Chapter Reflection: Communication, Culture, and Technology by Frances Vitali, Ph.D.

By Shacie Rankin

Pros:

1.The ritual view of communication values culture, relationships, and the meaning of interactions, and the nuances of how the experience is understood, disseminated, and then celebrated. I think that each person’s culture can and should be celebrated by the class, and teachers and students alike should seek to understand and celebrate all viewpoints and cultures in the class.

2. “All are born into orality and for literacy”. Every since I was a child, I noticed that white people say, “They’re having a baby”. Black people I have known often say, “She is having his baby”. My favorite way to express this fact, though, comes from my Navajo friends. They tend to say, “She is having a baby for him.” I think this phrasing gives the meaning that there is a purpose to the gift of life. It wasn’t until recently that I figured out that the phrasing comes from the “born to the mother’s clan, born for the father’s clan” idea. I like to think that we are born to speak for the purpose of writing, because this too, gives a powerful meaning to the skills.

Cons:

1. “Culture is almost indistinguishable from language.” This seems too simplistic. Many cultures have changed languages but still have managed to maintain their culture. Immigrants, conquered nations, etc. have had such a strong sense of tradition that the culture was maintained in the new language. Also, some cultured transcend across nations and languages. For instance the religion often becomes a very strong part of a culture, where the culture is almost blended with the religion. As the religion spreads across other areas, the culture becomes very much alike. An example of this is the Muslim culture that was originally Arabic, spread into Asia, and now Pakistan’s culture has blended with many Islamic traditions, though the dialects are not the same. I believe that while language is an integral part of culture, they can be separated.

2. The solution to (inequity in the standardized tests) “is for the Navajo Nation to develop their own instruments which will measure academic achievement of Navajo students.” I absolutely disagree with this perspective. As a graduate of a school system that was 87% Navajo, I realize that there is little opportunity for most of my classmates on the reservation. Many of them have chosen to leave and join the American workforce. The curriculum and standards they need to succeed in colleges and the workforce are the same that any other person needs for success. I believe that changing the standards and testing for Navajo students will put them at a disadvantage outside of local classrooms, and take away opportunities outside of the reservation. Every person should be given the opportunity to make their own choices and have the same opportunities for success. Also, I believe the Navajo Nation government is not exactly a well-oiled machine so putting the education of the Navajo children in their hands could prove disastrous.

3. I think this article is myopic. All children have the ability to learn, and many children are in disadvantaged situations. Several of my Navajo classmates were the top students in my class and went on to have successful careers, while many also continued the poverty cycle into which they were born. This was also the case with my white classmates. While there is no question that the Navajo students do not do as well overall as white counterparts, I believe this is a function of poverty. The number one predictor of a child’s success in school is the educational attainment of his mother or female caretaker, not his race, economic level, or anything else. Teaching students to overcome their situations is more important and will be more beneficial in the long run that giving them a crutch.

Things to Implement:

1. “The factors of isolation, culture and language, lack of parental support, and so forth all contribute to the problems the Navajo students currently face.” When planning lessons, I will try to keep these in mind as problems all children, especially those living in a poverty setting, can face. I believe the way to overcome these is to teach life skills to all students and to help each student to implement an individual plan for success in school.
2. It is important to recognize that standardized tests do not measure the true potential of ANY student, however they are a fact of life and teaching test taking strategies and helping all students to anticipate the test material will help all students.
3. An appreciation for both orality and literacy will help regain balance and cerebral harmony. I believe that this is very important. Children should be taught how to speak and listen in addition to reading and writing. In a kindergarten class, the children tell their “story” to the class, and it is dictated by the teacher for them to “write” and illustrate. The number one fear people have is public speaking, and listening is becoming a lost art. By allowing children oral opportunities, both of these problems may be solved.
4. Left/right hemisphere processing—Each of us has talents in both sides of our brains and teaching from both venues will help all students in all areas.
5. In honoring both communication technologies of orality and literacy, each perspective serves as a foundation for understanding the new information technologies. While I don’t think of speaking and writing as “new” technologies, I do believe that they go hand in hand and function best when working together.
6. I believe that strengths and needs of all students are different, yet similar. We all need to learn in the way that best fits us, yet we all need to know that same things to pass the tests, get into college, and get the job. School is what prepares us for life. By focusing on individuals rather than stereotypes, this success may be achieved.

Questions:

1. How can “Navajo oral tradition remain more accurate and reliable than written accounts documented in the Army annals”? Like the game when a secret is whispered around a circle, each listener will interpret it differently and retell it with even more changes. Also, I don’t know how they can test this theory, because the story goes to many different people and there may be many different versions in the end, so I believe that writing the story would be more accurate. However, I do recognize that the Army records are told from a different perspective and may even be falsified, which may be what the statement is referring to.
2. “A thorough analysis of the environment is a fundamental precursor to understanding the ways in which people communicate, process, and use information within any given community.” While there are always nuances and unspoken rules in any community, don’t all ways of processing information fall into the same categories within any culture?
3. “If we taught our babies to speak the way we teach them to read and write, we would have a nation of non-speakers.” This makes me wonder if there is a better way to teach reading and writing. Should we study language acquisition and apply those principals to reading and writing? Perhaps we are already doing this. I was taught to read solely using phonetics, but it seems that now I am being taught to use modeling (as we model speech) and a more whole language approach.
4. I am curious as to the first-order/second-order symbol system idea.
5. “Skills that are adaptive in one environment may not be adaptive in another.” I am curious about this because the same skills seem necessary to me in life, though some cultures rely more heavily on certain skills than others.
6. Since the world is becoming more global due to technology, will cultures evolve to value one communication form?
7. Throughout history, many languages have been used that are now extinct. I have often heard it said that Navajo is a dying language. I have seen this in my own lifetime. As a child, we had a Navajo interpreter/aide in every classroom through the second grade, because many children came to my school speaking Navajo predominately or only. By the time I graduated, my mother, who still worked at my elementary school said that though they tested all students in Navajo and English initially, there were no longer any Navajo only speaking students, and only a handful in the whole school spoke Navajo and English. When children no longer speak Navajo, and their parents don’t either, and the elders who remember the language do so in different dialects, it no longer remains a communication device. At this point, how does the culture reflect the language? Also can the language be regained, or is it merely studies by scholars (like Latin is now)?
8. Doesn’t literacy always enhance orality instead of being in conflict with it?