I actually joined MySpace about a year ago. There had been so much talk about kids and teenagers on the site and school districts desperately tying to block access that it sparked my interest. I wanted to understand all the hype so I decided to join. Naturally I didn't upload a picture ( at the time) fearing a student would see my face on this "subversive" site. But I did search around a bit. I saw tons of pictures of mostly young people with all sorts of profanity and suggestive pictures, which made me, believe there was some truth to all the stories I had been hearing. Then a close friend sent an email forward about a young girl, in her niece’s eighth grade class, who was killed after 'meeting' a man she met online. The story made the newspaper and MySpace, in my mind once again was this Internet networking site that allowed impressionable children to fall prey to child predators so I immediately deactivated my profile on the site. Case closed. MySpace was bad and had to be stopped. A month or so went by and I met a musician who told me about his MySpace page. I asked him (as we were the same age) if the site was just for kids. He told me that all the musicians he knows are on MySpace and he uses it to make new contacts, keep in touch with out of town friends, and to showcase his work. Really? I asked if there were people "our age" on MySpace and he responded there were thousands. Really? I decided to give MySpace another try.
This time what I found was much different. Naturally I went to his site first. I saw video performances of him on stage during Live8, photos of him on tour, heard original music he composed, and pictures of his "friends". Wow! It was a "living" resume for a musician. Not static, boring online resume I was accustomed to seeing. There might be something to this MySpace "thing" after all. So after a few hours of browsing through his "friends" (although I felt like a cyperstalker) I decided to join once again. It was slow going at first. The only "friend" I had was Tom (the founder who appears on everyone's profile). I felt like the high school outcast who wants desperately to be one of the "in" crowd...I wanted more friends. So I reached out. I started to send out "friend" requests to others, searched for old friends, and searched the alumni pages for college pals. One of my first friends was an ex-boyfriend who I kept in contact with and who used the site to promote his networking business. We talked about why we decided to join and what we have discovered about the site. Then I started to get "friend" requests. These requests were mostly from men (my age) who lived in the New Jersey/New York area. Heck, I'm a single gal and have learned that Internet dating is much more "acceptable" then it had once been but I wasn't too keen on "meeting" someone from MySpace. But I thought I would be "friendly" (pardon the pun). A few of my MySpace 'suitors' began to ask for my IM (I don't regularly IM so I had to create an identity on Yahoo Chat in order to communicate). (Random thought- we could apply the same "new literacies" paradigm to the shift in the way single people meet & date...but that is a blog for another day.) Before I knew it I had friends, IM pals, a new dating prospect, and funky new wallpaper for my profile. All my prior inhibitions seemed to go out of the window. That was then, this is now... Most of my "top friends" are family members, students I worked with in grad school, and some of my current favorite musicians. I visit MySpace almost daily, have posted a few blog entries, keep my current favorite song on my page, and have added more photos from my summer vacation in Maui. Since I am an obvious music lover, most of the current "friend requests" have come from bands/musicians, which I am happy to add. But I reserve my Top Friends for my favorites (A girl has to have standards! smile) I am not your average cyber-groupie. So that is my MySpace story. It has become another extension of who I am, what I value, and whom I care about.
Here are some of the other ways I have used MySpace...
* Sent birthday greetings or post holiday "comments" on my friend's/family's profile
* Rearranged my Top Friends to reflect those people I am currently in contact with
* Searched for and sampled new music and the profiles of my favorite musicians
* Visited my friend's profiles and read their pages
* Responded to friend's blogs (even read a short story by an aspiring writer and gave him critical feedback-he never
Responded)
* Visited sites of old boyfriends (I know it's cyber stalking but I can't help it)
* Saw pictures of my friend's families
* Laughed at some of the videos my friend's have uploaded
* Organized a reunion with my students from grad school
* Responded to a friend’s bulletin request for help with a creative project
* Sent my URL to friends
* Arranged to meet a "friend" in Chicago (but chickened out when I got there)
* Dated a guy for about three weeks after "meeting" him on MySpace
And in a bizarre "small world" story- I met a guy at a club in the city, only to find out later, that he had reached out to me on MySpace about 9 months earlier. I never put it together until I was clearing out old messages from my Inbox and saw his face! I thought it was interesting that neither of us would have ever figured it out nor did we recognize the other when we met.
http://www.myspace.com/courikym
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Friday, February 16, 2007
Saturday, February 10, 2007
"The Revolution Will Not Be Televised"
Borrowing a phrase from Gill Scott-Heron's famous spoken word poem, for me, captures what the underlying tone of the Chapters 1 & 2 of Michele Knobel & Colin Lankshear, NewLits book. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTCQSk2l8bc) In the poem, Scott-Heron juxtaposes prevalent 'images' from an everyday medium, television, and the 'real' social cultural struggles for power that impacted African American people during the sixties. He attacks the television medium in a way that highlights the power and influence of marketing and what "dominant" culture deems important. It is a call to action for people. This revolution could not be televised because it, as Scott-Heron states, "would be live". It would be an event, not a headline. (I hope my choice for an opening does not offend anyone because this is not my intention.) I had a hard time finding the right words to capture my feelings and thinking after this week's assignment.
