A Reading Response...

I have been mulling over the article "Curriculum Theorizing for Multiliteracies: A Rebel with a Cause" by Jennifer Powers.  I was planning on writing a response to it, and I was struggling with how to express my views, when we were given our graphic organizers as a guide for re-examining the text in class.  I must say, the P-M-I Chart (P for plus, M for minus, I for interesting) is a handy organizer for reflection, and in particular, becoming in tune with one's opinions on an issue or topic. This is a great way for students to make value judgements about texts, rather than passively consume.  Also, by making points regarding the good, bad and most interesting things about their reading, they are using cognitive strategies that wold assist them in writing an argument or thesis down the road.  That said, I am not going to be writing an argument or thesis today; I am just going to give you the straight-up P-M-I.

PLUS

• I support Powers' cause: "to further the development and acceptance of multiliteracies in the English classroom, and to promote discussion about how multiliteracies are incorporated into a school's curriculum."

• Powers gives clear examples of why to incorporate multiliteracies into the English classroom.  She argues that because students engage with many types of texts, they should be able to participate in those forms of literacy.  She also argues that there are many ways to be literate in our society, and by incorporating multiliteracies, you are setting your students up for success. 

MINUS

• Powers does not give clear examples of how to incorporate multiliteracies into the English classroom, or the English curriculum.  She suggests that the curriculum become more democratic, and less about "truth and facts" and more about "subjective understanding for existing knowledge." I feel that she could be more explicit.

• She downplays the importance of print literacy through statements like "unlike many teachers, I am trying my best to figure out how to buck the dominant print literacy system." I am all for incorporating multimodal texts, and like Powers, I believe print media can be limiting. I also believe reading and writing skills are valuable and essential.  I know that Powers is not arguing against this, but I do think she uses a begrudging tone to prove her point.

INTERESTING

• Powers urges educators to be "more eclectic" and allow for uncertainty in their approach, based on the work of Joseph Schwab.  She writes, "people, by their very nature, are eclectic... the way we approach curriculum should not deny this nature."  I find this statement interesting because any statements about "human nature" in an essay jump out at me and beg to be scrutinized.  Here though, I can't really argue with the notion that people want variety.  I also find this interesting because I see myself in her statement, and I like that she frames eclecticism in a positive light.