The parapgraph below is the first paragraph of my paper. I see this more as an OR because I am adding to the ideas of Brandt, but in an alternate way than Brandt openly states.
- In elementary education the idea that teachers aren’t showing effort to engage with their students is a common argument. Engagement with students shows that there is effort demonstrated in the classroom which can lead to a positive effect. A ways of engage that is most important with the topic of literacy success is communication. Communication is both shows in Brandt and the literacy narrative Live or Die by Paige Hibbard. Brandt states a sponsorship is shown through “any agents, local or distant, concrete or abstract, who enable support, teach, model, as well as recruit, regulate, suppress, or withhold literacy–and gain advantage by it in some way” (556), or can can express any motive of effort. In Hibbards literacy narrative she explains that her outlook on english changed when someone was there to regulate what she was doing when she says “She and I made a deal. If I needed help with my school work, she would help me or she would find someone who would help me” (Hibbard 2). Her teacher made a positive impact on her just through being there for her one and one, not just as a teacher. Beforehand in Hibbard’s elementary years she didn’t have anyone to trust she was always just told that she wasn’t good enough to be in a normal English class by being thrown into the class because of my NECAPS which I never really tried on in middle school” (Hibbard 1). There was a lack of sponsorship, or engagement being shown in her elementary years which is common because most students display a thought of discipline in earlier years which is not by any means of modeling, or teaching a student to succeed in the literacy discourse.
This paragraph is also considered an OR. I used this as an OR because again I am just adding another side to what Gee is already stating but just in a form of discipline. This disapline is supported by Gees thoughts.
2. Jess Larson states in her literacy narrative The Best Teacher I Ever Did Have her negative experience in elementary education is because strict requirements. Larson explains that “English class hasn’t been easy for me until I reached high school because my teachers focused more on disciplining us middle schoolers instead of elaborating on lesson plans” (1). Gee would agree with Larson that teachers are brainwashing, or forming them to follow strict guidelines which he doesn’t agree with when he states “It is a truism that a person can know perfectly that grammar of a language and not know how to use the language”(1).Gee and Larson are both trying to drive the point that someone can understand the concepts of writing such as grammar, sentence structure, and prewriting techniques, but not know how to use them at the same time. A lot of the time it has to relate to the fact that in elementary education free writing is limited there is usually always a strict prompt that has to be followed. Larson herself explained that her love for literacy started when she had a teacher that was less strict with the circulium and was more focused on teaching her how to use the language properly. Larson states “In her class I felt so free and unchained. The environment she provided us made it easier to get our work done; I didn’t feel confined to the rules”(3). This way of brainwashing was over for Larson because she could trust her teacher due to the safe environment that she was in. Gee, or Larson could agree that in order to become successful in a discourse you must be passionate for something and not mush fake it by knowing guidelines.
collreadwrit2e”
