Theoretical Frameworks and What am I doing with them?

I was interested in the first section of the reading since I am actually a fan of the standardized 5 paragraph essay.  Now, granted my essays are no longer 5 paragraphs, but they still follow the formula that was developed in the learning process of the assigned writing assignments.  I see the possible problem with teaching one form of writing though.  If you teach all the children in a classroom the 5 paragraph essay, that is all you will get for the rest of your life. You know the old addage "all your problems seem like nails, when all you have is a hammer" well this applies here.  If you hand every child the same format, you are going to get the same format back stifling the creative process that is inherent in some children.  On the other end of the spectrum, the "creative freewriting" is also a stifling concept for some children in that not everyone is capable of writing papers effectively.  Some of the children in a classroom excel in math, science and social studies and the safety of the 5 paragraph essay allows these children to feel like they have at least done a decent job in a subject they may not do as well in.  I wonder if teachers ever thought to teach a combination of the structured writing style and the free writing style.  They hadn't when I was in elementary and secondary school.  I do agree with Flower on the idea that students should be taught to speak up, against, with or for something.  The idea of speaking for something, as opposed to "advocating or critiquing" it is actually novel.  We assume that if you are for something that you are going to be an advocate for it.  That is not necessarily what the "something' you are speaking for needs.  Sometimes the "something" needs a common voice just saying "Hey... this is a good/bad idea and this is why I think so."  Sometimes it takes someone who is seen as "less literate" than the norm to open the eyes of those in power.  Take the example of that "plumber joe" during the presidential campaign.  His simple articulation of a simple statement earned him the right to be considered by both political parties and he was able, if not to affect change, then to at least bring attention to the ideas that the politicians were overlooking.

I really liked the point in the second article about "towns and gowns" working together to raise literacy and essentially "raising the missionary flag".  That is almost what it feels like people who are teaching standard literacy are doing.  "You can't read.  I can.  Let me teach you."  Everyone is smart in their own right, everyone is literate in different ways and when one group comes in and says that they can do it better, then tries to teach their way as the only way... things feel a little colonizing. :)

The idea should be for the "towns and gowns" to work together to teach the importance of certain literacies while learning the aspects of others.  Maybe someone can't read, but can look at a room and know how many cans of paint it is going to take to paint it.  That is not an act of doing the actual math on a piece of paper, but it happens in the person's head almost unconsciously.