An Excerpt From A Recent Worksample I Constructed Having Taught…

Overall, I am quite pleased with the gain my students made from the pre to the post test scores. The class of students averaged 49% on the pre-test and grew to averaging 85% on the post-test. Every one of my students registered gains. I believe the fact that everyone made gains is indicative of the classroom environment that my students and I created.

Our classroom environment hinged upon three ideas: First, number sense is best developed over increments of time, thus we took our time and stayed with topics that students struggled with until there was either a classroom consensus that we were ready to move forward or assessments that the teacher evaluated proved that students grasped the content. This allowed for more checking for understanding by the teacher and also allowed more partner and group time to converse about mathematics. Furthermore, and just as important, these times allowed the teacher more time to implement differentiated instruction.

We also decided that learning best takes place in an environment that is safe. Safety comes in a variety of forms, but we focused on listening to others, talking in turn, respecting differing opinions without put-downs, and staying within our roles as teacher and students. During more class time than not, students were seemingly autonomous. However, there were specified times when I needed to be allowed to manage the class from the front, having everyone’s attention. There were also times for group discussion, yet I still needed to be allowed to require quiet episodes or regroup students to their seats. My students allowed me this privilege.

Finally, I believe all of my students registered gains because we all agreed to work hard. After the first summative assessment we had a class meeting where we decided as a group on the three ideals that I have mentioned (Attached is an original version where students wrote down our convictions). Among this and a part of working hard was both teacher and students studying, taking notes, and completing the homework. My students came up with what they and I needed to do to better encourage their learning and we all kept our end of the deal.

Following are several graphs and tables indicating whole class pre and post scores, subgroup’s scores, and class averages. Each graph is followed by a brief interpretation of the data. This section offers information analyzed about male versus female learning gains, gains by people group, students who registered the fewest gains and those that registered the most. Graphs and all material reflecting students contain pseudo-initials. No real names or initials are included in this worksample.

• Data on Learning Gains/Related Standards: Data on learning gains resulting from instruction, analyzed for each student, and summarized in relation to students level of knowledge prior to instruction. TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(d) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1

• Interpretation or Explanation of Learning Gains/Related Standards: Interpretation and explanation of the learning gains, or lack thereof TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(e) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 4.1

Here are the pre and post assessment scores for each student. The scatter plot style of graph along with the table allow for a clear view as to the pre and post score as well as the points gained by the individual over the span of the unit. The smallest gain out of all of the students was 5 points from pre to post assessment and both student KS and student GA made those gains. The largest gain was registered by student CW who gained 20 points from pre to post assessment. As a whole, the students averaged a gain of just less than 11 points per student. The class average score gain was 36%, coming from 49% and ending up at 85%. Both the pre and post assessments included a variety of probes as questions, yet they both assessed the same concepts. Each of the assessments allowed students to illustrate their knowledge in a variety of ways: diagrams, written forms, and with mathematical symbols.

There were four students who did not register a passing score; student JC scored a 19≈61%; student MG scored a 20≈64.5%; student FL scored an 18≈58%; and student KS scored a 21≈67%. Though these students did not register a passing score, it is noteworthy to mention that they all made substantial gains. JC made gains of 26%; MG made gains of 39.5%; FL made gains of23%; and KS registered the lowest gains with 16%. It is also noteworthy to note that none of these students met benchmark on their state tests in mathematics last year; subsequently, though they made substantial gains, they had so much ground to make up from their original lack of experience that even substantial gains don’t show up through surface details like test scores. For instance, student MG registered almost a 40% gain, yet did not receive a passing score. The instruction that I differentiated for two of the four of these students worked well: different homework, which often equated to more practice; more one on one time with the teacher throughout the unit conversing about their reasoning than most students; and at times slightly different tasks during activities in class. For the other two, I must find another solution path. Neither 16% nor 23% are gains that I am willing to accept. For future considerations, I will differentiate modes of instruction and assessments.

• Data on Learning Gains/Related Standards: Data on learning gains resulting from instruction, analyzed for each student, and summarized in relation to students level of knowledge prior to instruction. TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(d) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1

• Interpretation or Explanation of Learning Gains/Related Standards: Interpretation and explanation of the learning gains, or lack thereof TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(e) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 4.1

The subgroups outlined above include all the students in the class where I completed my work sample. Each group’s pre and post assessment average score is graphed along with the possible points for each assessment [note: the possible points were 31 for each pre and posttest. There were two extra credit points on each test thus taking the maximum scores up to 33]. Each group showed significant increases in their average with the Latino/a group showing the least gains and the Vietnamese group showing the greatest. Something to note is that the Vietnamese group only consisted of two students. Though this group displayed the highest gains, it may be because it was a measure that calculated only the two students. The African-American group showed significant pre and post scores, but it is also necessary to note that there were only three African-American students in the class. The Latino/a group had the second highest number of students in the class with five. Their numbers averaged the lowest out of each of the groups which may be due to both their previous experience with the mathematics in the unit in addition to representing 1/5 or 20% of the classes students. Because they represented the majority of the class of students, the Caucasian group represents the most likely accurate representation of pre and post assessment gains. This group of students gained 12.14 points for their average test score taking them from a pre assessment average of an F at 49 %, to a post assessment average of a B at 88%.

