|
|
Post by janinesherman on Mar 15, 2016 22:37:51 GMT -5
I felt that the article for this week was a refreshing recap of everything we have been discussing in this class... That literacy is evolving over time due to sociocultural factors and that we should recognize the different kinds of literacy practices that appear everyday beyond simply reading!
Literacy that is "building upon learners’ existing
knowledge and cultural practices; demystifying academic language and literacy; and situating
literacy learning within a larger motivating activity and/or purpose" is making a shift to more contextualized learning that is more mindful of discourses of the individual learning. For example accepting youth media- music, film, art- as valid forms of literacy is something that we are moving towards because it is relevant and purposeful in students' lives. However, some curriculum/administration has concerns with this as actual learning.
There is an example in the article that a English teacher showed the play version of Death of a Salesman instead of actually reading the play in class. Does this pose a problem to you? How can we rationalize this as a valid form of literacy? The text was intentionally written by Arthur Miller to be acted out as a play, but how do we show parents/administration/standards that we aren't just showing a movie to get out of "actually" teaching?
|
|
jklee
New Member
Posts: 20 
|
Post by jklee on Mar 16, 2016 11:54:27 GMT -5
I totally agree with you, Janine. I feel like the article was building upon and furthering the definition of literacy. To me, literacy has become an umbrella term. So many definitions and functions fall under the term, and literacy is evolving over time based on sociocultural factors as well as advances in technology.
To speak to your question, I would say that there is not a problem with showing a play as it is meant to be seen. I think that, along with having the students act out the play themselves, is a fantastic way of teaching drama in your English classroom. Being able to interpret visual and auditory stimulus as presented through a play is an essential part of literacy, in regards to drama. If a parents or administrator were to approach me with doubts, I would tell them that I am teaching students how to analyze and interpret meaning from a play written with many levels. An important part of being an adult is to see past information given to us at surface level. Showing the students a play will give them the opportunity to go beyond the surface level and examine what the play is really trying to say, through more than just the words. The students will be able to examine and dissect the set, the inflection of the actors, the lighting, and even the costume design. There are so many levels of analysis that can take place, beyond the words that are written on the page. To further appease the administrators or parents, I would have the students read a copy of the play as the performance moves along. This will help students see the words come to life on stage, but have a clear idea of what is happening in case a character has poor diction.
|
|
kasee
New Member
Posts: 21
|
Post by kasee on Mar 16, 2016 13:18:13 GMT -5
I agree with your response jklee. I think acting out and role play is a great way to learn and bring the material to life in any content area. I think part of my argument to the administration would involve what benefits the students the most. The Hull article touches on many different literacy practices, and one was the use of technology. I'm sure that most teachers are aware of how technology plays such a huge role in the lives of his/her students, and showing a movie would be a great supplemental piece for the lesson. Students could view the film and have further group discussions following the movie to keep the conversation going, both face-to-face conversations and blog posts. Combining many literacy practices may help the students learn the material better and gain a deeper understanding of what the teacher is presenting to them. I would make that a part of my argument as well, showing the parents or administration that the purpose of going beyond the textbook will only help the students and hopefully increase their knowledge, or keep them more engaged. I think its imperative for the teacher to push his/her students and prepare them for life beyond the classroom. I'm not saying that showing a movie will do that, but attempting to tap into the student's interest will help to keep them engaged and hopefully learn something from the class. Each student is different and brings something different to the table, and the teacher should create an environment that encourages different points of view and tap into that by utilizing a variety of literacy practices to reach each student.
|
|
|
|
Post by ronettekortbein on Mar 16, 2016 14:03:02 GMT -5
I also think that acting out the play or watching it is still a great way to build literacy practices. The article talked about how one commentator thought that watching the movie didn't actually adhere to the Common Core Standards. A big part of Common Core is promoting literacy and I believe that by showing the movie, the teacher was encouraging her students experience the book in a different way than they were used to. Some students learn different ways, and Common Core promotes trying several different methods to teach student. I would argue with that commentator and say that if the teacher taught each book the same exact way by having them read it on their own and then discuss, then she wouldn't be adhering to Common Core at all. As a follow up question for you all, what are your thoughts on Common Core? Do you think is promotes literacy as I do, or do you think there are some flaws that should be addressed?
