Module 6: Discussion: Reading Reflection
This discussion was primarily based on the following referenced material:
- McDaniel, C. (2004). Critical literacy: A questioning stance and the possibility for change. The Reading Teacher, 57(5), pp. 472-481.
What was your prior knowledge about "critical literacy" before this week's readings? What does critical literacy mean to you now after having read the articles?
Prior to this week’s reading, I didn’t have any formal insight into critical literacy, though I’ve heard the pushback (without having a name for it) on all of the texts mentioned by Cynthia McDaniel in her Critical Literacy paper. It was a tough read for me because of the pervasive negative lens used throughout the article. McDaniel’s use of quotes around words like “inappropriate,” “sensitive,” “innocence of childhood,” “Dick and Jane world,” felt as if I was reading a literary eye-roll. Her concern was that readers would accept literature on its face value and “’accept’ their exploitation.” She quoted Kohl (1995) in a series of suggested story components that incorporate communities or social groups (not individual heroines), collective action against an abuse of power, and the absence of a happy ending.
I would like to say that my new understanding of critical literacy is that we are active participants in a story, perhaps calling a play-by-play from the sidelines with tongue-in-cheek commentary about “what’s really going on.” I’d like to say that I understand it to be that we think deeply and re-think deeply on text and ask for clarity and compare notes. These are good things. However, IF I was to define it by the way McDaniel presented it in her paper, I would say it was to create anarchy. She nearly says as much by quoting Freire in the solution to liberate “education implemented by the oppressed in which the roles of the teacher and student are redefined-teachers learn and learners teach.” It’s just such a cranky piece, I really can’t help but wonder if there would be a better example our positioning of critical literacy.
In the video by Dr. Allen Luke, a leading scholar in critical literacy, he explains the four resources model. What is this model? How is critical literacy different than simply critiquing the text?
The four resources model presented by Dr. Allen Luke was not a model on how to teach, but an heuristic (mental shortcut). He says, “It’s something that allows you to think through where the emphasis and where the balance of the work of the instruction and the curriculum that you’re engaged in is for each of the individual child[ren] and for cohorts in a particular community.” The goal is to create a conversation around a program without necessarily driving a mandated program, making it more democratic in nature.
My understanding from Cynthia McDaniel’s paper is, beyond evaluating the content and meaning of a text (critiquing), that critical literacy strives to prepare children to become “active citizens in a democracy, who can work toward transformation (Giroux, 1993; Shannon, 1995).
What are the challenges and benefits of enacting critical literacy in your (current or future) teaching context? How would you employ critical literacy pedagogy in your classroom/school/community? How can critical literacy be incorporated into curriculum and instruction in an era of standards-based, high-stakes accountability educational reform? (Refer to the Q&A session at the end of the Dr. Luke videoLinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)
To begin with, I wouldn’t implement critical literacy in any format resembling that which was presented by Cynthia McDaniel. I am aligned with Dr. Luke’s methodology of creating programs using teacher buy-in (and students for that matter), and I am entirely for authentic subject matters, however, in the 10+ years since the two aforementioned resources were created, the activism we have created throughout all ages and stages of our country has not resulted in a happier broader national community nor have our international educational rankings improved. Individuals should all have an equal voice and feel valued and empowered to challenge injustices, however, we need to also teach them to appreciate what is beautiful and exceptional and going well. I will incorporate this into every paper in this program, if necessary, but I strongly believe not everything has to be political.
Reply Eric Wolford
I agree with your remark about making sure that, when teaching students critically, we don't undermine what is beautiful about the world around them. I remember last year when teaching about Africa in our Geography class that I spent a ton of time talking about topics which were, frankly, depressing for students. Whether it be civil war in Sudan, genocides in Rwanda, or slavery, we had a lot of topics that were necessary for students to learn about the continent that were pretty heavy. Thus, I often liked to break up these topics by using resources like "Geography Now," a YouTube channel that dedicates itself to in-depth country-by-country videos about each country of the world. While the host does dive into the heavy topics as well, he also takes a lot of time helping people understand the unique cultural aspects of each country - ranging from food, to music, and even celebrities from these countries. Am I saying we should not take time discussing about heavy topics in school? Absolutely not! However, its just as important to accentuate the positive whenever we can.
Reply Michelle Johansen
Hey Melinda, I chuckled at your description of the McDaniel reading as "cranky." Weirdly enough, I agree that it is quite cranky, and I also wondered about why it was included, especially when the critical race media literacy in superhero movies article was more (in my opinion) interesting, relevant, nuanced, and scholarly. I'm struggling with the use of readings and videos that are a dozen or more years old. I can see having an article that is older because it was groundbreaking when it was first published and then a more recent reading to show how thoughts and perspectives might have changed. I found myself thinking this week, "Isn't there any new scholarly work happening?" I also agree with your desire to teach what is beautiful and joyful. I have to make sure to have a balance when I teach Mississippi history -- there's so much pain, but also so much resistance, resilience, strength, heroism, and love.
