CI 5441: Course Readings-- Wk 8: Oct 27

When it comes to discussions on literature within the classroom, I never realized how many different strategies could be employed to create a meaningful conversation among students. I’m glad that this week’s readings provided us with a few strategies we can test out in the classroom. I love the concept of a literature circle, the profound ideology behind the Socratic Circle, and the new advances in technology that take the discussion out of the classroom.

The Daniels article on literature circles provided a great definition and outline for literature circles. What I thought was the most interesting, and perhaps important element to remember as a teacher, is the importance of choice. Daniels notes that “Student choice tops the list, because the deepest spirit of literature circles comes from independent reading” (18). The choice of text offered in the literature circle is compared to the choice given to children by their parents in what books to read before bed, or whenever. While this is something that would no doubt be limited in the classroom, I think Daniels is right when he says, “you can’t fall in love with books that someone stuffs down your throat. For reading to become a lifelong habit and deeply owned skill, it has to be voluntary, anchored in feelings of pleasure and power” (19). I want reading to become a pleasurable experience and passion for my students and I hope I can give them the autonomy that will further this hope along.

Overall, I think that the literature circle is a great idea and I believe Copeland is right when he links them with Socratic circles. I can easily imagine how it would be useful to use both of these techniques in the classroom as ways to promote student-driven learning. Copeland notes that through the Socratic circle students will learn “that all new understanding is linked to prior understanding, that thought itself is a continuous thread woven through our lives rather than isolated sets of questions and answers” (8)—while this might be a bit existential, I love it! I think this is a profound insight that will be helpful in teaching students the malleability and constant reshaping of thought as we add and expand our experiences to shape understanding. This connects with his later acknowledgement that the Socratic circle will help students, “quickly see critical thought as an ongoing, developing skill rather than some secretive society to which some students belong and others do not” (12).

He further adds, “A Socratic circle turns the vast majority over of the guidance of the conversation and the ownership of the material over to the students” (9). Similar to the literature circle, the idea it that when given the reins of their education, students will be more motivated to fully engage in the development and creation of that learning—a constructivist view that I fully support!

I think the main thing I will take away from these articles—and perhaps my favorite point—is that in using these strategies we are teaching students to take their reading and learning into their own hands. By giving them the ability to chose their own text, form their own hypothesis, take their own notes, and discuss their ideas with their peers and teachers on a more equal level, we are preparing students for the future. We are actively giving them the tools that they will use to navigate in the “real world.” Daniels says that, “Students must learn to take full responsibility for locating, selecting, and pursuing books, rather than always expecting teachers or other adults to choose for them” (20). By reducing student reliance on teachers, we open up a whole new realm of possibilities and responsibilities for students that will lead them into a more successful life beyond the reaches of the classroom. Awesome!

CI 5441: Course Readings-- Wk 7: Oct 20

I found the readings for this week to be both incredibly insightful and interesting, but at the same time a bit daunting. The different authors of our readings each expressed in their writings elements of the type of classroom I want to create, but now I find myself worried about being able to accomplish all that they have set out on the table.

I desperately want to create the type of social justice classroom that Christensen defines as a combination of belief, multiculturalism, empowerment, critique, and growth. It is extremely important that teachers believe in the abilities of their students and make these beliefs known. Christensen passionately claims, “Teachers must see the gifts that each student brings to class, not the deficits. The teacher must absolutely believe in the potential of the student, but even more essentially, the teacher must believe in the right of the student to have access to a rigorous education” (171). In doing this, students can overcome the damage down by other teachers and members of society who have told them otherwise. I loved the quote by one of Christensen’s students who asked, “Why figure out ahead of time for people what they’re going to do with their lives?” (170)—it is up to the individual to figure this out for themselves and to create the future they want without the doubt placed on them by society.

One of these prejudgments made by society concerns language—what is right and what is wrong. The readings emphasized the political aspects connected to language and how as teachers we can try and combat ideas of right and wrong. Christensen mentions her own torment in school over the correct pronunciation of “lawyer.” Myself, whenever I tell someone that I am an English major, they automatically reply, “Oh, better watch what I say around you!” implying that I will constantly be on the look-out for misuse of the English language. While I might occasionally help friends who are trying to learn English as a second language, I do not go around with my Standard English radar looking for people I can humiliate with my “superior” understanding of the “right” way to speak.

