My Research Has Proven...

...that complete lack of inspiration and total frustration are a direct result of lack of sleep and too many things on one's plate at a time.

I think I'm at least a bit better now. I hope.

So, obviously, Thursday wasn't quite a productive experience for me. It was just frustrating, and I know that 99.9% of that was due to my fatigue. I have NO idea what exactly my next step it, because I'm not 100% sure where I stand, but here's my chosen (this is really what I do want to do research on) research question:

How do students’ perceptions of South Africans change as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on African Literature?

What I'm thinking for data now includes some of what was discussed in class on Thursday--some sort of "pre-assessment" of students' perceptions and where those perceptions come from. (Movies, TV, etc.) Most of the other data to be collected I think will be the same as I posted last week.

Now, as for data analysis...I think that there's some "cooking" of data as well as organization of "stuff" that can go on as I go along in my unit, and as I assess my students for typical "grade" types of things. However, I think that the majority of major analysis should probably come after the fact, because of the "before" and "after" comparison.

The other thing that I've been wondering is whether or not I should choose to track specific students rather than the entire class? I could choose students of varying initial perceptions, or even students of various "participation levels" (aka-those who are and aren't typically engaged) to get a varied sample? I don't know--this is mostly a new idea, and I'm thinking out loud.

So...what do you guys think? I could definitely use the feedback this week. Thanks for your help!

Oh the Data, the Data

First of all, let me just say a HUGE "Thank You" to everyone for last night's discussion. I left and I felt lighter than I have in quite a while...I really was having such a hard time with my research question and was terrified of the overwhelming task of implementing research into all of my classes over the course of an entire semester. Yeah, I really thought that, and so learning that data collection will take place in one of my classes over the course of one unit? RELIEF. (Don't get me wrong, I'm still very well aware of the fact that this is not going to be easy, but I can just breathe a little easier now.)

Also, I really don't think I would have been able to solidify my research question into something so "workable" without listening to our discussion and then adding your input. I can actually begin to see how this will be able to work itself into my classroom without having to revamp my entire life--which I was planning on doing.

So--THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!

Now, as for a response to last night's discussion of data, I kind of feel like we did this at the end of class, so I'll just recap here. Let me know if I need to include anything else. :-)

RESEARCH QUESTION:
"What is the nature of student perceptions of (insert culture here based on unit chosen) as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on (insert country/continent here based on unit chosen) literature?

PURPOSE STATEMENT:
"The purpose of this study is to examine the nature of student perceptions of (insert culture here based on unit chosen) as new media is infused into a World Literature Curriculum unit centered on (insert country/continent here based on unit chosen) literature."

PEOPLE INVOLVED:
* Teacher-Ms. Newby
* Students-Particular Class (A1, B1, etc.)
* The "Other" as introduced by the new media

PLACES TO COLLECT DATA:
* Classroom
* Computer Lab
* Home
* Internet/"Blogosphere"

POSSIBLE DATA TO COLLECT:
* Observations and Notes
* Lesson Plans
* Interviews
* Audio Recordings/Conversation or Instant Message transcripts
* Surveys
* Student work

Oh Brother, What is my Project?

So, I'm a teacher. Action research is perfect, right? However, while I'm SO glad that we're currently in the "visioning" stage of this thing, I think I may need glasses.

Here's what I know:
* I want this process to inform and improve my practice.
* I want the research to have a positive impact on my students (or at least not DETRACT from my normal standard of teaching.)
* I want my students to become more globally connected/open-minded/knowledgeable, hopefully opening the doors for an appreciation of literature created within other cultures.
* I will have 5 sections of World Literature in which to do this project--2 Honors classes and 3 Regular.

So...here are the "working" research questions I have developed. One has absolutely nothing to do with the other:

1-"How does the use of new media affect student connection to cultures outside of the U.S.?"

2-"How can our knowledge of traditional literacies help shape our comprehension and development of media literacy?"

I think that the second is interesting, though probably being researched all over the place, and the first one is obviously more tied to the list above. I also think that the first may be a bit more "action research-y" because I develop my own curriculum around the question whereas the second seems to be a bit more difficult to "implement" within the classroom.

So, with regards to the first, I think that I'll need some way to assess "global connection" before and after the project. There's a "test" out there that could possibly be helpful for this (the Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale, but we'll have to see.