The late hour and the several cups of coffee aside, I finished the reading and felt that the new "mindset" Knobel & Lankshear are discussing can/will have a revolutionary impact, as Schrage points out, on the way in which we think about our work as "reading" teachers and the ways schools will have to "re-orient" themselves. Prior to the reading I expected to read about how digital technology can be incorporated into what we were already doing. I didn't expect that this would problematize the very foundation of what I believed to be right things we are doing for schools and our students. I didn't expect to find myself feeling like an unwitting accomplice in maintaining the same "oppressive" practices that hinder our students from becoming literate. This reminds me of the first time I heard of Marxist theory from my Pan-African professor during my semester abroad in Zimbabwe. It was if a "new" world was being revealed to me that seemed to contradict what I understood about the world. It shattered my own preconceptions of history, present day, and the future. It is interesting that my professor used the work of Freire to highlight the ways we "know" the world is manipulated by forces in order to exact control on its citizenry. This new sense of the world continues to shape my own perspective.
So what does this have to do with reading?
If new literacies are about reshaping our "relationships between people and between organizations", it will obviously force us to reevaluate the entire structure of the educational system. I cannot draw any conclusions at this point but simply ask more questions:
1. How can we create pedagogy of power for literacy learning that meets the traditional standards imposed by state and national standard?
2. How can we effectively train teachers, through professional development opportunities, to meet the new pedagogical approaches necessary to meet the demands of these new literacies?
3. How can we properly support students who are "struggling" readers using new literacies?
4. Is there room for technology "tweens" in the "newcomer" and "native" paradigm (i.e. people in the 28-34 bracket who have their feet in both 'worlds'? How do we differentiate professional development for these "tweens"?
5. Where do we start?
The late hour and the several cups of coffee aside, I finished the reading and felt that the new "mindset" Knobel & Lankshear are discussing can/will have a revolutionary impact, as Schrage points out, on the way in which we think about our work as "reading" teachers and the ways schools will have to "re-orient" themselves. Prior to the reading I expected to read about how digital technology can be incorporated into what we were already doing. I didn't expect that this would problematize the very foundation of what I believed to be right things we are doing for schools and our students. I didn't expect to find myself feeling like an unwitting accomplice in maintaining the same "oppressive" practices that hinder our students from becoming literate. This reminds me of the first time I heard of Marxist theory from my Pan-African professor during my semester abroad in Zimbabwe. It was if a "new" world was being revealed to me that seemed to contradict what I understood about the world. It shattered my own preconceptions of history, present day, and the future. It is interesting that my professor used the work of Freire to highlight the ways we "know" the world is manipulated by forces in order to exact control on its citizenry. This new sense of the world continues to shape my own perspective.
So what does this have to do with reading?
If new literacies are about reshaping our "relationships between people and between organizations", it will obviously force us to reevaluate the entire structure of the educational system. I cannot draw any conclusions at this point but simply ask more questions:
1. How can we create pedagogy of power for literacy learning that meets the traditional standards imposed by state and national standard?
2. How can we effectively train teachers, through professional development opportunities, to meet the new pedagogical approaches necessary to meet the demands of these new literacies?
3. How can we properly support students who are "struggling" readers using new literacies?
4. Is there room for technology "tweens" in the "newcomer" and "native" paradigm (i.e. people in the 28-34 bracket who have their feet in both 'worlds'? How do we differentiate professional development for these "tweens"?
5. Where do we start?
Friday, February 9, 2007
What good are signs if I don't take heed?
Last night I had a flurry of odd dreams with a host of signs and symbols. I keep a dream dictionary next to my bed and usually reach for it after waking and something I dreamed really bugged me. So this morning, I turned to my bedside table and flipped the pages to make sense of what my subconscious had conjured up the night before. Three symbols stuck out to me...one was a mouse. It was a small mouse and he was being dangled in front of my face. For whatever reason, in this dream I wasn't afraid and was only mildly concerned as the person holding him threatened to kill him. Huh, excuse me...I'm a punk. If someone was dangling a mouse in front of my face, animal lovers will hate me for this, I would probably vote for a quick execution ( or a even quicker..get it out of my face!!!!!) So I was anxious to find out what seeing this little critter meant. According to the dream gurus...it was a precautionary sign, a warning that I should be careful in my dealings with people, both personally and professionally. Score One for "Warning".
