Month: February 2017

Framing: Through our years of schooling there have always been students who never enjoyed reading. Why is that? With the help with two scholarly texts, I aim to answer that question.

Credibility/Intro Sources: In Literacy, Discourse, and Linguistics: Introduction written by James Paul Gee, we explore what a Discourse is; “Discourses are ways of being in the world; they are forms of life which integrate words, acts, values, beliefs, attitudes, and social identities as well as gestures, glances, body positions, and clothes” (7). Using this text written by Gee, I will go into detail about how some students aren’t fully fluent in the Discourse of reading which is a contributing factor to why they don’t like reading. While reading Sponsors Of Literacy written by Deborah Brandt we learn about what a sponsor of literacy actually is. “Sponsors as I have come to think of them, are any agents, local or distant, concrete or abstract, who enable, support, teach, model, as well as recruit, regulate, suppress, or withhold literacy – and gain advantage by it in some way” (556). Using this text written by Brandt, I will go into detail about how the people in student’s lives (sponsors) affect their feelings about reading or learning in general.

Perspective: The scholarly texts written by Gee and Brandt help give more meaning behind the key issue which is; why don’t students enjoy reading, while the Raising Cairn narratives I incorporate throughout this paper help explore and give examples of the reasoning behind why students don’t like reading.

collreadwrit2e

Frame: Literacy acquisition is the way someone learns to read and write. Many scholars will agree that a student’s literacy success comes from a sponsor. Such scholars are Kara Alexander, James Paul Gee, and Deborah Brandt all explain how a sponsor can affect the ways of become fluent in literacy.

Credibility/Intro Sources: Alexander demonstrates outcomes in her writings that are caused by different kinds of sponsors, as Brandt and Gee would explain as someone that is teaching. Both scholars Brandt and Gee touch on this common thought of needing someone known mostly as a sponsor or apprentice to help them enter a discourse, but Gee explains that it can’t just be taught in the classroom. In the literacy narratives that are on the Rising Cairn most explain that literacy sponsors that show a positive interaction with a students and allow literacy success more commonly in higher education rather than elementary education.
Perspective: Why is it that the nature of elementary education has many negative outcomes? Although secondary education there is less negativity that is being described?

“collreadwrit2e”

Coordination examples:

So this poses the question, Is there a correct way to learn literacy acquisition or does everyone do it differently and at their own pace?

Due to the fact that not everyone learns the same way, but learns different ways to accomplish the same goal of understanding literacy acquisition.

Even though the two have a different argument, yet they both support the larger idea that there are multiple “correct” ways.

Subordination examples:

Connecting the two quotes together, they both have a different approach to the larger idea.

Even though the two have a different argument, yet they both support the larger idea that there are multiple “correct” ways.

Due to the fact that not everyone learns the same way, but learns different ways to accomplish the same goal of understanding literacy acquisition.

 

collreadwrit2a

If your project is truly “engaging the conversation” about literacy acquisition, it must be speaking to Gee/Brandt/Alexander in at least one of these three ways: affirm, add, challenge. And you probably want to be doing at least two of these things. What do your peers think you might do here, based on the evidence you’ve provided in the draft? Is there other evidence in the narratives that you’ve left out of the draft so far? Be specific about what your narratives reveal and what you think your might say about literacy acquisition through that data?

After reading my draft my peers and I discussed the stage of my draft where I would be affirming, adding, or challenging Gee and Brandt’s ideas.  My peers suggested that I connect the literacy narrative stories with the ideas that Gee and Brandt present in their works.  There is no other evidence in the literacy narratives that I have not used in the drafts so far however there is more effective ways to integrate the evidence in my draft.  The narratives I chose to write about was Hannah Metta’s literacy narrative which incorporated Gee’s idea of apprenticeship and Brandt’s idea of sponsorship.  Troy’s literacy narrative similarly to Hannah’s used the ideas of apprenticeship and sponsorship as main points in his literacy narrative.  In the last literacy narrative written by Alexis Ouellette about the “Little Match Girl” she uses Gee’s concept of “mushfake”.  I think in all three literacy narratives I will try and use the scholarly texts along with my opinion on the scholarly texts to try and clarify the stories being told in the literacy narratives.

