I think a critical literacy classroom would involve a more equal playing field between student and teacher. The teacher and students would all be learning and creating a new system for critique and expression. This could take shape in a way where students and teacher create websites together to represent their classroom activities and discussions. The teacher does not tell the students how to do everything, but the students learn on their own how to shape and create knowledge by making rhetorical choices in the representation of content on the website. Critical literacy works in a way that values “exploration and interpretation” (Selber 78). This creates active – not passive – classrooms for learning; a student-centered atmosphere that encourages students to “pursue personal interests, shape pedagogical environments, and become self-directed in educational situations.”
Being probably the most computer/technologically illiterate person in the classroom, I feel I am safe to say that I recognize a culture of purposeful experimentation in text when I see it. I’m going to be a rebel and say that I don’t need Wycoski to tell me to do so. Although I may be a little slow with catching on to the phrase “reading generously,” I think it’s in my nature to assume that authors are always expressing choice and agency when composing, but maybe there are still some elite snobs in this composition world who turn their noises up at diversity and need a lesson on generosity. So are we teaching students to read generously too or maybe they already do that?
Selfe states that we as composition teachers have an obligation to pay attention to computers and technology (and other societal ‘advancements,’ I’m sure) because when we don’t, we miss opportunities to question how race, class, and gender continue to be a disadvantage in terms of access. In 1999 when the Selfe article was written, computers and technology were at a boom. Selfe notes that majority of white males predominately had access to this technology while others had very little to none. Computer literacy was changing skills requirements in job placement and hiring qualifications leaving behind those who have been denied historically and socially. Does this unfair advantage still prove true today?