Post #11 – Lit. Bingo!

After roaming around campus in search of concepts that appeared in our readings, my group and I discovered several literacy concepts hidden around Cal. The first one we discovered was “A Social Justice organization in Berkeley.” This one came really quickly to us because we all agreed that UC Berkeley Boalt School of Law was one massive institution for social justice in policy reform. Next we also uncovered the bingo selection that reads “3 Examples of Non- English languages in the linguistic landscape AT CAL.” To find this we ventured of into the Free Speech Café. There we found several newspapers with the titles in different languages. Also, we found that ornamental obelisks and Sather Gate had writing in Latin. Thereafter we also checked in the box that reads “A compelling example of working in the ZPD at one of your group members mentoring sites.” One of my group members mentioned that she worked with a student at St. Martins on a math assignment. She mentioned that as a tutor she helped the student figure out a long math problem. She helped the student by explaining step by step as they went along. However, when my group member mentioned that she stopped and let the student try to figure the problem out, the student struggled.

Thereafter we also marked “An extreme example of the narrative character of teachers student relation in your experience.” I provided my example from middle school. When I was in the 8^th grade I remember having a teacher that would only read to us from the text book. She rarely allowed the students to talk about the material or even work in groups. I remember that she would simply read us a paragraph form the book and then make us work on a worksheet that was related to the paragraph she wrote. I remember that I dreaded that class, but fortunately that class only lasted one hour a day. Finally the last one me and my group check was “An example of literary in theatrical performance form a mentoring experience.” One of the group members shared that literacy and performance are deeply intertwined. She said that many students that perform must memorize certain lines in a play. Through this constant reading and rehearsing is where many students get the most exposure to literacy. My group member mentioned that the students may at times also remember poems by heart first by reading the piece then by practicing it over and over again.

Through this experience I discovered several hidden forms of literacy. I also discovered that there were many different ways of acquiring information, such as “banking” “performing” “scaffolding” and “narration.” Overall, this assignment opened my eyes to the world of literacy I hadn’t noticed before.

Post # 10 - Conventional vs. New methods of multimodal literacy

What is the future of the five-paragraph essay in a multimodal future? And if ‘performance’ in dance and filmmaking (to take a few examples) is to assume a place alongside ‘performance’ on a written exam, how should performance be assessed?

I think the five-paragraph essay will remain only because it has been a traditional method of argument and expository writing for so long. However, I also believe that the dance and film portions of performance will slowly be integrated into the traditional classroom curriculum. I think these types of multimodal literacy are beneficial because they force the students to “think outside the box” or in ways that challenge the norm. The benefits of assimilating such performances into the conventional styles of teaching broaden the spectrum of what people can use as a medium of expression. Teachers can use both the traditional style of teaching such as the five paragraph essay along with a newer form of assessment, for instance a film or piece of art. Through this, i feel the student will be able to achieve a mastery of several spectrums. The only difficulty lies in assessment. How can a teacher grade an abstract film piece? I think that it simply comes down to effort and thought. Ifi had to grade the video we watched in class I would give it an A because the author obviously put in much work into the movie. Additionally the creator of this film also took the time to reflect on the novel read in class and incorporates the major themes in a very subtle way into the movie. Thus I do believe that both the conventional styles of assignments (5 paragraph essay) and the newer methods (films or dance) can certainly be juxtaposed into one lesson plan.

Post #9 - Teaching the Teacher

Reading Paulo Freire’s piece last week made me think about what the role of the instructor is in classrooms. Obviously the teacher must teach, but the question that arose after reading a section form the "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" is how exactly should a teacher teach? Freire conveyed the dangers of simply narrating to children because teachers run the risk of turning their students into “containers, into receptacles to be filled.” I completely agree with Freire because if teachers simply narrate the students become easily distracted and lose the enthusiasm to learn. Essentially nicely summed up my thoughts when he stated that in a strict narration method of teaching “education becomes an act of depositing in which the students are depositories and the teacher is the depositor.”

I decided to do some extra reading on this topic and discovered that there are actually a number of different styles of teaching. I found that some teachers claim a Formal Authority teaching style in which teachers focus on content. This type of teacher doesn't usually require much student participation in class. In essence this style centers on the philosophy of “Sage on the stage.” I think Freire would argue that this method is faulty because teachers can fall into the hazards of narrating to their children. On the other side of the spectrum fall teachers who use a Facilitator style in which they focus on activities and emphasize student-centered learning. This type of teaching style works best for students who are comfortable with independent learning and who can actively participate and collaborate with other students. Finally I also fund that there are teachers who choose to be somewhere in between the strict narrating style and the facilitating style. These teachers use the Demonstrator style in which they act as role models by demonstrating a certain skill and then as guides in helping students develop and apply these skills and knowledge.

