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.