Category Archives: education

Teacher Voices: Teaching Young Men of Color

2013_Teacher_Voices_Report_cover_400

The National Writing Project recently published a new report that I helped contribute to, Teacher Voices: Teaching Young Men of ColorThe link describes the report as follows:

The new report from the National Writing Project, “Teacher Voices: Teaching Young Men of Color” focuses on powerful insights and knowledge from twelve teachers working in schools across the country. Working with colleagues from The College Board, this latest project in the Teacher Voices series advances conversations about the inadequate educational progress of males of color in America.

This was a fun project to be involved with and I am grateful for the opportunity to continue to connect with some of the country’s most brilliant educators. The document can be downloaded as a PDF for free here. Check out to see out-of-control-hair-era Antero.

 

 

Announcing Spring 2014 Speaker Series: Literacies of Contemporary Civic Life

Any Colorado-local (or Colorado-Adjacent folks): please join us!

The Colorado State University Department of English is pleased to announce the upcoming speaker series: “The Literacies of Contemporary Civic Life.” Throughout the spring semester the department will host nationally recognized literacies-based researchers and educators to discuss how literacy and youth civic participation intersect from varying, interdisciplinary perspectives. I’m thrilled to be able to put this event together with some of the most powerful scholars doing necessary literacies research.

The speakers will be presenting their work and engaging in dialogue from 5:30-6:30, followed by a brief reception. These events are free and open to the public. All of the speakers will be presenting at the CSU campus in Clark A 205.

The speakers and dates for this series are as follows:

  • 2/11: Buffy Hamilton – School Librarian, Norcross High School, Atlanta, GA; 2011 Library Journal Mover and Shaker.
  • 2/18: Mark Gomez, Patricia Hanson, & Katie Rainge-Briggs – School designers and educators from the Schools for Community Action, Los Angeles, CA.
  • 3/4: Marcelle Haddix – Assistant Professor, Syracuse University School of Education, NY.
  • 3/11: Patrick Camangian – Assistant Professor, University of San Francisco and teacher at Mandela High School, Oakland, CA.
  • 4/22: Linda Christensen – Instructor and Director of the Oregon Writing Project, Lewis & Clark Graduate School of Education and Counseling & Rethinking Schools Editorial Board member, Portland, OR.

Buffy’s talk next Tuesday is going to be awesome! Here’s the title and description:

Buffy Hamilton – 2/11 – Metanarratives of Literacy Practices:  Libraries as Sponsors of Literacies
How might libraries deconstruct the ideas and power relations that influence the ways they reinforce and distribute specific literacies and literacy practices to better understand their role as sponsors of literacy in their communities in a more nuanced and robust way?  By using Deborah Brandt’s concept of sponsors of literacy, libraries can situate and contextualize their work to frame their work as co-learners in a participatory community of learning who can collaboratively construct the possibilities of print, digital, information, and new literacies – rather than being a paternalistic sponsor that deliberately and/or unintentionally marginalizes the experiences and literacy histories of the people libraries serve.
Buffy’s an awesome speaker and I hope you will be able to join us for the first of five great events this semester. If you have any additional questions please email me. Thank you, I look forward to welcoming you at CSU!

 

Oh: YA and the Male Gaze

Earlier in the year my first book, Critical Foundations in Young Adult Literature was released. As I mentioned earlier, I will be occasionally posting excerpts from the book on this blog and elsewhere. Below is a two-page section from my chapter focused on gender and sexuality in YA. Take a look and consider requesting the book from your local library or bookstore (I should probably mention that this book is a perfect stocking stuffer for the future educator in your family…)

In Divergent the female protagonist, Tris faces her fears in a simulation as part of the final test to join the Dauntless faction. After facing fears of crows, drowning, and being burned alive, one of Tris’s final fears is best described as a fear of intimacy. More bluntly, Tris is shown as fearful of having sex with her character’s love interest, Tobias. In the drug-induced simulation, Tris must face her fear in order to find acceptance within the sect she is a part of:

