concept of comprehension.
\n
\nThroughout the \u201cNew Literacies\u201d reading by Leu et al., there were many parts that struck me and affirmed many of the things that I have been trying to do in my own classroom. When the Project Based Learning program that I teach in was created, it was created with the goal of equipping students with two essential \u201c21st century\u201d skills: collaboration and technology. The reading obviously emphasized the importance of technological skills within the scope of literacy but also mentioned toward the end that the overall model of education was changing. Teaching is becoming less and less about the teacher standing in front of the classroom and teaching individual students and more about students working with one another with the teacher as a guide to come to a group conclusion. This has been echoed with the common core standards that stress career- readiness with the skills necessary for the workplace, such as teamwork and collaboration.
\n
\nThe final part of the \u201cNew Literacies\u201d reading that stuck with me was the following quote: \u201cThe teacher's central role will change in a fundamental way, however. Teachers will increasingly need to orchestrate complex contexts for literacy and learning rather than simply dispense literacy skills, since they will no longer always be the most literate person in the classroom.\u201d I loved how the article explained the role of a teacher as almost the conductor of an orchestra guiding all of the students to create something great as opposed to a person purely dispensing information. Additionally, there are many times throughout the day when I feel like I am not the most literate person in the classroom. This may not occur when we are analyzing a primary source or evaluating the causes and effects of a historical event, but when one of my students has to come up to my computer and fix something because, \u201cMs. Clarke is not always good with the technology.\u201d","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49635554","body":"Robyn,
\nThis is the second time in as many hours that I have the opportunity to comment on your insightful thoughts and comments about teaching and more specifically teaching literacy.
\n
\nI wholeheartedly concur with your assessment, based on the Christenbury reading, that reading comprehension should not be limited to multiple choice answers. Unfortunately after proctoring the NYS Regents exam this week, I realized that our students are asked to interpret texts with a monolithic lens. Given that this is the case coupled with the fact that we believe that literature is chock full of rich ideas and dilemmas, how do we go about endowing our students with the necessary skills while still preparing them for high stakes exams ? Recently on the NYT's SchoolBook page, several parents lamented that already in the third grade students are expected on the state exam to filter out one theme in a text. In the complex world we inhabit, as educators it is our responsibility to not fall into the trap of teaching to the test.
\n
\nI also really liked your analogy of a teacher functioning as a conductor of an orchestra and how you feel as you may not be the most literate individual in the classroom. Your comment made me realize that when I engage my students in a discussion about their culture, I also feel that I am clearly not the most 'literate' person in the class. This underscores the point that the beauty of literacy is that there is never one undisputed leader and reader but a community of readers and experts.","dateCreated":"1327552694","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jmiller76","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jmiller76","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"49747792","body":"I like the connections you're highlighting between the expanded view of literacy and the role of the teacher. If we start to view literacy through student's authentic experiences, as a tool that engages with the world outside the classroom, then we also have to reconsider the role of the teacher. I think the conductor analogy is very fitting.","dateCreated":"1327778592","smartDate":"Jan 28, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]},{"id":"49627770","dateCreated":"1327541369","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"dschall2","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/dschall2","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"},"monitored":false,"locked":false,"links":{"self":"https:\/\/ctge5549spring12.wikispaces.com\/share\/view\/49627770"},"dateDigested":1532919265,"startDate":null,"sharedType":"discussion","title":"Douglas Schall's Response","description":"The two articles proved to be very insightful. I haven\u2019t delved much into the theories behind literacy, and really appreciate being given the opportunity to do so. Both the articles brought up points that I found worth chewing on for a while.
\nIn regards to the first text\u2014Christenbury, Bomer, Smagronsky\u2014I was most drawn to the controversy surrounding the testing of literacy \u2013 especially when assessing comprehension and analytical skills. Never have I found myself to be a wizard when it comes to multiple choice tests, which perhaps colors my opinion a touch, but I fully agree with the author in regards to the shortcomings of using multiple choice formats to assess comprehension skills. If, as a society, we do in fact feel that literacy encompasses both comprehension and analysis, then it\u2019s hard to create narrow enough texts which allow us to measure one\u2019s literacy skills, yet be inclusive of all the world-views and experiences readers would use as tools to analyze a passage. In my 7th grade class I teach the importance of readers taping into and accessing their prior knowledge. Is it really possible to predict and determine what prior knowledge should have been acquired so that one can analyze and comprehend a passage? Like the author states, wouldn\u2019t their personal experiences alter their interpretation, and subsequently their comprehension? With that said, I still find that in most regards standard assessments, at the level of my students, are adequate in assessing a tad more than simply the literal meaning of the text. They seem to require limited, if any real interpretation via the lens of personal experience. At least little more than knowing that rain is wet, and everybody smiles when they\u2019re happy. Lastly, I wished to thank the authors opening up the question as to whether literacy is ideological. The assertion that because it, \u201crepresents a stance in relation to the world,\u201d is compelling and opens up a whole slew in regards to the ethics of its testing.
