The affordances/limitation
of digitally mediated literacy artifacts is wonderfully described at the end of
the Haddix and Sealey-Ruiz (2012) article, “Using digital tools does not
exclude or supplant teaching the writing process, facilitating writing
workshops, focusing on writing conventions and grammar, or preparing students
for writing on demand. Instead, digital tools serve as a powerful way for
teachers to draw on students’ out-of-school practices and talents when composing
in school and on academic tasks.” (pg. 191-192) As teachers, it is crucial to
find solutions to hardships instead of brushing students aside because the systems in place
didn’t work. The affordances of digitally mediated literacy artifacts are
providing students voice and an outlet that relates to their personal life. By
bringing this into the classroom, you can provide space for students to “categorize
and index themselves.” (Wargo, 2017). And to find ways to express themselves
relating to what is happening "offline".
The idea that identity isn’t
constructed, but rather negotiated (Compton-Lil, Papoi, Venegas, Hamman, and
Schwabauer, 2016) stuck out to me when reading. My definition of
construction centers around the building of something. Students in schools shouldn’t have
to build a thing, but rather interact with the process of finding one’s
identity. They should be allowed to negotiate their identities by pushing back
on the norms of school and find their place within this figurative world.
When thinking of identity
performance as a means of conveying who we are to other people, we use
ourselves to project information to others. New media outlets connect identity in a way to bridge together divisions online and offline (Wage, 2017). The meta-process surrounding the uploading of the photo story is what intrigues me-the story behind the photo. My children are not the age of social media (and I hope I can hold them off for a long time), but they are aware of selfies. Our art specialist took their interest in selfies and created an art project. The children took a selfie and she printed them off-from here they took a transparancy and placed it over the picture to trace with a black sharpie. Then they sanded the transparency (to hold the color) and added the color of their choice. The first picture is a picture of my daughter:

She was very concerned to match every color precisely and wanted to make sure it was accurate. This carries over in other areas of her life-she wants things in order. She was able to articulate the struggle she felt to match her skin color-this was a common discussion at the tables.
My middle son was precise, but was upset his hair color didn't match his:
His reflection with a beautiful doodle on the back:
Mack was proud of his art work (He uses art in all areas as a mode). "I like my shirt" (it was very detailed).
Then there was Lincoln:
At first I was asking him why he drew himself all blue and he couldn't answer. Then, when I saw the final product I noticed he used black to cover over his face. At a first glance it would appear he scribbled, but when he had to reflect on this project he wasn't happy with the color he used to represent himself, so he was trying to get the color right. If I were to analysis this he was using the black to erase his face all together. He was listening to the older students around him about skin color and I think that is when he became aware of his color choice.

These artifacts created a connection in addition to the reading as examples of how our youngest students can use modality to examine their own identity using the idea of selfies. I feel by these artifacts, I am able to observe their process of creating their own identity. In contrast, I feel my view is altered because I am an observer who has already figured these creatures into my world and attached my own identities to them. I am curious to see how they shape themselves and resist some of the labels placed on them and how my outside view is placed on them.
We have all been push to examine our identity this semester-maybe this has been more of a process in addition to your foundation. I am curious how you use social media as a platform to create voice for yourself and do you use it as a mode of identity?
Beth-Thanks for sharing these great examples through selfies. How relevant to the Wargo piece! I'm wondering about how you see your children negotiating their identities based on the school as a figured worlds, gender norms and existing power structures, etc. In what ways are they agentic? Conforming and resisting as they take up their identities?
ReplyDeleteBeth, your paragraph
ReplyDeleteThe idea that identity isn’t constructed, but rather negotiated (Compton-Lil, Papoi, Venegas, Hamman, and Schwabauer, 2016) stuck out to me when reading. My definition of construction centers around the building of something. Students in schools shouldn’t have to build a thing, but rather interact with the process of finding one’s identity. They should be allowed to negotiate their identities by pushing back on the norms of school and find their place within this figurative world (Watson, 2018).
struck me. It reminded me of Friere's writing of “World and human beings do not exist apart from each other, they exist in constant interaction” (loc 637). I also saw a little bit of dichotomy between students and school; yet, how and why do we separate these out? I can certainly see us doing so when discussing schools as infinite figured worlds, but if using the terms to represent the adult and adult affinity groups within an organization, I think set up a power dynamic by using both terms.
I think you are so right that "The affordances of digitally mediated literacy artifacts are providing students voice and an outlet that relates to their personal life" (Watson, 2018). I see that our three required articles this week definitely support this as they discuss New Literacies.
Beth,
ReplyDeleteI still find myself on the seesaw of identity: it's constructed - it's negotiated. I think it's both. From reading last week's articles I can see how identity is constructed, how activities and artifacts can form and build your identity. (The #wokebaby activity will probably also be sedimented with this idea from now on.) This week the articles demonstrate how it isn't just construction, but students also have to negotiate it. I think Carlos in Compton-Lilly et al.'s (2017) article shows how he manages the different parts of his identity - he's American, but he's Mexican - and the times when he has to negotiate between them. It reminds me of Baron's (2013) discussion about Hamad. When Baron tries to "negotiate" and switch roles (Now you be England and I'll be Pakistan), Hamad refused to negotiate with him, "No, I Pakistan." I think Compton-Lilly et al.'s (2017) ideas about identity negotiation would be interesting to research among all early elementary students. What roles do schools and classroom place in the negotiation process?
~Sarah