Month: October 2018

Kayla:

The concept that I am focusing on for this paragraph is the idea of being a victim in a literacy experience. “The essay took me hours to write and perfect, but a week after I handed it in, I got it back and was devastated. The 70% that was written on that paper hit me like a bus. The feeling that my best work wasn’t good enough was honestly was devastating. There were red pen marks all over the page, word changes, “helpful hints” (as he called them), and just x’s everywhere. I saw nothing positive on the paper when I got it back. All I would see was “bad use of language” or “explain more.” The most constructive thing he had ever said was “explain more,” but explain what! ” In this quote Kayla is displaying how she felt as though her teacher was cruel to her about her work and made her feel invalidated. I believe that this is a good example of the victim story narrative that Alexander discussed in her work, ” The popularity of the victim narrative in the student texts indicates that students associate school-based literacy practices with oppression and even cruelty. When asked to reflect on past experiences in the confines of the literacy narrative, they remember these experiences that haunted them and took away their freedoms.” (Alexander, 618)  The details in the narrative shows that students often feel as though no matter how hard they work on something teachers will continue to tear down their effort and work, making them feel victimized.

Hannah D:

Hannah’s literacy narrative has themes of being both victim and hero. She discusses the hardships that she faced when writing her college essay about the death of her brother and how the teacher didn’t appreciate or understand the amount of work she put into it and how good she and others who read it thought it was, “When asked to reflect on past experiences in the confines of the literacy narrative, they remember these experiences that haunted them and took away their freedoms.” (Alexander, 618) I felt as though the beginning had a mostly victim theme versus the end when it turned into a hero based theme. “When I finally got my paper back, all I felt was disappointment. I couldn’t believe what I saw, I looked at my paper and saw a B- minus circled in the top right corner. I did not understand. Everyone who previously read my paper thought it was amazing. I didn’t get how my teacher didn’t.”( Hannah) I think that in her literacy narrative Hannah took the victimized feeling that she had after receiving a grade for her paper and decided to persevere and work hard and turn it into a hero narrative, “When push comes to shove, I believe this assignment made me both a stronger person and writer. It made me look deeper. It made me realize how although everyone has a different point of view, each point of view is important. It doesn’t matter whether it’s writing or a real life situation, peoples thoughts will always be different. I realized it doesn’t matter what you are writing about, you should be creating a piece of work you can always be proud of. Something that makes you happy to re out loud, something you could read a million times and never want to stop reading. Write what makes you happy, that’s the paper to aim for.” (Hannah)

Blake:

The theme in this essay is also the victim/ hero theme. The beginning of the paper feels as though it is the victim theme and then it transitions into how they persevered through this tough event and overcame it.  “At the time I felt like my teacher was kind of singling me out for such a small mistake. I mean, she told all the other kids what they had to fix in order for their essay to be done; why couldn’t she tell me? Now I know that the smile she had on her face when she first read my essay was her teaching me a lesson. I see now it was because she was holding me to a higher standard because she knew I had the ability to succeed in my work, but I would rush through it and not worry about it. Looking back on it now, this is the first experience that really brought my attention to me rushing through my work.” (Blake) Hero literacy narratives equate literacu aquisition with success, liberation, development… perserverance, self-reliance, and determination; establishes self as hero of literacy story.” (Alexander 615)

Sam:

In this narrative it felt similar to a victim narrative but there wasn’t a specific event that made him begin to feel differently about writing. “It just didn’t seem fun for me, anymore. I missed getting to unravel my creativity in short stories, where now the topics were strictly chosen by my teachers.”(Sam) While in this he isn’t blaming any particular person or event but rather the way the school’s take on english and writing gradually became less interesting to him. Also it is one of the less severe examples to me this felt like a victim literacy narrative, “When asked to reflect on past experiences in the confines of the literacy narrative, they remember these experiences that haunted them and took away their freedoms.” (618 Alexander).

