Critical Literacy at the Chalk Face:Multiple Concerns, Multiple Beliefs

• Jerome C. Harste

• Vivian Vasquez

• Andrew Manning

This study was designed to study how in-service teacherspositioned themselves relative to three issues beinghighlighted in their critical literacy master’ degree:

**Theoretically-Based Instruction (Essay: Keep Your Head)**Book Censorship (Essay: Risky Texts)**Maintaining a Critical Stance on Literacy given

These Political Times (Essay: Common Core)

Master’s Degree

Study Involved 30 inservice teachers responding to 3 thought pieces.Each thought piece called for 3 responses.Response Type 1: One Question, One SurpriseResponse Type 2: Issue: Postcard of the MindResponse Type 3: 500 Word Essay

Data Analysis consisted of coding the questions, surprises, issues, andstatements participants made across response types in terms of the stancethat was taken.

Four stances were identified:

Teachers as Conduits – The teachers role is to do what the administration wants.

Teachers as Advocates – The teachers first and primary responsibility is tothe education and well-being of students.

Teachers as Professionals – Teachers need to think theoretically and act professionally regardless of what local administrators think.

Teachers as Teaching for Critical Literacy – Teachers primary responsibilityis to create a critical citizenry for the 21st century.

Some Examples of Teacher Response to Our Tasks and How We Coded Them:

Conduit: “How do we find a balance when we must adhere to the standards in order to make sure our students are prepared for thestandardized tests?” -- Antonella

Advocate: “Students need to have control over positioning and notallow others to do it for them.” --Domenica

Professional: “We are part of the human community and professionalcommunity. I like this! I think it is important to think in these terms.”--Rachael

Critical Literate: “Standards fail to encourage questioning everythingand everybody.” --Enrica

Across Thought Pieces participants took on a Professional Stance morefrequently than any other stance (26% increase).

While there was very little change across Thought Pieces in termsof teachers taking on the Critical Citizenship stance, this may be due to the fact that the topics of the Thought Pieces got heavier and more demanding.

Fewer participants across time took the Conduit (13% drop) or Advocate Stance (15%)

The big picture: How did stances change over the course of the study?

How did stances change as a function of task?

The 500 Word Essay Task seemed to have the greatest effect on moving participants toward a Critical Citizenship Stance.

Participants were asked to do three layers of response for each of three essays.The more participants wrote after reading an essay the more they movedphilosophically to the position advocated by the essay.

Given the fact that these data were collected at the end of a 2-yearprogram of study which emphasized the need for teachers to be critically literate, as instructors (and as a teacher education program)we still seem to be better at instilling a sense of professionalism overtaking critical action by themselves, collectively, or with their students.

Despite all this, there is movement. Very few teachers saw themselvesand their role as being a tool to carry out administrative mandates;most were professionals in the sense that they wished to exercise their professional judgment and be accountable to what they believed.

The study has more to say about the importance of engaging teachersIn the reading of texts that take a clear position on controversial topics andIn following these readings up with engagements that involve reflection andwriting, then it clarifies what specific content graduate teacher educationprograms need to include in advanced degree programs that emphasize thetaking on of a critical stance towards literacy.

POST-HOC Analysis: Probably the more interesting studyis an in-dept analysis of the Thought Piece (Keeping Your Head) and participants responses to it:

1. Analyzed the Thought Piece in terms of Major Points made2. Identified what Major Points resonated with participants3. Identified misinterpretations4. Identified points made by participants not in original thought piece