Found My Focus

I can't describe the feeling I have now that I know what I want to research. I've had several ideas over the past 7 months since starting on this journey, but nothing about which I truly felt passionate. Feeling compelled to support acceptance of all people, I especially gravitate toward the LGBTQ population for many reasons. Having a gay nephew gives me a personal reason.

My love of writing led me to wonder how writing (in all of its forms) may be of help to this population. I'm thinking along the lines of writing as therapy, and maybe even using social networking, to build community to combat feelings of isolation and also to promote acceptance outside of this population. I've been a 'whirling dervish' since deciding upon this path of inquiry. I've become the teacher-advisor for our high school's Gay-Straight Alliance (GSA), met with a professor, and made contact with several people in positions of authority on working with LGBTQ teens/young adults. AND I've READ, and READ, and READ.

The Handbook of Research on Writing had two chapters that touched on the subject and I decided to read those, even though they were not specifically assigned. In Chapter 24: Teaching of Writing and Diversity, the authors ask "should students be encouraged to cultivate a voice in writing that may be unacceptable to the academy?" (p. 387). Often, LGBTQ students don't feel safe or comfortable writing what they truly want to write, thinking they won't be understood or accepted.

Chapter 30: Writing as Physical and Emotional Healing, was very interesting and gave me concrete ideas for conducting research. I was especially intrigued to learn that recent findings have "energized a research program among psychologists and medical scientists, but writing researchers have yet to join this community" (p.485). This chapter discusses research using short, brief writing activities and journaling over time to measure how writing can help various populations. Not only did they see improvements with physical ailments, but expressive writing was found to be effective for people feeling socially isolated (p.496). This gives me great hope that I can make inroads as a writing researcher, but that there is basic groundwork for me to build upon.

New Literacies?

So, this just made me laugh! In recent discussions about student engagement, motivation, 21st century skills, and New Literacies, I never thought about the possible transfer into the 'adult' world. Is this what the future holds for the 'cyber' generation as they move into the world of work? Talk about discourse communities.

Just look at what a cartoonist can say in one frame!

Questions of Authenticity and Translation

Two key concepts in Bazerman's Handbook, Chapter 5: History of Reflection, Theory, and Research on Writing,

caught my attention over everything else. "Death of the Author" just sounds so sad and scary, but with recent technological innovations which allow "readers (to) actively (re)shape texts they encounter" (p.85), it is more and more difficult to authenticate text. So the idea of authorship is something that will be constantly changing in the future. I know that some writers have no problem sharing their work online in the form of blogs and online critique groups, but others are quite wary of sending their work into cyberspace for fear of it becoming community property. It's an interesting dilemma.

The question I keep thinking about, however, is "whether there are universal language/thought structures that allow the transfer of meaning from one to another language, or whether texts are so culture-specific that something is always lost in translation" (Benjamin, 1996,; Chomsky, 2002; House, 2002; as cited in Bazerman, 2008, p. 86). I know that there is not always a word for word translation available, but I never really thought about meaning ALWAYS being lost in some way. It makes sense, though, when I compare the idea to what I know to be true regarding sign language interpretation. Having been a teacher of the deaf and fluent signer, I know the difficulties that exist when trying to transfer meaning from a spoken to a visual representation or vice versa. Most people who are unfamiliar with signing don't truly understand that meaning from a spoken/written language can never truly be transferred EXACTLY to a visual one. That's why it's called 'interpreting.'

I don't have any answers, I just found these two ideas interesting. I'll have to keep them rolling around my brain for awhile.

Where do I start?

There is so much to ponder in Where did Composition Studies Come From? by Nystrand, Greene, and Wiemelt. Trying to sift through the dense nomenclature of this chapter as it follows the development of writing research over the decades was taxing. I found the charts on pages 302 and 303 quite helpful in deriving some meaning out of all the comparisons of the 'isms' since I am, at times, a visual learner. What held my attention the most, however, were the continuous connections I made to current practices in my school.

I wish more teachers would recognize "a powerful sense of dissonance between their responsibility for teaching writing and the inadequacy of their understanding and training for doing so" (Lauer, 1984, as quoted in Nystrand, et al, 1993, p. 268). As the article points out, writing is more than just mechanics of our language, but is a cognitive, social, and recursive process. I still know teachers who use formulaic patterns and think that 'good writing' is technically correct. One teacher even told me she doesn't enjoy teaching writing, but it's so easy because you just use the 'formula' and plug it all in. UGGH!

