14 February 2011

Secondary Vs. Postsecondary OR REform Vs. TRANSform



Why is it that the definition of literacy appears to be conceived at the university? Should not our society, and the knowledge and skills one must possess to navigate and function within it, define literacy?

The new Common Core State Standards are based on the notion that transfer of knowledge, concepts, and competencies is key to, and the ultimate goal of, academic “proficiency.” This is the same for me as “application.” In other words, we in the k-12 grades are setting our sights on what students will be able to DO with what they learn. This is (seemingly) in stark contrast to the expectations of the university.

The definitions of literacy at the university level, as well as the expectations for students seems a bit arrogant and naïve to me at this juncture of my life and career. Many of my students find academic writing (which I agree should be a genre of its own) irrelevant and tedious. They prefer writing collaboratively, integrating visual components into their texts, and creating podcasts and web pages as opposed to composing essays and research papers. They also happen to excel at this form of communication, or literacy if you will. The world they will enter and will spend their lives in, with the exception of their years spent at the university, will not ask them to write five paragraph essays, or be familiar with the language of the academy. Why are we still using such an outdated, dysfunctional definition of literacy in education? Students can learn, and we can teach, all the strategies necessary for academic and vocational success, regardless of whether we use (and they are familiar and comfortable with) belles letters, British Lit., or blogs. Why are we not defining literacy in terms of how students can use knowledge and skills in various, dynamic, multi-modal contexts?  Why are we not assessing a student’s ability to create/edit a blog or webpage, as opposed to their five paragraph essay? How can we tell a student who is computer literate (and beyond!), and who composes effectively in that mode, that he/she is illiterate, or basic, and must agree to remediation before being allowed full, matriculating status in our universities?

In K-8 we strive to provide authentic, relevant writing contexts in which to situate our students to develop their writing skills. However, we then weigh them down with the most inauthentic high stakes writing we have available – academic writing – in the form of research papers, critical analysis of literature, etc. The ONLY place they will be called upon to do this is IN academia. As a secondary teacher, I don’t get to choose the type of student I get; it’s open enrollment all year, every year. I don’t get to make up my own language and version of literacy that students must learn and be able to use so they can become part of an extinct (at least in the real world) academic tradition. I strive to help them discover and develop the strategies and competencies that will serve them in life – at work, in their families, with the business community, and beyond. College is no longer the land of the privilege, and never will be again. Seriously, it’s been a HUNDRED years – WHAT is taking us so long?

I recently had a professor who proposed that we don’t need educational REformation, but that we are in desperate need of educational TRANSformation. Hmmmm....

1 comment:

  1. When you stated it is "open-enrollment all year" I laughed, but I know this all too well. I think that is why I like seminar-style classrooms, which isn't very common at the high school level. I think open conversation about writing and reading, help to bring all students to THEIR next level. I think it provides an even playing field in rooms where there are clear educational differences and understandings. I think some teachers and professionals in education worry that jobs be lost if we commit too much to what the real future of education looks like.

    ReplyDelete