An interesting point: “Many languages do no have a word for literacy…two African languages…Xhosa and Sotho do not contain words for ‘literacy’ and ‘illiteracy’…More recently, literacy has been defined as a social practice” (Janks, 2010, p.1-2). Emphatically, I believe in what Stern (2008) identifies as, “…a sociocultural approach to identity, which emphasizes the role society plays in creating the conditions that encourage young people to address the matter of identity” (p.96). Literacy as a “social practice” is informed by those sociocultural factors, creating “conditions” and mediums through which people can express their identity. In the absence of literacy as a social practice, in the case of societies where literacy is not defined, people approach identity in other equally as meaningful ways. Fredrick Douglass said, “I didn't know I was a slave until I found out I couldn't do the things I wanted” (http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/f/frederick_douglass.html). Obviously, he was unaware of this imposed identity until he engaged society.
The appeal that youth today have to digital media is bound up in the ways in which education, literacy, power, culture, and identity converge in our present society. The need to have a presence and to be valued in a given society is timeless. How that presence is expressed has evolved, in that it is now articulated as a social practice in ways that demonstrate multiliteracies – to include web pages, blogs, and social networking sites. Our present sociocultural climate encourages youth to “look to their social world for cues about what principles and traits to internalize…” (Stern, 2008, p.97). What are some of those cues? Celebrities and pop stars divulge virtually every detail about their personal lives on the internet; and “Virtually all “real” and “wanna-be” stars have web pages and blog…” (Stern, 2008, p.101). These internalized clues have further implications for technology, education, and society because they signal to youth a hidden agenda for why, how, when, and for what purposes digital media is to be used. What is even more alarming is that at the root of this hidden agenda is the word “self,” (the ego), not identity (character). The result is the use of digital media to develop ego with a total disregard for the development of character. On the surface, Stern (2008) appears to be neutral in her examination of the why/how youth express themselves on the internet using various digital genres. In truth, she has bought into the hype – “the cultural value of self-promotion” (Stern, 2008, p.101). As a result, her piece, “Producing Sites, Exploring Identities: Youth Online Authorship,” offers limited insight into what the future holds for this sociocultural orientation toward the exaltation of self via digital media.
"Where there is no vision, the people perish" (Proverbs 6:2). Stern (2008) reports: "Youth authors' desire to address the public is not simply about actually being heard (or read) by many people, but also about feeling empowered by the mere prospect of mass reception" (p.104). My concern is what message(s) are youth authors sending that are being received by the masses? And why are they not concerned about what affect those messages are having in the lives of others? I think the answer to both questions is a reflection of an even greater hidden agenda: They are not responsible for anyone other than themselves.
The birth of a vision: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/26676395#26676395
I think the real reason why there is no word for 'literacy' or 'illiteracy' in those cultures is the absence of self-exaltation to another's detriment.
Wow Tanya. I found your examination of the difference between self/ ego and identity/ character very well articulated. Nice examination of the difference in how youth (or all of us for that matter) portray these conflicting aspects of ourselves.
ReplyDeleteHowever, do you think blogging could be an exploration of this conflict as well -- in that examining the contradictions and differing elements that are portrayed via Sites is a good lesson in and of itself? Children display ego from the get go. The challenging super-ego might be accessed through blogging/ written work and discussion, wherein students are allowed exploration of others' stories or are thereafter allowed to reflect on their own "ego" on display?
Tracey,you always make me think in a new direction. I understand where ego can ensconse character as empowerment becomes a means to self-importance. I also witness too many students who are silenced in so many ways. The literacy defined by the “social practice” in a school’s culture brands students into stereotypical sub-cultures, and the boundaries become defined many times denying the individual of a voice. Egos dominate disregarding detrimental consequences. Either violence or silence occurs when relationships become confrontations.
ReplyDeleteIn the past, the silenced many times spoke through diaries. Unfortunately, no one heard the words and the voice remained silenced. I know that an adolescent’s character can too easily be shaped and/or skewed by the egos of others. Empowerment becomes aggressive instead of enlightening. With that said, I have found that at least some students find a release through blogging, networking, etc. that, for lack of a better metaphor, allows them to survive within the society of school.
Blogs are writing without rules, and this can be dangerous. They are written to promote agendas. This same argument was used when I was a teenager in the rebellious 60’s and 70’s with regards to music, print media that included underground newspapers and newsletters, social protests, and television. We did not have character. We were immoral. However, the argument stills empowers me through the self-enlightenment that I experienced during those years. Without the freedoms of expression I would have been one of the silenced voices.
Thank you, again, for your impactful insights that promote needed discussion. Jill
Tracy,
ReplyDeleteI love that you are not a moral relativist! Self-expression (whether private or for a mass audience) can be beautiful and empowering and gloriously freeing. It can also be pernicious. We have this American idea that as long as we are being honest and "true to ourselves" that other people must accept what we have to say.
We all have mean-spirited moments and self-destructive eras in our lives. I think you are right to question whether the public exploration of those moments (sometimes at the expense of other people) is a healthy thing.
Should we throw the baby out with the bathwater? No. As Jill says, freedom of expression is important. However, if we are to incorporate this digital world into our curricula, we must also consider the ethical dilemmas that arise. It is not enough to say that social justice demands that all students have unfettered access to the digital sphere and leave it at that. There are values that cross religious, political and social lines and one of those is kindness.
Teens live lives of heightened emotion and it is our responsibility as adults to help them avoid causing pain to others.