I've also thought about how to involve an analysis of how various cultures are treated within academic circles as well as in popular media as opposed to within outer new media forms, but this may make things a bit more complicated. And then there's the big question, "How do I get the kids to care about the new media element in order to even 'test' for personal connection?" It all sounds a bit nebulous to me. Any thoughts?

Reading Response 6-The Role of Schools

Kalantzis and Cope’s “Changing the Role of Schools” offered up some interesting ideas pertaining to the educational system. I feel like the contextualization was comprehensive regarding education’s past, present, and future relationship to work, civics, and personal life, and it was interesting to see how the authors demonstrated the interconnectness of education and other elements within society.

While I see and understand the first two sections, work and civics, for me, personally, I think that the most interesting section was the one on personal life. I think that this is because it is within this realm that I am able to actually make direct connections to my individual practice. It is here that I see the most potential for realistic change as an individual teacher because it doesn’t take the alteration of an entire society to begin teaching in a way that respects “multilayered identities.”

In the article, the authors point out that, since the end of the Cold War, “Instead of mass consumption, we are experiencing increasing subcultural fragmentation around niche markets…When not through a language of its own, each subculture speaks in its own specialized discourse.” And while these subcultures are becoming more and more defined and exclusive, they are also interacting more and more closely with others, creating a very interesting conglomeration of subcultures in small spaces. Trying not to sound too cliché, I think that we can see this “separated togetherness” very clearly within our public schools. Whether looking at the division of race, socio-economic class, or even just “cliques” within a school, these personal identities greatly affect the learning environment within my classroom.

As a teacher, I can see the value of using education in this “multilayered identity” fashion. Any practitioner will tell you that an open acknowledgement, respect, and access of student individuality can have a significant positive impact on learning. I think, though, that the problem lies in the fact that until there’s a nuclear holocaust and we start it all from scratch, the evolution of the educational system to include these principles is going to very slow-going. Does that make it any less worthwhile? Of course not, and I think that if more teachers would engage with these ideas then the change would be more effective more quickly. As for me…I’m gonna at least try.

Media Post 5--A Week After Valentine's Day...

I went and saw Valentine’s Day. It reminded me a lot of Love Actually in that there are a million different people in it, many of them well-known, and they create a myriad of story lines that intersect and interweave over the course of the film. I thought it worked…many of the critics didn’t. Many of you may not. But I don’t care; I liked the movie.

When I got home from the theater that night, my roommate said that she’d been listening to a film critic on the radio who had dubbed Valentine’s Day “homophobic” because the story’s “gay” storyline culminates in one man caressing the other’s face with a flower, rather than a kiss. As I thought about this, I was struck by the ridiculousness of this statement. Has it really come down to the fact that the only way to demonstrate love within a film is by having the characters make out? Gay, straight, whatever, is there really nothing left to be said for tenderness, or does it have to be full-force sexuality all of the time? If that’s the case, it’s sad.

Now, would I ever use this in my classroom? Probably not, especially not this specific example, what with the general attitude regarding sexuality in the public schools in Utah. However, I can see using bits and pieces of the film to help in the instruction of narrative structure, as each individual storyline is relatively short. Further examination of various story lines could also be use to show interconnectedness of story and how each character within one narrative has his or her own specific life and set of circumstances that come into play, even if you’re not telling this particular character’s story.

"Reading" Response 5-Digital Nation

First of all, can I just say that “Digital Nation” surprised me. While I was expecting a technology-heavy exploration of how digital media has incorporated itself into our lives, I really wasn’t expecting the relatively cautious and very two-sided approach to the pros and cons of life in a digital world. I think that oftentimes people choose a “camp” when it comes to innovation and progress, and it’s sometimes hard to remember that most of us are trying to reside in a world that is somewhere in the middle. For me, this recognition first came when Rachel Dretzin expressed her own uncertainty regarding digital media, especially with regards to her own kids. Again, as I was expecting a very blatant “GO TECHNOLOGY” type of presentation, the fact that the producer/director was unsure herself was refreshing.

As I watched “Digital Nation,” there was one specific conversation that stood out to me, probably because it is the same question that I have asked myself as I have interacted with my own students. After showing some of the results of research regarding multi-tasking and how those who think they’re wonderful at it actually aren’t, Douglas Rushkoff talks to Rachel as they are walking down the street. He says, “We need to know if we’re tinkering with something more essential than we realize…Are we changing what it means to be a human being by using all this stuff?”

