Reflection

Commonly approached is a way of teaching in which literacy is taught in a way that promotes “standard English”. The focus is on “standard English” instead of acknowledgement of the various cultural aspects that pertain to the students. The subtle differences in the cultural experiences of the students seem less significant as the content’s primary focus aims to that of the reading and writing “skills” of those in power. When students are placed in an environment where there cultural differences are unacknowledged, the curriculum and the standards become very complex –which causes a wall between what defines them culturally and what tactics define them as students; this offers very little opportunity for success within the classroom. Students will become engrossed in learning literacy as their cultural differences are acknowledged, embraced, and most importantly incorporated into the strategy of learning. All of which leads to culturally responsive teaching. As cultural experiences and differences are examined and accepted. When implemented into the classroom during lessons and procedures, the environment becomes familiar to the students. It is then literacy instruction becomes personal –meaning that it is of value, aiding in the students’ information retention, engagement, and motivation.

“…literacy knowledge refers to the concepts that children acquire during their preschool years, during the years preceding the beginning of formal literacy instruction, in kindergarten and first grade, in reading, writing, and printed language,”  (Purcell-Gates, 2002).

“When teachers and schools seek out and use these funds of knowledge, Moll expects there will be rewards: They will have a better change of helping bilingual and minority children achieve authentic literacy; they will foster a sense of community; and they will bestow a much richer education than most working-class kids enjoy,” (Moll,1992).

According the article written by Bolima, cultural deficit theory “justified the belief that certain groups were intelligently inferior to others, particularly to the group in charge,” (Bolima, n.d.). This narrow-minded perception hindered students from low income families and those considered minority in terms of reading instruction. When encouraged to embrace cultural dialects while speaking and writing, teachers can create an atmosphere of acceptance where cultural differences and “standard English” can find balance.  This method far exceeds that where focus is placed on the reading and writing “skills” of those in power. As Erickson points out, the cultural difference theory "provided a way of seeing classroom troubles as inadvertent misunderstanding--teachers and students playing into each other's cultural blind spots," (Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 1987). If teachers begin to work with the students and connect with the students, their understanding of each student’s cultural background would be better understood, thereby finding success in each student upon meeting the curriculum standards while maintaining their cultural differences. Implementing a change in strategies progresses a change in literacy instruction. A shared strategy amongst classrooms, schools, and districts alike consists of a change in material. Instead of the normalized reading material, material should be selected that complements that cultural background of the students –seeing that it would ultimately spark their interest and improve their success rate. Moreover, when the material is written in a way that is familiar to the students (perhaps in the manner that they speak), it becomes easier for the students to read and understand the material. Although such means go beyond the classroom; it is equally important to involve those outside of the classroom to aid the students in homework assignments, projects, and other assignments so that the culturally responsive learning environment seems consistent amongst learning settings. This enables a cultural capital, not deficit. When teachers use “funds of knowledge”, the knowledge students gain from their families and cultural backgrounds, classrooms become more inclusive.

“For now Appalachian English studies continue at AWP. The teachers are enthused, and last year's students impress their teachers this year with their knowledge of the grammar systems of Standard English and how it contrasts with their home dialects. As time passes, Dr. Clark and the teachers at the Appalachian Writing Project in Wise, VA hope to influence teachers far beyond their small mountain community to engage their students in studies of their home dialect, contrast it with Standard American English, and learn how to demonstrate their ability to code switch in order to succeed in school and jobs,” (Epstein & Herring-Harris, 2011).

The Where I Am From project supports culturally responsive teaching in that it provides an insight to the home life and cultural background of the student. The performance the student gives at school could be a reflection of his or her cultural background, which is displayed in the project format.  When a student is allowed to share his or her personal life (and culture) in a way that is productive, a door opens for the student to become more understood by his or her peers. The way in which the project is presented forms a connection amongst the students as they begin to accept one another’s differences while finding common ground.  The project also teaches the students to see the importance and worth in where it is they came from and all of the things and people that have helped them become the individuals they are today. Everyone has a story, all stories are different…but the story that each student has is of value, and it is important for the student to understand that individually and for the class to respect that collectively.  Culturally responsive teaching can be implemented throughout the subjects of elementary curriculum, especially in Reading and Language Arts, where balance is formed between required ways of teaching and the expected output of the students based on cultural diversity.

Sources:
Purcell-Gates, V. (2002). “...As soon as she opened her mouth!” In L. Delpit & J.K. Dowdy (Eds.), The skin that we speak: An anthology of essays on language, culture and power.

Gonzalez, N., Greenberg, J. & Velez, C., (1994). Thanks Funds of Knowledge: A Look at Luis Moll's Research Into Hidden Family Resources. CITYSCHOOLS, 1 (1), 19-21.

Moll, L. (1992). Funds of Knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to

connect homes and classrooms. (1992). Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132-41.

 

Bolimia, D. (n.d.). Context for understanding for Educational Learning Theories Retrieved October 5, 2012: http://staff.washington.edu/saki/strategies/101/new_page_5.htm

National Council of Teachers of English (2008). National Council of Beliefs About Writing. Retrieved October 12, 2012: http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/writingbeliefs

 

Epstein, P. & Herring-Harris, L (2011).Honoring Dialect and increasing Student Performance in Standard English. Retrieved October 12, 2012: http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/3655