My first idea while reading the article was the part about the presentation of quantitative research findings on the achievement of Native Americans in America's schools. After gaining a better understanding of the two types of research in the articles in past weeks, I was able to understand the author of this article. So often, we look at reports of what findings suggest about minorities; however, these are often reports filled with bias. In the article, an example is given of the 57 point average difference on the verbal section of the SAT between Native Americans and Caucasian students. This is simply a number. What does the qualitative research show? Is it possible that the tests are somewhat biased? Could it be that the vocabulary or stories used are more familiar to people of a different culture? So often, we only look at numbers but forget to truly analyze the "why" behind these numbers.
Then, the idea of forcing American Indians to assimilate by teaching them only English reminded me of several previous conversations during the semester thus far. The article stated:
Early Indian schools were established to suppress native languages in favor of English
(Lazarus, 1991; McCarty, 1994) and “to ‘civilize’ and assimilate Indians into the
mainstream of the dominant culture” (Reyhner, 1992, p. 35). Although these
policies are no longer carried out through abusive practices, their underlying
Eurocentric orientation continues to be reflected in the schooling of Indian students,
who thus experience a sense of cultural incongruence.
This is so true of our education systems and several minorities across the country. Although we do not directly discriminate in today's policies, discrimination and forced assimilation still happens every day. It reminds me of our previous conversations about African Americans in our classrooms. We have asked them to lose parts of their own identity in speaking only standard English. In an even more severe case, we have suppressed the Native Americans' own native language and taught them only English. I can definitely see how students can begin to question their own identity and culture in these cases.
Finally, I also felt moved by the change in definition for literacy. The author said:
I came to view literacy as the construction of meaning through language and other forms of expression or, as Eisner (1994) wrote, as “the ability to encode or decode meaning in any of the
forms of representation used in the culture to convey or express meaning”
This was an interesting view of literacy. If I were asked to present a definition of literacy, I would have definitely stated that it was an ability to read and write. This definition is much broader and encompasses ideas about meaning and culture that I would not have included. I immediately noticed my narrow definition and wondered how others had thought of literacy before reading this article. By including these other aspects, we allow students who may have problems in writing or reading due to barriers dealing with language and culture to still fit into the definition of being literate.
Brittany Guy
Comments (5)
Brittany,
Each time I read something related to Native American history, I am disturbed by the mistreatment of this group by our government. It does appear that in some classrooms this mistreatment continues today as teachers do not seek ways to connect mainstream culture to Native American culture. I could not believe that Daniel's civics teach would miss an opportunity to discuss politics and how Native American indians have been impacted since the very inception of our country. Just as strides have been made to honor African Americans in our schools, perhaps we should look for more formal ways to value Native Americans and their contributions to our "new" nation. If we showed more interest in Native American culture, Native American students may be more interested in "mainstream" culture. Considering the verbal SAT scores of these students, it would not hurt for us to consider new ways to reach these students.
Posted by Lisa Rasey | February 28, 2009 12:01 PM
Posted on February 28, 2009 12:01
I too had a moment in reading this article where my whole perception of literacy was questioned. Like you, I would have originally stated that literacy was a reading and writing skill. When I read about Daniel and Zonnie's views of music and dance being a literate activity, I wanted to slap my forehead and say "duh!" Now it seems almost ridiculous that I didn't include these things in my original definition. I wonder what else we could put under this same umbrella? Art? Theater? The possibilities are endless!
Posted by Christy Rivers | March 2, 2009 9:54 AM
Posted on March 2, 2009 09:54
I have heard several of my professors debate the idea of literacy. Not literally debate, but they have mentioned specific criteria that they feel is important when identifying literacy. They also urged the students to identify their own criteria. I agree with Noll when she said expressed her ideas of literacy, especially the part where she said it is the ability to convey or express meaning. I enjoyed reading this critique as well the comments because I am continuing to build my own understanding of literacy. I keep coming back to the idea of expressing meaning because I think of the ways some of the students I have worked with who have learning disabilities and intellectual disabilities. Some of the students express meaning in their own form of communication, some use devices like eye gazes. I think it is so important for teachers to look at what they feel are examples of literacy because our students need to understand the guidelines, whatever they may be, so students can work towards the goal of expressing themselves.
Posted by Elizabeth Griffin | March 2, 2009 5:28 PM
Posted on March 2, 2009 17:28
Brittany,
I am glad you pointed about that tests can be biased. I know that a lot of my students have issues with the state test. "Write about a time you went on a vacation with you family." "Ms. Feinman- I haven't been on a vacation". Why should they be punished because the state assumes every child has surely been on a vacation. Or, write about your favorite toy. More than once, a student has told me they don't have toys at home. And these are only first graders. I have never seen an EOG (nor do I want to), but what kinds of things are on this test that students have never heard of? It is heart breaking.
I tutor a group of fourth graders after school. The text that we are using is extremely difficult for them. They can read every word, but they do not understand it because they have no experience with it. For instance, we started reading a fantasy story about the Dust Bowl. And the students were so confused because they had no idea what it was. I showed them a short clip on destreaming of that Period in American History. We reread the story, and they understood it perfectly clear! This is the reason I have a problem with standardized tests. No matter what you do, the test is going to be biased against someone. Ugh. I hate it.
But back to your point. We do not to be asking the question, WHY. Why did you not understand this story on the EOG. Why did you not grasp this vocabulary. Thanks for bring this point up.
Posted by Sarah Feinman | March 2, 2009 6:55 PM
Posted on March 2, 2009 18:55
Brittany,
Such a smart post! I like the connections that you made among this reading and our previous readings. You provoked some excellent responses from your colleagues!
I also like the broadened definition of literacy from this week's article --- it will definitely help us to think about literacy in the book Reading Lives that we'll begin in a couple of weeks.
Posted by Alecia Jackson | March 18, 2009 7:42 PM
Posted on March 18, 2009 19:42