The Development of Initial Learning

Goodman's essay was extremely informational. I learned quite a bit about how children learn to be literate within school and also outside of school. Because it was so informational it is hard to summarize the whole concept into one because there were many different aspects of how a child learns literacy. One thing I realized is that kids are extremely smart. In the section about relational principles it states that "children believe that print related to a picture says the name of the items represented in the pictures..." In the example a three year old name Josh was asked to write his name. Instead he drew a little "j" and said "this is the boy" and then drew a big "J" and said this is the dad. Even though Josh was writing letters, he wasn't writing them to represent sounds, he was writing them to represent objects. I thought this was pretty clever!

In the section about linguistic principles, it is explained that children experiment with morphemic issues. Morphemic analysis then is "a strategy in which the meanings of words can be determined or inferred by examining their meaningful parts (ie, prefixes, suffixes, roots, etc.)" (google dictionary) The example they use is when Michael wrote his friend about his "sidren" and "bridren". The conclusion they came to was they Michael was talking about his sister and brother. It seems like he took the word and the concept of children and morphed it will sister and brother to get what he thought was the spelling. When he was asked to read the words he said "sister and brother". Although this is wrong, and actually pretty comical, it shows that children have a way of thinking about words.

In the end, Goodman explains that the way literacy is thought of and taught in school "oversimplifies what children really do learn and focuses on some insecure children on insignificant and often erroneous principles about language". I agree with this-- instead of focusing on the fact that the children are doing it wrong we should focus on how they are a. they are thinking about literacy and ways to use it in general, and b. how they eventually figure it out on their own through their experiences.

Sponsors in a holistic learning environment

The way Brandt describes the relationship between a sponsor and the sponsored, I believe, is the exact relationship between an educator and a student in a holistic learning environment. Brandt says "...sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite. They lend their resources or credibility to the sponsored but also stand to gain benefits from their success...". This give/receive process happens in the classroom between student and teacher. The students are gaining knowledge from their teachers and as the students communicate with each other and the teacher, the teacher is also learning from their students. The sponsor, the teacher, is a very important factor in a students literacy and educational attainment. Without others more knowledgeable than them to learn from, they could not achieve the highest education that they could.

Gee-- Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics

There are two concepts in Gee's writing that were intriguing to me. The first one has to do with the fact that language is not just language it "often suggests grammar" (Gee 525). He makes a great point that you can't just being able to say something, you have to know how to say it ("It's not what you say, its how you say it".) He gives the example of how you speak to your bar buddy. Although you may be asking for a match, something you would normally ask your bar buddy for, if you don't say it in the right context you aren't saying it "right". Its all about the situation you are in. Along with knowing how to say something the "right way", you also have to act the "right way" when you say something. Gee gives the example again in the bar when asking your bar buddy for a match you say something along the lines of "Gimme a match" and wipe your bar stool off so you don't get your pants dirty you aren't presenting what you're saying. These two ideas show that just because you are using correct language or correct grammar doesn't mean you are using either right, or presenting yourself right while using them right.

The second concept I liked reading was that of "D"iscourse. I put the 'd' in parenthesis because Gee believes in this context it should be capitalized. He explains Discourse as something that is acquired, and acquired in experiences and situations throughout your life. In this case, you can teach someone a certain thing, the example Gee gives in linguistics, but you can't teach someone to be a linguist. You may know all the concepts of linguistics, but you cannot be taught how to be what you learned.

Illiteracy

Kozol's writing on illiteracy is so real and so true that it is scary. His goal, I believe, is to make us realize how important literacy is and how detrimental illiteracy is. Those who are illiterate not only hurt themselves they hurt others around them. They are hurting themselves by limiting their lives. You need to be able to read and write it is survival in society today. Whether you're taking medicine or walking to the store, it is completely necessary to be able to read. If you can't read the back of your bottle of medicine you could overdose. If you can't read a street sign when you're walking to the store you will get lost. As I said those who are illiterate hurt others too. The children of illiterate parents are at an extreme disadvantage. Not only do you learn to read in school, but you learn to read at home. If you're parents can't read or write, you are more likely to not practice it at home. Without literacy it is impossible to survive. If you can't read you won't get a job and if you don't have a job you don't have money to support yourself or your family.

What is Literature?

I thought Szwed's writing was very eyeopening. Although I felt when I read it I already knew what he was talking about, this writing helped bring it into my conscious mind. On page 424 he poses the question of what literature is. Szwed says "No agreement. Distinctions between genres and categories such as functioning literature versus artistic literature are of little use." He goes on to ask if a subject such as sports could be artistic literature or functional literature or both. This part of the writing brings up a great point: there is no actual "literature" because there are so many different definitions and ideas of what it really is. To someone who does not attend college but works, their idea of literature will be completely different from the one who attends college. Does this make it wrong? I can't really answer that question. To me when I hear the word literature I think of reading novels or books. On the other hand, I just took a literature class and the only writings we read were articles. So to answer the question of what literature is, we would have to have pages upon pages of responses from everyone and anyone who has an idea of what it is.

Engaged Pedagogy

I LOVED reading Hook's writing. This sort of thing gets me really excited because I have learned about these concepts. In Currins 100, an intro to teaching class, we learned about and discussed the "banking concept", and that it is not the right way to teach. Students do not learn anything when they sit in front of professor or teacher that feeds them information so they can spit it back out on a piece of paper. Teaching "Engaged Pedagogy", or teaching with an holistic outlook is the right way to teach, and students get the most out of it. On pg. 72 Hooks says "Engaged Pedagogy necessarily values student expression." Students not only learn from their teacher, but they also learn from their peers and their own expression and ideas, and the teachers also learn from their students. In order for educators to teach this holistic way, they have to have self-actualization themselves. Once a teacher feels as though they can reach their full potential, they are able to teach their students to do the same. The world needs more teachers who take this approach seriously in order for their students to become engaged in their education in the classroom.

Inventing the University--Education

"Education may well be, as of right, the instrument whereby every individual, in a society like our own, can gain access to any kind of discourse." Understanding this first sentence to Bartholomae's epigram is key in understanding the relationship between success in academic discourse. In order to write academically about a certain subject you have to be educated about it. If you are uneducated in science, for example, and have to write an essay on a subject of science, your essay would not turn out very well. When you are educated in science you know and understand the dialect used in the subject and are then able to write an essay and not only sound like you know what you're talking about, you actually do know what you're talking about. I believe that education is the most important tool in life. Not only will it help you gain access to discourse, it is key in gaining access to anything at all.