We talked a little about this in class last week in regards to games and learning—whether gaming culture is, in fact, altering the learning styles of our students, if the beings that are now sitting in our classrooms are fundamentally different due to the games and other technology that they interact with. I, personally, would say that, as people are a sum total of their biology plus their experiences, yes, technology has altered people, which is why Media Literacy Education is, I feel, so important.

As I was looking through the Core Principles in relationship to “Digital Nation,” I think that many of the “areas of uncertainty” within the program could be addressed, or at least smoothed over a bit, by incorporating and institutionalizing the Core Principles. In particular, Core Principle 1—that Media Literacy Education requires active inquiry and critical thinking about media—is HUGE. I know it sounds a bit simplistic, but I think that if we all were a bit more critical (in an analytical, not a negative, way) as teachers, students, parents and children, many of the “issues” that arise with digital media could be resolved or even avoided. For example—the kids who’ve died in Korea during gaming tournaments? I’m of the opinion that THAT could have been avoided with a bit of logical reasoning.

Media Response 4

So, this week, in response to our reading, I decided to take a trip down memory lane and go back to an age when I did play video games. Last Sunday, I found an online version of Oregon Trail and started playing it. I was immediately transported back to third grade as I chose the names for my characters, my occupation, and the date I planned on leaving Independence, Missouri. My initial trip across the plains that day went well, until I was about three landmarks away from the finish, when my computer froze and my game ended. Playing it later in the week, Boyfriend and I managed to kill off our entire “family”—he was the only one who made it to the end because we all starved to death or drowned.


The thing that I thought was interesting about this process was to look at it now from a teacher’s perspective. As I mentioned playing this game to someone (I can’t remember who—it could have been one of you, but I’m thinking that maybe it was my student teacher), she said that she remembers competing with her friends, trying to see who could kill off his/her entire party the fastest. Now, I’m not sure, but I’d assume that WASN’T the educational objective of her teacher at the time, and I wonder what students actually learned from these days in the computer lab. I know that I, personally, remember thinking that it was “cool” and “fun,” especially because back then, computer games were very new.


I also had the chance to play the original Mario Brothers game this past week. I used to LOVE Mario Brothers 3, and as I played it was amazing to me how much my hours in front of the game as a kid are stored in my subconscious. I sat there and it was as if my hands and my head were coordinating to do things and go places in the game that I didn’t consciously know existed. It was really weird, having my subconscious control my actions. As I thought about this, I started pondering the implications if we could find a way to harness this aspect of gaming, the “training” of the subconscious, and apply it to learning. What would happen if we could use gaming to subversively “program” knowledge into students? Not a very ethical thought, I know, but still an interesting one.

Reading Response 4-Games and Learning

A couple of years ago, I had to share my classroom with one of our “roving” teachers, a World History teacher. It was the first time I had had the experience to truly sit back and observe someone else’s pedagogical practice, and it was rather enlightening to me. As I observed this particular teacher (who was a good one, by the way—not the type to sit students in front of a worksheet and then plan football pays all hour) it was interesting to see how he incorporated media into his classroom, particularly the use of video games. Much like the Civilization games described by Squire, this teacher used things such as Axis and Allies and another Roman Empire game, which I can’t think of the name for, in his instruction. At the time, I honestly thought that this was simply a way for Mr. Teacher to get up and play video games in front of his class. (He was the kind who wouldn’t hesitate to tell his students that he’s been up until 4 that morning playing Halo—NOT a good thing in my book, and I tend to be judgmental, so you can see how I could possibly make this kind of assumption.) After reading the articles for this week, I still have my doubts as to the effectiveness of this kind of teaching strategy; however, my hesitations may be for different reasons now.

Okay, as you have probably already deduced, I am not a particular fan of the video game. I think that certain games can be fun (original Nintendo Mario Brothers, Dance Dance Revolution, Rock Band, the Wii Sports games, and a few others) but I tend to lean toward the “worthless waste of time” camp, which again, I know is horribly judgmental and rude. Perhaps it’s because I have seen the negative effects—lack of ambition in anything else, complete lack of social skills, neglected spouses, ruined marriages etc.—that come from addiction to the fake worlds inside of the screen. YET, as I read for this week, I feel that some of what is being discussed as possibility for learning with video games is innovative and hopeful. I think that there truly are possibilities out there, but I think that, as educators, we need to make sure of one thing—that these types of teaching strategies are facilitating learning and aren’t becoming a “filler activity.”

