Category: Eng 110 Blog

What I will be removing from the podcast is how I translate my thoughts out my head onto paper and then explaining my beliefs verbally. Obviously, this means that I have to change the way things are stated and make sure I make my claim very clear. When reading my paper you can pick out where my claims are and connect it with the evidence that I present. Now when I put this into my podcast I’m going to try to make it clear and state my claim as early as I possibly can so people know what the podcast is trying to prove. I feel like with using different voices for my quotes I will be able to bring attention to what is being said and this will help my argument.

• I’ve come to realize that the sponsors who withhold from the victims, which are mainly teachers, never get a chance to state their opinion in the story being told. Therefore, I believe that the students are too sensitive and over exaggerate the situation as well as remember the situation different than it actually was.
• Too many details tend to work out of favor for these students and that is part of the reason why I find it so odd
• School wasn’t made to be a place where you have fun. It was made to empower young children with knowledge so that when they enter the real world they are ready to take it head on.
• I think the students because they are so young at the time remember the situation much worse or how they want to remember it.
• Sometimes it is about how much work you are willing to put in to become a better student more than anything else.

Overall I think it is clear that at times victim narratives can be exaggerated due to over sensitivity. To continue off of that I think it is clear that these same people writing these narrative misunderstood their sponsors and this led to a miscommunication between the two. I feel as though I have made it clear that there are instances in which people are actually a victim but it is not as common as we might think. I also believe that some might say they had a negative experience because school wasn’t “fun” one year. School isn’t about having fun it is about increasing your knowledge so you can function in the real world. So when times seem tough and there is a lot of work it is those that are willing to endure anything instead of complaining who are the most successful.

Old: When a sponsor, specifically a teacher, is giving advice they tend to talk to the students like they are on the same level of understanding. Some students take this advice and use it to become a better reader and writer. Others tend to interpret it differently and instead of taking this advice as a learning point they instead take it personal. I do agree that there are some sponsors who just are terrible and don’t care to see their students succeed. But at the same time I feel as though students can misinterpret the message the teacher is trying to send especially at a young age.

New: When a sponsor, specifically a teacher, is giving advice they tend to talk to the students like they are on the same level of understanding. Some students take this advice and use it to become a better reader and writer. Others tend to interpret it differently and instead of taking this advice as a learning point they take it personal. I do agree that there are some sponsors who just are terrible and don’t care to see their students succeed. I have had my fair share of these sponsors and not only have i learned from these experience but they have made me appreciate my sponsors who cared about my academic progress even more. But at the same time I feel as though students can misinterpret the message the teacher is trying to send especially at a young age. This I think this topic could be expanded on further and maybe even research could be conducted to see how many times a student sees themself as a victim and how many times they actually were victimized. But truthfully I think there is something to learn as a student everyday regardless of the sponsors actions. Many students can attest to having a bad teacher but getting their work done so that way they still achieve the grade they please. Sometimes it is about how much work you are willing to put in to become a better student more than anything else.

Old: Another thing that I want to prove is that the sponsors are just trying to make the students better at their reading and writing. One student wrote a narrative about a teacher who took the book twilight away from her when she was in elementary school. “She started to cause a scene in front of the whole class about how she thought that book was out of my reading level, and I wasn’t old enough” I think that the sponsor for one thought twilight was too much of an inappropriate book to be reading in elementary school. I also believe that yes the student might be able to read the book but while she be able to grasp all the concepts within it. Just because you can read a word doesn’t mean you know what that word means. This teacher was a sponsor that was doing her job. Brandt defines a sponsor as “Usually richer, more knowledgeable, and more entrenched than the sponsored, sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite.” She would have been a bad sponsor if she didn’t walk around the classroom and look at everything that everyone was reading. I think the students because they are so young at the time remember the situation much worse or how they want to remember it. Bronwyn expands on this concept by arguing “It is obvious that imagining a scenario doesn’t make it happen. Yet many students who do not feel successful as readers and writers think that these identities are the results of external judgements handed down by the literacy “authorities” in their lives” (Bronwyn 345). Between students trying to be a hero and not taking constructive criticism they are able to paint the sponsor as a bad person when in reality most of the time I feel that they are just trying to help out.

