Describe Users/Newton here.
On this fantastic bit of wiki-wonder, students can easily download their own papers, have each other edit them, and look at the ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-changes!
Here is an example bit of writing!
I would have to say that the primary objective and motivational force behind this Invitation Project is to, t¬¬hrough the use of literacies and texts that lie outside the dominant circle of accepted educational ideology and pedagogy, invite students to take an active role in and explore multiple avenues of literary practices and events. Through these explorations, the student is also introduced to ideas and practices that fit within the dominant modes of writing that he or she can use in more dominant expressions of thought and communication (such as papers, interviews, and the so forth). At the very heart of this process is the idea that literacy and “language [are] not simply a matter of right and wrong- of correct and incorrect- and when we reduce such cultural issues to monolithic simplicities, we invariably exclude the richness of language as it reflects the energy of our culturally diverse society” (Shafer, 67). If indeed there is no one true language or literacy, then the value of the specific type of literacy is much more subjective as it exists “in the relations between people, within groups and communities, rather than as a set of properties residing in individuals” (Barton & Hamilton, 8). When we choose to view the literacy spectrum not as a vying hierarchy, but more as a diverse, if not sometimes quarrelsome, family, we begin to understand how deeply related all literacies truly are and can better understand how, what, and why they communicate what they do for the context they are in. Then, when comes time to write a paper, the student is able to see the paper for what it is in its own context (not as a horrifyingly dark fortress of lingual correctness and red ink), and even use other modalities of literacy to aid in the writing process. Overall, I most definitely agree with these ideas. We as teachers should invite our students to look at literacy and language from as many different angles as possible. Through teaching a more critical approach to language, students learn to not just view writing and language as simply a set of rules, but as something so much more deep and complex and beautiful. However, in the society we live in, reading and writing is, at least in schools, placed as the mother and father literacies from which all others pour forth. I believe that they must be taught and students must have a deep understanding of these issues if they are to function well in our current society. This does not change the fact, though, that intrinsically they are no more important than any other literacy. If we teach reading and writing through extensive multiple modalities, I truly think that a deep and critical appreciation of many different types of literacies and languages can be conveyed while also reinforcing the notions of reading and writing in multiple contexts. The only problem is that this takes far more effort than teaching the simpler hierarchical viewpoint. Am I prepared to put the extra work required to convey these ideas? Do I truly care enough?
As far as graffiti is concerned, I am not sure if we could pick a better topic. Every aspect of the invitation process led us to new findings. One of the first things that fascinated us about it was its seemingly contradictory nature. Graffiti constantly straddles both sides of many different spectrums. It is equally secret as it is public, known as it is anonymous, accepted as it is illegal, artistic as it is trashy, powerful yet marginalized, bluntly ambiguous, brief yet says everything, and the so on and the so forth. Above all, though, it communicates a stance, no matter what that stance is, and beckons, if not demands, a response. It is communication- a marginalized discourse written literally on the wall of the institution. It must be read and interpreted by those who come into contact with it. With our sample, what we found most intriguing was the vast variety of responses and reactions it accrued- everything from ‘art’ to ‘vandalism in its lowest form.’ The whole act of graffiti is literacy. It is a written text, a social practice, exists within certain domains of life, most definitely has a purpose and a message and is embedded in much bigger social goals, historically makes up a quarter of hip-hop culture and has been around for centuries, and also constantly changes and develops, never staying static. If it is not a form of literacy, I am not a human being (Barton & Hamilton, 8). When thinking about connections specifically to writing, one of the first applications that flies into my mind is that most often, especially with overtly political writings, graffiti is a thesis in its most condensed form. It is an argument. It lays out a complaint and leaves the reader to either agree or disagree with it. That is the same thing we do in papers. Nearly every written piece must make a claim or an argument. If there is no argument, there is no paper. Also, graffiti speaks quite well to the idea of authoring. Being both very known, yet very anonymous, we as the reader are left to ponder who wrote it, why he or she chose to when it was written, and all the other questions that arise when the author is considered. In traditional writing, who writes the essay is just as important as what the person writes. When academic texts are not written by well known academics, we question them. When people have many titles and awards in front of their names, we automatically trust their opinion. The author must always be considered. Because graffiti is so ambiguous, it gives us much creativity to put our own author in the position. It challenges our preconceived notion of what an author is.
I do believe that the team aspect was one of my favorite parts about the whole process. I loved getting to know everyone I was working with. Everyone had a completely different story and reference point from which to start our oh so perilous graffiti journey- Will was the theory man, always taking the head route and figuring out ways to explain what we were looking at. Nicole came at the issue from the standpoint of a special needs educator, and always kept us thinking about how we would apply every aspect to the classroom, which was most helpful (I also did not realize that she used to be in a circus…interesting tidbit). Kelly took a very open view towards nearly every aspect of the project, but was also very vehement about keeping the project’s focus on the students and how to make the theory applicable. While I threw out as many ideas as I could and debated to the best of my abilities, I found myself, for some reason or another, taking the main administrative role. I sent out the e-mails and organized most of the meetings. I am not quite sure why I tend to slide into that position so often. One thing that did worry me, though, was that Will and I would often go into long, winding theoretical discussions about the nature of graffiti and would tend to forget about everything else going on. Luckily, both Kelly and Nicole always brought us back down and kept us focused on the task at hand. I was also afraid a lot of the time that Nicole and Kelly would feel left out and excluded while Will and I did most of the talking. I felt myself wanting to grab hold of the horns a little too much a lot of the time. Despite my worries and fears, though, everyone’s contributions were infinitely helpful and valuable in completing the project. We really never had any horrible, group-splitting disagreements. Any tension we faced was generally a result of misunderstandings, such as our stance on the illegality of graffiti. Each time something like this would arise, after discussion, things tended to work themselves out remarkably well until we had, in our minds at least, a pretty good looking project. We were all fairly surprised at how well everything came together in the end.
I realize that there are several problems with this, but it may be provoking to try it, then lead a class discussion about Web 2.0 and other such whatnots!
Comments:
Note: You must be logged in to add comments
2009-05-01 06:11:40 It looks like you're trying to use a wiki for a class or a bunch of classes. You haven't yet done that. Right now, you're editing the main wiki for the wiki spot project, where we talk about how to use our service and what various wikis are doing. What you want to do is head on over to Community Guidelines and see if what you have in mind could have a home here. If it does, head on over to Create a Wiki and follow the instructions there. If you have any questions, click on my name and leave me a comment. Happy editing! —WilliamLewis
2009-05-11 18:41:37 testing by enfield —76.112.50.214