• 200 words, roughly. Table 1 identifies eight distinct cultural narratives of literacy (Alexander 615), and the bulk of our reading selection is dedicated to discussion of these types. Pick any two “little narratives” that interest you, explain each of the little narratives and Alexander’s view on the type, and discuss your reasons for being interested in each type. (Note: “Success” is not a little narrative, so it is off limits for this question!) Remember: Quote & Explain. (15 minutes)
• In Alexander’s writing she discussed a pattern of six “little” cultural narratives that appear in student’s literacy narratives. The two “little” narratives that I found the most interesting were the “hero” and “victim” themes.  I thought that the “hero” literacy narrative was interesting because its ideas related very closely with the ideas of “master” narrative of success. The distinct difference between the “master” narrative and “hero” narrative is that a “hero” narrative is written with a specific event in mind, “The hero narrative is very similar to the success master narrative in that both cultural narratives view literacy as leading to success, but they differ in the specificity defining hero narratives, which are always tied to a specific time, place and instance.” (618) They are similar because both narratives focus on the idea that literacy acquisition leads to so success and progression. A “master/success” narrative is written from a more abstract or vague point of view, typically there isn’t a specified event or time given when writing a “success” literacy narrative. Another “little” cultural narrative that I found peculiarly interesting was the “victim” literacy narrative theme. Alexander stated that “Perhaps Kristy’s willingness to adopt the victim role may be the product of entitlement where, from her privileged socioeconomic place, she sees it as a natural right to critique schooling and pedagogical approaches, whereas others without such privilege may not.” (618) I believe that Alexander’s assumption that a more privileged student is more willing to describe themselves as a victim was overarching and inaccurate. I don’t believe that somebody’s socioeconomic level affects their beliefs regarding education and framing themselves as a “victim”.
• 200 words, roughly. Every literacy narrative has both the student/writer and a person (or persons) that Brandt might call a literacy sponsor. Williams notes that it is “intriguing to consider the identities students construct for teachers” (344). Choose any two of Alexander’s categories and consider how students represent the identities of the relevant sponsor(s). Be sure to quote and explain. (10 minutes)
• When a student writes a literacy narrative they aren’t just telling a story they are creating the story, they can choose to frame the story and characters however they want to. When applying this idea to the “victim” literacy narrative that Alexander discussed in her paper it is an interesting perspective to look from. After reading the example of a “victim” literacy narrative I didn’t feel as though I would describe the author as a victim.”The popularity of the victim narrative in student texts indicates that students associate school-based literacy practices with oppression and even cruelty.”(618) In my opinion it felt more like they had overcome an obstacle and felt accomplished for doing so, rather than trying to make the readers feel as if they were mistreated. Alexander’s description of the students use of a “victim” narrative was both unnecessary and dramatic, students were not attempting to adopt the identity of a “victim” of school-based oppression and cruelty but rather trying to express some difficulties and obstacles that they had faced with literacy. Another literacy narrative theme that is interesting when considering that students have the ability to adopt any identity when writing literacy narratives is the “child prodigy” identity. The student chooses to adopt the identity of a child prodigy for their literacy narrative because they believe that at a certain point they were so far advanced when compared to classmates that they were often recognized or praised for being so advanced; “When students portrayed themselves as child prodigies, they conceived of themselves and their literacy abilities as exceptional, highlighting moments when their literacy skills were put on display to amaze and astonish their audience.” (619) People who choose to identify themselves as child prodigies are often not actually prodigies but rather kids that had early exposure to reading and literacy, if they choose to identify as this for a literacy narrative they are probably trying to express to the reader how intelligent and literate they believe they still are.
• 200 words, roughly. Alexander contrasts “master” and “little” narratives. What is this contrast, and why is it important as she tries to analyze student literacy narratives? Use at least one kind of little narrative discussed by Alexander (614-22) to illustrate how little narratives differ from the “master narrative” one so often finds. Be sure to quote Alexander and explain the difference between master and little narratives. (15 minutes)
• When Alexander discusses the contrasts between “master” and “little” narratives she talks about the themes behind them and what makes a”master” narrative and what makes a “little” narrative.  The “master” narrative that she is referring to is the idea that literacy automatically leads to success and prosperity and the “little” narratives are any other literacy experience that doesn’t ultimately lead to success and prosperity through literacy.

