The multi-literacies theory was originally developed in contrast to what is traditionally referred to as literacy in the singular, which is learning the standard form of a national language. People were recognizing that this type of literacy did not address the concerns of the contemporary world – particularly in regard to culture and multi-modality. The central tenants of this theory revolve around the necessity of transforming learners by embracing their background and contextual differences/experiences and by designing instruction that aides learning in making meaning across disciplines in different modes. Supporters of this theory believe that all of the choices that educators make must particular to the subject, goals, individuals, groups in which they are engaging. This tenet supersedes any one curriculum or instructional sequence. Teaching writing from a multi-literacies perspective would place a heavy emphasis on tapping into the background that each learner brings to the table. It addresses diversity. It encourages students to pull from their cultural experiences and use them as a tool for success. Furthermore, a teacher working from this perspective would not have students complete all of their writing using pencil to paper or even on a Google Doc. Students in his/her classroom would be creating text in the context of other modalities including but not limited to image, space, and sound.

The critical literacies theory recognizes that meaning making is made in the interaction between the intention/experiences between the person creating the meaning and the person interpreting the meaning in text. Therefore, it is not about learning to “fit” into the dominant culture’s interpretation of a reading and writing, but rather learning to become participants in authentic reading and writing experiences through real issues, making personal connections and then using them to become aware of who you are in the world. Teaching writing from a critical literacies perspective would never look the same from year to year. This teacher is flexible and is looking for ways to inspire his/her students to go beyond themselves and the four walls of the classroom. This classroom would spend time out in the community finding ways to practice reading and writing authentically (i.e. petitioning to get a park built). This classroom has pen pals in Europe and writes into the local newspaper.

The cognitive process perspective aims to help educators understand the complex processes involved in composing. It describes the relationship between the task environment, working memory, and long term memory. Within this perspective, it is important to understand that young, inexperienced, and learning disabled writers have a limited capacity coordinate these processes and may struggle to efficiently toggle between working memory and long term memory. The 4 central tenants of this perspective revolve around the educators understanding of how working memory, transcription, self-regulation, and motivation can impact a writer. Teaching writing from a cognitive process perspective would be very individualized, allowing students build upon their strengths while receiving varying levels of support based on personal performance. There would be a lot of individualized and small group conferencing and students would have lots of opportunities to share their work in order to receive positive praise and feedback to help boost their self-efficacy. A teacher working from this perspective would provide students with a great deal of modeling in regards to writing strategies including how to set goals and regulate one’s self throughout the writing process.

The sociocultural perspective encourages educators help students learn writing through, and utilize writing to tap into deeper social concepts such as identity, culture, and power. It is less focused on individual mental processes and more focused on how the writing process falls within social, cultural, and historical contexts. When writing from this perspective, one must learn to spend time researching and analyzing how to write for a specific situation/purpose prior to engaging in that type of writing. A writer working under this perspective needs to be knowledgeable and aware in regards to their writing topic. Teaching writing from a sociocultural perspective if complicated. It is understood that students working in this classroom need to be supported as they develop their writing identities over time while continuously being exposed to a broad range of text types. Educators in this classroom need to introduce and provide opportunities for writing for particular social purposes. Additionally, they need to connect these opportunities to talking and reading. I imagine this to be a very poetry-rich classroom.

Of the four above-mentioned frameworks, the one that most closely aligns with my current teaching of writing is the cognitive process perspective. As an instructional special education teacher working with students who qualify for services under Specific Learning Disability (SLD), Emotional Disability (ED), Speech/Language Impairment (SLI), Other Health Impairment (OHI), and Austism, my kiddos have a very wide range of abilities when it comes to writing. To qualify for this program, students must be a minimum of 2 years behind their grade level peers (according to district-wide assessments/progress monitoring tools). For this reason, the general education classroom (even with resource support) it is not their least restrictive environment for writing instruction. Yet, their cognitive functioning and adaptive skills are such that they do not need to be working through an alternative curriculum. Rather, they just need a smaller class size with increased levels of support, more opportunities for repetition, and a slower pace of content delivery. Given this, it is my job to be very aware of how the task environment is structured and it is my responsibility to be educated in regards to the ways that working memory, transcription, self-regulation, and motivation can impact a writer. Writing within my classroom is very individualized. While there are times/circumstances that I still require all students to work pencil to paper, most of the time there is a lot of variation to our composting. Some students use paper to pencil for their initial draft and then move to a computer, some students use paper to pencil through all stages of the writing process, and some students work use the computer only. When on the computer, some students use voice typing, some students use word prediction software, some students use a speech to text screen reader, and some students use a combination of all of these. By having access to all of these options and then working with each individual to find the approach that is most suitable for them increases their self-confidence and makes them feel comfortable, which in turns takes them to a place in which they are more willing to take risks. Students receive varying levels of support through the different stages of the writing process dependent upon their strengths and personalized goals/objectives, and students have lots of opportunities to share their work. After sharing their work, the rest of the class has opportunities to ask questions and share compliments.

In reading about the different framework perspectives, I found myself thinking, “Oh, that would be so great!” and “I wish I did that more!” and “That’s really good exposure for kids!” on several occasions. Interestingly enough, although this was not one of the perspectives being showcased, I feel like I was educated from a didactic literacies perspective. I quickly learned how to become a passive and compliant proficient user of oral and written language. I was praised for meeting the basic criteria that was set for me and I was proud of myself for that because I was told that I should be. I’m hard-pressed to think of times in which I was pushed or encouraged by my writing teachers to participate in any sort of writing that went beyond the classroom (unless it was homework!). Even as an adult, although I have (and continue to) push myself outside of my comfort zone and outside of what is expected or what is the “norm”, I still spend time wondering what would be different about me had I been raised (at home and at school) to take action and challenge the norm. While I definitely see growth in my students and I can see them get excited about writing and feel proud of what they accomplished, I don’t think they’re going to remember much of anything from my writing class when they’re adults. What I take away from this is to push my instruction further over to the critical perspective so that it more closely aligns with my beliefs. I want my students to see/feel that they can use writing to have a voice in this world.