Changing Perceptions--Literacy and Learning

Gee’s readings have had me reflect on how I learn as a student and how I teach as an educator.  His main focus is how he identifies that students are all capable learners—as long as learning is presented in an inviting, engaging and “situated” manner.  He often refers to the educational system as very “content” laden—and he is right!  This is not so very surprising when our teaching is very “curriculum focussed”.  Our politicians want us to prove to their constituents that their children are learning.  I can’t help but wonder where else we could have spent the millions of dollars that is spent on EQAO every year? Just last week a teacher at my school asked if she could have a projector in her portable classroom.  If the EQAO tests were abolished, we could probably have bought net books for every student in the province.  Criticisms are often made about how teachers are teaching.  Today’s students are so technology oriented that it is difficult to engage them without having these tools.  I believe that effective teachers create and engage in a two way dialogue with the students and themselves.  I remember feeling as a student that if I was able to “connect” with my teacher I would have better success in the course/class/lesson.  Even as a teacher, I still feel that if there is a connection, then the students are better learners.  I have also learned that not all students learn in the same manner and boys do not learn the same way as girls. If boys become disengaged, they tune out much more quickly than girls do.  My goal, as a teacher is to engage each of these groups.  If technology allows me to engage in more effective learning situations—then I want to have access to these technological tools. Yes, books are great, but if we do not have books which connect with the learners, the learners will tune out. 

What Gee has made profoundly apparent to me is that literacy is not just books. Gee made a very compelling argument about how some students in traditional and structured educational environments succeed while others fail.  I agree with Gee when he postulates that learning has to be engaging and connected to the individual.  Effective reading occurs when readers can make sense (connect) with what they read.  An interesting comment by Gee was how does one get poor readers to develop their vocabulary?  As a literacy teacher, I encourage students to read MORE as a means of developing their vocabulary proficiency.  I believe that vocabulary development occurs when one hears, speaks, reads and writes it.  Gee recognizes that learning does not occur in a vacuum, and that literacy is not just “book reading” but comes in various forms.  It is this concept that many adults find challenging.  Parents need to be educated about what literacy is in the 21^st century.  All too often parents reflect on their own learning experiences as students and expect their children to learn the same way. When kids play computer games they are learning—not necessarily what we, as adults, appreciate, but they are learning.  What is important, is that we need to recognize why these are learning experiences. When students play these computer games, they are utilizing many strategies that facilitated successful learning environment.  From “fish-bowl” tutorials that utilize “just in time learning”, to a multi-modal approach in a contextual environment, students should to be encouraged to read and to develop their literacy skills. As teachers, we need to make sure that the purpose for learning is not just for “marks” but for meaning.  Struggling students need scaffolding from their peers and teachers and they need to see what is expected. I believe that effective teachers already do this.  Gee was right when he recognized that literacy needs challenges but only to the degree at which children are able to achieve success.  Isn’t this what our board has been doing with the literacy programme—identifying the student’s reading level and encouraging reading from this level?  As a Junior and an Intermediate teacher, I have been trying to engage all of my students to read, write and present their thoughts by utilizing social justice issues as they pertain to human rights, health concerns, Remembrance Day and anti-bullying awareness campaigns.    

But the question still remains, “Why are kids being “turned off?” Is it because we do not have the materials/resources?  Or, is it different from the way the educators were taught?  I have to admit, I think that many educators are in a rut.  They have not kept up with the pace of today’s technology. It’s not easy! Time constraints and mounting volumes of paperwork make everything “extra” like personal development, a luxury. Educators need to show more initiative and expand their understanding of what literacy is in the 21^st century if they are to succeed with their 21^st century students. Input is necessary from all of the involved parties—not just political leaders and theorists. 

Literacy, Schooling and Social Justice – October 27th 2012

Literacy involves being able to read and write in a socially appropriate context (Blackledge).  Cultural literacy acknowledges how the context of culture is crucial in the development of a person’s literacy.   As Comber and Cormack articulate, children come to school with different literacy skills.  In Canada, those students who come to school literate with a western cultural approach, aka upper middle class schools, have a distinct advantage.  Student’s who come from an oral storytelling culture, tend to struggle in school.  Wenger identifies us as social beings.  Western culture values students to ask “explicit questions” and to “synthesize the knowledge with the world around them”.   When students are able to develop knowledge and connect it to the world around them, they are proving their literacy.  Learning does not only take place in the classroom from textbooks—it takes place all the time—it’s human nature to understand things and to want to learn.

