Literature Review #1

Reading Reflection

10/31/20

Vicki McBride

SOURCES:

McLean, Boling, & Rowsell. (2009). “Engaging Diverse Students in Multiple Literacies in and

Out of School”, Handbook of research on literacy and diversity, 158 – 172.

Norton, B. (2010) “Identity, Literacy, and English-Language Teaching”, TESL Canada

Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada 28 (1), 1 – 13.

INTRODUCTION:

Throughout my graduate studies, I have focused on my ELL students and their literacy needs. For several graduate classes, I focused on the motivation of ELL students in literacy. The common thread in my thought processes has been ELL literacy engagement. My career has spanned thirty years and the thread of ELL literacy engagement has also been my focus. As I have become more reflective of my literacy teaching, and more constrained by the district’s expectations, my belief is that ELL literacy engagement should be my focus. This focus will help all of my students.

NOTES AND RESPONSES

My first reading reflection will focus on the text, “Identity, Literacy, and English-Language Teaching” by Bonnie Norton. I selected this article from Dr. Mary Rice’s class, Literacy Leadership, which I took in 2019. This article gave me an “ah-ha” moment, as Norton discusses the literacy investment of three ELL communities. Her premise is that it is necessary to depart “from current conceptions of motivation in the field of language-learning, the concept of investment signals the socially and historically constructed relationship of learners to the target language and their sometimes ambivalent desire to speak, read, or write it” (Norton 2010).

My research to this point, had focused on the motivation of the literacy learner. After reading Norton’s article, I realized that this idea of literacy investment coexists with the learner’s motivation. Literacy investment encompasses many literacies that are relevant to students. This means that what literacy learning the student brings from home, is honored and an intrinsic part of literacy learning. Literacy investment looks different in different communities, based on the needs, wants, and aspirations of the particular community. My research has focused on the literacy motivation of ELL students. Norton made me realize that motivation is affected by cultural capital. Norton’s terminology refers to literacy investment as “cultural capital”. Norton states, that “if learners invest in a second language, they do so with the understanding that they will acquire a wider range of symbolic and material resources, which will in turn increase the value of their cultural capital” (Norton, 2010). This cultural capital is intrinsic in the literacy learner’s identity as the learner expands their sense of themselves, and gains opportunities. Norton explains that these opportunities in cultural capital allow the learner to imagine a future relationship, and, sense of community.

The second text, is a chapter from the Handbook of research on literacy and diversity by Morrow, Rueda, and Lapp. The chapter “Engaging Diverse Students in Multiple Literacies in and Out of School, by McLean, Boling and Rowsell, reviews three key approaches to engaging learners. This is a text that I found, when researching critical and multimodal literacies, for Dr. Sung’s class, Issues in Language, Literacy, and Socioculture. The three key approaches discussed in this chapter are

1. critical literacy and critical pedagogy; and,

2. new literacy studies; and,

3. multimodality and multiliteracies.

This chapter does an excellent job of synthesizing these three fields of research as “education equity” (Au and Raphael, 2000). Equity in literacy provides individuals with cultural and community affirmation. I feel that reading McLean, Boling, and Rowsell, in conjunction with Norton’s article, has given me a great deal of information to apply to my classroom, and, my practitioner research. I have always tried to be culturally responsive in my literacy teaching. I never thought of literacy teaching as political, yet it is, because literacy provides the tools for navigating the world. These three fields of literacy, provide a lens to help students from varied cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds, to “focus in multiple literacies in and out of school” (McLean, Boling and Rowsell, 2009).

Critical literacy and critical pedagogy inform literacy education. This means analyzing and critiquing “oppressive beliefs, values, and ideologies of the language classroom” (Freire and Macedo, 1995). As a practitioner, this practice demands that “student interests, cultural resources, knowledge, and skills form not only the starting point but also the center of the curriculum” (McLean, Boling and Rowsell, 2009). New Literacy Studies (NLS) include critical literacy and critical pedagogy, and, focus on daily literacy practices that help shape our identities. Multiliteracies grew out of the fields of multimodality and NLS. Basically, these theories encourage literacy practices that go beyond the standard texts, and writing assignments of school systems. The theories encourage cultural and linguistic diversity. Confidence in one language, attributes to confidence in learning. Confidence in learning translates into effective communication with others. An ability to effectively communicate and navigate multiple literacies, gives students an equitable education.