As I read Ito, I was thrown back to elementary school and the days of Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego? and Oregon Trail. I remember going to the computer lab, sitting in front of big, clunky monitors, and playing them for hours at a time. I loved it! And yet, now, as an educator, I have to ask, “What was the point?” At least with the spelling games and the word processing car races, I can see the connection to the curriculum. Okay, so Carmen Sandiego does geography, but Oregon Trail? Really? I think I found this same weakness in the discussion of Grand Theft Auto and Squire’s argument for the potential of open-ended sandbox games. Yes, it’s good to have fun, and yes, it’s good to have students engaged because they’re having fun. However, without an objective you may as well turn on Halo, or better yet, Dance Dance Revolution, at least then they’d be getting some exercise.

Media Response 3-I Heart Regina

As you are all (except maybe Amy) aware, I LOVE Regina Spektor's “Fidelity” music video. Then, the other week, as I was reading a little about her (in class as we watched her video-I picked up the habit from Amberly, blame her), I was made aware of how often she uses literary allusion in her lyrics. Now, I’m a self-professed “lyrics girl”—if I think the words are cool, it doesn’t matter how terrible the music is, or how awful the person who sings them appears to be; I will like the song, the album, the artist. (This is probably the reason for my unexplainable love of John Mayer—his lyrics spoke to me at a time when I needed them—as corny as it sounds, it’s true.) Regina is another one who has caught me here. I enjoy her use of and play with words, themes, and allusion. Add to that the fact that her music video is rockin’, and she’s got me. I own her music, and one of the first reasons (among many) that I fell in love with (500) Days of Summer is her appearance on the soundtrack.

That being said, I realized the other day that I know absolutely nothing about any of her other music videos. Do any of the others come close to touching “Fidelity”? In my quest to answer this question, or at least become more familiar with her video work, I decided to Spektor-fy myself this week and use my media analysis time to check out some of her other work. What I found was interesting…

First of all, the red earrings that appear once her locket drops and color is introduced in “Fidelity” appear again and again in her videos. Perhaps it’s just because she likes them, but I would venture to say that it’s probably more than that. Often they are highlighted in hints of color, even when the rest of the scene is black and white; perhaps it’s a connection to who she is, herself, as a person?

The second thing is that all of the videos I looked at were truly perfect for analysis. It is evident that Spektor herself, or maybe it’s just her directors, though I think that it’s probably more her, as an artist, trying to present various messages through the videos as well as the words. If nothing else, however, they’re visually stimulating and thought provoking without being “too much” or “stupid.” I think all of these I’ve placed below are excellent choices when looking at the codes of music videos, and I truly would use any of them in a lesson on making meaning from textual analysis. Using “Sampson” in teaching allusion would also be effective, though in this case the lyrics may be a more obvious choice of focus.

“Samson”

Especially when looked at in relationship to the story of Samson and Delilah, looking at this video, one may get the message that sometimes things aren’t what they initially seem to be, or perhaps that things evolve and change over time and with perceptions?

“Us”

This one I think is interesting because of the stop-action animation effect created throughout and the used of the paper medium as well. I think that it’d be really interesting to see what my students would make of this music video in relationship to the lyrics of the song.

“Better”

I LOVE how it initially looks like there are many copies of the same person, yet upon closer observation it’s obvious that there are different faces. Through the various influences presented, are these women convinced that they need to be the same in order to be happy or accepted? In the end there’s an allusion to the idea of “marching to a different drummer,” which I think is probably Spektor’s point—be yourself.

Reading Response 3--Informality Anyone?

So, because my media post was forever long, because I am teaching in class on Thursday, and because even I am tired of listening to me go on and on, I have made a commitment to myself that this week’s post will be of the less verbose variety. Because of this commitment, I am going to respond to one of the readings and leave the rest for my lesson.

I think that things may be finally coming together in my mind. Like my father’s explanation of how to use Word 2007, Amy’s overt instruction/explanation of the connection between Gee’s “structure” and Kress’s “purpose” helped things to click for me. The New London Group’s “Pedagogy of Multiliteracies” provided the final connection that has helped me to make sense of it all, for which I am grateful. (Now here’s hoping that MY version of “sense” is the same as others’.) As I’ve been “putting it all together” this week, I had a few more random thoughts regarding this specific reading, and I want to focus on one of these here.