Schoolwide, we have formal writing assessments twice a year to monitor writing growth. The grade level teachers rate the compositions using a 16 point rubric that equally weighs the four categories of Content, Organization, Language, and Mechanics on a scale from 1 to 4. The given prompts are not tied to student interest or background knowledge and the students are not provided the opportunity to use any reference material in keeping with the state test protocol. It pains me to participate in this, knowing that "despite receiving the same prompt for writing, the students interpreted the task in a variety of ways" (p. 307) and that these two writing samples are not truly representative of what the students know and are capable of producing given more appropriate circumstances.

In keeping with this train of thought, I found it sad to read that "most students did not feel that they could challenge the authority of received opinion, nor did many students believe that they were really invited to develop their own ideas" (Ackerman, 1990, as cited in Nystrand, et al, 1993). This just flies in the face of everything I believe about teaching in general, but writing is something that students could truly have some control over. The fact that many teachers still value memorization and formulas over real learning is beyond my comprehension.

Can creative writing be taught?

The Menand article, Show or Tell, struck a nerve with me. I can owe the beginning of my career as a teacher of language arts to the 'Writing Process' of which I knew nothing when I interviewed for the 6th grade Language Arts position I eventually held for 14 years.

I began as a teacher of deaf students and, having finished college in 1981, was not familiar with the idea of the process steps of prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing that were so in vogue when I decided to leave deaf education and enter the 'regular education' world. I always loved writing stories and poetry and fancied myself a wannabe novelist, so I thought teaching writing would be fabulous. I just didn't have any real experience in teaching writing to the non-deaf population. I remember asking the resident reading specialist in our building what buzz words I should know when interviewing for this position. She handed me an article on the writing process and explained about the various stages involved.

Being the quick study I am, I had all the facts down pat and wowed the principal in the interview. He was familiar with my teaching style since I was already in the building in the special education department, so he was sold! I have to smile when I think about that because I didn't know what I was doing for quite awhile. I loved it, though, and eventually learned that wasn't the only way writing could be taught.

So, can creative writing be taught? It seems many experts disagree. The statement that "writing cannot be taught but that writers can be encouraged" (p. 106) seems a little too nebulous. I believe people can be taught to think in different ways that encourage creativity. I've witnessed this with my students. They can learn about craft and read like a writer, but when it comes down to trying their hand at creating something, they fall back on replicating plots of TV shows, movies, or other books. When introduced to the 'What if' game of taking an everyday situation and applying 'what if' questions, students begin to think differently. Granted, it's a guided creativity, but once they are successful with this, it comes easier after awhile.

That's just one example. I do feel frustrated with the old fashioned notion that elementary teachers should teach all core subjects. How in the world are we supposed to be experts in everything? I'm the first one to admit that I shouldn't be teaching math. I can handle 4th grade math concepts, but I'm not the best math teacher these kids could have. Likewise, there are teachers who don't really know what it means to be a writer and continue the antique notion that good writing means spelling, punctuation, capitalization, and grammar are correct and nothing more. This continues to be a point of frustration for me.

My favorite line, "Teachers are the books that students read most closely" (p.112), is a direct reflection of my assertion that teachers of writing should be writers, themselves. Would we accept teachers of reading that don't read? That notion seems just silly, yet in classrooms everyday there are teachers teaching students how to write based on out dated models and little if any true writing experience.

Please visit The National Writing Project site for wonderful information regarding the teaching of writing.

Awesome isn't Awesome anymore

I started reading Local Literacies by Barton and Hamilton and loved one of the first things I read in the Introduction on page 3, "Literacy is an activity located in space between thought and text." The authors go on to discuss how literacy is hard to observe since it includes things like values, attitudes, feelings, and social relationships (p. 6). I also loved the idea that "People appropriate texts for their own ends" (p.11). The kicker came when, on p. 12, I read, "Literacy practices are as fluid, dynamic and changing as the lives and societies in which they are a part."

I realize that reading and writing are the major focus here, but the whole discussion of fluidity, change, and social practice hijacked my brain and I couldn't stop thinking about the use of slang. Every generation has its own particular words and phrases and I find it fascinating to think about how words change. Who decides what words will mean and how does the new usage spread so quickly? Andrew Clements' Middle Grade novel, Frindle, is a fun story relating to this idea, but slang seems to travel faster than that in real life.

