I wonder how easy it would be to replicate this study. I think that the environment Henry created was so specialized that it may be difficult to generalize it to other situations. She created an ideal situation where she worked with a homogeneous cultural and gender group, African Caribbean teenage girls, using literature about the same group and led by an African Caribbean woman with similar background experiences. I think the power of this last factor, was under estimated by the researcher. I imagine that these girls saw her not as a teacher or even a researcher, but as their friend. This really changes the dynamic significantly. By lowering the affective filter, this group of girls felt comfortable enough to share intimate details in their writing and their discussions.
Although I don’t think that it is realistic to replicate all of these circumstances, there are some concepts that we can generalize from this study:
1)Students respond when they see themselves reflected in the literature.
2)Small homogeneous grouping by gender and cultural background helps students feel comfortable. Students may choose to do this in a classroom where the teacher uses literature circles and students self select the book. However, I don’t think it would be well received if the teacher grouped students by cultural background.
3)Same gender lowers student self-consciousness. Several school districts across the United States are experimenting with same gender classrooms and have found great success.
4)Students need to feel safe in order to learn.
I think this last point is the most relevant for me. We all need to give voice to our ideas, thoughts and feelings and know that we are safe. I work hard to create a classroom environment where students feel free to take risks in their learning. As teachers, we can control how we respond, but we can’t predict how other students will react. Although we have a huge influence on how our students treat one another in our classroom, we can’t always keep it a safe place.
Jayne Thompson
Comments (3)
Jayne, I am really interested in same gender schools and classes. I have read about it and it seems positive, especially at my level, middle school. I don't know how it would be to teach a room full of hormonal boys but I think there are a lot of advantages for the kids. I guess as a teacher you could do your own grouping so that girls and boys were separated for group work.
The issue of safety is so very important. There is a teacher here who is so negative and unfriendly to the students that a kid tried to poison her. The fault is clearly the student's but the teacher has absolutely no relationships with the kids. She is very rigid and obviously in the wrong profession. How could any child learn in that environment??
Ashley Catlett
Posted by Ashley Catlett | February 20, 2009 12:33 PM
Posted on February 20, 2009 12:33
Jayne,
I commented on Amie's post, that this type of group learning is something that I would love to try in my own classroom. But you are right. Henry was so successful partly because she was of the same cultural background. That would be extremely hard for me to replicate my own classroom. ;) However, I can try to meet your four points that you bring up. Your last point is also most relevant for me. After all the readings from this course, I feel as though it is my goal, everyday and in every moment.
Posted by Sarah Feinman | February 21, 2009 6:13 PM
Posted on February 21, 2009 18:13
Hi Jayne,
Remember that the term "generalization" and "replication" aren't goals of qualitative research. HOWEVER, I really like your interpretations of how you might apply this research to your own practice! Your 4 points are well put.
Finally, I completely agree about your comments regarding the researcher. One of the hallmarks of qualitative research is the "researcher as human interpreter" -- who also affects the research setting. I agree with you that it is a strength of the study.
Posted by Alecia Jackson | February 25, 2009 9:38 PM
Posted on February 25, 2009 21:38