Murdering Murderers...

Http://wtvr.com/2014/04/29/oklahoma-stops-execution-after-botching-drug-delivery-inmate-dies/

I just saw this posted on Facebook and thought I'd share given our conversation on unitive v punitive justice.

Basically, a death row inmate died in a painful way because the state used an untested drug cocktail.

From CNN: He convulsed and writhed on the gurney. Managing to raise his head, he got out the words "Man," "I'm not," and "something's wrong," reporter Courtney Francisco of KFOR said.

Oklahoma had to create a new drug mix because the European suppliers have stopped selling theirs to the US (all European countries except Belarus and Kazakhstan have outlawed the death penalty).

If you look at the comments at the bottom of the article, you can see what type of justice the commenters are seeking (the 500+ comments on Facebook are worse!).

Some samples:
" Just shoot them. One bullet to the head is a hell of a lot cheaper!!"

"How was it botched ? IS he dead? What happened to the good old days when we shot or hanged the scum bags? Hey we could fry them 2 i would give an extra dollar on the power bill for it !"

ADLT 650 final reflection

This class pushed me to challenge myself, my ideas.  Sometimes I forced myself to read with the text (Kirsch//Perfect Storm), sometimes I questioned my ability to read against the text (Janks). I struggled mightily with the 123 project, because it seemed to want to be everything at once, while being incredibly constrained by 10 minute presentation times and a five page conclusion. I got emotional listening to Dr. Michaelson tell us that sometimes the best you can do is be a compassionate human. I learned more about my ideas about social justice, deepened my understanding of what literacy means, and how it fits into a broader perspective of diversity.  There was enough course material in this one class for an entire PhD program, and I could see that sometimes in Dr. Muth's face when he'd writhe in agony, hands on his face, trying to use puny and insufficient language to explain how we could fit something so enormous into a one-semester class, or a ten-minute presentation, or a brief summary final paper.

Sylvia Clute gave me some hope last night that starting small with social justice initiatives is the only possibility.  She gave me the hope that maybe there are solutions to poverty, imprisonment, and a punitive-based capitalist society.  I guess for the first time I felt like maybe it's possible to fight the good fight, after all.

Finally, as always, I made new friendships with classmates, and learned so much from listening to all of us work things out in group discussion.  Social constructivist learning has impacted me greatly, especially once I knew what to call it.  Learning with one another, seeing things from a different perspective, hearing things through the lens of a surgeon or an ESL teacher or a civil engineer... I will always remember those moments when we're all so caught up in the subject that we're stumbling over one another, fighting to get our ideas out, struggling to fit what we thought we knew into a larger schema that keeps growing and changing and evolving.  That's what I'll take away with me from this class.

Great wrap up for the year!

Great wrap up for the year!

As I read Sylvia Clute’s literature I automatically think of all of the themes we have visited in class. I noticed the following themes we have seen previously:
• Question the system
• Knowledge of the cultural aspects of the workplace unveiled the “common sense”
• Multiple definitions for one concept and how the definition impacts the consumer
• Utilization of the “common sense” to enhance current processes

I am sure there are many more themes. Although I tend be analyzing and finding themes in everything I read, I feel “empowered” by my new knowledge. I am privileged to have participated with you all in this class. Thank you!

Shannon

1-2-3 Project Summary - Action Processing System

 ​


In this paper, I attempted to theorize the findings from and conclusions to my 1-2-3 Project mini-case study that investigated the literacy process called the Action Processing System (APS). The APS is a computerized business process and content management system.  The conceptual framework was the social practice view of literacy. This framework was utilized to understand the complex, interwoven view of which literacies are practiced, how they are lived and why (Belfiore, et al., 2004, p. 4).  The analytical lenses utilized to evaluate the fieldwork findings in the study where Discourse analysis and the concept “meanings-in-use.”

There were three major findings for this 1-2-3 Project.  The first is the existence of a “clash of cultures” between two Discourses.  For the workforce education community, this type of finding could have a tremendous impact on the design and delivery of their education and training programs and their teaching strategy if they realize they are instructing two distinct Discourses using the same computerized business process system.

Finding two revealed a disconnect between the ideal system operation and the actual workplace operation.  Workplace educators should be sensitive to this type of situation whenever they are assessing workplace literacy requirements associated with a computerized business process to preclude the misdiagnosing of the reason(s) why the target user population does not utilize the system properly.

