Philosophy of Literacy Instruction

Philosophy of Literacy Instruction

My students are more than statistics and sob stories, but their struggles with education are real and indicate a systemic issue in the United States. My kids are clever and smart, playing with rhyme and metaphor verbally. However, when given a paragraph to read or asked to write, they falter. Lorenzo explains the injustice of the Dakota Access Pipeline (DAPL) one moment, but is unable to sound out multisyllabic words the next. I owe him, we all owe him, the ability to read and comprehend at grade level so he can continue to grow as a lifelong learner. With millions of Lorenzos in the U.S., it is undeniable that liberation from oppressive systems is essential in providing high quality literacy instruction. Additionally, literacy instruction needs to be grounded in culturally responsive, authentic literacy tasks.

Figure 1. A comic illustrating the difference between equality, equity, and liberation. Work towards equality and equity still leaves a barrier (the fence) preventing oppressed populations from experiencing success. “The 4th Box.” From Sowden (2019) “Equity vs. Equality vs. Liberation: First Steps Toward Inclusive Classroom Discussions” Retrieved from blogs.tip.duke.edu.

Equity and Liberation

Teaching is a political act and requires educators to actively work against oppression. Without considering the history of literacy instruction, teachers may unknowingly continue traditions that alienate students. Equity, as demonstrated in the image above, is providing resources and scaffolds to give access to disenfranchised persons. To achieve liberation, a world free from barriers and inequality, we must all work together. Educators and the education system should be striving to end centuries-long oppressive practices, while providing equitable systems.

Unfortunately, we cannot break down the existing system and rebuild it overnight. Instead, we can work to undermine the system while providing students with resources within the existing framework. Muhammed (2019) wrote the way to engage students in liberation is through using methods created by the disenfranchised. Lacking equal access to formal education, Muhammed (2019) wrote African Americans worked together in study groups in previous decades to share knowledge. After reading through their work, she developed the Historically Responsive Literacy Framework, a four-layer approach to integrate equity into existing systems to empower students. Using this literacy framework, students embrace and celebrate their identities by learning who they are as individuals. Muhammed (2019) recommended using multiple genres to read and discuss, as well as provide a wide variety of authentic writing tasks to engage students. Using this system allows students an opportunity to engage in literacy instruction within the confines of our current system.

Engaging in a practice like the Historically Responsive Literacy Framework, while being ever mindful of the disparities in our education system, teachers can elevate students while actively dismantling a broken system. Our work as teachers will not be done until we have removed the barriers keeping students from reaching their full potential.

Cultural Responsiveness

Spring (2018) wrote the school system in the United States has strategically disenfranchised immigrants, children of color, and students with disabilities since its inception. Schools are not reaching all students by design. Students of color “learn quickly that they are expected to divorce themselves from their culture in order to be academically successful” (Emdin, 2016, p. 13). Acknowledging the harm of current educational practices, Emdin (2016) wrote students receive“soul wounds” from “teaching practices inflict[ed] upon them” (p. 27).

One way to combat a system working against students is to meet students where they are at and provide instruction that resonates with their identities. Hollie (2012) explained teachers can use Culturally and Linguistically Responsive (CLR) practices to help marginalized students engage in instruction. CLR is the process of responding to student needs by providing instruction that embraces student difference instead of trying to make students conform to a eurocentric standard. He wrote CLR “responds to students’ needs by taking into account cultural and linguistic factors in their worlds” (Hollie, 2012, p. 23).

Emdin (2016) made similar recommendations, stating teachers should “not teach directly to the assessment or to the curriculum, but to teach directly to the students” (p. 40). He recommended the same best practices offered by Malloy, Marinak, and Gambrell (2019): give students opportunities to actively participate, respond to student needs, provide students with choice and relevant work, and give students real-world problems and projects.

CLR echoes the work of Freire (2001), who explained the school system uses a banking method of education. Students should instead be co-creators of knowledge, which leads to the importance of utilizing constructivism in the classroom.

Authentic Literacy Instruction

In the classroom, we all create knowledge together. The most effective way to provide literacy instruction is to give students opportunities to be in control of their learning. Constructivism recognizes our individual abilities as learners and guides students as they build on their current knowledge. A constructivist learning environment should allow for the following: student voice and choice in content and discussion, opportunities to challenge other students and instructors, real-world problems and meaningful content, and recognition that there is not always one correct answer. Emdin (2016) labeled this Reality Pedagogy, which “positions the student as the expert in his or her own teaching and learning” (p. 27).

Constructivism allows students to engage in dialogue. Dialogic teaching practices, as opposed to monologic ones, give students opportunities to be in charge of the discussion and give them opportunities to change their thinking. Beers and Probst (2016) explained dialogic practices increase student engagement and learning. This process gives students a chance to think critically about themselves as learners and identify what they need from teachers and each other.

Madda, Griffo, Pearson, and Raphael (2019) wrote “authenticity has been identified as important to students’ literacy learning and motivation” (p. 39). Authentic instruction “should map the purposes for which we, as a society, use literacy: to communicate, to learn, and to enjoy” (p. 40). The most powerful thing we can do for students is allow them to share their voice in a meaningful way.

It Comes From the Heart

Teaching is more than content delivery; it is a nuanced practice that is never perfected. As teachers, we need to improve our practices and be better for our students. If we are going to truly reach every student, we need to first recognize the opportunity gaps and work to eliminate them. We can start this work by infusing empowerment into our literacy instruction. Through reading, students should learn more about who they are and what they want. They should read texts that resonate with them. They should engage in authentic work. They should be co-creators of their learning.

I will not be able to eliminate the countless barriers my students have, but I can give them the ability to read voraciously, write clearly, and think critically. I can empower them to recognize their own strengths and utilize them to tear down a system that is not working for them.

References

Beers, K. and Probst, B. (2016). Reading nonfiction: Notice and Note Signposts. Heinemann.

Emdin, C. (2016). For white folks who teach in the hood…and the rest of y’all too: Reality

Pedagogy and Urban Education. Beacon Press.

Freire, P. (2001) Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

Hollie, S. (2012). Culturally and linguistically responsive teaching and learning: Classroom

practices for student success. Shell Education.

Madda, C. L., Griffo, V. G., Pearson, P. D., and Raphael, T. E. (2019). Current issues and best

practices in literacy instruction. In L. Mandel Morrow & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Best

Practices in Literacy Instruction (pp. 27-51). Guilford Press.

Muhammed, G. (2019) Cultivating genius: An equity framework for culturally and historically

responsive literacy. Scholastic.

Malloy, J.A., Marinak, B.A., and Gambrell, L.B. (2019). Evidence-based practices for

developing literate communities. In L. Mandel Morrow & L. B. Gambrell (Eds.), Best

Practices in Literacy Instruction (pp. 3-26). Guilford Press.

Spring, J. (2018). American education (18th edition). Taylor & Francis.

The 4th Box. Center for Story-Based Strategy. Sowden (2019) “Equity vs. Equality vs.

Liberation: First Steps Toward Inclusive Classroom Discussions” Retrieved from

blogs.tip.duke.edu.