New: Sponsors are very important to literacy narratives because based on how the sponsor engages with the person writing the literacy narrative will determine what type of literacy narrative the student writes. Brandt defines a sponsor as “Usually richer, more knowledgeable, and more entrenched than the sponsored, sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite.” Another point that I want to prove is that the sponsors are just trying to make the students better at their reading and writing. They do so by sometimes challenging students to do harder work and this is what most people would expect when from a teacher. But sometimes teachers will make a student better by encouraging them to take a step back. I think most students would understand this but I was presented with a case where a student didn’t. This student wrote a narrative about a teacher who took the book twilight away from her when she was in elementary school. “She started to cause a scene in front of the whole class about how she thought that book was out of my reading level, and I wasn’t old enough” I think that the sponsor for one thought twilight was too much of an inappropriate book to be reading in elementary school. I also believe that yes the student might be able to read the book but while she be able to grasp all the concepts within it. Just because you can read a word doesn’t mean you know what that word means. This teacher was a sponsor that was doing her job. She would have been a bad sponsor if she didn’t walk around the classroom and look at everything that everyone was reading. I think the students because they are so young at the time remember the situation much worse or how they want to remember it. Bronwyn expands on this concept by arguing “It is obvious that imagining a scenario doesn’t make it happen. Yet many students who do not feel successful as readers and writers think that these identities are the results of external judgements handed down by the literacy “authorities” in their lives” (Bronwyn 345). I agree with Bronwyn because not only are there clear examples of this being true in literacy narratives but I have also seen it first hand in the classroom. Between students trying to be a hero and not taking constructive criticism they are able to paint the sponsor as a bad person when in reality most of the time I feel that they are just trying to help out.

I think throughout my paper I have the right amount of evidence to prove my points and persuade the reader to agree with my perspective. What I have learned from the feedback I have received from my peers is that I need to do more explaining of the quotes I use to show why I agree with what is being stated or disagree. I could also do the same with a few places in which I placed literacy narratives. It’s not that they don’t necessarily make sense it’s more of trying to paint a clearer picture for the reader to understand. Besides that I think my perspective is there I just need to state it clearer than I have so there is no confusion on the points I am trying to get across.

In my introduction my peers believe that I could speak a little more on literacy narratives and what they are all about. They also believe I can start naming some examples of literacy narratives the further prove my thesis and what I believe about victim narratives. One of my peers specifically believes that I could work on including a little more of Brandt or Alexander a little more in my introduction before moving on from it so I can say how I feel about their beliefs in relation to mine. I think the current narratives I’ve used have worked well and done a good job of showing examples of my perspective on victim narratives.

In my evidence I just need to make it clearer as to why I used certain quotes to the audience. My peers can clearly see why I chose certain quotes because they read these scholarly journals as well. But they challenge me to create a clearer picture for the reader so that my message is convey more smoothly and it is easier to understand. The evidence is there for the most part it is just time to take the evidence I have been given and use it to my advantage so that way I can convince readers to agree with my point of view.

 

Ideas- My peers seemed to like a lot of the ideas that I was presenting throughout my paper. They seem to think that I am on the right path with these ideas but there is some points in my paper where I can elaborate further on an idea or even present the idea earlier in the paper so it’s present throughout when reading.

Evidence- My peers also see this as something I can work on. While my ideas are somewhat present the could be further proven with some insertion from Alexander, Brandt and Bronwyn. My peers have a couple of suggestions as to where I can use those three the help prove my ideas true.

Organization- There wasn’t too much to work on here. There was only on spot where I inserted a quote and it didn’t fit with the idea that was present.

Local- I had a few places where punctuation was missing but I can just insert the proper punctuation in and will look how it should.

Jeremy Diaz

Dr. Michael Cripps

English 110

April 2, 2019

Literacy Narratives Paper

There are many different sub narratives in which a literacy narrative can fall into. One of these narratives that I have been specifically paying attention to are victim narratives. See when one reads these narratives they only get one side of the story and that is the story of the victim. In some cases it is clear to me that they are a victim and had a bad literacy experience. But in other cases these same narratives seem to be to sensitive and somewhat exaggerated. Examples of these consist of a teacher being rude when talking about a students reading level or tearing their paper apart. I want to delve deeper into this topic and in a way defend the “mean” teacher because I feel as though at times they are not accurately represented.

