Workshop 7 & 8 Written Response

Lookjen Tang-Prescod
Literacy Learning II
Activity II

Most of the readings for Workshop 7 highlight the fact that there is a great need for an expanded definition of literacy which focuses on multiple socially constructed practices. The vast majority of educators seem to still uphold the traditional meaning of literacy. Heath (1998) reinforces this belief when he notes that many educators, researchers included, are still not aware that “ways of taking from books are as much a part of learned behavior as are ways of eating, sitting, playing games, and building houses” (p. 258). For the purpose of this response, in the first part, I will focus on the Trackton community which is discussed in Heath’s article.

Although the Trackton “communities of practice” did not seem to support learning and literacy, Wenger (1998) highlights the fact that communities play an important part in people’s daily lives. In discussing the ways the children from the Trackton community “[took] from printed stories” (Heath, p. 259), Heath acknowledges that the literacy events for these children were unstructured. In many more ways than one, it seems that these children build their literacy skills in a ‘no frills’ environment. For example the children in Trackton did not spend quality time reading bedtimes stories nor did they live in homes that were conducive to learning. To be literate, it is not enough to be knowledgeable without experiences, therefore the social events, the conversations and the games in Trackton will play an important part in the children’s thinking, judgment, representation and the development of literacy skills.

The learning and the social identities of the children in the Trackton community is embedded both in their primary and secondary Discourses (Gee, 1996). From a very early age, the children use the knowledge, practices and events that they acquire in their natural environment to shape their experiences. For example, the children use nonverbal action in order to obtain adults’ attention and the manipulation of household objects as toys. However, in institutions such as in schools, systemic frameworks such as the curriculum do not promote the three interrelated dimensions of literacy: operational, cultural and critical. According to Manning (1993), the “real curriculum is what goes on in the mind of the student” (p. 2). He further explains that the ‘real curriculum is the one that “really counts, why learning and teaching are two different things” (p. 2). Schools focus on the envisaged and the enacted curriculum which promotes secondary Discourse. Therefore, students are usually assessed by the learning practices of secondary Discourses which are based on the values, perception and sociocultural norms of the mainstream pattern. Unfortunately, the clash of these two discourses cause students, such as those from Trackton, to be marginalized as they are labeled as being ‘different’ by social, political, cultural and systemic factors. According to Gee (1996), one of the main goals of literacy should be the ability to critique ones primary and secondary Discourses. This requires exposing children to a variety of alternative primary and secondary Discourses in an environment where one social practice does not take dominance over others.

After reading the articles for Workshop 8, I began to reflect on my teaching styles especially as an English as a Second Language (ESL) teacher. In this environment, it is very easy for an educator to intentionally or implicitly become a Transmission teacher. The mandate of the school curriculum fosters the banking model which describes the teachers’ role as “to ‘fill’ the students by making deposits of information” (Belenky et al., 1986, p. 214). For example for the ESL student, the instructions in English may sometimes become too overwhelmed with the formal aspect of the language, therefore the acquisition of fluency in the new language is hindered (Brown, 2001).

I particularly like the analogy of a teacher as a midwife, although one may argue that the analogy is sexist, it gives a different personality and role to the teacher (Belenky et al., 1986) It is recognized that the position of an educator carries with it a position of authority, however good teaching requires a teacher to reposition his/herself from the transmission pedagogy that vests an active, dominant, powerful role to teachers and a subordinate, docile, powerless role to students (Osborne, 1991). Recommended by Belenky et al., is the connected class model whose pedagogy focuses on an informal class community in which teacher and students are engaged. This approach will allow the teacher to connect to the students in such a way that each one nurtures each other thoughts to maturity (p. 221). Furthermore, this approach will provide meaningful opportunities for ESL students to engage in interactive, fun and practical activities that foster literacy and learning. For example, literacy skill can be taught through art, drama, storytelling and games. Consequently, in such supportive and relaxing experiences, the students will acquire a greater sense of confidence in using the targeted language.

Another article to which I could have related was Cambourne’s article regarding the model for dependent a-literate learners (Cambourne, 1987). As an educator, I must admit that I have used some of the activities that Cambourne has identified in his article. For example, I have used some written exercises to help students retain or remember what has been taught. However, I think that written exercises can be used in conjunction with other pedagogies, such as the Inquiry and Discovery approach. In this way, the written activities will become more meaningful and they will not contribute to the dependent a-literacy syndrome.

In reflecting on the strategies that I employ in my ESL classes, I can also identify with the Inquiry/Discovery approach which I use extensively. Actually, I find this approach to be more meaningful when teaching ESL students as it requires teaching from the known to the unknown. As such, I start with the information, content or skills with which the students are familiar and from that, new skills are taught. Furthermore, I find that with this approach, the students are more eager to share their information and at most times the teaching shifts from the teacher to the students. As such, I believe that there is an unquestioned need for ESL teachers to be aware of the stages of acculturation. This knowledge will not only be valuable in helping the teacher to be sensitive to the student’s needs, but also to identify the appropriate and effective pedagogies that will meet the needs of the students.

As an educator, the readings have introduced me to alternative pedagogies that will assist me in meeting the needs of my students. It is my belief that no one pedagogy is complete, a mixture of pedagogies may be necessary for students to develop the acquisition and learning processes. For ESL students, it seems that the jury is still out on whether a student can “learn" a language or is it "acquired". However, the goals of all literacy programs should acknowledge the students unique social identities, not as a problem, but rather as profound sources of knowledge.



References
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women’s ways of knowing, extract from, Women’s Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. New York, NY: Basic Books (p. 214-229).

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy, Second Edition. New York: Longman.

Gee, J. P. (1996) Discourses and Literacies, Chapter 6 in Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology and Discourses, Taylor Francis, p. 124-148.

Heath, S. B. (1982) What No Bedtime Story Means: Narrative Skills at Home and at School Language and Society 11, p. 49-76.

Manning, A. (1993). “Curriculum as conversation”. Keynote Address, Western Australian Reading Association.

Osborne, K., (1991) Teaching for democratic change, Montreal: Our Schools/Our Selves Education Foundation, p. 26-35).

Wenger, Etienne (1998) Introduction: A Social Theory of Learning, Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity Cambridge, p. 3-11.