He presses his mouth to mine, and my lips part. I thought it would be impossible to forget I was in a simulation. I was wrong; he makes everything else disintegrate.
His fingers find my jacket zipper and pull it down in one slow swipe until the zipper detaches. He tugs the jacket from my shoulders.
Oh, is all I can think as he kisses me again. Oh.
My fear is being with him. I have been wary of affection all my life, but I didn’t
know how deep that wariness went.
But this obstacle doesn’t feel the same as the others. It is a different kind of fear–nervous panic rather than blind terror.
He slides his hands down my arms and then squeezes my hips, his fingers sliding over the skin just above my belt, and I shiver.
I gently push him back and press my hands to my forehead. I have been attacked by crows and men with grotesque faces; I have been set on fire by the boy who almost threw me off a ledge; I have almost drowned–twice–and this is what I can’t cope with? This is the fear I have no solutions for–a boy I like, who wants to … have sex with me? (Roth, 2011, p. 393)

The passage challenges notions of what it means to be in control of one’s feelings and actions. The author tells readers that Tris “wants” to have sex with Tobias but the description is anything but enticing. The male character “presses his mouth,” and “tugs” clothing off, and “slides his hands” across the narrator’s body. For someone who is fearful she must give in to the invasive actions of her love interest. Where is the narrator’s agency here? More importantly, what does this passage suggest about femininity for readers? Is it to not be fearful when a boy one likes engages in similar activity? If this is her fear that she must overcome, should readers too find the willpower to endure such actions?

In similarly problematic depictions of female behavior, Taylor’s Daughter of Smoke and Bone takes an otherwise independent and strong-willed protagonist and renders her all but helpless when encountering an attractive, male foe. Early in Daughter of Smoke and Bone, Karou encounters an angel named, Akiva. For Karou, his beauty is exuded to the point of distraction. While Karou is fighting Akiva, her internal monologue depicts a woman flawed by her own sexuality; the fact that she finds this angel beautiful drives her actions in ways that are potentially life- threatening:

He stood a mere body’s length away, the point of his sword resting on the ground.
Oh, thought Karou, staring at him. Oh.
Angel indeed.
He stood revealed. The blade of his long sword gleamed white from the incandescence of his wings–vast shimmering wings, their reach so great they swept the walls on either side of the alley, each feather like the wind-tugged lick of a candle flame.
Those eyes.
His gaze was like a lit fuse, scorching the air between them. He was the most beautiful thing Karou had ever seen. Her first thought, incongruous but overpowering, was to memorize him so she could draw him later. (Taylor, 2011, p. 95)

Notice, across both Taylor and Roth’s depictions of sexual attraction as a weakness and fear in female protagonists the use of the italicized “Oh.” As if these women are stupefied and subsequently educated about sexuality through their encounters with men, both texts rely on this word as a means of suggesting the mental circuitry that wires women’s sexual awakenings. To her credit, Taylor crafts her description such that it does not focus on specific physical attributes. Instead, such depictions of beauty are largely left to the imagination of readers. What is problematic here is the constant loop of physical attraction that runs through Karou’s mind.

In addition to Karou’s overwhelming sexuality, Taylor’s text interweaves beauty and emotion for other characters in the text. For example, describing one of the ancillary characters, Taylor makes it clear that part of Liraz’s beauty is specifically related to her being female and “sharklike”. Taylor writes: “Though Hazael was more powerful, Liraz was more frightening, she always had been; perhaps she’d had to be, being female” (Taylor, 2011, p. 253). The construction of this sentence is striking: Taylor appears to deliberately draw connections that are powerful and problematic for young adult readers. It’s not simply that Liraz is frightening and female–this in itself would be worth considering in how it implicates beauty for readers. Instead, Liraz is frightening because “she’d had to be, being female.” Her frightening nature is due to how she is gendered by society. I want to make this use of “gender” as a verb clear: in the society of Daughter of Smoke and Bone Liraz is frightening and society casts her looks and frightfulness as particularly female attributes; they are cast, discursively, as what helps comprise her as a woman. For readers of this text the subtle construction of sentences like this one interweave feminine beauty – something that can be aspired to–as frightening. However, perhaps more importantly, this beauty and fearfulness can be seen as powerful: beautiful women have power and can enact changes in the world around them.

