Authentic Writing

I finally got the chance to use the New Readers Press (1989) book Writing it down: Writing skills for everyday life which was put together "by staff of the Women's Program Lutheran Settlement House Philadelphia, Pennsylvania" (and edited by Teddy Norwich Kempser).


I've always thought this book ought to be useful, but I never seemed to find the right moment to bring it out. (The couple of other times I've tried using it things flopped.) But, recently, somebody asked how to set-up a personal letter. "Just a sec..." I said, and opened the book to page 70, "Personal Letters".

Actually, it was page 71 that worked. The authors offered an example letter to "Dear Linda", and, below, an empty lined form to reproduce it in.

On a bit of a whim, I invited my learner to change the words - i.e., write her own letter - rather than simply reproduce someone else's content. "Write something you might write to a friend," I suggested.

Then I left her alone. She asked how to spell things when necessary. I checked in once or twice to ensure everything was going alright.

K. Fast forward an hour, and she's on Facebook, struggling to write a message to a friend.

I'm talking the "personal message" email-like app here, and not a wall post or photo comment or something. She's struggling with both what to say and how to spell it. "Well," I muse, "you could use that practice letter your wrote earlier."

Face lights up. Gets out scribbler and starts transferring text.

And I make note to self: this wouldn't have been possible if she had simply copied the Lutheran Settlement letter to "Dear Linda."

Authenticity is important.

It's how literacy learning becomes functional.

Reflective Practice and Reading

There was an adult reading in the tent this summer. This is a story, you understand - something I watched happen. There was a reader who was reading a book with animals and numbers. A child was listening and looking and was asking questions about the animals. Note that: it was the child asking questions. The reader was answering questions, providing information in a calm, interested tone. It was a wonderful learning time. You could almost see the synapses flashing, the weaving of new connections between images and ideas and understandings in the child's mind.

They were reading, and talking, and then looking at the numbers. The child began to count. I forget. Maybe the reader encouraged it. Maybe the child just started counting. Anyway, the child was counting and then he paused. The reader pointed to the next number and asked, "What's next?"

It was an innocent enough question. But it was also damaging. All of a sudden, for the first time that afternoon, it became possible for the child to fail a test. I saw that, because I saw the child's face change expression. I saw the worry and the frown and, then, the downcast eyes.

It had been a wonderful, sunny afternoon. But that was gone now. I'm positive the adult intended no harm. But that didn't matter either. The child had gone into protection. What had been a wonderful learning experience without possibility of failure had suddenly become school. Learning time was over.

(You will want to say I'm exaggerating, but the child remained quiet, and left the tent shortly thereafter.)

This sort of sadness and fear arises, says John Holt, whenever humans sit in judgment over one another.

Spelling and Word Games for Grown-Ups

I've been helping someone at another site hook up with some online word- and spelling-games. (They'd been mislead into using the trial download versions instead of playing the streamed flash versions.)

The two games my learners make the most use of are Bookworm @ Yahoo and Text Twist @ Yahoo.




There are comparable games among the Facebook apps Scramble and Word Twist, but I can't say I'm a fan of these. (Why do Facebook apps always seem to want you to spam all your contacts, publish your results, and generally do four other things rather than just play the game?) Michael Chalk from down under has a post about these games (as well as many other things - he's connected with the PRACE crew). Other than that....

Despite the hype and the promise, there are surprisingly few easy-to-access, high-end word and spelling games out there that are both suitable for adults and free.

Anyway, if you haven't tried the Yahoo games, give them a spin. If you know of another you'd like to share, let us know. Comment, or, better, post and put your link in the comments.

Have fun!

Defining Literacy

She said don't I know you
From the cinematographer's party,
I said who am I
To blow against the wind,
I know what I know

Paul Simon

I wrote this in a fury early this morning - comes of reading the web before breakfast instead of listening to Glenn Campbell and waking up slow.

It's always a bad sign, I think, when someone says they want to define "literacy". It means that, whatever else they say, they're going to insist literacy is not "just" reading and writing.

"Just."

This is, I think, a new phenomenon. Before the 1960s, I think, to be literate - to be lettered - meant one of two things. Either it meant being able to read and write, or it meant having read culturally important works like Shakespear or Faulkner. Most of the time, it was pretty clear which definition an author intended.

But then a "new literacy / -ies" came along. Too soon, any number of communicative acts were associated with the noun "literacy". Sometimes, it seemed "literacy" had nothing at all to do with letters and written texts. This third, fluid use of "literacy" makes my head hurt. It also interferes with my ability to attract funding and support for adults and children who want to get better at reading and writing words.

Anyway, here's this morning's rant....





What I said every day, until friends bade me stop, was that when everything counts as "literacy", it will be the most popular, the most fashionable, the least expensive, the least troublesome forms of communication that receive attention, funding, and support.