The second symbol in my dream was a toddler. He was an adorable little thing and I was holding him and kissing him. He wasn't my child. He was a friend's baby as I was staying at their home..(you know how dreams shift setting and context so quickly). Next thing I know, this cute, adorable thing is using a cloth harness to descend from the second floor balcony to the patio below. The rope for the harness is thick and buoyant so his little feet softly play patty-cake with the floor until he stops bouncing and released him from the rope. He then comes smiling and walking into my open arms and that's when I realize he does not have any arms. He does, however, have hands. His hands are coming from his shoulders. My heart breaks at this sight and I wake up. Again, I look up the symbol for child. Usually children are a good omen...unless they are sick or disfigured in some way. If they are, yes, it is a symbol of warning in personal matters.
Finally, I looked up the meaning of lake or water. I remembered a large lake from which one of the rooms I was staying looked out over. The interesting part of it was that the closer I got to the window, I could see that the waters were actually raging. The water was frothy from waves and a murky green-blue. If you'll been paying attention...you can guess what this symbol represented.
At this point of my diatribe, I'd like to make two points...I am not as strange as these dreams suggest and I do not think I can predict my future with dreams. I do, however, that if you pay attention...dreams provide a window into what we may already know to be true in our subconscious lives. Having said this, one would think that I would be extra cautious about my personal dealings today. No such luck! I got into a huge argument with an old friend of mine and said some awful things. That would normally be enough...Not for me! It so happens that today is her birthday! Can you believe that??? It seems that the signs were there...I just thought it meant that someone would do something with me or maybe I should be a little weary of others when it turned out, the signs were really for me. I was supposed to be cautious about how I deal with others. Dang! I really thought I was going to get it right today. Therefore, after several apologies, I hope she can forgive me and I can somehow stop kicking myself in the pants for not paying attention to the signs that were right in front of me the whole time! Thank goodness it's Friday. I need to boogie before I blog about "New Literacies". It has been some week.
Saturday, February 3, 2007
The Purpose of Education
Recently I read James Baldwin's 1963 essay, "A Talk To Teachers" in which he discussed the purpose of education. He stated "The purpose of education, finally, is to create in a person the ability to look at the world for himself, to make his own decisions, to say to himself this is black or this is white, to decide for himself whether there is a God in heaven or not. To ask questions of the universe, and then learn to live with those questions, is the way he achieves his own identity." As educators, we often tell our students that 'knowledge is power'. As a classroom teacher, I remember countless times telling my students about the importance of education. I would lecture them about why they need to do their homework or why they should read a particular book. Yet, I can't call a single moment when I made it abundantly clear that the process of learning would someday allow them to the opportunity to question or make personal meaning of the very things I was teaching them.
These words resonated with me as I read Angela Thomas' article " Children Online: learning in a virtual community of practice". Using Wenger's model of 'communities of practice' as a lens, she described ways in which students were 'making meaning' of their world and themselves and creating a space for identity to evolve. Many times as teachers we will say " But I taught them how to do this...Why don't they do it?" We shift the responsibility to the kids for not 'learning' what we 'taught' as if it is their problem that they just get it. I was so struck but the holes Thomas poked in Vygotsky's theory of learning and the necessity of the "expert" other. In our own district, we focus on the use of Vygotskian approaches to scaffolding learning for our students-again, the premise being that WE are the ones who KNOW and our students are the ones who don't know. Yet it seems educators are the ones who are stuck when it comes to knowing what literacy learning is and what it is not.
We assume that a child with an open book is learning while the student on the internet is wasting time. We assume that all eyes have to be directed at us in order for a child to learn. "New Literacies" means looking closely at the ways in which students engage in literacy practices using technology as a mediator. If we are to truly engage in the teaching of literacy, it seems to me that we have to change what we think literacy learning "looks like". It is abundantly clear that literacy is about identity formation therefore we must understand the digital contexts in which students use language to create an identity for themselves. As Thomas illustrated, although an online community may NOT appear to be a literacy rich environment, in reality, "literacy is marked and mediated specifically through language" in this digital space.
In this era of standardized testing and the death grip of NCLB, particularly on urban districts, we moved further away from the very purpose of education, which as Baldwin so eloquently stated, is the ability for our students to "achieve their own identity". It is up to educators to transform any classroom practices that hinders education's true purpose.
So how can we transform schools and classrooms to allow for these "new literacy" practices to occur and be valued? I think it starts with a complete paradigm shift about what literacy learning really is and keep a clear focus on the very purpose of the institution itself. If we, as educators, don't begin to transform curriculum and teaching and learning to meet these new practices, then someone else will do it for us- which Carmen Luke illuminated in her article.