Immediately following the above sentence connecting femininity to frightfulness, Taylor writes, “Her [Liraz’s] pale hair was scraped back in severe plaits, and there was something coolly sharklike about her beauty: a flat, killer apathy” (Taylor, 2011, p. 253). This beauty is expanded to a less beautiful understanding of her appearance: her hair does not flow softly, it is “scraped” and “severe” and her appearance is “sharklike.” The harsh alliteration within this sentence cuts into the reading of the text and makes the description of this female angel something wholly inhuman, frightful and dangerous. Whereas Pudge’s view of Alaska [in Green’s Looking for Alaska] as an unknowable and vastly sexual woman placed control of female identity in the hands and gaze of the male character, Liraz here is a strong and beautiful woman. However, the description here makes her cold, calculating, and dangerous.

These are small microaggressions that female readers endure from one book to another. Instead of claiming that these readings of passages from Roth and Taylor critique too heavily minor, well-intentioned passages, I believe these are damning attributes of the literature we encourage young people to read non-critically. The messages of how females must look and behave that are read again and again in these texts typify identities that sexualize and pacify a female readership.

 

Thanks for reading! Consider checking out the rest of the book over your winter break!

NCTE & NWP in Boston this week!

Next week I head to Boston for the annual meetings for the National Writing Project and the National Council of Teachers of English. Between the two meetings I can be found doing the following:

If you are headed to Boston, say hello!

Teaching Reading and Civic Responsibility

This week I listened to the audiobook of Allegiant, the third in Veronica Roth’s Divergent trilogy. I also read a bunch of Twisty Little Passages a book about interactive fiction. I caught up on the last two issues of Brian K. Vaughn’s Saga. I finished reading the business book The Year Without Pants (despite the goofy title, I think there’s some awesome “stuff” here for educators to consider and it makes me want to consider how to use P2s in classrooms). I am planning on starting A True Novel and The New Jim Crow as I travel to the NCTE Annual Conference next week.

The above paragraph may come as a mean-spirited humblebrag about my use of time and my incredibly-amazing reading habits. However, I offer it to begin a reflection on a discussion we had in my “Teaching Reading” class on Thursday.

Preluding the prompt with a quote from Linda Christensen, I asked my class to respond to the following questions:

How will you decide what texts you should teach in your class? What books are you excited about teaching? What are you dreading? How will you know what your students need?

The discussion that followed turned primarily toward an up-and-coming writer you may have heard about: William Shakespeare. We English educators regularly get into a tizzy around the question: To teach or not to teach? As I told my class, Shakespeare’s words are personally meaningful for me and I know many of my students reinforced a passion for literature as a result of how we interacted with his texts in my classroom. However, the key word in that previous sentence is passion. We can just as easily quelch enthusiasm when we are not very excited about the books we teach in our classrooms.

And so, on my brain today is the question that extends beyond our conversation on Thursday. As was mentioned in the class, most schools are going to require students to read Shakespeare’s works in their English classes. For better or worse, English teachers have to be able to teach texts they may not be passionate about. Whether it be Shakespeare or Cisneros or Hemingway or whatever canonical-ish author you are expected to utilize in classrooms, how do you teach effectively, enthusiastically, passionately to texts you may not personally identify with? On the other hand, you could also refuse to teach that text. Even better, do it… in the name of “social justice, man.” (My friend Other Chris and I joke that every everything can sound sarcastic by adding “man” to the end of it.) By either teaching without passion or by refusing to teach a text you feel negatively toward, do our students miss out? What kinds of lessons about the value of students’ time laboring in classes do we demonstrate when we fumble?

These are the questions I’m left with on this sunny Saturday morning.

Hustle, Flow, and adventures in #PWFWriMo & #RPRGWriMo

Last week, I talked about where I was wobbling in my teaching practice. This week I want to describe a new pose I am trying out.

This week month I’m trying out a pose of sustained writing and “hustle.”

This month is National Novel Writing Month–colloquially NaNoWriMo, which challenges participants to write a 50,000+ word novel in the month of November. It’s a daunting number of words, but when broken into daily amounts (just shy of 1700 words per day) it’s … less daunting (?). I’ve never actually done it. However, I did challenge my 12th graders to participate several years ago. One of my students, Sam, was already a novelist in her own right and the month of November was one where she was co-teaching the class with me and coaching her peers with myriad writing strategies. I talk a bit more about this process of student-driven writing instruction in my book.

In any case, while I’m not writing a novel this month (or in the foreseeable future), I am using the online momentum of NaNoWriMo to focus on getting significant wordage on two current research projects: my work with Cindy O’Donnell-Allen on Pose/Wobble/Flow and my work exploring the literacy practices enacted in tabletop roleplaying games. I am calling these two projects, respectively, #PWFWriMo and #RPGWriMo. (There’s also a contingent of academics tweeting to the hashtag #AcWriMo that I’ve been lurking around.)

