Hillary Janks article on Domination, Access, Diversity and Design: a synthesis for critical literacy education made me think of multicultural education in the United States. As I understand it, there continues to be a struggle in the implementation of multicultural education curriculum in our public schools, and I think it is due to the domination of the "American Culture" aka as "white culture." It's also a question of access as Janks points out "If we provide students with access to dominant forms, this contributes to maintaining their dominance. If, on the other hand, we deny students access, we perpetuate their marginalization in a society that continues to recognize the value and importance of these forms (p.176)." I see this happening with the text books in U.S. public schools. There is really one side that is presented in text books, especially history books that perpetuate the domination of the white culture and only now are they trying to superficially speak to a more culturally diverse audience. I read this great book called Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong by James W. Loewen. It really does a great job in pointing out the myriad of inaccuracies in the history text books we read in high school. More importantly he shows how historical conflicts can be connected to modern day life. Something that most text books fail at and instead neatly package and compartmentalize the information into neat chapters.
Multicultural education also is able to appeal to a more diverse student population naturally, but it has the design or redesign component that Janks speaks to as well. Unfortunately, academic politics continues to get in the way. I liked her quote on "Knowledge cannot advance without contestation and movement." For without a critical discourse, how can we hear other voices?
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Thursday, March 8, 2007
Tenure revisited
As I was reading Sumida and Meyer's article, T4=Teaching to the Fourth Power: Transformative Inquiry and the Stirring of Cultural Waters, I was reminded of a class discussion we recently had in my Multicultural and Global Education class. We talked about different types of racism, but primarily focused on institutional racism that perpetuates the dominant white culture in US schools. We find it everywhere from our textbooks to the posters that adorn the school hallways. From the beginning of their academic careers, children who don't fit the in the dominant culture are excluded and are expected to give up their own cultures unique history.
I liked how the article stressed the importance of teachers needing to think critically in order to teach students to become empowered. So much of what goes on in our classrooms is what Freire (1970) described as the "banking" concept of education,"in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits" (p. 72). There is little time or support for exploration of critical literacy when teachers are charged with raising test scores under the NCLB act.
I was reading in Feb. 24-March 2 issue of The Economist that NCLB is up for renewal this year. While there have been some improvements under this act, such as the closing of underachieving schools and allowing parents to be informed of their child's school status, this by no means make the NCLB act a success. The author of the article suggests that the best way to improve our schools is to abolish tenure, since it's mostly based on seniority. His rationale for this is that the bad teachers continue to be protected by the teacher unions and that meritocracy is overlooked. I know I have had tenured teachers who feel they don't have to go above and beyond the status quo. The teachers who do make the effort to go beyond the scripted curriculum are often not recognized, unless it is reflected in their test scores. But there seems to be little support for teachers to implement critical literacy or multicultural education when their jobs are contingent on test scores.
I know tenure is a very controversial topic, but it seems to me that the way it is awarded should be revisited. If our schools are to become truly inclusive of all cultures, there needs to be a dramatic institutional change. It can't just be about test scores, too many kids are being left behind! Lawmakers need to support our teachers who want to make a difference, for they have the power to transform our students from simply memorizing information to becoming active agents in our society.
I liked how the article stressed the importance of teachers needing to think critically in order to teach students to become empowered. So much of what goes on in our classrooms is what Freire (1970) described as the "banking" concept of education,"in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits" (p. 72). There is little time or support for exploration of critical literacy when teachers are charged with raising test scores under the NCLB act.
I was reading in Feb. 24-March 2 issue of The Economist that NCLB is up for renewal this year. While there have been some improvements under this act, such as the closing of underachieving schools and allowing parents to be informed of their child's school status, this by no means make the NCLB act a success. The author of the article suggests that the best way to improve our schools is to abolish tenure, since it's mostly based on seniority. His rationale for this is that the bad teachers continue to be protected by the teacher unions and that meritocracy is overlooked. I know I have had tenured teachers who feel they don't have to go above and beyond the status quo. The teachers who do make the effort to go beyond the scripted curriculum are often not recognized, unless it is reflected in their test scores. But there seems to be little support for teachers to implement critical literacy or multicultural education when their jobs are contingent on test scores.