In Carmen Luke's article "What's Next? Toddler Netizens, Playstation Thumb, and Techno-literacies", she examined the impact of 'educational' software companies and video game media has already far preceded educators in framing what learning with technology looks like. In doing so, they have created a myoptic version of literacy learning with technology in the eyes and minds of parents. Her article was a call to action for educators to grab the reigns from these developers and take a critical look what, who, where, and how children are using technology.
I was particularly struck by two observations which, I had not thought much about, have a real impact on the students in my district. The first was the way in which these games present an Anglo-centric view of the world. It resonated with me when I thought about a recent video someone sent me online. It was a newstory about a young, African American teenager, Kiri Davis, who created a documentary in which she re-enacted the same study about race used by Dr. Kenneth Clark to make the case for desegregation in the landmark Brown Vs. Board of Ed. decision. In the documentary, young black children are asked to choose between a black or white doll. Most of the kids chose the white doll when asked which doll is "good" or "nice" and chose the black doll when asked which doll is "bad". If we know that marketing and products impact young children's preception of themselves, then I can only imagine the detrimental impact on identity, African American students in particular, if the online and digital media exclude them from this evolving media. The second observation made by Luke which really hit home was her conversation about access to technology. Which begs the question... What good is the superhighway, if you all you have is a bus pass? I think these are crucial considerations as we re-examine what learning in this new digital environment for urban, mostly African American, students.
These words resonated with me as I read Angela Thomas' article " Children Online: learning in a virtual community of practice". Using Wenger's model of 'communities of practice' as a lens, she described ways in which students were 'making meaning' of their world and themselves and creating a space for identity to evolve. Many times as teachers we will say " But I taught them how to do this...Why don't they do it?" We shift the responsibility to the kids for not 'learning' what we 'taught' as if it is their problem that they just get it. I was so struck but the holes Thomas poked in Vygotsky's theory of learning and the necessity of the "expert" other. In our own district, we focus on the use of Vygotskian approaches to scaffolding learning for our students-again, the premise being that WE are the ones who KNOW and our students are the ones who don't know. Yet it seems educators are the ones who are stuck when it comes to knowing what literacy learning is and what it is not.
We assume that a child with an open book is learning while the student on the internet is wasting time. We assume that all eyes have to be directed at us in order for a child to learn. "New Literacies" means looking closely at the ways in which students engage in literacy practices using technology as a mediator. If we are to truly engage in the teaching of literacy, it seems to me that we have to change what we think literacy learning "looks like". It is abundantly clear that literacy is about identity formation therefore we must understand the digital contexts in which students use language to create an identity for themselves. As Thomas illustrated, although an online community may NOT appear to be a literacy rich environment, in reality, "literacy is marked and mediated specifically through language" in this digital space.
In this era of standardized testing and the death grip of NCLB, particularly on urban districts, we moved further away from the very purpose of education, which as Baldwin so eloquently stated, is the ability for our students to "achieve their own identity". It is up to educators to transform any classroom practices that hinders education's true purpose.
So how can we transform schools and classrooms to allow for these "new literacy" practices to occur and be valued? I think it starts with a complete paradigm shift about what literacy learning really is and keep a clear focus on the very purpose of the institution itself. If we, as educators, don't begin to transform curriculum and teaching and learning to meet these new practices, then someone else will do it for us- which Carmen Luke illuminated in her article.
In Carmen Luke's article "What's Next? Toddler Netizens, Playstation Thumb, and Techno-literacies", she examined the impact of 'educational' software companies and video game media has already far preceded educators in framing what learning with technology looks like. In doing so, they have created a myoptic version of literacy learning with technology in the eyes and minds of parents. Her article was a call to action for educators to grab the reigns from these developers and take a critical look what, who, where, and how children are using technology.
I was particularly struck by two observations which, I had not thought much about, have a real impact on the students in my district. The first was the way in which these games present an Anglo-centric view of the world. It resonated with me when I thought about a recent video someone sent me online. It was a newstory about a young, African American teenager, Kiri Davis, who created a documentary in which she re-enacted the same study about race used by Dr. Kenneth Clark to make the case for desegregation in the landmark Brown Vs. Board of Ed. decision. In the documentary, young black children are asked to choose between a black or white doll. Most of the kids chose the white doll when asked which doll is "good" or "nice" and chose the black doll when asked which doll is "bad". If we know that marketing and products impact young children's preception of themselves, then I can only imagine the detrimental impact on identity, African American students in particular, if the online and digital media exclude them from this evolving media. The second observation made by Luke which really hit home was her conversation about access to technology. Which begs the question... What good is the superhighway, if you all you have is a bus pass? I think these are crucial considerations as we re-examine what learning in this new digital environment for urban, mostly African American, students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