Source introductions. Do your peers think you have enough “introduction” of G/B/A in the draft? Do you have too much? And what about your naming of the literacy narratives? Alexander offers little stories of her examples; Brandt offers richer descriptions so the reader has enough information to understand her analysis. In a short project, one should not repeat the details from the narratives, but the reader probably needs some description/context. What work do you have in this area?

I think my peers did a very good job of introducing the work of Gee, Brandt, and Alexander into their papers with and with some slight adjustments they can pull the full potential out of their quotes.  I think I need to do a better job of less summary and more textual support in my paper to push my thoughts to the forefront.  I think with using both the Barclay’s and TRIAC method to paragraph structure I can improve my paragraphs and get the most out of my analysis of the scholarly texts.

Evidence. We must have actual passages from both our scholarly sources and our literacy narratives. The scholarly sources help signal the conversation you’re engaging; the narratives are your support for the ways you’re engaging the conversation. It is entirely reasonable to need to find and consider additional narratives, to need to dig more deeply into those one is using, and even to read parts of Brandt or Alexander that are relevant to one’s project but were not originally assigned to the entire class! What do you need to do in this area?

I think I have a good variety of scholarly texts to allow me to talk about and analysis a plethora of information from both Gee and Brandt’s work.  I think they both engage the text in different ways with both similarities in apprenticeship and sponsorship and differences in mushfake.  There is a possibility in finding additional evidence in my literacy narratives that I think I should take the time to more deeply examine before my final draft.

 

collreadwrit2e

The following paragraph shows “or”. This best explains an “or” argument because it shows possibilities, in this case, a possibility for two different outcomes for the same questions. For example, alexander argues that narratives help one learn literacy acquisition. On the other hand, Brandt argues that sponsors change the way they teach to allow the best outcome for each student.

Connecting the two quotes together, they both have a different approach to the larger idea. Being that there are multiple ways someone can learn, and the “correct” way to learn may be different for multiple people. Alexander says how writing narratives help reveal the students, helping them learn in the long run. While Brandt argues how Sponsors have to constantly change and adjust the way they teach because not every student learns the same way. Even though the two have a different argument, they both support the larger idea that there are multiple “correct” ways.

 

The following paragraph Shows “But”. This best explains a “but” argument because it shows how there’s sometimes exceptions to the normal way of doing something. For example, in the following paragraph, the teacher changes his approach on the assignment to allow it to become more engaging for the students. Rather than taking the normal approach of having them just read a text and write off that, he instead picks a topic that allows the student to be more personal and more spontaneous about what their writing about.

This Quote shows how the teacher purposely chose the topic to be animals simply for the fact that the students wouldn’t lose focus. Also, by him allowing this to happen it made a chain of positive events happen. It allowed the students to be more passionate and focused while doing the assignment and overall allowed them to learn better. Also just by changing up the generic way teachers teach help allow the students to be more successful. Looking back at alexander, she talks about Master and little narratives. For example: “Close examination of student essays shows that when students compose a school-based literacy narrative, they invoke cultural narratives, Including both master narratives of success and other little narratives.” (alexander 614) This goes hand and hand  with ericas experience. The idea behind the little narratives is just a different way to learn literacy acquisition compared to how the teacher changed up his ways of teaching to allow more success from the students.

 

 

collreadwrit2e

• Here in my first body paragraph I moved some words around and rephrased some sentences to make my statements more clear. I also added “or” in one sentence to add an – his teacher didn’t help him OR give him academic freedom. I also added “but” to the statement “this evidence here…” because it is a foundation for critical thought.

First of all, when it comes to disliking reading sometimes situations occur like in The Mean Teacher written by Noah Luccini, that is the reasoning behind it. The narrative is about himself as a young boy in the fourth grade whose teacher was not as helpful as she could’ve been. He writes, “…she’d throw worksheets at us and just sit at her desk. Doing this didn’t help us learn it”. Not only that but he adds, “She forced me to find a new book and I was not happy about it and remember having a lot of trouble getting through the book she gave me because I was so uninterested in it”. From the examples given here, his teacher Mrs. Page didn’t seem like the type of literacy sponsor that a young student needs in order to succeed. Brandt writes; “Sponsors are delivery systems for the economies of literacy, the means by which these forces present themselves to – and through – individual learners” (556). So as a sponsor, Mrs. Page didn’t do much to help Noah as a student or give him the academic freedom to choose his own reading book which ultimately resulted in him being uninterested in the assignment. But this evidence here helps answer my question: when students aren’t allowed to choose their own reading material, it makes the assignment dreadful and painful to get through. Students crave academic freedom that not all teachers allow. However, even when some students get the freedom they want, they still aren’t comfortable with reading or they still dislike it.

