David could have had his students work further with print and television advertisements, engaging issues of social equality, issues of gender and of class.
For example, women's bodies are often times objectified within ads. This could have been a topic of discussion. He also could have had his students study positive images in advertisements such as those of grassroots campaigns, political or otherwise.
There could have also been a long term project assigned where the students would write, talk about, and visually portray their own ideas about the issue(s). David could have pushed them further by having them engage in a debate where they had to argue for ideas that they didn't necessarily hold themselves or even to create their own positive ad to reflect what they have learned in the unit.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Blog Post 1: Based on the readings, create a thoughtful post on your initial reactions and questions regarding critical literacy and children's books
As I introduce myself to critical literacy, I notice a similarity between this framework and that of the culturally responsive classroom, which I recently learned about in my Foundations of Education course. On page 2 of Getting Beyond “I Like the Book”, Vivian Vasquez compares critical literacy to Flint and Riordan-Karlsson's idea of encouraging “conversation related to social issues” (Vasquez, 2). One of the tenets of culturally responsive classrooms is encouraging students to develop a critical consciousness and challenge social injustice (Gloria Ladson-Billings, cited in Sadker, et al). Also, both critical literacy and culturally responsive classrooms emphasize the use of diverse instructional materials. Cultural awareness and inclusion seems especially important in the diverse urban environment, and yet many urban classrooms still see Euro-centric, white-washed literature and traditional, teacher-centric instructional practices. However, I am beginning to see through my classwork that trends in education are moving towards a greater recognition of cultural diversity and an inclusion of this fact into teaching materials and practices.
Barbara Comber “states that critical literacies include practicing the use of language in powerful ways to get things done in the world, to enhance everyday life in schools and communities, and to question practices of privilege and injustice” (Vasquez, 2). I now teach the fourth grade, but when I started teaching last year, I taught middle school English. As part of my coursework, I took a class called “Methods and Materials in Secondary English”, which touched on critical literacy for a time. It seemed that, at the secondary level, the most focused area of critical literacy was the last element Comber mentioned: questioning practices of privilege and injustice. Perhaps I developed the wrong idea, as I only took this one course, but we focused a lot on looking at everyday texts and finding ways that they may support or subvert the structures of power, gender, and other such constructions in our society. I suppose different teachers can focus on different aspects of critical literacy as they apply to their content area, grade level, and objectives.
Vasquez writes that “critical literacy is also about imagining thoughtful ways of thinking about reconstructing and redesigning texts and images to convey different, more socially just and equitable messages that have real-life effects in the world” (Vasquez, 2). This concept made me think of an instance from my childhood. My mother, who was very into progressive education and getting me to think for myself from an early age, bought me a book of “politically correct” fairy tales. My aunts made fun of my mom (I come from a big Greek family full of aunts and cousins who are always into each others' business), but it really got me thinking, at a young age, that there must be a reason why people decided to re-write these stories. I definitely see the value of presenting such ideas to young children, because they learn to question the world around them rather than just accepting whatever is given to them. This is a skill that much older students still struggle with, and perhaps they would think differently had they been in classrooms that demanded such critical thinking of them in their earlier years.
Luke and Freebody's Four Resources Model also got me thinking. This model consists of four levels of thinking about text: code-breaking, meaning-making, text-using, and text-critiquing. My students are mostly at the level of meaning makers. Some of them are still code-breakers. Sometimes, my students can be text-users, but usually only if I force them to be for a specific writing assignment. They are rarely thinking at the level of text critics, although the bright students sometimes have breakthroughs. However, in the classroom, we definitely focus on the first three levels. I would like to argue it's because we have to, because if kids can't read, how can they ever reach the higher levels of approaching text? At the same time, I wonder if we are creating a vicious cycle. Luke and Freebody write, “access to different kinds of educational experiences becomes both a symptom and a cause of literacy performance.” Perhaps by not exposing our students to the higher levels of critical thinking, we are actually harming them, and keeping them at those lower levels. It is definitely an idea to consider.
I have a few questions about critical literacy. My first is, in a NCLB-driven system, how can we integrate critical literacy into our curriculum while still meeting all of the district-mandated standards and using district-assigned texts? Sometimes, the anecdotes in Vasquez' text reminded me of an emergent curriculum approach, following the students' interests to develop what you study. I wonder how critical literacy will look in a “big kids” classroom, especially with all of the content and testing expectations we have. Also, I wonder how I can take my class from one that has not been exposed to critical literacy to one where critical literacy works? How can one teach kids to have these kinds of discussions? Other than just providing thought-provoking literature, how can you lay the basic foundations for critical literacy? Finally, just a thought: when students are dealing with social and/or controversial issues, the teacher needs to be careful to keep from pushing her own personal agenda. I feel like a teacher could abuse the concept of critical literacy to promote her own beliefs; for example, if students are discussing eating meat and a teacher is a vegetarian, she may push students to take one her perspective. I think it is important for a teacher to check her neutrality to allow the students' voices to shape the discussion.
Works Cited
Freebody, P., & Luke, A. Further Notes on the Four Resources Model. Retrieved February 5, 2008 from http://www.readingonline.org/research/lukefreebody.html
Sadker, D. M., Sadker, M. P., & Zittleman, K. R. (2008). Teachers, Schools, and Society. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Vasquez, V. et. al (2003). Getting Beyond I Like the Book: Creating Spaces for Critical Literacy in K-6 Classrooms. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)