Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The nature of middle-class Latino/a students' cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom's reading and writing activities
(USC Thesis Other)
The nature of middle-class Latino/a students' cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom's reading and writing activities
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE NATURE OF MIDDLE-CLASS LATINO/A STUDENTS’ CULTURAL
CAPITAL IN A FIFTH-GRADE CLASSROOM’S READING AND WRITING
ACTIVITIES
by
Margaret Sauceda Curwen
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
(EDUCATION)
December 2007
Copyright 2007 Margaret Sauceda Curwen
ii
DEDICATION
This work is dedicated to my mother, Mary Sauceda, for lovingly and
patiently waiting for me to find my way back.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
My journey to earn a doctorate was guided by the many individuals who
provided valuable support and mentoring.
First, I acknowledge the members of my dissertation committee. My advisor
and chair, Dr. Ron Avi Astor exemplified the value of rigorous academic standards
and thinking. His high standards were always coupled with positive and encouraging
coaching. Most of all, he taught me to welcome and wrestle intellectually with
unexpected events and occurrences that often happen while conducting research. I
am grateful to him for stepping in to chair my committee and for his close guidance
throughout this process. Dr. Robert Rueda provided mentoring academically and
professionally since my first day of coursework. I had knowledge of his extensive
work in the field of education and I chose USC’s program to have the opportunity to
study with him. I am especially honored that he remained on my committee through
his sabbatical. My outside committee member, Dr. Janet Hoskins introduced me to
notions of transnational citizens and imaginary nations. Several years ago, her
anthropology course furthered my understanding of how globalization intersects with
the lives and the education of young children. It is an area of study that has
increasing potency. Each committee member, at different points in the doctoral
iv
process, gave me the opportunity to reflect on and explore my Latina identity. It has
been a privilege to have them mentor my work.
Secondly, there have been many individuals at USC who I have been
fortunate to work with. Dr. Laurie MacGillivray shepherded me through the early
stages of my program. As a professor and mentor, she both challenged and inspired
me to constantly evaluate my own views on literacy, learning, and identity. I shared
this academic apprenticeship with two brilliant colleagues, Dr. Amy Ardell and Dr.
Jenn Palma. Together, our team collaborated, conducted research, published
manuscripts, presented at conferences and along the way solidified our academic
collegiality and sustaining friendship.
Third, I have the utmost appreciation to this study’s participants: Room 500
students, Mr. Harris, the families of the students, and other school members.
Research ethics keep me from identifying them, but I am most grateful for their
generosity of time and their willingness to let me share their classroom experience.
Because of this research, my understanding of culture, immigration, and the
complexities of teaching and learning has been significantly broadened.
Fourth, there were numerous individuals who gave freely of their expert
guidance and interest. On my USC qualifying exams committee, I had the counsel of
Dr. Alexander Jun and Dr. David Yaden. My USC study group provided ongoing
collegial support and read portions of this work: Dr. Karla Colorado, Dr. Kimberly
Shotwell, Dr. Joan Tardibuono, and Dr. Tina Tsai. Thank you to Jenn and Joan who
provided valuable feedback on portions of this dissertation. Dianne Morris answered
v
my many questions and always found ways to assist me along this journey. Other
professors and colleagues who inspired and helped me through this program include:
Dr. Jill Aguilar, Dr. Rey Baca, Dr. María Barillas, Dr. Dolores Beltrán, Beverly
Franco, Lisa Galvan, Dr. Kris Gutiérrez, Dr. Sandy Kaplan, Dr. Lilia Monzó, Dr.
Greta Nagel, Dr. Paz Oliverez, Dr. Gigi Ragusa, Dr. Lilia Sarmiento, Dr. Kristen
Venegas, Dr. MaryEllen Vogt, and Dr. Nancy Walker. During my early years as an
educator there were mentors and friends whose words continue to resonate in my
thoughts. I thank: Jane Barboza, Roberta Berg, Dr. Rosalyn Benitez Bloch, Ray
Chavez and Lin Zang, Carmen Garcia, Chris Libeu, Carol Roughton, Julie Dearborn,
Courtney Etherington, Jodi Glasgow, Joyce Gordon, Lori Knight, Gloria Lleonart,
Francisco Mariscal, Helen Masuda, Stephanie Matthies, Rae Ann Montoya, Edna
Morales, Dr. Maria Ott, Barbara Sheldon, Susan Sherman, Lillian Slater, Lisa Tone,
and Tina Vince. And to the many talented and skilled educators – and especially my
students from elementary to undergraduates over the years who each day taught me
more about what it means to teach.
Fifth, my families provided encouragement at every step. Throughout my
life, I have been anchored by the unwavering strength and bond from by eight sisters
and brothers and their spouses: John and Carolyn Sauceda, Ed and Gwyn Sauceda,
Gracie Rey, Katie Sauceda and Bob Rivera, Bob and Phebe Sauceda, Tina Sauceda
and Jim Conaway, Pat and Ralph Alcantar, and Carol Sauceda and Jim Macari as
well as their respective children and grandchildren. I have had much support from
my extended Rios’ family uncles, aunts, and cousins. I gratefully thank my Curwen
vi
family for their support. To my in-laws, Jim and Ann who provided encouragement
at every juncture. To Bob and Susan Curwen, and Sally and Jan Libourel, and their
respective children and grandchildren. A special thanks to Krista Ivy for her research
skills and Jackie Rivera for word processing assistance. There are many educators in
the combined Sauceda, Rios, and Curwen families whose dedication, innovativeness,
and commitment to teach others leave me in awe.
Most of all, I am indebted to my parents and to my grandparents, immigrants
from Mexico, who labored so that their children and grandchildren might have a
better life. To my mother Mary Sauceda, whose love, strength, wisdom, and courage
continue to teach and inspire me. Her gift of faith provided me with the foundation
that sustained me during critical periods—especially during my writing. To my
father, Louis Sauceda whose words when I was a little girl in the hospital, “Mija,
someday you will be a doctor,” will finally be realized. I know somehow both he and
Ann Curwen have accompanied me along this path and are watching at this moment.
Finally, my eternal love and gratitude to the most important person in my life,
my husband Tom who is my companion, confidante, and intellectual muse. Your
love, support, strength, sacrifice, encouragement, humor, positive outlook, and belief
sustained me when I thought I could no longer walk this road. Your appreciation of
the written word, your keen interest in the meaning individuals ascribe to their lives,
and your own eloquent writing have opened me to the wonders, nuances, simplicity,
and grandeur of this world. I am grateful to these gifts and to your continual
vii
reminders to be aware of the glimpses of light beneath a door and to take note how
the stars can rearrange themselves.
viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION ........................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .......................................................................... iii
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................ ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION .............................................................. 1
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .......................... 39
CHAPTER 3: METHODS .......................................................................... 69
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS ......................................................................... 116
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ................................ 197
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................................................................................254
REFERENCES ............................................................................................275
APPENDICES ............................................................................................ 277
ix
ABSTRACT
The overarching purpose of this qualitative study was to understand the
specific dynamics of how upwardly aspiring Latino/a students, in a well-functioning
elementary school setting, incorporated their cultural resources, background
knowledge, language, and lived experiences during their literacy engagement. By the
year 2050, it is estimated that one-in-four school age children will be of Latino/a
descent. This study adds to the literature regarding the educational adaptation of
children of intergenerational immigrant status.
The main research question was: What is the nature of middle-class Latino
students’ cultural capital in their fifth-grade classroom’s reading and writing
practices? The four sub-questions were: (a) What are the characteristics and
structure of the reading and writing activities in this classroom? How do they foster
integration of middle-class Latino/a participants’ background and cultural
experiences?; (b) What was the nature of children’s participation in the classroom?;
(c) How are upwardly aspiring students’ different forms of cultural capital valued in
the classroom?; and (d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of middle-class children’s cultural knowledge?
The study’s findings were analyzed within the following frameworks: a
sociocultural theory of learning, Bourdieu’s perspective of cultural capital, and
contemporary perspectives of culture as permeable and fluid. In addition,
x
contemporary conceptions of culture were included. In light of the complexities of
students’ responses, two additional relevant theories were incorporated. Because
students’ intergenerational immigrant status was one aspect of their historical
dimension, immigrant theory—specifically ethnic diasporas’ adoption of the
American Creed—interpreted their educational and social adaptation strategies.
Critical Race Theory provided a framework for interpreting the students’ developing
notions of ethnic and racial discrimination.
A case study design was used over a nine-week period with ethnographic
methods to capture data. These included: 162 hours of classroom participant
observation; fieldnotes; interviews with students, teacher, and school staff; student
writing artifacts and school documents; and daily researcher reflexivity. Inductive
analysis was used to capture the nuances and complexity of students’ responses and
teacher beliefs. Activity theory was used to analyze the classroom setting and
identify the characteristics and practices of literacy activities as well as student
participation. A constant comparative method was used to categorize themes and
patterns in the data. Data sources were triangulated to check the integrity of
researcher inferences.
There were five key findings. First, a mismatch arose over the teacher’s
attempts to incorporate students’ lived experiences and the students’ resistance
towards inclusion of their Latino culture. Explanatory elements were that students
had embraced the American creed, were secure in the homogeneity of their context,
were uninspired by uni-dimensional cultural portrayals, were pulled by the upward
xi
mobility of their families, and were motivated to speak English because it was
perceived as a high status language. A second finding was that students, at times,
exercised their agency by including selective aspects of their background knowledge.
This typically occurred during informal classroom contexts. A third finding was a
mismatch between the teacher’s attempt to forefront social issues, particularly ethnic
and racial discrimination, and students’ disinclination to publicly include personal
experiences. Many students perceived discrimination as historical and they distanced
themselves from its salience in their current lives. The fourth finding was students’
use of popular culture to achieve academic, social, and personal goals within the
classroom. Images from the media played a role in shaping students’ perceptions of
race and ethnic discrimination. The fifth finding was how the classroom’s literacy
practices were shaped by the current sociopolitical dimensions of accountability
enacted by the educational reforms of the 2001 No Child Left Behind legislation.
The teacher’s pedagogical creativity was constrained, and the use of whole class
instruction—limiting students’ participation—was shaped by the school’s curricular
pacing. Overall findings address middle-class intergenerational children of Mexican
heritage negotiating with the ongoing process of their lives as transnational citizens.
Implications for theory, research, and practice address the future education of an
increasingly diverse student population.
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
On a spring morning in a school in Southern California, Room 500 fifth-
grade students visited their school library. After selecting new books, they gathered
on the rug and the school aide/librarian casually inquired about their weekend plans.
Their lively interaction provided glimpses into their textured out-of-school
experiences:
Oscar: Ensenada.
Eddie: Aquarium, ________, and _________.
Conner: My sister’s baptism.
Brenda: My friends in Catechism are going to have a party.
_______: Go to church and then grandma’s.
Eddie: Have you been to a beach next to the Queen Mary?
San Pedro?
Victor: In Newport Beach, the ferry takes us.
______: Oh, Balboa Island.
Anthony: Catalina Island. (HWFN #5, p. 23)
In this brief exchange, the students’ range of interests, family life, and
blended cultural experiences is revealed as rich with literacy and cultural capital. Yet
there is sometimes an assumption that children from diverse backgrounds, such as
these Latino/a fifth-graders in Room 500, have limited literacy experiences
(Compton-Lilly, 2003), the “wrong types of human capital” (Shannon, 1996, p. 441),
limited “intellectual or academic capabilities” (Moll & González, 1994, p. 440), or
lack requisite mainstream experiences (MacGillivray, Ardell, & Curwen, 2004).
2
These intergenerational Latino/a students, primarily English speakers, and
their families who were upwardly aspiring and immersed in an American lifestyle
unquestionably had interesting life experiences to share. Yet such a portrayal of
Latino/a children and their families as aspiring toward middle-class social status and
mainstream integration is not the typical perception created when educators and
policy makers refer to children from diverse backgrounds as “minority,” “non-
mainstream,” “marginalized,” or “at risk” (Lee, 2003).
While all students are textured individuals (Rogoff, 2003), rich moments of
children’s meaning-making during literacy engagement are not always integrated
into the classroom setting (Moll, 2002). Some of the reasons for excluding students’
cultural experiences are the consequences of broader economic, sociopolitical, and
educational policy issues that filter into the micro classroom interactions between
students and teachers (Cummins, 1994). At the macro level, globalization is
transforming populations into increasingly multicultural and multilingual societies
(Luke, 2003). In the United States, neoconservative approaches have taken the lead
in establishing educational policy for an increasingly diverse society. One aspect of
this approach is the promulgation of a singular society through a common culture
and English-only instruction (Halcón, 2001). Another recent trend is the back-to-
basic skills curriculum in which schools’ academic progress is measured yearly
through high-stakes standardized testing (Apple, 2001). Attempting to drive their
reading and math test scores higher, schools have reacted by narrowing the
curriculum’s breadth and depth through test prep lessons and foregoing teacher
3
professional instructional decision-making in favor of prepackaged curricular
programs. While these regulatory educational reforms affect educational outcomes
for all public school children, the effect is particularly poignant for working class
and poor children who attend public schools (Darder & Torres, 2004). The result is a
curriculum that is both unchallenging and limited.
For Latino/a children who are historically underachieving academically
(Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997), the long-term social and economic consequences
of such a curriculum are compelling. However even in this environment, there are
scattered classrooms and individual teachers finding ways to “teach between the
cracks” (Short et al., 2005). Some educators are creatively engaging students in
meaning-based classroom instruction while simultaneously addressing the rigors of
state content standards and demands of standardized testing. I sought out such a
classroom to conduct this study. In addition, this dissertation focuses on the
experiences of a different faucet of the population—middle-class Latino/a students.
Purpose of the Study
The overarching purpose of this study was to describe how fifth-grade
English-speaking Latino/a students, in a well-functioning school community and
taught with an expansive school curriculum, incorporated their lived experiences,
background knowledge, and cultural experiences while participating in their
classroom’s reading and writing activities. This study focuses on middle-class
children, a segment of the Latino/a population that prior studies have seldom
4
addressed. The goals were three fold: 1) describe how background knowledge and
resources—including popular culture and cultural resources—were accessed and
integrated during classroom literacy engagement; 2) describe the classroom
community’s student-centered literacy practices that mediated the inclusion of
students’ resources; and 3) focus on the learning experiences of English-speaking
Latino/a students from upwardly mobile families.
Exploratory Questions
This research was augmented by the following research questions:
a) What are the characteristics and structure of reading and writing activities,
that is, norms, routines, and practices, in this classroom? How do they foster
integration of middle-class Latino/a participants’ background and cultural
experiences?
b) What is the nature of children’s participation in the classroom?
c) How are upwardly aspiring students’ different forms of cultural capital (e.g.,
embodied, objectified, and institutional) valued in this classroom?
d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s epistemological
stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives of middle-
class children’s cultural knowledge?
My aims for this study included: (a) providing a detailed, qualitative
description of the reading and writing practices of one fifth-grade elementary school
classroom of primarily Latino/a students whose families lived in an upwardly mobile
5
suburb of Los Angeles (by doing so, I will detail the nature of the classroom context
and its affordances and constraints of students’ participation [Wertsch, 1991]); (b)
gaining insight into how mainstream students’ participation in literacy activities
affects their developing views towards reading and writing; (c) noting middle-class
children’s active employment of their background knowledge, and resources—
including popular culture and other cultural resources—in their reading and writing
activities; and (d) developing an understanding of the classroom teacher’s
educational philosophies driving his instructional decisions and learning about
possible political consequences for the teacher in making particular curricular and
instructional choices.
An exploration of these questions and issues expands on previous research in
two important ways. First, I explored the classroom experiences of inter-
generational, middle-class, English-language dominant Latino/a students within the
dynamics of assimilation and accommodation to American society. While Latino/a
students in general have a history of academic underachievement, Latino/a English-
speaking children are also struggling academically (Nieto, 2001; Orfield & Lee,
2005). Much of the recent literature on Latino/a children’s academic experiences
focuses on their rich and complex bilingual skills that serve as a resource in school as
well as out-of school contexts. By comparison, the focus of this research was on
other aspects of Latino/a students’ cultural capital, that is, lived experiences, history,
cultural knowledge, and language (Freire & Macedo, 1987) and how it was
strategically used in a well-functioning school setting. In exploring group cultural
6
differences, particular attention was paid to not essentialize any ethnic or cultural
traits or to portray Latino/a students as a monolithic group. By studying Latino/a
students’ use of their cultural capital an exploration was made of their “in-
betweeness” (Bhabha, 1993) experience as children, grandchildren, and great-
grandchildren of immigrants negotiating their place in American society.