Christenbury and Chritensen’s pieces resonated with both speech and writing. I had never thought about how I would handle different Englishes in my classroom. Christensen’s idea of “correct and connect” is a great idea to start with (101). Christensen notes that, “Students need to know where to find help, and they need to understand what changes might be necessary, but they need to learn in a context that doesn’t say, ‘The way you said this is wrong’” (101). In creating this environment students can feel more able and comfortable in communicating their thoughts rather than worrying about avoiding errors. I know now that I need to come up with a grading system that will reflect these ideas while still trying to help students become more comfortable with the “power” language they are sure to encounter.

Christensen also emphasizes the need to ground lessons around the lives of our students. By carefully selecting texts and activities that illustrate the diverse backgrounds and experiences of our students we can create an environment that is multicultural and empowers students. When students can see that their own lives and experiences are the basis for their education, they can learn how to look at the real world in a different way and work together to try and make it a better place. This leads into the preparation for social critique that comes from reading, discussing, and reinventing issues found within literature. When students are given the tools to do this and asked to work together in their classroom community they will be all the more prepared to take on the world around them. The growth that this type of education creates in students is priceless. Not only does this form of curriculum give them the abilities they need, it gives them the necessary confidence to draw from.

They most troubling section for me was Delpit’s article about power in the classroom. I do not see myself as a strong authoritative figure and I know that I employ the indirect directives mentioned in the article. My eyes were definitely opened to the difficulties that might arise through these characteristics and I am not sure how I can combat them. It will take a great deal of attention and reflection on my part, but I hope this is something that I can keep in mind as I begin my teaching journey. I know one thing though, I mustn't let them see my fear!

CI 5441: Course Readings--Wk 6: Oct 13

Well, for last week we read our assigned chapters on critical theory and, lucky us, we were able to see Deb Appleman present information on her research, in person. Then is Rick’s class, we also looked into critical theory in analyzing media representations. One of the things that has really stuck with me is the idea of using critical lenses as a way to provide a safe environment for bringing up difficult issues and encouraging deeper discussions among students. Appleman notes in her text that through the use of the postcolonial lens creates a more “inclusive classroom” that “validates the experiences and perspectives of readers from outside the mainstream” (89). This is achieved by using the lens as a way to recognize, respect, and truly acknowledge the unique histories and cultures from all around the world. By giving students a chance to read literature written by non-Western voices, literature written by the people who have been oppressed, silenced, and neglected, students can feel more comfortable with their identities in and out of the classroom.

Another advantage to using the postcolonial lens, and some of the other lens as well, is that by using this lens teachers can establish a more empathetic classroom dialogue. Using different lenses in order to illustrate different ways of examining a text teaches students not only to question the world around them with a critical eye, it also puts them in someone else’s shoes; shoes that might belong to their fellow classmates. By using the postcolonial text, for example, white students might be able to empathize more with their minority classmates while those who are the minority can partake in discussion knowing that they are for once not the only ones to interpret a text in one specific way. This safe zone, in which students can share a viewpoint that might be drastically different from that of the mainstream population, will connect students in a way that forces them to open their eyes. Such discussions will open up avenues for teachers to really attack the tough issues brought up in a text without fear that some students might feel singled out, attacked, or simply uncomfortable with their reading of the text and class discussions.

All of this will help students become more critical observers and actors in the world around them. Appleman quotes a teacher who in order to move her students “outside their familiar patterns of thinking,” took it upon herself to ask them to reflect upon how they would handle being indoctrinated—“incapable of thinking collectively in any but the most inhuman ways” (91). Her point was to illustrate to her students the need to think of themselves as “public individuals” rather than brainwashed members of a community. They need to think beyond themselves and react to what they encounter in society from a variety of viewpoints in order to successfully participate in the world around them. As teachers it is our responsibility to give them the strategies and tools that will help them examine and analyze the world around them critically, today, in hope for a better tomorrow.