I have to agree with Freire’s point on the misfortunes of narrating, but I also think that teaching at one point or another involves some sort of narration. For that reason I feel that if I were a teacher at St. Martin’s I would utilize the Demonstrator style in which the teacher allows the students to participate, BUT at the same time uses some narration to explain the subject material.

How would YOU teach if YOU were a teacher? Do YOU agree with Freire?

What do YOU think?...

Post #8 - Learning Language in Literacy

"Think about what you have read about language learning or language use and any explicit and/or implicit messages you have heard about language? And what have you seen and heard in your fieldwork and mentoring experiences?"

"How do these different “voices” contribute to your understanding of the bilingual education issues? How does this impact the education of linguistic minority students?"

One thing that I have heard repeatedly in my field work is bilingual conversation amongst students. There have been times at St. Martin de Porres where kids will be talking to me in conversational English and then will switch into conversational Spanish. These students do not struggle to speak in English, and yet they will still bring in a few Spanish words into our conversation. I can’t help but notice that this has occurred more than a few times. I feel that the students who switch between English and Spanish do it to form a closer connection between me and the student. These students know that I can speak both Spanish and English and I can’t help but wonder if they speak to me in Spanish to create a friendlier conversation between us. I feel that they aim to establish a sense of cultural familiarity with me.

From my observations at St. Martin’s, I noticed that there is no real language barrier between students and teachers. However, in previous schools that I have mentored in I have encountered a growing number of students that struggle to communicate through English discourse. I believe that bilingual education can be a great tool in schools that have a population of students that do not claim English as their first language. I feel that the lack of bilingual education will only hinder these students because they need a scaffold that can communicate to them in their own language throughout the learning process. I have come to see English-only teaching as a dangerous path in education because it forces students to either sink or swim. I think that students who are not native English speakers will struggle in English-only classes because they will not be able to communicate with instructors. As a result, they will be forced to either quickly assimilate into the English language (which gets harder as you get older), or simply quit and stop trying to assimilate in the new language. On the contrary, through bilingual education students will be taught in their native language and their target language (English) will only be their subject material in school. Through this, students will have an easier time learning the English language because they will have someone to assist them while they learn the language.

What do YOU think? Do you think bilingual education should be implemented in every school? Do YOU see a language barrier at YOUR school site?

Post # 7- Ideas, Thoughts, Comments on Case Study

Recently I have been looking over my field notes and I’ve been trying to find a theme that resonates across all of my observations. I found myself highlighting similarities between my notes and was surprised to find out that I had written so much on the style and structure of teaching in classes. I had constantly detailed the different ways in which teachers make students enhance their literacy capabilities. From my notes I found that there are two ways in which teachers make students learn Basic English sentence structures. In the first method, students are given the opportunity to write on anything they want as long as they use either a declarative, imperative, or exclamatory sentence in their descriptions. They are given the chance to write about what happened to them at home, what they saw in recess, what they like/dislike, what they wish for, or what they hate. On the other hand, teachers at the school site also restrict their students writing choices. For example, at times teacher A would make his students learn how to write sentence structure by answering question from a text book. The process of formulating these answers did not require much thought since the students merely copied what the textbook said. For example, one question read “What is a Declarative Sentence?” The student would then open the book, look up Declarative Sentence, and copy the definition on a work sheet. I noticed that several students got bored of this type exercise and frequently turned to talking to one another. Conversely teachers that used the first method of giving more freedom on writing saw their students more engaged in their assignments. It seemed as if these students were more interested in writing on their personal experiences rather than looking up definitions from the book.

Stemming from my observations I think I’m going to focus on teaching style when it comes to letting students have options and freedom in their writing. Through this trajectory in my investigation I see other questions coming up:

-What do the students write about when they are given this freedom?

-Which is method is more successful in teaching students the different styles of sentence structure?

-Can promoting student-choice in classrooms spark an interest in learning to read and write?

What do YOU think? Any feedback appreciated!!!