Since there were no students in my class labeled as English language learners or none on I.E.P.’s, my next and final subgroups are male versus female. I was excited to confirm that scores were almost identical across gender lines. The female pre assessment average score was 15.25, while the male average score was 15.46; the female average post assessment score was 26.37, whereas the male post assessment average score was 26.73. Males reflected a gain of .06 more than the females in my classroom from the pre to the post assessment. Six one-hundredths is not a substantial difference in improvement and lends itself to the notion of fair treatment and individualized instruction.

• Data on Learning Gains/Related Standards: Data on learning gains resulting from instruction, analyzed for each student, and summarized in relation to students level of knowledge prior to instruction. TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(d) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 3.1, 4.1

• Interpretation or Explanation of Learning Gains/Related Standards: Interpretation and explanation of the learning gains, or lack thereof TSPC OAR 584-017-0185(2)(e) GSE Conceptual Framework: 2.1, 2.2, 4.1

Measuring a class of 25 students as a whole, here are the pre and post assessment average scores, along with both the maximum and minimum scores shown graphically and in a table. All 25 students were provided the same pre and post assessments. Students that were absent during the unit were given the homework and any quizzes and/or tests that were covered while they were gone. One on one time was spent before, during, or after school with students who were absent and felt as though they did not understand the material that they missed.

Both the pre and post assessments had a total of 31 points possible with 2 additional bonus points. The bonus points were items that were not covered in the unit, but relate to the material covered in the unit and that students will receive later in the year. The class average was 26.6 which equals out to a B≈85%. A successful 44% scored 28 and above receiving A’s, while 3 of the students receiving A’s scored 1.06%, even getting the two bonus questions correct.

Man…it’s been a minute!

Life has been a serious trip for me as of late. The things that Ihave able to write about don’t appear, to me at least, to be things that most people would find interesting. I’m in grad school, student teaching, and unable to write about the injustices or the justices that I often see. I have been trapped or strapped by a lack of time to express this experience. My time of reflecting has been scrambling trying to write this worksample. The worksample is one the necessary components of grad school  and getting a license to teach. It’s detailed and often hundreds of pages. I will be able to post some of the writing I do for this sample as I will mos def express the discomfort I experience while teaching children that have such a lack of experience with people of color in leadership positions.

Speaking of discomfort I also can’t wait to get the oppression and lack of equity that children of color and lower economic status experience daily…even at a school that touts itself on being inclusive and “progressive”. During this next break, I guess that will be spring break, I’m looking forward to getting some of this out in unique ways. What are you, my folks out in cyberspace, up to? I have had a few quality conversations on my facebbok account, but that’s not the most favorable context to go into deep thought…I don’t know. I guess my point is that I will be back doing my thing on this site shortly!?! I’m also not going to proofread this few paragraphs so there.

Reflections on Sociological Thinking…

According to Sorokin, a sieve is a control that acts as a sifter in society that maintains and regulates social mobility and actually places individuals in society according to her/his “talents”; in fact, sieves “control the process of vertical circulation”. Sieves typically have a direct relationship with standardized tests. Examples of sieves that Sorokin gives are educational institutions, families, churches, government institutions, and the armed services.

The purpose of schooling according to Sorokin is to be a kind of machine for testing the ability of individuals and determining their social position. I imagine that Sorokin must be a Marxist or neo-Marxist because of this stance. Sorokin goes on to say, “At the present moment it is certain that the school, while being a ‘training and educational’ institution, is at the same time, a piece of social machinery, which sifts them, selects them, and decides their prospective social position”. To take this thought a bit further, Sorokin sees educational institutions as vehicles that reproduce existing social inequities. For example, if an individual comes to school from a low-class background, then the school will work to produce a working class individual; furthermore, if a person comes to school from a upper-class background, the school will work to produce an upper-class worker (most likely leader in this case).

Weber describes rational bureaucratic structures as those structures in society that come from the top down, aren’t democratically decided, and are foisted onto society as the “norm” and certainly rational. The stratification of individuals along the basis of educational “certificates” is one of the examples that Weber uses. Structurally, a person is doomed if she/he doesn’t have some type of certification in our society. Of course there are isolated incidents where people do well without some type of certification, but the overwhelming majority of people who have no type of certification, especially a degree, are seen as incapable to do certain jobs and aren’t given a chance to prove themselves. This weeding out and distributing appears rational because of the false notion that people receive what they do in life strictly on a merit-based system. Adults without certificates are seen as those that haven’t worked hard enough or are inherently inferior intellectually. Bureaucratically, it is postulated that people are where they are in life because they worked hard to get there. Unfortunately, these individuals don’t accurately measure the role that circumstances play in life outcomes and economic mobility.

Under capitalism, a supposedly merit-based system, rational bureaucratic structures has as its key characteristics the aforementioned certificates, special or expert examinations, privileged stratum in institutions, and a seemingly rational claim to monopolize socially and economically advantageous positions.

…On Ground Level…

President Barack Obama

Take a moment in an attempt to grasp what all is happening here.

An Aspect of Assimilation in Schools

Something that I wish more researchers, educators, and scholars would study and write about is the socialization and assimilation process that students go through during their “education”. For all students, this is a very difficult time and process. Recently I have spent a bit of time reading and analyzing how many African-American students manage this period of time in their lives. One of the more insightful articles to explicate how language is used by students in the Black community is by Signithia Fordham called, “Dissin’ ‘the Standard’: Ebonics as Guerrilla Warfare at Capital High”. In this article, an aspect of the issues that Black students go through is examined and discussed. Specifically, Fordham extricates “the way in which the speakers’ discourse style convey meaning and both conceal and make manifest a perception of power”. Many academically “successful” African-American students lease “Standard English” during the hours of school and then return to their home language after school is out (code-switching); on the contrary, most academically “unsuccessful” African-American students choose not to lease the mainstream version of English—choosing to use Ebonics (African American Vernacular English (AAVE)) and resist that which has been deemed the “Standard”.