I know tenure is a very controversial topic, but it seems to me that the way it is awarded should be revisited. If our schools are to become truly inclusive of all cultures, there needs to be a dramatic institutional change. It can't just be about test scores, too many kids are being left behind! Lawmakers need to support our teachers who want to make a difference, for they have the power to transform our students from simply memorizing information to becoming active agents in our society.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
Questions that matter
After reading Dr. Vasquez's book, I was throughly amazed by the questions that her JK students were asking. I know kids are naturally curious, but the depth to their questions were so much more meaningful than the usual "why?" Dr. Vasquez mentions that one of her student's parent told her that her students "ask questions that matter"(p. 141). I think that is what really struck me the most. The way Dr. Vasquez was able to get past the superficial surface and dig deeper is very well documented in her book. I think a big factor is the audit trail, which is so appealing to all types of learners and really helps connect the dots. I think this should be done in every classroom, and at home as well. I plan to create a similar audit trail for my child, something on a smaller scale, but portable, such as a notebook. The great thing about critical literacy is that it can go in so many directions, the pages will fill up quickly.
I especially like how each theme in Dr. Vasquez's book was linked to social action. The children learned at a young age that they do have a voice and can make a difference by creating alternative solutions. What a wonderful lesson to learn at such a young age. I wonder if these same children continue to be activists in and out of the classroom. Dr. Vasquez, have you been able to follow up with this group and see how they are doing?
I also wanted to mention that I really enjoyed the conference last Saturday. Even though I am not a teacher in a classroom, I appreciated all of the ideas that Dr. Harste had for us. He was able to give us a lot of "take-aways" that I am curious to know if the teachers in our class where able to implement any of them.
Have a great week!
I especially like how each theme in Dr. Vasquez's book was linked to social action. The children learned at a young age that they do have a voice and can make a difference by creating alternative solutions. What a wonderful lesson to learn at such a young age. I wonder if these same children continue to be activists in and out of the classroom. Dr. Vasquez, have you been able to follow up with this group and see how they are doing?
I also wanted to mention that I really enjoyed the conference last Saturday. Even though I am not a teacher in a classroom, I appreciated all of the ideas that Dr. Harste had for us. He was able to give us a lot of "take-aways" that I am curious to know if the teachers in our class where able to implement any of them.
Have a great week!
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Valentine's Day cards boycott
I remember Dr. Vasquez mentioning in our first meeting how we will start to look at the world differently once we become more conscious of what critical literacy is. It wasn't until I started reading Negotiating Critical Literacies with Young Children did I finally start noticing the hidden messages in everyday life. I find myself asking who is behind this message? What is the purpose?
For instance, I was shopping in Target yesterday and I was bombarded by Valentine's Day advertisement. I walked through the aisle of Valentine's cards that kids give to each other in their classrooms. I looked closely and saw that almost all of the Valentine's Day cards were connected to a TV show (Dora the Explorer, Care Bears, Power Rangers, etc.). Not that this a novel idea....even when I was in elementary school Care Bears was all the rage, funny how things come back in style. Of course Valentine's Day is a hyped up commercialized event, but why should our kids buy and then help spread free advertisement for these TV shows? On top of parents already have to deal with buying all the tie-in stuff like toys, clothes, bed sheets...the list goes on.
I like how critical literacy helps find alternative solutions. Instead of buying into all of this consumerism around such commercial holidays like Valentine's Day, children can invent their own cards to give to their classmates. Or better yet make them for people who normally don't receive such greetings. Imagine all of the topics that can come out of looking closely at who is behind such a holiday. I am sure the possibilities are endless, especially by putting a bunch of young minds together. Don't get me wrong, I loved receiving those little envelopes with the cheesy messages when I was a kid, but the ones I do remember were especially made for me. You know the ones where the glitter fell on your lap and your name was spelled wrong, but hey, at least it was personalized!
For instance, I was shopping in Target yesterday and I was bombarded by Valentine's Day advertisement. I walked through the aisle of Valentine's cards that kids give to each other in their classrooms. I looked closely and saw that almost all of the Valentine's Day cards were connected to a TV show (Dora the Explorer, Care Bears, Power Rangers, etc.). Not that this a novel idea....even when I was in elementary school Care Bears was all the rage, funny how things come back in style. Of course Valentine's Day is a hyped up commercialized event, but why should our kids buy and then help spread free advertisement for these TV shows? On top of parents already have to deal with buying all the tie-in stuff like toys, clothes, bed sheets...the list goes on.