Post #6 - My Linguistic Anatomy: A reflection on Delpit's reading

Does Delpit have what might be called a “radical middle” position, or is she taking sides? (see, for ex., p.30)

Stemming from our readings regarding race, language, and education I was reminded about a class activity in which Dave asked us to draw where we see language in our body. I wanted to elaborate more on my drawing and how this exercise relates to Delpit’s The Silent Dialogue.

Firstly, I talk many languages in one day. At times I may speak (or try to speak) standard Spanish to my parents and relatives. This is the language that is native to my homeland. However, I struggle speaking standard Spanish with relatives and at times feel alienated from my own family. I have this language barrier because as a child I was taught Spanish at home and English at school. As result I slowly began to adapt the English language and use Spanish less often. That is why I see standard Spanish in my head because it’s a language that I have to really think about in order to speak it. This language has been a “skill” that has been that I have “learned at home in order to survive in my community” (Delpit, 1995). Similar to what Delpit argues, I believe that homes must instill certain skills that help the child survive in society. These skills cannot be taught by schools and must come from the children’s home. However, this does not say that Delpit sees a strict divide between what is taught in school and what is taught in home. I believe Delpit is yet another educator that falls in the “radical middle” since she advocates cultural enrichment at home, AND also wants schools to provide the “cultural orientation that is found at home.”

Next, I also speak a variation of the Chicano language that is a hybrid of both English and Spanish. This is the language that I most identify with because it’s the tongue that I used to communicate with friends at school and in the neighborhood. I hold it really close to my heart because it’s a language that comes naturally to me. I don’t have to think about it, it a language that I love to speak because it represents who I am and who I am not.

Lastly, the English language to me is a tool that I use every day. I use it to socialize and advance academically. I see English as being in my hand because it’s something that I use to work and get ahead. Without my hands, or the English language, I would be lost in this society. Regrettably, I agree with the “several black teachers” that Delpit presents who say that “progressive” education imposed by liberal on poor children are only be based on “the desire that the liberal children get access to the dwindling pool of American jobs.” For that reason I have constantly tried to assimilate myself into this “progressive” education and utilize English to have access to the “dwindling pool of American jobs” and succeed in this world.

Where does language fit into YOUR body? Do YOU agree that the “progressive” education Delpit demonstrates really exists?

What do YOU think?

Post #5 - "Yup you're White"

After reflecting on the topics discussed in class a few days ago about race, ethnicity, and identity I remembered an incident that occurred while I was at St. Martin de Porres. The day was like any other, I had just finished tutoring young fourth graders and was heading towards the courtyard for recess. As I was walking out I noticed 3 boys sitting down on the benches just talking. I wanted to get closer to the students at the school so I thought what better way to do that than to sit down and talk to them during recess.

I headed over to the bench and I sat down. The three young boys looked at me then looked back at each other. I could tell that they were thinking “Who is this guy?” or “Who does this guy think he is?” Despite that, I managed to choke out a simple “hey wass up.” Surprisingly they responded, “hey…” I made contact! I took advantage of this situation to get acquainted and move towards formal a introduction. So I said, “What’s your guys' names?” For the sake of confidentiality let’s just say their names were Ray, Jay and May.

Thereafter we began talking about sports, particularly basketball and I was telling them I could dunk (I really can’t I just told them that so they we can have something to talk about). Amazingly, this simple chat led to a deeper discussion about race and ethnicity.

Ray looked at me and said, “What are you?” At first I didn’t know what he was talking about. What possibly could I be? Thoughts surged to my head. I’m a student, I’m a tutor, I’m a mentor, I’m an athlete, and well I’m just a human being. Then it hit me: could it be that an 8^th grader was asking for my race? Why? I decided to play it safe and said, “Well right now I’m a tutor for 4^th graders at Mr. Ali’s class. How about you?” “No! What are you? You know…” he responded.

I looked at him with confusion. With a sigh he then said to me, “Are you white, Mexican, Asian…You know.” I was flabbergasted. I just replied, “Well I don’t think it matters does it?” With a groan he answered “C’mon just tell us. Are you White?” Another round of thoughts came surging through my head: White? Do I really look white? Am I white? I decided to play it safe a second time and said, “I said I’m a tutor.” Then in a confident voice Ray said, “Yup, you’re white.” Then without much thought, as if instinctively I replied, “No, I’m Mexican.” Ray replied with bewilderment, “What really? Man you look white.” I didn’t feel comfortable talking about race and “what I am” at the school so I quickly changed the topic and said, “You know I could dunk over a chair.” Luckily they too fell quickly into this separate talk about me dunking over a chair.

