This is my 35-mm Minolta camera. It is a film camera. Do you remember film cameras? Since I have very little time for photography at the moment, it sits in a very old, hardly-still-intact camera bag. I still remember the first time I took this camera out of its case. It felt quite overwhelming. It actually isn't my camera. My older brother and I traded cameras for the semester because I needed a film camera for class. He got to use my amateur, point-and-click digital camera, which he somehow got quick-dry cement all over...so perhaps this is my camera now.
There was no manual to go along with the Minolta. My ability to learn new skills through reading was difficult to exercise without a manual, but I did find one online. The manual, however, did not prevent me from accidentally ruining the unwound film that sat in the camera from when my brother used it. I felt so guilty for erasing those captured memories that I put the camera down, and would not touch it until my teacher explained to me step-by-step how to get film out in the future. Even after he showed me, I still made him watch me do it when I had my own film in the camera for fear that I would ruin another roll of film.
In every medium of art, a different type of literacy is needed. In some mediums, things can cross over. Photography just happens to be very mechanically-oriented. All I know is that there is a very specific language that one has to learn in order to properly use their old Minolta film camera...not to mention all the machinery that one faces in the darkroom.
Jenna's post makes an interesting point regarding content area literacy, which I had previously overlooked. Clearly, literacy in each content area involves a unique language and set of processes. Jenna's post describes the necessity of having a deep understanding of the language of photography and a developed familiarity with the processes involved in photography (taking out film, developing in a dark room, etc.) in order to effectively practice photography. The most interesting finding from reading Jenna's post, however, is that within certain content areas, subdivisions of literacy exist. For example, art literacy can be divided into literacy in painting, literacy in photography, literacy in print-making, and the list continues. This notion is applicable to physical education, sciences, mathematics, english, and possibly even foreign language. As effective teachers, we must find the bridge between the subdivisions of literacy in order to make the specific content area more accessible to students.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing I thought of when I was reading your post is how a lot of people learn how to be literate. Your first instinct was to try to learn how to use the camera by yourself. A lot of times that is how people learn. In fact, my high school choir teacher told us that boys often have a larger vocal range than girls, most likely because they are more willing to experiment with their voices. Little boys make all sorts of strange noises as a result of this experimentation. You experimented with your camera when you were trying to figure it out. Unfortunately, you ruined the film, but you did learn from that experience and you discovered that you needed help beyond your own devices. The fact that you understood your limits in using the camera and chose to go ask your teacher does demonstrate a level of literacy. You understood enough of about the camera to know that you were doing something wrong, you were not going to be able to figure it out, and most importantly that you needed help. Textbooks, like your manual, can sometimes lead students astray. As teachers, I think that we will be lucky to have students like you who are literate enough to know when they need help.
ReplyDeleteTwo things:
ReplyDelete1st, Kendra is recognizing what we call discipline-specific literacies--those skills and strategies we apply in very specific contexts and that we might not learn unless someone who is well-schooled in recognizing those literacies teaches us about them. One major thrust of this course (and this project really pushes the agenda) is to name kinds of literacies that students will need to master to be successful in our courses. The more I think about this, the more I think that the list is very short. There are more "generic" strategies that work across disciplines than there are specific literacies that only work (or that one only utilizes) in certain contexts. Kendra also points out that there are literacies within literacies. This is interesting.
2nd: Allie's idea that we learn by doing is especially relevant to the "mechanical" literacies that you, Jenna, point to in your post. I'd say singing is mechanical in that your voice is an instrument or tool to get stuff done (noises, in the case of young boys, tunes in the case of singers). I'd like to talk more about which mechanical literacies exist in the content area represented by our class this semester. Do French and Spanish have any mechanical components in them, that is , literacies that students might practice doing before reading? I think so. How about English? P.E.? Math? We know art does.
Thanks for provoking so much thinking, Jenna!