Prior to this week’s reading, I didn’t have any formal insight into critical literacy, though I’ve heard the pushback (without having a name for it) on all of the texts mentioned by Cynthia McDaniel in her Critical Literacy paper. It was a tough read for me because of the pervasive negative lens used throughout the article. McDaniel’s use of quotes around words like “inappropriate,” “sensitive,” “innocence of childhood,” “Dick and Jane world,” felt as if I was reading a literary eye-roll. Her concern was that readers would accept literature on its face value and “’accept’ their exploitation.” She quoted Kohl (1995) in a series of suggested story components that incorporate communities or social groups (not individual heroines), collective action against an abuse of power, and the absence of a happy ending.
I would like to say that my new understanding of critical literacy is that we are active participants in a story, perhaps calling a play-by-play from the sidelines with tongue-in-cheek commentary about “what’s really going on.” I’d like to say that I understand it to be that we think deeply and re-think deeply on text and ask for clarity and compare notes. These are good things. However, IF I was to define it by the way McDaniel presented it in her paper, I would say it was to create anarchy. She nearly says as much by quoting Freire in the solution to liberate “education implemented by the oppressed in which the roles of the teacher and student are redefined-teachers learn and learners teach.” It’s just such a cranky piece, I really can’t help but wonder if there would be a better example our positioning of critical literacy.
In the video by Dr. Allen Luke, a leading scholar in critical literacy, he explains the four resources model. What is this model? How is critical literacy different than simply critiquing the text?
The four resources model presented by Dr. Allen Luke was not a model on how to teach, but an heuristic (mental shortcut). He says, “It’s something that allows you to think through where the emphasis and where the balance of the work of the instruction and the curriculum that you’re engaged in is for each of the individual child[ren] and for cohorts in a particular community.” The goal is to create a conversation around a program without necessarily driving a mandated program, making it more democratic in nature.
My understanding from Cynthia McDaniel’s paper is, beyond evaluating the content and meaning of a text (critiquing), that critical literacy strives to prepare children to become “active citizens in a democracy, who can work toward transformation (Giroux, 1993; Shannon, 1995).
What are the challenges and benefits of enacting critical literacy in your (current or future) teaching context? How would you employ critical literacy pedagogy in your classroom/school/community? How can critical literacy be incorporated into curriculum and instruction in an era of standards-based, high-stakes accountability educational reform? (Refer to the Q&A session at the end of the Dr. Luke videoLinks to an external site.Links to an external site..)
To begin with, I wouldn’t implement critical literacy in any format resembling that which was presented by Cynthia McDaniel. I am aligned with Dr. Luke’s methodology of creating programs using teacher buy-in (and students for that matter), and I am entirely for authentic subject matters, however, in the 10+ years since the two aforementioned resources were created, the activism we have created throughout all ages and stages of our country has not resulted in a happier broader national community nor have our international educational rankings improved. Individuals should all have an equal voice and feel valued and empowered to challenge injustices, however, we need to also teach them to appreciate what is beautiful and exceptional and going well. I will incorporate this into every paper in this program, if necessary, but I strongly believe not everything has to be political.
Reply Eric Wolford
I agree with your remark about making sure that, when teaching students critically, we don't undermine what is beautiful about the world around them. I remember last year when teaching about Africa in our Geography class that I spent a ton of time talking about topics which were, frankly, depressing for students. Whether it be civil war in Sudan, genocides in Rwanda, or slavery, we had a lot of topics that were necessary for students to learn about the continent that were pretty heavy. Thus, I often liked to break up these topics by using resources like "Geography Now," a YouTube channel that dedicates itself to in-depth country-by-country videos about each country of the world. While the host does dive into the heavy topics as well, he also takes a lot of time helping people understand the unique cultural aspects of each country - ranging from food, to music, and even celebrities from these countries. Am I saying we should not take time discussing about heavy topics in school? Absolutely not! However, its just as important to accentuate the positive whenever we can.
Reply Michelle Johansen
Hey Melinda, I chuckled at your description of the McDaniel reading as "cranky." Weirdly enough, I agree that it is quite cranky, and I also wondered about why it was included, especially when the critical race media literacy in superhero movies article was more (in my opinion) interesting, relevant, nuanced, and scholarly. I'm struggling with the use of readings and videos that are a dozen or more years old. I can see having an article that is older because it was groundbreaking when it was first published and then a more recent reading to show how thoughts and perspectives might have changed. I found myself thinking this week, "Isn't there any new scholarly work happening?" I also agree with your desire to teach what is beautiful and joyful. I have to make sure to have a balance when I teach Mississippi history -- there's so much pain, but also so much resistance, resilience, strength, heroism, and love.