\nAfter reading the Leu et al passage I found myself in full agreement with the authors in regards to the need to reassess literacy in the current digital age. The authors harbor a more utopian view of the internet\u2014\u201cthe new literacies of the Internet and other ICTs provide individuals with opportunities to make their personal lives more productive and fulfilling,\u201d(p.5) and \u201cthe new literacies of the Internet and other ICTs permit greater civic engagement in democratic institutions,\u201d(p.5)\u2014than I share, yet the idea that we as educators must include new, digital, literacies in our instruction is indeed true. Perhaps the most compelling component of this new literacy, or at least one that I\u2019ve not seen folded into the notion of being \u201ccomputer literate,\u201d is the need for speed (p.19). Speed does count in regards navigation of the web. Naturally, the demands of reading comprehension have expanded. Yet, once one is adept at comprehending the validity of hyperlinks, using a search engine, and generating text via word processors, all of these new literacies will need to be applied quickly while still maintaining that analytical touch.","replyPages":[{"page":0,"digests":[{"id":"49635116","body":"I was really intrigued by your comments on the value of multiple-choice tests vs. more comprehensive tests. It sometimes seems impossible for me to test literacy through DBQs or thematic essays in my Global History classes, when some of my students cannot identify all the letters of the alphabet. Even more simple than essays and Document Based Questions are "simple" Regents multiple-choice questions on the exams students are required to take to receive their high school diplomas. Almost all of my students are fully capable of reading the questions and answer choices (which some may attribute to the "recitation" stage described by Resnick and Resnick (1977), even if my students are not reciting from memory). However, again, almost all of my students would not be able to fully and accurately explain what the question (and sometimes the answer choices) actually mean or are asking. At the beginning of the year, I admit I went into my classroom with certain assumptions: that all my kids MUST be able to read if they made it to 10th grade (despite what TFA had forewarned), that all my kids would at least be willing to TRY (definitely not true), and that I would be able to teach them what they needed to know about reading and understanding what they read. I've been reading since I was 3 - I figured I could handle it. But I haven't been able to. It's not even always an issue of just explaining what a question means to a student - after I explain, my kids can fully understand it, but then it comes to a matter of retention. Retention and comprehension and analysis (according to, again, Resnick and Resnick). My students can understand the words that I say to them and know what the question is asking - which I consider a type of auditory literacy. But they are lost again when it comes to connecting the question to an answer choice that may have absolutely no meaning or importance to them because they did not absorb or interpret the information when we discussed it in class. I know I'm rambling now, and have gone completely off topic. My point is, in regards to MC tests vs. other assessments, both provide incredible opportunities for testing literacy. Teachers just need to be aware of the different aspects and levels of literacy, and how to monitor and teach them so that tests are designed to adequately determine students' literacy in a wide variety of scenarios.","dateCreated":"1327551667","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"sdeuitch","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/sdeuitch","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"49636128","body":"I absolutely agree with your comments, Douglas (not Darren) and I appreciate the application made to your class, sdeuitch. I do think the multiple choice testing - for example, in regards to testing reading levels - (even on computers, like we do at my school with Scholastic Reading Inventory) work "for the most part" with the levels my students are at. When things seem off, I do still sit down and do a more comprehensive one-one-one reading testing. Ideally, I think that in a perfect world, all teachers would use lots of different types of strategies to assess and test literacy, but I think the ideal is far too often not possible. So I think that if teachers are aware of all different types, along with their pros and cons, like sduitch points out as necessary, teachers can be able to determine what tools to use and when in the most effective manner.","dateCreated":"1327553882","smartDate":"Jan 25, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"emilylynnmiller","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/emilylynnmiller","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}},{"id":"49748032","body":"This discussion is an interesting application of the readings. The question of how this expanded view of literacy applies to assessment is, I think, key for all of us. For me, multiple choice tests are not an inherent evil. They can be a useful tool. The issue is how much value is placed on these tests. Both in terms of public policy and instructional practice, we tend to use a student's multiple choice score as THE marker of a student's literacy proficiency. As both the articles point out, there are many facets and dimensions to literacy in 2012, and certainly a 2 on the ELA test is only a measure of a few, particular slivers of a student's literacy proficiency. It is certainly not the whole picture.","dateCreated":"1327779390","smartDate":"Jan 28, 2012","userCreated":{"username":"jetadonovan","url":"https:\/\/www.wikispaces.com\/user\/view\/jetadonovan","imageUrl":"https:\/\/ssl.wikicdn.com\/i\/user_none_lg.jpg"}}],"more":0}]}],"more":true},"comments":[]},"http":{"code":200,"status":"OK"},"redirectUrl":null,"javascript":null,"notices":{"warning":[],"error":[],"info":[],"success":[]}}