literacy – EDUC 342: Child Development & New Technologies

Week 6 response

marcc — Wed, 10 Feb 2016 05:26:03 +0000

I liked the Rogoff (1991) and Doise (1990) citations in Cassell (p. 78), where Cassell writes: “When two peers collaborate, the simple juxtaposition of their actions allows the peers to modify their understanding of their own actions, through appropriating the perspective of the other peer. That is, to apply Rogoff’s notion to emergent literacy, the very fact of telling a piece of a story that follows after the piece told by one’s peer allows both peers to gain a new understanding of the meaning of their words in the context of the story.”

I wonder how much status matters for Cassell’s model of peer collaboration. I’d think that the “balance” of which participant “modified” the understanding of the other would depend on the roles and status of the participants. Not all collaboration is equal; Rogoff’s own idea of “intent community participation” (Week 2 reading) depends on the notion that children observe community activities for a while before assuming greater and greater responsibilities. This is collaboration via a teacher-student relationship, wherein we’d expect the learner to modify their understanding far more than the teacher.

I’d be curious to know how Cassell’s idea of collaboration extends to the “affinity spaces” that Curwood, Magnifico, and Lammers discuss. Quoting Gee (2004), they say that “‘newbies and masters and everyone else’ interact around a shared passion” in these spaces. Surely “masters” and “newbies” must have different roles in these spaces, as suggested in the features they list for affinity spaces. I’d be curious to know more about the roles of leaders and followers within these affinity spaces [aside: can we just call them ‘fandoms’ like everyone else?] and how they influence the conversations within, and especially the influence on young people. Is the language of superfans influencing the language patterns of young fans?

Critical Media Literacy

marcc — Thu, 28 Jan 2016 05:52:27 +0000

The Black et al reading is the second reading in this class (after Alper, week 2) to emphasize the need for children to develop “critical media literacy.” Both papers recommend that children gain some critical faculties for analyzing the cultural messages and assumptions that they receive from media. I think this is desirable, but I wonder how feasible it is to ask young children to think critically about the media that are simultaneously shaping their capacity to think and ways of thinking. Critique requires a knowledge base and set of values to critique with, and the media that young children encounter are constantly shaping their knowledge and values. I am not sure it makes sense to ask children with such plastic minds to have established powers of deep critique at this age. Cultural critique is hard enough for adults. Would it make more sense to encourage less critical, but more blunt, methods of resisting certain cultural influences (similar to the “Just say no” attitude toward drugs and strangers)? Are children capable of reasoning about the values of the very media that shape their values?

Betsy’s Review and Redesign

eanders7 — Tue, 26 Jan 2016 22:29:54 +0000

Website Name: Raz-Kids

URL: https://www.raz-kids.com/

Focus: Literacy

Grade Range: K – 5

Description: Raz-Kids is a subscription based e-book library with a wide selection of leveled books and reading comprehension quizzes for elementary aged students. On the website both family and classroom subscriptions are available.

Elizabeth Anderson – Assignment 1