Introduction: I changed my introduction by adding to the information I had already included in the introduction. I elaborated on the thoughts of Nair and Nair and James Gee and briefly tied those ideas back to my own. I attempted to make my thesis more clear and my claim more concise.

Evidence and Explanations: I added more evidence and quotes than I had originally in my first draft. I added more in the areas regarding my claims for the building tasks of practices and politics. I added more evidence to strengthen my claims for these building tasks.

Reorganization: I didn’t do much reorganization between my first and second draft but I did add a few paragraphs in different spots.

New Paragraphs:  I added new paragraphs to my paper pertaining to politics as a building tasks and practices.

The next practice that Gee discusses in “Building Tasks” is the idea of a practice. A practice is defined as “ the actual application or use of an idea, belief, or method as opposed to theories about such application or use.”(Google) The practices and actions of a member in a Discourse are easily recognized by other members of the Discourse. The way you conduct yourself or go about certain things can affect how easily you will be able to enter the Discourse you are trying to join. We see examples of this in Haas’ experiment where she observed a student that was attempting to join the biology Discourse.  Haas observed her practices and activities and noticed that as she moved further into the Discourse her preferred practices began to change as she became more knowledgeable about the subject. An example of this would be that as she got further into the Discourse she preferred to read scientific articles rather than textbooks, because the information in the articles was more current and relevant than that in the textbooks. Another practice that is used in Discourse is IMRad Format when it comes to writing a formal scientific paper. The IMRaD format is a very specific guideline that scientists follow in order to give their information in the most concise and effective way. Every scientist follows this format when writing a paper and anyone attempting to join a science Discourse has to practice writing in this format. In order to become a member of the scientific Discourse a student must master this practice of the IMRaD format.

The next practice that Gee discusses in “Building Tasks” is the idea of a practice. A practice is defined as “ the actual application or use of an idea, belief, or method as opposed to theories about such application or use.”(Google) The practices and actions of a member in a Discourse are easily recognized by other members of the Discourse; The way you conduct yourself or go about certain things can affect how easily you will be able to enter the Discourse you are trying to join. We see examples of this in Haas’ experiment where she observed a student that was attempting to join the biology Discourse.  Haas observed her practices and activities and noticed that as she moved further into the Discourse her preferred practices began to change as she became more knowledgeable about the subject. An example of this would be that as she got further into the Discourse she preferred to read scientific articles rather than textbooks, because the information in the articles was more current and relevant than that in the textbooks. Another practice that is used in Discourse is IMRad Format when it comes to writing a formal scientific paper, the IMRaD format is a very specific guideline that scientists follow in order to give their information in the most concise and effective way. Every scientist follows this format when writing a paper and anyone attempting to join a science Discourse has to practice writing in this format.(This is a complex sentence because it has two slightly differing topics that are combined into a single sentence.) In order to become a member of the scientific Discourse a student must master this practice of the IMRaD format.

I think that some areas that I am developing Gee and Haas’ ideas well is when discussing the ideas of sign systems and knowledge and practices. I believe that I have good ideas and some good evidence pertaining to these ideas but there are certain areas that I need to develop my thoughts and evidence more. My thoughts on Gee’s politics “Building Tasks” needs to be further developed and needs better evidence to support my claims.

My analysis will tell us how the three most important Building Tasks affect the scientific Discourse. Practices, sign systems and knowledge and politics mold the Science Discourse and the members of that Discourse.