• Here in my second body paragraph I also rephrased some sentences and added/took away some commas and combined some sentences to make things flow better. I also added “but” and “or” to certain areas of my explanations of quotes to add alternative thoughts or set a foundation for critical thinking. I even added “and” in some places as a foundation for thought and as an addition to my previous thoughts.

Secondly, if someone enjoys reading they might have moments of dislike if they feel uncomfortable in the classroom setting like in Comfort written by Alexandra White. This narrative goes into detail about how she would distract herself during reading time during class but would go home to her grandparents bookstore, and read! Why would she not read in class? Alexandra writes; “I was always a slow reader growing up and when I started to notice other kids around me weren’t as slow as me, I started to retreat from the idea of reading”. As a child in school she felt judged by her peers but with this example of not feeling like she fits in in the classroom setting, maybe Alexandra isn’t fluent in her secondary Discourse. A secondary Discourse, as defined by Gee is; “These may be local stores and churches, schools….Each of these social institutions commands and demands one or more Discourses and we acquire these fluently to the extent that we are given access to these institutions and are allowed apprenticeships within them” (8). If Alexandra is a slower reader than her fellow peers, it might be possible that she is not as fluent in her secondary Discourse compared to her other students which can lead to intimidation and the fear of reading in front of them. Along with intimidation, other outside forces can make a person (student) feel uncomfortable about reading or even writing in a classroom.

collreadwrit2e

 

Subordinate: 

“After he was able to learn how to manage his time, he finally got the grade he wanted”. 

I am emphasizing on the fact that he did not get the grade he wanted until after he learned to manage his time effectively. The reason why is because before he did not want to put in the time to do anything. Everything to him took only half an hour at most, which clearly didn’t work out well. This sentence is complex for the reason that because it states two things how he got the changed and what the results were.

“Since shown in elementary education that there is a lack of effort shown by sponsors, it can result in a negative effect on a students education.”

In this sentence it sates an issue and its result which make it a complex sentence. I am trying to emphasize on the issue of lacking effort causes students education to have a negative effect. negative effect being the result of effort not being shown. The main issue is effort not being shown because very kid is different. so a teacher needs to know when to individualize a student to allow them to succeed.

“After Hibbard explains her teacher made a positive impact on her through being there for her one and one, not just teaching her the subjects.” 

My main point here is that the teacher made the effort to support Paige. Something that not every teacher is willing to do. They can’t just focus on getting through the lesson plans and teaching the subjects they need. They also need to make sure the student understand what they are being taught. This sentence is complex because it states my independent claim and followed with a clause.

Coordinate: 

“Larson explains that this discipline is a way of brainwashing the students into knowing the rules of writing which is helpful, but not in everyday life will you be able to use those rules.”

In this sentence I show that it is coordinate sentence by breaking the two sentences into putting the word but in between my thoughts. I am emphasizing both part equally because it is true students should not be brainwashed into all these rules that are helpful in the moment, but not long term.

“This strategy of planning helped him not only in his english class, but all other classes.”

This sentence is a complex sentence because its showing that planning can be effective in not only english but in other subjects as well. I am emphasizing on both part here that learning to be organized with have a positive effect in not just one way but many.

“In order for the student to show effort they need their trusted sponsor to show a sense of effort, so they can rely on constant help.”

This sentence has two point that I am emphasizing on. The points being that I am showing that in order for one to succeed they need to have someone they can trust so they know they can alway have help. Both points are important to show what a sponsors duties are to a student.

collreadwrit2e

 

The parapgraph below is the first paragraph of my paper. I see this more as an OR because I am adding to the ideas of Brandt, but in an alternate way than Brandt openly states.