|
|
|
|
Post by chelseahickox on Mar 16, 2016 15:38:58 GMT -5
I am such a fan of expanding our typical "literacy" practices. Especially because the fact of the matter is that students are no longer responsive to the traditionally, read the book,write a paper, and/ or answer questions. Its frustrating for me as an upcoming teacher to be entering this education world were we have a problem, the solution appears to be obvious and we have still administration and office people, people not even in the classroom, telling us whats best for our students. I feel that whats best for our students is that they are able to think past the surface level of whatever medium is presented to them to criticize and analyze the world that they live in. If they do this by looking through a magazine or creating something beside a 5 pg paper, than I would be ecstatic. Because either way, they are doing the thing, and I don't care how it is tht they get there, and who am I to limit how they can get there?
|
|
|
|
Post by felishadake on Mar 18, 2016 13:40:13 GMT -5
I completely agree that it is a prevalent problem when literacy practices that do not look traditional are dismissed by administration. There are so many ways to promote literacy that are not typically seen in the classroom that can be just as, or even more effective as those we already see. I like the idea of cultural modeling that was brought up in the article. If we can bring students home, culture, and community into the classroom, and use them as a resource for teaching academic literacy, this can help students with different discourses to learn. It can also open up and introduce students to varying discourses that are unfamiliar to them.
|
|
|
|
Post by hannahhiester on Mar 23, 2016 14:53:38 GMT -5
I'm not hugely familiar with Common Core but a quick look at the standards gave me this one:
"Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words" (http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/CCRA/R/7/)
I think you could definitely say that the movie was within Common Core standards but like the Hull article points out we all have our own notion of literacy and interpretation of standards which it can be hard to shake. Also, with the number of movies now-a-days and material coming at us through TV shows or online series, perhaps it is a good idea to have students learn that they can be as critical of a movie as they can of a print text.
I also agree with what felishadake said about using students external influences in the classroom. On a slightly different tack, I also wonder if this might help soften some of the Jock-Burnout polarization discussed in the Eckert reading from a few weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
Post by sarahaubreyr on Apr 17, 2016 16:10:06 GMT -5
I totally agree with you, Janine. I feel like the article was building upon and furthering the definition of literacy. To me, literacy has become an umbrella term. So many definitions and functions fall under the term, and literacy is evolving over time based on sociocultural factors as well as advances in technology. To speak to your question, I would say that there is not a problem with showing a play as it is meant to be seen. I think that, along with having the students act out the play themselves, is a fantastic way of teaching drama in your English classroom. Being able to interpret visual and auditory stimulus as presented through a play is an essential part of literacy, in regards to drama. If a parents or administrator were to approach me with doubts, I would tell them that I am teaching students how to analyze and interpret meaning from a play written with many levels. An important part of being an adult is to see past information given to us at surface level. Showing the students a play will give them the opportunity to go beyond the surface level and examine what the play is really trying to say, through more than just the words. The students will be able to examine and dissect the set, the inflection of the actors, the lighting, and even the costume design. There are so many levels of analysis that can take place, beyond the words that are written on the page. To further appease the administrators or parents, I would have the students read a copy of the play as the performance moves along. This will help students see the words come to life on stage, but have a clear idea of what is happening in case a character has poor diction. JK! I absolutely love how you defined literacy as an umbrella term! I could not agree with you more! I also really love where you went with your discussion. I always find reading your posts (in any class) to be insightful. It is always so important to give students the opportunity to go beyond surface level and I am glad you mentioned how plays help students do that. |
|
