Search This Blog

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Questions for Misreading Masculinity (Newkirk)

  • In his book Newkirk argues for the "viability and utility of forms of popular culture that many in education dismiss as inappropriate or worse." He makes the case that these forms of pop culture that young boys enjoy should not be excluded from schools or separated from what education systems deem as important mediums of literacy. What is his evidence/reasoning behind this argument and how does he come to this conclusion? Do you think that what he argues is valid and should be applied to the American education system today?
  • What does Newkirk say about the "hierarchy" he claims education systems have established in literature today? What does he mean when he talks about the classification of literature into the "serious" and the "vulgar"?

2 comments:

  1. In his article, the evidence that Newkirk uses behind his argument is how different grade students, third-graders in particular engage with stories and the different ways in which they employ the fictional elements of narratives to tell, as stated by Newkirk, very elaborate and “unadultlike” stories. Newkirk’s main focus is to explore this aspect of storytelling that young male students find so engaging. In other words, stories that make them want to read. By failing to engage in the forms of literacy that boys most enjoy and by taking boys' reactions to media too literally, Newkirk suggests that schools contribute to the unachievement gap of young boys.
    I believe that Newkirk makes a case for the alternative politics of inscription that are available to young people today. Personally, I think that the loss of/and omission of particular forms of literacy in schools today run the risk of loosing relevant forms of literature that can engage students in schools. Also, I think that these would need to come accompanied with an acknowledgment of the histories and movements in which some of these forms were formed (hip hop, R&B, etc.)

    ReplyDelete