What we have sought to achieve as a result of our literacy programs, has simply been about teaching our students to become better readers and writers, but from a technical perspective. We don’t often think about the social, political or cultural influences that may or may not arise as a result of our teaching. However, that being said, I don’t think that we can view literacy as either a set of individual skills or just a set of cultural practices or relations of power and control. For the most part, I think they go hand in hand – you cannot have one without the other. There are so many cultural and social implications when it comes to literacy, that the idea that literacy is exclusively about correct spelling and fluent reading, seems extremely archaic.
Wednesday, 31 October 2012
A New Approach to Literacy
The
concept of literacy is much more complex than I could have ever imagined. I think about the literacy programs that are
typically developed in the classrooms at my school, and the very narrow focus
that these programs tend to have. We go
through a checklist of topics to cover throughout the year; reading
comprehension strategies (i.e. visualizing, making connections and asking
questions), text forms, and various forms of writing. However, I have to wonder how effective our
programs are, and if our literacy programs are as meaningful as they need to
be. Finn’s notion of Powerful Literacy vs. Functional Literacy is something I
believe all educators need to become familiar with, and perhaps decide which of
these literacy’s is most predominant in their classroom. Since reading Finn’s text, Literacy with an Attitude, I am
beginning to become more mindful of the instructional approach I am taking,
particularly with language. I need to ask myself if I’m truly preparing my
students in such a way that they will be able to adopt positions of power and authority,
or will they just be able to “get by”, and have minimal impact when engaging socially
on a larger scale.
At
the beginning of his article, “The Social Process of Literacy”, Adrian
Blackledge listed a series of rather important questions about literacy. I immediately thought to myself, “how many of
these questions are actually taken into consideration by teachers as they
develop their literacy programs?” A
couple of the questions he posed really made me think – “What is the importance
of literacy in terms of cultural and personal identity?” What role does literacy play in societies
where there are unequal relations of power between different groups?” And
finally, “If schools are important sites of social and cultural reproduction,
what is the role of literacy in the process of schooling?” As I suggested
previously, educators need to be challenged, whether it be personally or by
their peers, to ask themselves questions of this nature.
What we have sought to achieve as a result of our literacy programs, has simply been about teaching our students to become better readers and writers, but from a technical perspective. We don’t often think about the social, political or cultural influences that may or may not arise as a result of our teaching. However, that being said, I don’t think that we can view literacy as either a set of individual skills or just a set of cultural practices or relations of power and control. For the most part, I think they go hand in hand – you cannot have one without the other. There are so many cultural and social implications when it comes to literacy, that the idea that literacy is exclusively about correct spelling and fluent reading, seems extremely archaic.
I
still see a great deal of importance in the development of basic skills in
reading and writing, but how we use literacy in response to various social
dynamics appears to be more critical.
It’s more advantageous to have a strong sense of how certain
messages/ideas are being conveyed and/or received, verses mastering the
mechanics of the language that is involved.
In Finn’s analysis of why working class students continue to be put at a
disadvantage, he made it quite clear that one of the major factors in this
unbalanced educational experience is the quality of teaching that is being offered
to these students. Finn uses several concrete examples to illustrate the fact
that teachers (at times subconsciously), adopt a pedagogy that can be regarded
as subpar, because they believe it is most appropriate for students of a
certain profile. On the other hand, they
may ensure their teaching practice is thorough and challenging when working
with students of a higher social class. This phenomenon has obviously cycled
through the education system for far too many years. In an effort to change the mentality of
working-class students, teachers need to re-wire their own thinking as well.
What we have sought to achieve as a result of our literacy programs, has simply been about teaching our students to become better readers and writers, but from a technical perspective. We don’t often think about the social, political or cultural influences that may or may not arise as a result of our teaching. However, that being said, I don’t think that we can view literacy as either a set of individual skills or just a set of cultural practices or relations of power and control. For the most part, I think they go hand in hand – you cannot have one without the other. There are so many cultural and social implications when it comes to literacy, that the idea that literacy is exclusively about correct spelling and fluent reading, seems extremely archaic.
