RE_5539

Lisa Outland –
We must become aware of our student’s cultural literacy’s so we may then begin to educate them properly. Just as we check to see if a child knows their ABCs when they come to school, I think we need to take time and talk with their parents and find out about their expectations, beliefs, and own educational experiences. Without these missing puzzle pieces we may never completely educate the student. I think we are going to have to return to a time when we do take the time to get to know the families of our students. We are being given so many different levels of literacy competence in the home that we cannot assume we can educate the student without this knowledge. I loved the section on the radio being tuned to Classical music and the author (Rose I think) compared this to Shakespeare, very unrelated to their world, therefore, dumb (to use Jake’s word). I have to agree that I felt the same way the first time I read Shakespeare. Now, I am wondering how many of my students think what I am trying to teach them has no purpose for them. It is now my job to figure this out. I am glad I figured out early on, just as Rose did at some point, that it was my job to entice my children into learning. I was to invite them, hook them, make it so interesting they wanted to learn, now if I can just find a means to make this happen with everything that I teach. I realize too that I am so lucky to have already had training from Ruby Payne and her research on working with children of poverty. Many of the issues brought to light in her work were also discussed in this chapter. Hicks mentions that teachers often fuss about how a certain student is doing, their parents don’t care, the students are not learning their lessons, etc. Ruby Payne teaches us as well that it isn’t about you, it’s about getting to know your students and home lives so you can teach them. Maybe she and Hicks need to team up together and do some research.

"We can only change the world that we can SEE"~ Iris Murdoch (page 157/bottom)

I believe that this quote sums up the entire course! If we fail to really see and connect with our students, then they will fail to succeed. It makes so much sense, yet why is it so hard? I see many teachers that teach all day long, yet they fail to reach many of their students. This may just be the reason. The teacher next to me yells at her students constantly, talks about them to other teachers, and i know that the kids just don't feel like she likes them. She has constant behavior problems and many of them did not pass the EOG's......I wonder why?! "Poor and working-class children don't just reject our discourses; they reject us- the others whose gaze envelops them in a destructive value context." (p. 151/bottom) Children cannot learn from someone whom they believe doesn't value them, their culture, their race, gender, class, etc....neither can I. Deborah Hicks has opened my eyes to the importance of knowing your students, and letting them know you accept them for who they are and where they come from. I know that i'm going to try to do a much better job of researching their backgrounds and homelives, and using that information in the classroom.....academically and socially.

When i began this chapter, i was utterly confused! But, by the middle, i began seeing what all of the beginning jargon was about and why Deborah Hicks included so much of it. Deborah Hicks seemed to be saying that everything is not "intrisically interesting", it's how a teacher presents the information and knowledge that can hook a child. And, if a child thinks that they are important, and the teacher truly believes that they are, then the classroom environment can become magical, and learning can take place.

Although this book has been difficult to read, i think i've gained a lot from it. I've always felt that i was welcoming to all children, but after reading this book, i realize it's not just "talking the talk, but also walking the walk". I know what i'm going to do different, and i'm excited for the new school year to start.

wow! there is so much knowledge in this chapter. there seemed to be an unlying feeling of acceptance, faithfulness and love...along with dialogue. there were a few quotes from this chapter that i found profound. "the emotional shading that enables the child's individuality"..."from his mother, from others who are close to him." "the child receives all initial determinations of himself and of his body from his mother's lips and from the lips of those who are close to him." if a child's identity and feelings about him/herself come from his/her family, then we must accept the child as well as the child's family because they are one. it doesnt seem as if they can be separated and not accepting a child's whole home life will disable the child. this thought leads me to the next quote..."Particularly as children leave the intimacy of home and family, the constitution of identity from other subject locations can be limiting or damaging." wow!

then on page 151 i found myself talking to the text in agreement when i read, "but this kind of action is more problematic if teachers cannot see the richness of children's situated histories and as a result reduce those complex histories to labels that account for children's academic failures." i had a black, fatherless, poor SES, BED, speech delayed, DD, child this year in kindergarten...i was told that he would never make it in my room. he did! despite the labels this precious child came to me with, he made it. i believe in my heart that if his next teachers choose not to look at his given labels, he can shed them. he is bright and intellegent. what this child needed was to be accepted. he wanted friends! he needed love and patience and understanding and faithfulness from his teachers.

lastly, i underlined these two sentences from page 152. "rather, change also has to entail a moral shift, a willingness to open oneself up to the possibility of seeing those who differ from us. this is very hard work, but work that lies at the heart of teaching." i believe that when one is faithful to the teaching profession and to children a child can move mountains.

donna byrd-wyatt

Hybrid Languages of Inquiry – Laura Wollpert

This chapter gives the reader a lot to think about as our perceptions, views, and beliefs change as we experience and grow. An example of this is how young people most often believe what their parents believe until they have lived and experienced enough life to develop their own opinions and beliefs.