This morning, on the site of a man who calls himself "the literacy adviser", I read:

The definition of 'literacy' in [the U.K.'s] Curriculum for Excellence is “the set of skills which allows an individual to engage fully in society and in learning, through the different forms of language which society values and finds useful."

And I said to myself - because I have no cat to complain to - "language" is a pretty slippery term. A lot depends on how you define it. Then, I read the next bullet:

The Literacy framework recognises that the meaning of ‘text’ has to include the huge range of texts with which we engage on a daily basis, and that we should use a range of texts to reflect this in our learning and teaching.

Yes, well. "Range of texts" is a complete give-away, isn't it. The next bullet read:

We live in a society where the image is becoming the dominant means of communication, and where once we used pictures to illustrate our written texts, increasingly we are using written text to illustrate the pictures.

I don't know if I agree with that. In fact, I know I don't. But nevermind. What I want to draw attention to is this passage:

Most of us engage with moving image texts more than any other form of text in any given day, so the development of literacy skills in young people should recognise that fact.

There it is. "Text" and "language" have come to mean "moving images". And literacy, one supposes, is as much about appreciating cinematography as it is decoding grouped letters for meaning. Or, as he puts it, "developing the set of skills which will enable [learners] to engage critically with the range of narratives which are in the world." There's that "range" again: a range dominated by "moving image texts".

Now, in all fairness, the gentleman whose website I took this from also describes himself also as a "Teacher, Education Manager and Independent Learning Consultant with a particular interest in Literacy and Moving Image Education." So, there's a certain logic in him drawing connections between written words and film.

But, this isn't literacy.... Surely, this isn't literacy!

Look. I know I have no university degree. The government doesn't hire me to consult - has had second thoughts about hiring me for anything. But I do work in this field. Almost every day I interact with someone who can't read very well. Sometimes they can scarcely read at all. Sometimes they can read a little bit, but read far too poorly to do clerical work or pass a written test. Sometimes they read moderately well, but feel unable to write notes and letters.

These people, these adults and children, can watch movies. I promise you, television and feature films don't trouble them. Youtube is not a mystery. Video is not a source of social embarrassment or a barrier to health or employment.

They want and need to get better at reading and writing text. Real text. "Text" as we have for decades understood that term.

Not everybody has to be a supporter of literacy.

But, at the very least, they could have the decency to honour the meaning of the word.

Things I'd Like To Remember

Gets dark early now.

I was walking home in the dark the other night, heading for supper, when somebody beeped and waved from a parked car.

It was too dark to see much beyond the waving, so I stopped and peered in. The passenger window came down, and there was...

Hi, Wendell!

Damn... thinks I, She was in my class! But what was her name?

It's Britanny!

Right! Of course. You were, um...

I was working on my GED.

Right! Did you, um...

Oh yes! I'm in university now.

University?

Yes. I'm doing fourth year psychology.

Well. That's great!

See you later, Wendell.

See ya.


And it is great, you know. I mean, psychologists do all sorts of interesting things.

Like helping old people with their memory.

:)

How To Encourage Adult Reading

Read the newspaper, read magazines, read books. Read whatever appeals to you - but read! Regular, daily reading is the best way to improve your reading skills.

The Gage Canadian GED Study Guide Series

p. 11

So, I woke up early a few days back, rushed down to my local semi-independent bookstore, had a coffee and a brownie for breakfast, slid four pages of a catalogue across the counter-top, and said "I uant une unv uvurthung."

"What?"

'"Urrry" *finishes chewing* "I want one of everything. But I don't want the hassle of ordering the stuff myself. I'd pay you a mark-up if you'd look after this for me."

"There's a lot here...."

"Yeah. It's about 650 dollars worth. Do you need the money up front?"

"No. Let us look after it."

And they did.


It was another half hour or so before the Scrooge McDuck side of me woke up to what was happening. At which point, he could only say, "WwhHat-kchack-stahack!!! Jrrusck-thrassckt-ishck!"

"Krash-thiskas-kursct-ghrsckiak..."

And then, the day before yesterday, the order came!

Yay!

The bookstore gave them to me at cost - i.e., with no mark-up - because they're supporters of adult literacy work.

And the books look Very Nice indeed. There are some Quick Reads, a variety of the lower-level Oxford Bookworms Library series, some more books from PRACE, and, well, a bunch more.



Then, yesterday, three learners each took one of the new books home to read. Every one of them said, in some form or other, 'I don't like to read' and every one of them said, in some form or other, 'This one looks like it might be okay.' Oh, and all three of them are parents, which means they will be modelling reading behaviour for their children.

It is so freaking easy to support adult reading. It is so Easy!

All you need is

A) a variety of quality titles and topics at various reading levels [see Grass Roots Press and/or New Readers Press]; and

B) a willingness to lend books.