In order to avoid assimilating and succumbing to a discourse and system that they view as oppressive to them, many African-American students choose resistance to the “Standard”. This resistance is perceived as their only means of power and the vehicle to stay true to one’s self. Both “successful” and “unsuccessful” students are navigating through this web of ascribing to dominant culture’s idea of success while attempting to stay true to one’s self and group [1]. There are huge identity issues being contemplated and at stake here. Few of the students that are going through this know, understand, or can begin to intricately articulate this experience. But make no mistake about it, this is real, being experienced in schools and campuses nationwide, and there is not a student that does not have to “choose” allegiance to their people group or “the system”.

What I would like to write about in detail some day is how one can remain connected to the Self, one’s group, and simultaneously do well academically. Because students of color almost exclusively are forced to leave their culture and group identity at the front door of their schools, this entire issue is exacerbated. This should not be happening. Students should be able to go to school to learn and acquire the problem solving skills they need in order to reach success in their eyes while influencing their community in positive ways. Students of color are often preoccupied with finding a middle ground of how to navigate through school and not lose who they are.

Quoting Fordham, I attempt to illustrate how different groups of students cope:

          “…while resistance is the common weapon the high- and underachieving students use in constructing a Black (school) identity, the specific ways they resist do not converge and are noteworthy…the high achievers resistance is manifested as conformity to school rules and practices in order both to achieve academic success and to negate state-supported claims of Black intellectual inferiority…the underachieving students resist the larger society’s claims of Black intellectual deficits through avoidance. Avoidance includes lack of attendance, tardiness, refusing to study or participate in class, disobeying clearly established rules of conduct or behavior, and so on…sadly, the underachievers’ refusal to lease the discourse practices that they view as foreign or hostile to their own identity is influential in marking them for academic and social failure”.

It is sad. These students are trapped—there is no way out. Where are they going to go where their existence is not dominated by mainstream (in this country Anglo) norms, values, curriculums, social systems, etc…? Many of these students would rather fall on their swords as it were, than succumb to being another pawn or puppet in a society that oppresses them. I can not blame them, I just wish I had the platform, along with a plethora of others who are aware of this, to provide vehicles out or through this web of social failure.

What is likely worse is that FEW teachers in this country are aware of this student conundrum. Even many teachers of color, who are also products of this society and Eurocentric teacher education programs, think that children who behave in these manners are just bad kids, disabled from experiencing disjointed homes, and culturally deprived. Educators are oblivious to the fact that this immense struggle is going on in children from elementary through higher education, so they see “bad” behavior and write it off as personal deficiencies. EEERRRG!!! These children are subconsciously asking for help.

---

[1]“…because members of the African American community have been indelibly marked by their ancestors’ enslavement, the descendants of those Americans have incorporated into their cultural practices an organizational structure that celebrates group rather than individual achievement” Signithia Fordham

A short reference list of cultural competence literature

Anyon, J. (1981). Social Class and the Hidden Curriculum of Work. Journal of Education , 67-92.

Applied Research Center. (2001). Racial Profiling and Punishment in U.S. Public Schools: How Zero Tolerance and High Stakes Testing Subvert Academic Excellence and Racial Equity. Oakland: Expose Racism & Advance School Excellence (ERASE) initiative.

Bowditch, C. (1993). Getting Rid of Troublemakers: High School Disciplinary Procedures and the Production of Dropouts. Social Problems, Vol. 40, No.4 , 493-509.

Chunn, E. W. (1990). Sorting Black Students for Failure: The Inequity of Ability Grouping and Tracking. The Journal of Educational Research , 94-106.

Cross, B. E. (2003). Learning or Unlearning Racism: Transfering Teacher Education Curriculum to Classroom Practices. Theory Into Practice , 203-209.

Cross, B. (2004). New racism, reformed teacher education, and the same ole’ oppression. Educational Studies , 263-274.

Delpit, L. (1992). Acquision of Literate Discourse: Bowing before the Master? Theory into Practice, Vol. 31, No. 4, Literacy and the African-American Learner , 296-302.

Delpit, L. (1995). Other People’s Children: Cultural Conflict in the Classroom. New York: The New Press.

Delpit, L., & Dowdy, J. K. (2002). The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom. New York: The New Press.

Delpit, L., & White-Bradley, P. (2003). Educating or Imprisoning the Spirit: Lessons From Ancient Egypt. Theory into Practice, Vol.42, No. 4 , 283-288.

Ernst-Slavit, G., & Slavit, D. (Summer 2007). Educational Reform, Mathematics, & Diverse Learners: Meeting the Needs of All Students. Multicultural Education , 20-27.

Fine, M. (1991). Framing Dropouts: Notes on the Politics of an Urban High School. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Labov, W. (1969). The Logic of Nonstandard English. Twentieth Annual Georgetown Round Table Meeting (pp. 153-189). Washington: Round Table.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, Vol. 34, No. 3 , 159-165.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1992). Liberatory consequences of literacy: A case of culturally relevant instruction for african american students. The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 61, No. 3 , 378-391.

