Implications of "New" Literacies for Writing Research by Lankshear and Knobel

I am impressed with the fact that the editors let the word "shonky" (pg. 15) slide past. Although unfamiliar with the word it appears that it is an accepted Australian term used to describe used car salesmen. I agree that shonky does capture the image of curriculum movements that seem to be using surface features of what is good instruction in lieu of critical elements of good instruction. I think all the permutations we see in schools called "process writing" are a testament to Knobel and Lankshear's idea that the "schoolification" of a good idea makes it a bad idea. I loved several quotes in this piece

"In such a case it would be crucial to avoid as far as possible the "schoolification" of the practice in question, mindful of the tendency for schools and classrooms to remake all social practices in their own image."

How true this is but why? You would think that with all the focus on schools in crisis that many elements in schools would have changed.

I enjoyed the following quote as well

"For literacy education to be soundly based, we must be able to demonstrate the efficacy of any and every literacy that is taught compulsorily."

This can certainly be applied to everything we do in schools not just new literacies.

I was surprised to read in Melody's blog that she was unfamiliar with some of these websites. I know I am out of touch but I thought I was one of the few (I actually feel better Melody, thanks). I just don't take the time to explore much on the computer. I know what I know and when I need to learn more I do. I regard my computer as an office tool much like a stapler. I'm really glad to have it but I don't want to get one for Christmas.