In my research paper, first I plan to use some outside sources to define the "literacy story" as I experienced it in school. I was planning on using Chandler's chapter "New Literacies, Story Forms, and Literacy Narratives" and "Using Critical Metaphor Analysis to Extract Parents' Cultural Models of How their Children Learn to Read Critical Inquiry in Language" to define the "story" that was acceptable in school. I plan to go on to show, through relevant examples in my transcript, how I did not fit into this "story" and the ways I fit myself into the story in unconventional ways. One example I was thinking of focusing on is the soap opera I wrote in elementary school, as a way, (in an unconventional way) I was able to write for school despite a lack of success with academic writing in grade school. I might think about my experiences with my son, and trying to get him to "buy into" that accepted story, and creating that environment for accepatance in my home. It's possible I will also look at my role as a teacher, and my encouragment towards my student to be a part of that story, even if they didn't feel it was "their" story.

Today in my conference I was able to narrow my focus for my research paper. I started out with the idea that I would prove that the process of learning to read and write is a complicated and often times painful experience despite "romantic" notions as the process as a simple one. In doing some outside research, and talking about the topic, what I'm finding is I more specifically want to write about the cultural story created in the school system. I want to examine my transcripts to look for evidence of how I did not fit into that story, how I made my way into the story (through rebellion) and how I came to be on the other end of it, as a teacher who came to expect my students to fit themselves into that story, even when it wasn't a good fit. I want to look at, as a teacher and a mother of a new reader, why I could not recognize those who are not part of that story, and the significance of being on the fringes of that, when I was there as a young student myself.

I have a couple of ideas for the project. I see a number of relevant themes in my transcript. Over and over I talk about an idea of reading and/or writing as romantic and the notion that the reality of doing it is very different. I thought it might be interesting to look at that although I'm not sure where that would go. I mention three specific stories where this is the case. The first is a story about preconceived ideas I had about reading a book I took out of the library that proved to be too challenging for me. The second story relates to a term paper I had to write in my senior year, and I selected to write about a book I loved but got very bogged down by the process of the research and got an average grade. The last story (ies) relate a romanticized view of journal writing througout the course of my life that conflicted with the painful reality of it. It appears as if I have a love/hate relationship with writing, particularly with journal writing, which might be something else to examine. There is a clear distinction in my transcripts between a distaste for writing in school and a love for writing outside of school, which is clearly reflected in my choice of language. That might be something else to look at.

I notice in my transcript a pattern of remembering educational experiences in a negative way. I use words such as "torture" "brutal" and "painful" in regards to acadmeic situations. I also put myself in the role as either as trouble-maker or simply a person who gets into trouble frequently. On the other hand, in non-acadmic situations my language takes on a more positive feeling. When talking about my experience writing as League Manager for my fantasy football website I use words like "fun" and "love". Most of my stories seem to rebel-victim stories, where I seem to rebel against something or view myself as the victim. I recover from the role of victim nicely in most stories, which I'm sure means something, although I'm not sure what it means. It seems to be the writing that is most meaningful to me is journal-writing, letter-writing and using humor in writing for non-academic situations, such as writing for fantasy football.

The "decreased access to language" Duffy mentions in terms of coping with trauma is the most interesting part of the chapter. In regards to any research I might do it could be interesting to examine the validity of this, although, through my own experience I find it to be true. In going through my interview I notice I used words like "brutal" and "painful" in regards to learning how to write and learning grammar. In some cases, like when diagramming sentences and being forced to go to the board when I didn't know the answer, the experiences seem to have left an impression. It might be interesting to look at my language, my word choice, how I told the story as compared to other stories to determine if I had less language for something I considered to be somewhat traumatic as opposed to something I didn't. In reading the first Chandler chapter, and understanding that our more important stories, or the ones we've told over and over are presented in chronological order, like an actual story, it would be interesting to go back to the story about diagramming sentences to see if that's how I told it, or did I lack the language to accurately portray what happened. It would be interesting to look at the details I decided to keep in and leave out and try to figure out why I made those decisions and what that says about me. I notice, overall, my language in my interview is more negative than I realized while giving the interview. I repeatedly told stories about being in trouble and not doing well in school for the first (at least) 50 minutes of the interview. My voice and tone change when talking about things I love to read and write.