Lewis, A. E. (Winter 2001. Vol. 38, No. 4). There Is No “Race” in the Schoolyard: Color-Blind Ideology in an (Almost) All-White School. American Educational Research Journal , 781-811.

Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2000). Intercultural Communication in Contexts 2nd Edition. Mountain View: Mayfield Publishing Company.

Mayer, G. R. (2001). Antisocial Behavior: Its Causes and Prevention Within Our Schools. Education and Treatment of Children, Vol. 24, No. 4 , 414-429.

Moses, R., & Cobb Jr., C. (2001). radical equations. Boston: Beacon Press.

Pransky, K. (December 2002/January 2003). To meet your students where they are, first you have to find them: Working with culturally and linguistically diverse at-risk students. The Reading Teacher , 370-383.

Thompson, A. (1997). For: Anti-Racist Education. Curriculum Inquiry , 7-44.

Williams-Shealey, M., & Callins, T. (2007). Creating Culturally Responsive Literacy Programs in Inclusive Classrooms. Intervention in School and Clinic, Vol. 42, No. 4 , 195-197.

 

 

Race-Based Affirmative Action…What To Do?

This post came as a result of an article that I read online; I had to make a comment on it, though it was short, I did. Here’s the link if you desire to read what I thought was a slippery piece of information:

http://www.oregonlive.com/news/oregonian/susan_nielsen/index.ssf/2008/11/whats_next_for_affirmative_act.html#comments

This is an extremely delicate issue. I do have a few questions I would pose to those that are against race-based affirmative action (AA). First, have you who oppose this type of AA done any substantive research on its purpose? Are you under the assumption that the “playing field” today is equal? If the field is equal today, can you point out either the event that caused this or at least a period of time that created this equality?

I’m convinced that often people forget that for approximately 246 years European Americans were as a group able to become educated, fill prominent leadership roles, acquire economic wealth, and spend their families all throughout the US. During this time, Blacks in particular, were enslaved and it was illegal to learn, illegal to buy property, illegal to run for any office—let alone actually fulfill leadership roles. Of course the list goes on. My point is that European Americans have had a substantial “head start” as it were—246 years! Have the last 40 years of lackluster AA reversed that?

By no means is AA a perfect remedy—it has faults—people that shouldn’t receive it do at times. When implemented correctly it fulfills what it was designed to do—make life more equitable! I doubt that there is a perfect remedy for such a horrific institution (slavery), but AA is the best thing that we have for the time being.

I’m taken back by those that with a straight face can say that life is equal as far as opportunities are concerned. I honestly don’t know what to say to you. But if we were to hypothetically say that things were equal (I’m certainly not conceding to that), would that necessitate doing away with race-based AA? Simply because we hypothetically have equal opportunities doesn’t mean that things are equitable (the point of AA along with diversifying various roles and positions). If you and I take off running around a track at the same time, we have an equal opportunity to finish at the same time; however, if you get a 246 yard head start, it isn’t equitable nor is it realistic for me to catch up with no assistance.

Lastly, one comment said something analogous to Whites being minorities in 2030, and what would those (who are White) that propose AA think then. Again, let’s say that in 2030 Whites are demographically minorities…this won’t carry over to positions of power…nor will it carry over into ownership…nor will it carry over into economic status. Those that are actually running the country (and everything else for that matter) will still look like you—don’t worry your little head.

If you are truly interested in continuing a respectable conversation on this topic, post a comment on my blog:

matthewross35.wordpress.com

An intriguing path of a math teacher

 

Mathography

 

          Something that I have recently realized is that I remember very little of my school educational experience before middle school. For instance, I don’t remember when I learned to read, write, or do math. I remember being “good” at doing these activities or exercises, but I have an extremely vague memory of when I learned them. Perhaps this is partly due to elementary school settings where “subjects” are not separated out like they often are later in school; in addition, I imagine this is also partly due to the fact that my parents were not afforded the most favorable education and subsequently I was not provided with a strong foundation. I don’t recall being read to at home as a child. I assume that math games and the like were not likely a part of my experience either. I have never had to recall much of this thus it is difficult for me to stop writing about it. At any rate, I remember from middle school on.

          Both my elementary and middle schools had students whose parents were overwhelmingly working-class. Seldom do I remember having classmates whose parents owned anything besides their homes and they typically worked jobs similar to my parents. Considering the teaching styles I encountered, I vividly remember coming to class and having many things written on the board so that my classmates and I could copy them in a journal. I was typically taught mechanical, rote memorization type of skills. It would be hard to say that we were being trained to be creative, express our thoughts on life, or lead the country through decision making. We were being trained to follow rules. In the 7^th grade much of this began to change.

          Though the name of my 7^th grade math teacher eludes me, I do remember that I made substantial progress in her class. She was encouraging and called on me often in class. This was the first time I recall being made to feel that I was a part of a mathematics class. In this and my 8^th grade class I remember doing lots of work using deductive reasoning. We worked on lots of word problems that were logic problems. I saw that many of my classmates had trouble with these problems because they had trouble decoding what the problem was asking. I excelled at this decoding/translating exercise and began to look forward to math class so that I could contribute. One type of problem that she would give involved a story problem that gave clues as to who in the story did certain things. The point was to enhance students’ deductive reasoning; I thoroughly enjoyed those and still do.