McLean, Boling, and Rowsell spend time considering the implications for teacher practice. As a practitioner, my focus is practice and materials that promote literacy engagement for ELD students. This research has opened my eyes to theories that promote engagement, or, “buy in”, through a culturally relevant lens. Throughout my career, I have promoted cultural relevance in my lesson planning.

In 2006, NCLB was established to standardize and create equitable education for all. The intent of NCLB did not fully consider that an equitable education, does not necessarily mean equity in education (Darling-Hammond 2007). Common Core standards and assessment driven curriculum/instruction has created a standardized approach. This standardized approach is seen as beneficial in teacher efficacy, as evidenced through standardized testing. In my district, I have been expected to participate in this standardized approach. I critically look at the standards, the materials, and, my practice. I have looked for ways to embed curriculum that engages my students in literacy. I need to take my practice further, and critically consider cultural relevance. That is a big task. As a practitioner I need to consider the following: the varied needs of my ELL students, the school and district’s expectations (their standards and teaching expectations), and, now, how to be a virtual teacher. Currently, there is a divide in America that excludes cultural diversity. There needs to be a bridge over that divide. I believe that is part of my professional responsibility as an educator.

CULMINATING QUESTION:

Can I encourage literacy engagement with my ELD students by implementing, in my practice, critical multiliteracies (critical literacy + multiliteracies = multiliteracies)?

FURTHER READING:

So, my further reading will guide my next 3 literature reviews/reflections. The authors and the articles are primarily from this class, The Process of Reflection and Inquiry, and, from Dr. Sung’s class, Issues in Language, Literacy, and Socioculture. It is a great meld of social justice and practitioner information.

So far, I have the next two literature review/reflections planned. I anticipate that with some feedback, I will figure out the third paper, or, I may figure it out as I plan my next two papers. My second paper will be focused on multicultural practitioner research. I have an article about Gloria Ladson-Billings entitled Igniting Student Learning Through Teacher Engagement in Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. This article is classified as a narrative study focused on multicultural education. This multicultural education is a way for educators to legitimize all stories, especially those of African American children, and ELL students. I will include Gloria Ladson-Billings’ But That’s Just good teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, and Gary R. Howard’s As Diversity Grows, So Must We.

The third literature review/reflection will be focused on four authors’ practitioner research. These articles include, Irene Welch’s Building Interactional Space in an ESL Classroom to Foster Bilingual Identity and Linguistic Repertoires, Cati V. de los Rios’s article Picturing Ethnic Studies: Photovoice and Youth Literacies of Social Action, Elizabeth Marshall’s Counter-Storytelling through Graphic Life Writing, and, finally, Frances Vitali’s Teaching with Stories as the Content and Context for Learning. These four articles provide thoughtful, culturally relevant examples of teacher practitioners implementing critical literacy. The depth of the studies is evident. The practitioners’ research focal point includes “student interests, cultural resources, knowledge, and skills” (McLean, Boling and Rowsell, 2009).

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Au, K, and Raphael, T. (2000) Equity and literacy in the next millennium. Reading Research

Quarterly, 35(1), 170-188.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). Race, inequality and educational accountability: the irony of 'No Child Left Behind'(3), 245.

de Silva, R, Gleditsch, R, Job, C, Jesme, S, Urness, B, and, Hunter, C. (2018). Igniting Student

Learning Through Teacher Engagement in Culturally Revant Pedagogy. Multicultural Education Spring/Summer.

Freire, P, and Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy:Reading the word and the world. South Hadley, MA:

Bergin and Garvey.

McLean, C, Boling, E, and Rowsell, J. (2009). “Engaging Diverse Students in Multiple

Literacies in and Out of School”, Handbook of research on literacy and diversity, 158 – 172.

Norton, B. (2010) “Identity, Literacy, and English-Language Teaching”, TESL Canada

Journal/Revue TESL Du Canada 28 (1), 1 – 13.