Tuesday, March 23, 2010
N(n)ew L(l)iteracies!
I seem to be writing a paper about new literacies through a New Literacy Studies lens...I'd like to be the first to suggest that one of these names needs to change - if only for my own sanity!
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Informal learning and literacies
Wow. I nearly forgot to do my blog post this week. Why? I hear you ask, well I was busy using the Internet to learn about the best ways to deter spiders (don't ask - just know I am an arachnophobic and that this is the weekend from hell!). Anyway, when I need to learn something fast, I go online and find the answer. As a woman living alone in a strange country (well I guess I should say foreign country, although it is a little strange as well!), I have to teach myself things every week that my formal education as a doctoral student can't help me with. In essence, I am taking part in "informal learning".
This week I read a brilliant article by Mary Hamilton (y'know, one of those articles that you just smile at afterwards because it says everything you've been thinking), and it talked about the kind of informal learning and literacies that people take part in everyday: Hamilton, M. (2006). Just do it: Literacies, everyday learning and the irrelevance of pedagogy, Studies in the Education of Adults, 38(2), 125-140.
"Everyday activities can at any moment present an opportunity for learning" (Hamilton, 2006, p125), and I think we all recognise that we learn unexpectedly from a variety of reasons every day. Among other things, Hamilton goes on to explain that New Literacy Studies "are implicitly concerned with, and informed by, models of situated and informal learning" (p. 126), and the idea of situated learning is one that I think is key in adult education.
Adult basic education students are often those most reluctant to return to the institutionalism of formal education, yet these are also the people who use literacy in their everyday lives "to serve their own purposes and needs"; however, these vernacular literacies aren't always highly valued in formal learning (Hamilton, 2006, p. 131). As with my spider searching, people's everyday literacies and informal learning involves "activities that people carry out to make life habitable" using whatever resources happen to be at hand, as Hamilton puts it, "it scavenges available resources and expertise, appropriating them to new ends" (p. 133).
The point of all this then, is that informal learning incorporates a variety of literacy activities and shows the strong motivations adults have when seeking out learning for a variety of purposes. However, to bring this back to a phrase you've all heard me use many times before, doesn't school suck the life (or in this case the purpose, motivation, and "hands-on" aspect) out of learning?
Hamilton's article seems to suggest that the pedagogies used in formal learning situations can actually prevent learning from occurring, because they "colonise learning, standardise and reduce it...they fail to engage with existing motivations, emphasising a narrow range of achievements and ways of being" (p. 133). There are so many areas I could go to with the rest of this post, for instance, looking at the notion of formal and informal learning from a Postcolonial lens, or summarising the rest of Hamilton's article as she discusses how formal educational situations can learn from the informal to better teach adult students. Instead though, I'd like to bring this back to the topic that started this PhD journey for me, the idea that school (or academic literacies) suck the life out of reading for pleasure.
While Hamilton is talking about adult basic education students with low levels of literacy and I am talking about pre-service teachers who will one day teach literature, the phenomenon she describes is the same for both. It is the "reduction" of a topic to the point where students can no longer find enjoyment of it; it is the disconnection between curriculum and students' motivations, "emphasising a narrow range of achievements and ways of being"; and it is inflicting "individualised, authoritarian relationships and particular methods and routines of study" (p. 133).
These problems, as I see them, relate to curriculum across the board of formal education - Hamilton's words here go some way to explain while people who love reading may sign up for an English degree but get so lost in the formal academic reading of novels and texts that their love of reading is not acknowledged, valued, or used in the classroom. If anything, the adult basic education students may be better off in this area; researchers acknowledge their vernacular literacies and informal learning practices and are beginning to research how to incorporate them into formal learning. I suppose adolescents in high school are also being thought of in terms of situated learning - there is a vast amount of literature on how to incorporate high school students' cultural and social literacies into the classroom to make learning more interesting for them (whether teachers follow through with it or not).