Thursday, 4 October 2012
Properly Literate
Although
the articles for this particular seminar appear to have been written several
years ago, they are outlining issues within education that are still very much
a point of concern. If after all these
years, the same patterns are still evident (low test scores among minority
students, the need to strengthen skills in reading and writing, pedagogy that
lacks emphasis on problem solving and critical thinking, etc.), perhaps it is
safe to say that advances in education have been marginal at best (?)
I chuckle to myself when I think back to an interesting comment that was made by our school’s ELT (Early Literacy Teacher), about a year ago during a workshop that she was hosting. She stated, with confidence and pride, that we have made so many advances in the way that we are teaching our students and the rate at which they are learning, that school boards all over the world are now looking to Ontario as a leader in education (pause and reflect here). I hope not to be misunderstood. I’m sure there are amazing things going on in the classrooms here in Ontario and across Canada, and as educators we have much to be proud of. However, I found this statement to be quite ambitious.
I think there are several factors that have had a significant impact on how we approach education, and these factors have resulted in greater challenges and more hurdles that need to be cleared before achieving high levels of success for both teachers and learners. For instance, as our population grows increasingly more diverse, the number of ELL students has also increased, and this has led to the need for several modifications to curriculum expectations. The same can be said for what seems like an increase in the number of special needs/learning disabled students. Another example is the introduction of standardized testing (EQAO) which has had a negative impact on the pedagogy of many teachers teaching grades in which the test is written. The bottom line – while we have an abundance of resources (books, graphic organizers, adaptive technology, etc.), I am beginning to wonder if these things are just creative/innovative ways to continue to dance around a prevailing and long standing problem – many of our students are not necessarily becoming better at reading and writing – we’re just finding ways to make it easier for them.
I think back to the article Properly Literate, by Wayne O’Neil. He suggests that reading without context is the beginning of the breakdown in coherence (pg. 77). He went on to explain that proper literacy should extend a person’s control over his/her life and environment. I have to wonder what sort of context I create for my students on a daily basis – especially those who are new to the country or who’ve generally had limited experiences. In an effort to promote reading for meaning, as educators we must be mindful of the material that we have selected for use in our classrooms, as well as the criteria we have chosen for use in our evaluation. If not, we may be inadvertently creating a generation of improperly literate children who are just merely “following words across a page, and are getting a general sense of what’s superficially there.” (pg. 75)
The same can be said for writing. Whether it is a matter of providing graphic organizers to ensure the correct formatting, or using sentence building programs like Clicker 5 - while these tools are quite helpful, there is a strong need to evaluate whether or not the actual skill of writing is being adequately developed. Writing, like reading, must also be meaningful – it needs to be done within a certain context, and should have strong connections to each student’s current experience, as well as the experiences they are sure to have somewhere down the road. But the question still remains – how do we make our student’s better readers and writers? What type of pedagogy is guaranteed to produce this desired outcome? Is there one approach, or are there many?
I`ve become a strong believer in the importance of critical literacy and giving students an opportunity to make strong connections to everyday life. But I often find myself at war with the phenomenon of standardized testing, large class sizes, feeling overwhelmed by the number of expectations that need to be covered, and the most challenging of all – what the school board/ministry suggests we should adopt as best teaching practices. I think our world might seem as though it has become more complex – but if we have a good understanding of the various social dynamics that are at play, the power relations that are constantly being developed, or the reasons why certain groups of people are more disadvantaged than others, our approach to society and how we identify ourselves within it, may actually be quite simple. As suggested in the reading “The Sanitized Curriculum: Educational Disempowerment in a Nation at Risk”, education seems to be lacking meaningful learning experiences – it is overly prescribed and does not honour the importance in developing a student’s ability to think critically. It’s also important to find ways to ensure that our students are feeling empowered, all students alike, not just the minority. This empowerment will limited feelings of inadequacy and leave students feeling confident and capable (Cummins, pg. 31).
I feel extremely compelled to challenge my students to question, connect, relate and debate things that they see in the media, read in books, newspapers and magazines, or hear through word of mouth. The video “Voice and Choice” was an awesome example of this type of learning in action. In the conclusion of his article, “The Sanitized Curriculum”, Cummins offers some sound advice: “A practical “pedagogy for resistance”...would incorporate at least two immediate goals...rid the educational system of the straightjacket of standardized tests...and insist that any test used in the school incorporate the full range of curriculum objectives emphasized within an interactive/experiential model of pedagogy.” How do we put something like this in motion?