A second underlying rational was the focus on upper elementary Latino/a
students’ engagement with reading and writing activities. Upper elementary occupies
a unique position in a child’s educational life as they prepare to leave behind their
self-contained elementary classrooms and high-status positions in their school
community. Simultaneously, they are anticipating middle school’s new
organizational structure of discrete content area classes. Extant literature on Latino/a
students’ school experiences typically focuses on primary grade students or
adolescent school experiences. Thus the available field research often overlooks this
upper elementary time segment of children’s schooling.
This study is important because it seeks to provide insight into the long-
standing inequitable schooling experiences of Latino/a children, a group that
although successfully adapting, continues to encounter institutional power and
societal negative sentiment towards their culture and language. The intersection of
these has lead to detrimental policies and inequitable situations contributing to the
academic underachievement of Latino/a children. Another current issue underlying
the importance of this study includes the rapidly growing Latino/a population in this
country (Alemán, 2006).
7
This chapter serves as an introduction to this study in how upwardly aspiring
Latino/a children use their lived experiences and resources as they engaged in their
classroom’s reading and writing practices. The purpose and significance to the
educational field have been described as well as the goals for this study. In order to
understand middle-class students’ educational adaptation, it might be important to
understand underlying factors of overall Latino/a students’ school and social
experiences. These issues include: culture and power in education, devaluation of
their language and culture, history of academic underachievement, and changing
demographics. The next section addresses each of these issues and their import for
the education of Latino/a children.
Social and Structural Dynamics
Culture and Power in Education
An orienting perspective that education is not neutral (Freire & Macedo,
1987) helps to unveil the effects of educational reform and policy on children’s
schooling experiences—particularly those from diverse backgrounds. The current
tenor of the national educational policy to promote functional literacy emphasizes
students attaining a basic skills set (Ferdman, 1999). With the passage in 2001 of the
federal No Child Left Behind Act, high stakes testing has become the cornerstone of
assessing school and student progress. This focus on test scores rivets attention to a
single measure of student learning. Another concern of high stakes testing is schools’
gravitation towards a drills-and-skills curriculum—more likely to yield increases in
8
test scores—at the expense of a more substantive curriculum (Gutiérrez, et al. 2002).
This dilution of the curriculum has debilitating consequences for all public school
children but particularly for children from diverse backgrounds. With limited
meaningful engagement in their learning, children are preempted from connecting
their vast store of family background experiences, cultural resources, friendship
networks, and community knowledge to their classroom learning experiences.
Darder deplores this situation in which children from diverse backgrounds have their
cultural knowledge and language resources “hidden within reinforced silences”
(1997, p. 332). Moreover, the preoccupation with test scores detracts the educational
discourse from structural inequities and more holistic types of school reform. It also
detracts from larger systemic issues such as poverty and its material effects on school
resources and students’ learning (Darder & Torres, 2004; Greene & Abt-Perkins,
2003).
Devaluation of Language and Culture
Concerted efforts to diminish an ethnic diaspora’s cultural resources have
been specifically targeted at Latinos/as. Since the 1990s, a succession of legislation
provides evidence of growing negative sentiment towards immigrants. In California
(Proposition 227) and Arizona (Proposition 203) all but eliminated bilingual
education in these states that have substantial Latino/a populations. In California, the
passage of Proposition 187 in 1994 sought to bar illegal immigrants from public
health and educational services. Two years later, the passage of Proposition 209,
which ended affirmative action, provides a further example of concretized anti-
9
immigrant sentiment (Halcón, 2001). Suárez-Orozco contends, “Identifying
wholeheartedly with a culture that rejects you has its psychological costs, usually
paid in the currency of shame, doubt, and even self-hatred” (2000, p. 21).
Individuals from historically oppressed groups, such as Latinos/as, often find
that their cultural capital is not as valued as much as the dominant group’s (Luke,
2003). While all students come to school with a variety of experiential backgrounds,
some differ from “mainstream” experiences and are under appreciated by some
teachers (de la Luz Reyes, 1992). In some educators’ views, this class, cultural, and
linguistic diversity renders students less able to comprehend literature and content
area texts or to write engaging personal narratives than students with upper- and
middle-class literacy and cultural experiences (MacGillivray et al., 2004). Although
this deficit perspective (Valencia, 1997) is rarely talked about explicitly among
educators, it becomes part of the unofficial talk in the “teachers’ lounge and
hallways” (Lubienski, 2003, p. 36) and is reflected in teachers’ low academic
expectations (Diaz & Flores, 2001).
History of Academic Underachievement
The academic success of Latinos/as is crucial to their future viability and
inclusion in the workforce. While educational improvement is substantial for first-
and second-generation Latinos/as of Mexican origin, the growth is not sustained in
later generations. Surprisingly by the third generation “progress stalls” (Grogger &
Trejo, 2002; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). Fittingly, literacy researchers, such as
10
Jiménez (1999), cite the need to expand educational research to other Latino/a
groups beyond those who are migrant and immigrants.
Education is one avenue towards economic security and upward social
mobility (Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997). (Although Luke [1986] cautions
education, in and of itself, does not have a “hypodermic effect” overriding other
sociocultural and contextual issues.) Lack of adequate education and appropriate job
skills make individuals particularly vulnerable to the changing workforce demands
of the new globalized capitalistic economy (Grogger & Trejo, 2002). However the
current educational climate that views literacy as a functional, neutral stand-alone
assemblage of discrete skills (such as phonics, grammar, and punctuation) and the
extension of this perspective into an unchallenging curriculum portend negative
consequences for developing students’ critical thinking skills. As a result, the current
back-to-skills focus is not adequately preparing individuals for the literacy
requirements of an increasingly “semiotic workforce” and is thus affecting the
potential in children’s life trajectories (Luke, 2003).
Changing Demographics
By the year 2050, it is estimated that one-in-four school age children will be
of Latino/a descent (Gibson, Gandara, & Koyama, 2004). Because globalization has
engendered relative ease in individuals’ movement across physical boundaries,
nations are reconfigured into increasingly multicultural and multilingual populations
(Luke, 2003).
11
From 1990 to 2000, the Latino/a population in the United States grew by
58% (Suárez-Orozco, 2000). In 2003, Latinos/as accounted for 37 million people
becoming the new “largest minority group” (Darder & Torres, 2004, p. 122). Two-
thirds of this group are of Mexican origin (Rodriguez, 2006, Nov. 12). Seventy
percent of the nation’s Latino/a population is concentrated in two states, California
and Texas (Grogger & Trejo, 2002). Currently in California, Latinos/as comprise
nearly one-third of the overall population and are the largest non-white population.
In California, 83% of Latinos/as are of Mexican descent (Rodriguez, 2006, Nov. 12).
In Los Angeles, 45% of the population is Latino/a or Hispanic (Latino Policy and
Issues Brief, 2003). This research is timely.
Exploring Suburban Contexts
The educational experiences of intergenerational Latino/a children living in
suburban contexts are often overlooked in educational research. Current educational
research frequently targets “urban” schools without recognizing suburban schools as
sites requiring equal concern. The terms “inner city” and “at risk” become catch
phrases for non-White children (Lee, 2003) and unintentionally perpetuate a deficit
discourse and perception. In contrast to these perceptions, Mexican-Americans are
rising to middle-class status (Rodriguez, 1996). By conducting research in a
suburban school in a middle class community populated primarily by English-
speaking Latino/a children, I plan to add to the literature by widening the focus on
issues in children’s educational experiences beyond geographic locale or language
minority status.
12
In the next section, I review the selection of sociocultural and cultural capital
theories as appropriate conceptual frameworks for this study into how middle-class
Latino/a children bring their cultural capital into their classroom reading and writing
practices. It was facets of this study’s findings, specifically the complex responses of
students’ adaptation to mainstream society and their perception of discrimination as
historical, that prompted me to draw upon two additional relevant theories for
interpretation. These are, respectively, immigrant theory specifically ethnic
diasporas’ adoption of the American creed and Critical Race Theory. It is important
to look at these theoretical constructs to understand the educational adaptation of
intergenerational immigrant Latino/a children. Each of these frameworks will be
reviewed.
Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks
This research was initially based on two key assumptions. Given that the
classroom site would have student-centered literacy activities, a sociocultural theory
of learning which views individuals’ social, historical, and cultural selves shared in
purposeful joint activity would be fitting. Because sociocultural theory
conceptualizes learning as a socially, linguistically, and culturally mediated process,
Moll characterizes this perspective as a “theory of possibilities” (2002, p. 266). The
second assumption was the study’s focus on how middle-class Latino/a students’
used their background experiences. Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital that views
13
individual’s resources as being strategically utilized (i.e., valued) in a particular
social setting seemed equally fitting.
Based on the research findings with this intergenerational immigrant group’s
varied responses to accommodation and assimilation, the relevant theories of
American creed and Critical Race Theory were incorporated in order to fully
interpret the findings. Immigrant theory, specifically ethnic diasporas’ adoption of
American values and beliefs, provided an understanding of ethnic diasporas’
integration and adaptation in American society. Specifically, conceptualizations of
the American creed gave insight into an understanding of the Mexican ethnic
diasporas’ integration in American mainstream culture and lifestyle. Critical Race
Theory, built on the ubiquitous nature of racism in this country and the potential of
counter-narratives to promote individuals’ integrated selves, was also relevant.
Within the four theoretical frameworks of sociocultural theory, cultural capital,
American Creed, and Critical Race Theory, I explored how middle-class Latino/a
fifth-graders tapped into their cultural resources as they engaged in their classroom’s
reading and writing practices. Following is a discussion of each theory.
Sociocultural Theory
Using sociocultural theory allows us to appreciate that a child comes to
school not as a blank slate but as an individual with a fully textured life and cultural
experiences that can serve as a resource in their intellectual development. Rooted in
the early twentieth century socio-historical school of Lev Vygotsky, sociocultural
14
theory focuses on the interrelated social, historical, and cultural influences that
contribute to children’s development.
A sociocultural approach to human development broadens the research lens
to examine the overall cultural, institutional, and historical dimensions that shape and
influence human action (Wertsch, 1991, 1998). For many years, psychologists and
social scientists had viewed cognitive processing as an isolated in-the-head
experience (Bruner, 1986; Wertsch, 1991, 1998). By contrast, sociocultural theory
shifts the focus from the individual’s cognitive processes and encompasses the social
relationships, nature of interactions, communicative means, and cultural mediational
tools involved in goal-directed human activity (Rueda & McIntyre, 2002). This
perspective is particularly critical for children from diverse backgrounds whose life
experiences and languages are often not valued in mainstream classrooms (Moll,
2001). Sociocultural theory views human development to be: 1) socially situated, 2)
mediated by cultural tools and artifacts, and 3) affected by institutional power (Cole,
1996; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991, 1998).
Socially situated learning. Children have a multitude of out-of-school social
groups in which they participate and acquire particular ways of being. Thus, learning
is socially situated. Participating in multiple communities encompasses a variety of
social interactions (adults and peers), structures (dyads and small and whole groups),
and an understanding of its norms and routines. In such settings, the everyday
behavior of learners and their active contributions to their learning are valued. For
example, the nature of a classroom’s literacy practices is evidenced by the actions
15
that the members of the group take up, respond to, accept, and reject. Within any
context, knowledge is shared and borrowed among participants at various times and
within a variety of circumstances (Lave & Wegner, 1991).
Mediational tools. Learning is mediated through cultural tools and artifacts.
Foley, Levison, and Hurtig (2001) cite the utility that Latino/a scholars have found in
applying a Vygotskian notion of cultural tools to highlighting community and
individual funds of knowledge (e.g., Moll & González, 1994) and describing the
manner in which the educational context provides a zone of proximal development.
Among cultural tools, language is critical in communicating with others and
conveying meaning. Literacy learning occurs through two key uses of language:
interpersonal language between others and the intrapersonal language of self
(Vygotsky, 1987). Language is used knowledgeably, strategically, and appropriately
to a specific context. It helps assure shared understanding and meaning among
participants. Rather than literacy learning provided through a prescriptive “teacher-
proof” reading program that some school reforms have advocated, learning occurs in
social mediation with students within their zones of proximal development, that is
the range of learning in which they can best learn with the support of a more expert
peer or teacher. The classroom environment is deemed to be a social practice in
which individuals develop an understanding of what constitutes literacy and learning
based on what is valued in the context by participants (Gee, 1997; Hagood, 2000).
Influences of institutional power. Schools are the dominant formal institution
in children’s learning. In a sociocultural contextual view, the influences of cultural
16
and institutional power become apparent. This perspective helps to reveal the
systemic and institutional barriers of school inequity and negate the blaming-the-
victim or other cultural deficit theories (Darder, 1991; Rueda & Moll, 1994) as
explanatory frameworks of underachievement of Latinos/as and other racialized
populations (Darder & Torres, 2004).
Focus on activity setting. Cole (1996) suggests that the complexity of a social
context, such as a classroom, is best accomplished by capturing the components of
purposeful activity (cf. Rogoff, 1995). These interdependent components include: the
members of the community, their overall shared goals, mediational tools used,
routines and norms, and individual purposes and goals. Using an activity setting as a
unit of analysis provides insight into the nature and range of individuals’
participation. This approach provided a frame for capturing and analyzing data for
this study’s two research sub-questions regarding student participation and
identifying the characteristics and structures of the classroom’s literacy activities.
Cultural Capital Theory
Using sociocultural theory as an encompassing framework allows researchers
an orienting perspective with which to recognize the mutually constituting nature of
the community and the individual acting within that community (Rogoff, 2003).
Using the work of Bourdieu allows a further tightening of this research focus to
show how particular aspects of middle-class Latino/a students’ lives and experiences
are integrated into their classroom literacy learning experiences. The notion of
17
cultural capital provides a theoretical tool to identify and differentiate between
different forms of cultural capital and its acknowledged value in a particular social
arena. It is unclear, however, how this might apply to children from families actively
aspiring toward middle-class status.
Concept of cultural capital. The sociologist Pierre Bourdieu (1986)
developed the concept of cultural capital to explain differentiated outcomes in the
academic experiences of students from different social classes in French society.
From this perspective, each individual has a “habitus” or set of dispositions and
preferences they bring to any social context (i.e., social field). Their habitus is an
internalization of their perceived role in their world as well as their perceptions of
possibilities for action.
Three forms of cultural capital. All capital is a form of power and has a
degree of status in the social field it is activated (Horvat, 2003). Bourdieu
categorized cultural capital into three types: embodied, objectified, and
institutionalized. Embodied capital is an individual characteristic (e.g., the ability to
speak Spanish). It is acquired over time and at an investment by the individual with
cost to other embodied capital not pursued (e.g., time devoted to learning Spanish
many preclude time devoted to playing outdoors with friends). As symbolic capital,
it is not initially recognized as having currency and value, however, it does
substantiate an individual’s claim of competence. The second type is objectified
capital. This form is material and tangible (e.g., books, video games, bootlegged
movie videos). As a tangible form, it can be transmitted to others. However,
18
possession of objectified capital does not guarantee appropriate usage. This, too, may
require an investment in time and effort to adequately appropriate it. The third form
of capital is the institutionalized state, which is the academic-sanctioned credentials
and degrees earned that establish competency in a field (e.g., in a school setting,
these might be selection as student of the month or an attendance award).
A key understanding of cultural capital is that possessing it, in and of itself,
does not guarantee a privileged state. It must be valued and legitimized by a
particular group or within a particular context or social field (Horvat, 2003; Luke,
1996). For example, a video game enthusiast holds little cachet sitting in with the
school band. Using a more relevant classroom example for this study, cultural capital
can be applied to evaluating whether or not a child’s dual language use is recognized
and valued.
Application in educational research. Freire and Macedo (1987) used the
notion of cultural capital to describe students’ “life experiences, history, and
language” (p. 148). They contend that when not given the opportunity to use their
cultural capital to make meaning out of their surroundings, students lose the
opportunity to engage in a broader interrogation and understanding of society
including the asymmetrical power relations of schooling.
There are differing perspectives among educational researchers regarding the
use of cultural capital to explain differences in academic outcomes. Kingston (2000)
asserts that unlike the hierarchical nature of French society (the context in which
Bourdieu developed his theory), American culture is more horizontal and pluralistic.