In “Building Tasks” James Gee states that there are many different languages and different varieties of a language and these sign systems are how people within a certain Discourse can communicate, “There are many languages (e.g., Spanish, Russian, English). There are many different varieties of any one language (e.g., the language of lawyers, the language of biologists, and the language of hip-hop artists). These are communicative systems that are not language (e.g., equations, graphs, images). These are all different sign systems.” (Gee 35) As Gee goes on to discuss this idea he elaborates to say that within certain privileges or disciplines there is set of sign systems that everyone within that discipline has the ability to use. For those in the discipline it is very simple and easy to understand to use these sign systems but they usually seem foreign and unfamiliar to those who are on the outside. These types of sign systems are especially prevalent in the scientific fields, they allow for smoother communication between scientists all over the world despite language barriers. The idea of a scientific sign system was also discussed by Nair Nair in ” Organization of a Research Paper: The IMRAD Format”. The IMRAD format that is being discussed in his paper is a form of scientific writing. “These are words by which the paper should be indexed by abstracting services. Words that appear on the title should not be repeated as keywords because titles and keywords are listed together by abstracted services.”(Nair Nair 16) In the IMRAD format scientists use certain keywords that proves their expertise in the subject by the diction or jargon that they use. The words that they use are part of their scientific sign system.

In Gee’s “Building Tasks” he discusses the idea of practices and activities and how these can affect our ability to enter a Discourse. The way you conduct yourself or go about certain things can affect how easily you will be able to enter the Discourse you are trying to join. We see examples of this in Haas’ experiment where she observed a student that was attempting to join the biology Discourse.  Haas observed her practices and activities and noticed that as she moved further into the Discourse her preferred practices began to change as she became more knowledgeable about the subject. An example of this would be that as she got further into the Discourse she preferred to read scientific articles rather than textbooks, because the information in the articles was more current and relevant than that in the textbooks.

ENG110J

 

1.) When Haas opened her article by saying ” At the college level, to become literate is in many ways to learn the patterns of knowing about, and behaving toward, texts within a disciplinary field” she was discussing the idea that students need to approach literature differently based on the subject in which it is from.  She goes on to discuss the importance of reading certain types of literature with a different mindset, “One of the things that students of science must become privy to, as part of their disciplinary education, is this rhetorical, contingent nature of written scientific discourse. Science educators at every level have been concerned with fostering students’ cognizance of the contexts, conduct, and purposes of science as well as its factual content. (Haas 45) You cannot approach the literature from a science based course with the same mentality that you approach literature from and english course with primarily because of the language or discourses that are used in the different types of literature.

2.) The myth of autonomous texts is that they are reliable and useful sources in reference to literature. An autonomous text is a text that acts independently often without proper information or contextual support. Haas stated that, “In general, the belief in autonomous texts views written academic texts as discrete, highly explicit, even “timeless” entities functioning without contextual support from author, reader, or culture.” (Haas 45) Haas calls it a myth because people have come to believe that these are proper and reliable sources to use in academics, even though they been critiqued and shown to be unreliable and inaccurate.

3.) Haas hypothesized in her work that the a student’s ability to comprehend literature would vary and grow greatly as they were to go through college. Through her research on the reading ability of one student, Eliza created a foundation for her hypothesis” I focused primarily on her reading processes and practices, and on the various texts she read, rather than her writing processes and products.” (Haas 47) Haas chose to focus primarily on one student because that would be the best system to truly understand the reading processes and how they would develop as she progressed through college.

4.)  The rhetorical frame consists of everyone and everything that is involved  in the making of a piece of literature.“elements of the rhetorical frame include participants, their relationships and motives, and several layers of context” (Haas 48). The rhetorical frame can help a reader to determine whether a source is reliable or not based on the motives and relationships of the author.

5.) The main idea of Gee’s “Literacy, Discourse and Linguistics” is about Discourse and how they are a sort of identity kit, in a way this relates to the idea of a rhetorical frame because in reference to literature is a sort of identity kit for a piece of literature. The rhetorical frame determines the make up of the piece of literature in the same way a Discourse makes up an individual’s personality.

ENG110J