When I taught high school several years ago during a presidential election year, one of my students wanted to know who I voted for. I try to make it a policy not to give students this kind of information about myself. This particular student really wanted to know, so I explained to the student if I told him who I voted for he could not get upset if it was not the candidate of his choice as we all had the right to vote for whom we believe is the best candidate. This student agreed. Of course I told this student and he became very upset because it was not the candidate of his choice. I had to remind him of our conversation and he tried to hold back. What would happen if we taught our children to become critical thinkers? My husband was taught by his father how to think critically from a very young age. He is always thinking and considering both sides of an issue. He often reminds me of things I haven't thought of from the opposite perspective. I think this is a gift his father gave him.

Nussbaum has an interesting statement that I agree with on page 141. It states, “The longer I stay in education, the clearer it becomes to me that some of our basic orientations toward the teaching and testing of literacy contributes to our inability to see. To truly educate in America, then to reach the full sweep of our citizenry, we need to question received perception, shift continually from the standard lens. The exploratory stories that bring this book to its close encourage us to sit close by as people use language and consider, as we listen, the orientations that limit our field of vision.” This is a lot to digest, but for me it says we are all looking at life through limited vision because our past experiences shape us. We must step out so we can see beyond our limited views to look at something in a new way. It is extraordinary when ordinary people do can this. My parents did this when my nephew told them he was gay. My dad is a farmer who is a very traditional thinker. I was not sure how he would take this news as he does not know one single gay person. I was so proud of his reaction. Soon after he received my nephew’s news, he took both my nephew and his partner fishing. My dad loves my nephew and accepts his partner as he would anyone else.

I have read the last sentence in Nussbaum’s statement over and over, “The exploratory stories that bring this book to its close encourage us to sit close by as people use language and consider, as we listen, the orientations that limit our field of vision.” I think the key is listening. If we really listen and try to understand what our students are saying from their perspective not our own, we may be able to have a greater understanding. How do you turn off your own mind enough to listen without judging from previous experiences? If we learn to think critically and shed the layers upon layers of experiences that have skewed our own thoughts and perceptions, we may have a chance of understanding someone else.

Further on page 152 Hicks talks of the, willingness to open oneself up to the possibility of seeing those who differ from us. She states this is the heart of teaching. I argue that it is the heart of humanity. I wonder how much conflict in the world could have been avoided if our government and ordinary citizens practiced opening to the possibilities of those being different from us. My daughter (who is not yet two) has a book entitled “Who Ever You Are All Over the World”. It explains some of the similarities and differences of people all over the world. It explains that smiles, hearts, pain, and blood are the same, while languages, houses and clothing may be different. If we made a chart to compare the similarities and difference, we would find the differences are not important. They are all external while the internal similarities such as the smiles and pain are attributes that every human being shares. I think this is an important concept and it is never too early to begin the discussion.

The one most important concept that I connected with in this chapter is listening to our students is the key to teaching them. If we take time to know our students and understand them (without) judging, we may have a chance at reaching them. This requires shedding our own perceptions, beliefs, and views.

Isn't it amazing the path one may take because he has been placed in a certain social track? It is unfortunate that students base what they can do on placement test scores. Until Rose realized placement test scores would place him on a college-prep track he just wanted to be average. What can we do that this doesn't happen to our students?

I believe the author is on track when she says, "Rather, change also has to entail a moral shift, a willingness to open oneself up to the possibility of seeing those who differ from us.This is very hard work, but work that lies at the heart of teaching." We have to cross these boundaries to reach the poor and working-class children. It was difficult for Hicks to cross boundaries but she had to in order to develop understanding of Jake and Laurie's worlds. If we understand children's situated histories then we can move toward literacy practices in the classroom. Hicks comments that contemporary educational theory may not support these kinds of teaching practices. Before taking this course, I hadn't realized how important it is to cross boundaries with working class children and their parents. I am now convinced that this is crucial in order to connect with and reach these working class children.

I want to begin this post by saying how much I have enjoyed reading the book Reading Lives. The way in which this text was written allowed me to think critically about the way school and home-life effects the education of a student. I felt as if I were able to see the “whole-picture” when looking at the lives of Jake and Laurie. Many times in research we only see the data and rarely do we know much about the “life” of the child. It was refreshing to read research that was done in a totally opposite way. This text has truly changed my thinking in regards to “knowing” my students. I really agree with the quote on page 137 that narrative literature can be used as a “means of engaging teachers and student teachers in critical reflections on curriculum.” I honestly feel that this text has impacted and changed my thinking as an educator.