When reading victim narratives we often try to sympathize with the author and take their side since they’re the one telling the story. In my experience, I’ve come to realize that the sponsors who withhold from the victims, which are mainly teachers, never get a chance to state their opinion in the story being told. Therefore, I believe that the students are too sensitive and over exaggerate the situation as well as remember the situation different than it actually was. For example in one of the literacy narratives I read titled “Expect the Unexpected” by Hannah D there is a clear case of over exaggeration. She boasts about a paper she felt she did really well on. The topic of the paper was the death of her own brother so she put a lot of work into this paper since it was something personal to her. When she received it back she wasn’t so happy “When I finally got my paper back, all I felt was disappointment. I couldn’t believe what I saw, I looked at my paper and saw a B- minus circled in the top right corner.” She believed she deserved much more because of her emotional attachment to the paper. She didn’t even go to see the teacher and ask why she got the grade she did like I’ve read in past narratives. I also believe that the sponsor was just trying to get more out of her than she had already put on the paper. But instead she decides to play the victim. Kara Poe Alexander defines a victim by arguing “They also might see victim narratives as constituting a critique more in line with the assignment expectations than other moves might be”(Alexander 618). But this doesn’t sound like our author. This sounds like someone who’s skills were generally suppressed or overlooked by a sponsor or anyone else who could’ve helped but instead hurt them. In all honesty I think that students when writing literacy narratives like to play the victim so that way they can emerge as a hero in the end. Bronwyn argues this best when she quotes Carpenter and Falbo. “Carpenter and Falbo, for example, noted how their first year writing students, when writing literacy narratives, often portray themselves as the hero of their stories, overcoming all obstacles to succeed at reading and writing” (Bronwyn 343). Now it is clear that everyone wants to be a hero but not every story is written that way. Same as how not every story tells the truth. I believe that Hannah D’s narrative is a perfect example of a story where someone tries to play hero because they stuck to their guns and took the constructive criticism to heart when in reality the teacher was just doing their job and trying to make them a better writer.

I don’t mean to call these students out when I say that their story is exaggerated but it just seems as though it might be true. Too many details tend to work out of favor for these students and that is part of the reason why I find it so odd. Logically speaking, if there was an issue that was very bad, I think most people if not everyone would try to do everything in their power to remove themself from a toxic situation if there was absolutely no way to succeed in that environment. This is the environment that has been described on multiple occasions in victim narratives. Bronwyn describes the victim narrative as “being stigmatized through their literacy experiences, particularly in school where the student is a victim of bad or insensitive teaching.” (344)  While this could be the case for some the other students could also just be overly sensitive to constructive criticism.

One common theme there was in these narratives was that a lot of them lost the fun and enjoyment they found in reading. Alexander would argue that “A victim of negative literacy experiences, in or out of school; cast blame for negative literacy experiences; discusses how someone took the fun out of reading and writing.” (615) But I don’t believe that this necessarily the whole truth. The literacy narrative Road to Failure by Madison Derosa depicts this perfectly. This is a story about a girl who took title one classes multiple times in order to improve her reading. First off, Madison went into her 2nd year of title one with a negative attitude. This year was different though. I didn’t have the same teacher, the one I actually liked. “This year my name was called by an old, tall, skinny, grey haired woman with a coconut haircut. She called off our names and would sigh in between them. Her teeth were stained as if she drank too much coffee. Her name was Mrs. Millisauskis and I knew that this wouldn’t be a fun year.” It is clear that Madison not only wasn’t excited about learning with her new teacher but just wanted her old one back as well. Madison writes in her narrative “Even though I hated being in Title 1, I missed being with Mrs. Ouimette. She was about making learning fun, Mrs. Millisauskis didn’t care if we enjoyed it or not, we were getting our reading done.” This is a clear example of her over sensitivity. School wasn’t made to be a place where you have fun. It was made to empower young children with knowledge so that when they enter the real world they are ready to take it head on. Clearly Madison missed this point when she was younger and never realized it after she grew up. Her sponsor Mrs. Millisauski was there to help her learn not to make things fun like her teacher Mrs. Ouimette did in the past year. Technically, we can say as a sponsor, Mrs. Ouimette failed because Madison ended up in title one class the following year.