 Students from lower socio-economic groups who challenge authority and try to “save face” and maintain their culture, are significantly less likely to achieve success in school.   Many of the students from these lower socio-economic groups do not see the point in education and many are blamed for “not trying”.  They believe that by becoming educated, they are adopting the culture of the middle-class and betraying their own cultural community.  Freire believes that these students need to see how literacy and education can make their own lives better—to figure out how literacy will help them.  Students from many  voluntary “immigrant” families frequently see literacy and schooling as the key to mobility. 

 Luke identifies how different literacy approaches have serious political and economic consequences.   Government wants educators to be more accountable.  It’s not surprising then that a technocratic data driven approach is what is preferred by governments today.  This is particularly true in our “data” driven board.  It is not surprising that many “inner-city” multi-cultural neighbourhood  schools struggle to achieve acceptable standardized results compared to their upper middleclass suburban schools.   A technocratic approach assumes that literacy can be accurately measured through this “neutral” and “efficient” approach.  This approach ignores the unique personalities and challenges in multi-culturally diverse schools.  For example, I remember one EQAO assessment story where students were to relate and reflect on their camping experiences.  This assumption that all students would be familiar with camping proved particularly challenging for students who lived in downtown Toronto.  This socio-cultural experience is similar to Gregory’s article about the Chinese immigrant child in Britain.   The article extrapolated how not all cultures place the written text on as high a pedestal as the Western culture had.  The article identified how a British advertisement equated the cultural practice of the bedtime story ritual to that of washing with Persil soap.  It related how the Western culture valued both cleanliness and the bedtime stories with your child; how both were a given.  The article implied that there must be something wrong with a family that did not read to their child.

 Although I read bedtime stories with my sons when they were small, I did so with the belief that it would develop their love of reading.  I also believed that this experience would strengthen the relationship we had with each other.   I never thought how this might not be the experience for children of different cultures. 

Western governments and educators tend to prioritize their culture above others.   Even when I taught grade 6 History, rarely did the text book relate to the Native Canadians.  The vocabulary used was from the European perspective—“the European explorers discovered North America”.  The vocabulary in the text comes across as rather insulting to the Native Peoples.   Thankfully, teachers are able to use critical literacy to debunk insufficient text and open the student’s eyes to different perspectives.   However literacy is taught--it is never taught through a neutral lens.  Many of society’s educators and successful individuals believe that everyone has had an equal chance to achieve success in life.  That if you study and work hard, a solid education will give you an equal opportunity to rise up into a higher social class than one into which you were born. The reality is quite different.  It is much easier to maintain the social class into which you are born than to “jump” up to another one.  A socio-cultural approach to literacy helps to explain how the student’s own culture plays a pivotal role (both positive and negative) in their acquisition to the dominate culture’s literacy.

September 2012 - Properly Literate

 

Growing up as I did in suburban southwestern Ontario, I never truly realized or appreciated how my middle-class upbringing influenced who I would become.  In many ways, I took it for granted. I went to school and continued with my education until I had the qualifications I needed in order to become what “I wanted to be”.  Looking back, I realize now that this was clearly based on a life that came from middle class privilege.  Fortunately I grew up in a home where both parents were teachers—where education was supported, family vacations were “field trips” and learning to speak “proper” English was perpetually reinforced.  My parents’ careers reinforced the socio-economic status of my family as was outlined by Stuckley’s article “Literacy and Social Class”.  My belief in my socio—economic status was reinforced by our living in Westmount, as opposed to “EOA”--“East of Adelaide”.

My cultural background was mirrored in the television programs I watched and in the books I read.  I was able to become literate because I was able to relate what I read with my life.  I didn’t grow up with a disconnect—where my background and culture was invisible or subjugated.  Looking back, school was pretty easy—I was able to talk-the-talk and my responses were valued and accepted by my teachers/educators. My childhood was filled with academics, sports, part-time jobs and friends.  It was a safe life. I didn’t have to really worry about what I was going to do when I grew up—I just knew that I would be happy providing I remained healthy.