19
Therefore, there is not one type of cultural capital that is valued universally in
multiple social fields. Furthermore, Kingston claims that studies of causal
relationships (e.g., Roscigno & Ainsworth-Darnell, 1999; Lareau & Horvat, 1999)
between an elite cultural capital and school success do not account for differing
experiential factors, individual accomplishment, or institutional factors. Some studies
of the effects of cultural capital on educational attainment have used reductionist
measures, such as theater attendance, museum visits, etc. (e.g., Kalmijn &
Kraaykamp, 1996). Lareau and Horvat (1999) explored ways in which non-European
middle-class parents drew upon their cultural capital resources to successfully
interact with school staff.
Most recently, literacy studies by Compton-Lilly (2003) and Monkman,
Ronald, and Théraméne (2005) drew upon the construct of cultural capital to identify
the acknowledged value of resources within particular communities of practice.
Compton-Lilly found that parents in a low-income community felt their particular
social practices and available resources were undervalued at times by school
personnel. In a classroom setting, Monkman, Ronald, and Théraméne (2005) noted
how Latino/a immigrant first-graders used their social relationships with peers and
their teacher to tap into their multiple forms of cultural capital. The latter study
forefronts notions of community regard and values gleaned from using students’
embodied, objectified, and institutionalized forms of cultural capital.
Both a sociocultural perspective and the concept of cultural capital provide
useful frameworks to guide this inquiry and subsequent analysis. Using a
20
sociocultural perspective as the central framework affords a recognition that
individuals are textured selves with historical knowledge, lived experiences, and
cultural resources that are shared through spoken and written language and
participation within a community of practice. A classroom is one such example of a
social context. Considering students’ resources as cultural capital adds another
dimension to this proposed research in noting different types of cultural capital
accessed by students and how some cultural capital may be more valuable than other
types. For example, relevant to Latino/a children’s experiences, research has
concluded those individuals from shared cultural backgrounds display resilience to
sustain and use their language and culture and tap into “multiple memberships and
the use of multiple linguistic codes as an asset” (Trueba, 2002, p. 10).
Comparing Cultural Capital and a Funds of Knowledge Perspective
Because Bourdieu’s cultural capital theory and Moll and González’s funds of
knowledge theoretical approach share similarities (Lubienski, 2003), it is useful to
distinguish between the two. First, I will present similarities and then outline the
distinctions. The first similarity is that both perspectives acknowledge individuals’
lived experiences with which they can access as resources; secondly, both recognize
the importance of a social network in resource distribution and acquisition; and third,
each was developed to address disparity in education and schooling.
Briefly described, the funds of knowledge approach developed by Moll and
González (1994; 2004; González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005) succinctly contends,
“People are competent, they have knowledge, and their life experiences have given
21
them that knowledge” (González, Moll, & Amanti, 2005; p. ix). This perspective
highlights the range of “material and intellectual resources” (Moll & González, 2004,
p. 702) shared among a community’s social relations in problem-solving and goal
attainment. In turn, educators can adapt this child, familial, and community
knowledge to develop novel curricular instructional activities that integrate these
resources.
The cultural capital and funds of knowledge perspectives are differentiated
by four aspects: 1) theoretical genesis; 2) degree of individual agency; 3) capital as
commodity; and 4) perception of power. Each aspect is outlined below:
Theoretical genesis. A key difference between the two theories is the notion
of privilege and power. Cultural capital is imbued with notions of social class,
hierarchy, and competition. Bourdieu (1986) developed the concept of cultural
capital to explain differentiated outcomes in academic affordances and privileges by
individuals from different social classes (Schwartz, 1997; Olneck, 2000). Those in a
higher economic class have a superior caliber of resources and influential social
networks affording more potential to gain power and greater economic and social
status than those in low-income communities. Olneck notes that cultural capital in
its jockeying within a field for distinction differs from cultural resources which can
be negatively or positively acknowledged (2000).
By contrast, a funds of knowledge approach is used to alter educators’ deficit
view of children and families (Moll & González, 2004) who come from either low-
income households (e.g., Mercado, 2005) and/or diverse backgrounds (e.g.,
22
McIntyre, Kyle, Moore, Sweazy, & Greer, 2001). The goal is to develop a
recognition and appreciation of household competencies and strategies used to
access resources. By doing so, children and their families’ knowledge could be
incorporated by educators during their school practices (Moll & González, 2004).
Degree of individual agency. From a cultural capital perspective, individuals
strategically use their cultural capital to broker and activate available powers of
economic, cultural, social, and symbolic capital (Bourdieu, 1989) and cooperation
(Lamont & Lareau, in Schwartz, 1997). In contrast, a funds of knowledge approach
is a framework used to guide educators as they engage in ethnographic household
inquiry. Guided by this information and through collaboration with other educators,
they incorporate students’ and families’ expertise and resources in innovative and
relevant classroom instruction. It is through the educators’ time and efforts that
students and families gain a school’s institutional recognition.
Capital as commodity. Cultural capital is manipulated and accessed through
social capital, that is, networks and associations with others, in order to gain
additional capital. On the other hand, a funds of knowledge perspective values
students’ and families’ knowledge as a resource worthy of integration into the
curriculum. By doing so, there is a potential to authentically involve community
members in the school institution.
Perception of power. Cultural capital examines individuals’ competitive
struggle for maintenance of and/or acquisition of power in the social hierarchy.
Individuals continually compete as they transition through different social fields
23
(contexts). In contrast, a funds of knowledge approach considers the transformation
of teachers’ perspectives as powerful. Teachers’ recognition of students’ and
families’ social and economic competencies is a first step in a re-visioning of
educators’ imagination and perceptions that can positively extend to the school and
the school community.
Both cultural capital and funds of knowledge perspectives provide useful
orientations to exploring students’ lived experiences. However, for the purposes of
this classroom study, focusing on individual students’ cultural capital was more
relevant to answer the research question. As previously mentioned, two frameworks,
conceptualizations of the American creed and Critical Race Theory, also had
relevance in interpreting the findings. In the next section, these two theoretical
orientations are discussed.
American Creed
Immigrant children are the “fastest growing sector of the child population in
the U.S.” (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 4). With the study’s focus on intergenerational
Latino/a children, it is important to include perspectives of the socialization
processes of the Mexican ethnic diaspora. While scholars such as Ogbu (1994; 1995)
present insights into immigration not always being a matter of personal volition, as
was the case of African diaspora, this review of American Creed focuses on ethnic
diasporic groups who voluntarily sought immigration to the United States.
Historic views of immigration in the United States. Historically, Americans
have negatively perceived the influx of immigrant groups into their middle-class,
24
White Anglo-Saxon Protestant way of life (Gordon, in Alba & Nee, 1997; Shain,
1999). From the 1840s with first major wave of Irish immigrants, to the 1880s wave
of Italians, Eastern European Catholics, and Jews to the early twentieth century wave
of European origin immigrants, Americans have regarded ethnic diasporas with fear
and suspicion. A pervasive concern has been that the ethnic diaspora’s have split
allegiances to the U.S. and to their ancestral or symbolic homeland (Shain, 1999).
Other concerns have arisen regarding the emergence of radical ethic separatist views
vying with American democratic values (Levine, 2005). Since 1965, the largest
immigration wave has come from Latin America and Asia (Jensen, 2001; Pedraza,
1998; Sanchez, 1999; Suárez-Orozco, 2000) and their phenotypic and linguistic
differences raise the immigration debate again (Jensen, 2001) as nativists fear
immigrant groups will erode this nation’s cultural values.
Assimilation and multicultural perspectives. Fears of earlier nineteenth and
twentieth century immigrant groups were dispelled by their assumed assimilation
into American society. The assimilationist model presupposed a continuous ongoing
path, albeit not linear, of initial contact and then subsequent societal integration
(Alba & Nee, 1997). While this historic nostalgia has been referred to as a “mythico-
historic” cultural narrative (Suárez-Orozco, 2000, p. 7), some scholars expect that
today’s newer immigrant groups will follow a similar pattern (Levine, 2005).
However, because technological ease in maintaining instantaneous communication
and travel to their homeland, today’s newcomers tend to be more transnational
(Pedraza, 1998; Portes, 1997; Shain 1999; Suárez-Orozco, 2000). Through the
25
availability of mass media, immigrants have often already been “ ‘Americanized’ in
consumer patterns, lifestyle, and popular culture” (Rumbaut, 1997, p. 948). Other
immigration scholars contend integration remains uneven for various immigrant
groups and is influenced by current contexts including factors such as generational
status, receiving social networks, changing labor markets, and ethnic competition
(Alba & Nee, 1997; Ono, 2002; Portes, 1997; Rumbaut, 1997, 2004; Suárez-Orozco,
2000). During the 1960s and 1970s, multiculturalism emerged as a new perspective
in addressing the existence of multiple groups (Banks, 2004). Its underlying ideology
was claiming equal status for all racial and ethnic groups (Rodriguez, 2004). But
balkanization of American society vis-à-vis multiculturalism is perceived by some as
a threat. Furthermore, a multicultural society does not quite adapt itself to “liberal-
pluralist vision and view of a color-blind society” (Shain, 1999, p. 29).
Both assimilationist and multicultural views are problematic in evaluating the
immigrant experience. Assimilationist perspectives present a deficit view with
expectations that immigrants acquire the host country’s dominant language and
culture (Rumbaut, 1997). Suárez-Orozco proposes assimilation be re-conceived from
a one-way to a bi-directional process with the host country learning from immigrant
groups (2005).
Multiculturalism has been critiqued as an intellectual proposition and not
necessarily an accurate reflection of the immigrants’ interpretation of their own
experience (Joppke, 1996 cited in Shain, 1999). From this perspective, while ethnic
diasporas aspire to integrate into society, multiculturalism forefronts a notion of
26
“otherness” and further separates them from mainstream society (Shain, 1999).
Likewise, the focus on differences belies the dialectic between “immigrant and
majority cultures [that] so often influence each other and converge” (Rodriguez,
2004, p. M5).
Ethnic diasporas and the American Creed. Looking beyond the concept of
assimilation are broader views of diasporic citizens (cf. Laguerre, 1998) and ethnic
diasporas (Shain, 1999) that capture the “international process that reshuffles persons
and cultures across nations” (Pedraza, 1998, p. 379). Shain posits that ethnic
diasporas adopt, not undermine, the “American creed” (hereafter no longer in
quotes), that is, this country’s values of freedom, democracy, equity, opportunity,
self-determination, pluralism, justice, and human rights (1994, 1999).
In Shain’s cross-cultural case studies of ethnic diasporic groups, he cites their
respective interests in development of United States foreign policy in which they
reinforce American values to their homeland (ancestral or symbolic). The case study
of Mexican-Americans is particularly relevant because they are one of the largest
diasporic groups (cf. Portes, 1997; Rumbaut, 2004) as well as the focus of this study.
This group’s complex experiences stem from their long history of the Mexican
homeland’s troubled relations with the U.S. For various economic and political
reasons, Mexican-Americans have had a conflicting and changing relationship with
Mexico. While Mexican Americans have “looked to Mexico for emotional or
cultural solace” (Shain, 1999, p. 175), they are forging unique and separate identity
for themselves—not one prescribed by their home country. Not wanting to be torn
27
between two cultures never fully belonging or being one or the other, Shain asserts,
“Mexican Americans have a strong sense of themselves as Americans, and their
ethnicity is part of the American ethos” (p. 195).
Overall, Shain contends that when provided a legitimate meaningful voice in
shaping U.S. foreign policy, ethnic diasporas recognize the fulfillment of American
potential and promise (1999). That promise includes the American capacity of
absorption of multiple ethnic diasporas. And inclusion bears responsibilities. In turn,
ethnic diasporas seek to transform their outsider status to be part of the American
culture and promote its values.
Shain asserts that ethnic groups can simultaneously maintain an identity as a
diasporic group member and also embrace the American creed. Yet group
relationships are always in transformation shaped by socioeconomic, political,
religious perspectives, and context of both the home country and homeland (cf.
Pedraza, 1998; Rumbaut, 1997; Sanchez, 1999).
Contemporary relevance. Currently, the U.S. is experiencing a historically
large-scale immigration peak expected to continue for the next 15 to 20 years
(Meissner, 2007). Latinos/as are among the fastest-growing groups in the U.S. with
most Latinos/as being of Mexican descent (Alemán, 2006). In the dynamic shifting
of American culture, there is no uniformity and no definitive American (Suárez-
Orozco, 2000). The demographics and character of the region are in constant flux.
As the contemporary political analyst Gregory Rodriguez characterizes the
transformation of intergenerational immigrants’ aspirations over time, “I know that
28
the dreams of those who came before me are not the same as mine and will not be
the same as those who come after me” (2006, p. 5).
Critical Race Theory
As previously mentioned, the conflicting response from this study’s student
participants prompted the integration of other relevant theory to interpret the
findings. Individually students recounted experiences with discrimination. However,
publicly in the classroom, they viewed discrimination as historical or only
experienced by others primarily in school texts.
Critical Race Theory (CRT) has recently entered the educational field as a
relevant theoretical lens to examine asymmetrical structural power and critique
curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices especially for children from diverse
backgrounds (Ladson-Billings, 2004). CRT emanated from the Critical Legal Studies
movement during the mid-1970s as a framework for critiquing legal ideology that
promulgated inequitable class structure (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller, & Thomas,
1995; Ladson-Billings, 1998, 2000; Tate, 1997). Despite the implied focus in its
name, CRT is concerned with social justice and equity for all groups and does not
privilege race over gender, class, linguistic and/or other identity categories (Ladson-
Billings, 2000, 2004).
CRT tenets. There are four tenets of CRT. First, is that racism is “a
permanent fixture in American life” (Ladson-Billings, 1998, p. 11). This orienting
perspective powerfully forefronts the pervasive and underlying aspects of race in
society. Second is the role of storytelling that includes experiential knowledge of the
29
subaltern (Ladson-Billings, 1998, 2004) to “name their own reality” (Ladson-
Billings & Tate, 1995, p. 57). These stories provide counter-narratives to the
stereotypic or typical historic portrayals of different groups (DeCuir & Dixson,
2004) and have the potential to disrupt and challenge the dominant discourse. For
students with varied and multiple ethnic, racial, gender, and linguistic identities,
storytelling can be particularly helpful in supporting their perception of themselves
as transcendent and in an advantaged position (Ladson-Billings, 2000, 2004). The
third tenet recognizes a convergence of CRT’s interests with mainstream group
goals. That is, the implementation of specific equity policies is more likely to occur
when they are advantageous to mainstream groups as well (e.g., affirmative action
has benefited White women). Finally, critical race theorists are impatient with the
slow pace and incremental progress of liberal programs and as a result advocate
more sweeping changes (DeCuir & Dixson, 2004; Edwards & Schmidt, 2006;
Greene & Abt-Perkins, 2003; Ladson-Billings, 1998, 2000, 2004).
Applicability in education. In the field of education, CRT problematizes the
current curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. In its use of texts, the
school curriculum tends to adopt a race neutral perspective (Ladson Billings, 1998,
p. 18) or tends to portray texts that mute or erase voices in a way that distorts their
meaning and significance (King, 1992). A standardized curriculum focused on test-
taking skills provides a questionable instructional experience for children and does
little to recognize and develop individuals’ strengths and needs (cf. Alemán, 2006).
Assessment practices by which national educational reforms and schools rely on a
30
single point of standardized testing measurement are questionable in their accuracy
and adequacy in fully capturing the range of children’s educational development
(Ladson-Billings, 1998).
New multicultural education approaches. Since the 1960s and 1970s, one
way of addressing a pluralistic nation has been through multicultural education
(Banks, 2004). However, Ladson-Billings notes current dissonance in the field
(2004). King concurs and contends most multicultural efforts are “marginalizing
knowledge that …simultaneously distorts both the historical and social reality that
people actually experience” (2001, p. 284). According to Ladson-Billings, two
promising multicultural approaches include McLaren’s critical multicultural
approach (McLaren, 1994 cited in Ladson-Billings, 2004) and King’s “deciphering
of knowledge” perspective (2001). Both approaches advocate children learning to
question not only words but also the silences in the literature and in classroom
discourse. Children need skills to decipher school texts as well as the multiple
societal texts including popular culture and the “less sophisticated …everyday
advertising and media representation” (Ladson-Billings, 2004, p. 54). This is
particularly crucial in today’s globalized society where worldwide information, text,
and images are readily accessible (cf. Suárez-Orozco, 2005) and play a role in
shaping individuals’ self-perception and self-identity.