As I started reading Chapter 6, I saw many of my own students and Jake in Mike Rose. I was very amused by Rose’s descriptions of his first interactions with classical music and Shakespeare. Rose wanted nothing to do with these things because he thought of them as “snooty and put-on, kind of dumb.” Boy did I think of Jake. Just like Jake, Rose wanted nothing to do with those things that did not connect with his own personal life. In Rose’s eyes these things were not “valuable”. As we have read throughout this book, we value what our family values. Therefore, it is very difficult to identify with and value those things that are not important in our daily lives. Reading further, I began to think of my students as the author stated, “resisting were safer modes of response than tackling the unknown territories of science and literature.” I have observed several students throughout my few years as a teacher refuse to complete an activity just because it is new and different. It is our jobs as teachers to make new things seem interesting, exciting, and valuable. We must find better ways to make connections for our students.

Continuing to read, I became intrigued by Bakhtin and Murdoch’s thoughts and ideas. Their ways of “seeing” others was very interesting and eye opening. They truly brought to light how poor & working class children feel in a middle class world. The author states, “Poor and working-class children don’t just reject our discourses; they reject us – the others who gaze envelops them in a destructive value context.” We have to be very careful when giving our own thoughts and ideas to our students. We should present information as just another view of the world; not correct just because we think so.

Finally, I wanted to copy page 152 and give it to every teacher at my elementary school. The 2nd paragraph on that page truly tells the story of many of the teachers, including myself sometimes, at the elementary school where I work. My peers and I get very frustrated year after year when we do not meet the criteria for AYP. Therefore this leads to a lot of anger and frustration. The author states, “When I work with teachers who teach poor and working-class children, the first thing I encounter is their expressions of anger: these children whom my lessons do not reach, and who fail their proficiency tests at such high rates; these parents, who do not support my professional work or share my values; this community – and so on.” I am not ashamed to say that I have felt this way many times over the past few years. However, the author goes on to reiterate the importance of valuing our students for who they are and where they come from. The author states, “Change also has to entail a moral shift, a willingness to open oneself up to the possibility of seeing those who differ from us. This is very hard work, but work that lies at the heart of teaching.” After reading this book, I honestly wish that it could be read by many of my co-workers. I will never again look at child and not take into consideration his/her home & life experiences. This book has greatly changed the way I will teach the students in my classroom!

In Chapter 6 I equated the process of reflection and self-discovery with my own experience in reflecting on my teaching methods. I am continuously questioning and reflecting on what works and what needs to be changed. That process appears to be true for our students as well although we must set-up inquiry based activities and the necessary follow-up for them to learn from.
As the author stated the process of conforming to school tasks does seem to come more naturally for girls but since every year I have predominately more boys I feel that I need to plan a variety of tasks to accomodate both.
It seems obvious through my own experience and through this text that without purpose and connection many learners experience "difficulties in crossing cultural boundaries". It also seems that their feelings play a large role in the acceptance of learning tasks.
In reading further there were many comments that stood out. For example, when Rose was quoted as saying his teachers who had an impact "lived their knowledge and talked it, not to establish dominance but to foster growth". I thought back to an earlier comment I made while reading "The Skin That We Speak" where I questioned how we sometimes turn people off by sounding so intelligent that we intimidate them. My own college age daughter has mentioned professors who like to hear themselves talk so much that they can't let go of their ego long enough to just tell it like it is. As teachers we should be more aware of how we sound since we are the "conduit", encouraging our students to move between their worlds.
If we can do so, we should establish grounded relationships with our students which according to this author's research may be the answer to meeting our working class students where they are and then moving them forward as much as possible.

This was a "heavy" chapter, difficult to read and digest but with a strong message. From the very first paragraphs to the very last pages, the message seemed to be the urgency and importance of relationships. I agree with Hicks that authentic learning does not take place in a vacuum. True learning involves emotional commitment just as a relationship involves such a commitment; just as learning itself mirrors the sensitivity inherent in a meaningful realtionship, meaningful relationships (teacher/student, student/parent, parent/teacher) support meaningful learning. Rose equated teaching with romancing when he stated that he'd learned to "woo kids" in order to bring relevance, significance into the classroom ("Knowledge gained its meaning, at least initially, through a touch on the shoulder,......a conversation....."). So complicated and yet so simple; as people, we respond to those who value us and shut down if we sense we are undervalued. If this is so, then shouldn't we, as teachers, value our students, in order to establish a relationship that can foster inquiry?

Hicks has continually reminded us that dialogue is the means to establishing an environment in which all (students, teachers, parents) are valued and all claim ownership to the learning that results. Historically educational institutions have not supported such open dialogue. In fact, students have been (and continue to be) reduced to a set of data and then labeled as if they are nothing more than a product to be marketed. In this highly competitive age of accountability and "marketability" we as educators have hurrriedly forsaken the old fashioned skill of LISTENING. In our rush to push our students to perform, compete, excel, we have often lost touch with the essence of the child we seek to educate. Hicks implores us to notice the "richness of children's situated histories" in order to reverse the dehumanizing trends in education. In order to establish meaning, relevance, to learning for all our students, Hicks insists we concern ourselves not with instructional strategies but with establishing meaningful realationships. According to Hicks, meaningful dialogue happens when we, as teachers, are willing to entertain and imagine new practices incorporating the differences that we, teachers and students, bring to the classroom.

