As we grow up, we learn to read novels and then text books. We learn that reading text is all about reading words on a page. But, is it really?
According to Kallus, text is more than this but, rather, includes so much more from the arts to signs to movement. 
Almost anything can be argued as text and it is important to recognize that when we think about the question, "are you literate?" If we are reading 'text,' are we not literate? Gone are the days with the traditional standard of reading as the world around us opens the doors to new types of reading we did not realize were even imaginable.
Can a person be only a few degrees literate in a specific literacy? And what do you consider to be fully literate? It seems like in theory this can be a good thing to include in the classroom but is it really going to be helpful for students when the boundaries are so vague. For example, I know that even though I consider myself to be a fairly accomplished pianist that there are still so many other who are better than me. I feel like it could leave a student feeling frustrated and unmotivated to increase their abilities if I were to try explaining that to them. Do you have any ideas with combating those sorts of problems?
ReplyDelete