          In the 8^th grade I encountered Ken Wanderer. He became my math teacher and seeing my potential met with my parents to discuss ways to supplement my shaky background. [To digress for a moment, I often think about where I could have been were the education system equitable. This sobering thought motivates me to be the best, most well-rounded and equitable, mathematics teacher possible.] I began to play chess, I often took extra work home for homework, and I eventually entered a program in high school that had an emphasis on conceptually understanding and learning of mathematics. I made huge improvements during this period of my life; unfortunately, most of the improvements came through worksheets that focused on following rules and doing certain procedures.

          My high school experience began with my entering the Institute for Science and Mathematics (ISM) program. A good friend of Ken Wanderer, Fred Rectanus, was the director of this program and I happened to go to the high school that offered this trial program. The focus of this program was on cooperative conceptual discovery, in “real-world” contexts. It took me a while to warm up to this program because I had become accustomed to math being learning skills only. In this program the focus was more on process and deeper understanding. Once I understood (so I thought) the idea I began to enjoy the set up and progressed. Algebra became my strongest strand and perhaps geometry my weakest; this is likely due to my many experiences with various aspects of algebra and the amount of time we typically spent on algebra versus geometry.[I wonder do most schools and math departments spend more time on certain strands and why?] By the end of my sophomore year the school lost funding for the program and my last two years of school I went back into a traditional classroom setting. This did a lot of damage to my growth. I had the transition period to go back through and did not enjoy the teaching style of my teacher.

          As a freshman I joined both the symphonic and marching bands. Contrary to what I thought at the time, I used a great deal of math and mathematical thinking in band. Rhythm takes an abundance of mathematical thinking to maintain. I have always been musically inclined and as a freshman I was first-chair percussionist. Reading music involves counting, visualizing, and physically acting in a manner in accordance to a beat. This is not the easiest act to master. What is even more difficult and that takes more mathematical thinking is improvising. While I enjoyed reading music and coming in at the prescribed time, the art of improvising was always much more complicated.

          I also played in the jazz band during this time where I played the drum set. There is written music to playing the drum set but I never used it. I became adept at playing the correct beats at the correct time during a desired point in the piece. I’m not sure I can explain the complexities involved in doing this; I’ve not met or heard of anyone who can teach this art. This is something that people just learn or don’t. I think of improvising as mental geometry. People don’t often think of music and math having such a connection but for me, culturally speaking, there was always a major connection. When I look back through my life I can see so many instances where I have always been involved in things that progressed my mathematical thinking.

          My last high school teacher, who I recently found out retired, gave me some very discouraging news one day as I went to him for help after school. I vividly remember making a meeting with him to get help; went to meet him; and left feeling like I never wanted to return to his class. After attempting to “tell” me how to do the math I was inquiring about two or three times, he put his hand on my shoulder and told me that math just was not for me. I was too young to know how to respond to this adult/leader dismissing my ability so I just took it. I internalized it. I eventually dropped out of school, but this would not be the end of me.

          In retrospect, this discouraging “educator” would have done well to show me how to do the math I was inquiring about. If it was me, I would have shown the student any number of ways of doing and understanding the problem. When I read the literature that multiple representations are necessary, I have a unique perspective as to why this is so necessary. Telling students in the same manner when they are not grasping a concept does little besides frustrate and discourage. Show how to do mathematics and show various ways of doing and illustrating.

More of my story….

Literacy Autobiography

 

          One of the most shocking realizations that I have come to in the last year is that I have no recollection of ever being read to as a child by my parents or siblings. I imagine that I was likely read to here and there, but it was apparently so infrequent that I have no memory of it. My parents, who were always highly involved in my education, were never read to as children and were not fluent readers by the time they had me. They were both born in the 1940s in a section of the country that did not afford them a quality education; matter of fact, neither of them were able to go to school the entire school year for most of their educations. They typically went to school for half of the year and tilled cash crops and cotton for the rest. This was not an option, but a way of life. This starts my experience with literacy.

Similar to how they were socialized and a part of their culture, my parents most often taught me through either direct instruction or hands on learning. I remember being taught through my parents and siblings telling me how things were and then when applicable they would show me and let me further learn by doing. Seldom did I learn things by reading about them. Storytelling was big in my family as was showing; “now you do it” was a phrase that I heard often growing up. I have learned that there are many aspects and discourses to literacy. Through direct instruction, inference, and kinesthetic learning I was taught many discourses as a child. I will attempt to explicate a few of these as I explain my evolution through literacy.

          During my elementary years I became a decent reader. I measure this against my surroundings as in class we were often asked to read aloud. I remember being pressured into acquiring the skills to avoid sounding illiterate. I must have read every day during these years yet I do not recall reading at home. It was well into middle school until I remember reading my first book from cover to cover. My school socialization (in the form of enunciation of words) must have been recognizably good because I recall going to Arkansas to visit relatives and being teased for sounding “proper.” This sounding proper was a soft way of saying that I was “talking White.” I knew this from inference as did everyone else that was in the vicinity. I then used one of the literacy skills I had acquired, learning by watching and then doing, to adapt my dialect to fit into this environment.

          By the time I started middle school, I had begun to enjoy writing essays and things that involved expressing my thoughts. I began to get praise from my teachers for my ability to communicate on paper and for my legible handwriting. This praise prompted me to continue writing and make attempts to improve. I also bought my first dictionary during these years and can vividly remember studying words throughout it to improve my ability to communicate. I know that I read my first book cover to cover while in middle school, but I do not remember what the name of the book was. During my eighth grade year I read more books cover to cover than any other time period in my life to date. I noticed and was enticed by what this reading did for my ability to communicate; it provided me with a more vast vocabulary to verbally express myself and more advanced sentence structure.