Mind you... it is not always cheap or cost-effective to support adult reading. But that has to do with personal and social choices, and that's a blog topic of a different order.

(Hang the rich.)

Wonders of Science and Vertical Learning

Speaking of science, do any of youse have these?

I love the Steck-Vaughn "Wonders of Science" titles by Joan S. Gottlieb - love them enough that they're becoming a source of friction between me and my public library.

I've talked before about background knowledge in social studies, and the problem of learners being able to read beyond their experience. The more common problem in science seems to be that background material is presented only at a very high reading level. These books create a wonderful bridge between basic literacy materials (say, the PRACE materials at reading level 4) and GED prep materials. I haven't done a readability on Gottlieb's books, but judging from who in my class has or hasn't found them accessible I'd call them a 5 or 6.

My favourite use for them is as part of what I imagine as a vertical learning column. I say "vertical" because the learner is moving up through higher reading levels, and "column" because they are remaining with a relatively small topic or theme. In other words, they are meeting the same ideas presented in increasingly complex language or graphics.

Picture this. A learner with an independent reading level of 7 works on their own through the water plants section of Water Life. We talk a little about the material as well - we have to, because there are questions but no answers (I'm guessing there's a "teacher's edition" somewhere). Sometimes, at this point, we seek additional explanations with Youtube or my globe or whatever. Then, I pull six or eight questions out of a Gage GED-level science book that focus on water plants. The learner works their way through these questions, with me sitting close by. They get some right, get some wrong, and we talk about the questions - about the science content, but also about reading strategies or how charts work. Then, they go back to working independently with the next unit of Water Life.

The advantage I see in these topic or theme based learning units which employ a range of reading-level materials is that learners are able to engage with GED level materials even when, strictly speaking, their reading skills or vocabulary aren't up to it. The alternative, and my former practice, was to give them only materials "at their level" and resist every effort they made to work out of the GED books. This was hard on our relationship, and on my self-image as a facilitator rather than a teacher or somebody's boss.

What happens when they meet material they just don't "get"? The same thing that happens in daily life. They come away with questions, knowledge, a larger vocabulary, and a new platform or starting point from which to approach the material again.

I don't stray far from my learners when we do all this level jumping. I watch very closely for signs of frustration or discouragement. I try to make sure they really are reading about the same thing - the earth's plates, human cell growth, photosynthesis - when they try the upper level material. I'm painfully aware that I risk setting them up for failure. Sometimes I forget to breathe and my chest hurts.

But it's a way to honour their desire to prepare for the GED as quickly and directly as possible. Plus, I'm helping them build reading strategies for difficult material - that's always part of our conversation - and I'm helping them gain necessary background knowledge in science.

It's not a perfect approach. It's vexing that, so far, I've only been able to find three of Gottlieb's titles. I'd be more comfortable with a greater range of science books at different levels. But, right now, this feels like the best I can do.

Water - Science, Social Studies, Engagement

The man in that picture up there is my dad. He's working on a wharf on a lake that's part of a water and ecosystem his dad - a onetime county councilor - was once hired by the provincial Minister of Lands and Mines to protect. When I was very young, we moved into a village that drew its water from a near-by river, stored it in a former CN water tank, and dispensed it through old pipes in a rather limited and hit-and-miss fashion. The river received run-off from local farms, small industry, and various residential septic systems of greater or lesser efficiency. It was a bad deal for everybody.

In time, as mayor, my dad oversaw the creation of a new water system, originating from a new town well, and a sewerage treatment system that kept most of the pollutants out of the river. This was accompanied by improvements to the volunteer fire department and the installation of fire hydrants. It was also accompanied by an unpopular rise in rates, and a fair amount of grumbling.

I mention this because I'm awfully proud of my dad, but also because I want to indicate that I'm not a complete idiot when it comes to the politics of water and the guarding of ecosystems.


I know literacy and basic adult education organizations have to avoid doing advocacy work, lest they have their knuckles rapped by Revenue Canada. But nothing absolves us of our responsibility to help learners understand how government works or how to write a letter to the editor or the import of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Adult literacy is inescapably "political" in that sense.

Even preparing someone to challenge the Social Studies GED involves thoughtful discussions about the party system or the pros and cons of free trade or MacDonald's National Policy.

Thus, I have both a professional and a personal (citizen's) interest in environmental, political or economic debates and developments. If I'm to do my job well, I need to know something useful about, say, global warming, or the recent economic contraction, or the fighting in Afghanistan.

Or about water as an endangered resource, and what us ordinary folks can do about it.

I assume I'm on the wrong side of history when it comes to the bottled water debate. They're probably right: I'm probably wrong. Oh, and on a related matter, I'd always assumed I was a fan of The Council of Canadians even if I'd only met them through media releases.

And yet.