Yes, we teachers should be angry, not that our students fail their proficiency tests or that their parents fail to understand our formal instructional goals, but that the system is failing our students! All the guided reading workshops and cultural practice professional education does me (the teacher) no good if I hold fast to simplistic formulas of "appropriate" (often privileged) learning behaviors. I agree with Hicks that true learning can come only from an environment in which both student and teacher are vested, mirroring a successful relationship, in which both parties are willing to identify and take into account the differences which enhance the relationship. I hope I can take this idea, the concept of developing hybrid languages of inquiry, back into my classroom
Betsy Baldwin

This chapter stresses the need for teachers to learn to use discernment ("a slow and patient process of 'reading' another's actions and meanings") to be able to respond appropriately to students. A teacher's response to a student has the power to motivate or discourage; build and strengthen a child's identity or undermine it. "...An indifferent or hostile reaction is always a reaction that impoverishes and decomposes its object... Only love is capable of being aestetically productive" (pg. 150). Therefore, we need to not only be careful what we say to children, but also have to be aware of the tone of our voice, our facial expressions, and any other body language that children might perceive as hostile. I have to admit, controlling "what" I say to children is a lot easier than controlling my facial expressions because my face usually shows whatever emotion I am feeling in response to a student's action or behavior, especially when the action or behavior is negative. On the other hand, I don't think the text means for teachers to wear artificial smiles on their faces all day long either. We just need to be more aware of how our responses affect children and learn to control our responses in ways that will benefit them. This is something I definitely have to work on.

This chapter also seemed to advocate that a teacher's response to a student influences how the student responds to the teacher. "I seek and find myself in another's emotional excited voice; I embody myself in the voice of the other who sings of me; I find in that voice an authoritative approach to my own inner emotion or excitement; I sing of myself through the lips of a possible loving soul" (pg. 148). In other words, our responses to children can influence how they feel about themselves as students and individuals, and can define their identity in the classroom. Could a wrong response to a child's action or behavior can cause him/her to develop a negative classroom identity such as a student known as a troublemaker or a student who avoids doing his/her work? On the other hand, could the right response to a child's action or behavior really motivate and encourage him/her to try to please the teacher and do his/her best work?

I plan find out the answer to these questions during the next school year by monitoring my responses to students and students' responses to me. Hopefully, I will learn to read my students and develop the discernment that is required to respond to them in ways that will motivate and inspire them to "reach for the best" (our school motto).

Vickie Howell

In the beginning this chapter was very difficult and foreign to me. I had no idea what Hicks’ was writing about, but the more I read the more it started to make sense to me. In Chapter 6 Hicks sums up what she has learned about “reading lives” and how we can implement it in our literacy instruction and learning environments. Although this book was different from others we have read about working with children, the way in which it is written gave me a new perspective on teaching with children from working class families. On page 138 Nussbaum suggests that narrative discourses focus readers’ attention on how relations between subjects engender changes in identities, beliefs, practices, and understandings. Reading the narrative discourses presented in the book gave me another view into a child’s world and how much their environment influences their literacy. The information presented here has helped me to change my beliefs and hopefully my practices.

The portion of the chapter that discussed Mike Rose’s text was rather interesting. Some of the examples he gave was similar to what Jake felt based on the information Hicks gave in Chapter 5. I think as educators we have more to learn about crossing cultural boundaries and getting to truly know children, their families, and the communities in which they live. Ross’ “exploratory stories” seem to be very similar to Hicks’ narrative text. It allows us to see and feel the difficulties of crossing cultural boundaries, but it also gives us insight into the importance of connecting with children and getting to know them on a deeper level. It is the only way we can effectively change their view of education and ours as well. It’s like Ross said on page 141 “The longer I stay in education, the clearer it becomes to me that some of our basic orientations toward the teaching and testing of literacy contribute to our inability to see.”

What Hicks want us to get from this book is in order to help working class children learn, we must be aware of the family and community contexts of these children and how these contexts create a difference in literacy, which need to be recognized within the classroom (154). If we begin to share our lives with students and give them a chance to share theirs with us we can create a classroom environment where children feel a sense of belonging. If children do not feel connected to their teacher than teaching will be difficult for you and learning from you will be even more difficult for the student. A hybrid approach helps working class students forge caring relationships with educators, relationships that cultivate literacy learning. I think how Hicks showed the students of Appalachian descent that she could cross boundaries is a good example of what we should do in our classroom. Not that we have to use “ain’t” because the children may be using it, but we have to be able to cross those boundaries and connect with children. We have to create relationships and cross boundaries if we plan to teach them anything.

