It wasn't until reading Gwen Harwood's work in year
12 that I formed a deep appreciation towards poetry which inspired
me to become an English teacher and has significantly shaped the way I view and
construct texts today.
When I first read this poem I thought of humanity values and the idea that the poem was 'real' it didn't
glorify life but instead it was a representation of reality. My teacher also suggested feminist
reading with the line "I fired" representing that for women to gain a sense of power
they must first sacrifice their femineity and attribute masculine qualities. We were
also show an image of Gwen Harwood where we identified her as a kind and
cheerful woman yet her poetry portrays her passion, turmoil and anger that she
experienced in her own life. Here I was engaging in Critical Literacy.
It is this
understanding of the hybrid nature of texts and how they position listeners,
viewers and readers that taps into the notion of critical literacy as described
by Luke (2000). In the 'Four Resources Model' Luke and Freebody indentify this
as the role of 'text analyst' (1999). Through the role of text analyst
individuals look at what is happening beyond the text like I was able to recognise how the text had shaped my perspective
and how the text empowered and
disempowered groups such as the feminist example. I was also able to distinguish
that the poem had not been created to express the neutral humanity values but
rather it was a representation of Gwen Harwood's experiences and views on her own
life.
A little under twelve months ago I lost a very important person in my life. So when I was asked to write the Eulogy for my Nan's funeral I began writing
in an attempt to capture the amazing woman that she was. However I had to consider the purpose of a Eulogy. Was it to
sum up a person’s life story, capture moments that made them who they were or was it to demonstrate the significance of their life to
everyone they had touched. I wanted it to not only be significant for me but also to everyone who would be in the audience at church. I also had to consider where and who i would be reading the eulogy to in regards to age appropriateness from ages 16 - 90+ and religious and cultural understandings that would be present.
In the Eulogy I reflected on the joy my Nan had
brought to so many people's lives, the amazing life she had lived and the
spritely nature that shone within her. It was constructed for the people in her
life and those who came to celebrate it. And this is the reason why I cannot
share it with you.
My story of writing my Nan's Eulogy is to illustrate that different texts
have different purposes and that the purposes behind constructing texts
influence the structure and form that is used (Freebody & Luke 1999). The
role of 'Text User' reflects the ability to comprehend cultural literacy by
understanding that texts serve different cultural and social functions (Ludwig
2004). This knowledge is applied when creating, understanding and transforming texts
(Freebody & Luke 1999).
"You are to write a short story of a childhood memory or a memory that has defined your relationship with a parent or carer."
This was a weekly exercise task I was expected to complete for one of my University courses. When I first read this instruction I felt confused and worried that I could not complete the task at hand. Was I to write reflectively or creatively, should it be written in first person or third person and was it to be biographical or autobiographical in nature. And this is where I understood the semantic nature of texts.
My confusion of the task was cleared by my readings of other pieces of work that reflected on parent-child relationships and the use of varying writing conventions to convey this. Some of the texts I read included:
Through the knowledge of similar texts and my own reactions towards each of these texts I was able to identify features of autobiographical writing which assisted me in construction of my own text. Not only was I using the Available design and redesign methods (New London Group 1996) discussed in my earlier blog on 'Multiliteracies' I was also taking the role of 'Text Participant' outlined in in Freebody and Luke's Literacy Model (1999). This role allowed me to engage with Personal literacy through drawing on my prior experiences and understandings of similar texts.
As teachers we can encourage students to engage in personal literacy through asking them questions (Ludwig 2004) such as:
Does the text remind you of
something that has happened to you?
As a child my mum always provided me with every
learning aid possible. Like the fairy tales she read to me before bed she
displayed posters around my room with the alphabet letters and visual images to
assist with my learning of the pronunciation of each letter.
Mum would read out the letters to me A is for Apple B is for Bird and so on until we completed the chart. Before long I was reading the chart by myself and identifying other words that started with the same letter like B is for Bees and C is for Cat. As I continued my learning at school mum created cards with particular words on them and through the same way I had learnt the alphabet I began to understand the words on each card recognising the symbols and "sounding out" my letters.
The literacy process I was undertaking was the role of 'code
breaker' described by Freebody and Luke as the individual’s ability to break
down the codes and conventions of texts in written, visual or spoken forms
(1999).
So what is functional Literacy?
It can be identified as a way of teaching people how to
understand texts well enough to function in a complex society (SIL
International 1999). Functional literacy gives students the applicable or
useful life skills needed to socialise and work in today's society. If we
consider this in a school setting using the methods of functional literacy as
teachers we are then providing inclusivity and equitable practices in our
classroom.
In today's society literacy does not only take the form of written print
text but also incorporates the many variations of literacy that have emerged to
address our cultural and social diversity, technological advancements and the
'shrinking of the world' from globalisation ( The New London Group 1996).
This morning when I woke up I sent an email, wrote a text message, scrolled
down my news feed on facebook that revealed freshly posted images and comments of friends
and family. All of which I would not have known or seen if not for the World Wide
Web. It is from this observation that I can illustrate that we live in a world
that allows us to communicate our daily movements through multimodal patterns
that requires us to identify, read and create new texts using various semiotic
codes (The New London Group 1996).
Cope and Kalantizis developed a framework to describe the process that an
individual takes in order to do this (1996).
So how do we use these multiliteracies that are present in our
daily lives?
Cope and Kalantizis identified three elements within their framework
consisting of Available designs, DesignandThe Redesigned.
The framework thus becomes a more fluid way of creating knowledge applicable
to all literacies which now incorporates the vast array of ways to communicate in today's society (Cazden, Cope, Fairclough, Gee et al, 1996).
"The texts of everyday life are not innocuous, neutral texts requiring simple decoding and 'appropriate' response. They are key moments where social identity and relations of power are established and negotiated... They do so through various lexical and grammatical, generic and semiotic features."
(Luke, Comber & Grant 2003 p. 21)
As a child I remember turning the colour splashed pages of 'My Treasury of
Fairy Tales' book and delving into the worlds illustrated before me. As the
tales drifted from my mum's lips I became absorbed with the fantastical
characters of fairies, mermaids and talking animals. This is where my love of
reading began.
When first considering the word 'literacy', like traditional pedagogical
practices, I thought of reading and writing (O'Toole 2003). I believed I was
literate in the sense that I could read and write and was "at ease with
letters" (O'Toole 2003). These were the very skills that I had acquired
through many years of being read fairy tales and nursery rhymes. However I was essentially forgetting
that I was also cultured and educated a component of being literate that I had
not previously reflected on (O'Toole 2003). And yet I had become cultured and
educated through my early experiences with 'Alice in Wonderland' and 'Snow White' where I had broken the code of these texts into understanding
and identifying the images and names associated with each character. My mum
hadn't taught me literacy but had rather given me an insight into how to
approach reading a book (Bull & Anstey 2005). It was this experience of the
way of approaching reading that contributed to my cultural capital that empowered me throughout school (Bourdieu 1986). It is in this reflection that I can
identify that literacy is both literal and metaphorical. It is a form of social
transformation where an individual’s literacy skills ultimately impacts on
their life chances (O'Toole 2003). It is the understanding of these various capitals and the literacies associated with each that influences my teaching so that I can provide
an equitable and all inclusive learning environment for my students.