          While in middle school I also learned how to become a good listener. It must have been the beginning of my seventh grade year when I realized that I had a crush on Jamie Winters. Our communication, primarily over the phone, solidified the idea that men were often awful listeners and attempted to provide insight at times when they should simply be listening. I vowed to myself that I would never be considered a poor listener. My ability to listen grew from listening to women in relationships to more attentive listening in the classroom. I became an avid note taker as a result of this. Reading more often, writing in more detail, attentive listening, and my improved note taking skills all came together to dramatically improve my literacy skills.

          High school marked the time when I learned that there were discourses of literacy. In other words, there are certain arenas and environments where specific types of literacy are expected to be used and others are not; for example, using the MLA writing format for certain writing and APA for others. Another example is the terminology used in a doctor’s office versus that used by a warehouse crew in their respective occupations. Some discourses use the same words that others do yet mean slightly different things when using them. Words mean different things in different contexts. Other times certain discourses are unaccepted and frowned upon in certain contexts.

          Upon my arrival to high school it became very apparent to me that my home discourse, ways of communicating (e.g. talking, posturing, and/or dressing), was most often unacceptable. Though for success in U.S. society this was a necessary literacy skill for me to acquire, it was harsh in that it showed me that parts of my person, not just things I was doing, were unacceptable. By this time I had learned and was using a plethora of words, teachers would “correct” my home language (Ebonics/A.A.V.E.) by telling me that I was pronouncing words wrong. In fact it was not the wrong way to pronounce words, but another way of pronouncing and using words. I wish my teachers would have said, “Let me show you another way of communicating or using this word.” Condemning that which is personal, cultural, and familial to me was disheartening at best. Yet and still, there were some benefits to this experience.

          Reading different discourses was and has been important in allowing my opportunities for success to flourish. For example, knowing when it is safe to talk in my native dialect versus when it could cost me social respect or even a job has come in extremely handy. This type of literacy, discourse literacy, has many cultural implications, and I think should be expanded upon in teacher education programs. It would be nice to see this incorporated into literacy teaching and not relegated to a chapter in an isolated course on “Urban Education.” The isolation of such courses is interesting in that it apparently assumes that urban education is somehow separate from regular education and subjects like math, science, and history. Just as literacy is taught throughout all subjects, so should the urban education experience.

          As an adult, I have really flourished as a reader, yet I still read few entire books. I am a self proclaimed article specialist. I am a tenacious reader. I read academic articles on 10 minute breaks at work, on my lunch breaks (for lunch at times), between classes, early in the morning, late at night, whenever I get a few minutes. Seldom do I read things that I am not passionate about. I imagine that I should read things for “fun”, but my fun reading includes my passions in life which are primarily academic in nature. Most of these passions also have an effect on my life as a teacher.

As a teacher, I believe my literacy skills and proclivity for literacy learning should be a huge benefit. Being able to relate and build meaningful relationships with students is primary to reaching all students. Being bicultural, which includes a component of literacy, is a major asset in understanding where many students are coming from, as a result of my education, I also know academically where they are going. This allows me to have a unique lens to see the possible pit falls and necessary courses of action to facilitate their learning. Knowing how important the reciprocal relationship that reading and writing have and their impact on one’s ability to communicate effectively also plays a substantive role in shaping my literacy pedagogy. Literacy crosses all subjects, and all students should have as many in-roads to these subjects through literacy as they can possibly manage. This is my wonderful and challenging honor as an educator.

An intriguing piece of a lesson plan I’m constructing…

Necessary Background Information: Students will find that the U.S. Department of Agriculture has calculated that one-third of a family’s total income could be set aside for food. This led to the original poverty line at $3000 in 1963. This and other information surrounding this activity lends itself easily to fraction, decimal, and percentage manipulation, and is appropriate for context-based comparisons. The underlying questions, is this poverty line assumption fair; is it realistic to assume families can survive on a healthy diet with this government mandated establishment; is expecting that a family living at the poverty line will be able to budget one-third of their income to food reasonable? These questions drive this lesson.

Students will find that today’s poverty line is just under $17,000 per year. From this students will be prompted to find the weekly income given this figure. Then they will be asked to determine whether a family of three can maintain a nutritious diet without exceeding this budget. Ironically, students will find that this is in fact possible. Consequently, students will be asked to look beyond food expenses and calculate housing, transportation, and utility bills. Given their (17,000) income, students will be provided four housing options from which they may choose. They will finally be guided to consider the combined cost of public transportation and three additional essential housing expenses of their choice. After completing a monthly table where they will be asked to demonstrate equivalent equal parts of a whole, decimals, and percentages, students will be prompted to write a detailed reflection of their analysis of the current poverty line.

Students will likely assume that those who live at the poverty line are minimum wage earners. As students divide the annual poverty line income by the federal hourly wage they will find that the federal poverty line income for a mother and two children equates to the mother working roughly 60 hours per week. This is of course unrealistic and will likely motivate students into a rich discussion about fairness. While a full-time minimum wage earner could adequately support a family of three in 1963, today this simply isn’t realistic. An ending question might be to ask students whether a minimum wage earner could ever get out of poverty.