Another thing that I want to prove is that the sponsors are just trying to make the students better at their reading and writing. One student wrote a narrative about a teacher who took the book twilight away from her when she was in elementary school. “She started to cause a scene in front of the whole class about how she thought that book was out of my reading level, and I wasn’t old enough” I think that the sponsor for one thought twilight was too much of an inappropriate book to be reading in elementary school. I also believe that yes the student might be able to read the book but while she be able to grasp all the concepts within it. Just because you can read a word doesn’t mean you know what that word means. This teacher was a sponsor that was doing her job. Brandt defines a sponsor as “Usually richer, more knowledgeable, and more entrenched than the sponsored, sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite.” She would have been a bad sponsor if she didn’t walk around the classroom and look at everything that everyone was reading. I think the students because they are so young at the time remember the situation much worse or how they want to remember it. Bronwyn expands on this concept by arguing “It is obvious that imagining a scenario doesn’t make it happen. Yet many students who do not feel successful as readers and writers think that these identities are the results of external judgements handed down by the literacy “authorities” in their lives” (Bronwyn 345). Between students trying to be a hero and not taking constructive criticism they are able to paint the sponsor as a bad person when in reality most of the time I feel that they are just trying to help out.

When a sponsor, specifically a teacher, is giving advice they tend to talk to the students like they are on the same level of understanding. Some students take this advice and use it to become a better reader and writer. Others tend to interpret it differently and instead of taking this advice as a learning point they instead take it personal. I do agree that there are some sponsors who just are terrible and don’t care to see their students succeed. But at the same time I feel as though students can misinterpret the message the teacher is trying to send especially at a young age.

I think it is obvious that at times students can take a situation with a sponsor too serious. I think the reasons for this is that they’re too young to put things into a logical perspective and therefore they remember the situation as something bad and scarring from their childhood instead of taking it as a learning situations. I wish that there was a way for us to hear the side of the bad sponsors in certain narratives so we can get a sense of understanding on their side. Maybe they don’t know that they can come across rude to students at times but they’ll never know unless someone speaks up. When students ask a question there is always some type of response. It could be a passionate one that is trying to see the student succeed or a rude one that doesn’t care at all. But if students just sit in silence and allow themselves to feel like the victim then their problems can never be solved.

 

Worksheet I – Build a Barclay’s paragraph that puts you in the conversation by establishing a key idea/concept in the scholarship.

 

TLS = The Little Seagull; TSIS = They Say, I Say

 

CLAIM (main idea) – What’s the paragraph going to be focused on?

I believe that some students are too sensitive when they have interactions with a teacher

INTRODUCE QUOTE – Establish a little context for the quote, through a full sentence introduction, a signal phrase, or a clause that works to set up an embedded quote. (Resources: TLS E4; TSIS, CH3)

“When I finally got my paper back, all I felt was disappointment. I couldn’t believe what I saw, I looked at my paper and saw a B- minus circled in the top right corner.”

 

QUOTE 1 – This is a quote from one of the scholarly sources we’re putting into conversation. If you use a signal phrase or seek an embedded quote, you’ll need to be sure the quote “flows” smoothly from the INTRODUCE QUOTE material above.

Kara Poe Alexander defines a victim by arguing “They also might see victim narratives as constituting a critique more in line with the assignment expectations than other moves might be.”(Alexander 618)

 

EXPLAIN QUOTE 1 – Elaborate/explain/rephrase Quote 1 above in a way that helps move the reader along towards the next quote. By doing this well, you’re establishing HOW this existing conversation works. Additionally, you’re positioning yourself in it through your effort to NAME the issue as one that’s important in the field of study.

The point of this quote is to show how an actual victim is supposed to be portrayed. Instead of showing an example right away it is important to define a victim for the reader.

Worksheet II – Build a Barclay’s paragraph that relates a concept in the scholarship to the data (evidence in the archive)

 

TLS = The Little Seagull; TSIS = They Say, I Say

 

CLAIM (main idea) – What’s the paragraph going to be focused on? What does the data show us about the concept?

