Readings 2/02/12 - Enlightenment

Assignments: Hooks "Engaged Pedagogy"
                      Moje (2008) "Complex World of Adolescent Literacy",

                      Gee "Literacy and Linguistics"                                

“It is not enough to simply teach children to read; we have to give them something worth reading. Something that will stretch their imaginations--something that will help them make sense of their own lives and encourage them to reach out toward people whose lives are quite different from their own.” Katherine Patterson

This week's readings were very enlightening. All three articles focused on some of the influences of critical and social perspectives on adolescent literacy. The authors used their writings as a medium in which to express their justifiable beliefs in how one or more aspects of literacy are shaped by both formal and informal education.

The articles were quite stimulating, the authors called for deep thinking and great analysis of the foundations and influences on literacy throughout different life stages as well as how different perspectives helped shaped one's literary thinking. The Hooks article focused a lot on the feminist perspective and also mindfulness in learning, while the Moje article was written from a blended perspective point of view and finally the Gee article was written from the point of view supporting the concept of discourse.

As I read all three and highlighted different sections and made my 'mind- map', the similarities as well as the differences among them became clear and my mind began to imagine the difference a literacy teacher could make by being aware of the different perspectives and how they shape the literary journey of the students we try to teach.

The Hooks article was the one I found most interesting because of the introduction of the concept of 'wholeness' in teaching, where the author stresses the importance of seeing education as the practice of freedom, where the mind is not the only focus, but the body and spirit as well. The author mentions Buddhist Monk Tich Nhat Han, whose work I've read before for personal growth, but never from the perspective of a teacher. In reference to this 'teacher' the author states that Tich Nhat Han cites the teacher as not just an educator but a 'healer' as well, managing a classroom where the banking system of education was challenged and students were seen as and became active participants instead of passive consumers. This author discussed the feminist perspective through the introduction of the female teacher as the 'better educator', from the perspective that  feminist classrooms were the ones that allowed students to be able to share and participate. She also discussed the concept of engaged pedagogy as that which values student expression. The Moje article supported this concept/belief in that they express the fact that reading and writing for adolescents occur in a wide range of literary text outside of school and that young people are so diverse that it is challenging not to take this into account as we prepare to teach these students. Although the Moje's article supports the Hook article to some extent, whereas the Hook article is focused more on a feminist perspective, Moje believes that literacy is and should be defined form multiple perspectives as the definition of literacy based on research put forth by him states that the 'definition of literacy varies widely based on different belief system and experiences even among people who are thought to be alike'.

All three articles in my opinion focused on the fact that students should be taught how to live in the world through critical thinking. As educators, if this is our goal then we need to understand the 'whole' child when we attempt to teach students as well as teach them the different contexts in which literacy defines who they are and what they do.

According to research it is basic human need to be part of a community or group and the Moje article highlights this through stating that having access to socially constructed and conventionalized code is central to being part of a community and means having access to certain kinds of power. The Gee article also touches on this when the author explains that acquisition of discourse often occurs from being with a group as well as the fact that literacy should be taught in many different social contexts as they occur as such. The author cites examples of being at a bar and the language she would use that would be socially acceptable although the  grammar is incorrect as to the other way around.  It is interesting that as a teacher I never considered teaching my kids from this perspective. I always assumed that they came with their 'street/bar' language and also that is wasn't my job to teach them that, but to teach them 'proper language'. The thought just never crossed my mind, although I would often say it to them, to actually teach them when and where certain types of language, as in speaking and/or diction is relevant or acceptable and others are not.

Through reading these articles and actually paying attention (they were interesting) I learned that so much of what our students learn and so much of the way they learn are based on social and cultural practices, that if as educators we do not find a way way to combine the two there will always be a divide that will go way beyond just being digital. Gee discusses this from her discourse(way of being in the world) in literacy point of view, where she states that what is important is not language but saying (writing), doing, being, valuing and believing combinations. She believes that language should be taught in a socially acceptable context. She believes students learn through practice, and that discourse in her opinion is acquired through interaction with people who have already mastered discourse. She also believes, and I agree that discourse changes our outlook as our experiences does. I believe that it changes it as well as shapes it. Moje points out in her article that even though young people are different/diverse that they still share patterns of at least one group's literacy practices. This in my opinion implies that our students learn so much more from their peers and group relationships than they learn from us as educators in an academic setting.

My greatest take-away from this week's readings would be based on the fact that although we know how different or should I say how diverse our students are as individuals and as learners, as educators our teaching styles do not reflect that. There are so many studies about how to teach and how to reach our students that it is hard to keep up with them, but we still have students graduating high school who can't read and write 'well'. With the materialization of this thought many questions arise in my mind, is reading and writing 'well' overrated? Or is it based on the the perspective of merely academics? Are our failing students succeeding in a more social or cultural context? Are we actually measuring the 'whole' individual or just one aspect? From which perspective REALLY is our education system based, and is it the best one for such a diverse system?

As I try to think of ways in which I can utilize my new scope of enlightenment in my own daily practices, I think of our culture as an education system. One in which inclusion is fought for, and wonder if in embracing the diversity of our learners and accepting or just merely acknowledging the concept of diversity in learning and knowledge that our kids bring as well as their cultural and social experiences, if inclusion is the best practice. Our learners have their own belief systems that serve them and their own social 'circles' in which they thrive and are comfortable. Is it our responsibilitiy as educators to try and change that to teach them what we see as the norm or what we consider to be acceptable values, or is it our responsibility to teach them how to continue to be accepted and survive in the context which they know, plan to remain in, and from which perspectives their value systems are based?

As a teacher in a city school I believe it is my responsibility to, like the Moje article stated, support my students in developing sophisticated academic, community and workplace literacy skills. But who decides what students REALLY need which skills, and if differentiation in this instance is not discrimination?

I guess my lingering thoughts leave me with the knowledge that a teacher's role and responsibilities are undefined and differ based on different perspectives. Therefore each learning experience for the teacher and the students he or she teachers occur within the context of which perspective has shaped that teacher's experiences and more so the experiences she chooses to share with her students.

Learning is as complex as teaching.

“It is important that students bring a certain ragamuffin, barefoot irreverence to their studies; they are not here to worship what is known, but to question it.”

- Jacob Bronowski

Iffeisha