There are plenty of places throughout this lesson to stop and ask students to demonstrate their number sense, graph their comparisons, explain what they are finding, and write equivalent fractions. This lesson lends itself to a realistic research of life circumstances and can give students a well grounded experience into the lives of many Americans. Middle school students are at a developmental stage where they begin to ask questions about social justice. Learning mathematics in the midst of this context is very logical and engaging.

A work in progress on past and present learning theories

          Behaviorism is one of the theories that have remained popular since its inception. This theory came out of the notion that humans were biologically continuous with the animal Kingdom (Phillips & Soltis, 2004, p.21). The focus in behaviorism isn’t how new knowledge is acquired but how new behaviors are acquired. Simply put, behaviors are learned through conditioning. Learners are conditioned by an outside stimulus that causes a reflex action that is innate in individuals. The role of the student is biologically built in as a passive reactionist where the teacher finds a stimulus or reward that can be used to produce a conditioned response.

          After Thorndike there was B.F. Skinner who expanded on the work on both Pavlov and Thorndike. All in all, there are many similarities between these behaviorists: they postulate that a single mechanism, conditioning, is responsible for producing learning, and furthermore, this mechanism operates throughout the entire animal kingdom (Phillips & Soltis, 2004, p. 29). Though there are relatively obvious problems with these theories, they do have some validity to them in that students can be encouraged to participate in behavior seen as becoming as a result of specific stimuli; in other words, motivation and interest can be generated.

          Social Learning is another strand of learning theories that encompass many theorists. Pioneers like Lev Vygotsky, John Dewey, and Albert Bandura have popularized this theory into one of the major influences on modern education. Generalizing these theorists, there are four major themes that they espouse as that which makes learning possible: social interactions is the most obvious, followed by activity being done by the learner (learner not passive in learning), another is memorization and practice with others that is tied to language, and finally the idea that there is some problem to be solved by the individual or group. These ideas interrelate at some point and all feed off of one another.

          The teacher and the student have separate but similar roles. The teacher is to engage the learner and facilitate learning in an environment that is relevant to the learner, stretching the previous knowledge of the learner with new knowledge; in fact, the teacher is an active agent orchestrating circumstances of motivation and relevance. The student on the other hand is also active in her/ his learning process but in another way. The student is interacting with other students on a similar path, some more and some less advanced. The student may be modeling or mimicking behavior or problem solving a meaningful situation, either way they would be in a social setting and relating to their environment.

          The theoretical usefulness for educators with this theory is that the problem solver is in a place to learn about his or her action and its consequences (whether good or bad). The fact that the content of their learning is couched in a context that is relevant to them affords them the opportunity to notice how helpful or not helpful his or her actions are. Pointless or non relevant problems don’t always lend themselves to being helpful in meaningful contexts. Learning from others is also highly beneficial because of the nature of commerce and economy. It is paramount that all U.S. citizens be pliable enough to work with well people, including learning from them. As an educator, I believe that is something that we should aim at encouraging.

          As an educator in an educational system that consistently continues to have trouble providing an equitable education to the same groups of students, I see myself among other things as a liberator. Though I desire to see all students excel and be pushed to their full potential, I am especially sensitive to those groups of students who have consistently made up the bottom of the achievement gap since the achievement gap has been measured many decades ago. What I mean by being sensitive to the groups of students who have made up the bottom is that my focus in my “free” time is to go in depth to find the reasons why this gap exists and explore how to avoid this happening in my classroom. This may entail my treating students different according to their strengths and weaknesses, or as a result of their personal culture, but it doesn’t entail my having low-expectations and goals for any student, regardless of their ethnic or racial background. My motivation and desire is that my classroom be equitable—that all students reach their potential. 

  

In addition to the aforementioned theories, the theories that most represent my personal pedagogy are critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy. These are extremely similar except critical pedagogy focuses on individual empowerment and culturally relevant pedagogy focuses on group or “collective” empowerment (Gay, 2000; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Wink, 2005). At the heart of each of these theories is the notion of being equipped with the tools that it takes to be successful in a given system while simultaneously being empowered to change that system. Students taught with this premise should leave school with the ability to grow in understanding and respect for their culture and those of others. As Gloria Ladson-Billings in The Skin That We Speak asserts:

           “Rather than experiencing the alienating effects of education where school-based learning detaches students from their home culture [culturally relevant pedagogy]…is a way for students to be bicultural and facile in the ability to move between school and home cultures…it is designed to help students ask larger socio-political questions about…ongoing inequity and social injustice. If students do not begin to ask these questions, they are likely to reiterate positions that suggest that the reason people are unsuccessful in school is that they do not try hard enough. Culturally relevant teaching is designed to help students move past a blaming the victim mentality and search for the structural and symbolic foundations of inequity and injustice”. (Delpit & Dowdy, 2002, p.111)

From the inception of tracking student achievement the same groups have pulled up the rear; consequently, the same groups have consistently been out front. During this same period there has been an abundance of school reforms, none of which has substantially changed the achievement of poor children and the achievement of students of color. What critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy affirm is that these students are alienated in our current school systems, having to leave their culture and thus a part of them at the school door upon arrival. This isn’t working.