I like how critical literacy helps find alternative solutions. Instead of buying into all of this consumerism around such commercial holidays like Valentine's Day, children can invent their own cards to give to their classmates. Or better yet make them for people who normally don't receive such greetings. Imagine all of the topics that can come out of looking closely at who is behind such a holiday. I am sure the possibilities are endless, especially by putting a bunch of young minds together. Don't get me wrong, I loved receiving those little envelopes with the cheesy messages when I was a kid, but the ones I do remember were especially made for me. You know the ones where the glitter fell on your lap and your name was spelled wrong, but hey, at least it was personalized!
Thursday, February 1, 2007
Understanding Critical Literacy
As I learn more about critical literacy and some of the theories behind it (such as the four resources model of reading developed by Freebody and Luke) I am reminded of the work of Paulo Freire. Just as Freire helped link social change to empowering the underprivileged and oppressed, I believe critical literacy is able to do a similar feat in developing the voice of our youth.
It's amazing listening to young children debate on what's fair and unfair. Often we neglect these conversations as trivial and uninformed. But if you listen closely, you will find that children already posses insightful thoughts and strong opinions on what impacts their world. It seems to me that the key age to further develop these critical skills is not at high school level, where we are taught how to critically analyze text, which by then we have already cemented our rote learning skills, but at the pre-school level where Dr. Vasquez has focused her research.
It's at this age we can equip our children with the tools needed to carefully analyze the text they will come in contact in their future classrooms, as well as in everyday life, such as the media and other forms of commercialism. More importantly, kids will learn to question such things and not take everything at face value, but instead dig deeper.
I look forward to reading Dr. Vasquez's book, Negotiating Critical Literacies with Young Children who has brought attention to the voices of our young children and what we as teachers can learn from them.
It's amazing listening to young children debate on what's fair and unfair. Often we neglect these conversations as trivial and uninformed. But if you listen closely, you will find that children already posses insightful thoughts and strong opinions on what impacts their world. It seems to me that the key age to further develop these critical skills is not at high school level, where we are taught how to critically analyze text, which by then we have already cemented our rote learning skills, but at the pre-school level where Dr. Vasquez has focused her research.
It's at this age we can equip our children with the tools needed to carefully analyze the text they will come in contact in their future classrooms, as well as in everyday life, such as the media and other forms of commercialism. More importantly, kids will learn to question such things and not take everything at face value, but instead dig deeper.
I look forward to reading Dr. Vasquez's book, Negotiating Critical Literacies with Young Children who has brought attention to the voices of our young children and what we as teachers can learn from them.
Thursday, January 25, 2007
First Impressions
When I first signed up for EDU 623: Critical Literacy Trends and Issues, I wasn't sure what to expect. I assumed we would be looking closely at children's literature, but after our first class meeting, I realized critical literacy encompassed so much more than books. There is content all around us that needs to be scrutinized and questioned.
For instance, the toys our children play with and the clothes they wear. From the earliest age (even in the womb) girls and boys are being told what they should like and how to act. As a soon to be mother, this is something that I am becoming familiar with as I browse the aisles looking at the latest toys. I realize not knowing the sex of my baby helps me from falling into the trap of buying things specifically for girls or boys. It's is easy to get caught up in all of the pink ruffles that the little girls dresses have, or the sporty blue clothes that they make for boys. But do I really want to start conditioning my baby from the start that girls are meant to be dainty and boys can be rough? No, and fortunately there is a selection (albeit small) of gender neutral items available.
I feel this class will be instrumental in helping me develop a critical eye of the content our children are exposed to and help me become a better parent/teacher of my child.
For instance, the toys our children play with and the clothes they wear. From the earliest age (even in the womb) girls and boys are being told what they should like and how to act. As a soon to be mother, this is something that I am becoming familiar with as I browse the aisles looking at the latest toys. I realize not knowing the sex of my baby helps me from falling into the trap of buying things specifically for girls or boys. It's is easy to get caught up in all of the pink ruffles that the little girls dresses have, or the sporty blue clothes that they make for boys. But do I really want to start conditioning my baby from the start that girls are meant to be dainty and boys can be rough? No, and fortunately there is a selection (albeit small) of gender neutral items available.
I feel this class will be instrumental in helping me develop a critical eye of the content our children are exposed to and help me become a better parent/teacher of my child.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)