Finally, the study revealed the power of the concept of “meanings-in-use” to discern “why” workers don’t comply with a literacy practice as intended by management. In this case it helped explain why workers chose to accomplish staff actions working outside the APS.

 In the case of all of the findings, they would probably have been missed if the focus of the study had not considered intervening social factors by utilizing the “social-cultural” view of literacy or literacy as a social practice as a framework for analysis.

Portraits of Reconciliation- Rwanda

A few weeks ago, I saw this feature in the New York Times about a reconciliation project between the Hutus and Tutsis of Rwanda, which I think is a great example of the concept of restorative justice:

Portraits of Reconciliation

Through this program, which is run by a non-profit organization, victims and perpetrators of the Rwandan genocide participate in counseling sessions.  At the end of the program, the perpetrator formally requests forgiveness from the survivor and if forgiveness is granted, then they hold a community celebration.

It is a very interesting and touching article.  Please read it if you have time. :-)

1-2-3...Theory

Overall, I’m extremely pleased with the progress that I have made with this project throughout the semester. While my literacy event was not clear at first, my research helped me to more clearly define the event and surrounding issues. The VRS Hybrid plan has just been rolled out, and we cannot expect that the explanation and understanding will be 100% from the beginning.  I was initially apprehensive that I would be able to successfully find links between my work, and the theories that we studied this semester. However, when I started reviewing all of my information, research, and all of our readings from the semester, the theories presented themselves quite clearly to me. 

The theories that presented themselves were Social Practice Theory and  Connectivism Learning theory. Especially with the Social Practice Theory, I really enjoyed the process that I went through to get myself to really understand the theory and how it was connecting to my project.I only hope that I was able to communicate them in my paper effectively.   

 I think that with a little more preparation I’ll be able to present my findings to the benefits manager and hopefully we will be able to adjust some things when it comes to the information that we offer during New Employee Orientation, as well as information that is offered on the VCU website.

Untive, the Real Justice

What I found most compelling about “unitive” justice was its consideration of the larger community. I'm a believer in conflict resolution and mediation, but oftentimes these approaches focus on a small incident and do not consider the bigger picture. For instance, if two men got into a fight, they have several options: they could further escalate the conflict by getting their friends/family involved, file an assault charge, or they could opt for mediation.

While not all parties are willing to engage in mediation because of animus, a sense of pride, or other reasons – if we consider that an assault charge may result in jailtime for one or both which could separate them from their children; jailtime could cause them to lose their jobs and make it more difficult to pass a background check and get hired in the future; that a loss of income could push them and their families further into poverty – if we consider all this then we can see it is not just about “punishing one person,” but that a punitive system has far reaching impacts on many other people. If the two parties involved in the dispute realize this, I think they'll be more likely to at least try mediation over the court system.

Precious and SCAN

The Sunday before Easter, I volunteered at SCAN (Stop Child Abuse Now). I know this doesn’t immediately seem blog worthy, and I have hesitated to post it, but I did it because of Precious. While I can’t help her directly, because she’s a character in a book, I can find ways to help other children like her. My volunteer event wasn’t direct service, meaning we didn’t work with the children, rather we created a heart wall. We each created artwork on canvases of different sizes that will be hung in the new Child Advocacy Center (CAC).

They also gave us a tour of the new Child Advocacy Center, which they moved into just two weeks before. I felt like reading Precious’ story gave me the ability to go into that Child Advocacy Center and face whatever facts and feelings might be presented to me. It was a beautiful new space and they were still setting up some of the rooms. While over 20 people had volunteered to help create the artwork, only 6 of us went on the tour. I wondered about the reasons why the others had volunteered, but didn’t want to know where the artwork was going. Were they uncomfortable at the idea of being inside the Child Advocacy Center? Or were they just there because they loved a good art project? It was a great turnout on a beautiful Sunday, so I know the SCAN volunteer coordinator was really pleased.

 In one of the rooms, she showed us a TV screen and said it was where they will do their peer reviews, where they are able to watch themselves as they interview the children and get peer feedback. They have a lot of social work interns from VCU and so I sensed that it has been designed to be a supportive learning environment.

The statistic on their website is: “In 2012-2013, the CAC served 535 children who were victims of severe physical or sexual abuse and 44 of their non-offending caregivers.” I asked the staff member who gave us a tour and she said they see 40-60 children a month. I believe they support 3-5 cities/counties in the local area, but most of their cases come from the City of Richmond. (I wish I could have taken notes during the tour).

