- Haas opening statement is essentially stating how literacy at the college level isn’t about simply reading. It also isn’t about memorizing the information and accepting the text automatically. Instead it’s about verifying the authors validity as well as looking into the authors motive and much more. It is going beyond what the text says. For example, when talking about scientific work ” ‘Scientific literacy’ as not the only mastery of scientific facts and concepts, but an understanding of ‘the evolving contributions of individual scientists and groups pf scientists’ “(Haas,45). This quote shows how with scientific work it is comprised of facts that support a hypothesis, yet these aren’t the primary focus. In fact college level literacy is when their work is compared to others or an overarching theme of discovery or question in the particular field. It is not only knowing background information but understanding why the study took place in the first time. It is one thing to memorize the data but it is literacy to see the creation of the work. Overall, this example strongly reflect the opening statement due to it stating how memorization of facts isn’t what’s important.
- Throughout Haas’ text she mentions the term autonomous text several times, this is when a student automatically accepts the writing and validity without any concern to who the author is. That if a teacher gives the student the text it must be reliable and instead of learning about the author and their motives they skip over it and simply start memorizing the texts. Haas mentions how new students often view “textbooks as written by nobody and everybody” (Haas, 46) That the authors aren’t important due them all being scholarly and credible, that the main contribution to their learning is the facts. That since they have experience under their belt everything inside must be correct. No student questions or argues, they merely accept and simply open the book and begin.
- Haas’ study of Eliza helps the reader see that as college experience increases so does their literacy, the literacy that she mentioned in previous pages (question one). At the beginning a young college student is primarily concerned with memorization of facts yet over the years this turns into interest and understanding of not only the author and his field but the impact of his contributions and focusing in on the primary information in the text. Towards the end of her years at college “She exhibited a growing cognizance of texts as the result of human agency… She recognized rhetorical nature… And she viewed texts as multiply connected” (Haas, 69). That she no longer was simply extracting information but instead applying the information to the world around her and to the field of study. She also didn’t view her texts as written by everybody and anybody, but instead looked into who the author was, why he preformed the experiment and how his results had an impact and much more. Her literacy was much more complex overtime and due to this the author is suggesting that is what happens to most individuals throughout college.
- A rhetorical frame is the overall motive that an individual has to place the study as well as write upon the results. Haas extends the definition by saying “Why the author wrote the piece, why he or she chose the form that was chosen, why he or she used a particular structure or chose certain words” (Haas, 48). Overall it is all of the aspects that go into the motivation for the final work. Every characteristic should be know and analyzed due to it potentially having and impact on the work overall.
- Overall much of Haas’ work is deeply related to Gee due to the fact that they both believe that many aspects must be mastered in order to be fluent in both a Discourse or in reading college level academic work. Gee states how the “perfectly good grammar just won’t get you the type of job in this type of society.” (Gee, 6) Many aspects go into fluency such as acts beliefs and dress. Without these one may never be included or fluent, and one could never fake such knowledge. Meanwhile Haas mentions how in order to be fluent in ones work one must not “see texts primarily as repositories of factual information”(Haas,46). In order to be fluent in ones work one must view the text as coming from an author. Not only this but they must recognize the importance and why the author wrote about their findings in the first place. Overall both authors agree that being fluent in reading and Discourses aren’t about simply being able to read and talk but many more aspects. Without these aspects anyone could do it and what would the importance of them be if anyone could do it?