This particular, and quite random thought deals with the discussion of changing working lives. We have talked about the need for us, as educators, to cultivate “profile people” and the fact that our students are multimodal learners. In the New London Group’s article, they talk about the fact that a new work life (which is what is happening with the focus on profile people, multimodalities, etc.) is the result of new social relationships at work. Technology has helped to alter the workplace and the attitudes of workers, who now work in teams. They say that “effective teamwork depends…on informal, oral, and interpersonal discourse. This informality also translates into hybrid and interpersonally sensitive informal written forms, such as electronic mail” (12).

As I read this, I noticed the use of variations on the word “informal,” and I began thinking of my own work life. Has my realm of work, the classroom, become a more informal place due to revolutionary changes in technology? As I thought about it, I came to the conclusion that, yes, there is a level of informality that exists in the public high school that I am pretty sure did not exist when I attended high school. (Allow me to qualify at this point: this is from my own personal experience and observation—nothing else.) The introduction of email, text messaging, and social networks have, again—in my opinion, broken down many of the “boundaries” that were once a part of the teacher/student relationship. Students who would, even still, NEVER dream of looking the teacher’s home phone number up and then picking up the phone to call and ask a question, have absolutely no problem trying to get cell phone numbers and then texting questions (or even less formal things) to teachers. Email has made it possible to get information to a teacher at any time of the day or night; making appointments for face to face interaction is rendered unnecessary in the minds of many because of this technology. And then there’s Facebook and MySpace. People have been fired because of the “informal nature” of the content of their social networking pages when students have been involved. After thinking about it, I think that technology is one of the main elements at the core of changing relationships between teachers and students. I’d never really thought of it that way before—maybe it’s just me though?

Overall, after reading for this week, I think that the face of education in changing in all kinds of ways that I have never thought of before. It’s interesting to look at it with a different set of lenses.

Cry, Media

As it is going to be a very large part of my life very soon, the subject and methodology of my action research project has kind of integrated itself in my subconscious; it is always in the back of my mind, and I can imagine it probably is in everyone else’s too. As a result of this, I’ve been paying more, and closer, attention to how media has shaped and continues to shape my world view. In addition, I’ve been more conscientious of how I use it in order to help my students to understand and be able to visualize the unfamiliar areas of the world that we will be studying.

These days, most of my media interaction, outside of requirements for our classes, has focused on building schema for my students’ study of the novel Cry, the Beloved Country. Now, even though the novel was written almost as a warning to South Africans before apartheid was officially institutionalized, I feel that to fully appreciate the power of the novel, my students need to gain a basic grasp of South African history during the apartheid era and after its abolition. In addition, because my students have absolutely NO concept of Africa at all, let alone South Africa (they often think that when I say “South Africa” I mean “the southern half of the continent that is Africa”) I like to allow for visual and audio experiences while also allowing them to discover bits about the history on their own as well.

So, here are three of the “pieces of media” that I have viewed and/or used that have connected directly to my classroom in the past month.

This first one is the trailer from the 1987 film Cry, Freedom, which was based on the true story of Steve Biko and his interactions with a white South African reporter, Donald Woods. As Woods, himself, wrote the book, this seems to be a pretty accurate representation of one particular instance of apartheid at work, and it is one that my students seem to get into. I like it because it focuses on someone other than Nelson Mandela, it demonstrates the fact that not all white people were evil (which is VERY important in relationship to understanding the novel), and the setting allows the students something to visualize when it comes time to picture the landscape while reading.


This clip is from Paul Simon Graceland: The Africa Concert, a concert featuring musicians from South Africa held in Zimbabwe in 1987 in order to raise awareness. This one I use in conjunction with a discussion of what role music plays in a culture and how we can learn a little about the “other” through an examination of their music. I tried to find a clip of the entire group singing South Africa’s now national anthem, “Nkosi Sikelel' iAfrika,” but alas, Youtube did not have one. I like this one, though, because I love Ladysmith Black Mambazo. The other thing that’s cool about the recording of this concert is that it’s interspersed with images from life around Zimbabwe, and while I recognize that it’s not South Africa, the geographical location is much closer than what my students are typically familiar with.


This final trailer is from the newly released film Invictus. I haven’t shown any part of it to students because it’s not yet on DVD, but for me, personally, seeing the film was a reminder of why I have been fascinated with South Africa since my 10th grade English teacher made us read Cry, the Beloved Country. In this particular case, I was amazed at the ability of media to reawaken the passion that had dimmed a bit over time. I loved the film.