            The readings for this past class made me realize that life really wasn’t the same for everyone.  The article “Why the Underclass Can’t Get Out From Under”, focused on the struggle that many welfare mothers and inner-city youths face and how their lives and culture were invisible through the naïve form of literacy that was taught in school.  Visible minorities were actually given the short shrift.  Stereotypes were made and they were only seen as a “single” story.  These students, who were not able to speak “proper” English –the language spoken by business, were assumed to lack the academic ability to succeed in school.  Traditionally, most teachers were typically from the middle class.  Many of them did not connect with the lives of their students. Unfortunately, some lacked empathy.  The life experiences of the working class students were not appreciated to the same degree as experiences of the middle class students.  It was assumed that if the students were from a lower socio-economic group or visible minority then little could be expected from them.  This still continues to be true when you think of “high stakes” testing where certain vocabulary and experiences are assumed to be true for all of the students.  If the students don’t perform well in the test, they are assumed to be lacking—not the test. 

My first years as a new teacher when kids would say that they were “finished their work”, I would settle for what they gave me.  Today, as an experienced teacher, I realize that these students were capable of much more.  As Cummins recognizes in his article “The Sanitized Curriculum”, I had to build a trusting relationship with the children, believe in them and encourage them to give me more—which many of them now do in spades!   

In North America, many of the decent paying blue collar jobs have been outsourced leaving only low paying McJobs.  Higher immigration and more women in the workforce compete with less-educated blacks living in the inner cities.  The question in Garland’s article “Why the Underclass Can’t Get Out From Under”, asks what kinds of employment are people supposed to do who have not have success in school?  Welfare, in many ways, perpetuates the status quo as it “discourages marriage and work while rewarding out-of-wedlock childbearing and unemployment” (Garland, 62) Who would want to work, if your standard of living is higher if you stay on welfare?  While on the surface, this might seem reasonable to a young teenage mom, it unfortunately leads to generational welfare, rather than having welfare work as a step up.  

            It’s rather ironic that in today’s Presidential election the Republican candidate was caught saying that he didn’t really care about the bottom 47% of the population in society as they really didn’t have much power.  This reinforces the stereotype that if you are of a lower socio-economic group, you really don’t have a voice.  It just seems harsh to hear it said so candidly by a person running for President. 

            How do we, as a society, allow all of its citizens an equal chance at success? Students need to have access to education plus they need to be challenged and stimulated in order to achieve success.  The solutions are not simple, but education is the key.  Teachers and students need to connect.  Teachers cannot simply follow a script and be the authoritative figure in the classroom.  There needs to be dialogue.  Discourse should not be one-sided.  Sharing should be encouraged.  It is only through positive educational experiences that students will be able to become qualified for employment.  Over 100 years ago Ryerson believed that the purpose of education was to create an educated work force.  Is that still true today?  How can education help to make all of its citizens employable if so many of the jobs are being outsourced? There are many differences today in employment opportunities, as well as the welfare safety net for the unemployed.  I don’t believe that there is one easy answer to this situation, but, I do believe that if there was a mutual respect for all parties involved, life would be better for everyone.    