CRT as a tool of change. In American society, particular groups—African-
Americans, Native Americans, Latino/as, and Asian Americans—experience “a
racialized identity” (Ladson-Billings, 2000, p. 262; cf. Lee, Spencer, & Harpalani,
31
2003). CRT’s focus is on race-consciousness and how it continues to shape
institutions and practices. In his study investigating community tensions between
multi-generational Mexican-American workers and recent immigrants, Jimenez
found that continual waves of Mexican immigrants creates an “immigrant
replenishment” that consequently “bolsters the salience of race in the lives of
Mexican Americans” (2005, p. 22). Furthermore, Jimenez’s concept seeks to provide
tools to bring about change while “avoid[ing] the traps of racial thinking”
(Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller, & Thomas, 1995, p. xxxii).
Conceptions of Culture
Using sociocultural theory and cultural capital as frameworks for this study
assumes a forefronting of culture and an imperative to define how culture is
conceived. The following section addresses this need and extends to a brief
discussion of views of culture in education. First scholarship from the fields of
anthropology and education is used to present contemporary views of defining
culture. Secondly, a brief summary from educational literature addresses how culture
has intersected with classroom curriculum, students’ identity, and learning outcomes.
Defining culture
With conceptions of culture continually evolving, establishing an
authoritative definition of culture is often a slippery task (Merry, 2006). In the
nineteenth century culture was viewed as fixed, geographically bounded, and further
contained through romanticized notions of the exotic “Other.” In the last two
32
decades, anthropology has incorporated a perspective of culture as porous and
shaped by the transnational flows of people, resources, and ideas (Merry, 2006;
Suarez-Orozco, 2005). Such a view pushes against notions that a group acts
predictably or maintains a monolithic ideology (Erickson, 2004; cf. Shain, 1999).
Anthropologist Sally Merry notes within-group differences include levels of
education, social class, and language use (2006).
Contemporary views of culture focus on globalized and deterritorialized
ethnoscapes (Appadurai, 1996), fluid nature (Erickson, 2004), and as the product of
political, economic, and historical relations of power (Merry, 2006). Such an
intertwining of culture and societal power is reflected in Bourdieu’s (1986) concept
of cultural capital in which an individual strategically wields varied forms of elite
capital to gain personal advantage. A sociocultural perspective views culture as the
repertoires and practices engaged in as a group member (Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003;
cf. Merry, 2006). A perspective of ethnic diasporas’ adoption of the American Creed
explores the transnational nature of culture as well as historical and political contexts
that shape individual experiences and perceptions (Shain, 1999). Today culture is
generally defined as “the behaviors, beliefs, attitudes and practices” shared and
engaged in by a particular group of individuals (Goldenberg, Rueda, & August,
2006, p. 251). Merry describes the changing fluidity of group practices as a result
of:
contradictions among them or because new ideas and instructions are
adopted by members. They typically incorporate contested values and
practices. Cultures are not contained within stable borders but are
33
open to new ideas and permeable to influences from other cultural
systems… (2006, p. 11)
With a conception of culture as dynamic, anthropologists guard against
describing groups in essentializing ways through assigning a fixed set of traits or
practices (Gupta & Ferguson, 1997). It is problematic when culture is used for group
labeling because it “…offers an apparently benign way of describing immigrant
minorities, racializing these populations while appearing to describe differences in
terms of values and beliefs” (Razack, 1998; Volpp, 2000 cited in Merry, 2006, p.
10). The anthropologist Abu-Lughod argues for the importance of ethnographers to
purposely “write against culture” (1993, p. 13) by avoiding generalizations.
Educator Frederick Erickson (2004) brings the discussion of culture to an
everyday level. He asserts individuals participate in a myriad of small cultural groups
or microcultures, some of which are family, church, peers, school, community, and
sports. People circulate in and out of their idiosyncratic micro-communities as a
natural course of their day. These multiple group memberships mean that everyone
has culture and is multicultural. Yet although everyone has a culture, not all cultures
are valued equally in society; minority cultures are often less valued than the
dominant culture (cf. Luke, 2003). It is inevitable that cultural differences will arise.
However, conflict can be ameliorated by framing cultural differences as flexible
boundaries instead of rigid borders (Erickson, 2004 emphasis in original).
34
Culture in education
The schooling experience for students in which individuals are both cultural
and multicultural is an increasingly important issue for educators and educational
researchers (Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003; Lee, 2003; Lee, Spencer, & Harpalani, 2003;
McCarthy, Dressman, Smolkin, McGill-Frazen, & Harris, 2000; Olneck, 2004;
Spencer, 2006).
Since the 1960s, multicultural pedagogy has sought to meaningfully
incorporate the history, perspectives, and contributions of diverse groups that had
previously been underrepresented (Banks, 2004; Olneck, 2004). However, at times
classroom educators too easily focus on a group’s explicit cultural aspects such as
language, traditions, food, and customs. Such a superficial pedagogy makes invisible
the dynamic and nuanced aspects of a group (Erickson, 2004). Furthermore this
multicultural approach, as an addendum to the regular curriculum, is unlikely to
explore the individual or societal roots underlying group conflict (Banks, 2004).
Erickson cites the implications of a surface approach and notes
when such issues as racism, class privilege, and sexism are left silent
in the classroom, the implicit message for students of color appears to
be that the teacher and the school do not acknowledge that
experiences of oppression exists (2004, p. 49).
Multicultural pedagogy is continually being reconceived to more effectively
promote students’ critical thinking (Ladson-Billings, 2004). An emancipatory
pedagogy that forefronts societal issues is advocated by some multicultural and
critical pedagogy scholars. Such a pedagogy allows students to wrestle with insights
35
and new understandings supported by access to the school and teachers’ knowledge
resources (Ladson Billings, 1998, 2004; McLaren, 1994/1998). Yet multicultural
pedagogy is not without its detractors, scholars contend multiculturalism can
sometimes serve as “an unnatural imposition” of reinforcing an outsider status—
particularly significant when an ethnic diaspora group is interested in societal
inclusion (Shain, 1999, p. 29).
Culture and students’ identity and learning outcomes
The tacit and explicit addressing of students’ culture vis-à-vis local school
practices, curriculum, and pedagogy shapes their identity (Gibson, 1997; McCarthey,
2001; McCarthey & Moje, 2002; Olneck, 2004) and contributes to their academic
expectations (cf., Lopez & Stanton-Salazar, 2001; Valenzuela, 1999).
The interactions between culture, identity, and schooling have been explored
for various ethnic and racial groups of which a full discussion is beyond the scope of
this work. However, Ogbu’s scholarship on the historical academic
underachievement of African Americans (1987, 1991, 1995) is seminal. Ogbu
contrasted African Americans’ social experience to various immigrant groups. He
asserts immigrants who chose to come to the United States (voluntary immigrants)
tend to be optimistic in their prospects. As involuntary immigrants, the African
diaspora negatively perceive cultural differences as barriers to be overcome. School
survival for these “caste minorities” required resistance and opposition to the
dominant White culture.
36
While Ogbu’s work drew attention to distinctions of hierarchical social status
and subsequent cultural frames of reference, further studies of ethnic and racial
groups and academic achievement have explored other aspects. The variability of
second- and third-generations and their social accommodation has broadened to
more proximal and distal factors (Erickson, 2004; Gibson, 1997; Olneck, 2004;
Spencer & Harpalani, 2006). Some distal social processes include immigrants’
motivations for migration, reception, available resources upon arrival (Gibson, 1997)
and interest in permanent residency. In considering proximal factors, Rumbaut
redirects focus from individuals to the local context. He contends students’ academic
performance is not based on ethnic perceptions but instead on “the specific nature,
context and the style of the minority group’s perceptions and adaptive responses to
their specific social and historical context” (1995, pp. 65-66, cited in Olneck, 2004).
Teacher ideologies and local school policies and practices towards particular cultural
groups shape the educational environment. Student resistance arises not only from
historical oppression but ongoing oppressive practices and policies in school and
institutional and societal pressures (Erickson, 2004; Olneck, 2004).
In summary, contemporary views of culture and specifically conceptualizing culture
in the field of education draw attention to four key aspects. First, culture is dynamic
and responsive to historical and political influences with dimensions of power
embedded in particular types of practices. Transnational global flows of individuals,
resources, and ideas continually alter groups’ perceptions and interests. Groups
cannot be essentialized in fixed and static descriptions; there are conflicts and
37
contradictions within evolving repertoires of practices. Secondly, individuals
participate in varied micro-communities in their daily lives which makes them both
cultural and multicultural. This leads to conflict that can be ameliorated by framing
cultural differences as flexible boundaries instead of rigid borders. Third, given a
view of culture as fluid and permeable, students’ identity and expectations are
intertwined in their participation and exposure to school practices. Finally, the
national and local context plays a role in the shaping of students’ academic
experience.
Definitions
For this study, the definition of cultural capital used students’ “life
experiences, history, and language” (Freire & Macedo, 1987, p. 148). In addition,
cultural capital will be further analyzed using Bourdieu’s three forms of cultural
capital: embodied, objectified, and institutionalized.
Organization of the Study
The remaining chapters are organized in the following way:
In Chapter 2, I review the relevant research that informs this work. The
review is organized into four strands. The first strand is a sociohistorical review of
Latino/a academic underachievement and addresses the two relevant issues of quality
of education and poverty. The second strand is a review of educational research
conducted with Latino/a students. This literature focuses on students’ bilingual
resources and leaves further opportunities to study Latino/a children who are
38
primarily English speakers. The third strand presents a review of literacy research
with race and ethnicity as central components of the study. With this study’s findings
indicating students’ awareness of racial and ethnic discrimination, this research
literature provided parallel understandings. The fourth strand focuses on the current
educational climate of high-stakes testing and accountability and their effects on
Latino/a students’ instruction. It helps to contextualize the educational environment
in which this study occurred.
Chapter 3 addresses design and methodology. I explain my decision to use
qualitative research and a case study design. I describe my decision to use a middle-
class, well-functioning school. I outline the data collection methods of participant
observation, interviews, and collecting student artifacts and school documents as
data sources. The analysis of the data for each research question is detailed. Issues of
trustworthiness of data are addressed. Researcher reflectivity is also included.
Chapter 4 of the dissertation will focus on the findings of the study into the
nature of middle-class Latino/a students’ use of the cultural capital during their
literacy engagement. The findings for the main research question and four research
sub-questions will be answered individually.
In Chapter 5 of the dissertation, I will summarize the findings from Chapter 4
to answer the research questions. The chapter will also include suggested
implications for theory, research, and practice.
39
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
The review of the literature in this section focuses on four relevant aspects of
the research. First, a sociohistorical review provides a framework for understanding
the Latino/a gap in academic achievement and helps to situate this research. Because
systemic factors are stronger explanatory factors for the chronic underachievement
of Latino/a students, than “culturally deterministic” views (Darder, 1997, p. xii),
greater attention is given to two issues: quality of education and poverty. Next, I link
a review of key educational research conducted with Latino/a students. This
empirical research highlights three areas: students’ bilingual skills as strengths and
resources in their learning, supportive educational contexts that tap into students’
bilingual skills, and social networks as ways to achieve academic goals. The third
strand focuses on empirical literacy research with race and ethnicity as central
elements of the classroom curriculum. I conclude by presenting the current
educational context of accountability and its effect on classroom teachers to invoke
instructional decisions detrimental to the education of children particularly those
from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds.
Sociohistorical Review of Latino/a Academic Underachievement
The educational scholar Darder (1997) asserts Latinos/as are “among the
nation’s most educationally disadvantaged and economically disenfranchised
40
groups” (p. xi). Perez and de la Rosa Salazar (1997) contend they have the “lowest
levels of educational attainment, highest dropout rates, and highest illiteracy rates”
(p. 153). But a view of Latinos as a monolithic group does not adequately convey or
address the within group variances (Ferdman, 1990) and the “contradictions,
tensions, and fissures–around class, race and color—that often separate them”
(Suárez-Orozco & Páez, 2002, p. 3). These within group variances can be
differentiated by dimensions of generational status, individual language preferences,
countries and regions of origins, length of stay in the country, impetus for
immigration, occupation, and socioeconomic status (Jimenez et al. 1999; Orellana &
Bowman, 2003).
Of particular concern are Latinos/as who have been born in the United States
and whose home language is English. It might be expected that because this group
are native born and have acquired the necessary language skills, they would logically
find success in school. However Nieto (2001) points out that many English-speaking
Latino/a students are disproportionately underachieving. Rumbaut (1996) asserts that
U.S. born Latinos/as “perform academically as poorly or even more poorly than
those for whom English is a second language” (emphasis added). Clearly, Latino/a
immigrants do not follow the late nineteenth and early twentieth century American
idealized vision of immigrant groups’ trajectory of educational, social, and economic
progress. For Latino/a immigrants of Mexican origin, the educational and economic
gains made by first and second generation come to a standstill by the third generation
(Grogger & Trejo, 2002; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). This halt in the academic
41
progress of a growing segment of the nation’s population has serious ramifications
for American society and its competitiveness in a global market that relies on well-
developed literate and technological skills in an increasingly textually-saturated and
language dependent job market (Luke, 2003).
In the next section, I discuss the sociohistorical issues of the Latino/a
immigrant experience in this country and two relevant issues–quality of education
and poverty—that contribute to their academic underachievement. Following that, I
will review literature on key educational research from the 1990s to the present
conducted with Latino/a students.
Sociohistorical Processes
The current negative sentiment towards Latino immigration is not new—
particularly with regard to those from Mexico (Halcón, 2001). Unlike other
immigrant groups who have faced a positive reception upon immigration (e.g.,
Cubans), the Mexican immigrant experience is distinctive. Because of this
differential host government response and reception, Latino/a assimilation has been
more likely to be “segmented” into differential societal rungs (Portes & Rumbaut,
2001) and not fully integrated into the “American hierarchies of wealth, status and
power” (p. 268).
The asymmetrical political relationship between the U.S. and Mexico has
been fraught with domination and oppression. The Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo in
1848 effectively colonized the indigenous peoples who had been living in land that
now comprises the southwestern United States. These memories of subordination
42
and negative sentiment linger (Moll & Ruiz, 2002). Suárez-Orozco and Páez (2002)
cite three broad sociohistorical processes that have contributed to Latinos/as as a
subordinate group. These include 1) an ongoing immigrant pattern of continual
waves over 100 years; 2) unequal power relations between Latino countries and the
United States; and 3) racialization that is visible in high poverty levels, segregation
in communities, media negative stereotypes, and a societal deficit view of their
culture and language (cf. Portes & Rumbaut, 2001).
Systemic and institutional factors have also contributed to the
disenfranchisement of Latinos/as. These include racial discrimination, poor quality
of education, poverty, family structure, and a lack of a cohesive national response
(Pearl, 1991 in Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997). Because two issues—quality of
education and poverty—are particularly relevant to providing the background for this
study, each will be further elaborated.
Quality of education. Larger social inequities are reflected in schools by the
quality of available resources and education (Darder, 1997). Moll and Ruiz (2002)
cite six institutional school concerns that have impeded Latino/a academic progress.
The first is differential school resources by social class, which limits access for
students from less wealthy backgrounds to material resources, modern facilities,
state-of-the-art technology, and cultural experiences, as well as highly trained
teachers, school counselors, and principals. The second is the issue of school
segregation. Perez and de la Rosa Salazar cite the inordinate concentration of
Latinos/as in inner-city schools as de facto segregation (1997). Chapa iterates this
43
point by referring to Latinos/as as “the most segregated ethnic minority” (2002, p.
377). A third issue, according to Moll and Ruiz, is school tracking and ability
grouping into low-level courses. The reduced number of advanced placement
classes, that would increase students’ access to choice colleges and universities, puts
them at a disadvantage. A fourth issue is Latinos/as disproportionate numbers in
school categorical groupings such as special education classes. Perez and de la Rosa
Salazar (1997) note the greater likelihood of Latinos/as enrolled below grade level
through school retention. Completing the list of school concerns are violence on
campuses and harassment by immigration officials.
