|
For our First Discussion Board Post, I am interested to your reaction to the "Why Johnny Can't Write" article from 1975 that appeared in Newsweek magazine. This article started a back to basics movement in both K-12 and Secondary Education that returned phonics to prominence and was the impetus for the kinds of high-stakes testing like MCAS that has such a grip, to this day, on the American Education Landscape.
For this first post, I invite you simply to react. What do you think about as you read this article? There is no word count or particular requirement, simply respond to what I see as a kind of historical document (a DB for a DBQ?) for the field of Literacy Studies.
16 Comments
Alyssa Campbell
1/25/2022 04:32:16 pm
I am going to begin by saying that honestly, I am really quite conflicted on this particular article. I like and found myself agreeing with some aspects of it, but there were also parts I disagreed with and shook my head at. I think that overall, I agree with the notion that people have to know the rules of writing and language in order to break them.
Sarah
1/25/2022 04:33:27 pm
"Prestige dialect" -- what a concept. This reminds me of the conversation surrounding the classics. Is it important to teach the classics because they are the classics or because they invite students into a place of prestige, or into the cultural-know (or is it no longer important at all)? I agree that we "exaggerate the need for standard English," especially in the world of text sound-bytes, but I also want to give my students all available access into thinking carefully about their own ideas and processing the ideas in the world around them. This kind of thinking requires more than a sound-byte.
Shauna Cascarella
1/25/2022 04:34:37 pm
My first major reaction was in response to seeing Marshall McLuhan's name in discussion of literacy, being that he formed one of the biggest Media Studies programs in the United States. Then I realized ... he's kind of right! The amount of times I have had to adapt my teaching to ensure the students are understanding what they are reading simply because they struggle to form thoughts without being provided an image is beyond comprehension to me. "Can't we just watch the movie?" is the most overused phrase by my juniors and seniors. McLuhan discussing the impact of television on the literacy of young people fits right in with the rest of the article as it goes on to discuss the rise of "creativity" in the classroom and the blatant disregard for the rules of reading and writing that so many of us are accustomed to. I know I am guilty of just throwing a narrative or a creative project at the kids to allay their fears of failure, and yet their creative writing is not much better than I assume their argumentative or persuasive writing would be.
Megan
1/25/2022 04:41:16 pm
Hi Shauna,
Matthew Cutter
1/25/2022 04:35:40 pm
This article is fascinating as an historical document because it echoes the way that many people talk about phones now. It strikes me as a bit alarmist, just like our conversations around phones, seeing that television has not in fact destroyed the written word. I often think of discussions like this being led by people who are just extremely resistant to change and don't know how to cope. Johnny can write, we're just not doing a good job of meeting him where he is at.
Sarah
1/25/2022 04:41:55 pm
I was counting on a reply like this from the non-traditional-grader! Yes, I agree that TV has not destroyed the written word, and I actually love and admire some of what our students can achieve with very few words digitally, but I am concerned with the connection between what they think and what they write. In terns of "meeting them where they're at" - that's my great struggle as a teacher.
Megan
1/25/2022 04:37:25 pm
Reading this article, I felt it could be easy to take out all of the dates ranging from the 1960s and 70s and replace them with the 2010s and 20s. One part that stuck with me is the idea that incorporating more audio-visual components into the classroom created a writing-deficient society. I believe incorporating these could actually enhance one's level of literacy if they are analyzed through writing later on. The example of the teacher allowing students to translate Shakespeare into modern language and their own cultural lingo is a perfect example of a non-traditional way to have students practice writing and increase their level of literacy. I have heard from many teachers that teaching this year is one of the hardest, as some students were learning online for nearly a year. While it may seem that students are behind where they would normally be, I think any progress is progress and it will take creative ways of teaching + restructuring of the education system to really see the desired results of increased writing skills and literacy.
Shauna Cascarella
1/25/2022 04:40:29 pm
I asked students to write local legends using only modern slang to mimic the writing of Zora Neale Hurston's short story "Spunk" and we discussed how truly difficult of a time I had in reading their stories because I am not literate in their slang. It was fun and fascinating.
Megan
1/25/2022 04:42:44 pm
That is awesome Shauna! What a fun exercise that helped their writing skills and increased their literacy.
Olivia L
1/25/2022 04:40:40 pm
Absolutely! I forgot to comment on the audio-visual influence over writing and education. It is a blessing and a curse.
Olivia Limoncelli
1/25/2022 04:37:42 pm
I am very conflicted by this entire idea. In a way, individuals do have a right to their own language, but in a professional setting, the proper English language should be used. It is hard to find an in-between, but I do believe that it is crucial to teach our students the proper sentence structure and writing techniques.
Maura Geoghegan
1/25/2022 04:37:53 pm
I've heard references to this article before, but this is my first time reading it. While reading this I had to continue reminding myself that it was written in 1975 because it seems like something that could have been written yesterday about students today, especially in the midst of the pandemic while many are concerned with "learning loss." As Alyssa mentioned above, there are some sections that I agree with and some that I disagree with. One section that I did agree with on the bottom of page four is that students should write as often as possible and every single piece of writing doesn't have to be graded.
Ashley Merola
1/25/2022 04:39:09 pm
After reading this article, I found the rhetoric they used to assess writing instruction in 1975 interesting compared to the arguments presented today. The paragraph in which Sheils discusses the effect of TV on students' literacy levels reflects the contemporary conversations faculty and families alike conduct about phones and social media. However, the last two pages of the article are what drew my attention the most. The line about asking students to write about their interests before moving onto more subject-specific topics really resonated with me. As someone who teaches primarily writing courses, I was happy to hear that a pillar of my own pedagogy is one that has stood the test of time.
Brian Seibert
1/25/2022 04:39:24 pm
Since the article was written in 1975, it makes it difficult for the reader to relate. I wonder if writing across the country has gotten better in the 45+ years since the article was written. I find it interesting that the author used the cliche of blaming TV for poor writing. With such high demand to watch shows and movies, the writing going into those projects has gotten tremendously more complex.
Kayleigh Holt
1/25/2022 04:41:01 pm
This article touched on a wide variety of topics and ideas. Some of which I felt had far more merit than others. One argument that they touched on, was the fear that students raised "in the glare" of the television were inherently loosing their writing and literacy skills as a result. This felt reminiscent to me of the arguments that we have heard in the last decade or so of how children being so connected to their computers and the internet is detrimental to their academic skills. Another point that I found really interesting was the anecdote that was included by the teacher who was teaching her students English as if it was a second language, called "Standard English".
Melissa Batty
1/29/2022 06:49:16 pm
Yikes. I find myself so conflicted by this article. I will start by agreeing that writing seems to have taken a backseat to STEM –– as if it is lacks importance because the capitalist market deems it financially lesser than. I agree that overcrowded classrooms lead to a strain on an educator and their ability to interact with students in a meaningful way. These classrooms prohibit teachers from assiting each student with the development of their written skills. The article appears to be an ally to writing; however, it exhibits moments of classism, elitism, racism, ableism, and imperialism. What is "ordinary, expository English?" How can an educator reference students as deaf and idiotic because they have yet to gain a mastery of the "English language." Who has mastered the English language? Even using the word "educationese," is so racially offensive and insensitive, that I have difficulty relating to the validity of the argument posed within the article. I will leave my response on a positive note: althought the article argues differently, it is never too late to help an individual improve their writing skills. Isn't that part of our purpose for pursuing a graduate degree in English? Leave a Reply. |
ENGL 513Use this space to post your weekly reading responses. Archives
April 2024
Categories |
RSS Feed