Stereotyping - Cultural Discourse - March 10th

Stereotyping – Cultural Discourse

Critical literacy is learning to question assumptions.  I am writing this as my niece and nephew aged seven and four are playing with some dolls.  What is amazing is that they are both playing with them.  Each child has their own assortment of Barbie dolls even though one is a girl and the other is a boy.  We ,as a society, are so conditioned to gasp in shock when boys play with dolls but when one thinks about action figures, aren’t they actually the same thing?  My brother and sister-in-law have heard all of the comments, from “It’s OK you know!” to “He’s just copying his older sister whom he idolizes.” Regardless, they both enjoy playing with their dolls.  What is just as interesting is how they interact with them.  My niece organizes the clothing, and sings as she changes the dolls outfit from one to another.  My nephew on the other hand shouts, makes vocal noises, and has his dolls perform physical feats that demonstrate  his dolls physical ability.  Whereas my niece enjoys making her dolls into  princesses—pretty and polished. My nephew is only interested in battling his dolls with his sister’s.  Why is it that little girls typically prefer calmer more creative pursuits whereas little boys prefer more action-based ones?  Even when we don’t differentiate and provide children with gender biased toys, it seems that children play with the same toys differently.  Although young children are very aware of their gender roles they are also very much impacted on sibling rivalries.  In my niece and nephew’s case, the younger sibling always wants to do and play with the same toys that the older sibling has.  My nephew is torn between loving Barbie and enjoying more traditional boy “super hero” action figurines.  His super hero figurines are addressed as “Batman Barbie” or “Superman Barbie” because to address them without the Barbie label would diminish their value in his eyes—toys not the same as his sister’s.  Does it matter that he plays with dolls vs figurines? Is it not really the same thing?  Can’t creative play be creative play?  I wonder how my nephew plays when he is in Junior Kindergarten or daycare?   Does he restrict his play to more typical boy pursuits?   Is he really aware of the gender divisions?  Why should we care how he chooses to play? Why are so many adults shocked and surprised  that a little boy chooses to play with dolls? 

                As a society, we consciously and unconsciously define the gender roles.  Dolls that are promoted for boys vs girls are identified by how we as a society  epitomize the male and female role models.  Both Batman and Superman are extremely muscular and are given unrealistically large chests.  To be a successful male, you have to be strong and heroic.  You need to be able to “save the day”.  Barbie is also unrealistic with her hourglass figure, slender waist and voluptuous breasts.  Does this mean that you can only be a success as a female if you are skinny and beautiful like Barbie and dressed in the latest fashionable outfits?  Do young children even notice the unrealistic body proportions? Do they equate physical beauty with social acceptance? How come masculine action figure dolls are socially acceptable for a boy than Barbie?  My nephew loves his super hero action figure dolls but he does not play with them to the exclusion of his Barbies. These gender roles have been expanded into stories, movies, advertising, toy industry—everywhere in society.            

Where I’m From.... Natalie Danielle Dewling

                           It seems strange to see my “maiden” name, it seems so long ago,
                                As I am from a London suburb in southwestern Ontario,
                           From parents who were teachers and reverse psychology the norm
                                Taunting nursery rhymes ”I’ll tell you a story” to
                                                  Singing “You  Are My Sunshine”

Reading was another world—a movie in words to see

My days were always filled with sports with names like “Nat” and “Stretch” for me

            Summer was family road trips and summer jobs—that’s how I preferred to learn best
                         Life was about learning and doing— and for that I truly feel blessed!  

Inquiry Based Learning – February 18^th, 2012

                 I am of two minds about inquiry based learning.  Inquiry based learning excites me.  It allows my curiosity to flourish and find out about things that I want to learn about.  It gives me choice and control over what interests me.  This of itself is admirable and in reality will allow the student to produce likely their best work.  They would not only step up but then excel.  Inquiry based learning will provide a framework for the students to utilize technology.  School is always more engaging when it can be done more easily and efficiently and in a fun manner.  Technology does not hamstring those students who are less artistically inclined. Those with poor penmanship are not penalized and students who need help with writing, spelling, grammar etc have the flexibility of using programs like Word to assist those struggling writers.  Oral presentations, that utilize power point presentations, engage the audience in a visually stimulating manner.  Power point presentations also help the presenter to present in a simple and straightforward manner, where the written bullets on the screen help to expand the presenter with their dialogue. 

Inquiry based learning has one major drawback—technology.  As a Junior Elementary School teacher in my school board, I have, along with the other teachers in the Junior Division been relegated to teach in a portable.  This on its own does not sound so daunting until you begin to actually try and utilize technology.  Our portables do not as of yet, have any computers—let alone a “hook up” to the board’s server or Internet. 

The Junior grade classes at my school are expected to go into the main building and access net books (in a locked storage container located in an Intermediate classroom) and work in a “hot” zone hallway, where the net books can hook-up wirelessly to the board’s server.   The problem with this is focus.  Many of my students are easily distracted and have difficulty following the oral instructions.  What I would prefer to do, would be to have my own laptop connected to a projector so that the students would visually and orally be able to see and hear what my instructions are.  This would help to facilitate the development of the student’s research skills because they would be able to both see and hear my instructions.  Prior to this year, the Junior students had access to a computer lab (30-60 minutes per week) but this room is currently being updated.  The old Computer Lab was problematic for a number of reasons.  A number of students would often have difficulty logging on to the board’s server.  As well, students would have to listen to the oral instructions as there was no projector or Smart Board.  And lastly, when one included the travel time it took to walk from the portable to the Computer Lab, actual teaching time was severely limited.