In addition to these issues outlined by Moll and Ruiz (2002), schools use
“subtractive” forms of education that result in an unraveling of their culture and
language (Gutiérrez et al., 2002; Moll & Ruiz, 2002; Valenzuela, 1999) though a
“pedagogy of control” (Moll, 2001, p. 13). Jimenez et al. cites the paucity of
culturally relevant classroom texts that reflect and honor children’s life experiences
(1999). The net effect is that home and community experiences are excluded from
the classroom curriculum and as resources for children to draw upon in their
learning.
A negative view towards children’s primary Spanish language has also been a
source of contention. Luke (2003) notes members of historically marginalized
communities characteristically will experience a devaluing of their cultural capital,
including bilingualism, compared to the dominant culture and language. In the U.S.,
individuals’ use of languages other than English has been perceived as a deterrent to
44
full assimilation (Jimenez et al., 1999). Historically, U.S. schools sought to rectify
the immigrant problem. In the 1930, schools were marshaled to “Americanize”
Mexican children through adoption of U.S. culture and the English language
(Halcón, 2001). Today, the English language continues to be privileged (Reyes,
1992). Since the late 1990s, legislation in California (Proposition 227 in 1998) and
Arizona (Proposition 203 in 2000) has all but eliminated bilingual education (Moll &
Ruiz, 2002; Gutiérrez et al., 2002; Halcón, 2001). This legislation reverberates with
a strong anti-immigrant sentiment and exemplifies the strong interest in maintenance
of the “prevailing cultural capital by promulgating the authority of the English
language” (Olneck, 2000, p. 328). With the loss of bilingual education in many
schools, the Latino/a child’s home language has been stripped out of most
classrooms. Sánchez (1997) decries such legislation as evidence of a general lack of
understanding by policymakers in the “role that language plays in intellectual
development” (p. 125), in formulating a child’s identity, and in fostering their self-
esteem. Similarly, Freire and Macedo contend a child’s own language during
literacy engagement is key to their self worth (1987).
Language has been but one barrier to the academic success of Latino/a
children. Other deficit theories of one form or another have prevailed. The biological
deficiency model that once held sway in the early decades of the twentieth century
has been sufficiently debunked. The 1960s culture of poverty perspective led into the
1970s cultural deficit theories. Deficit models blame the victim for their
underachievement and lack of economic progress while ignoring overall systemic
45
and structural factors (Barrera, 1997; Ladson-Billings, 1998; Valencia, 1997). A
multicultural perspective has since superseded these deficit perspectives. This
inclusive perspective promotes a cultural appreciation and intellectual interest in the
differences and contributions of multiple groups (Banks, 2004). Yet in some current
educational talk, the deficit view is inferred (Valencia, 1997) through educational
labels such as “at risk” and “minority.” These and other labels, such as “urban” and
“inner city” tend to depict non-White children from diverse backgrounds as being
less capable (de la Luz Reyes & Halcón, 200l) and the labels become short-cut terms
for differentiating them from mainstream, middle-class students (Lee, 2003).
Because of poor quality in schooling and negative societal perceptions,
Latinos/as have had a difficult time persisting in the educational system. With the
highest high-school dropout rates in the country (Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997),
Latinos/as have not kept pace with the educational attainment and economic stability
of other ethnic groups (Gibson, Gandara, & Koyama, 2004). The 2000 U.S. Census
Bureau reports only 8% of Latinos between the ages 25-29 have completed four
years of college (Gibson et al., 2004). While the process, difficulties, and
complications inherent in immigrating to a new country might be attributed as an
explanatory factor to high dropout rates, surprisingly immigrants account for only
one-third of this dropout rate (Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997). This leaves
unexplained why the majority of school dropouts are U.S. born, English-speaking
Latinos/as.
46
Poverty. Added to the lack of quality of education and negative perceptions
of Latinos/as is an issue of low economics. The effects of poverty are indicated by
inadequate school resources, caliber of the curriculum (Knapp & Woolverton, 2004;
Shannon, 1998), and poor performance on standardized tests (Perez & de la Rosa
Salazar, 1997).
While poverty is an issue that cuts a swath in the educational attainment of all
individuals without regard to race or language (Cummins, 1994; Dillon, 2003; Perez
& de la Rosa Salazar, 1997), minorities are disproportionately economically
disadvantaged (Gimenez, 1997). Shannon found that compared with Whites that
have a one-in-ten chance of living in poverty; Latinos/as have a one-in-three chance
(1996). In schools across the nation, Latinos/as comprised nearly a third of the Title
I enrollment of low-income students (Jimenez et al., 1999). Rist contends that the
academic challenges for poor children are exacerbated when children are also from a
minority background (2000). Gutiérrez et al. (2002) contend schools fail poor
children through a “backlash pedagogy” (p. 329) by engaging in academically
harmful practices such as reductionist reading programs, assignment of least trained
teachers, and high-stakes standardized testing. Educational scholars contend
standardized test scores are less likely to measure students’ learning than they are
reflections of a family’s cultural capital, that is, resources and income (Au &
Raphael, 2000). Furthermore, the current national focus on high-stakes testing
distracts meaningful educational reform policies from the significant effects of
47
economic disparity and social class differences (Darder & Torres, 2004; Dillon,
2003).
Educational Research with Latino/a Students
Research in the field of education regarding the academic underachievement
of Latinos/as has changed substantially since the 1960s when research perspectives
were based on a culture of poverty (Lubienski, 2003) and subsequently on deficit
perspectives (Ladson-Billings, 2000). During the 1970s and 1980s, research explored
the barriers to Latino/a students’ academic success—specifically language (Gibson et
al., 2004). Since the 1990s, educational research with Latino/a students has taken a
new turn. This research has investigated different facets of their educational
experience including: the intersection of students’ biliteracy and bicultural aspects in
their learning process; the characteristics of educational contexts fostering biliteracy;
and the role of social networking strategies in schooling. The following is a review
of key empirical educational literature conducted with Latino/a children and
adolescents.
Building on the value of language and culture. Literacy researchers have
documented how bilingual students use their language skills as a resource to support
their learning. Jimenez, Garcia, and Pearson (1996) compared the reading strategies
used by sixth- and seventh-grade bilingual students to English monolingual students.
They documented three metacognitive strategies that high achieving bilingual
students used. These include the use of Spanish cognates, translating from English to
Spanish, and transferring effective reading strategies (e.g., questioning and re-
48
reading) learned in one language to another. Their study highlighted the bilingual
students’ agility attending to dual languages, noting their monolingual English-
speaking peers did not experience the same degree of cognitive demands placed on
them while reading.
In a later study, Jimenez examined how literacy experiences intersected with
bilingual students’ identities (2000). From data gathered through classroom
participant observations, student interviews, and think-aloud reading episodes with
85 fourth- through sixth-grade students, Jimenez found that students were
apprehensive about losing their Spanish language skills, discussed multiple literacy
practices involving dual language, engaged in language brokering, and received
literacy encouragement from family members. When provided with specific literacy
instruction capitalizing on their biliterate skills, students expressed connections
between their dual language skills and literacy learning. Jimenez suggests that
teachers can tap into students’ dual language skills as a strength and recommends
that the “cultural borderlands” (Anzaldúa, 1987, cited in Jimenez, 2000) of students’
hybridized identities be placed at the forefront of literacy research.
How children drew upon their bilingual resources during reading and writing
activities was the focus of Moll and Whitmore’s (1993) study in a bilingual third
grade classroom. Children accessed both English and Spanish language texts for
information, discussed their writing plans, and used their primary language for
cognitive pre-planning of their writing tasks. Their study similarly draws attention to
young students’ flexibility with dual languages during their literacy learning.
49
In out-of-school contexts, Orellana, Reynolds, Dorner, and Meza (2003)
documented the literacy practices used when bilingual adolescents served as
translators of oral and written text for their monolingual Spanish speaking family
members. The researchers noted the ease by which youths negotiated diverse and
challenging text genres ranging from legal documents (e.g., jury summons),
pharmacy labels, and letters sent home from school. By bearing a responsibility as
“para-phrasers,” youths played a pivotal role in sustaining their families’ connection
to the broader English language dominant community and by doing so helped
safeguard their family’s household. The researchers contrasted the children’s skillful
participation in these out-of-school literacy practices to typical school literacy
practices. They noted that in a teacher-dominated discourse, common in many
classrooms, students’ adeptness with varied out-of-school literacy practices was
unlikely to be incorporated in the class.
In summary, these studies examined children and youths’ ability to tap into
their primary language in school and out-of-school and documented specifically how
they used their bilingual skills as resources in their cognitive development. Children
fluidly moved back and forth between their languages in classroom environments
that recognized and supported their bilingual skills as a strength. Spanish as a
primary language was reconceived as a vital aspect in their listening, speaking,
reading, and writing bicultural literacy (Darder, 1997). Typical classroom discourse,
however, does not often acknowledge or integrate students’ complex literacy skills
50
gained from participating in the everyday literate practices of their home and
community.
Educational contexts. While some research points to schooling’s historical
devaluing of culture and language (Moll, 2001; Portes & Rumbaut, 2002), the
following studies cite positive examples and benefits to student learning when their
culture and language are fostered in educational contexts.
The first two studies examine innovative learning contexts. Vasquez (1994)
studied children’s participation in an after-school program called La Clase Mágica
(The Magic Class) distinctive in providing varied opportunities to use bilingual
skills. Children negotiated through La Clase Mágica by making decisions and
choices in which they drew upon the culture of school, home, and/or the after-school
program itself. Children were encouraged to collaborate with adults as well as peers
and to share what they learned—thereby teaching—the new incoming members.
Vasquez concluded children’s language resources supported their participation in
multiple avenues of reading and writing.
Similarly, Gutiérrez, Banquedano-Lopez, and Alvarez (2001) studied an
after-school program attended by Latino/a, African American, and Tongan children
called Las Redes (Networks). The program fostered novel learning opportunities that
combined adult scaffolding, computer learning games, and email communication
with opportunities for children and adults to engage in dual language literacy
practices. The researchers found children strategically used both English and Spanish
languages in order to form affiliations and alliances with others.
51
Other studies provide evidence of language flourishing in more traditional
school contexts that were receptive to both languages. Moll and Dworin (2001)
reviewed two case studies. A bilingual kindergarten student’s emerging
understanding of writing was represented in both English and Spanish languages. A
third grader’s reading and writing experiences thrived in a biliterate classroom
environment with multiple textual resources and dual language use. Reyes and
Halcón (2001) found that in a second grade classroom “spontaneous biliteracy”
occurred in classrooms that fostered and nurtured learner’s cultural and linguistic
resources. Similarly, Manyak (2001) documented the Daily News oral sharing and
writing routine with first- and second-grade native speaking Latinos/as. Students’
everyday experiences with “lowriders, border crossings, bike racings, birthdays, and
lost teeth” (p. 455) were deemed valuable when recorded by the teacher as
newsworthy events. Manyak found that the easy fluidity of hybrid language
practices facilitated collaboration among students, developed their bilingual and
biliterate identities, and contributed to their ability to participate successfully in their
classroom. Monkman, MacGillivray, and Leyva (2003) portrayed how a first-grade
teacher integrated children’s cultural knowledge as part of their language arts
curriculum. With their cultural experiences tapped into and made a vital part of
instruction, students intertwined their sense of self, home, and school into a holistic
educational experience.
The crucial role of the teacher in fostering student participation was
highlighted when Gutiérrez (1993) studied five teachers’ instructional styles in
52
primary grade classrooms with Latino/a students. Although all teachers were trained
in a specific pedagogic practice and shared similar educational goals for their
students, they taught in three distinct approaches that, in turn, shaped student
participation. In the teacher directed “recitation” approach, the least amount of
student and teacher interaction occurred. In another approach, which Gutiérrez
termed “responsive,” the interaction between students and teachers occurred more
often. In the third “responsive-collaborative” approach, the teacher assumed a
facilitator role, allowing students to take the lead in discussions and peer
collaboration. In essence, each learning environment was differentially created by
the teacher’s instructional approach.
Zecker, Pappas, and Cohen (1995) also looked at the teacher’s role in
selecting instructional strategies to facilitate Spanish-speaking Latino/a second-
graders from primarily immigrant families. By conceiving of her role as a mediator
of children’s learning, the teacher used modeling, questioning, and coaching
strategies. Using these scaffolding techniques, the teacher/researcher reported being
better able to assist students’ literacy learning.
Interestingly, even in a supportive learning environment, outside negative
pressures permeate the classroom. Worthy, Rodriguez-Galindo, Czop Assaf,
Martinez, and Cuero (2003) discovered contradiction and conflict in a fifth-grade
bilingual classroom that supported students’ dual language ability. Students were
apprehensive about their prospects of maintaining their bilingualism throughout their
future school years. Explicit and implicit messages from social groups and the school
53
institution were pressing on them. Peers and family members (other than their
parents) pressured them to speak English. The prospect of losing Spanish-language
support in middle school began to weigh heavily in students’ minds. The teacher,
too, wrestled with her own concern for the students to have adequate English
language skills to support their academic success in their middle school years and
beyond.
Reviewing these studies of educational contexts indicates how educators
placed value not only on students’ language skills and cultural resources but actively
incorporated them into the classroom curriculum and activities. Spanish language
served as a resource for students’ cognitive and social development. Students
engaged in classroom discussions in a more personal and meaningful manner
through inclusion of their home culture and everyday life experiences. In alternative
after-school educational contexts such as La Clase Mágica and Las Redes, children
did not have language restrictions. These studies are invaluable in breaking through
stereotypic views of working class children lacking a dimension of home resources.
Furthermore, their collective findings demonstrate how language, especially
biliteracy, supports students’ cognitive development. However, as Worthy et al.
(2003) found, a supportive learning environment is not a sufficient shield for
students against the hostile societal and institutional contemptuous messages about
speaking in Spanish. This last study demonstrates how macro circumstances infiltrate
the micro interactions between teachers and students (cf. Cummins, 1994). In
addition, it draws attention to the upper elementary grade experience as a period of
54
anticipation—in this case with specific anxiety—about transition to middle school as
well as how students’ embodied cultural capital, in this case their bilingual skills,
changes from one academic social field to another.
Networks and alliances. Through the use of social networks and personal
alliances, individuals can be strategic in accessing social, economic, and academic
support. The landmark work in this area was conducted by Moll, Amanti, Neff, and
González (1992) who applied the concept of “funds of knowledge” (Velez-Ibañez &
Greenberg, 1988) to describe the wealth of material resources, goods, and services
communities activate and exchange through their complex network of relationships.
In the Moll et al. (1992) study with classroom teachers in a low-income community,
the researchers guided the teachers as they interviewed students’ families to explore
the resources used. Gaining new insight into the neighborhoods as thriving social
and economic sites of support and interchange, the teachers’ sought to incorporate
family and community resources into classroom instruction.
Another type of network instrumental in educational success is a supportive
peer network. These relationships are considered social capital defined as the active
reciprocity within a social network in which others’ skills and resources are
beneficially used (Bourdieu, 1986). Trueba (1988) examined how a university-based
intervention program supported high schoolers’ motivation to pursue higher
education. The dyadic relationships with college instructors, mentors, and tutors
anchored students’ emerging interest in pursing higher education. However, Trueba
55
found that students’ long-established negative perceptions towards school were
difficult to overcome.
A decade later, Valenzuela (1999) studied the differences in the
disproportionate underachievement of Latino/a youths. She studied within-group
differences for Latinos/as in one Texas high school and found peer social networks
to be one key. Immigrant youths tended to do better academically than multi-
generational and U.S.-born students of Mexican descent. Immigrant students had a
positive attitude towards their education and formed strong social networks in which
they relied on the tangible (e.g., computer) and intangible resources (e.g., science
savvy) of their peers. By contrast, the U.S.-born students had a negative view of the
teachers, yet paradoxically, they were the most likely to benefit academically from a
caring teacher. Overall, the school created a “subtractive” educational experience by
disenfranchising students through daily institutional schooling practices that did not
build upon students’ cultural resources, including their Spanish language ability.
Students were not adverse to education per se, but rather the “subtractive” effects of
the school’s institutional practices that undervalued their culture and language.
Further exploring how social networks shaped student performance, Stanton-
Salazar and Dornbusch (1995) used interview data from 205 Latino/a high school
students to consider how their relationship networks, educational outlook, and
aspirations contributed to their school success. One major finding was that high
academic performing Mexican-origin students were more adept at accessing
institutional agents (i.e., using their social capital) than were low performing
56
students. This social capital provided them greater educational support. Bilingual
proficient students were more likely to receive institutional support and attention
than their working-class monolingual peers. In addition, the researchers discovered
that peers, especially middle-class peers, were also a key resource for students.