CI 5441: Course Readings-- Wk 4: Sept 27

The readings for this week definitely provided a lot of useful information and different ways of thinking about how to both approach and use texts in the classroom. What surprised me in the readings was the material presented in the first section of Critical Encounters in High School English: Teaching Literary Theory to Adolescents by Deborah Appleman. Not only did Appleman present a teaching philosophy that is very similar to my own, but she also brought up the importance of using literary theory as a prime means in which to provide students with, “critical lenses” that “provide students with a way of reading their world” (4).

It was startling to read that so many teachers have balked at using literary theory in the classroom. I don’t understand why teachers wouldn’t be able to see the benefits of using these different perspectives in interpreting texts. Appleman lists some common defenses against literary theory as being the difficulty of keeping up with the latest developments, the struggle to “to juggle curricular concerns as well as the varied literary skills and needs of their increasingly diverse student body,” or the difficulty of seeing the relevance of such “abstract” analysis. Nevertheless, I agree with Appleman that these statements are absurd. If anything, the use of literary theory in the classroom should help increase diversity of thinking in the nation’s increasingly diverse student population by allowing them think in ways that “sharpen one’s vision and provide alternative ways of seeing” (Appleman 4).

After reading this chapter, I feel fortunate in my own educational background. While it might not have been exceedingly multicultural, it definitely centered on the different perspectives associate with literary theory. I would say that starting in my sophomore year of high school I was exposed to literary theory in my English classrooms. We did a lot of our own research or analysis in searching for meaning and purpose within a text as well as discovering the analysis and research of others. My junior year we did a project of short stories and dug around for criticism that would help us explore the text. Then we were able to compare and contrast our own perspective against the articles we had found. We performed a more sophisticated version of this assignment my senior year and with every assignment I grew to appreciate the different perspectives of the theory.

I would say that the these assignments and the presence of literary theory in my classrooms prepared me for many of the college courses that required me to examine other cultures or think outside of my own limited experiences. In general, I also believe that without those opportunities to look at a text through a specific view, I learned skills that allow me to try and rationalize or sympathize with the actions of others in my day-to-day life.

I was also struck by Appleman’s reflection on the political side of teaching. She quotes Shirley Staton who claims that, “there is no such thing as an innocent, value-free reading. Instead, each of us has a viewpoint invested with presuppositions about ‘reality’ and about ourselves, whether we are conscious or not” (Appleman 8). This is so true! Everyone brings with them their preconceived notions, previous experience, values, and prior knowledge into whatever they read. As teachers it is important that we are able to guide students in such a way that they are able to use that knowledge to better understand and interpret texts. If students can understand that, just like them, the creators of any given object relied on their own personal backgrounds during the creation process, they will learn to question the purpose or drive behind an action and interpret it accordingly.

What startled me was the apparent distaste for such methods expressed to some degree, by Rosenblatt’s article. It seems to me that it will be difficult to create a classroom that can both scaffold students with ways to perceive a text through the use of literary theory while preserving aesthetic reading within them. I hope that I can create a classroom environment that is safe for the expression of thought and experience when reading a text but also drives students to look at readings through different lenses.

CI 5441: Course Readings-- Week 3: Sept. 22

This week’s readings provided a look into culturally relevant pedagogy that seemed to mirror some aspects of my own teaching philosophy. I thought that Gloria Ladson-Billings article “But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” was a particularly enlightening illustration of the ways in which teachers can create a productive and culturally diverse classroom and curriculum in order to empower students as important actors in American democracy. Ladson-Billings mirrors a principle that helped create my own teaching philosophy connecting English—and other forms of—education with the formation of knowledgeable and proactive citizens.


Ladson-Billings defines culturally relevant pedagogy as relying on three characteristics: academic success, maintained cultural competence, and a developed critical consciousness. She frames these on the belief that in order to be productive and active citizens in our democracy, students must be given the necessary tools. She highlights a teacher who focused on providing African American boys in her classroom with a challenge to succeed. Ladson-Billings writes that, “Instead of entering into an antagonistic relationship with the boys, Lewis found ways to value their skills and abilities and channel them in academically important ways” (160). Instead of giving into the common “we—they” approach—as illustrated in chapter 2 of Teaching Literature to Adolescents (Beach et al. 25)—this teacher found a connection with her students by challenging them to prove their educational prowess. She is giving them the chance to see their own power in order to fulfill their duties as democratic citizens.