Given all of these pitfalls with access to computers, I am hesitant to presently utilize technology as an inquiry approach to learning.  When I did utilize an  inquiry approach to for a topic, this would often take the better part of five to six weeks as the time available for the students to complete their projects took a considerable amount of time.  Even with the time constraints, students for the most part thoroughly enjoyed utilizing technology.  They appreciated the how “polished” their finished product would appear and what they would discover.  Students would be able to teach each other, and share websites that were more “user friendly”.  

This year I have had the students approach topics utilizing an inquiry approach.  Students have been asked to interview their parents/families about cancer or why/how their family immigrated to Canada. Students have also been expected to research at home about other topics—space, electricity generation, trading partners etc.. at home.  I am a little uncomfortable with this form of inquiry as I like to see what and how the students are developing their research skills.  As well, my class comes from a variety of socio-economic levels and I know that some students need to access the computers at the local Public Library in order to complete these assignments. I know that access to technology is developing in our board.  The Intermediate division at my school currently has Smart Boards, Projectors and net books in their classrooms. I know that I just need to be patient and know that eventually the resources will trickle down—I’m just a little frustrated at its seemly glacial speed!     

Reflection on Literacy Learning - Seminar 1

I can only become an effective learner when I learn to take risks.  This is often the most vulnerable part about teaching and learning—being truthful and honest—to be otherwise is shallow and ineffective.   I have always treated my students as my adopted kids for the year and treated them as a surrogate parent—trying to understand what they are really like and capable of.  As a “new” teacher I was afraid to be myself, to share my real ideas and uncertain opinions.  Ironically, it is only after I took risks, taught at the students’ level and embraced a sensory approach to learning did I witness real learning.  This was when my students demonstrated to me that effective teaching does not come out of a reader,  a theme kit of published materials or even teacher’s manuals.  Uncertainty is walking down the path less travelled, and it is only when I was willing to do so, did I feel the most success!   Having said this, I struggle to follow this path because it certainly does not seem to be the well trodden.   These readings have been validating because it reminds me that effective learning only occurs when it happens together, when I recognize that I AM still willing to see the anomalies that the kids see. 

                I can only view the world as I know it.  My students all have different perspectives of the world because they all have differing cultural backgrounds, socio-economic classes and experiences.   When I see an object, I automatically recall my previous experiences with it.  I am forever modeling my experiences to things with my students.  I want them to have a better understanding and of literacy.  I know that their grasp of the English language and their awareness of the Canadian culture will have a direct impact on their ability to have success on the year end EQAO testing.   In Britton’s article about “Language and Learning” she stipulates that throughout our life, we continually build on our previous experiences, on how we perceive the world.  But we do not live in isolation.  The experiences of others also impact on our lives.  Speech is the verbalization of symbols. 

When I first began to read these readings, I became more and more frustrated at how I perceived myself as not “measuring-up” to these teachers.  I would have thought that after 20 years as a classroom teacher I might have learned a thing or two about managing my time, but I frequently find the bulk of my time spent scrounging for resources, photocopying or communicating with people whom I am suppose to connect primarily with my special needs students.  I feel like my paper work consists of “putting out fires” by completing the paperwork that needs to be done immediately.

 Like the teacher who taught from a cross-curricular approach, I too like to teach using this pedagogy however, in doing so although I believe it to be more engaging for the students I cannot help but feel that it is penalizing for a teacher to teach using this method as I find it challenging to keep on top of the paperwork (assessments).  Having said all of this, I do believe that it is important to document daily—as my memory is not perfect.  Student conferencing is critical.  Understanding and seeing students engage in learning as a whole child—in a variety of situations (group presentations, recess,  field trips, sports teams etc.) fills out the written responses and reflections—particularly from boys.  I want to learn how to more effectively organize my teaching so as to be true to what I believe true teaching and learning is.