• 200 words, roughly. “Literacy, like land, is a valued commodity in this economy, a key resource in gaining profit and edge” (Brandt 558). If literacy is so valued, why might so many of us have such complicated relationships to reading and writing, perhaps two of the most important features of literacy? Make a text-to-text or text-to-self connection in your response. (15 minutes)

The high value placed on reading and writing can often mean high steaks.  Brandt says that literacy is a key resource, inferring that without this recourse one would have less success.  The pressure of attaining this resource reaches even young kids. In my literacy narrative I told a story of me encountering this pressure.  In short, I had to read a sentence out of a “hard book” in order to check it out from the library. My librarian put stress on me to prove my literacy level and in turn I did as well.  Because I felt so much pressure, I developed somewhat of a hatred for reading. Alongside this hatred for reading all I wanted was to be the best without the steps in between. This complicated relationship connects back to Brandt’s idea that literacy is very valuable in this economy.  While I never directly saw the connection to economy, I saw thee importance. Economy would come later, while driving the importance of literacy from the very beginning and placing high stakes on literacy.

• 200 words, roughly. Alexander contrasts “master” and “little” narratives. What is this contrast, and why is it important as she tries to analyze student literacy narratives? Use at least one kind of little narrative discussed by Alexander (614-22) to illustrate how little narratives differ from the “master narrative” one so often finds. Be sure to quote Alexander and explain the difference between master and little narratives. (15 minutes)

Alexander describes little narratives and more descriptive and specific events, whereas a master narrative is an overarching story.  The main difference being that a little narrative is much more specific. Following this specificity, little narratives challenge master narratives. A little narrative that Alexander explains is the victim narrative, which occurs through negative literacy experiences. With these different forms of narratives in mind, Alexander analyzes a plethora of literacy narratives written by students.  This is important because by doing so we are able to see how often one is used over the other, when the are used together, and when there is tension between the two. Alexander sees one of these relationships when discussing the victim narrative, “In sum, the popularity of the victim cultural narrative is important because it allows us to understand that although students may view their literate futures in terms of success, they view their literate pasts in terms of victimhood” (Alexander 618).  A specific event that shows the little narrative of victimhood is compared to the generalization of the idea of future success, which is the master narrative.

• 200 words, roughly. Every literacy narrative has both the student/writer and a person (or persons) that Brandt might call a literacy sponsor. Williams notes that it is “intriguing to consider the identities students construct for teachers” (344). Choose any two of Alexander’s categories and consider how students represent the identities of the relevant sponsor(s). Be sure to quote and explain. (10 minutes)

Williams is interested in the identity that students place on teachers because of how they show the identity, “But, they will often, in their discussions of past writing experiences, tell me how and, more to the point, why they dislike a particular kind of literacy practice” (Williams).  By using little narratives, such as the ones discussed by Alexander, students create identities for sponsors and tell a very explanatory literacy narrative.  Examples of little narratives using sponsors to tell a much more specific story would be the outsider narrative and the victim narrative. As an outsider, the people on the inside are the sponsors because they are the driving force as to why the student didn’t fit in.  As a victim, the people judging or “taking the fun” out of reading and writing are the sponsors. These are the sponsors because they are the reason the students felt victimized.