The next criterion illustrates the need for teacher to connect a student’s home culture with the broader culture of school and society. This is done by teachers who can “utilize students’ culture as a vehicle for learning” (Ladson-Billings 161). Here teachers must find a way to make meaningful and relevant connections between their students and the curriculum they are bringing to the table. Similar to the example in the article, I had a teacher who built a bridge between what was relevant to us and the various pieces that make up figurative writing by allowing us to present a song of our choice to the class and analyze it for different elements of figurative language. Thus students could connect their “cultures”—age, ethnicity, gender, etc.—with an informative classroom assignment. This is something that instills both excitement and trepidation within me, but I know that it will be something I will need to constantly work and reflect upon in order to accomplish.


The last criterion for culturally relevant teaching is based on the belief that students should “develop a broader sociopolitical consciousness that allows them to critique the cultural norms, values, mores, and institutions that produce and maintain social inequalities” (Ladson-Billings 162). As English teachers I think it is important that in our discussions of literature in the classroom we develop in our students the ability to examine, identify, analyze, critique, and reflect. In doing this we can provide them with the tools that are necessary to look at the world around them with an open and critical eye through which they can observe society and act in support of a better nation, a better world. Ladson-Billings outlines a path for teachers that can help them create the type of education that can best serve the needs of the people and, this might sound very idealistic, but if education is not based on the idea of creating more intelligent and proactive citizens who can work to make the future brighter for themselves and all those around them, then what is the point?

Ladson-Billings, Gloria. “But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant
Pedagogy.” Theory into Practice. 34.3 (1995):159-165. 02 Sep. 2009

CI 5441: Course Readings-Week 2: Sept. 15

I was greatly intrigued by the reading from the text Teaching Literature to Adolescents. The chapter we read for this week focused on censorship in the classroom and how a teacher goes about the exciting and arduous task of deciding which texts to include in the classroom. An important moment for me in the text was the question, "how do you design a curriculum that takes students beyond books, preparing them for the host of ethical and moral decisions they must make each day of their future lives as members of a democratic society?" ( Beach et al. 243-244). This question is a daunting one and made me stop to think about my future goals for my future classroom.

In my class I want to explore a variety of texts that illustrate the cultural diversity of our nation. This will be an important aspect of my curriculum no matter where my teaching career might lead me. It is important to explore and discuss issues of diversity--be it diversity of culture, religion, sexual orientation, etc.--in even the most homogeneous of societies. It is only by educating students to accept and embrace the differences they will most certainly face in our ever changing world that we can attempt to create a society based on tolerance, acceptance, and understanding. This connects with another idea in the book which focuses on creating a "socially responsible" students (Beach et al. 244).

What amazed me about the need to use classrooms as a melting pot of differences and create an atmosphere of respect was the lack of this, for the most part in my own education. Upon reading the text I struggled to remember instances of diversity in my own learning processes. I was interested to note that the text specifically mentions the influence of conservative Texans in monitoring the the "text-book adoption process" (Beach et al. 244). I spent my middle school and high school years in Texas and I can not remember ever reading or encountering literature in my English classes that explored the great realm of diverse texts available for students. Sandra Cisneros and Langston Hughes are the only non-American or European authors I remember encountering. The realization that I never would have noticed this in high school and it is only since entering college that I can reflect on this is disturbing to me and I realize how important it is to expose students to texts that either introduce them to or reflect their own experiences.

I also agree with the argument in the text that many adults do not give enough credit to their children when it comes to how they will perceive or react to a text. The writers cite a woman who claims that the influence of family values and culture has much more to do with how a child will interpret a text than the books they read. I again look at my own experience with this one. I read The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and afterwards I did not suddenly have racist beliefs. I think that we need to give children more credit and understand that if we can use these materials to bring up difficult subjects or connect them with things they may or may not have been exposed to before we can stimulate their minds in a way that will better prepare them for the future.

Beach, Richard., et al. Teaching Literature to Adolescents. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc., 2006.