The sponsors are just trying to make the students better students

 

INTRODUCE QUOTE – Establish a little context for the quote, through a full sentence introduction, a signal phrase, or a clause that works to set up an embedded quote. (Resources: TLS E4; TSIS, CH3)

 

Sometimes, it’s good to begin with the concept quote, especially if the application is straightforward: LN a shows us that Alexander’s view on how victim narratives work is a solid one. Other times, the data complicates or challenges the concept, and it might be good to reverse the order: Show the part of the LN that reveals something complicated about the victim idea in Alexander, then in Quote 2 show the part of Alexander that you’re complicating or challenging.

“She started to cause a scene in front of the whole class about how she thought that book was out of my reading level, and I wasn’t old enough”

 

QUOTE 1 – This is a quote from either a scholarly source OR a literacy narrative. If you use a signal phrase or seek an embedded quote, you’ll need to be sure the quote “flows” smoothly from the INTRODUCE QUOTE material above.

“Usually richer, more knowledgeable, and more entrenched than the sponsored, sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite.”

 

EXPLAIN QUOTE 1 – Elaborate/explain/rephrase Quote 1 above in a way that helps move the reader along towards the next quote. By doing this well, you’re establishing a stronger sense of the ways the evidence shows what you’re claiming in the topic sentence. This helps the reader stay focused on YOUR idea.

This quote explains what a sponsors job and how the sponsors are just trying to improve the students skill sets because that’s what they’re supposed to do

When reading victim narratives we often try to sympathize with the author and take their side since they’re the one telling the story. In my experience, I’ve come to realize that the sponsors who withhold from the victims, which are mainly teachers, never get a chance to state their opinion in the story being told. Therefore, I believe that the students are too sensitive and over exaggerate the situation as well remember the situation different than it actually was. For example in one of the literacy narratives I read titled “Expect the Unexpected” by Hannah D there is a clear case of over exaggeration. She boasts about a paper she felt she did really well on and the topic of the paper was the death of her own brother so she put a lot of work into this paper. When she received it back she wasn’t so happy “When I finally got my paper back, all I felt was disappointment. I couldn’t believe what I saw, I looked at my paper and saw a B- minus circled in the top right corner.” She believed she deserved much more because of her emotional attachment to the paper. She didn’t even go to see the teacher and ask why she got the grade she did like I’ve read in past narratives as well. And I also believe that the sponsor was just trying to get more out of her than she had already put on the paper. But instead she decides to play the victim. Kara Poe Alexander defines a victim by arguing “They also might see victim narratives as constituting a critique more in line with the assignment expectations than other moves might be”(Alexander 618). But this doesn’t sound like our author. This sounds like someone who’s skills were generally suppressed or overlooked by a sponsor or anyone else who could’ve helped but hurt them. In all honesty I think that students when writing literacy narratives like to play the victim so that way they can emerge as a hero in the end. Bronwyn argues this best when she quotes Carpenter and Falbo. “Carpenter and Falbo, for example, noted how their first year writing students, when writing literacy narratives, often portray themselves as the hero of their stories, overcoming all obstacles to succeed at reading and writing” (Bronwyn 343). Now it is clear that everyone wants to be a hero but not every story is written that way. Same as how not every story tells the truth. And I believe that this is a perfect example of a story where someone tries to play hero because they stuck to their guns and took the constructive criticism to heart when the teacher was just doing their job and trying to make them a better writer.

Another thing that I want to prove is that the sponsors are just trying to make the students better at their reading and writing. One student wrote a narrative about a teacher who took the book twilight away from her when she was in elementary school. “She started to cause a scene in front of the whole class about how she thought that book was out of my reading level, and I wasn’t old enough” I think that the sponsor for one thought twilight was too much of an inappropriate book to be reading in elementary school. I also believe that yes the student might be able to read the book but while she be able to grasp all the concepts within it. Just because you can read a word doesn’t mean you know what that word means. This teacher was a sponsor that was doing her job. Brandt defines a sponsor as “Usually richer, more knowledgeable, and more entrenched than the sponsored, sponsors nevertheless enter a reciprocal relationship with those they underwrite.” She would have been a bad sponsor if she didn’t walk around the classroom and look at everything that everyone was reading. I think the students because they are so young at the time remember the situation much worse or how they want to remember it. Bronwyn expands on this concept by arguing “It is obvious that imagining a scenario doesn’t make it happen. Yet many students who do not feel successful as readers and writers think that these identities are the results of external judgements handed down by the literacy “authorities” in their lives” (Bronwyn 345). Between students trying to be a hero and not taking constructive criticism they are able to paint the sponsor as a bad person when in reality most of the time I feel that they are just trying to help out.