They need artwork. The building is three times as big as when they were at City Hall, and they need to decorate and warm up the space. If you happen to have any pictures that you think would brighten their empty walls, they would love to have it.

Please provide suggestions on themes!

Thank you all for great questions and suggestions on my change management processes I found all feedback to be valuable. As a reminder, I have included my research details below. I welcome your thought on appropriate themes.

Investigation Goals: Understand the social and cultural practices that influence the processes associated with the Change Management Form

Change Management Details:
• Work Functions - All technical and procedural changes to the production environment and infrastructure
• Text-Related Tasks - Request changes using the Change Management Form

Relationships with the texts cause biases and threaten results. Neutrality is critical to increase the validity of the findings.

• Theme 1: Larger socio-cultural purposes for literature
• Theme 2: Resistance
• Theme 3: Regimes of Truth

Thank you in advanced.

Using what we have learned on the job….

Everyone did a great job presenting their mini case study. It seems like we all learned a lot new things from this project.

My question to the class… “How can working professionals perform cultural research with demanding roles?”

Personally, time is always limited. I would have to set aside a dedicated amount of time to get obtain social and cultural details related to a literacy event. At this point in my career finding that extra time is a challenge.

Although I can’t implement mini case studies in its entirety, I can use bits and pieces to enhance learning and processes. Below are some ideas I have on how to use pieces on the research project on the job:

• When gathering project requirements, ask neutral questions that unveil the social and cultural aspect of the project.
• During discussion observe and take notes on themes.
• Perform discourse analysis on documentation.

I am sure there are more ways to use what we have learned without engaging in an entire research project. I welcome your suggestions.

Working Backwards

While working on the 1-2-3 project, I felt like I kept stumbling over my research question. I know you're supposed to start with one, and I had an idea of what I wanted to do, but I kept trying to figure out how to put it in words. What I wanted to do was to read a chapter of a book with the inmates, the chapter would be about a person overcoming oppression, and I wanted to see what they "did" with the chapter (would they have an emotional reaction to it, would they write a response if I asked, would they connect the narrative to parts of their own life or other stories they've read). So I just went ahead and did it. Afterwards, I realized that I wanted to see if by presenting the chapter through a lens of critical pedagogy while we read it, would that impact their responses to the text?

I settled with: "How do incarcerated males respond to a semi-autobiographical narrative presented through a lens of critical pedagogy?"

So, y'all can help me clarify my research question tonight if it doesn't make sense.

More graffiti!

My friend Janet just got back from Buenos Aires and took some beautiful photos of the street art. When she posted it on fb I knew I wanted to share it with the class! I know it's not the same city we read about in class but I thought some of the literacy might be similar.

Photo from MonkeyDogStudio.

1-2-3 Project Paper

In our class syllabus, the requirements for the “Discussion Paper” paper area as follows:

“After your class presentation (and with the feedback you received from it), write a 5 page double spaced paper that attempts to theorize the findings from and conclusions to your mini study. This theory work should be based on readings and generative themes from the course, and authors should be cited appropriately. If appropriate, discuss implications for professional development and consider imaginative PD strategies that reflect the contextuality /de-contextuality of the strategy, as well as the ideological implications of the learning epistemologies.”

I want to share my understanding of theses requirements and my approach to fulfilling the requirements with the hope of soliciting feedback. 

First and foremost, I don’t believe we are expected to generate “new” theory based upon our 1-2-3 Projects.  After all, my 1-2-3 Project was a qualitative project based upon a very small sample size (9-interviews).  As stated in the “Analyzing Qualitative Data” paper by Taylor-Powell and Renner, “a qualitative approach seeks to provide understanding from the respondent’s perspective” and “the goal of qualitative work is not to generalize across a population.” (p 9).  Consequently, my interpretation of “theorize the findings” means that I will attempt to analyze my findings using the various analytical lens we studied during the semester. If I am wrong about this then please enlighten me.

Have stated my assumptions, I started my quest by re-reading Chapter 7, Implications for Theory by Dr. Judy Hunter in the of the Reading Work book.  My goal is to get an idea about a possible “framework” on how to “theorize the findings from and conclusions” to my 1-2-3 Project. 