Now, as a final note, most especially for Amberly’s sake, I’ve never been to South Africa, though it’s always been a dream. I have no direct personal experience with this place, beyond research and interacting with people who are from there and who have lived there. Given that, I am aware that there is so much I don’t know. However, I try my best to not perpetuate stereotypes to my students and to demonstrate my interest and passion to them through the use of this (as well as other) media. (Sorry this is so stinking long!!)

Rant Anyone?

So, as a preface to my commentary here, I’d just like to say that I am looking forward to the presentations on Thursday, because in all honesty, this week’s reading was challenging for me. I’m not too sure why, but I have had a difficult time getting to a point where I feel as though I truly comprehend the discussion taking place across these three readings, especially with regards to Kress’s “Multimodality” article. As for the bits that I did fully grasp, I feel as though a “ditto” to Erika’s post would probably encompass the better part of my thoughts this week.

However, there are a few things that came out of the Seiter article, in particular, that I want to address from my perspective as a teacher. After reading her work, and despite her overt (and self-acknowledged) negativity, I still want to say to her, “Thank you! At last someone has said it!”

Now, don’t get me wrong, I love technology, and I think that its use can truly revolutionize the educational process, when instituted in a manner that facilitates students’ overall learning and growth. However, I am with Seiter when she says that oftentimes technology is viewed as this “silver bullet” which will somehow manage to kill all educational woes. As she so forcefully states, IT DOESN’T WORK THAT WAY. And I honestly believe that if it did work that way, there would be no need for a program such as ours. I feel that learning about media literacy education is a means for educating educators about how to effectively teach media so that it can be a positive force within the educational realm. As it stand now, though, with so many holding the views so forcefully challenged by Seiter’s article, it can even, at times, cause more harm than good.

I just keep thinking back to her discussion of High Tech High, and I just get so irritated. As a public school teacher, I am constantly being told that “I’m not doing enough” or that “I need to be doing better.” Well, as a teacher who easily works 50-60 hours in a typical week, I really am doing all that I can, to the best of my abilities. My resources are often limited, and yet my students still score relatively well on standardized tests. And as Seiter points out in her article, students in traditional schools often score better when tested for actual content knowledge. I get really tired of being constantly compared to other schools and teachers, especially when, as Seiter states, schools like High Tech High can afford public relations reps and billions of dollars worth of PR and equipment to make themselves look good. Honestly, how is a normal teacher supposed to compete with that? (I can feel myself slipping into my “lack of regulation for charter schools” tirade right about now, so I’m going to move on…)

And as a final note, because I’m into my 500th word, I also really appreciated her assertion in the beginning that “computers cannot teacher-proof the classroom.” Do I feel as though computers and all that they bring with them have a place within the educational system? OF COURSE I do. However, I do not think that they should be an excuse for shoving 45-50 students in one class. If there is anything that has been emphasized over the three readings that I did fully understand, it’s that technology, like any other text, must learn to “read.” You need teachers to teach that.

Media Response 1

After reading the articles for this past week, especially the one on social networking, I decided to spend some quality time with my Facebook account. Really and truly, I probably log on twice a week for an average of about 5 minutes each, so spending a significant mount of time on the network is pretty abnormal for me, and it was an interesting experience.

First of all, as I logged on, it brought up the News Feed home page, where I noticed right off that my sister had changed her status and her profile photo. The little picture that shows up on the page showed her with our youngest brother, Brayden, in a photo taken over the break—a photo which I was initially in as well. Offended that she’d cut out her older siblings (me and our other brother, Landon) I immediately clicked on the picture without paying attention to anything else. It was when her profile showed up, complete with the entire photo of the four of us together, that I noticed what her status update said: Lexy Newby it's nice to have siblings, they're almost always on your side and by your side even when they're not physically there. Now, without being overly sentimental or sappy, I was touched, because I know she was talking, at least partly, about me. The thing that I think is most interesting, though, is that 1-I had known that she was having a hard day and I had talked to her repeatedly on the phone that day, but 2-it took looking at Facebook, a public forum, by CHANCE to find out that she appreciated it. It doesn’t change the fact that it made me feel good, though.