This made me realize that race is deeply integrated into the social fabric of the middle school. In just our first conversation they already wanted to know my ethnicity/race/nationality. So after that incident I started to wonder if it was wrong of me to change the course of the conversation. Should I have kept talking about “what I am”? At the time I didn’t feel right telling students “what I am” and desperately wanted to just talk about sports.

Did I do the right thing? Should I have not changed the direction of conversation?

What do YOU think?

Post #4 - Beginnings, topics, stories for my Literacy Autobiography

Learning to read and write has been a real struggle throughout my life. Tracing back to my earliest memory I remember my parents trying to teach me the sounds of each letter in the alphabet. I was 7 years old and was sitting at the kitchen table with a pencil in one hand and an alphabet chart in the other. I think it was around 10:00pm which for a 7 year old was considered rather late. Sitting on the opposite side of the table were both of my parents looking at me with frustrated, tried, and upset faces. I remember they had spent several hours trying to teach me the sounds of each letter in the alphabet. They would take turns pronouncing the sounds of every letter. My mom began by saying, “Alligator A goes AAAAH, Butterfly B goes Buh-Buh, Camel C goes Cuh-Cuh.” Then my dad would interrupt and say, “Dolphin D goes Duh-Duh, Elephant E goes Eh” and so on. I also remember looking at my parent's exaggerated expression every time they would make a sound for a letter in the alphabet.

I don’t really know if this experience was effective in teaching me how to read, but I do know that it was a very confusing time because my parents were also going through the same process of learning how to read and write in English. My parents at the time had just emigrated from Mexico and carried with them a heavy Spanish accent. Consequently, the sounds they would make for each letter in the alphabet would be really different from the sounds I heard at school.

As a result, my interpretation of that memory has changed over time. As a child, this experience was very confusing since my parents and teachers had different sounds for each letter. However, as a teenager this memory turned into a hilarious recollection because I remembered my parents taking turns making exaggerated sounds for each letter and animal in the alphabet. Now as a twenty year old, this recollection is one of the most beautiful memories in my childhood because it represents the hard work and determination my parents put in trying to teach me how to read. I now understand the struggles they were going through because they were trying to teach me a language they barely knew themselves. I hold this memory very close to my heart because it embodies the first steps I took in learning how to properly speak, write and read.

Post #3 - Redefining the "Contact Zone"

Contact zones, as defined by Mary Louise Pratt, are “social spaces where disparate cultures meet, clash, and grapple with each other, often as highly asymmetrical relations of domination and subordination.” In the past I have been in classes that were used as vehicles for the initiation of contact zones. These classes have struck me as very interesting because they touch on sensitive aspects of our history that can be applied to each student in the class. For example, in a class I took my sophomore year titled History 7B dealt with Colonialism in the Americas and mainly brought up topics regarding African-American slavery, Native American (U.S. and non-U.S.) encounters with Europeans, and Asian immigration in the Americas. Every race, ethnicity, and culture that ever existed in the Americas was brought up into investigation and was closely examined. This class was a prime example of several cultures clashing and meeting to create an intense contact zone.

No race or culture was spared in this class. If you were Black, White, Hispanic, Asian, or Native American you were going to explore the highs and lows of your ancestry in the Americas which stretched from the northern tip of Alaska in North America to the most southern tip of Chile in South America. From this class I realized that contact zones are an integral part of all of our histories not only here in the United States, but in all of the Americas. Through my education here at UCB I was allowed to come into contact and have deep discourse with several different types of cultures. Thus I strongly feel that education can be a good vehicle for the exploration of contact zones. Education can be the catalyst to which we greet other cultures with respect and reverence for one another; and at the end of the day revisit our safe-houses where we can return to our community members of with which we have an easier time identifying with.

However, after reading Pratt’s definition of contact zones I wonder why contact zones must be a point where “highly asymmetrical relations of domination and subordination come into contact- like colonialism, slavery, or their aftermaths as they are lived out across the globe today?” In other words, is it really necessary to have a dominant-subordinate relationship between cultures in order for there to be a contact zone? Why can’t there simply be a contact zone where there are two different cultures, but they both regard each other as equal? I find it extremely illogical that for there to be dialogue between two cultures and sharing of ideas one culture must be subordinate. I think there can be a mutual relationship where there is a constant sharing of ideas between two cultures without subordination.

