Before going into these readings i’ve never heard of discourses and I was even more unaware of “new literacies” and “multiple literacies.” So much information came from the two readings however they both were unable to give one simple definition for these terms. Instead there are multiple different meanings. Take discourses for example, James Paul Gee made pointed out discourse can mean the ways people think, act, and speak or it can be others viewpoints, norms, and beliefs. Yet what stuck out the most to me was how he said discourse consists of a combination of grammar and language, connecting what you believe, value, and do make up the way people are. On the other hand those all associate with being socially accepted and becoming a social network. Which makes sense, it’s a social agreement when deciding ways of writing and speaking. For example Somebody somewhere came to the decision of putting grammar, reading, speaking, spelling, and composition all under one category and calling it ELA, English language arts and others had to have agreed with it. This displays the social impact and how it connects to being considered a social network. Cervetti looked through more of a teacher’s perspective. Also how the two multiple literacies and new literacies both are linked to technology. New literacy is attempting to take a new approach with literacy using today’s technology. Multiple literacies is instilling literacy in more of a modern day approach. Overall they both have the same desire to link literacy into the students lives and teach them how to use it for real world situations. They want to implement literacy but in a more up to date way for students because their world, their generation, things are constantly changing. Any teacher can teach reading and writing but a great one can make it applicable and engaging towards student lives.
Leave a Reply