Circumspect Speculation

Reading Response to Chapter 17 of Handbook of Adolescent Literacy Research

In “The Literacy Demands of Entering the University” author Kathleen Blake Yancey assesses twenty-first century literacy and how well it prepares students for the world of academia in college: “Thus, while college literacy is variously defined across very diverse sites, at the beginning of the 21^st century in the United States it involves a postsecondary culture of composing, reading, thinking, resourcing, reflecting, creating, and revisioning—of writing and of student” (269).

Yancey also acknowledges the pedagogical difficulties of teaching a class that contains students who may not be interested at all in even pursuing a college degree. How should curriculum be structured in order prepare students for life outside of school? If there are students who are not interested in going to college, is it fair for teachers to water down the curriculum, even though there are students in the class who want to pursue higher education?

Yancy brings up a good analysis of the AP program and the pros and cons of assuming that this prepares students for the rigors of college. It seems that one of her assumptions is that “[i]f college credits represent college literacy, then college literacy is delivered in high school” (258). Or at least it should be in an AP classroom. Reading several accounts of my clssmates, however, I found that this is, unfortunately, not always true. Often times how well a student does in an AP class or on an AP test is not a good benchmark for how well they will be acclimated to the college setting. Fortunately, in my case, I had wonderful AP English teachers throughout high school and an innate desire to excel in my studies. I took both the AP English Language exam and the AP English Literature exam during my junior year and made fives—the highest possible score—on both exams. I thoguth the assessment and preparation that went on in my classrooms did a wonderful job of preparing me for college.

Bringing this discussion full-circle, I’d like to go back to Yancey’s quote: “Thus, while college literacy is variously defined across very diverse sites, at the beginning of the 21^st century in the United States it involves a postsecondary culture of composing, reading, thinking, resourcing, reflecting, creating, and revisioning—of writing and of student” (269). Yancey cites the importance of revising both writing and the student, in the way s/he thinks, analyzes, reads, and writes in order to prepare them for the rigors of university life. Perhaps even more important is the revising of the teacher in order to be a good example and advisor for a body of students that is constantly evolving throughout the generations. In several of my classmate’s accounts that I have read, it seems unfair that they did not have teachers that could have prepared them adequately for college life.

Not only should teachers think of revising their students and students’ writing, but they should also think about revising themselves and tailoring the curriculum they teach each year so that it suits each new body of students more beneficially. Being an effective teacher is not about following antiquated pedagogical processes, it is about constantly evolving as a teacher in order to both engage students and to give them the skills they need to succeed in whatever path they choose to pursue.

I think we all could take a note from John Keating.