This chapter closed the book very nicely. I feel the author made good points about our society’s need to educate all children. We need to find methods to reach all the needs of every child in our room. Working class children are truly the “lost” children in today’s classroom. We are required by law to follow IEP’s (Individualized Education Plan) for any exceptional needs child. These require modifications, specialized lesson plans and modified course work. These plans are easy to follow and found in most classrooms today. Working class children often do not have IEP’s. They do not come with instructions, they just learn differently. Yet, we need to reach their needs as well. Training and exposure to new techniques and hands-on lessons will greatly increase the mastery of subject matter for all of our students.

The memories of the young man named Rose brought to light how important we need to take this issue of working class education. Rose was tracked into a vocational program, by a mistake his teachers/school made. One teacher noticed how he “did not belong” in the program. What a difference this one teacher made for this child. By placing him in the college prep program, he was given the opportunity to advance his educational career. Even though Rose felt displaced, this one teacher made an impact on this boy’s life that he will never forget.

Finding out that Rose eventually became a teacher touched me. We have no idea how many students like Rose that we have every year. Knowing how to connect knowledge to learning styles is a strength that Rose gives to his working class students. He sees himself in his children probably every day. We have all benefited from hearing his stories of his own childhood experiences.

The author summed the book up well, when she expressed how we need to understand gender, class, and racial locations that have been traditionally excluded. We need to develop new teaching methods to reach all of our students and give them an opportunity to work to their greatest potential.

Beth Rigsbee

As this book closes, the emphasis on realtionships is further revealed. I love when Nussbaum speaks of "love's knowledge", "beteween persons and of persons". Is this not the important knowledge in the world? She also says, "that the process of understanding and learning involve weaving increasingly complex strands of connection with concrete others". Before students will gain anything from being in a classroom, they have to know and believe that the teacher accepts them and wants to be their teacher. This is explained as Rose speaks of "wooing" students. You have to win them over, and have them on your side before anything else. Students must feel safe in their relationships with teachers. It is these relationships with others, both at home, in the community and at school that make up our hyrbid language.

I also gathered from this chapter that the problem is bigger than us as teachers;however, we can start small and embrace our children and their histories. Nussbaum says, "The longer I stay in education, the clearer it becomes to me that some of our basic orientations toward the teaching and testing of literacy contribute to our inability to see." How fitting for how so many teachers execute their classrooms and teachings! We have to assume when students walk into our classrooms at the beginning of the year that we are already rejected. If we approach our teaching approach that way, perhaps we will be more open to students. I found the lines on page 152 to speak directly to so many of us. The right kind of relationships are obviously needed, but so is the support of teachers so that they may focus on students and not the high demands of the testing system. Hicks later again states that she does not find much support for responsive literacy practices in the current educational theory or research. How disheartening. She even says that the struggle facing the practices this book suggests to be the educational system that seems to want to mainstream everyone. She then says this is "devasting" to our working class children like the Lauries and Jakes.

We have to realize it is not a student's fault that they are poor. It is not their fault their parents do not participate in school. It is not the child's fault they live where they do. These parents send us everyday the best that they absolutely have. It is our job, our "moral" duty to accept our students as different, teach them of differences and embrace that we are different.

Finally, on page 154, Hicks addresses what can help teachers move toward more responsive literacy practices. Thank you!! I have been asking this question over and over as we continued to read. What I gathered from her response here is that there is not one specific thing "that works". We must change with the children, learn about them, their community, why they are where they are and how they go there.

In this final chapter, Hicks shares her reflections of the implications of creating educational research discourses that are literary in form. Hicks discribes "love's knowledge", knowledge between persons and of persons which is part of our everyday relations with others. She argues that a big part of what we know comes from our social relations with others. Our relations with others changes our identities, beliefs, practices, and understandings. Our knowledge of others also connects with a feeling. Feelings are also embeded in the texts we read that are part of our reasoning and cognitive awareness. When we talk with others there are feelings that shape the things we say in our conversations.

Hicks talks about how Rose researches writing and literary learning in this chapter. Rose does see that the social classes that people are in, does play a huge part in literary learning. The things we come to terms with in our culture, affect who we are and what we know. The culture we come from creates feelings of things we know and value. Rose also suggest that learning is embeded in the social relations and identies we form with others. She suggest that when we form a connection, like a romance, with our students, then they have an enthusiam for writing because they want the teacher to like them. I teach in a poor and working-class school where I too have experienced that the love I show to the children, creates an environment of learning and has eleviated some possible discipline problems.

