Tuesday, March 26, 2024

Blog #9. Literacy with an Attitude by Patrick Finn


                                    Literacy with an Attitude

                                                       Written by Patrick Finn                           

                                         Chapter 1

Do you believe there to be inequalities in education?  I didn't think too much about this before reading Patrick Finn's article but I certainly do now!  Out of all the articles we've read for this course, I felt this to be the most 'eye' opener for me, being in eduction for over 28 years.  

I know that there are some inequalities in education but have always felt them to be community based, not on students' social classes within the same communities.  Finn starts of chapter 1 with a discussion of Paulo Freire, a professor at the University of Recife in Brazil.  This professor started a literacy program in the early 1960's.  Mr. Freire started this literacy program for illiterate, poor adults.  The idea behind this program was that the community leaders believed that by teaching literacy to the adults, it would make them become better workers and better citizens.  Paulo's approach to teaching was different than the previous programs, he introduced the concept of justice.  After introducing this concept, he went on to teach them and instill the idea that by them learning to read and being literate, they would have the ability to secure 'JUSTICE' and engage in the struggles and challenges they faced being illiterate.  Because of this one factor, which all the other failed programs did not have, Paulo's program was effective.  This would give the lower class more power!  

                                                      Chapter 2 

Author's Point of View: "Don't be so damned superior! Don't look down your nose to people out there teaching real children in real and sometimes dreadful circumstances. Don't question their intelligence, or their motives." 

In this chapter, Finn introduces the reader to a study done by Jean Anyon whom 'studied fifth grade classes in five public elementary schools in rich neighborhoods and not-so-rich neighborhoods in northern New Jersey.'  He ranked these schools based on the level of family income:  elite, wealthy, middle, and working class.    

Finn goes on to write about the similarities among these schools in his study.  The population was predominately white, they used the same language arts curriculum, and math books.  The the curriculum was very similar within these five schools.  Even though there were so many similarities in the curriculum, the delivery of the content was drastically different based on the children's families socioeconomics status.

                                                            

                                                      Anyon's Findings:

I believe Anyon felt there to be a correlation with the teachers whom taught at these different schools with their own upbringing and socioeconomic background.  Many of the schools did not ask Bloom Taxonomy questions:  

Blooms Taxonomy: CLICK HERE     

                                                             




2 Working Class Schools :

*students were given little decision making or choices on their learning

*solving problems or figuring out the work had to be done the 'teacher's way' or else

*'in one working-class school, the teachers used manuals that specified that the textbooks were intended for "low ability students".'

*students were not challenged academically, there was no creativity, higher questioning, exploration, or free choice in their learning

*children in these working class schools were required to copy notes, take multiple choice tests and never had to explain their reasoning

*science experiments were performed by the teacher as the students watched

*teachers controlled 'students' movements throughout the day, guarded materials, and punished those who did not finish their work

*teachers belittles and 'looked down' on their students, there was no school 'community'

*students felt belittled and education, gaining knowledge, was not instilled as being important and therefor they acted out

*work was repetition and mechanical

Middle Class School:

*textbooks were harder

*questioning was not inquiry based, just recall questions

*information presented by the teachers was not presented in a way for students to make connections to their own lives

*math problems that were answered needed to have an explanation as to  how the student got the answer

*work passed in was not graded on creativity just completing on whether or not they did the project correctly

*rote memory was emphasized

*"dominant theme in this school was possibility"

*students felt that working hard and getting good grades would lead them to get a good college education and good job

*critical analysis was not valued as 'important' to the children's' future

*work was knowing the correct answer

Affluent Professional Schools:

*personal development and creativity were goals for the students

*students were encouraged to 'think for themselves', explore, and find different ways to solve problems, and share their opinions

*hands on learning and inquiry were important and encouraged across subjects

*in science, students performed the experiments

*textbooks emphasized higher lever thinking 

*students were taught such things as:  financing, savings, religion, cultural issues, and labor laws

*social differences and conflict was discussed in this school unlike the working and middle class schools

*learning was fun knowledge was 'power'

*creativity was the 'theme' across ALL content areas

*students were in charge of their own behavior and had some choice with their consequences

*work was as Anyon writes, "symbolic capital"

*individualism was stressed by educators

Executive Elite School:

*knowledge = academics that were intellectual and rigorous

*academic language was rigorous, complex, and analytical

*materials were easily assessable for all students

*student led groups and 'teaching out' sessions 

*teachers gave few direct orders

*overall theme in this school was 'excellence'

*students encouraged to be the best and to show outstanding performances 

*the fast paced instruction meant students were responsible for keeping up

*'students were developing a relationship to the economy, authority, and work that was different than all the other school'

*education was something that would put them at the top of the economical work force

SUMMARY:

As an educator, I felt this article to be riveting and powerful!  Jean Anyon was able to expose a problem in history with social injustice that took place in a school system in New Jersey in the 1960's.  The children were effected by this.  If the same education was delivered in all 5 of these schools, many lives would probably have changed and been different, probably for the better.  

In Allan Johnson's article Privileges, Power, and Differences he wrote about this same problem but in society, not schools.  Trouble with issues of difference based on social class can lead to 'unnecessary suffering.'  Both in the working class students and middle-class schools, students were taught to 'take orders.'  The knowledge in textbooks was more valuable than their own experiences.  They were taught through traditional, directive methods to look up knowledge, not to create it.  They were not taught to manipulate or direct systems, with little connection to school knowledge or with their daily lives.  

Towards the later part of Patrick Finn's article, he notes that this same practice could be seen in the early 1990's in California where schools are continuing this practice of teaching based on students' social class, poverty level, or cultural background.  Jean Anyon's study took place over 40 years ago, and to think that this same practice is still happening based on the social statues of the populations is 'crazy' to me!  So unfair!  Finn refers to this practice as the 'caste system' in India.  It is a social hierarchy passed down through families, and it can dictate the professions a person can work in as well as aspects of their social lives. I agree with Finn!                       Shame on the our administration and educational system for allowing this same practice to continue today!


          









1 comment:

  1. Hi Lisa, Thanks so much for writing such a great blog. You did a really nice job breaking down some really key points that Finn discusses in his writings. It truly was an eye opening article for me as well. Teacher hold so much power and influence in the classroom setting and Anyon really did some amazing work proving this through her observations. I really think you organized your blog in a way that was clear and informative. Really nice job!

    ReplyDelete

                                    Presentation