Writing Between Languages 3/21

When this class started, I mistakenly referred to Kelly Gallagher as "she." Every time I reference a new text since then, I read a little about the author, to make sure I'm using not only the correct pronoun, but I also want to know a little about the author. It's like reading the labels on food in the grocery store. I noted that Danling Fu learned how to write in English when she was in grad school, and as such has an important perspective as an English Language Learner, what works and doesn't. Gives me confidence that what I'm reading is important and accurate.

Something that pops up early and often in this book is the idea of identifying students' home cultures as an asset instead of a deficiency. When she refers to her students as "funds of knowledge" it reminds me of literacy practices and Emdin's co-teaching article, which references students as experts. I think it's critical to recognize the importance of a student's first-language proficiency, and building on that to help them become proficient in English. Fu makes the distinction between teaching English proficiency and replacing the original first language. I particularly liked the way she explained that the idea was not to replace a student's L1, students will continue to develop their first language writing skills while also learning to be better writers of English. She says, "ELL's first language writing plays an important role in their English writing development."

• I particularly liked the example Fu showed where teachers were asked to write a passage in another language, even if they had only taken a limited number of classes. They were allowed to use translation dictionaries, and whatever else they needed. Once teacher chose to write the whole passage in Italian, and it was limited to the things she remembered how to say in Italian, "I love vacations. I like ice cream. I like pizza." The other teacher chose to write using both English (L1) and Spanish and was able to express what she was trying to say, without having to resort to limited expressions. 
• At the end of Chapter 3, Fu describes getting pushback from one of her admins about how letting ELLs write in their first language was nice, but difficult to assess and measure int the era of NCLB.  Her response touched me when she said "no matter what the political climate is, we, as educators with conscience and responsibility, should always find ways to reach out students."
• During the guest lecture in our SED 407 class, Rachel Toncelli spoke at length about allowing students to write in their first language, and that allowing them time to begin to blend in English words worked wonders. I was skeptical and was happy to see Fu explain the benefit of mixed language use and code-switching. 
• I appreciated the contradiction about mixed language use in the reverse--how many Spanish classes, for example, do not allow ANY English spoken in class. But when Fu explains that code-switching encourages growth of English writing, it makes complete sense. She notes that as ELLs "try to write in English, their thinking is blocked due to their limited vocabulary." When you allow students to fill in some of the gaps of English words they don't know with words from their L1, their thinking process isn't interrupted, and their writing skills can continue to develop.
• Fu also describes code-switching as an asset, that it is actually a way to encourage bilingualism, and there are many examples of writers who switch between L1 and L2 as a better way to express things like emotion. 

I feel like I have a better grasp on how to help ELLs become better writers, both in their L1 and L2. I will keep the 4 stages in mind: Native language --> code-switching --> inter-language --> conventional English). I am actually looking forward to having an emergent bilingual in my class--I'm eager to watch them progress as writers in my class. 

I really liked the Pahl/Rowsell article about "artifactual literacy." I had not heard the term before, and I think it is an important concept, especially for adolescent writers. We talk in class (and read in our texts) about the importance of student choice, that they are better writers when they care about what they are writing--when it's personal. Pahl/Rowsell say it best when talking specifically about displaced students, such as immigrants and refugees, that when "people move across borders, objects come to stand for 'who they are'--their identities. These objects remain powerful in their memories, which are evoked in their stories."

As a future English teacher, I find it so interesting that in my English classes we talk about "the death of the author," and yet at the same time, like this article states, it's impossible to separate the meaning from the conventions of writing. I LOVED the description of this meaning as sedimentary, and how they write that inside that sediment are "shards of everyday life." So good.

**I need further help to really understand the concept of habitus...

I also totally love the concept of stories themselves as artifacts, with all of the sensory nature that physical artifacts have. I discovered that when we wrote our writing histories, and my memories all had smells and sounds, I could recall the feel of certain things...though the memories aren't physical objects, they still resonate across the senses.

I'd like to read chapter 6...where they talk about digital artifacts are used to harness identity narratives in classrooms....