Week 1, Literacy as a Social Practice
"The
distinctive contribution of the approach to literacy as social practice
lies in the ways in which it involves careful and sensitive attention
to what people do with texts, how they make sense of them and use them
to further their own purposes in their own learning lives" (Gillen and
Barton, 2010, p. 9).
The social approach to understanding literacy, as I am understanding it, focuses on the broader social and cultural aspects of literacy rather than reading as a technical skill. It emphasizes how people use literacy and text in their everyday lives. Our lives are full of what could be called “reading”. Literacy Debate: Online, R U Really Reading? by Motoko Rich makes what I think to be an accurate metaphor when it describes the way some characterize this type of modern literacy consumption as empty calories. The metaphor I immediately thought of was art. Art is all around us but it is only my proficiency with the principles of art and design that allows me to see and appreciate it. Perhaps if I taught music or math I’d have made a different comparison. In the end, I think this is reflective of what I believe to be at the core of the debate. We can only understand things in the context of what we already know. There are ways of knowing that a mathematician might have that I do not because the math skills that I use in my day-to-day life are too poor to allow me to appreciate. If we do not work to expand our technical ability with literacies in all areas, beyond the social and culturally relevant ones, are we not limiting our capacity?
While I would argue a broader perspective is necessary I would not diminish the importance of contributing to the social approach either. We cannot progress if we are constantly looking backward. Neither would it be productive to continue walking through a forest without a clear understanding of where you had already walked.
References:
Gillen, J., Barton, D. (2010). Digital literacies. London Knowledge Lab Institute of Education University of London.
Rich,
M. (2008). Literacy Debate: Online, R U really reading? The New York
Times, 1-10. https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/27/books/27reading.html
Jonathan,
ReplyDeleteI think the comparisons you made in your reflection were very insightful and, in a way, summarized the important aspects highlighted in the readings. I agree with your reading that it is valuable to expand our abilities and understandings in all areas. Likewise, I think this is less of a debate between which should be our focus the new versus the traditional literacies but rather a conversation starter about how to utilize and incorporate both as they both have different value to us and our students.
Hi Jonathan,
ReplyDeleteI was really compelled with your response to my post, so I had to come and read your post as well. I found your comment "We can only understand things in the context of what we already know" very interesting. This is an insightful way of looking at the argument, and I think its a valuable stance to consider when focusing on the ways in which we use literacy to broaden our capacities to learn. I also agree with your "We can not progress if we are constantly looking backward" comment. This seems, in my opinion, to make a great point in the discussion. How can we ever be open to learning about every aspect of literacy if we are focusing on the classic aspects? Overall, great post!