Let's take the first topic. Here are the four points often made, put simply. (If I'm missing one let me know, but don't simply restate a point in different language):

1. We're taking water out of the ground, in specific locations (some quite large), at a rate that threatens the long term viability of those locations for residential or agricultural use (or, simply, as a home for plants and animals). Fair enough. This is a practice that needs to stop.

2. Too much plastic is being produced, used and discarded by the bottled water industry and its consumers. Well... yes, though this isn't a water-specific issue. It's true of many food or drink products. Are we talking about water or the plastics industry? I think we're talking about plastics, and I assume glass-bottled water would be no more acceptable over the long term because of point #1.

3. Bottled water is less safe and/or less palatable than municipal water. Wrong.

Maybe some bottled water is less safe or less tasty than some municipal water, but that's isn't the case everywhere. Let's set aside the boil orders I've been under (5 in the past two years) here in Saint John. Even when the service is at its peak, my tap water turns my sink and shower stall blue, leaves deposits in my pots and kettle, and frequently smells quite bad. None of those things has ever been true of water I have purchased.

Yes, yes. I know the bit about how legal health standards are applied to city water systems but not to water companies. I'm not talking about standards: I'm talking about outcomes. Let me say it again: the water coming from my tap is dirtier and smellier than the water coming from the plastic container on my counter. Campaigns to prevent me buying bottled water are campaigns that threaten my quality of life and probably my long-term health.

4. The choice to drink bottled water is a result of industry hype and marketing, not thoughtful personal choice. Um... no. See point #3. And anyway, this claim is simply a personal attack, a sort of "shaming", meant to evade the reality of the general public voting ("wrong") with their pocket book.

I feel for the mayor of my city. I know he wants what's best. Saint John has about 75,000 souls living inside the city proper at any one time. If a third of these spend $2 a day on bottled water, that's $50,000 per day. Maybe I'm exaggerating. Let's make it $20,000 per day. That's still $600,000 per month or $7,200,000 per year.

Imagine having an extra 7 million a year to spend on water system up-grades! In 5 years we'd have one sparkling water system!

But few of us want to spend that money up-front for clean, safe, good tasting water 5 years from now - especially if it means not drinking what we want right now. (We might be okay with raised property taxes and service fees, properly explained, but only if industrial users paid the same rates - and anyway it's not going to happen because our major property-owners use their ownership of local media to convince everyone our property taxes are already too high.)

The city can force its employees to leave their bottled water at home, as can sympathetic private companies. But that just means people will be drinking iced teas, juices or soft drinks until a new council is voted in.

K. Topic Two. When I was on the Council of Canadians website, reading their news bits and essays on water use and bottled water, I found no place to comment.

There was plenty of opportunity to join or donate to the cause (turns out that was the same thing). I could have sent an email "for more information on how you can support The Council of Canadians." But there was no place to pose a public question or join a discussion.

(The closest I got was discussions on rabble.ca, and I gotta tell you, that particular bully-board is not a forum I would ever take part in, let alone introduce a learner to.)

Why does this matter? Because global warming and environmental destruction scare me and should scare you. Because the power of the resource industries scare me and should scare you. Because citizen engagement is the only way I see out of the mess we're in.

And because helping adults become politically engaged citizens is an essential part of adult and community literacy work.

But, listen, engaging citizens also means talking with them in polite, open public forums, and allowing them to ask questions or even disagree. It doesn't mean telling people "Drink from the tap - trust us, it's safer," and then leaving no place to comment.

So, I'll send this text in an email to the Council. They deserve to know. But then I'll be done with them.

Maybe the Green Party would like to have a conversation. I'll let you know.

Learning To Drive - One Good News Story

One of my learners who reads at a lower level came in the other night and said, "I got my driver's permit. I passed the test."

Really? Oh, that's great!

"Yeah, I wrote it again."

How did you do it? What happened that you were able to pass this time?

"Someone went with me to read it."

Yes? You mean read the questions?

"Yes."

I thought they read them to you last time.

"Yes, but this time I passed."

So, why do you think you passed this time?

"I listened to the tapes again and again."

The tapes?

"The tapes you made me."

Oh! The mp3 files of me reading from the book.

"Yeah. Sometimes I listened to them when I was at work. Then I went and wrote the test and passed."

Yay! Is it okay if I tell people about that?

"Of course. They can use the tapes too."

Original story here. The "tapes" contain parts of the New Brunswick Driver's Handbook, which is available online here, have been read aloud and saved as .mp3 files in my Windows' Skydrive folder. (Be aware of the underscore issue if you download into Firefox 3: you may need to rename the extension. More here, at the bottom about that.)

Side note: this noteworthy adult-learning success can't be registered or tracked using NB's performance accountability tools. We have ineffective tools, and everybody in the field knows it, except those civil servants who authored them and then imposed them upon us.