In one of the few studies in which both Bourdieu’s concepts of cultural
capital and social capital (1986) are applied in a primary grade classroom,
Monkman, Ronald, and Théraméne (2005) document how low-income, high
achieving Latino/a children accessed not only their own cultural capital but also that
of their peers and teacher in their learning process. First-grade students used
horizontal social capital (i.e., with peers) to access their cultural capital in matters
such as following class routines. They used vertical social capital (i.e., with teacher)
to access her adult perspective on promotion to middle school (cultural capital) and
her personal text purchases (economic capital). The researchers documented
instantiations of students’ embodied, objectified, and institutionalized cultural capital
and its perceived value in their classroom environment. The researchers suggest
similar classroom experiences in which children use social interaction (i.e., social
capital) to access other’s cultural capital can disrupt deterministic views of schools’
replication of social hierarchies
In summary, this body of research with Latino/a students’ social networks
indicates how the cultural capital of others is exchanged, integrated, and used in
individual opportunities for academic growth. These studies primarily focus on
experiences of bilingual children or English speaking adolescents. Further research
57
is needed with variant groups of Latino/a students such as age groups, linguistic,
generational, and socioeconomic class. Furthermore, research is needed into
exploring how English-speaking students use their own particular types of cultural
resources as they write, read, talk, and listen during classroom interactions.
Up to this point, the literature review has focused on first, the socio-historical
aspects of Latinos/as’ academic underachievement and secondly, on key empirical
literacy research conducted with Latino/a children primarily since the 1990s. In the
next section, empirical research in literacy studies that explores how children are
attuned to race and ethnic issues.
Issues of Ethnicity and Race in Literacy Research
Literacy research of children of color has been limited (Edwards & Schmidt,
2006; Green & Abt-Perkins, 2003; Nieto, 2003). Although many educators may not
consider racial elements common in classrooms (Banks, 2004), research into the
nature of race, ethnicity, and class issues during elementary students’ literacy
engagement indicates its presence. The following studies include explorations of
children’s attention to race, class, and gender in everyday classroom interactions;
students’ multiple responses to explicit social conflict curriculum; and pedagogic
considerations of using emotion-laden texts.
Awareness of race and ethnicity. Young children’s attenuation to race and
ethnicity in day-to-day social interactions of the classroom have been noted during
classroom ethnographies (e.g., Rogers & Mosley, 2006). In one study, Dyson (1997)
observed ethnically diverse third-graders compose texts to achieve social goals of
58
membership and participation. She noted their social relations gave valuable insight
into the “interrelated issues of gender, race, class, and culture” (p. 21) with which
children grapple.
Race and ethnicity integrated in literacy curriculum. Using implicit and
explicit social issues in the curriculum, researchers discovered a range of student
responses. Möller and Allen (2000) explored reader response in a literature group
with four fifth-grade girls. Students drew intertextual connections from Mildred
Taylor’s The Friendship (1987) to their present day lives and knowledge of the Ku
Klux Klan. The students displayed an “engaged resistance” described as deep
involvement in the text but had strong “resistance to the pain of engaging intimately
with frightening knowledge that directly related to their lives” (p. 172). Similarly,
Sipe and McGuire (2006) found primary grade students from a range of
socioeconomic and racial and ethnic backgrounds used six types of resistance during
teachers’ read alouds of multicultural texts. The researchers contend it is through
moments of resistance when “children give voice to their insecurities, anxieties,
questions, and struggles” (p. 6).
Using an explicit conflict-based curriculum with third- and fifth-grade
children of diverse backgrounds, Dauite and Jones (2003) selected texts dealing with
racial and ethnic discrimination. Students employed nine strategies including:
identifying, contextualizing, broadening, practicing, empathizing, universalizing,
distancing, avoiding, and personalizing. In ‘empathizing,’ a typical American value
grounded in notions of fairness, students focused on the consequences of
59
discrimination. An ‘avoiding’ strategy was outright denial of race or ethnic
discrimination. This strategy was typically evoked during teacher-led discussions.
The nature of the classroom’s social contexts with specific expectations and rules
was instrumental in shaping student discourse. For example, students were more
likely to be explicit about discussing discrimination while responding to literature
questions than while writing personal narratives. The researchers conceded “not all
ethnic or racial minority children were politicized around those issues” (p. 26).
Similarly, López and Stanton-Salazar noted Mexican-American immigrant
adolescents acknowledged discrimination but “opt[ed] to downplay their personal
vulnerability to discriminatory institutional forces” (2000, p. 75-76).
Implementing an antiracist curriculum with African American and European
American fourth- and fifth-graders, Enciso (2003) studied their classroom
participation and talk. After reading about a specific episode of discrimination
between African Americans and Whites, students normalized the conflict. Perceiving
an impasse, Enciso had students collaboratively use an alternative strategy to
interpret the text. When two African American students used a graphic
representation to formulate and articulate their interpretation, their unique cultural
perceptions and knowledge added new insight to the discussion. Thereafter,
classroom discourse included students’ cultural knowledge and resources in tandem
with literature-based evidence to acknowledge the validity of the classroom’s
“multiple narratives” (p. 171).
60
White privilege was explored in texts and absences of racial talk in a diverse
second-grade classroom setting. Rogers and Mosley (2006) used Critical Race
Theory, that presumes pervasive societal racism, and whiteness theories, that
problematizes whiteness as a norm, in their research. Three themes were identified
when children read selected literature: noticing whiteness in text, enacting White
privilege by viewing “whiteness as the standard” (p. 479), and transforming
whiteness into liberatory alliances. Interestingly, several children in their study
understood Martin Luther King, Jr. had eradicated racism.
Presenting difficult textual themes. Considering the impact of literature in the
classroom, Robertson (1997) explored pre-service teachers’ perspectives on using
“risky texts” with elementary students. Risky texts were defined as those containing
emotion-laden themes of “degradation, pain, and death” (p. 459). She noted pre-
service as well as in-service teachers’ general under-preparedness when using
commonly accepted multicultural texts with difficult themes of war and death (e.g.,
Sadako and the Thousand Paper Cranes [Coerr, 1977] and Faithful Elephants
[(Tsuchiya, 1951]). Using risky stories can rouse student discomfort and tension and
when confronted with difficult knowledge, children may pull away or distance
themselves. Robertson suggested creating a safe and supportive classroom
environment with ongoing dialogue, writing, continual returning to text, and
opportunities for students to share their interpretations as they address and explore
complex themes in literature. Robertson’s conclusions resonate with López’s and
Stanton-Salazar’s views that difficult themes such as “discrimination and prejudice
61
can be much more psychologically damaging for children and adolescents than for
adults” (p. 73).
In summary, these studies provide insight into classroom dynamics when
social issues were explored implicitly or explicitly. They cite literacy engagement
with race and ethnicity issues presented within students’ zone of proximal
development (Rogers & Mosley, 2006) in safe and supportive classroom contexts;
participating in guided discussions; using alternative ways to interpret text; allowing
room for multiple narratives steeped in children’s cultural resources; questioning
“common sense” norms; and problematizing the status quo to mediate children’s
interactions with and re-imagining of their world. Yet, as these studies indicate,
quality literature and/or an explicit curriculum are not always sufficient or eagerly
embraced by students. The student response was mixed.
The final section that follows rounds out this literature review and
contextualizes the current educational climate and its impact on the literacy
experiences of children from diverse backgrounds.
Current Context of Educational Accountability
Globalization has created new issues regarding nations’ cultural citizenry.
With relative ease in individuals’ movement across physical boundaries, nations are
reconfigured into societies that are increasingly multicultural and multilingual (Luke,
2003). While globalization’s effects on population composition and future
engagement in the workforce are beyond the scope of this paper, in this section, I
62
focus on U.S. policies designed to educate a diverse population and the
consequences of these efforts on Latino/a children’s learning.
This ongoing demographic reconfiguring requires policy makers and
educators to rethink how immigrant children experience school and are integrated in
a new country (Suárez-Orozco, 2001). However, the response has not been to
broaden the scope of educational research and policy but rather one of retrenchment.
Sociopolitical factors such as a perceived literacy crisis (Dillon, 2003) and the need
to teach literacy to a diverse population drive the national and state educational
policies. These policies filter into the classroom affecting the nature of the reading
and writing curriculum and the social interaction between teacher and students and
among students themselves (Cummins, 1994; Darder & Torres, 2004).
Recent national educational reform legislative policy reflects this
entrenchment visible in the current back-to-basics movement (Luke, 2003) and
reliance on school accountability through high-stakes testing (Darder & Torres,
2004). The federal No Child Left Behind Act passed in January 2001 is the
legislative blueprint designed to reform education (Dillon, 2003; Hillocks, 2003).
States are encouraged to develop content area standards specified for each grade and
administer standardized tests or risk the loss of federal funds (Hillocks, 2003). The
cornerstone on which the legislation rests is the yearly assessment of student
performance through standardized testing in reading and math. Most recently,
science testing has been added to some grade levels. Standardized tests have long
been criticized for their cultural bias (Darder, 1991; de la Luz Reyes, 2001) and for
63
the generally low performance by Latino/a students. Test scores are more likely to be
reflective of family income than student academic ability (Au & Raphael, 2001). The
unevenness of this high-stakes testing policy becomes clear when the experience of
public school students required to take the test is contrasted with private school
students who are exempted (Gutiérrez et al., 2002)
These top-down policies of high-stakes testing prompt public school districts
to respond by sometimes adopting negative policies that affect the quality of
children’s literacy instruction (Allington, 2002; Lin, 2003). Gándara notes an
“erosion of strong literacy practices in favor of bottom line instruction” (2002, p.
353) that focuses on increasing test scores. Classroom teachers substitute substantive
curriculum with test-taking strategies (Darder & Torres, 2004; Gutiérrez et al.,
2002). These policies have deleterious effects on working class and poor children
(Darder & Torres, 2004). For example, a recent news report of a primarily Latino-
populated school in Santa Ana, California described how the principal and staff felt
compelled to provide extra instructional time to their “bubble students” those
identified as having the greatest potential to increase the school’s overall test scores.
Meanwhile their lowest performing students—ostensibly most likely in need of
additional tutoring—were not provided any additional instruction. This practice is
not uncommon in other Southern California school communities with substantial
working-class Latino populations (Rubin, 2004). These allocations of instruction
time and resources have deleterious effects on students’ literacy learning as they
64
become little more than passive recipients of teacher directed instruction often
consisting of rote-skills (Darder & Torres, 2004; Freire, 1970; Gutiérrez, 1993).
Pedagogical methods in the form of commercially packaged and scripted
programs are adopted to ensure student reading (Dillon, 2003; Gutiérrez et al., 2002).
In California, where one-in-five children are immigrants (Trueba, 2002), the two
largest public school districts in the state have narrowed reading instruction by
mandating a prescriptive reading curriculum of reductive skills, such as phonics and
grammar. In the Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) with nearly 728,000
students and its two largest student subgroups consisting of 72.2% Hispanic/Latino
and 11.4% African American students and with English language learners
comprising 40% of the student population (California Department of Education
Educational Demographics, 2007), the implementation of this reading mandate is
closely overseen by district-assigned literacy coaches who tightly monitor what is
taught and when it is taught. Darder and Torres (2004) cite the rigid implementation
in LAUSD as “directly or indirectly linked to an academically limiting and
subordinating system of social control—one that sustains the reproduction of class
formation in both public schools and larger society” (p. 81) (emphasis in original).
Educational consequences for children are great. As Ferdman notes,
“Children become literate in the cultural image presented in their school” (1990, p.
189). As a sociocultural perspective on education proposes, the social interactions
and individual’s development are mutually constituting (Rogoff, 2003) and the
person’s subjectivity is constituted by the social engagement (Moll, 2001). A rigid
65
implementation of reading mandates and a reductionist literacy curriculum affect the
quality of the interaction in the classroom by lessening time for student authentic
conversation and meaningful engagement (Meyer, 2003). As a result, children often
do not learn to use literacy to make the rich textual connections (Keene &
Zimmermann, 1997), co-construct their learning (Weaver, 1988), recognize that
reading and writing are avenues to self (Ferdman, 1990), and use literacy to help
them analyze and transform their world (Freire & Macedo, 1987). Especially crucial
for children from diverse backgrounds, the narrowing of the curriculum leaves little
opportunity in the classroom to explore relevant social issues such as race and class
and develop higher-level thinking skills, engage in critical thought (Darder & Torres,
2004) and begin to thoughtfully reflect on and critique their world (Au & Raphael,
2001).
In addition, the primacy of high-stakes testing presupposes that a single
measure can adequately discern student learning. In effect, this focus denies
students’ history, background and cultural resources. A standardized curriculum
presupposes a generic curriculum can meet all students’ academic needs and interests
regardless of their community context. Both policy and practice effectively deflect
attention from other pressing social factors, such as poverty and differential school
resources, on student achievement. These issues affect working class and the high
percentage of children from diverse backgrounds who attend public schools
(Allington, 2002; Apple, 2001; Darder & Torres, 2004; Shannon, 1998).
66
Another assumption undergirding high-stakes testing is that an objective view
of knowledge is not only possible but can be acquired separately from the subjective
experiences of students (Darder & Torres, 2004). In an increasingly globalized world
society, these assumptions are bereft of necessary attention to the “blended cultural
identity, linguistic diversity and economic disenfranchisement” of its nation’s
citizens (p. 135).
This shift to a technocratic quality control view of education (Darder, 2004;
Luke, 2003) preempts critiques of economic and social inequities. Educational
discourse becomes centered on accountability and not on more substantial issues
such as children’s development, cultural differences, and schools’ differential
resources (Darder & Torres, 2004).
At this point, it is critical to present alternative and more hopeful aspects in
today’s educational context. Schools are not sites of either compliance or resistance
to mandates and policies; educators exercise agency. Recently, the editors of a
respected educational journal produced a themed issue highlighting individual
teachers who were circumventing mandates. They contend, “Educators must actively
resist and reject the conformity and loss of control” imposed by federal policy and
district mandates (Short et al., 2005). There seems to be greater flexibility as well for
smaller school districts to navigate these in-between spaces. For example, in smaller
school districts throughout the state of California there is more freedom for teachers
to employ student-centered pedagogical practices to challenge students’ learning
than those in larger districts. Even in larger school districts such as LAUSD with
67
curriculum mandates, individual schools, for example, magnet and charter schools,
operate with a greater degree of curricular autonomy and decision-making. In these
smaller school districts and magnet and charter schools, classroom-learning
environments draw upon their students’ resources. However, these classrooms are
becoming more and more difficult to find; they are the exception rather than the rule.
This situation increases the urgency for educational researchers to explore how these
previously mentioned practices affect students’ lives, learning, and engagement with
reading and writing. This study focused on middle-class Latino/a students’ cultural
capital, that is, their “life experiences, history, and language” (Freire & Macedo,
1987, p. 148) they brought to their classroom literacy engagement.
Research Questions
This review of relevant literature provides the background to understand the
range of underlying issues of Latinos/as students’ educational underachievement and
the focus of recent educational research into bilingual skills as resources and peer
networks as academic supports. This literature review also reveals the complexity of
student response when ethnic and racial themes were a part of classroom literacy, as
the middle-class Latino/a students I studied similarly exhibited. A presentation of
the current educational context provides insight into macro influences that shape
classroom practices and student participation.
Globalization is creating an increasingly linguistically and culturally diverse
student population (Suárez-Orozco, 2001). I explored the nature of middle-class
Latino/a students’ cultural capital and focused on one facet of this changing
68
demographic. This study explored the educational adaptation of intergenerational
and upwardly aspiring Latino/a students. The main research question regarding the
use of cultural capital was addressed by the following question: What is the nature of
middle-class Latino/a students’ cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom’s reading
and writing practices? and the associated sub-question (c), How are students’
different forms of cultural capital valued in this classroom? The research sub-
questions regarding the sociocultural dimensions of the classroom learning
community were addressed by the remaining sub- questions: (a) What are the
characteristics and structure of reading and writing activities, that is, norms,
routines, and practices, in this classroom? How do they foster integration of
participants’ background and cultural experiences?; sub-question (b), What is the
nature of children’s participation in the classroom? and sub-question (d), How is the
classroom structure shaped by the teacher’s epistemological stance, philosophy
regarding individual learning, and perspectives of children’s cultural knowledge?
