Mahiri & Sablo:
- This article seems to operate under the assumption that literacy, in the final instance, is inherently“political”? Do you agree with His assertion? Please explain.
- Mahiri seems to be pushing for a reconceptualization of literacy, which includes the cultural offerings of traditionally marginalized students. Do you see this as a clear challenge to the American “canon”; and, how realistic, in the face of the overdetermination of a Western, Eurocentric epistemology, do you think the prospect of this reconceptualization is?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete- Answering Mahiri’s and Sable’s first Question:
ReplyDeleteI do agree with Mahiri and Sable that literacy is inherently political in which politics has set up an education system that has specific standards for literacy, which these literacy standards tend to create language barriers for minority students growing up in these poor communities. In addition, these literacy barriers occur in education in which the teacher is following the literacy standards set up by the state’s education system, as this controlled by politics primarily in regards of state exams and literacy standards for public schools. This is clearly depicted in Mahiri’s and Sable’s reading when they state that, “discontent and frustration with writing in school were often voiced by students in both Brown’s and Park’s classes. However, these same students clearly valued the out-of-school writing of their peers, voluntary writers like Keisha and Troy.” As a matter of fact, this also supports that these literacy standards are creating a barrier for students in regards to real and unreal perspectives of their world around them, as this has to pertain to what they see and what they do not see in their environment. However, the students do not see how these learning literacy standards is going to help improve their current living situation, since they know that this is absolutely unrelated to what they have experience in their lives and in their communities such as needing the basic necessities in order to survive from day to day. On the other hand, the students living in poor neighborhoods do know that the literacy standards that they are taught in their low track classes will not prepare them on the pathway towards college such as their teachers not helping to prepare them to take the SAT or supporting their decisions to enroll in AP or Honors classes. Furthermore, they also know that it will take more than just literacy standards and education to move out of their poor and dangerous neighborhoods, but it will take changing the politics that happens to standardized literacy implemented in their classrooms and in their schools. Finally, I do agree with Mahiri and Sable that literacy is inherently political in which schools located in good neighborhoods tend to have better student standardized test scores than schools located in poor neighborhoods, since the schools located in good neighborhoods tend to have the necessary funding and resources that would impact and reflect the students quality of literacy in their education.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTuyet Truong
ReplyDeleteI also do agree with Mahiri & Sablo that literacy is inherently “political” and it has different implications with different sociocultural contexts. For example in schools, teachers are only able to teach what the state and district deems correct to teach. Teachers were not allowed to teach what's not in the books i.e authors of history books in America are usually written by middle to upper class white males, thus what's included in the book is what they want you to know (their political agenda) and often does not include the whole story (in other words very bias). Who ever has the most power seems to be able to control what goes on. Mahiri & Sablo mentions that Camitta (1993) "uses the term 'vernacular writing' to describe the literacy practice of urban African American adolescents… consists of a range of significant and meaningful literate skills and resources that are artificially disconnected from the process of literacy education as it is officially conducted."(pg.229) This proves that although other types of literacy can be used effectively to teach students about literacy it is often ignored because it's not "standard" according to the State, etc.
As Edwen mentions above these standards create barriers. These standardized tests prove nothing about what the student has learned in or outside their classrooms which makes it hard to keep students of certain ethnic groups to stay in school since the system is created in a way to force them to fail, thus only the groups that are "worthy” and/or better are included in classrooms. Since many are not included or simply feel inferior they are forced to practice literacy outside of schools and hide away from teachers. This is problematic in that students are not receiving the help they need to improve to better themselves to not only change themselves, but the world around them. They are not given a chance because they are poor and colored.
It will not be easy to change the political arena currently set up in the public schools systems. However if more people (in power) like Ms. Parks and Ms. Brown were to change their attitudes and accept the fact that life in urban schools are changing they themselves would also have to change in order to accommodate others that don't go through everyday life like them. Educators need to help students think critically for themselves and not just copy or memorize things they are taught. (Bartolome, pg.457)
As Edwen and Tuyet states Mahiri and Sablo are correct when they speak of the educational system of being guided by political strings. This is reflected by the educational system's bureaucracy policies. It is a top down process, for the most part. The education board decides on specific numbers on tests to determine which school gets how much money.
ReplyDeleteFor example, take the High School Exit Exam. The board decided students would have to pass this exam to graduate from high school. Ever since it went into practice, schools now take out extra time to "prep" the students on how to take the test so that they pass. Priority is being given on the test instead of learning material in class that may be of value to them. However, you can't exactly blame the schools either. They are just trying to make sure enough students pass so that their school doesn't lose money. It's the policy's fault. It does not take into consideration that some areas are in the more poor and minority dominated regions. Those areas will have lower achieving students. It's not catering to them and what they know.
Because some main guy at the top decided ont his rule, the principal is having to create rules to make sure the teachers get enough passing students, thus the teachers are having to guide the material they teach to help with this test. The whole agenda has changed.