oh, deer

Ha, ha.  I know I'm corny.  Eschenfelder and Miller's take on the positive government-citizen relationships made possible by the internet is interesting in light of Yudof's warnings about the government and technology.  Both articles did say that the internet provides a very quick and effective way to reach the masses.  Whether the purpose is for propaganda or public safety & education is in the eye of the beholder.

Again remembering Yudof's warning concerning governmental omissions of information, I can see how easy it would be for CWD sites to strategically leave out information to tailor the message to someone's agenda.  The variety in levels of disclosure among the four CWD sites was astonishing.  I appreciated the authors' attempt to provide some structure and framework for including enough information for stakeholders to make decisions.  It makes a lot of sense that agencies should follow "guidelines for 'influential' information that require agencies to provide sufficient information such that interested parties could conduct an independent reanalysis and come up with similar conclusions" (p. 82). 

Of course my brain heads to school libraries.  In the same way that government websites must present the complete picture, school libraries should endeavor to provide a well-rounded collection, complete with controversies and debates.  The omission of certain books and topics may speak as clearly as the inclusion of them and should be considered carefully.  Just as government agencies should follow clear guidelines, so should school libraries follow a plan for collection development and management.

Changing directions, I found something missing in both the other articles was citizen-to-government communication.  If the governing body believes it is true that "the role of government information is to educate citizens so they can provide input to agency decision makers", then there must be a convenient avenue for communication from citizens to those agencies (p. 82).  The citizen-publisher form of government information dispersal seems to fill that gap.  The article goes so far as to suggest an online forum for discussion or even published articles from concerned citizens.  While this model may thwart traditional forms of authority to some extent, it also allows for a public sense of ownership (and possibly more complete/diverse information than would be available from the governmental office alone).  In light of the ubiquity of "wikis" and social cataloging, it seems like user-created content and discussion would be a natural next step in government information.  As providers of information to patrons, do libraries (particularly school libraries) provide ample opportunities for the public to speak to the library about their needs?

I have not finished reading Literacy in American Lives, but so far it has made me realize how many factors of literacy I take for granted--both in my own development of literacy and in the development of my students.  First, I tend to ignore the interplay between economic factors and literacy.  While, I understand that some of my students can afford books at home and other can't, I hadn't thought of the way that illiteracy and therefore economic disadvantages are perpetuated through this disparity.  As a public educator, I would like to think that my instruction can somehow "level the playing field" when it comes to breaking the cycle of illiteracy.  On the other hand, teachers know how much a child's background contributes to his or her readiness to learn new information and skills.  In addition, author Deborah Brandt points out that increased and shifting expectations of literacy in schools only widens the gap between the literate and illiterate.  Teachers, and I'm sure students as well, are feeling the pressure of increased expectations, without increased time or resources (and often with less of these).  About this Brandt says:

"The school's responsibility should not be merely--and perhaps not mainly--to keep raising standards, revising curricula, and multiplying skills to satisfy the restless pursuers of human capital.  Efforts must not go only to preparing students for future demands, not should students' problems with reading or writing be defined solely in terms of rising expectations versus insufficient skills.  Economic changes create immediate needs for students to cope with gradual and sometimes dramatic alterations in systems of access and reward for literacy learning that operate beyond the classroom" (pg. 43-44).

From Brandt's quote, I understood that changes in the economy and therefore literacy standards require new ways to approach literacy.  She also wrote that economic hardships loom large in students' literacy experiences and must be considered when attempting to bridge the gap between "rising expectations and insufficient skills".  For me, this speaks to the ways in which certain groups in the school environment are disadvantaged, particularly boys, and more specifically boys of color.  In their cases, not only economics, but race and gender are also factors in their literacy development.  I began to make connections to this issue when examining Brandt's case study of Martha Day and the way Day's white, rural, conservative values were maintained and disseminated through her work in newspapers.  The literacy she developed, embedded within her upbringing, was valued and exploited by those in power to perpetuate the values and literacy of the day.  Stick with me--I'm bringing it back around.  In a similar way, I can see how my white, middle class background (and the literacy that is a product of that background) gave me an advantage in securing employment from those who would like the current form of literacy to continue.  I don't mean to imply that fostering this kind of literacy is a problem.  The problem may arise in the ingrained ways I go about teaching literacy--in the same way I learned to read and write.  The effect of my own background on my teaching is the second factor I tend to ignore.  I may be perpetuating the traditional and accepted form of literacy because of my background, while missing other, less-accepted forms of literacy.  If I am not self-reflective, I may not be providing appropriate pathways to literacy to the marginalized groups in my classroom.  I am reminded again of the "Beyond Diversity" training I attended last summer.  One of the most powerful ideas presented was to show students (particularly students of color) the way to be successful in the dominant culture while allowing them to maintain their identity.  I may be able to accomplish this by acknowledging various forms of literacy that are not necessarily valued in the school setting (I'm thinking standard English versus dialects). 

How will this apply to me as a librarian?  I will certainly have opportunities to support literacy and will need to be careful to consider students' backgrounds when I do so (which can be more challenging when I will see the students far less than classroom teachers).  I will also have the opportunity to work with a shift in literacy that we are experiencing currently.  That is the increased importance of information literacy, which will be a large part of my responsibility as a school librarian.  Learning from past changes in literacy, this new movement will likely continue to be turbulent.  Economic factors will certainly come into play as computer literacy specifically requires abundantly more financial investment in children's homes.  It will be useful to consider how the school library can again "even the playing field" as more and more jobs require at least a basic level of information and computer literacy.

photos from the excellent superbomba flickr photostream