By exploring the students’ incorporation of their cultural resources, this study
adds to an explanatory framework for upwardly aspiring, English-speaking, upper
elementary Latino/a students’ experiences and practices during their classroom
literacy activities.
69
CHAPTER 3
METHODS
In this chapter, I describe the methods for capturing and describing the
experiences of middle-class fifth-grade Latino/a students as they participated in their
classroom’s reading and writing activities, interacted with others, and tapped into
their life experiences and cultural knowledge as resources. The chapter opens by my
detailing the selection of a qualitative case study design (Stake, 2000; Yin, 1989).
Next, I describe the process of identifying and gaining entry into the setting.
Following that is a description of the site and research participants. Next, I outline
the methods and research procedures used and the steps in data analysis. The chapter
concludes with a discussion of the research’s trustworthiness and researcher
reflexivity.
Qualitative Design
With a primary research goal to provide a clear description of the individuals,
circumstances, environment, and events that occur in the natural setting of an
elementary grade classroom, I selected a qualitative research design to observe the
phenomenon (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998; Denzin & Lincoln, 2001; Lincoln & Guba,
1985; Marshall & Rossman, 1999; Polkinghorne, 1995). This method enabled me to
capture the dynamic and complex actions through what Geertz (1973) has termed
“thick description.” Seeking to understand the emic perspective of upwardly aspiring
70
Latino/a students as they engaged in their classroom’s reading and writing activities
and how they accessed their cultural knowledge was best captured through a
qualitative research design (Gall, Borg, & Gall, 1996).
Because I was interested in learning more about the ways in which children
actively construct (Fine & Sandstrom, 1988) and interpret (James, 2001) their social
worlds, I chose to use ethnographic methods of qualitative research. By being
present in a school setting and observing the flows, ebbs, and tensions through the
data gathering techniques of participant observation and interviews, I could best
capture students’ voices in order to “better see the world through [children’s] eyes”
(Fine & Sandstrom, 1988, p. 12).
The Case Study
The case study design provides insight into a “specific, unique, bounded
system” (Stake, 2000, p. 436) and has wide application in the field of education (Gall
et al., 1996; Yin, 2003). Therefore, because I sought to understand middle-class
Latino/a student participants’ perspectives and meaning into how they incorporate
their cultural capital in a classroom setting, this design was selected.
This case study of a fifth-grade classroom is both intrinsic and instrumental
(Stake, 2000). The intrinsic aspect addresses students’ integration of their lived
experiences and cultural resources while participating in their classroom’s reading
and writing activities. The study’s instrumental purpose furthers the understanding of
educational issues with middle-class English speaking Latino/a children.
71
Furthermore, using a case study enabled me to use theory, in this case Bourdieu’s
notion of cultural capital (1986), as the backdrop against which the findings were
compared (Yin, 2003). Various ethnographic techniques including participant
observation, interviews, and document analysis were used to gather data and
generate a narrative report (Stake, 2000) with the storytelling from emic
perspectives.
Selecting and Entry into the Research Site
After reviewing salient literature of sociohistorical and educational issues for
Latinos/as, I embarked upon finding a research site with relevance to the study’s
theoretical purposes. There were four criteria for selecting the school and classroom
site. First, to explore issues of non-urban students’ experiences, I sought a school
located in a middle-class community in a suburb of Los Angeles, California.
Secondly, because previous research indicated that English-speaking Latino/a
students are academically under performing (Nieto, 2001; Rumbaut, 1996), I sought
a classroom primarily populated by Latino/a children. Previous research has pointed
to a decline in academic levels by third generation Latinos/as (Grogger & Trejo,
2002; Portes & Rumbaut, 2001). Aware that schools do not collect generational
information on students (Rumbaut, 1997), I sought out classrooms with primarily
English-speaking Latino/a children. A third criterion was a classroom site with a
literacy instructional program that allowed the teacher a relative degree of pedagogic
decision-making. That is, the teacher would be using research-based reading and
72
writing practices that incorporated student choice, peer collaboration, challenging
assignments, and open class discussions. This criterion was selected because skill-
and-drill and prescriptive curricular reading programs often curtail classroom
discussion (Darder, 1994), limit student participation, and program rigid
implementation constrains pedagogical professionalism (MacGillivray, Ardell,
Curwen, & Palma, 2004). Finally, I sought an educator who encouraged his or her
students to use their background knowledge, personal history, and cultural resources
during literacy activities. This classroom environment would provide an opportunity
to address the study’s overarching research question of how middle-class children
access their cultural capital during reading and writing activities.
Selection of the teacher was made through nominations by experienced
educators and determined through purposive sampling (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
Because I was looking for an experienced and skilled teacher, I sought an educator
knowledgeable in a variety of language arts instructional strategies including writing
workshop or process writing and/or readers’ workshop. In the fall of 2004, I began
visiting elementary classrooms in different suburbs of Los Angeles. Very quickly, I
discovered that the changing demographics in the region made it difficult to find
schools and/or classrooms with only English-speaking Latino/a students. I adjusted
the English-only criterion to include students who had developed classroom
academic level English-language skills. Visiting potential classrooms, I was
repeatedly surprised at my reception as either an evaluator or literacy coach.
Classroom teachers at these trial sites invariably approached me afterwards and ask
73
for instructional advice and suggestions. Because my research role was to be that of
an observer, I considered this reaction as a potential research obstacle. On the other
hand, Mr. Harris at Newbury Elementary School stood out because he was
simultaneously welcoming and seemingly non-plussed by my researcher presence.
To confirm his classroom as a good fit for the study’s criteria, I returned for a second
observation a few weeks after the initial visit. The classroom’s opportunities for
student talk, peer interaction, and the school’s fit with the other research criteria
made this site a good match.
Gaining Access
Access to the school was accomplished by first contacting the teacher to
explain the nature of the research and confirm his interest in participating. Mr. Harris
was open to the idea of having another adult in the classroom and understood my
role would be that of an observer. Next, I met with the school principal to explain the
nature of the research and gain her support. Catherine Knight is an experienced
educator holding advanced educational degrees. She was receptive in offering her
school site. To secure district approval, I met with a district administrator and
provided a two-page synopsis detailing the nature of the proposed research. The
synopsis was reviewed by the district’s executive committee and approved. I was
ready to start the study in April 2005.
74
The School Community and Participants
Newbury Elementary School is a neighborhood school located in a suburb
southeast of a major metropolitan city. It was built in the mid-1950s and the grounds
and playground areas are landscaped with mature mulberry and palm trees. Beyond
the asphalt playground is an expansive grass playing field. A chain link fence hems
the school grounds. The school buildings include administrative offices, a cafeteria,
and a series of six classroom wings separated by concrete walkways and lawn. The
recent addition of trailers provides additional classroom and library space. The
classroom wings are parallel to one another. Overhangs on each wing provide shelter
from the sun and rain.
Demographics
Newbury School’s red brick walls were filled with students of changing
demographics that mirror the neighborhood’s transformation from White, middle-
class families to primarily Latino/a families of lower-middle and middle-class
socioeconomic status. Nearly 45% of the city’s households have yearly incomes
greater than $50,000. Of the city’s total population, 20% of the households have
yearly incomes greater than $75,000 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2000). In the 2004-
2005 school year, there were 543 students with a demographic composition of 77%
Latino, 12% White, 3% African American, 3% Asian, 2% Filipino, 1% American
Indian or Alaskan Native, and <1% Pacific Islander. 62 % of the student population
was on the free- or reduced-lunch program and because of this, the school receives
Title I funding. One literacy coach positively described the student population as
75
“95% of the kids are coming really with the attitude that they’re gong to learn
something when they come here…they’re going to come away with something
valuable” (Lit Coach, G, p. 6).
The principal described the parents as becoming increasingly savvy about
navigating the school system. However, a literacy coach conceded parents with
limited English skills “may be even afraid of coming to school, of sometimes
participating, especially when there’s that language barrier” (J, p. 23). The
neighborhood residents were described succinctly as “a community that is employed.
Pays their bills. Their children have things. Material things. The parents drive
workable cars. Nice middle-class, solid middle class community” (IN: Principal, p.
8). This description was echoed by a literacy coach who noted students were third-
and fourth-generation immigrants from “middle class [families]…both parents are
working” (IN: Lit Coach, J, p. 11). She commented on the comparatively high family
interest in events like Little League but not in Newbury’s after-school events and
wondered whether the “community’s priority is in school” (p. 7). While the principal
proudly acknowledged the PTA’s ability to raise more than $20,000 for school
programs and the strong parental interest and support for arts and music, there was a
clear administrative goal of increasing family involvement at academically oriented
school events
Focus on the English language. Both community demographics and political
climate were changing the school’s need to provide bilingual education. The
principal noted, “We don’t have very many recent [immigrant] arrivals. And the ones
76
who are recent arrivals seem to have jobs and are employed… [there is] a shrinking
core of parents whose language is only Spanish” (IN: Principal, p. 3). With the
current political climate shaped by the passage of Proposition 227 in 1998, which
diminished bilingual education, Newbury School’s parents were indicating not only a
marked preference for their children to be taught in English but students were
coming to school with greater English skills than in previous years.
Academic Standing of School
On the 1999 state standardized testing, the school missed its targeted
Academic Performance Index (API) goal “by a couple of points” (IN: Principal, p.
10) and became part of the Immediate Intervention/Underperforming Schools
Program (II/USP). This designation made the school eligible for extra funding to
increase test scores. A portion of these funds was used to hire outside educational
consultants to monitor the school’s progress in improving student outcomes. Two
years later, the consultants concluded there were inconsistencies in Newbury
School’s teacher grade level instruction and planned outcomes (SD1; p. 1). As a
result, Newbury School began aligning curriculum with the state’s grade-level
content standards (IN: Lit Coach, J, p. 17). In 2003, the school met the state’s
established Adequate Yearly Progress goals for standardized testing in English
language arts and mathematics. In April 2004, it was designated as a California
Distinguished School; the first in the district to be so recognized (SD2, p. 1). When
the school missed their API target in the 2003-2004 school year, they were eligible
for one year of funding for program improvement (IN: Lit Coach, J, p. 18). The
77
pressure was on for improved results from this year’s 2005 standardized testing. If
not, the state would designate it as an “improver school” with consequences for
attendance (IN: Lit Coach J, p. 19).
While these ups and downs of standardized testing might be frustrating, the
principal put a positive spin on the school’s gain of additional funds to implement
curricular changes and provide time for staff collaboration. One literacy coach
contrasted the increased teacher collaboration and commented, “I feel kind of lucky
to be part of the whole evolution from where we started a few years ago” (IN: Lit
Coach, J, p. 21). The result of the 2004-2005 school academic year’s standardized
testing was a “33 point gain in the school’s Academic Performance Index” (SD4,
2005, p. 7).
Newbury School’s literacy instruction goal was for “all students to meet
grade level benchmarks or grade level standards and be literate” (IN: Lit Coach, A,
p. 1). To meet these goals, the district four years ago adopted a consistent literacy
framework; held higher expectations for teachers; and provided ongoing staff
development (IN: Lit Coach, A, p. 11).
School Environs
Offset from a main boulevard, Newbury School is in proximity to a steady
stream of cars moving in rhythm with the boulevard’s traffic signals. Within walking
distance is a small shopping center with a chain pizza restaurant, several small
independent eateries, and discount stores. Children either walk from the neighboring
streets of single-family single story tract homes built in the 1950s and 1960s or are
78
driven to the Newbury School campus. Sitting in the parking lot one spring morning,
I noted the sights and sounds of the school day’s beginnings. Parents urged their
children to hurry along. A mother and daughter chatted in Spanish as they
approached the entrance. A parent completed a cell phone conversation as two boys
exited the car. Car doors slammed. Rosaries dangled from some rear view mirrors.
Strollers were pushed along. Children were driven in late-model vehicles: minivans,
Ford Expeditions, Toyota Camrys, SUVs, F-150 trucks, and RAM 1500 trucks. Most
were clean with an occasional vanity license plate. (I realized with slight
embarrassment that my 1981 Volvo with its cracked windshield was the oldest and
most visibly worn.) A banner bearing the words “California Distinguished School”
hung on the fence. Students’ writing projects, all in English, were displayed on
bulletin boards around the school campus. Once the morning bell rang, students lined
up on the playground and were met by their respective teachers. When the students
were in their classrooms, a school staff member padlocked the gates.
As a visitor, I was required to register in the school office and wear an
identifying badge. Along the office hallway were plastic bins filled with appropriate
level reading books available for classroom use. Hung next to the principal’s office
were poster-size curriculum plans for each grade level. The district’s mission
statement was displayed prominently on a bulletin board.
Walking towards Mr. Harris’ fifth-grade classroom, I passed the school
cafeteria that doubled as an auditorium during special assemblies. During lunch,
students sat at pull-down wood-grained laminate tables that folded flush into the wall
79
when not in use. During school assemblies, the students would sit in rows on the
linoleum floor.
As I was walking towards Room 500 and surveying the playground, I
realized for the first time that the school and its playground area was abutted by a
major freeway. The traffic’s insistent murmur rose over the sound wall; a semi’s
horn punctured the air. Gazing at the looming freeway, I wondered about the
economic and political decisions underlying the building of a highway that
simultaneously bounded and divided neighborhoods.
The Classroom: Room 500
At the second morning bell, Mr. Harris’ students gathered in separate girls’
and boys’ lines on the asphalt playground. They bore a semblance of homogeneity in
their blue and white school uniforms but claimed their own unique identity with
assorted colors and styles of sweatshirts, sneakers, and book bags slung over their
shoulders. On their short walk to their classroom, students good-naturedly chatted
with one another or walked with a purposeful gaze. There were 32 students in the
Room 500: 17 girls and 15 boys. Of these students, approximately 18 were English
Language Learners (ELL). School documentation completed voluntarily by the
parents indicated 11 students came from households in which Spanish was the
primary language. There were 27 Latinos/as, three Whites, one Asian, and one
Native American.
Room 500 was one of the school’s three fifth-grade classrooms. The room’s
modest 25 feet-by-28 feet dimensions were mediated by four large windows along
80
one wall that provided a pleasing view of the play field and mulberry trees beyond.
All the school’s classrooms had been modernized with heating and air conditioning,
new lighting fixtures, and dry-erase whiteboards. The carpet was industrial-gray.
Each morning before entering class, students stored their backpacks on
wooden pegs outside the classroom. Mr. Harris assigned two students to supervise
their entry into the classroom. Once inside, students retrieved a plastic blue stackable
chair from against the wall and placed it at their assigned seat.
Students’ seating was configured in five table groups. Three students were
strategically separated at individual desks for classroom management purposes. (A
context map [Lincoln & Guba, 1985] is included in Appendix A, Classroom Layout.)
Other furniture included a small circular table in the center of the room, a kidney-
shaped table at the back, a tall steel file cabinet, and the teacher’s large oak desk. At
the beginning of the year, students had been assigned peer tutors. On occasion during
their class work, two or three students would get up and sit next to a peer tutor seated
at another table. Otherwise, students worked with their seatmates. Inside their desks,
the students stored their own notebooks, pens, and papers. Cardboard cubbies
provided additional storage space and were brimming with assorted papers and
books. On top of each desk, the teacher had taped two reminders for students. One
was “100 Most Frequently Used Words in Reading/Writing” and the other reminder
listed suggestions for students’ free time when assignments were completed (FN#8,
p. 13-14).
81
The classroom simmered with activity. Mr. Harris did not have strict
requirements for orderly desks. Displayed on bulletin boards and taped to the walls
was a collage of student work and teacher hand-lettered posters. In the front of the
room were poster-sized images of several U.S. presidents. The four bulletin boards
showcased students’ range of genre writing: U.S. state reports; mock newspaper
front pages; poems celebrating Dr. Seuss’s February birthday; and odes about an
American Revolutionary figure of their choice. During the research study, three of
the bulletins boards were updated. At the front of the room hung a student-lettered
poster that bore testimony to a writer’s purpose, “Write like a reader and read like a
writer.” Often students and the teacher would take up this mantra in chorus as they
embarked on a writing assignment. Other classroom resources included two
computers, a television and VCR, an overhead projector, and telephone. The
classroom rules derived at the beginning of the year were prominently posted near
the front door. Rule #6 specified, “No discrimination, no name calling, no fighting.”
