Robin,+Responses+to+verbafacture+wikis

Wiki Responses Journal 1. wk of Jan. 30: [|**Robin1963**]just now Hi Dawn! No wonder your comments about Friere sounded familiar, he and Gee both have this "marginalizing" idea going on, Friere involving gender and Gee involving money. Just as you point out men can be marginalized as well as women and that women are not quite as marginalized as in earlier decades, I took issue with Gee in that social manners, including speaking, can be adopted regardless of income and that the "perfect" diction & syntax is no longer specific to the wealthy - as most of our rich and (in-)famous can attest. Sometimes it seems to me these scholars dig up any old relic topic just to reinvent some action. I guess there may still exist some residual gender bias - but not significantly so that genuine barriers exist - women are all over academia; if anything, it is the positions of power that are slowly, slowly, catching up. I liked your observation that men are granted status of mobility.

2. wk of Feb. 6: Ann Marie’s blog: I totally agree the multitude of literacies is bewildering! The way you tied digital literacy with all its offshoots to multiple intelligences and all its offshoots does help contain the whole idea, but I wonder if there will be a limit to how many versions of digital literacies are to be coped with or if the idea will expand weekly? In the classroom, I would like to select a few literacy intelligences to become proficient in that will provide the most bang for my instructional buck - a few multi-purposed features I can use across multiple lesson-situations, and ones that will also be of most practical use to students outside the classroom, like for functioning within their government. My difficulty now seems to lie in which one of hundreds of digitial literacies to select to become proficient at (relatively easily and quickly). I don't even think I can make that choice at this time as I suspect I'm looking only at the part of the iceberg that is above water level!

3. wk of Feb. 6: Theresa Dark’s blog: Hi Theresa, I also find it amusing that no two author scholars can agree on a single word meaning - if they ran the world nothing would get finished. I'm not sure there is a wide disparity between Yagelski's view of social writing and Ivanic/Clark's view of writing practice. Had Yagelski delved deeper into what he meant by writing in harmony with earth it may loosely jive with what I. & C. describe as the social nature of writing. Though, I don't think they really go too deeply into this aspect either, it feels to me more of a sidebar that leads into the meat of their objective: their proposed alternative practice differing from linear models. I. & C. spend a lot of time comparing the differing elements of their perspective to those of previous chaotic linear writing processes, and I think Yagelski would agree there is an unavoidable process of writing whether determined or indeterminate. The chart is rather overwhelming, but, I think interesting. It responds to the ebb and flow nature of writing and helps to visualize something very difficult to explain. What I have difficulty with is the absence of methodology to instruction or assessment. Yes, it would be lovely and (maybe, maybe not) ideal if writing happened by natural process in social harmony, but really folks, circumstances of writing include purposeful writing more frequently than personal pleasure writing - which I should think would little require formal instruction. If writing scholars are circling the idea that instruction should be based on reality, I agree, but lets get a little closer to reality.

4. wk of Feb. 13: Dawn Trueblood’s blog. Whew, for a minute I thought I might not find anyone responding to the New London Group piece! Idealistic - I wrote it reminded me of so many school mission statements, lovely, but really? At the end of mine I too wrote that changes will have to involve those outside education and most relevantly, students themselves. I also mention the noble, yet overwhelming responsibility, of placing these changes onto teachers to implement: who said (?), "You can't please all the people all the time" (No, not Mae West). I do like that they offer suggestions along with theory - so often it's just the theory, leaving me with the "great, now what"? I am interested in what curriculum development program the International Multiliteracies Project comes up with, but I probably won't unpack the rest of this article with "budding enthusiasm". I also like the new words (in spite of getting tired of too-much-info/words): glass ceiling has always sounded "pretty" (even though I know it's a "bad") still, glass slippers would be pretty, and so are skylights. "Conversationalization" I thought was a little over the top (I think sometimes "things" get made-up that don't necessarily need to be). Lifeworlds I leaves me ambiguous, if there can be valid grounds (meaning) for making it up - then it needs to be; the article does provide some meaning so I'm leaning 70/30 towards favoring "lifeworlds" (still sounds a little pretentious).

5. wk of March 5: Becky Morrison’s blog. Becky, you mention being amazed at how much “college level” literacy is gained outside of college and (as Yancey discusses) students gaining college literacy while in high school. I guess I’ve seen it both ways, literacy-prepared and under-prepared high school students entering college. I do know there is a stronger focus in high school to prepare students for college in all content areas, especially in the ELA area, and that most schools offer additional courses and programs targeting college preparation literacies and behaviors. I believe the level of preparation as always, rests in the hands of the students. If resources, instruction, and practices are engaged critically by students and validly internalized, they will be better prepared for college literacy than their peers who do not take advantage of offered resources, do not engage with instruction, and do not internalize their learning and practice. I think also, many high school students do not seriously consider attending college until, belatedly, in their senior year, or a year or two after graduation, they reconsider and enroll; under-prepared. This introduces a new topic of remedial college courses or the community college as the new high school. I certainly do see community college as a bridge between high school and universities, as they have long offered programs that transfer, and, I think, are sensitive to the literacy transformation that often needs to take place for new students who have not always been academically minded.

6. wk of March 5: Aylen’s blog. Aylen, you mention how the five demands of college literacy make sense for college and for life in general and ask why it is these skills are not prioritized in high school classes. These demands, readiness standards, core content, mission statement objectives, or whatever pop name refers to these expectations (still a rose) are a part of high school disciplines; more so the last 10 years or so I guess than in earlier decades. Most high schools offer college preparation programs, advance placement courses, dual enrollment to local community colleges, and the high school ELA content is reflective of both Genre, Creative, Life Applicable, and taught by methods of process-based portfolio, publishing for public reading and are assessed using multi-fold techniques. The Common Core standards embody expert quality, real world applications, media proficiency, cross-genre and cross-cultural text variety, and the curriculum implemented, especially ELA, does facilitate high engagement. Lecture, a commonly employed strategy of college delivery, is the least employed strategy in high school settings. K-12 classrooms are very active and collaborative. School districts target, for their students, college preparation development and responsible academic behaviors in their school programs. Nevertheless, the horse can only be led to water. Unlike college students who are present by choice, high school students can be resistant to academics if they don’t view that path as their future. Possibly too, the age gap between 17 and 19 might be bigger than 2 mere years. I believe the level of preparation as always, rests in the hands of the students. If resources, instruction, and practices are engaged critically by students and validly internalized, they will be better prepared for college literacy than their cognitively un-prepared peers who do not take advantage of offered resources, do not engage with instruction, and do not internalize their learning and practice. Some say an equally influential factor is students' home environments, however, I'm not sure I agree to an equally influential factor, I lean more towards a personal motivation factor as a precursor to successful freshman college experience. I think also, many high school students do not seriously consider attending college until, belatedly, in their senior year, or a year or two after graduation, they reconsider and enroll; under-prepared. This introduces a new topic of remedial college courses or the community college as the new high school. I certainly do see community college as a bridge between high school and universities, as they have long offered programs that transfer, and, I think, are sensitive to the literacy transformation that often needs to take place for new students who have not always been academically inclined.

7 & 8. wk of March 12: