Our readings this week talked about literacy and writing. We've also been talking about code meshing and switching in class. And I think that writing and speaking are related in a way and so there should be similar pros/cons/problems from an education and societal standpoint that we had discussed with code meshing/switching. And so the first question I had before I got into it was:
1) How should we determine what meaningful writing is? Or what do you think is meaningful writing?
Writing Next I found interesting but also something I didn't enjoy reading if that makes sense. It was interesting in a sense that they had a method with a statistic that measured how strong it was. So the greater the number, the more effective the method was. But I also didn't enjoy it because it placed a strong emphasis on why students should know to write rather than how they write. But I feel like both are important because you should know how to write because it will depend on your intended audience.
2) Is it more important for students to know how to write or why they write?
Write Like This by Gallagher was interesting because she began by stating the importance of writing because of the practical manner in which it was used in our society. She didn't argue it based on subjectivity but the fact that many jobs today require a form of writing. And in that sense writing "well" has become a gate keeping skill as the author put it. So writing "well" is a necessary evil in education because of the function it has in our society. I also, put quotes on the word well because I think that is also subjective. Similar to code meshing/switching, I think that if you can write something that explains your thoughts clearly to your audience even if it doesn't use the language that constitutes as academic is also how you could look at something being written "well". And I read this article as if it were a textbook and just didn't enjoy it.
3) Is it more important to be able to write an explanation that breaks down a complex subject into something easy for the reader to understand or is it more important to write something complex using language, vocabulary, information and detail that institutions of higher education, research facilities, and governments will value? Or are writings in fine/liberal arts more important such as music, art, humanities, etc?
I really enjoyed the Macaroni Social Justice article by Greenstein. Ilana Greenstein was a 3rd grade math teacher and had just taught fractions to her class. In one of her classes Greenstein used macaroni to show fractions again and to show the inequality in the distribution of wealth in the U.S. She had all the students bring macaroni and put 9000 macaroni in 5 equal bags. The macaroni represented all the wealth in the country. She then had the class distribute the bags of macaroni based on how much they thought each fifth of the population had. She then showed how wealth was actually distributed in this country. The students were shocked but were also able to see the massive inequality between the population groups. I thought Greenstein's method was unbelievably brilliant because her lesson taught simple fractions (math) and related it inequality in the U.S (connecting to real issues).
4) What article did you read in your discipline-orientated choice article? What were your thoughts on it?
Also, some questions that our professors posted if you wanted to answer those.
1) How should we determine what meaningful writing is? Or what do you think is meaningful writing?
Writing Next I found interesting but also something I didn't enjoy reading if that makes sense. It was interesting in a sense that they had a method with a statistic that measured how strong it was. So the greater the number, the more effective the method was. But I also didn't enjoy it because it placed a strong emphasis on why students should know to write rather than how they write. But I feel like both are important because you should know how to write because it will depend on your intended audience.
2) Is it more important for students to know how to write or why they write?
Write Like This by Gallagher was interesting because she began by stating the importance of writing because of the practical manner in which it was used in our society. She didn't argue it based on subjectivity but the fact that many jobs today require a form of writing. And in that sense writing "well" has become a gate keeping skill as the author put it. So writing "well" is a necessary evil in education because of the function it has in our society. I also, put quotes on the word well because I think that is also subjective. Similar to code meshing/switching, I think that if you can write something that explains your thoughts clearly to your audience even if it doesn't use the language that constitutes as academic is also how you could look at something being written "well". And I read this article as if it were a textbook and just didn't enjoy it.
3) Is it more important to be able to write an explanation that breaks down a complex subject into something easy for the reader to understand or is it more important to write something complex using language, vocabulary, information and detail that institutions of higher education, research facilities, and governments will value? Or are writings in fine/liberal arts more important such as music, art, humanities, etc?
I really enjoyed the Macaroni Social Justice article by Greenstein. Ilana Greenstein was a 3rd grade math teacher and had just taught fractions to her class. In one of her classes Greenstein used macaroni to show fractions again and to show the inequality in the distribution of wealth in the U.S. She had all the students bring macaroni and put 9000 macaroni in 5 equal bags. The macaroni represented all the wealth in the country. She then had the class distribute the bags of macaroni based on how much they thought each fifth of the population had. She then showed how wealth was actually distributed in this country. The students were shocked but were also able to see the massive inequality between the population groups. I thought Greenstein's method was unbelievably brilliant because her lesson taught simple fractions (math) and related it inequality in the U.S (connecting to real issues).
4) What article did you read in your discipline-orientated choice article? What were your thoughts on it?
Also, some questions that our professors posted if you wanted to answer those.
- What texts are students consuming and to what disciplines are these texts central?
- What texts are students producing and within what disciplinary practices?
- From the Gallagher (2001) chapter:
- What "real-world discourses" are being introduced?
- What "authentic modeling" is being employed?
- What "mentor texts" are being used?
- From "Writing Next" (2007), which of the "11 key elements of effective adolescent writing instruction" are being employed?
You brought up some very interesting points. Specifically the question if knowing how to write is more important than knowing why you write. I think from an early age children are taught to focus on how to write rather than why. It just becomes a reality to students that writing is a part of life and school. But students have very little choice, so if you managed to ask elementary students why we write they would answer in a way that suggests they do it because people tell them too, and this seems rather sad. However, writing is an important tool so it is important that people learn the importance of knowing how to write. At the same time its also important to make sure they understand the application of the skills they are learning in their life after education.
ReplyDeleteI like the point comparing the necessity of the writing skill versus why students are writing. I believe students would probably develop their skills when they are passionate and believe it has an actual impact. Can you think of any examples of any ways students can write in a way that really gets them thinking about why they are?
ReplyDelete