 

The chapter provides a good overview of the two approaches to literacy we studied this semester, e.g. cognitive theories verses social practice theories of literacy.  Additionally, it provides numerous examples of literacy problems that are either “misdiagnosed” or significant issues completely missed when using certain types of analytical lenses.  Consequently, I hope to replicate this process in the context of my 1-2-3 Project.

Last but not least, I have started to review our past readings in general, and chapter 2 of the Reading Work book specifically (due to the many similarities to my project), searching for relevant information that I can cite to fulfill the requirement to “….theory work should be based on readings and generative themes from the course, and authors should be cited appropriately.”  

This is my approach. I look forward to any feedback.

Folks,

Dr. Muth and I decided it would be reasonable to post as a blog a few emails we exchanged in regards to the Boudin article.  You may find them mildly interesting


Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2014 15:36:32 -0400
Subject: Re: Boudin Article
From: wrmuth@vcu.edu
To: gregorydomson@msn.com

Thanks for touching base, Greg. I do respect your strong feelings about Boudin and would never try to minimize her past acts or persuade you to accept her account of the story. In fact, I have experienced a crisis of this sort hundreds of times as a prison teacher--almost every time I found out what the person was in prison for, it made it almost impossible to teach them. Thus I stopped asking about their sentence and concentrated on the way they presented themselves in prison...what other option did I have, but to leave prison work? I guess what i personally came to accept about the complexities of life were these: (1) I accepted their good intentions and expressions of remorse at face value while in prison- if they helped another prisoner or sent money home that was good enough. Who knows where they'll be when they get out? (2) being "brainwashed" by the Jesuits, I'm stuck on the gospel view of radical forgiveness. It is, after all, just possible that people can change, yes? but (3) I did find it harder to work with white collar criminals-they abused the privileges that most of the other prisoners never received (and were in fact quite often victims themselves, like the Hope House fathers that grew up in Carol's homeless shelter...)

Sorry I can't help you find your own way here, but fully empathize with your stance. These are some of my ways of reacting/coping to the ethical and visceral quandaries of this messy world. Thank you so much for writing...

Bill

On Thursday, April 3, 2014, <gregorydomson@msn.com> wrote:

Dr. Muth,

     I've been spending a large amount of time thinking about the Boudin article; it disturbs me very much.  I wanted to touch base with you about my thoughts privately before I post a blog or make my feelings public.  I've done a little research into the background and history of the author, and this information has made me question the validity of the paper.  First, I will go ahead and reveal my own internal bias that I have against convicted criminals.  I'm not in the practice of reading, listening to, or believing the opinions of convicted murderers or terrorists (which I think is an appropriate label for Ms. Boudin by today's current societal norms).  That is my problem, and I accept that.  Certainly, and I'm sure you have many examples, there are criminals who can reform and become productive members of society, but I can't help but questions their authenticity, motivation, and honesty.
     More importanly, for the purposes of this class, I cannot accept that this article is valid or legitimate (I am actually somewhat shocked it was published, but I must admit I'm not familiar with the review process of the Harvard Educational Review).  As you know, I come from a "hard science" background.  Hypothetically, if I was convicted of a felony and imprisoned I would lose my medical license.  Even if I was able to keep it and conduct research on prisoners, I find it hard to believe any peer-reviewed medical journal would publish my results.  I am an untrustworthy author and clearly biased by being a prisoner myself. 
     Her background and obvious bias (which is not hidden at all in the article) are not the only "red flags" for me.  At one point during the article she mentions her background as a social activist in the 60's.  Based on what I have researched, she was a full-fledged terrorist (plotted bombings not dissimilar to the recent Boston marathon, undertook bombings of the Capital building) throughout the 70's and into the 80's.  She was convicted of  accessory to murder in 1981 at the age of 38.  Her characterization of herself is clearly only the part of the truth (I am actually scared to think of what her opinions are about the rest of her life and life choices), but there is no doubt she was making reprehensible decisions based on radical thinking at an advanced adult age.
     So why would I ever believe a word of what is written in this article?  Even if her recounting of the events is accurate, why would I ever believe or respect her interpretation of the events?  Certainly, there is a chance this research and article are legitimate.  There is a chance she adhered to the highest levels of honesty and protocol.  I acknowledge that.  However, you must also admit there is a chance this research is complete rubbish.  In my field, when that chance exists, research doesn't get published.  It may be interesting, but it isn't research.
     My initial feelings are to excercise my own social activism and boycott this article.  But I'm wondering if there is another project concerning prison literacy (like your own) that may be more valid and authentic.  Thanks.