These slang terms are what unite people or separate generations. Sometimes I feel old saying, "Neat!" The word 'cool' is my favorite and it seems to be pretty universal. I still can't say, "Sweet!" It just seems stupid to me. What bothers me most, though, is the overuse of the word 'awesome.' I love that word to mean something that inspires or is truly breathtaking and people use it for the most mundane things. 'Awesome' just isn't awesome anymore and it makes me sad. How personal is that? It seems like such a trivial thing, but words mean something to me and having taught for 29 years, I have witnessed the changing of slang terms in school to be quite interesting.

Maybe we should start a project to bring back 'the bee's knees ' or 'the cat's pajamas.' Maybe we could make up our own and see how far we get! Worth a try!!

Click here for a link

to a variety of slang sites.

Parallels

My intention was to read Chapters 9 and 10 in Bazerman's Handbook of Research on Writing in order to gain a historical perspective on writing, which I did, but I kept finding parallels that were even more fascinating. Early on, Chapter 9 cites some of the things that writing was able to accomplish, like facilitating organization of information; constructing abstractions; holding stable certain procedures, rituals, recipes, and formulae (p. 143). However, the line that struck me most was the following, "Writing facilitates inspecting exact wording to hold authors accountable for what was said, as well as comparing accounts for inconsistencies, differences, and contradictions" (p. 144).

I'm wondering if this is a good thing or a bad thing. Like everything, I believe it is dependent upon the lens we use to view the situation. I immediately thought of how careful we all have to be with our words online these days. Teachers are often discouraged from participating in social networks because districts are afraid of words and images getting into the wrong hands. Administrators even warn us about how we word emails to parents and what we send to our colleagues using our district's system. Students are carefully advised to censor what they post for fear of possible employers viewing their private world.

Another parallel situation within Chapter 9 was the reference to writing being the tool of the elite classes in certain cultures. How interesting to see a similar situation with our new writing technologies, the computer and text messaging on cell phones. These forms are still not accessible to everyone and creates a divide in some areas.

I also found it interesting that in contrast, the scribes of ancient India were of low status and that writing was viewed as a "teaching aid for those too dull to remember" (p. 148). At this time in history, teaching was through recitation and learning was through memorization. The chapter continues to list all the significant discoveries that were made by these people in this time, but the lack of transcribed written text allowed others to take credit for some of these discoveries much later. This must be the reason Copernicus gets the credit for the heliocentric theory of gravitation in the 16th century, even though Indian astronomers formulated this idea in the 6th century!

The major parallel I can draw in Chapter 10 is that of how the invention of the printing press resembles that of the internet. Both provided a means to disseminate knowledge across vast distances and to allow people to connect to one another. "Gaining knowledge of each other through books, scholars across Europe engaged in lively correspondence networks" (p.159). Interesting.

Click below to read an interesting comparison of scribes illuminating the Bible to the internet.

"Change the lens and you change both the view and the viewer" (Tyson, p. 10)

The conclusion to Chapter one of Lois Tyson's book, Critical Theory Today, helped me finally feel that I'm where I'm supposed to be in this journey. Believe me, I've been having my doubts! She writes, regarding her reading of Jacques Derrida's "Structure, Sign and Play" during a thunderstorm, "I was just beginning to learn about critical theory, and my reaction to the essay was a burst of tears, not because I was moved by the essay or by the sublime nature of the thunderstorm, but because I couldn't understand what I'd just read. I'd thought, until then, that I was very intelligent" (p. 9). She continues reading my mind and putting me more at ease by stating, "I had no road map. I was lost...We simply don't know how to get there from here" (p. 9).

I started to relax and contemplate what I had just read and then read it again. I haven't been bursting into tears since beginning my PhD studies, but I have felt flustered and lost several times. I've found myself reading passages over and over in certain texts and thinking that I must not be as intelligent as I thought I was. Part of it could be that I'm pushing my brain in new directions while I'm trying to teach, grade papers, plan a conference, read dense text, research, blog, revise an article and a book review. I just have to change my lens a little. One way I've done that is in response to her idea that "Knowledge isn't something we acquire: it's something we are or something we hope to become" (p. 10). I'm slowing down, accomplishing things in smaller increments, and really trying to see how things fit together. I'm trying to build my road map one road at a time. Sometimes I meander down the out of the way scenic paths, and at other times, I speed along the highway, but always wearing my new lenses.