Response to 4/21 Readings

Protean Shapes in Literacy Events: Ever-Shifting Oral and Literate Traditions
Shirley Brice Heath

Shirley Brice Heath begins her essay by cautioning readers against relying on literacy theories. She goes on to define what a literacy event is; any occasion in which a piece of writing is integral to the nature of participant’s interactions and their interpretive processes. Heath takes this theory, and investigates its veracity in the context of a particular community, Trackton.

In exploring the applications of literacy in Trackton, Heath lists the following as purposes for writing in Trackton: instrumental, interactional, news-related, confirmation, provision of permanent records, memory supportive and as substitutes for oral messages. Most of these purposes are supplemented by oral actions.

Heath also notes that “individuals saw literacy as an occasion for social interaction.” (Heath 451) ; she provides ample examples of this, from church activities to porch discussions. Even the usually literary act of completing paperwork for school or work is intertwined with social discussions, as townsfolk share information.

I liked Heath’s example of the written version of a prayer verses the oral result. I saw a few devices that reminded me of oral epics, such as the use of formulaic voices, and expression of personal involvement.


Hearing Other Voices: A Critical Assessment of Popular Views on Literacy and Work
Glynda Hull

I think that Hull does an excellent job debunking current myths and views surrounding worker illiteracy. Hull questions both the relevancy of literacy in specific work situations, and the burden that is shifted onto the worker, rather than the employer. My favorite example that she gives is “[t]he years of picky hiring are over. Vicious competition for all sorts of workers – entry-level, skilled, seasoned – has begun. Employers must look to the nonmale, the nonwhite, the nonyoung. There may be a push for non-citizens as well: over the next 10 years …only 15% of work force entrants will be native-born white males.” Aw, poor native-born white males! Whatever will they do?

I found the personal accounts that Hull uses a sad indicator of current government programs. Jackie was trying her hardest to get off government assistance, but it seems to me that the government provides little assistance or incentive to do so. In addition to this, as Hull points out, some of the programs that involve workplace training are merely training for tests that have little or nothing to do with actual tasks.

As I had previously been unfamiliar with Taylorism (it is a pity that it is so negative), I read Hull’s section relating the effects of Taylorism with great interest. As anyone who has worked in retail, manufacturing, or many other fields knows, workers are still accorded very little trust, with most of the responsibility and training given to managers. However, workers still seem to be given a fair share of the blame when something goes wrong.


Sponsors of Literacy
Deborah Brandt

I though Brandt’s essay does an adequate job explaining the discrepancies between teaching methods used and methods that work, and the underlying politics motivating those choices. Brandt looks at the sponsors of literacy programs, and investigates their intentions. I have to admit, I had never considered the politics behind academic programs such as literacy, this article really made me think.

Brandt looks at the reasons people seek literary education, the foremost motivation being upward mobility. She does this by looking at two specific individuals, Raymond and Dora. Raymond enjoyed a childhood full of technological advantages, while Dora grew up as a bilingual minority in a Midwest town. Although Dora and Raymond find themselves in very different literacy environments, they both have the desire to learn more.

I appreciated the amount of real life examples Brandt uses in her essay, I found most of them relevant, and all of them interesting to read. Given the examples, there is a great deal of truth in Brandt’s statement that “the course of an ordinary person’s literacy learning – its occasions, materials, applications, potentials – follows the transformations going on within sponsoring institutions as those institutions fight for economic and ideological position.” (Brandt 177)

Strangers in Strange Lands: Student Writing Across Curriculum
Lucille Parkinson McCarthy

McCarthy’s introduction to “Strangers in Strange Lands” is an accurate portrayal of advice that I myself have been guilty of giving: write to your professor. I often tell students in the Writing Center “Well, I personally think this…but you need to check with your professor”, or something similar.

McCarthy draws from the works of two noted sociolinguists, yet another indication of the connections between composition, writing pedagogy, and linguistics. McCarthy does an adequate job explaining her data, but I felt that she should have given more contextual information. I did like the quote from Dave, where he explains that he sees writing as a tool. I felt that this highlights many students view of writing not as a learning process, but as a tool to be acquired and wielded. This mindset parallels Dave’s desire to find on “right” interpretation of a poem for his poetics class. McCarthy call this being “tied to the concrete material”, a problem that many students face.

By looking at what classes Dave does well in, McCarthy construes Dave’s intent and perceived benefits from each class. In classes that he sees as vital to his career and further academic success, he does better. In a class such as poetry, which is only tied to a grade, Dave doesn’t do as well. This may seem obvious, but I think it is important for instructors to keep in mind, so that they might find ways of linking a particular class to a students aspirations.