Greg

Problem-Opening

First of all, thank you so much to everyone who shared their presentations on Tuesday.  It was really interesting to hear about everyone's project.  I was surprised to learn how similar many of the themes were, despite the fact that many of us were working on completely different artifacts.

Carol and I have really loved working on this project.  It was such an interesting, eye-opening experience.  It has been great working together, especially since both of us have very different positions within our organization.  I have found so many rich, interesting details in this study, and it was so frustrating having to summarize everything within 20 minutes.  When Carol and I first met to organize our presentation, we ended up having an hour-long discussion just on our findings.  Our work environment is basically a cacophony of multiple, competing Discourses.  There are so many factors that come into play: cross-cultural communication, power relationships between our department and the university as well as university office staff and students, language barriers, subversive appropriations of text...I do not even know where to start on writing my discussion paper!

Out of all the stakeholders that I interviewed, I am most fascinated by the responses of the student workers in our office.  Their positionality to our text gives them a very unique perspective.  Not only do they serve as office members who are responsible for answering questions regarding the process, they are also international students at the university AND language brokers.  Each one of them is at least bilingual (one of them actually speaks 5 languages more or less fluently), and they are frequently asked to interpret or assist the students in filling out forms.  They seem to be able to bridge all of these competing discourses (is there a term for this?).  Not only do they serve as language brokers for students that speak their mother tongue, but I would say that they are language brokers for all international students that come to our office.  Even I would consider myself a language broker, not just because I speak two languages fluently, but because I "speak the lingo."  My friends and family often tease me about my ridiculous hand motions and my slow speech when I am trying to explain something.  I just tell them that I speak "fluent ESL."  Often I receive phone calls from other departments at the university asking me to "translate" what the student wants.  Most of the time it is a student whose language I do not speak, but because I spend so much time in this world of modified English, I am able to understand what the student is trying to say.

One other theme that I came across in my interviews that I didn't have the chance to mention in my presentation was the idea of exclusionary language.  On our application, we have many questions regarding immigration and immigration status.  The student workers have informed me that they notice a lot of confusion surrounding those questions.  One even told me a story about how when he first arrived in the United States he had no idea what any of these acronyms or codes meant, only that when he realized how  important they were, it made him terrified.  A student's understanding of their immigration status is critical for their survival here, but it takes a while to understand all of the legalese and abbreviations.  It took me nearly a year to get the lingo down, and even now I still have to look up items on the DHS website.  I could do an entirely different project on this topic alone.

Questions and comments are welcome!  Also, does anyone have any suggestions on how to synthesize some of these findings so that this doesn't turn into a dissertation? :-)  I feel like there are just so many theories I could use!

Code Switching?

As I’ve been reading and re-reading my interview notes, there is a direct quote I scribbled down and have been grappling with since.  To give some context, the interviewee was explaining her perception of the transition from our full agency name to the shortened acronym, emphasizing that she knew a specific population had some feelings about moving to the shortened name.  She then described what she does depending on who she is speaking to…she uses the acronym when speaking to current staff, family members, etc.-people she knows understands and are okay with it- but uses the full agency name with the others to keep them happy.  Since she changes her lexicon depending on the audience/social context my question is, can this be considered code switching if it’s only within one (English) language?  I’m thinking no but I haven’t been able to find other text/readings to confirm this.  Input welcome!

On a side note, here’s a fun NPR post about code switching and gravy

1-2-3 Follow Up

First off, kudos to everyone who went on Tuesday- I thought everyone did a great job!

My place: Currently in the Transfer Center of VCU, I am in charge of advising and inputting transfer credit for all prospective pre-health students. “Pre-Health” encompasses nursing, dental hygiene, clinical lab sciences, occupational therapy, physical therapy, pharmacy, dentistry, and medicine. Prospective students to our health programs generally transfer from the VCCS (Virginia Community College System), but many come from other four year institutions and other communities colleges located out of state. To assist in the transfer of these students and understanding of each program’s requirements, the Transfer Center offers multiple tools for prospective students. In addition to assisting prospective students, the Transfer Center is also responsible for inputting credit a student has received prior to attending VCU. This is a meticulous process which calls for close attention to detail.

What's the question?: Why are prospective students and VCCS advisors having troubles with utilizing our resources (literacies)? What issues are to blame?

