That flopped.

I’m fearful that discussion wasn’t deep tonight because the texts aren’t being read as closely as they were at the beginning of the semester. I’m not collecting the annotations anymore, so I’m fearful that the readings are getting short shrift – especially the harder ones like Lankshear & Knobel. I understand the temptation to skim, especially as things heat up in other classes, in jobs, etc., but these are important readings that will move thinking forward. 21st century literacies and skills is where all the professional discussion is.

Now, I’ve come to realize there were some problems in the assignments.

One thing I’ve decided is that the Larson & Marsh chapter on the New Literacies has to go earlier in the semester. Either when reading the Heath piece or when reading about sociocultural theory.

The other thing is, I’m having mixed feelings about the literacy artifact review. I think the assignment needs to be severely rewritten. The way it’s written does not meet my instructional objectives.

Next week we’re going to revisit the Lankshear & Knobel article. I took out chapter 3 from L&K’s book because it is closely related to the ELearning article, so I don’t feel badly about revisiting it.

Why is L&K 2007 so important? It’s the difference between Web1.0 and Web2.0 ethos. The idea that the new literacies afford different ways of thinking about the world and being in the world. It is a shift in our way of thinking about literacy and how the changing nature of literacy impacts teaching and learning. Yes – we need to spend some quality time with that article.

The other thing with the L&K article:  I realized that Mr. Zogby’s use of iPods is an example of L&K call “old wine in new bottles.” He’s really not doing anything new or different in terms of instruction – he’s just delivering it with new technology. What I need to do is find someone who really is doing something new in terms of instruction. Really engaging kids in new ways of thinking that tap into participatory culture. That’s hard to do in the era of NCLB. I’m going to sound cynical here, but I think that the constraints put on teaching by NCLB etc. ensure that the haves stay haves and the have nots remain have nots. If teachers across the board were consistently supported in their efforts to develop critical thinkers, participatory thinkers, web 2.0 thinkers we could have a revolution on our hands (an intellectual revolution – not a violent one). It would upset the status quo, and the job of schools is really to maintain and perpetuate the status quo. Yes, a pessimistic view of things.

This is the germ of an article I want to write. I’m not quite ready yet. I have to immerse myself in the literature before I write.

I’m also concerned that the understanding of critical literacy isn’t developed enough. We’ve got to revisit that too. I need to find better readings on it. I’ve got a new book on order that focuses on critical literacy, so hopefully that will help. I know Dr. Maples focuses on critlit in 652, so I know some people understand it, but those students in 652 are in the minority.

I had been struggling with Larson & Marsh’s separation of the NLS from sociocultural/historical theory. Megan B.’s annotation clarified it for me. NLS explicitly reminds us that literacy practices occur outside the walls of the classroom – which is what Gatto does a great deal of. Sociocultural theory does not explicitly address that, although it is implicit when you understand that learning is a social act.

That’s why essay 2 isn’t going to be a “cut and paste” from essay 1 because it’s going to address expanding definitions of literacy. If the essay just repeats what was discussed in the first essay, the students haven’t progressed. We’ve done a lot of reading since midterm and the ways of thinking about literacy should be expanding. What was discussed at midterm is just the foundation. The rest of the semester takes us into the present and future.

So, next week is going to be the literacy artifact review, and essay prep, but we need to also review the readings in depth. I think it’s time for a short lecture.