Blog post on Gee / Delpit

Quickwrite 1 These terms show that literacy, or more specifically, our language systems, are all intertwined. A synchronization is necessary in order to form literate discourses because we must add on to our primary discourse, what we already know, new information – all the time. He is claiming that we acquire certain knowledge from our home setting, then that knowledge is expanded when we get into school and social situations. All of this learning culminates in our identity kit, the skills and knowledge we use to figure out problems, read difficult texts, and write college essays. The terms are relevant because they allow us as teachers to understand that there is a complex background to the literacy of each of our students. In other words, we must be conscious of the many factors that have influenced out students’ discourses, and the many discourses that will be present, so that our lessons reach a wide variety of language and reading levels. In addition, these discourses will give birth to a type of meta-knowledge, an understanding of theories and beliefs outside of our dominant discourse, but nonetheless reachable by using the learning we have gained thus far.Quickwrite 2These terms show Delpit’s understanding of literacy as a learning experiment; our primary (dominant) discourse can be modified, added to, and even transformed to fit the assignment we are working on. She argues that there are tests which determine if a person is in or out of a discourse. She also addresses the issues of non-learning, when a person’s dominant discourse will not allow him or her to access information that is being read, and non-teaching, in which teachers will neglect to correct grammatical mistakes or language errors in order to stay‘safe.’ Delpit argues that each and every person has the potential to reach an advanced dominant discourse, and that one can change their discourse over time and through learning. Her main argument against Gee is that people can in fact move out of their discourses and change their literary skills/knowledge. Blog Entry for Gee vs. Delpit• Gee says that you are fixed Discourse; that your personal set of literacy skills can be added to, but that you cannot transform into another discourse, and you are either completely in or completely out. Delpit rejects this statement, citing examples of people who came from poor communities with low literacy rates but with perseverance toward learning, they ‘escaped’ that discourse and went on to be successful, educated people. Delpit argues that each and every person has the potential to reach an advanced dominant discourse, and that one can change their discourse over time and through learning. Her main argument against Gee is that people can in fact move out of their discourses and change their literary skills/knowledge. She claims that a discourse can be transformed, that we can temporarily take on or assume another set of skills in order to refute an argument that is using that discourse; i.e., using deconstructionism to critique a literary piece based on this theory… of deconstructionism. Yeah.