Yet I wonder how much of this is being incorporated into the higher education curriculum, for example, in English Literature degree courses. While universities talk about the best way to encompass multi- cultural- and social-literacies for students in secondary education, do we follow the same suggestions for our own degree level students at all levels, or do we simply try hard to acculturate students into the academy (or academic literacies) with little care of what motivated them to study in the first place?
This week I read a brilliant article by Mary Hamilton (y'know, one of those articles that you just smile at afterwards because it says everything you've been thinking), and it talked about the kind of informal learning and literacies that people take part in everyday: Hamilton, M. (2006). Just do it: Literacies, everyday learning and the irrelevance of pedagogy, Studies in the Education of Adults, 38(2), 125-140.
"Everyday activities can at any moment present an opportunity for learning" (Hamilton, 2006, p125), and I think we all recognise that we learn unexpectedly from a variety of reasons every day. Among other things, Hamilton goes on to explain that New Literacy Studies "are implicitly concerned with, and informed by, models of situated and informal learning" (p. 126), and the idea of situated learning is one that I think is key in adult education.
Adult basic education students are often those most reluctant to return to the institutionalism of formal education, yet these are also the people who use literacy in their everyday lives "to serve their own purposes and needs"; however, these vernacular literacies aren't always highly valued in formal learning (Hamilton, 2006, p. 131). As with my spider searching, people's everyday literacies and informal learning involves "activities that people carry out to make life habitable" using whatever resources happen to be at hand, as Hamilton puts it, "it scavenges available resources and expertise, appropriating them to new ends" (p. 133).
The point of all this then, is that informal learning incorporates a variety of literacy activities and shows the strong motivations adults have when seeking out learning for a variety of purposes. However, to bring this back to a phrase you've all heard me use many times before, doesn't school suck the life (or in this case the purpose, motivation, and "hands-on" aspect) out of learning?
Hamilton's article seems to suggest that the pedagogies used in formal learning situations can actually prevent learning from occurring, because they "colonise learning, standardise and reduce it...they fail to engage with existing motivations, emphasising a narrow range of achievements and ways of being" (p. 133). There are so many areas I could go to with the rest of this post, for instance, looking at the notion of formal and informal learning from a Postcolonial lens, or summarising the rest of Hamilton's article as she discusses how formal educational situations can learn from the informal to better teach adult students. Instead though, I'd like to bring this back to the topic that started this PhD journey for me, the idea that school (or academic literacies) suck the life out of reading for pleasure.
While Hamilton is talking about adult basic education students with low levels of literacy and I am talking about pre-service teachers who will one day teach literature, the phenomenon she describes is the same for both. It is the "reduction" of a topic to the point where students can no longer find enjoyment of it; it is the disconnection between curriculum and students' motivations, "emphasising a narrow range of achievements and ways of being"; and it is inflicting "individualised, authoritarian relationships and particular methods and routines of study" (p. 133).
These problems, as I see them, relate to curriculum across the board of formal education - Hamilton's words here go some way to explain while people who love reading may sign up for an English degree but get so lost in the formal academic reading of novels and texts that their love of reading is not acknowledged, valued, or used in the classroom. If anything, the adult basic education students may be better off in this area; researchers acknowledge their vernacular literacies and informal learning practices and are beginning to research how to incorporate them into formal learning. I suppose adolescents in high school are also being thought of in terms of situated learning - there is a vast amount of literature on how to incorporate high school students' cultural and social literacies into the classroom to make learning more interesting for them (whether teachers follow through with it or not).
Yet I wonder how much of this is being incorporated into the higher education curriculum, for example, in English Literature degree courses. While universities talk about the best way to encompass multi- cultural- and social-literacies for students in secondary education, do we follow the same suggestions for our own degree level students at all levels, or do we simply try hard to acculturate students into the academy (or academic literacies) with little care of what motivated them to study in the first place?