Bakhtin's writings point out how language practices shape the relationships that exist between children in the different social worlds. Children's identities as readers and writers are constructed through the cultural and social genres that they are around and exposed to. A child's writing, speaking, and oral language are shaped from the things they hear and see from other people's language practices that are around them. My literacy knowledge came from a Southern culture. It wasn't until I got to college that I started hearing and seeing language that was different from mine. It was then that I felt I started learning and growing more after being around others whose lannguage and culture backgrounds differered from mine. Renee, I did read a post of yours that explained how you had lived in a variety of areas. I feel that your language and literacy were probably shaped early because you had a variety of exposure to diverse cultures,

I agree with Bakhtin, that as teachers we need to have a teaching relationship with our students that is sensitive to a child's history and culture if we want academic success from our students. I never thought about how poor and working-class children reject us, not just our discourses. When I think about my relations with people in general, I can recall tuning people out either because I thought they acted to high-and-mighty or just the opposite where I found them not worthy enough to live up to my standards. It is funny how we go through these feelings as children. As I grew up, I learned to have respect for everyone and truely began to see beauty in the cultural diversities in individuals. So it makes sense that we may find children who reject us for the same reasons or possibly for things such as skin color if they have heard racist remaks from those around them. I think as teachers we have to change as much as the students in order to see why these children are failing. To truely be a good teacher means to open up and see how those students of different backgrounds differ from us and be willing to open our heart to them. I totally see more than ever now after reading this book, how children's literacy has so much to do with literacy at home including their language and culture.

Hicks writes, "Cultural literacy educators have also focused a great deal on language, arguing that classroom instruction needs to build on students' home and community discourses". I like how Hicks used the word "ain't" to connect with the students. I do notice students seem really interested and turned on when I use slang or speech that is not part of my expected cultural voice. I see now that just my desire to learn about the lives of the poor and working-class children in my classroom, is part of an answer to what works with them.

More than ever, I now deeply understand how important it is that I get to the root of who my students are and where they come from. I see how writing practices come from a child's social world. So from here I know that I am going to have to learn who my students are and where they come from in order to maximize the success of my students. I know I plan to send a survey at the beginning of the school year to learn about my students. I also plan to do home visits. If I can not work in a home visit, then I plan to have early conferences with my students. My question is, what are other ideas that have helped you learn about the situated histories of your students? My biggest challenge is going to be how to incorporate histories of the students when they all come to you from a variety of cultures and linguist backgrounds. Any suggesstions?

Linda Younts

In my mind he word hybrid reminds me of hybrid cars-those that must function using two different forms of fuel (gasoline and elevtricty). Ok I am going somewhere with this! So I began to think about students who must use a hybrid language system, meaning more than one style of language to function at home and at school. I feel like after reading this confusing chapter, I understand this to be true- it is our job as educators to understand and appreciate the situated histories of our students, to maintain a positive working relationship with students and their families, to respect individual differences and use that in a positive manner at school, and ultimately to prepare students in understanding the language/skills necessary to engage in and participate in "middle-class institutions of learning" (p. 141). We are the link, in a sense, that provides the necessary tools for children to grow and understand the differences among communications and values among families and social classes. Is it our job to educate children about choices in life or about the doors that a college education may open? The answer is yes. We have a responsibility to lay it all out there for kids- teach them that sometimes life isn't fair but that choices you make as young people can affect your future. It becomes a challenge to try to explain this while remembering each child's background and not relate the information in a judgmental way. Not such an easy task.
Rose explains that he was on a vocational track initially in high school and that it was painful to try and fit it and succeed in school because it seemed as if the track he was on placed a painful label on him. It is no wonder that some students are turned off by school when faced with the expectations for students are different depending on which "track" or category you fit into. For example, I was on a college prep track- my teachers expected me to give 110%, make As, behave, have great attendance, and eventually get accepted to college. My sister was on a different track. Her teachers simply wanted her to show up and give her best on schoolwork- if she chose to work or possibly attend community college after high school, then that would have been the best that was expected of her. Two sisters- same parents-two completely different set of expectations by our teachers.
On page 151 Bakhtin explains that teachers often cannot see the richness in children's situtated histories and as a result reduce those histories to LABELS that may in part account for children's failures in school. This again reminded me of my younger sister. She was labeled differently than me by teachers. Incidently, I am proud to say that she did attend CPCC and has a fantastic career now!
Finally, I cannot agree more with the statement on page 152, we must be willing to open ourselves up to seeing those who differ from us- hard work but it is this work that lies at the heart of teaching.