The second thing that I did was to start looking at pictures of members from my mission…I know that the article we read last week said that there isn’t one solid global networking site, but Facebook has made its way to France, at least a little. It was quite interesting to flip through images of activities at the church; pictures really do say a thousand words, and you can learn a lot about even more than the person whose profile you’re currently examining. For example, I learned that a couple of the members who were there while I was serving got married. The Valence branch is now a ward, but it seems that they’re still in the same rented space, even though there was a ward-building planned when I was there 6.5 years ago. I wonder what happened there. And, it seems that a couple of people who were recent converts when I was there so long ago are still attending activities at least. That’s comforting.

So, what are the implications for teaching? I really have no idea. Last semester we did look at the Pride and Prejudice and Hamlet Facebook pages…for me that wound be an interesting activity, to have students use their “Facebook discourse” to summarize novels. I think, too, that there are lessons that need to be taught regarding how students present themselves on these types of sites. As I was looking through things, I thought about how Amy felt like she had to alter her profile a bit when her niece added her as a friend. I’ve heard of (and they mentioned in the same article) that prospective employers and admissions committees have sometimes made decisions based on these profiles. There’s a life lesson that needs to be taught somewhere along the way.

Reading Response 1- I AM...

...a daughter, a sister, a friend, a significant other (I’m not sure if we’re calling it girlfriend these days…), a graduate student, an English teacher, a bibliophile, a traveler, a John Mayer fan (sorry Amy)…the list goes on. As I read through the readings for the week, especially thinking of them in regards to the topic of identity, I kept coming back to this question: Who am I? And closely related to that is another question that kept popping up: How do others perceive me in various realms? It’s amazing what new media has done and continues to do in illuminating the complexity of these questions.

Considering the fact that “New People in New Worlds” was written by the same guy, it’s not a surprise that, in my head at least, the article dovetailed a bit with our discussion regarding Gee’s “Reading as a Situated Language” and our brief discussion of it. As I read, I kept making connections back to the idea of discourse, especially when thinking of examining people as portfolios and the conclusions made regarding language in and out of school. I thought that it was extremely interesting how by examining Sandra and Emily, Gee is able to demonstrate how indicative language is of who is and who isn’t a “capitalist portfolio person in the making.” Their identities are so connected to their language, and their “lifeworlds” are made so evident through their very words, that to say that language isn’t contextualized is, in my humble and highly educated opinion, a bit stupid. I really do agree with him when he says that “All language is meaningful only in and through the contexts in which it is used” (63). When I read that “we always actively create ‘context,’” I thought about the fact that, in the creation of meaning, I firmly believe that perception is reality. And, before I even read Gee’s example of sexual harassment, I thought of one that I use with my students when we talk about perception, which can, in my opinion, be transferred to the issue of contextualizing and creating meaning from language.

What I say to students is this:
“Imagine you receive a huge bouquet of flowers (boys and girls alike). They are gorgeous, and whether or not you like flowers, you can truly appreciate that they are beautiful and that they were very expensive. Now imagine that you look at the card, and they are from this adorable boy/girl that you’ve been interested in for forever and who you’ve been out with a few times. How do you feel about receiving the flowers?” After receiving the typical positive responses, I have them think about the very same bouquet, only this time when they open the card, the flowers are from the creepy boy/girl who has been following them around school, waiting outside their house, calling in the middle of the night and hanging up, etc. Now how do they feel about the flowers? Creeped-out is right.

The meaning of the gesture is found within its context rather than within the gesture itself, in much the same way that the meaning of language is found within its context as much as it is within the actual combination of letters written/spoken. As I understand Gee, it seems he’s saying that much of the problem of much of today’s underprivileged youth is found in their inability to comprehend the context of language, which marginalizes them from the “portfolio person” who is more likely to be successful in life. I can appreciate this, and I can even agree with it. In fact, as I read a quote from a 16-yer-old-girl named Nadine in the article “Why Youth Love Social Network Sites,” it was obvious language affects the classification and identification of youth. She says, “As a kid, you used your birthday party guest list as leverage on the playground…Ten, as you grew up and got your own phone, it was all about someone being on your speed dial. Well today it’s the MySpace Top 8. It’s the new dangling carrot for gaining superficial acceptance. Taking someone off your Top 8 is your new passive aggressive power play when someone pisses you off.” Wow. Isn’t it interesting how simple it is to make assumptions about this girl, based on the construction of and our contextualization of that one statement? I think so. And I think that if we were to look at her actual MySpace page, we could very easily find a completely different person there.

So, I guess my question now is: If I can create a complete identity for this girl from simple statement, how are people identifying me, especially once they've looked at my Facebook profile?