Graff, "The Vanishing Classics and Other Myths"

I thought that this article was very fun and interesting to read. I find it hard to believe that Clausen would bet that the Color Purple is taught in more English class than Shakespeare’s entire plays combine. This statement alone has spark critic to come forward and say that classic works are replaced by “trendy lightweights.” Graff claims that these critics have not research the issue and that they only made assumption. If they research it they would have been proven wrong. Graff have proves in his claim that classic works are being replaced in today’s English class. Some English class is “trendy lightweights”, but to say that all would be a false assumption and misinterpretation of the English courses. For the most part, I believe that in the English courses classic novels are not included enough in the curriculum. Overall, I think that classic novel may slowly vanish if teachers do not include it in the curriculum to arouse interest for students to read.

Gee, “Semiotic Domains: Is Playing Video Games a ‘Waste of Time’?”

A lot of people say video game is a waste of time and I totally disagree with that. Video game might not be taught in a public classroom, but certainly it help with reading, writing, interacting, and comprehension. According to Gee “People need to learn to be literate in new semiotic domains throughout their lives…” As technology are advancing so should we in a new era where we can not move forward without technology. Video games can teach human how to have fun and at the same time solving a problem that is complex in our world. Video games can be educational for examples Leap Frog. I believe that video games teach us a lot of things that we don’t know about for examples vocabulary in a game and definition of words that we don’t normally use in school. When playing with video games it is important that we use it minimal so it is not distracting away from learning and school.

Kress & Van Leeuwen, “Reading Images”

Literacy as we know it goes beyond the ability to read and write. Literacy is very complex and many people try to explore and understand the definition of literacy. The article “Reading Images” is one great example that through images it can shape the meaning of the texts. Like the saying goes picture is worth a thousand word and we could say the same to this article. The images can describe how the authors feel about a particular situation. It’s interesting to see picture without words because it make the stories more interesting. Through images it describes a scene and stories that can be told through pictures. When you create a photo album it is the same concept that the pictures tell a story about yourself and your experiences.

Hass, "Learning to Read Biology"

I thought the reading were very interesting because it relates to my experiences in college. I am not a biology major or a chemistry major, but I certainly have change my view of literacy discourse and practices many time in college. We all could relate to Eliza's view and how she is required to read to understand the texts. Eliza's reading and perception changes as she were going to school which I could understand. She impress me with her notetaking skills how she learn how to do it verbatim which is a unique strategy. We all learn different ways and strategy that best suit us as individual. In college we have taken many classes and courses that open our mine and understanding and our perception can change daily. In college I learn how to read text for information and sometime I forget to think critical of it. For the most part I say we all learn from experiences. We tend to understand what strategy work best for us. I know that I still have much more learning to do because learning never stop.

Heath, "Protean Shapes in Literacy Events"

The oral language and written language are very different and many question still need to be answered. Many researcher are studying the possible links between oral and written language, and between literacy and its individual and societal consequences. I believe that individual grow up and learn the oral part of literacy and than they learn the written language of literacy. Although those two are very different it is important to be literate both in oral and written. Research that have examined oral performance in particular groups is said to support the notion that as members of society increasingly participate in literacy, they lose habits associated with the oral tradition. Language on the other hand is literate and meaning is created through text and interpretation. According to Heath "The literacy event is a conceptual tool useful in examining within particular communities of modern society the actual forms and functions of oral and literate traditions and co-existing relationships between spoken and written language."(p.445). As individual the environment where we grow up in and how we are raised play a role in our literacy discourse and practices. For the most part literacy can be obtain not just in school but in the community where an individual grow up in. Literacy can be seen in many activities in our lives and it is not just oral but in text and writing.

Reading First: Cautions and Recommendations

After reading this article it made me realize the flaws in teaching children how to read. School and teacher are now redefining thier approaches to teaching and learning because of inadequate research. I can not believe that a study were over estimated and under-studied I believe that someone should take the responsibility for that. The reports that claim to improve the method of teaching never exist and how can we defined the levels of reading for children. I believe that the report did not understand what reading mean because it only focus on one or two method of teaching. Some of the things that were emphasize such as phonics and what sound were before they could do any other reading is absolutely rediculous. How do you measure children reading levels base off of incomplete research and one or two method. Not all children have the same learning style and some children are much quicker learner than other. The meaning of reading varies throughout the report and there is no consistency. Over exaggerating a studies make no sense beacuse in the long run it only hurt teacher and students.

Response to Coles and Woodside-Jiron

Coles talks about the "underlying assumptions" regarding literacy in the current debates. I think this discussion is very interesting because it addressed a lot of the issues surrounding "The Great Debate" over issue of literacy. How do we measure literacy and what is the rubric? These question are important because there seem to be no definite answer and no real solution to how we define literacy. Coles introduction is interesting because he talks about changing the term of debate and most people are focusing on issues that are not relevant to literacy. How do we measure or have a standardize rubric of children who are literate when there is no real definition of the term literate or literacy. I believe that children have different learning style and to place a measurement on how much they need to learn or know is irrelevant. Not just children, but all of us have different learning style and some people learn faster than other. So how do we measure which age of children should read on a certain level when they have different learning style. It make no sense to teach children one method and not the other. I believe we should use both in order to achieve the literacy level that we want our children to be. As teacher and educators we must adapt to different level and learning strategies because no one technique fit all. Teaching children how to read is important therefore educators must be sensitive to children who might not be that great or to student who lack reading skills. For the most part there are many ways and strategies of teaching children how to read so they could be literate. There is no right or wrong answer to the problem only solution to what work best for the children.

Both Coles and Woodside-Jiron point out ways in which "research" has been misused in the reading policy debate. Since both sides claim to be basing thier argument on research, this does not mean that research is meaningless. Research into the issues raises question and debate on how we teach children how to read and become literate. Strategy such as "meaning emphasis" or "whole language" are a great method, but it is not the solution. Educational setting is always open for debate so it is important that the curriculum is fair for children. How do we balance teaching children how to read in a level that is appropriate or the standard? We don't we just try our very best of our ability to teach children how to read and to become literate.