1. In elementary education the idea that teachers aren’t showing effort to engage with their students is a common argument. Engagement with students shows that there is effort demonstrated in the classroom which can lead to a positive effect. A ways of engage that is most important with the topic of literacy success is communication. Communication is both shows in Brandt and the literacy narrative Live or Die by Paige Hibbard. Brandt states a sponsorship is shown through “any agents, local or distant, concrete or abstract, who enable support, teach, model, as well as recruit, regulate, suppress, or withhold literacy–and gain advantage by it in some way” (556), or can can express any motive of effort. In Hibbards literacy narrative she explains that her outlook on english changed when someone was there to regulate what she was doing when she says “She and I made a deal. If I needed help with my school work, she would help me or she would find someone who would help me” (Hibbard 2). Her teacher made a positive impact on her just through being there for her one and one, not just as a teacher. Beforehand in Hibbard’s elementary years she didn’t have anyone to trust she was always just told that she wasn’t good enough to be in a normal English class by being thrown into the class because of my NECAPS which I never really tried on in middle school” (Hibbard 1). There was a lack of sponsorship, or engagement being shown in her elementary years which is common because most students display a thought of discipline in earlier years which is not by any means of modeling, or teaching a student to succeed in the literacy discourse. 

 This paragraph is also considered an OR. I used this as an OR because again I am just adding another side to what Gee is already stating but just in a form of discipline. This disapline is supported by Gees thoughts. 

2. Jess Larson states in her literacy narrative The Best Teacher I Ever Did Have her negative experience in elementary education is because strict requirements. Larson explains that “English class hasn’t been easy for me until I reached high school because my teachers focused more on disciplining us middle schoolers instead of elaborating on lesson plans” (1). Gee would agree with Larson that teachers are brainwashing, or forming them to follow strict guidelines which he doesn’t agree with when he states “It is a truism that a person can know perfectly that grammar of a language and not know how to use the language”(1).Gee and Larson are both trying to drive the point that someone can understand the concepts of writing such as  grammar, sentence structure, and prewriting techniques, but not know how to use them at the same time. A lot of the time it has to relate to the fact that in elementary education free writing is limited there is usually always a strict prompt that has to be followed. Larson herself explained that her love for literacy started when she had a teacher that was less strict with the circulium and was more focused on teaching her how to use the language properly. Larson states “In her class I felt so free and unchained. The environment she provided us made it easier to get our work done; I didn’t feel confined to the rules”(3).  This way of brainwashing was over for Larson because she could trust her teacher due to the safe environment that she was in. Gee, or Larson could agree that in order to become successful in a discourse you must be passionate for something and not mush fake it by knowing guidelines. 

collreadwrit2e”

In my paper I mainly follow the idea of affirming to the scholars ideas such as Gee and Brandt. My paper is supporting and adding different context to their definition of a sponsor or apprentice. Throughout my paper my peers did agree that I showed a lot of Gee and Brandt to support my main idea and used good literacy narratives to use as data. Although my peers did rise a concern that there is not enough “I say” throughout my paper, such as summarizing to allow the reader to understand more. My main point in this paper is to prove how important apprenticeship/ sponsorship is to a student learning growth and how the lack of effort from a sponsor can effect a student forever. In order to successfully affirm the scholars I do need to add more terms from both the scholars to strengthen my paper, which was suggested from my peers. I do think that I am with the revisions from my peers driving home the point that literacy is based on a great sponsor that shows continuous amounts of effort and welcome a student to a healthy free environment.

The one thing I struggled with throughout was the introduction of the literacy narratives. I did set them up naming the article and author but not enough background with all of them to show what they were feeling, or for the reader to clearly understand what happened in that literacy narrative. I do set up the quotes I use well and do not have to much summarization, just about a sentence or two per quote. I think I need to when writing my next draft think more so as a reader and not a writer. I mean that by making sure I explain everything enough so if someone never read any of the source I’m using would understand.

As of evidence from scholarly sources I do think that I hit that one home. I do have mostly everything that I am affirming to them in my paper. I do think I could add some keywords and definitions to strengthen my paper, but nothing to drastic. As for data, or literacy narratives I do think I should search for one or two narratives that better support my idea. My third literacy narrative does really support where I’m going now that I have talked to my peers. The third paragraph is where I need to focus on for better data.

collreadwrit2e