Saturday, March 13, 2010
Double Consciousness
I'll get to the photos in a second, but today, I'm still talking about Postcolonialism (mostly because I feel I have to, and one post can never be enough to even start to explore this critical theory). Two of the major ideas from Postcolonialism are "double consciousness" and "unhomeliness". Both of these notions relate to "being caught between cultures, of belonging to neither rather than to both...psychological limbo" (Tyson, 2006, p. 421). These phrases pole-vaulted off of the page for me, because I'm a little unhomed myself these days; I have a double consciousness. The two photographs above are of the view from each of my homes: the picture on the left is the winter view from my "house" in England, and the picture on the right is the summer view from my "apartment" in Kent, Ohio. I am by no means stating that I have an "unstable sense of self", or that I am a "psychological refugee" (p. 421), but I can definitely relate to how easily this can happen. I am caught between two cultures; I now no longer fully belong to either. When I'm in America I am "other" - not as much as some international students, but nonetheless the language I use, my cultural frame of reference, and my educational paradigms all differ from American students. On the other hand, all is no longer normal for me in England either. I am now that bit "Americanised" in the way I speak, act, and view the world, so I have to continuously track my own cultural identity in order not to become the "psychological refugee" Tyson talks about (p. 421).
But enough about me!! I've been thinking a lot about adult literacy over the past couple of days, and I see a connection between double consciousness and adult basic education. Tyson explains that, "double consciousness and unhomeliness persist in decolonized nations today. Among the tasks formerly colonized peoples face is the rejection of colonialist ideology, which defined them as inferior, and the reclamation of their precolonial past" (p. 422). This quote made me think about adult basic education students as similar to colonized people - let me walk you through my line of thinking here. We are told from almost the moment we're born that we have to learn to read and write in order to achieve in this world, in order to do well at school, and in order to find a job. For adults who, for whatever reason, have not achieved this desired level of literacy, the world is a very different place than for those who take literacy for granted. Adult basic education (ABE) students are "othered" - in a sense, just like colonized people, ABE students are "defined...as inferior" by those in power (or in other words, the colonizers) . However, when ABE students undertake study to make gains in literacy, perhaps to get a better job, encourage their children to persevere at school, or just so they can feel better about themselves, they begin to straddle the lines between the culture of low-literacy adults and the culture of their "oppressors".
I imagine that adults who go back to education in whatever form and raise their literacy levels might end up feeling a little unhomed - they will have developed a double consciousness. It's my belief that these adults would still identify strongly with the community of adults who have low-levels of literacy, but at the same time, by improving their situation, they have begun to align themselves with those in power. I think that this may cause a cultural identity crisis for these learners, just as it does for colonized people.
The two issues here then, are the de-valuing (or othering) of adults who have low levels of literacy, and the cultural identity crisis that may occur when adults begin to raise their literacy levels and alter their life situations. Both of these problems have implications for the design of adult basic education. I see a curriculum issue in whether and how adult learners are prepared for the change in cultural identity that is likely to occur after they finish their studies - is it right to educate them and send them back into the world without helping them come to terms with possible changes in cultural identity? And there are issues around the political and social definitions of adult literacy that feed into the "othering" of adults. I doubt much can be done about this, but adult educators can attempt to include elements of empowerment and liberation into adult education curriculum. This definitely calls for more thought.
Friday, March 5, 2010
Response to Critical Theory Today #1
Tyson, L. (2006). Critical Theory Today, New York: Routledge, Ch. 12 Postcolonial Criticism.
So, here's the background. For a class assignment each student was allocated, by chance, a criticism to learn more about and reflect upon. Which criticism did the English girl in a class of American's get, I hear you ask. Why Postcolonialism of course! A cruel twist of fate? A sickeningly ironic joke from the educational gods? I thought so, I have to confess. I mean, for starters, how boring does it sound?! The word colonialism just seems to make my eyelids droop, and anything with 'post' in front of it transports me back to very sleepy lectures from my English degree days. This certainly wasn't a good start then.
