RES 5530: Race, Class, and Gender in Literacy Research (Spring 2009)

But why? Jake appeared to have background knowledge and prior experiences that the teacher could help him link the text to, so did that happen, where the successful? I would really like to know. Based on the comment Hicks makes at the end of the chapter, I feel that Hicks may have thought the efforts may not have been effective/successful because she states: “His problems lay more in conflicts between an institutional system of middle-class practices and the life worlds he embraced as a boy”. Is she saying she feels that these worlds are so extreme that they cannot be linked to the curriculum? Based on the chapters we have read, I would think that she would not feel that way but I was a bit confused as to where exactly she stands. What through me for a loop as well, was that Hicks either did not see the need to help Jake (like she did with Laurie by providing additional instruction in a one-on-one setting). What is the difference? Hicks states: “Laurie’s’ even more troubling experiences in primary school have made mea cutely aware of how much schools need to change if students such as Laurie and Jake are to experience the sense of belonging in school …” Maybe she felt Laurie’s discourse would cause more trouble for her in school, than Jakes will because with his discourse comes MANY supportive family members.

In the beginning of the chapter we read about Jake’s story, and learned about his discourse. I was able to compare a few things to Laurie’s experience in the classroom, but I continue to find myself thinking “but why” as I read about Jake’s experience in the classroom (just as I did with Laurie’s). From last week’s critiques and comments about Laurie’s discourse and relationship with education, I understand that there is a frustration from educators when students’ needs aren’t addressed, and I understand and acknowledge the efforts that are made to meet these needs.

I have always felt that once you understand the reasoning behind a situation, setting, or event, you can begin to adjust and change that setting if it is fit for changing. It is very discouraging to me when Hicks states the following: “To make space for Jake’s primary values in school would mean opening up the curriculum to the forms of knowledge voiced by working men like his father. The classist nature of schools and society at large pretty much guarantees that won’t happen”. WOW. Because of the comment above, and the reflection of Jake's experience in a classroom led by an “accomplished teacher”, I feel that students like Jake are expected to hold their breath and see how long they can hold it before letting go. There are “courageous educators” that step back and see the changes that CAN be made to meet the needs of students, who are in systems like these. I respect the courageous educators! (I’m sure it is hard to do, but well worth it!) But what is the big picture of the educational system, is it to make sure students meet short term objectives that will lead to a long term objective of application of the skills they have learned? Or is just on the short term objectives in each classroom. I think the key is working together as a system so students experience a "hybrid space" across the curriculum and across the grade levels that addresses those objectives.

Elizabeth Griffin