As this chapter (mercifully) ended, I found myself thinking about the efforts we, as teachers, make to support our students' growth in the classroom. Before we can get down to the business of teaching and learning when the new school year begins, we have to "sell" the classroom not only to our students, but their parents and families. Once you have the parents and families on your side, the rest seems to fall into place. This relationship is essential. Rose supports the idea of "wooing" children in the relationship of the student/teacher/classroom, much in the same way that a business "woos" its clients with the "customer is always right" attitude. By treating parents and families as customers (even when they're not right) they tend to support the classroom and teacher in difficult situations. Combine this support with the "romance" of the child in the teacher/student/classroom dance, and you create the most successful environment for the child as he/she grows academically, socially, and behaviorally. I relate to this (difficult to read!) chapter because it supports the idea of this successful environment by nurturing the students through mutual respect. In essence, the students are given encouragement and are made to feel important because they are valued. This value supports their self-confidence in the classroom environment, which helps them to grow as learners because they feel like they're PART of the classroom - a valuable part. They feel their opinion matters. They look to themselves because they value their own growth and understanding as a learner. And they take ownership in their learning. This is very powerful. The ideas presented in this chapter support the need for the involvement of parents, students, AND teachers in the classroom. The classroom can't be viewed as the "teacher's" classroom. While the teacher oversees the classroom, the students and parents need to feel ownership within its walls. I LOVE THIS. I wish I had the parental involement necessary to forge such a successful relationship with every parent in the classroom. This, unfortunately, isn't possible. Many parents don't view themselves as part of the classroom. Their narrow view is of what classrooms used to be: classrooms that belonged to the teacher, were run strictly by the teacher (with no student input), and were solely the responsibility of the teacher. The students were extensions of the teacher. The parents were merely vehicles to administer support when something went wrong or to help with homework. I much prefer the classroom Hicks is talking about in this chapter. Such involvement and support are ideal and create an optimal environment for all involved. This, in turn, paves the way for each student to fully reach their potential in all aspects of the classroom.

The author speaks of the cultural boundaries in the classroom. I'm guilty of assuming that my students and their families think like I do. This, as I mentioned in an earlier post, has been one of my most difficult challenges in the classroom. I have to constantly remind myself that our values are different and that I need to be the one to bend to meet the understanding and the needs of my students and their families. I need to be the one to bridge this gap. As the teacher, it's my responsiblity to make my students and their families feel comfortable in the classroom. I hold that key. I am working to be mindful in our interactions of the vocabulary I use and the inferred meanings in my statements. They may not understand some of the vocabulary I choose and my inferences may not have the same meanings. Therefore, I need to be very deliberate in the things I say. As teachers, we hold the power to bridge the cultural and social gaps in our classrooms. The bridge is built with solid relationships that we nurture with our students and their families that meet THEIR needs on THEIR terms. What a challenge in the classroom!

Heather Holland

Okay, I have to be really honest. After reading about four pages of chapter 6, I got up and thought… maybe I am not applying myself with the text in this chapter. Maybe I need to move to a different reading spot in the house—that didn’t work, so I broke the title apart word by word and “inquired” about what the author, Beth Hicks, was trying to convey in this final chapter. I have considered Beth Hick’s use of the word, “Hybrid” and I am sensing that she is referring to the “fusion” of languages in the classroom, social settings, and home-situations to make language or communication work for everyone. A child, before coming into the classroom, is generally only exposed to his/her home environment, parent(s), and their social network. With that being said, many children have a very limited resource for knowledge and experiences. They are completely dependent on the teacher for bridging the gap between home and school and the outside-world. A teacher is the conduit and facilitator for children to view the world around them. It is up to the teacher to construct inquisitive minds that wonder about language and the world and its interconnectedness. Without a teacher’s facilitation of this, a child is left with merely their limited experiences from their home life. A teacher must have an open-mind, explore and inquire about the social environments’ of her students, and make educated decisions about how to bridge the gap between worlds of knowledge and language. In order to do this, a teacher must explore, communicate effectively with parents and the community, and look for opportunities to prove trustworthiness to community members. Once trust is established between the parent and the educator or the community volunteers and the educator, the process of exploration and understanding begins.

As a second grade classroom teacher, I have found that it is important for me to understand my students. This job is not easy. My background is very different from most of my students’ and their families’ backgrounds. However, I communicate in many ways. I share with language by using various avenues to communicate: newsletters, telephone calls, classroom website, parent-teacher conferences, notes of praise (about their child’s great work), and family event nights in my classroom. Each avenue has a different level of effectiveness and is used for a specific of purpose. Without language, bridging the gap between our worlds would be virtually impossible. I must try my best, as a teacher, to be accepting, caring, understanding, and friendly with my students and their families. In order for them to view my teaching as important, I must demonstrate my value for each of them. If children and parents do not realize and understand that I value them, then they will not value the language I possess and share with them. Just as Beth Hicks had to do, I must gain perspective and cross class boundaries often to see into the lives of the children I teach.

Written by
Heather Holland

I must admit that I found this chapter just as difficult to read as Chapter 1 and was disappointed that Hicks found it necessary to use intellectual ramblings rather than the personable and understandable prose she used for the rest of the text.