With a sigh of resignation I began reading - well, I had to didn't I? It was an assigned chapter, and not completing an assignment would be a cardinal educational sin resulting in, gulp, failure. So I began to read, with a fully closed mind I must admit, and as with anything one undertakes with a closed mind, I wasn't disappointed. There it was, page after page of text about the evil British Empire and how we colonised country after country and stole their identity, and "subjected [people] to the political domination of another population..." (Tyson, 2006, p. 47). My thoughts grumbled away rebelliously as I read on. Of course it's all true, but England isn't the only nation to have colonised people, I muttered away internally, what about....Ok. I stopped there. Time for a break. I surfed the web aimlessly for a while, watched some t.v, and had a weekend away from study. The following Monday I returned to Postcolonialism with a fresh, and slightly more open mind.
And aren't I glad I did.
Individual identity and cultural beliefs
For a couple of weeks now, we've been discussing the notion of Discourse communities and how we navigate these various communities on a daily basis. As I've already stated on this blog, I find this idea fascinating, so I was pleased when I found what I believe to be a connection to Postcolonial criticism. Tyson (2006) explains that topics in Postcolonialism "illustrate the...recognition of the close relationship between psychology and ideology, or more specifically, between individual identity and cultural beliefs" (p. 427). Colonised people are walking a cultural balance-beam between their culture prior to colonization and the culture forced upon them when colonised. This is often called "double consciousness"; "a way of perceiving the world that is divided between two antagonistic cultures: that of the colonizer and that of the indigenous community" (p. 421). But I think this balancing act between two (or more) cultures is not unique to postcolonial people; isn't this a phenomenon that all people experience as their lives grow and develop and encapsulate new people/identities/cultures?
As an example, I recall a class during my English degree in the UK. In that class the professor asked if I was "working-class". I responded that of course I was - I have a very strong working class identity from my parents and grandparents. "No" she replied, and explained that now that I was undertaking a Bachelor's degree I would be clearly defined as "middle class". At the time I got very annoyed and did not agree at all, but in fact, it's probably true. My intention here is not to start a "class" discussion, but instead to illustrate that by completing a Bachelor's degree I was moving from my indigenous culture into another, opposing cultural, with its own unique values. As this change took place, one culture did not trump the other, instead I had to negotiate the two cultures within my own identity (which in this case, as in Postcolonialism, happened to be somewhat opposing cultures, but I don't think they always have to be opposing).
Some Postcolonial theorists believe that "even if there had been no colonization, the ancient culture would have changed by now...therefore, Postcolonial identity is a dynamic, constantly evolving hybrid of native and colonial cultures", and within this hybrid culture is a "productive, exciting, positive force in a shrinking world that is itself becoming more and more culturally hybrid" (p. 422). This is why Postcolonialism started to appeal to me, because within each of us I believe there is a hybrid cultural state based on where we come from, where we've been, where we are now, and where we intend to go in life. This unique mix within each person is an exciting resource, especially in education, where I believe lived experiences and beliefs are crucial elements for successful learning. This idea is also similar to the idea of Discourse communities, in that we utilise different languages and elements of ourselves depending on the community we are interacting with.
I've only begun to scratch the surface of Postcolonialism with this post, and I confess it's all a little messy and shallow in it's thinking. I have lots more I want to reflect upon in future weeks, especially as someone from one culture living in another culture. I'd also like very much to look at adult education with a Postcolonial lens. For a while now, I've been thinking about adult literacy students as a group who have been "othered" in education, but I'm not a keen feminist (so far, but who knows; last week I wasn't a keen Postcolonialist!) so I've been looking for a theory that incorporates the idea of otherness and oppression that could relate to these adult learners, and I think Postcolonialism might be it. Much more reading is needed (when isn't it?!), but let's see what happens; there's definitely lots more to come.
So, here's the background. For a class assignment each student was allocated, by chance, a criticism to learn more about and reflect upon. Which criticism did the English girl in a class of American's get, I hear you ask. Why Postcolonialism of course! A cruel twist of fate? A sickeningly ironic joke from the educational gods? I thought so, I have to confess. I mean, for starters, how boring does it sound?! The word colonialism just seems to make my eyelids droop, and anything with 'post' in front of it transports me back to very sleepy lectures from my English degree days. This certainly wasn't a good start then.