What do YOU think?.......

Post #2- Reciprocal Research: Hindrance or Opportunity?

Activist Methodology is crucial to research because the researchers is not seen as an outsider or an institutional representative, and can eventually obtain firsthand experience on how participants react and think to certain situations. This type of methodology basically illustrates a useful give-and-take situation where scholars and participants work together to achieve goals. Through my filed work I have discovered that I must not only observe but I also actively engage with students to uncover underlying information. For example, today at St. Martin de Porres I was assisting at a class of 5^th graders and noticed a young boy, named Bishop, completely motionless and looking up at the ceiling. From a strictly observational point of view the child seemed to be lethargic and distracted of his work. So as a result I walked over to the young boy and asked, “What’s up? Are you tired?” The student looked at me and replied with an inquiry, “58?” I had no idea was he was referring too. He then continued and said, “I’m trying to solve this word problem but I’m stuck cuz I forgot what 7 times 8 was.” I was flabbergasted. The entire time I thought he was simply being lazy and refusing to do his work he was merely having difficulties on his assignment. Without my engagement and active participation I would have never known that he was in fact completing his assignment and thinking though his solution. My observations would have been faulty since I saw him as lazy and careless of his school work. Thus, I completely agree with Cushman and Moll because it is through these interactions that we uncover crucial mental processes that enhance our understanding of research and simultaneously assist the participants.

I believe this reciprocal methodology can be used for research and to concurrently empower participants because Cushman demonstrated that she received important “letters, applications, diaries, notes, handouts, valuable critiques” and in return provided “time, resources, and knowledge” to the community. Similarly my experience with Bishop at the school proved to be an important instance of reciprocal methodology bcause I received vital information on how students think-through math questions and, at the same time, helped Bishop with on his math homework.

Unfortunately, one of the barriers limiting activist methodology at the university level is the enormous fear that interacting and engaging with participants will tamper or sway the data. However, stemming from my experience with Bishop, I feel that without interaction researchers will have a weaker understanding of their data and participants will fail to benefit from their researchers expertise and assistance. Luckily as tutor/mentors I see that there are several opportunities that can allow us to actively participate and engage in the reciprocal relationship that Cush and Mole advocate. For instance, mentors at the school sites can play or converse with the children instead of simply observing them from afar.

Post #1 - Thursday's Word of the Day: Orality

Orality was described in class as a function that does not require logic, whereas writing is the ability to “logically” express abstract thought. However, I see orality as a function that requires as much logic as writing. The process of learning how to speak is acquired at a young age and is simultaneously engraved in our mental processes to the point where verbally expressing thought is done instinctively. Yet attainment of language is achieved through a “critical point” in our development when the human mind is most capable of absorbing the surrounding language. After this crucial time the individual will never accomplish a full command of language, especially grammatical systems. Therefore beyond this “critical period,” such as learning a new language later in life, becomes a function that requires much logic to achieve.

In terms of the “great divide,” Walter Ong argues that writing, as a form of literacy, is essential to the human repertoire because it “separates past from present,” and “separates academic learning from wisdom.” Through this, Ong suggests that orality is inferior to literacy because it enhances our ability to identify historical events and enables us to become wiser; however, I argue that orality and literacy have shared the same level of importance in our society. Firstly, Ong’s proposal that writing “separates past from present” is not entirely true because if you examine written diaries, journals, or even testaments form the past one cannot help but image the past to the point where the reader becomes entrenched in the setting from which those texts were written. In other words, historical texts can be written is such a vivid style that readers can shatter the barrier between the past and the present.

Secondly, the fact that Ong argues writing is necessary to separate academic learning from wisdom seems completely unreasonable because in the past there have been superior societies that thrived on orality instead of literacy. Before the advent of written language and previous to the arrival of literacy, oral tradition was much more of a presence in people’s lives. The Anlo-Ewe people of present day Republic of Ghana, for example, used orality for learning and scholarship through folklore, myths, and songs. In addition, “Griot’s” were West African poets, and wandering musicians that were viewed as repositories for oral traditions since they passed important information to subsequent generations. Prior to the dawn of literacy and written language, orality laid the foundation for myths and folklore's that bequeathed wisdom from one generation to the next. Thus, I see that Ong’s statement which regards writing as the link between academic learning from wisdom as absurd and completely irrational.