Stakeholders: My Transfer Center co-workers, VCCS advising staffs, prospective students.

Possible solutions: Cultural influences, pressure by higher ups, do we need more interaction besides referencing our resources....

Agile: Committed vs. Involved

Here's a quick post to open up to "the room" for additional questions about my presentation on Tuesday. 

One thing I wanted to explain further was the pig vs. chicken cartoon. The principle behind the cartoon is that the pig is committed, meaning that he gives it his all. In fact, ultimately he becomes ham. He is changed forever because of his commitment to this project/cause. The chicken on the other hand, really just comes and goes through the process, because she can lay her eggs and then move on to the next project, place or idea.

Agile aside, the idea is pretty interesting.You can ask yourself if you are committed or involved on any number of events in your life. Are you all in? Or do you have one foot out the door?

I've already set up a meeting with my Product Owner (aka business owner in charge) to review my research findings for next week. I'm hoping to make some changes, even if they are small. 

123 Project--Theory help!

So I need some help, friends!  I need some THEORY help.

I'm not sure how to fit my findings into a theoretical framework.  I think there's something in there about what people will say in confidence being different from what they'll type in a survey.  There's also something about power in there: the resistance comes, I think, because the Powers That Be who make all of us peons take all these mandatory online training modules, they don't consider how many of the modules we have to take, and there's no coordination of who is taking training modules, when, or how often.  I thought I was going to be talking about digital literacy but apparently that's not so much of an issue.  I guess I could go at it from a grounded theory aspect, since I went in with specific biases and intent but I walked away with a very different perspective.

Any help you might be able to offer, or questions you could ask, would really help me with the theoretical perspective.  Thanks!

1-2-3 Presentation & Feedback

I am at work and do not have my notes with me, but you all asked some great questions and I hope you can remember some more of them!

I'm working on trying to tie the form to institutions of power and Discourse--the chapter on the "language of the new capitalism" (Gee et al) and the Reading Work book were particularly influential to me when I was starting this project so I intend on going back to those and connecting that theory to my findings (I took so many notes during those Gee chapters about my project!). I wanted to mention that in my presentation but I ran out of time.

Any other suggestions?

Fabric from here.

Meanings in Use

As I prepare a briefing for my 1-2-3 Project, I realize how much I am relying on what I learned from the book "Reading Works" and in particular, Chapter 2: Paperwork is the Lifeblood of Quality. If you recall, in that chapter Sue Folinsbee wrote about her study of literacy practices in a factory. She had two stated goals:
- First, she wanted to show how literacy practices or "paperwork" are inextricably interwoven into all aspects of workplace life….especially how literacies are the lifeblood of ISO 9001
- Second, she wanted to make explicit how literacy or documentation requirements of systems like ISO pose contradictions and dilemmas for both workers and managers that are about "meanings in use"……

She illustrated how different meanings that workers and managers give to literacy practices reflect power, social relations, work practices and values that are part of a larger company culture. She also discussed the implications when there is a gap between "policy" and "actual practice" in how paperwork is accomplished.



When I first read the chapter, I'm not sure I really appreciated the significance of Folinsbee’s case study and the findings. Her study was conducted inside a factory. Most of my work experience is from working in an office. The workers in her case study were mostly "blue collar" workers. In contrast, my job background thus far has been "white-collar," i.e. chained to a computer 8-10 hours a day. In short, I did not believe that Folinsbee’s study had implications for my work environment – but the insights acquired from my 1-2-3 project proved to me I was dead wrong.



What has changed? I can now personally empathize with the major points made in the Folinsbee case study—and most important – I can see their applicability beyond the factory. For example, I now greatly appreciate the significance of different "meanings in use" between managers and workers and the consequences associated with these differences. During my 1-2-3 Project I listened to testimonies on how different "meanings in use" can negatively impact a worker’s level of stress, workload, and sense of job satisfaction.



I am also more appreciative of the "situated" literacies that the workers develop to cope with the different "meanings in use." Whether or not a person has earned a GED or a PhD – in both cases I better respect and acknowledge how workers become "experts" in devising process orientated workarounds that attempt to bridge the gap between their expectations and managers. In summary, I have gained a new appreciation for the sociocultural approach to literacy and realize that the insights gained from the Folinsbee case study, and my 1-2-3 Project, would not have been acquired from a cognitive-psychological view of literacy.