With a sigh of resignation I began reading - well, I had to didn't I? It was an assigned chapter, and not completing an assignment would be a cardinal educational sin resulting in, gulp, failure. So I began to read, with a fully closed mind I must admit, and as with anything one undertakes with a closed mind, I wasn't disappointed. There it was, page after page of text about the evil British Empire and how we colonised country after country and stole their identity, and "subjected [people] to the political domination of another population..." (Tyson, 2006, p. 47). My thoughts grumbled away rebelliously as I read on. Of course it's all true, but England isn't the only nation to have colonised people, I muttered away internally, what about....Ok. I stopped there. Time for a break. I surfed the web aimlessly for a while, watched some t.v, and had a weekend away from study. The following Monday I returned to Postcolonialism with a fresh, and slightly more open mind.
And aren't I glad I did.
Individual identity and cultural beliefs
For a couple of weeks now, we've been discussing the notion of Discourse communities and how we navigate these various communities on a daily basis. As I've already stated on this blog, I find this idea fascinating, so I was pleased when I found what I believe to be a connection to Postcolonial criticism. Tyson (2006) explains that topics in Postcolonialism "illustrate the...recognition of the close relationship between psychology and ideology, or more specifically, between individual identity and cultural beliefs" (p. 427). Colonised people are walking a cultural balance-beam between their culture prior to colonization and the culture forced upon them when colonised. This is often called "double consciousness"; "a way of perceiving the world that is divided between two antagonistic cultures: that of the colonizer and that of the indigenous community" (p. 421). But I think this balancing act between two (or more) cultures is not unique to postcolonial people; isn't this a phenomenon that all people experience as their lives grow and develop and encapsulate new people/identities/cultures?
As an example, I recall a class during my English degree in the UK. In that class the professor asked if I was "working-class". I responded that of course I was - I have a very strong working class identity from my parents and grandparents. "No" she replied, and explained that now that I was undertaking a Bachelor's degree I would be clearly defined as "middle class". At the time I got very annoyed and did not agree at all, but in fact, it's probably true. My intention here is not to start a "class" discussion, but instead to illustrate that by completing a Bachelor's degree I was moving from my indigenous culture into another, opposing cultural, with its own unique values. As this change took place, one culture did not trump the other, instead I had to negotiate the two cultures within my own identity (which in this case, as in Postcolonialism, happened to be somewhat opposing cultures, but I don't think they always have to be opposing).
Some Postcolonial theorists believe that "even if there had been no colonization, the ancient culture would have changed by now...therefore, Postcolonial identity is a dynamic, constantly evolving hybrid of native and colonial cultures", and within this hybrid culture is a "productive, exciting, positive force in a shrinking world that is itself becoming more and more culturally hybrid" (p. 422). This is why Postcolonialism started to appeal to me, because within each of us I believe there is a hybrid cultural state based on where we come from, where we've been, where we are now, and where we intend to go in life. This unique mix within each person is an exciting resource, especially in education, where I believe lived experiences and beliefs are crucial elements for successful learning. This idea is also similar to the idea of Discourse communities, in that we utilise different languages and elements of ourselves depending on the community we are interacting with.
I've only begun to scratch the surface of Postcolonialism with this post, and I confess it's all a little messy and shallow in it's thinking. I have lots more I want to reflect upon in future weeks, especially as someone from one culture living in another culture. I'd also like very much to look at adult education with a Postcolonial lens. For a while now, I've been thinking about adult literacy students as a group who have been "othered" in education, but I'm not a keen feminist (so far, but who knows; last week I wasn't a keen Postcolonialist!) so I've been looking for a theory that incorporates the idea of otherness and oppression that could relate to these adult learners, and I think Postcolonialism might be it. Much more reading is needed (when isn't it?!), but let's see what happens; there's definitely lots more to come.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)