The blame the victim notion that points to behavior, home circumstances, IQ, cultural deficiency, genetics and the sort, has brought about plenty of reform that has done little more than divert attention from the real issues. The forced assimilation that schools postulate onto students assuages citizens, even at times those who are being oppressed, to believe that the problem is in individuals instead of systems and structures that privilege middle and upper-class whites (Gay, 2000). The notion of success that schools typically espouse does not include Mexican, African, Native, or some Asian American cultural traits or languages. This leaves students with the difficult task of deciding to divorce their culture and attain “success” or embrace their culture and struggle emotionally and academically.

Specifically, culturally relevant pedagogy rests upon three criteria:

 (1) Students must experience academic success

(2) Students must develop and/or maintain cultural competence

(3) Students must develop a critical consciousness through which they challenge the status quo of the current social order (Ladson-Billings, 1995)

          Instead of simply building off of that which is “normal” to middle-class students, culturally relevant pedagogy incorporates that which is culturally pertinent to “other” students as well. Simply stated, this is good teaching. Building on meaningful previous student knowledge is at the heart of the most recent research on student engagement. In another thought provoking article, Gloria Ladson-Billings (1992), speaking of culturally relevant teachers, clarifies this notion by stating:

           “…they come to participate in a reciprocal relationship with students in which they use their professional knowledge and skills to help students academically, socially, and culturally. In turn, the students can use their cultural and community knowledge to help their teachers more fully integrate into the students’ worlds. The teacher…comes to believe that she or he can learn from students as well as teach them”. (Ladson-Billings, 1992)

Culturally relevant pedagogy purports the ideal situation; as Nel Noddings says, educating the whole child (Noddings, 2005). Critical pedagogy also endorses this notion of the learning process between teachers and students being reciprocal and fluid (Wink, 2005). The painstaking question yet remains to be, why aren’t education programs implementing true culturally competent or culturally relevant teaching? Might it be that education administrators and many teacher educators are not laden with this knowledge and experience of cultural competence themselves? After all, one cannot teach what one does not know.

In light of these two theories, it seems to be a sham to relegate diversity and multicultural education to a course, workshop, or module that students must complete for certification (Cross, 2004). Can one truly become culturally competent through an “observation” or a “course” on diversity? Who are we kidding? Furthermore, what type of assessment is being done to assure that teachers leave this hoop-jumping with any substantive competence? Are education administrators and teacher educators teaching teachers with no assessment? If a k-12 teacher taught a course or unit without any assessment, formative or summative, they would be labeled neglectful at best or more likely incompetent. If this is the state of education leadership, is there any wonder why the achievement gap still persists? Teacher education programs and education reform need to incorporate meaningful relationships for future teachers with students other than those of their personal culture; in addition, future teachers need to foster relationships with teachers of diverse populations who have been noticed as exemplary. The observation model that is presently in place in most teacher preparation programs is sorely inadequate. As Martin Haberman eloquently states: “completing a traditional program of teacher education as preparation for working in today’s urban classroom is like preparing to swim the English Channel by doing laps in the university pool” (Haberman, 1995).

          As an educator, how might I apply the lofty goals and aspirations of critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy? My first challenge as an educator having become proficient in my content knowledge is to change the context of the content that I plan to teach. Ideally, the context of the content that one teaches should represent the culture of one’s students. For instance, if I am teaching a math class where the students are predominately African American, much of the content, particularly projects and word problems, will be couched in African American culture. The other personal cultures of the students in the class will also be recognized and education will be inserted into their cultures. This isn’t to say that students won’t learn dominant cultural traits and nuances as well; in fact, it is vital that all students learn dominant discourses so as to be prepared to function in a society that by and large functions on the principles of the dominant culture (Wink, 2005). The difference being that dominant culture will be viewed as an addition rather than students’ home culture being left out or seen as deficient which is typical of traditional classrooms (Cross, 2004).

          Lastly, the notion of high academic achievement will be a staple of my classroom. When students see school as a place of inclusion and cultivation instead of exclusion and deprivation, teachers can make substantial progress in their students’ academic achievement. Many of the issues that keep students from being successful academically (e.g. behavior, delinquency, disengagement, lack of confidence, being pushed out) begin to go away as students see school as a place that is adding to who they are instead of subtracting from who they are or trying to change them in some undesirable way. Having high expectations for all students is a major piece of attaining high academic achievement, but in order to truly have high expectations teachers must be culturally competent. Much of the misunderstandings, misinterpretations, and stereotypes that teachers have for low achieving students are purely cultural. Critical pedagogy and culturally relevant pedagogy quell this issue along with a plethora of others that students of color and low income students face on a daily basis in traditional classrooms.

Bibliography

Cross, B. (2004). New racism, reformed teacher education, and the same ole’ oppression. Educational Studies , 263-274.

Delpit, L., & Dowdy, J. K. (2002). The skin that we speak: Thoughts on language and culture in the classroom. New York: The New Press.

Gay, G. (2000). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Haberman, M.  (1995). Star teachers of children in poverty. West Lafayette, IN: Kappa Delta Pi

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory into Practice, Vol. 34, No. 3 , 159-165.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1992). Liberatory consequences of literacy: A case of culturally relevant instruction for african american students. The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 61, No. 3 , 378-391.

Noddings, N. (2005). What does it mean to educate the whole child? Educational Leadership , 8-13.

Phillips, D. C. & Soltis, J.F. (2004). Perspectives on learning, 4th Ed. New York: Teachers College Press.

Wink, J. (2005). Critical pedagogy: Notes from the real world, 3rd Ed. Boston: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.