GLIT2728

Presentation:

We Are Racist

View more presentations from TCDSB.

As I listened to Alan Luke speak, what really resonated with me was the notion that critical literacy is really about social justice. It is about teaching our students to be “constructive sceptics”; to challenge authority and the status quo, to be informed decision-makers, to articulate or reject ideas, and to constantly be engaged in inquiry and discovery. In essence, we want to empower our students and instil in them a desire to be life-long learners. I believe this is the only way we are going to engage or re-engage our students in our classrooms because too many of them, unfortunately, see learning as a means to an end; an end that is often dictated by a teacher or a textbook/resource; someone or something they see as the ultimate authority and therefore, cannot and should not be challenged. Students will not challenge unless they are taught to challenge and unless they are in a learning environment where it is acceptable and encouraged to do so. As teachers, we need to create those places for our students and more importantly, we need to model this and teach by example. In order for this to happen, however, we also need to feel empowered. As Frank Smith states in his article, Overselling Literacy, “Of course, there is no way that students will be empowered until teachers themselves are empowered, and this will not happen until teachers are autonomous in their classrooms.” I completely agree with Frank Smith. In my work with teachers, I often hear their frustrations about a system that is constantly deciding what is best for them and their students without ever consulting them in the process. They want to be part of the decision-making and they want to be more autonomous. What I’m frustrated about, however, are the many contradictions to this argument that I encounter on a daily basis. Many teachers (often the same teachers who are lamenting about feeling powerless) are asking for prescribed programs and resources to teach literacy. Sometimes teachers are the authors of their own misfortunes. We can’t have it both ways. I think it comes down to this: we either choose to create opportunities for our students to engage in authentic and relevant reading and writing tasks or we rely on prescribed texts or programs to teach reading and writing skills. I believe the latter has its place in our classrooms, but if that is all we are doing then learning will never cease to be anything other than a means to an end for our students. If we want to empower students then we must empower ourselves and trust in our own abilities to do what is best for them. We must lead by example. “When students of any age see teachers striving to understand and control the situation in their own classrooms, through reading, writing, reflection, discussion, and action, then the power of literacy will indeed be revealed and developed.” (Frank Smith, Overselling Literacy)

Good pedagogy is teaching that is tailored to the individual needs, interests, and learning styles of all students. Currently, the big buzz term for this is Differentiated Instruction. I believe that differentiated instruction is not just about meeting students’ intellectual needs. It is also about addressing their physical, emotional, socio-cultural and spiritual needs as well. This is a very learner-centered approach. It implies that we, as teachers, are not just transmitters of information, but also active participants in the learning process with our students. In turn, students become active participants in their own learning. It places more emphasis on who we teach rather than on what we teach and what we teach also needs to have relevance for our students. If we want them to succeed then we must create an environment where they feel validated and empowered. In my opinion, the way to do this is to give students a voice. We need to relinquish some of our control in the classroom and to stop being the ‘sage on stage’ all the time. We must abandon the transmission view of teaching that still exists in too many of our classrooms and adopt a more critical pedagogy. I like Paolo Freire’s thinking, “Whatever children say becomes the text.” I recently heard David Booth speak and he echoed this sentiment. In his book, Whatever Happened to Language Arts, he suggests that “the children are the text and all other resources are the enrichment.” He goes on to say that “when children are the text, their norms emerge.” What a great way to learn! Begin where the children are and where they come from. This is how we build meaningful relationships with our students; relationships based on trust and hope. My daughter recently shared with me her frustration with her Grade 11 Biology course. She said that in most of the classes the teacher stood at the front of the classroom with an overhead projector. As she lectured, she wrote notes on the overhead and the students spent the entire class copying those notes. There was no inquiry. There was no discovery. There was no talking. There was only copying. To make a long story short, when I spoke to the teacher about my daughter’s struggles in her course, her response was that this was a Grade 11 University Course and how it was taught was determined by the curriculum and the members of the Science department (notice she didn’t say determined ‘by the students’ needs’). Her only justification for teaching in this manner was that she was preparing students for university. In the end, she suggested that perhaps my daughter would be more successful in the college level course. Unfortunately, this way of thinking still plagues too many of our classrooms. Dr. Rick Stiggins said, “We need to be merchants of hope for our students.” Let’s face it. If we believe in them, then they will believe in themselves. It’s so simple, isn’t it?