Workshop Two

Response to Workshop 2

Workshop 2 has been a journey for me. It was a transition from being vaguely aware of the depths of the social issues around literacy, to having a beginning of greater understanding. While reading the articles, I felt as if I was wading through the information, trying desperately to see what it was that I was supposed to see. Immersed in middle class culture- experiences, schools, neighbours, friends- I found myself questioning what the authors had to say. “Was this just an American experience?” I wondered, and “does Canada really have an illiterate underclass?” Naively, I suppose I wanted to believe not. As I considered what I was reading, I began to feel as if I really had no idea about the issues around being critically literate. Reading, talking to my colleagues and workshop discussions has opened my eyes significantly. Considering the readings, the situation seemed pretty bleak. How, with all the social issues, systems of meanings and all the other things at work beyond a teacher’s control, can we make a difference and empower our students? That question especially rang true when reading p.140 in Literacies as Social Practice- “as long as literacy is tied up with the state, the church, and the school, there will be powerful hidden agendas at work”. If educators are successful in teaching all students to be critically literate, is that all that is needed? Will the hidden agendas lose their power?
Recently I was listening to a program called “C’est la Vie” on CBC. It is a program that airs documentaries about French Canadian personalities. During this particular program, a doctor who has worked globally with AIDS patients spoke of the resistance he encountered as he considered medicine as his career. He was encouraged by his family to stay in their community and work in the local industry. His family worried that once he was a doctor he would forget his family and maybe even more importantly his French Canadian culture and where he came from. I made a connection between his experiences and our readings and class discussions about some of the obstacles faced by learners. It also reminded me of how strong family influences can be, along with society- either positive or negative.
So, how do we help these students overcome obstacles and believe in themselves and the power of the written word and their ideas? How do we take the students beyond being naively literate to being critically literate? In my opinion, Rich summarized it best for me. It requires trust between student and teacher. How do we develop trust when students will be reluctant to “make friends with the enemy”? The discussion in class around this was particular interesting for me to think about. It must be extremely difficult for a student to “beat the odds” when you are attending schools that are rundown, crowded, and where teachers and society expect you drop out anyway.
One quote that resonated with me is also from Rich’s Teaching Language in Open Admission “it is a very demanding matter of realistically conceiving the student where he or she is, and at the same time never losing sight of where he or she can be.” I would also add we need to show the students where we believe they can be and the power that they can have when they begin to express their ideas and to look at their world in a different way.