I want to describe my writing practices briefly. First of all my rules for my month of #NaNoWriMo are as follows: every day I will publicly update my progress on Twitter – it forces me to feel accountable and to feel bad on the days in November when I don’t write. A day of writing starts when I wake up and ends when I go to sleep. That means even if I’m writing well after midnight, it’s the same day (so chill out imaginary time-sticklers!). I’m also keeping two tracking systems. On my computer I have a simple Excel file where I list the actual words I write each day. It looks like this:

In my notebook I have a chart that measures writing in increments of 250 words at a time. It looks like this:

I will write, at a later time about how I am using Scrivener to allow me to organize my jumble of verbs and haphazard sentences into something useful. For now, here is a screenshot of in-progress messiness and varying writing prompt:

What I think is important to share here isn’t how awesome it feels to be 15,000+ words deep into a couple of projects that I am working on. Instead, I am interested in how reading and writing are fundamentally different in 2013. When I write in the morning and add my progress to a growing number of tweets, I am joining a community of other writers. I feel accountable because of how technology is connecting my literacy practices with others. It also allows me to engage in some good ol’ shit-talking with my friend Daye:

Reading comments in this post from last week, I’ve been thinking about my writing practices this week and the day-to-day stress of work and teaching and home life. I mean, it’s not like my workload is reduced during the month I’m choosing to put (digital) pen to (digital) paper. I think about those frustrating years of working a weekend job and teaching at the same time–trying to cram in grading student essays while working the graveyard shift at a newsstand on Sunset Blvd. Not fun. Cindy talks about GYST: Get Your Shit Together. I wonder if that’s an appropriate “pose” I can take on. It sure is something I wobble with on any given day. One of my early teaching mentors, Jeff Duncan-Andrade, talked about being a teacher and having to “hustle.” And I think about treating my writing and “real” responsibilities as hustle. In the past when I’ve played around with things like NaNoWriMo, I have approached it like this:

And this month I’m trying to approach it like this (while still keeping everything else somewhat together):

I’m only a quarter deep into what is a long month of writing, so we’ll see how long I can keep this pose going. I know there will be days I am not productive but I also know (and have felt) the awesome flow of cranking out 2,000 words on a beautiful Sunday morning. We’ll see where this pose takes me.

What new pose are you trying out?

 

[Also: it’s not too late to jump on the #NaNoWriMo bandwagon! If you get some awesome writing done, be sure to let my friend Daye know how much better you are doing.]

NCTE Position Statement: Formative Assessment That Truly Informs Instruction

I was recently honored to get to work on an NCTE Position Statement as a member of the NCTE Task Force on Assessment chaired by Cathy Fleischer. The statement is written to be accessible and useful for classroom teachers. As assessment in an era of the Common Core is being re-defined by organizations like PARCC, this statement offers specific guidelines for how formative assessment can be crafted and utilized meaningfully in teachers’ day-to-day practice. I’d encourage you to take a look – I think this statement turned out great. The entire statement can be read and downloaded as a pdf here.

Beautiful Dark Twisted Pedagogy: New Article in Radical Teacher

My article, “Beautiful Dark Twisted Pedagogy: Kanye West and the Lessons of Participatory Culture,” is now  available in the most recent issue of Radical Teacher. It can be read here.  Here’s an abstract:

 This article builds off of the author’s classroom experience as a high school teacher in South Central Los Angeles and looks at how cultural shifts with regards to media consumption and production impact liberatory pedagogical practice. Using media superstar Kanye West as a case study, this article argues that today’s classroom practices must expand in ways that reflect a more participatory culture. In particular, West’s marketing and engagement with his audience during the release of his 2010 album My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy highlight how mainstream media practices offer pathways for renewing critical pedagogy in the 21st century.

This article started as a series of rumblings and throat-clearing on this blog here and here and here. I owe thanks to many of you for helping to continue this conversation with me online and at conferences. As I briefly mention as a footnote here, I am intrigued by West’s latest musical direction (even if he cancelled his recent show in Denver, effectively killing our Sunday night plans). I hope to continue to push on contemporary notions of critical pedagogy through looking to what’s happening in popular culture.