I chuckle to myself when I think back to an interesting comment that was made by our school’s ELT (Early Literacy Teacher), about a year ago during a workshop that she was hosting. She stated, with confidence and pride, that we have made so many advances in the way that we are teaching our students and the rate at which they are learning, that school boards all over the world are now looking to Ontario as a leader in education (pause and reflect here). I hope not to be misunderstood. I’m sure there are amazing things going on in the classrooms here in Ontario and across Canada, and as educators we have much to be proud of. However, I found this statement to be quite ambitious.
I think there are several factors that have had a significant impact on how we approach education, and these factors have resulted in greater challenges and more hurdles that need to be cleared before achieving high levels of success for both teachers and learners. For instance, as our population grows increasingly more diverse, the number of ELL students has also increased, and this has led to the need for several modifications to curriculum expectations. The same can be said for what seems like an increase in the number of special needs/learning disabled students. Another example is the introduction of standardized testing (EQAO) which has had a negative impact on the pedagogy of many teachers teaching grades in which the test is written. The bottom line – while we have an abundance of resources (books, graphic organizers, adaptive technology, etc.), I am beginning to wonder if these things are just creative/innovative ways to continue to dance around a prevailing and long standing problem – many of our students are not necessarily becoming better at reading and writing – we’re just finding ways to make it easier for them.
I think back to the article Properly Literate, by Wayne O’Neil. He suggests that reading without context is the beginning of the breakdown in coherence (pg. 77). He went on to explain that proper literacy should extend a person’s control over his/her life and environment. I have to wonder what sort of context I create for my students on a daily basis – especially those who are new to the country or who’ve generally had limited experiences. In an effort to promote reading for meaning, as educators we must be mindful of the material that we have selected for use in our classrooms, as well as the criteria we have chosen for use in our evaluation. If not, we may be inadvertently creating a generation of improperly literate children who are just merely “following words across a page, and are getting a general sense of what’s superficially there.” (pg. 75)
The same can be said for writing. Whether it is a matter of providing graphic organizers to ensure the correct formatting, or using sentence building programs like Clicker 5 - while these tools are quite helpful, there is a strong need to evaluate whether or not the actual skill of writing is being adequately developed. Writing, like reading, must also be meaningful – it needs to be done within a certain context, and should have strong connections to each student’s current experience, as well as the experiences they are sure to have somewhere down the road. But the question still remains – how do we make our student’s better readers and writers? What type of pedagogy is guaranteed to produce this desired outcome? Is there one approach, or are there many?
I`ve become a strong believer in the importance of critical literacy and giving students an opportunity to make strong connections to everyday life. But I often find myself at war with the phenomenon of standardized testing, large class sizes, feeling overwhelmed by the number of expectations that need to be covered, and the most challenging of all – what the school board/ministry suggests we should adopt as best teaching practices. I think our world might seem as though it has become more complex – but if we have a good understanding of the various social dynamics that are at play, the power relations that are constantly being developed, or the reasons why certain groups of people are more disadvantaged than others, our approach to society and how we identify ourselves within it, may actually be quite simple. As suggested in the reading “The Sanitized Curriculum: Educational Disempowerment in a Nation at Risk”, education seems to be lacking meaningful learning experiences – it is overly prescribed and does not honour the importance in developing a student’s ability to think critically. It’s also important to find ways to ensure that our students are feeling empowered, all students alike, not just the minority. This empowerment will limited feelings of inadequacy and leave students feeling confident and capable (Cummins, pg. 31).
I feel extremely compelled to challenge my students to question, connect, relate and debate things that they see in the media, read in books, newspapers and magazines, or hear through word of mouth. The video “Voice and Choice” was an awesome example of this type of learning in action. In the conclusion of his article, “The Sanitized Curriculum”, Cummins offers some sound advice: “A practical “pedagogy for resistance”...would incorporate at least two immediate goals...rid the educational system of the straightjacket of standardized tests...and insist that any test used in the school incorporate the full range of curriculum objectives emphasized within an interactive/experiential model of pedagogy.” How do we put something like this in motion?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)