I’ve decided that I want to work with narratives that have to deal with victims and sponsors that with hold knowledge. I feel like I can defend the teachers in some of these narratives and show that not only are these faulty narratives but maybe some of these students were being to sensitive. Maybe there was a lesson to be learned and they missed it or they are just over-exaggerating.

List of Narratives

• Expect the Unexpected by Hannah D.
• Literacy Narrative by Olivia Cram
• Learning not to Hate English Austin Scaglione
• I don’t read by Brandon Cass
• The Roller Coaster by Evan Dodge
• Acceptance of Change by Katherine Parker
• Road to Failure by Madison Derosa
• The Mean Teacher by Noah Luccini

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

The sponsor in Ben’s story is his mother. The reason why this is so is because she is the one that not only brings him to the library but also suggests the book that makes him want to get into reading. While his mother may not have realized it at the time by doing this she improved Ben’s interest as well as his knowledge and that day Ben became a better student because of it.

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

Ben states that he read books like Huckleberry Finn and the Three Musketeers going into 4th grade. I remember reading this book in high school and having trouble with it. For someone who picked up reading not too long before then his reading level must have been advanced to read a book that was so complicated and had so many themes. I wonder if he was able to pick all that up at that young an age.

 

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

There isn’t a clear specific sponsor so I would say the sponsor was the school as a whole. They guided her from not being able to read at all to liking it so much that she would write her own stories in her free time. From the sponsor point of view this must feel amazing because they were able to help a girl who was struggling with something to love and embrace it

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

I found it interesting that she found a passion for reading and that it made her want to write her own stories. I feel like she would be able to write a whole literacy narrative on her book club alone.

 

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

The Sponsor who is his grandfather wasn’t able to see his effect on his grandson because he was sick in the hospital when he goes from a mentee to a mentor. A lot of responsibility was given to David and he believes that he was able to deal with it because his grandfather taught him so well.

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

I found that there was very little in this narrative to do with literacy. Instead this seems more like a tribute to his grandfather than anything else. I think there should have been a stronger focus on what his grandfather taught him in reading and writing and how that turned him into the reader/writer he is today.

 

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

The sponsor in Haileys narrative was very helpful to her even though she was originally believed to be mean and hard grader. The sponsor was willing to help and was happy that Hailey reached out because she wanted to see her do better and knew she had the capability to do so.

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

I really like how this originally feels like a victim narrative and has some aspects of that in the beginning because once she transitions it into a success narrative there is more of a happy ending and a bit of the unexpected feeling is given to the reader.

 

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

The sponsor may believe that she shouldn’t have been reading twilight due to the fact that she read it herself. If you know the twilight plot you know that there are some inappropriate moments throughout the series for someone so young. I feel as though the teacher was just trying to look out for the student but she never realized that she went about it the wrong way.

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

This story really didn’t have anything special to it. In fact I found it quite boring and short. I feel like she must have another literacy narrative that is closer to her. All she says is that she got a book taken away and that inspired her to finish the series. I wish there was more for her to tell.

 

Q4. For each SPONSOR, imagine how he/she might view the central literacy moment in the story. Williams suggests the value of this thinking in suggesting that students “rewrite the key moment (or moments) of the narrative from the position of a different identity” (345). WRITE ABOUT the SPONSOR’s perspective. Briefly note relevant detail/evidence from the LN that suggests that perspective.

The sponsor was willing to sit down with her and work with her in order for her to get the work. But she also took another step that she didn’t necessarily needed to do. She understood that Reegan was struggling to make friends with the other students and went out of her way to make sure that she wasn’t alone in the classroom.

 

Q5. What strikes you as INTERESTING, COMPLICATED, or otherwise worth NOTING? (Use shorthand or fragments, but attempt to say WHY it’s interesting/complicated.) Here YOU start to decide what’s important FOR YOU.

What I found interesting about this narrative was the fact that she was in a room with a bunch of kids from South Africa. Hearing this made me want to read more and see how she would react to being put in this environment. I’m glad she was able to succeed in not only improving in the classroom but also when making friends.