When I was an undergrad student at UNCG I remember my Reading Methods instructor telling us that it was our duty to teach "good" literature. She defined good literature as "literature that evoked change, or at the very least makes one feel with strong emotion". I am the first to admit that I am quite guilty for not following her instructions. I cannot count how many times I explore "safe" literature with my students simply because it is a lot less emotionally draining for me (and my students). Although I will willingly go down the road of controversial topics, it is by no means my favorite thing to do. As a matter of fact, I can only count three times in my teaching career that I made that venture and I ran into "complications" each time. My first two experiences were when I taught 4th grade, first as a student teacher then as the commander of my very own classroom. Both times my students were reading To Kill a Mockingbird and of course we delved into the history behind the story, etc. When I was student teaching the demographic make-up of my class was primarily white. The entire time we were reading this novel I felt like my students thought I was accusing them, no, making them feel guilty for being white. My cooperating teacher (a white lady and the one who suggested that I explore the novel with the students) assured me that I was "doing no such thing" and that it was important for them to know American history, all of it. Needless to say I was thrilled when we finished the novel, and I am almost positive that we read something light and fun like Stuart Littleafterwards.
The next school year I was in my own classroom with a very diverse demographic make-up and since I already had the unit, why not? Well about half way into the novel I was called into the office to have a meeting with my principal, one of my students, and their parents. The student (one of the most compassionate kids I''ve ever met) took it upon her self to call her great-grandpa for the express purpose of finding out if their family ever owned slaves. His answer upset her, she gave him a tongue lashing, and officially declared to her family that she was ashamed to share their last name. As you can imagine that meeting did not go well.
I guess the more you do it the better it gets. The third time that I dealt with controversial issues using literature was in my 2nd grade classroom last school year. This time I was doing an assignment for my Advanced Children's Literature class with Dr. Green. This time I got three notes from three different parents (two black parents and one white) that reprimanded me for teaching their children about slavery and racism and pretty much they just wanted their children to know that Martin Luther King Jr. changed all of that. Despite the parent notes, I continued my unit and finished the project with my students.
The Moller and Allen article has challenged me to be the responsible teacher of literature that my undergrad professor commanded me to be. I am not doing my students any favors by keeping the truth hidden from them. Frankly, it is a teacher's duty to give children the truth no matter how bad or ugly it may be. Of course there is a proper way to teach the truth and Karla Moller did just that. What struck me as I was reading the article is that she did not lead the children to draw any conclusions. She did not start asking the four girls questions until they began making their own connections and drawing their own conclusions about the characters and situations in the story. Only once the girls stumbled upon the right conclusions did she ask them probing/leading questions. She also did not "shelter" the conversation. She allowed the girls to express their feelings/comments/concerns regardless of how deep the conversation went or how uncomfortable it became. She provided a space where these students could discuss social issues and confront real fears. The depth of knowledge that these girls acquired over this short time period is far more promising than test data scores on any given day.
Cherrita Hayden-McMillan
Comments (7)
Cherrita,
I think everything in a teacher's world points her to playing it safe. After all, protecting our children is inherent to the role as teacher.
It never crossed my mind that some African American parents would not want slavery discussed. The fact that Africans were brought here to America is a part of history. By failing to teach or even acknowledge this part of American history we miss the opportunity to celebrate how far we have come as a nation. I certainly understand that much still needs to be accomplished in the area of race relations, but how can we continue to make strides if we turn a blind eye to reality?
Posted by Lisa Rasey | February 14, 2009 7:14 PM
Posted on February 14, 2009 19:14
Wow, TKAM in the 4th grade? That's intense!
I agree that as teachers, we do tend to stray toward "safe" more often than not. Dealing with parents, school boards, and administrators can sometimes make the fight not worth it. I admit I had my reservations when I first decided to teach Huck Finn. But I think there is a lot of good literature out there that would be considered "safe" that can evoke controversial topics. You can find controversial topics in just about any piece of literature that we read in high school. When you think of Shakespeare, for example, many people just think of a brilliant English playwright, who wrote the classics of our time. This is true of course, but delve deeper into any given play and you will find a plethora of controversial issues to discuss (once you can get past the language barrier, of course!)
Posted by Christy Rivers | February 15, 2009 5:04 PM
Posted on February 15, 2009 17:04
I also liked how she didn't try to "lead" the discussion in any particular direction. I think that kids can connect to literature (and any topic for that matter), when they have to develop their own opinions or insights. Some of my most vivid memories from grade school English classes were the class discussions--not just regarding main idea, but what we thought about the characters intentions or thoughts, or what we might have done if we were put in the same situation. Without this personal connection, I don't think I would remember as much about "The Tell-Tale Heart" or The Grapes of Wrath, for example. Unless kids think that the topic relates to them, chances are, they won't transfer that information into their long-term memory.
Posted by Heather Coe | February 16, 2009 10:20 AM
Posted on February 16, 2009 10:20
I enjoyed reading your blog this week. I like the way your undergrad teacher defined good literature. We are required to use a county adoption text for reading. Yet prior to that, did I choose "good literature"? I think I played it safe too. But I certainly agree, when my own children read books like The Giver. I had my reservations, becuase I was only hearing bits and pieces of the story. Once I read the book for myself, it became one of my favorites because it makes you think!
Posted by SuSu Watson | February 16, 2009 12:07 PM
Posted on February 16, 2009 12:07
Christy,
That's what I thought too, when the book was suggested. The students at both the schools (student teaching and my 1st year) did ability grouping. Somehow I ended up with AIG each time. Often those kids get accelerated into things that they are capable of doing, but aren't intellectually ready for simply because it's not developmentally appropriate.
Posted by Cherrita Hayden-McMillan | February 16, 2009 9:01 PM
Posted on February 16, 2009 21:01
Cherrida, it can definitely be frustrating when parents don't understand what you are trying to do. Something that has helped me, because I use a lot of "unsafe" material, is explaining to the children why we are learning the subject. This way, if they understand, they don't go off telling their parents that you are "corrupting" their minds or pushing your beliefs on them. But I hear you, it is sometimes a painstaking task to take on.
Posted by Whitney Gilbert | February 16, 2009 9:19 PM
Posted on February 16, 2009 21:19
Cherrita,
I love that you ended your post with:
The depth of knowledge that these girls acquired over this short time period is far more promising than test data scores on any given day.
I think that so eloquently sums up the promise of qualitative inquiry -- and teaching for social justice -- in education!
I also appreciate the honesty in your post. It *is* difficult to tackle controversial issues in your classroom. But it seems as if more teachers did this with more frequency, then it wouldn't be an "issue" -- it would just be a part of the curriculum that students grow accustomed to, don't you think? I mean, look how quickly students have learned the culture of test-taking! Couldn't they "learn" a culture of critical thinking, too??
Posted by Alecia Jackson | February 20, 2009 10:50 AM
Posted on February 20, 2009 10:50