Despite this downfall, I found Hicks' recounting of Mike Rose's study from his book Lives on the Boundary intriguing. His personal connection to the lives of other working class families was very interesting. "There are some things about my early life, I can see now, that are reflected in other working-class lives I've encountered: the isolation of neighborhoods, information poverty, the limited means of protecting children from family disaster, the predominance of such disaster, the resilience of imagination, the intellectual curiosity and literate enticements that remain hidden from the schools, the feelings of scholastic inadequacy, the dislocations that come from crossing educational boundaries." I can very much relate to having seen some of these things in the lives of my students this year. One student in my class, for example, probably suffered from isolation due to social status more than any other student in the entire fifth grade. She came from a working class family. She frequently wore the same clothes multiple days in a row, was constantly picked on for her “buck teeth”, and suffered the loss of her dad to suicide due to her parents’ ensuing divorce. She rarely paid attention in class and I found her drawing pictures more than anything else in our classroom. She struggled greatly to succeed academically. Despite all of these hardships, she demonstrated enormous resilience and strength of character. She never once lost her imagination, creativity, or personality. If anything, she allowed these struggles to more clearly define the young woman she was becoming. As an educator, I saw the need for her to express herself in multiple formats. She was given a journal to write in and I allowed her to draw a picture depicting her thoughts or feelings. Trying and testing new methods like this for different students, helped me to become a better teacher, as it gave her the opportunity to become a better student. Rose stated, “ To truly educate in America, then, to reach the full sweep of our citizenry, we need to question received perception, shift continually from the standard lens.”

Reasons such as these are exactly why we must embrace a hybrid teaching philosophy. There is no one right way to expose a child to literacy learning. There is not one specific way to teach so that every child succeeds. It is absolutely necessary to be willing to try and use a multitude of teaching strategies, to better enable our students to learn in a way that is most comfortable for them. If I teach something in only one way and only one or two students truly connect to the curriculum and understand what I am explaining, then am I really teaching? Shouldn’t being a teacher automatically create an opportunity for others to learn from your example? ~Allison Reese

What a great way to end this book! From my perspective, Hicks journey for this research is like a lesson plan. She had a plan of what she was going to do. After the implementing her plan, then she observed her subjects, and finally the conclusion of her investigations, she was able to reflect on what worked, what did not work, and what she learned. At the end of her book, this is exactly what Hicks has done. She summed up this book by reflecting and the admission of self-discovery. In this study, she discovers that our social relations play a great part in our student’s education. I particularly like what Nussbaum’s articulated on page 137, the term “love’s knowledge—knowledge between persons and of persons. To me that mean, when one loves learning, then they will be lifelong learners. The relationships we form among home and school will ensure success for all students, we need to understand our student’s “situated histories”. These “situated histories” encompasses understanding their identity, class, gender, beliefs, and practices.

According to Hicks, hybrid language of inquiry is the bond needed in the educational development of children. Most students from working class environment enter into school with limited or complete absent of knowledge and experience with formal registry. We want our children to think out of the box but before they can think out of the box, teachers must incorporate vocabulary along with the hidden rule of upper and middle class society in educating their students. Research has shown major deficits in student’s test scores, which has been related to student’s inability to understand the language presented on formal assessments.

Unfortunately, language and grammar has inconveniently been removed from the North Carolina Standard Course of Study. No Child Left Behind (NCLB), has placed major emphasis on test scores, which has sent state departments and local school systems into a panic. Therefore, teachers have been sanctioned to teach educational programs that have been proven to work. However, based on my experiences in equity plus/ Title I school these programs are designed for upper and middle class students that has developed formal registry. They don't allow for the implementation of vocabulary instruction that is required to develop lower income students language ability to enable them to perform successfully on standardized test. Ruby Payne’s book, “A Framework for Understanding Poverty”, states that it is essential component of students educational development, to teach formal registry and acceptable behavior patterns to student of lower income homes for them to become success. In implementing programs and creating schedules administrators, tend to over look this vital component. Yet, continue to fault the teachers for student failure, when the teachers have followed the schedules assigned to them and implementing the programs mandated to them by the county school system.

Upon her completion of this journey, she suggested, and referred to researchers and theorists ideologies about bridging and engaging our student’s home literacy practices into the school’s literacy practices while implementing the goals and objectives of the curriculum.

I truly believed that Hicks should be employed by our school system to equip our administrators with this knowledge. Then, administrators must trust teachers to implement their knowledge and experiences in instructing our students that will best enhance individual abilities and needs based on prior knowledge experience and implementation of the classroom teacher and not be driven by programs mandated by No Child Left Behind (NCLB). This profound effect of free thinking attitude and in seeing the world from a different angle will enable educators in crossing boundaries of the student’s situated histories and the hybrid languages of home and school. These entities will influence our students and make their educational experience a successful one of working class families.