Colleagues,

 

I don't know how learning to read can be separated from the content of what is utilized to teach reading--printed text.  While I have taken issue with Freire in some of my published work, I take as axiomatic his core aphorism that one reads the word in order to read the world.  http://www.nald.ca/library/research/George/AmPolCul/cover.htm and http://www.nald.ca/library/research/George/Pedagogy/cover.htm and http://www.nald.ca/library/research/george/litgrow/cover.htm

 

I do not know how it can be otherwise.  Moreover, Freire's assumption that teaching/learning is, by definition dialogical seems also very close to axiomatic; the issue being whether such dialogue is going to be both empathetic and critical as Bonnie has depicted the latter term, which applies both to critical thinking as a form of rational analysis and critical pedagogy.  Critical pedagogy is equally rational (premised on an enlightenment epistemology), but based on the assumption (which merits critical analysis) that the pedagogical and the political are mutually entwined all the way down.  I realize all do not accept this assumption, a topic that merits critical assessment (rather than polemical uncritical rejection), but that is another discussion.

 

Such texts contain messages--implicit or explicit even such "decontextual" programs like the Wilson Reading System in terms of how literacy develops and what the foundational components of the reading process consist of.

 

Moreover, the adult education publishing houses such as New Readers Press and Steck-Vaughn embed literacy instruction within the framework of specific content-based instruction in the areas of health, parenting, work, civics and history, and human interest stories. Such texts contain narratives.  Such narratives created by authors send messages to intended readers.  Such messages are not neutral, but reflect moral or ethical predispositions which are culturally shaped.  While there are various messages embedded in these texts, a common theme focuses on the importance of work hard, frugality, following the rules through, and studying hard in your adult education class.  The cumulative result is that of attaining some level of reasonable success of realizing the American dream based on what is realistic within one's own social status.

 

I for one am far from dismissive of such ideology, which in many ways, hopefully with some nuance, I do too.  I do not, however, dismiss the notion that such perspectives are ideological and ultimately political, recognizing as well that there are other ways to construct social and cultural reality in which to dismiss the notion that adult basic education is not fundamentally a cultural product is to reflect an ignorance of a great deal of 20th century educational scholarship.

 

What I argue for is less emphasis on stereotypical broadsides and more sustained analysis based on research, well crafted theory as well as the conjoint work of our collective critically-attuned experience as seasoned practitioners.

 

George Demetrion

"Each effort at writing is a commitment of time and world view.  Think critically before posting" 
 


Date: Fri, 30 Oct 2009 06:49:37 -0700
From: kearney_lykins at yahoo.com
To: professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov
Subject: [PD 4100] On the meaning of politics and why teaching is political






 


Literacy practitioners:

Can we all just get this out in the open once and for all and acknowledge that terms (as they are most commonly used in this listserve) such as critical thinking, critical analysis, social change, social progress, social justice, and The Change Agent, are all ideologically based vehicles that assume that there is something inherently wrong with society as it exists in general (and with America's in particular) and that the remedy is an inherenly left-leaning, if not outright socialist or communist one. 

I am tired of reading posts that dance around this issue, as if no one knows the names of the steps.


Literacy teachers should teach people to read, write, and speak. Learners should not have to be subjected to implicit or explicit political agendas from teachers who think they know better than others. In Steve's latest post (PD 4087) he very cogently unmasks the condescending nature of teaching "critical thinking," that there is an assumption that learners don't already think critically, or that they don't do it as well as the teacher. Or that students are in more dire need of "emancipatory change" than teachers are.  I find it interesting that the Friere followers are so quick to abandon his leaderless classroom when it comes to critical thinking and pressing "social justice" issues. 

It is my understanding that the methods for teaching people literacy skills went relatively unchanged over several millennia, and that these methods actually worked long before anyone heard of "praxis." I believe Marx, Lenin, and Darwin learned to read in this quaint, disparaged way.

I now await the barrage of comments from educators who will insist that rote memorization drills and vocabulary lists have oppressed me, and that I am but an oblivious political pawn.


In good spirits, 

Kearney



 
 
Kearney_Lykins at yahoo.com
 







From: Federico Salas-Isnardi <fs_dos at yahoo.com>
To: The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List <professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov>
Sent: Thu, October 29, 2009 8:23:06 AM
Subject: [PD 4085] On the meaning of politics and why teaching is political





Thank you, Janet for your contribution about politics.  I would go one step further in arguing for a political education or political literacy:  the word politics comes from Greek πολιτικός (politikόs) which simply means citizen, civil, of (or regarding) a citizen, and of (or regarding) citizenship.  πολιτικός, in turn, comes from Greek πόλις (pόlis) which means city or inhabited territory or island.



 

Thus, everytime we engage students/adults/citizens we are engaging in a political activity.  We cannot ignore that when we deal with the inhabitants (I don't want to use the word citizens in this context) of any territory we are dealing with the nature of politics.  

 

Some people (and some politicians) give politics a bad name, but the fact remains that politics is everything we do that involves us as citizens of this nation.  As you said, nobody is advocating to engage our students in a specific end of the political spectrum but rather that we should accept our political role as teachers and facilitators or learning which is to engage our students to the extent possible in a critical analysis of what they learn or they are confronted with.  Otherwise we are giving our students only data to deposit in their "bank" which may never be useful to them.


 
federico
 
Federico Salas-Isnardi
Adult Literacy Specialist, Texas Center for the Advancement of Literacy and Learning
Secretary, Executive Board,  Association of Adult Literacy Professional Developers
Adult Education Consultant, Houston, Texas
 

"The Arc of the Moral Universe is Long but it Bends toward Justice."  Martin Luther King






From: Janet Isserlis <Janet_Isserlis at brown.edu>
To: The Adult Literacy Professional Development Discussion List <professionaldevelopment at nifl.gov>
Sent: Wed, October 28, 2009 7:50:27 AM
Subject: [PD 4080] Re: Swinging the Sword of Literacy in Iraq

Re: comments about Art's post, education in Iraq and the whole notion of political literacy.

Just looked up the word politics, but the definition kept using the word "political"
so then I looked that up:

po·liti·cal (pə lit′i kəl)

adjective

of or concerned with government, the state, or politics
having a definite governmental organization
engaged in or taking sides in politics political parties
of or characteristic of political parties or politicians political pressure

http://www.yourdictionary.com/political


so now, to reply, simply, to those who believe we shouldn't impose a particular set of political beliefs:
NO ONE here has said we should.  Art has spoken eloquently to addressing the skills, knowledge and strategies needed to understand how government works and to enable adults to make choices  (and/or support them in making choices) that best suit their own interests and beliefs.  NO ONE is advocating for any one system, or set of beliefs.  No one is using the adult learning center as a soap box.  Good educators are listening to learners, living in shared communities, discussing what goes on and using language and learning skills, critical thinking, healthy debate, use of media and other resources, to enable everyone to get on as well as they can in the communities in which they live.

Janet Isserlis 



 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/professionaldevelopment/attachments/20091030/8ec0a4d5/attachment.html