Ways With Words, Chapters 1-3

Sometimes I think empirical research can be too limited or simplistic in its approach as it tends to draw conclusions based on explicit, quantifiable data. However, ethnographic research brings into light the invisible, the unknown, and the unique--one that cannot be generalized across a larger population.

This is indeed an important aspect of Heath's ethnographic research, as it focuses on literacy practices and events in regional or local settings as opposed to literacy in general. This is what makes her work "unique" because it gives the reader an insight into the "particular" ways in which members of Trackton and Roadville tell stories, read, write, and talk about texts.

Heath's work, as an ethnographic study of literacy practices of two different communities, enables us--doctoral candidates--to see the importance of cultural factors in shaping literacy practices of a group of people.

Heath's ethnographic research localizes and particularizes literacy events and, as such, helps us see how differences in the ways in which members of Trackton and Roadville participate in literacy events are cultural, rather than cognitive. In other words, the particular ways in which the locals tell stories are specific to that culture; they serve the needs of the inhabitants. They should not be attributed to individual differences in understanding and learning about literacy.

I found her writing very accessable and her description--narrative--of literacy events vivid.

Questions:

1) How would Heath's narrative look like if she conducted the same ethnographic research today?
What would she include and exclude? How different would her interpretations be and how would they compare to a narrative of another researcher who conducted the same study?

2) How much do our literacy practices at home compare to those in institutions? How does social class play a role in the divide between our home and institutional literacies? How can we negotiate the two?