Vulnerability, Public Wobbling, and “The Best Ever Dog in Fort Collins”

Digital Is Crash and Burn

So here’s what happened: my class, “Teaching Reading,” was using Digital Is as a space for online discussion. I’ve reiterated in this class that I value the sense of public discussion. I am appreciative of the ways Digital Is brings my preservice students into the same digital space as the career teachers I continue to learn from. I value the notion that our dialogue is one that other teachers can infringe upon with new insight and ideas. Of course something something the best laid plans blah blah blah Digital Is moved to a new layout and my discussion system went bust-o.

And so my mid-semester quandary was one of deciding if I should lock up our discussion behind some closed online site elsewhere or find a new digital, public space for dialogue. I chose the egotistical route and moved the rest of the semester’s dialogue here, on my own blog. Each week, you’ll see a rambling post where I detail what I am struggling with in the class and where I pose a few questions for my students (who are obligated to respond – hi class!). Feel free to jump into the dialogue with them!

Vulnerable Wobbling

My colleague Cindy and I have been thinking a lot lately about growth, struggle, and identity. We are working from a model called Pose/Wobble/Flow, which you can read a bit more about over here.

One thing I’ve been wobbling with lately is confronting vulnerability and uncertainty within the classroom. My friend & mentor Travis instilled in me the value of articulating to students that it’s okay if teachers don’t know everything. See:

On Thursday, a group of students in the class led us through a writing exercise where we adapted a favorite poem or song. I chose this classic:

I was thrown for a loop when trying to adapt this at first – I think John Darnielle (aka the Mountain Goats) spins great portraits and vignettes. I like the concise way he turns a funny sounding title and opening verse into an impassioned condemnation of authority. Obviously, my adaptation has to do with this rapscallion:

The best ever dog in Fort Collins

The best ever dog in Fort Collins

was a small mutt that’d been digging holes since the summer.

Her name was Olive or Olivia Agadorus Garcia

and she walked ’round the lake every day.

 

The best ever dog in Fort Collins,

never actually caught a cat

but the most grisly kills – after weeks of practice

were a bird, and a rabbit, and another rabbit without a leg.

 

Olive believed in her heart that she was destined for hunting greatness.

So in the backyard she made prominent use of the running space

and prepared for her eventual takeover and escape.

 

This was how she got out

and how the fence was rebuilt to make it taller

and why her howls of frustration ring out in the night

and why she made plans to get even.

When you punish a canine for dreaming her dream

don’t expect her to thank or forgive you.

The best ever dog in Fort Collins

will in time both out-jump and outsmart you.

Hail Satan!

Hail Satan tonight!

Hail Satan!

Hail hail!

Yeah, I know that whole last “hail Satan” part came from the original … but if you’d met Olive you’d be cool with it.

In any case, I remember writing not-so-light-hearted poetry during the annual unit plan when I was a student many a year ago. I remember when it came to the “who wants to share” part of the class feeling the terrible top-of-the-rollercoaster mixture of fear and excitement about sharing my work. A part of me really wanted to. A part of me was firmly dead set against it.

And so, thinking about the young me, I am wobbling with: how do I get students to move beyond feelings of vulnerability within my classroom? There are strong voices in both of my classes and there are those that are often missing. Particularly within the context of teaching reading, how can I support students who may be feeling more dependent–wanting more models for teaching & curriculum development (as examples of dependent reading within the context of an upper division course)?

Likewise, there are lots of reasons for feelings of vulnerability to manifest within a classroom. Some come from being afraid of not knowing what the teacher or professor wants. Some from not knowing what your peers expect and feeling out of place. I realize I can be both intentionally and unintentionally vague in my class and in my expectations of the work I would like students to turn in; this creates vulnerability. What if you do the assignment wrong?* Part of limiting vulnerability can be seen as increased efforts of clearly articulating goals. But part of this, too, is guiding students to understand that they–as much as the teacher–can define what is correct or incorrect, when to share and when to remain silent, when to–as our course norms dictate–“step forward and step back.”

Anyways, that’s what I’m wobbling with. I am asking my students–in the comments below–to explain what they are wobbling with this week, or to respond to my own wobbling above.

 

* “doing it wrong” is a socially constructed conceit and one I think about with regards to technology often.