| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | |
| 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 |
| 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
| 28 | 29 | 30 |
What does it say when, while studying a subject titled "Primary Curriculum and Pedagogies - Language and Literacies 2", I'm have trouble deciphering the basic intent of the sentences? And is it even worse that I had the same problem during Language and Literacies 1? It's mildly disconcerting, to say the least. I've been struggling with these readings all weekend. I'm starting to wonder if, perhaps, I am in fact illiterate. Or at the very least, I interpret the English language is some less than normal manner.
In an attempt to make myself feel slightly less at fault, I'm going to blame the writing. As I have done in the past, here and here. Slightly comforting is the fact that the author of these readings is the same person I am currently trying to read. And I have had no trouble deciphering any other reading I've had to do in my entire university career. With exception, perhaps, of those times when I was falling asleep while trying to read ... at which point the inability to read clearly had very little to do with the writing.
While this decision to place the blame on the writing helps with my own literary confidence, it does concern me given the fact that these impossible texts are supposed to be teaching us how to provide effective literacy education. There's something ironic in the whole situation. The horribly long sentences, the ambiguous sentence structure, the overused passive rather than active verbs, the vague intent, the hard to find crucial verbs hidden at the end of complicated noun phrases ... it's all so frustrating and impossible to read. I get caught up trying to decipher the intent, and miss the overall point of the reading.