At the end of each day, Mr. Harris stacked up the plastic chairs in hopes that the
school custodian would be scheduled to vacuum the floor which was by now
confettied with bits of paper and pencil shavings. Each week, Room 500’s students
were scheduled to visit the school library and computer lab.
A variety of texts was readily accessible to students. There were three
bookcases filled with assorted student texts at varying readability levels as well as
dictionaries and thesauruses. An out-dated encyclopedia set took up one bookcase.
Displayed upright on desks and countertops was the teacher’s collection of fiction,
82
non-fiction, science, chapter books, and picture books. Each month, Mr. Harris
changed the themed books on display. One set of students’ spiral-bound writing
notebooks was stored in a back closet. Another set of students’ writing journals was
stacked on the steel file cabinet. Because of limited desk space, the language arts,
science, history, and math textbooks were kept in neat piles on a counter. While there
were enough textbooks for everyone to have their own copy, other reading texts used
in small group reading often had to be shared between students.
Each day begin with a routine: Over the public address system, the principal,
Catherine Knight, opened with a snippet of classical music followed by a cheery
greeting, the Pledge of Allegiance, the Newbury Elementary School Learning
Aspirations Code, and school announcements. Most activity in Room 500 classroom
quelled. Some students mumbled along, others remained silent. Afterwards,
everyone resumed his or her seat and several students pulled out books to read while
the classroom’s morning activities took place. “Who wants the very excellent corn
dogs?,” Mr. Harris asked as he took the daily lunch count. He would also repeat the
lunch choices “en español.” On a whiteboard, Mr. Harris had written the day’s
instructional schedule. Although the language arts time was scheduled in the
morning, reading and writing activities typically occurred throughout the day.
Overall the students from Room 500 were genial. Most of the time, they
seemed to get along good-naturedly, shared books and materials easily, and readily
recognized their peers’ writing efforts. For example, on more than one occasion, they
broke into spontaneous applause when the teacher read aloud a student’s writing. In
83
an end-of-year activity, they created a Classmate Award citing a peer’s admired
characteristic. Interestingly, the awards weren’t cited for the smartest, the funniest,
most athletic, best speller, or those with the best attendance. Instead, awards were
given to their peers who had “helped” them, was a “friend,” or “was always there for
me” (HWFN#32, p. 13).
The Teacher
Mr. Harris had been teaching fifth-grade at Newbury Elementary School for
four years. He was in his early 40s with an athletic build and the gray was just
beginning to streak his brown hair. He was proud of his diverse “cultural mix” of
European grandparents who immigrated in the early twentieth century. His wife was
a “late twentieth century immigrant” from a Latin American country (IN: T #13, p.
59). In an open letter to parents posted in the room, he shared his enjoyment in
vacationing with his family to other states and countries.
Often dressed in jeans with tennis shoes, he strode confidently in the
classroom, rarely sitting behind the paper-strewn teacher’s desk at the back of the
room. More often he was jotting key instructional points differentiated with colored
dry-erase markers on a whiteboard. At any moment during the instructional day, Mr.
Harris might reach into a back cupboard and select a book from his personal
collection to read aloud to students. He read motivational stories and inspirational
quotes from authors, historical figures, and sports personalities. Because writing
instruction was a Newbury School focus, he had recently spent a summer immersed
in a university-based course on process writing. Mr. Harris served on a school
84
committee comprised of parents and teachers with the goal of developing a variety of
school and community supports for its Spanish-speaking families (IN: Principal, p.
4). For a portion of the year, he tutored struggling readers in a before-school reading
intervention program. Although not fully bilingual, he made earnest efforts to
communicate with Spanish-speaking parents.
Mr. Harris had several framed pictures of his family throughout the
classroom. During class discussions, he would occasionally weave in a comment
about his wife or his two young children. He enjoyed sports and each school year
had organized a Saturday family field trip to attend a sports event. This year’s class,
however, was the first not to respond with adequate interest and was cancelled.
Respect and good-natured humor were hallmarks in his treatment of Room
500 students. He frequently addressed students by “Mr.” or “Miss” followed by a
student’s first name when calling on them (e.g., “Don’t worry, Miss Natasha, we’ll
come back to you”). When another teacher came and pulled out selected students for
a remedial instructional program, he reminded them, “You have one of our very
intelligent students.” He was often teasing and joking with the students. Outside the
classroom while students were jostling one another as they lined-up, he occasionally
broke into a ditty “Best Friends” when he was standing next to one particular student
who was likely to be the target of ridicule. The student flushed with delight. During
P.E., Mr. Harris was likely to be playing basketball along with the students or out on
the field simultaneously coaching, playing, and refereeing their kickball games.
85
Teaching was a career Mr. Harris arrived at from a circuitous route. Born and
raised on the East Coast, he moved to Southern California to study film. He found
working for film production companies to be exciting albeit unstable. Initially, he
gravitated towards the teaching profession for its freedom and creativity (IN: T #1, p.
53-56). At the time of the study, he was in the process of earning university
certification teaching English to second language learners and had experience
teaching English as a Second Language to adults. Prior to working in this school
district, he taught at-risk youths in a local city’s youth intervention program. When
he joined the school district in the late 1990s, he taught middle school history but
soon became disenchanted with a schedule that churned students hourly. He chose to
work at the elementary level to be able to interact with a one group of students for an
entire school day. Whether teaching adults or children, he described almost
reverently the existence of rare instances during instruction he termed “teaching
magic” (FN5; lines 51-59). These interactions were what hold him in this profession.
Yet he was currently under a shadow with the principal and on more than one
occasion, commented on the tension between their differing views of a school’s
purposes in educating children. During the first week of the study, the principal
informed him he was going to be reassigned to a primary grade in the upcoming
2005-2006 school year. It was a move not to his liking.
On several occasions during the course of the study, former students stopped
by the classroom to visit him and share their personal and academic
86
accomplishments. Commenting on these frequent visits, a colleague remarked
admiringly, “He must create a relationship with them” (FN10, line 20).
In Chapter 4’s findings, I will present Mr. Harris’ teaching philosophy, his
understandings of how children learn, and his perception of the cultural capital Room
500 students brought to their classroom-learning environment. In addition, I will
address the tension between the teacher and principal.
Participant Consent and Assent
Obtaining participants’ consent and assent. Anticipating that some Newbury
students might come from homes with Spanish as the primary language, I had all
parent and student consent and assent materials professionally translated into
Spanish. In addition, the teacher wrote a parent letter endorsing the project. During a
class meeting, I explained the nature of the study and my expected involvement. To
facilitate students’ understanding, I enlarged the assent forms to poster size and
“walked through” each form with the students. Parent consent forms were sent home
with students. Small incentives (e.g., pencils and stickers) were offered and forms
were returned within a few days. In week #5 of the study, a new student joined
Room 500. I met with her individually and secured her assent. Once focal students
were selected, both they and their parents were given appropriate assent and consent
forms for formal interviews. Of the 32 students in Room 500, all but two parents and
their respective children agreed to participate in the research. Students selected their
own pseudonyms and because there were some similarities between their real names
and chosen pseudonyms, I made a few changes to ensure anonymity.
87
Choosing focal students. I sought to identify informants in the classroom
who could guide me in answering questions and also serve as focal points of
observation. Five focal students from this classroom were selected to serve as the
teachers (Spradley, 1979) and guides (Dyson, 1997; Fontana & Frey, 2001) to Room
500. They were selected on the basis of their exhibited use of background
knowledge, lived experiences, and resources—both popular and cultural—during
their reading and writing activities. In week #3, I approached the teacher with a list
of focal student candidates. Mr. Harris agreed with my initial choices and suggested
two alternate students. Although not a criterion, attention was paid to balance
selected focal students for race, ethnicity, and gender. One student candidate did not
return the parental consent and as a result, I selected an alternate student.
Focal students had a range of high, middle, and low academic abilities.
Oscar, a Latino, was considered academically high. Since Kindergarten he has
wanted to be a veterinarian (FS2, #14). Kristen was bicultural, Latina and Native
American, and was also considered academically high. While often quiet in whole
class discussions, she was constantly sought out for academic support by her peers.
Jessica, a Latina, was considered an academically average student who planned to be
an archaeologist (Parent/child, 6-20-05, line 223). Corina, a Latina, was also
considered academically average. She was always asking questions and enjoyed
writing and sharing personal books with the teacher. Victor, a Latino, was
academically a low student who caught my attention early on. However, I was
puzzled by the fact that while Victor’s ideas, imagination, and connections seemed
88
insightful to me, they only captured the ire of the teacher. At the end of the study, the
teacher noted the changes in Victor’s academic effort and performance and shared
that for the first time he was able to write something positive on his report card.
Data Collection
To gain an understanding of participants’ experiences and meaning of events
and their actions, I used a variety of ethnographic methods in order to capture data to
help me with the final report. These included participant observation, fieldnotes,
interviews, and document collection.
Participant Observation
Classroom data was collected over a nine-week period from April through
June 2005 in four phases of data collection. I used a research timeline to assist me in
staying on schedule and adhering to my research focus and goals. Because the
research was conducted at the end of the school year, the timeline helped me
accommodate school events such as standardized testing, and other school special
events, for example, Open House and Field Day (Appendix B, Research Timeline).
In order to capture key data information and contextual information about the
classroom and school, I created a Participant Observation Guide for each visit.
In Phase I lasting two weeks, I stayed full days at the school conducting
general overview observations of all in-classroom and out-of-classroom activities
(e.g., playground at recess, cafeteria at lunchtime, before- and after-school
transitions). The goals in this phase were to gather high-level information about the
89
school and classroom routines, establish rapport with the students and teacher, and
gain familiarity with Room 500’s reading and writing activities. Using a Participant
Observation Guide, I was aided in systematically documenting the reading and
writing activity settings, for example, participants, nature of activity,
texts/artifacts/materials, and school contextual events (Appendix C, sample
completed Participation Observation Guide).
In Phase II lasting two weeks, I continued to stay for the full day. Because in
Room 500, reading and writing took place throughout the day, this approach gave me
further understanding and a sense of the nature of literacy activities at different times
in the day. Also, the study’s observation time was reduced because of test
preparation and standardized testing took place for four mornings. I elected not to be
present in Room 500 during testing time to ensure that my participant observer status
was not conflated with that of an authority figure in the classroom. At the end of
Phase II, I was able to identify five focal candidates who would serve as guides in
this classroom.
Phase III was five weeks in duration. During this time, I concentrated
primarily on focal students while still maintaining observation on the full class.
During this phase, I spoke individually with other students about their perspectives
regarding the classroom’s discussion themes and issues. Audiotaped formal
interviews with the five focal children, their parents, as well as school and district
staff were conducted during this time.
90
In Phase IV lasting one and one-half weeks, I visited the classroom to
confirm hypotheses, collect additional data, and include any exit interviews.
Researcher role. As a participant observer, I sought to establish my role in
this classroom as a “balance between an insider and an outsider” (Spradley, 1980, p.
60) and as a “tolerated insider in the children’s society” (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992, p.
88). From the beginning, I had the teacher’s permission to ask questions of the
students at different points throughout the day to follow-up and clarify their
comments. That is, I would talk to students as they worked at their desk, at the end of
a lesson, during recess, and briefly while they were walking in line. I focused on
having my role be that as a friend. In the early days of the study, students viewed me
as a potential co-teacher or teaching assistant and brought their writing assignments
to me or asked me questions. I declined to advise them and instead directed them to
their peers or teacher. Once students recognized that I was not going to answer their
questions, they ceased.
Field Notes
During Participant Observation, I used different types of field notes. One type
was condensed field notes. While observing, I noted the time, nature of instruction,
speaker/s, and captured verbatim quotes as much as possible. These condensed notes
were augmented immediately afterwards in free moments during recess and lunch
and upon leaving the site. This process of filling-in any blank spots from memory
and adding recalled additional thoughts (Spradley, 1980) took approximately one
hour. (Augmented notes were differentiated using a different colored ink.) After
91
augmenting these condensed field notes, I typically had 20-25 pages of hand-written
field notes. Therefore to reduce data, I once again reviewed my notes and identified
ten pivotal moments on children’s use of cultural capital (Lareau, 2005). I then typed
up a short paragraph summary of these ten pivotal moments. A third type of notes,
observed comments (Marshall & Rossman, 1999), was added to these short
paragraph summaries. These were marked as “OC” for observer’s comments and
became part of the initial stages of analysis. (See Appendix D for an example of
pivotal notes.) A fourth type of notes, were my researcher reflections. These were
written after each observation linking the day’s observations to Bourdieu’s theory on
cultural capital (1986). Each reflection ranged from two to three typed pages.
In writing my field notes, I used the analytic technique of developing
questions (Strauss & Corbin, 1998). I posed the following questions at the
conclusion of each day’s fieldnotes such as: “What are the major hypotheses that I
am developing? How should my future observations change to accommodate these
early hypotheses?” (Erlandson et al., 1993, p. 114). In addition, I developed
clarifying and follow-up questions for students and teacher.
In summary, these were the total number of observation visits and hours over
the study’s nine weeks: During Phase I there were eight visits and 29.5 participant
observation hours. In Phase II there were eight visits and 37 hours; Phase III, 16
visits and 80 hours; and Phase IV, there were five visits and 21 hours. In all,
participant observation included a total of 37 observation visits and 162.5 hours.
92
Interviews
I conducted participant adult and child interviews using a semi-structured
protocol (Kvale, 1996, Patton, 1990; Spradley, 1979; Tierney, 1991). Formal
interviews were conducted with the classroom teacher and key school personnel
including school principal, and literacy coaching staff. Interview protocols were
used to minimize research bias (Tierney, 1995). Sample interview protocols are
attached in Appendix E.
I used semi-structured interviews with the focal students to follow-up and ask
about their meaning ascribed to the reading and writing activities in their classroom
as well as their attitudes toward reading and writing. Focal students were interviewed
in groups of two or three during a portion of their lunchtime. Each focal student
participated in four audiotaped interview sessions. Each interview lasted
approximately 15–25 minutes and typically took place inside the classroom. In
addition, because I often sat at a table on the playground area or in the cafeteria with
students, other Room 500 students initiated conversations with me. Notes were taken
during these conversations.
Interviews with parents of the focal students occurred over the course of three
days. Interviews with the three parents who came after school were audiotaped. Two
parent interviews were completed over the phone as I took notes. The focus of the
interview was to ascertain their child’s reading and writing habits and future
academic and language goals.
93
The purpose of interviews with the classroom teacher was to gain an
understanding of the teacher’s epistemological stance, philosophy of student
learning, and perspective regarding children’s cultural resources in their learning.
Each of the three formal interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes to one hour.
Informal interviews, vis-à-vis ongoing conversations while walking to the
playground, or at the end of the school day, or over the telephone also occurred.
These informal interviews were not audiotaped but notes were taken during and
augmented immediately afterwards. These informal interviews helped clarify
research questions regarding instruction.
Interviews were held with other members of the school and district staff.
There was one formal interview each with the principal, two site literacy coaches,
and a district literacy coach. The focus of each interview was on the literacy
activities and goals of the school and/or district. Clarification of the district’s literacy
mission, selected language arts curriculum, instructional methods, assessment
policies, overall school and district performance in standardized tests, and their
perspective regarding integration of children’s cultural resources was sought.
Interviews lasted approximately 30 minutes.
Informal conversations were also held with many of Room 500 students.
When the research findings indicated a mismatch between the teacher’s goals and
student response, I followed-up with individual student conversations. The purpose
was to clarify questions about classroom discussion themes and students’ cultural
94
interests including popular culture and interest in speaking Spanish. Notes were
written during these conversations.
Each audiotaped interview was professionally transcribed. Cost for
transcriptions totaled $1,300. A written one-page supplement to each formal
interview included other pertinent observed data, for example, context, non-verbal
cues, seating arrangement, tone, etc. This information, especially gestures and
intonation assisted in capturing participants’ understandings and meaning (Bogdan &
Bilken, 1998).
Writing Artifacts
I collected writing artifacts from the whole class on eight separate occasions
and from focal students only on three occasions (Appendix F, collected written
artifacts). The purpose was to analyze how students accessed their cultural capital
while they were developing their personal narratives and stories. Student writing was
photocopied and date stamped. To protect the confidentiality of participants, I
covered students’ names and substituted pseudonyms.
While writing occurred daily in the classroom throughout the study, there
was little personal narrative writing. Writing activities were of varied genres and
geared in “school-type” assignments. These included writing: recycling
commercials, odes to American Revolutionary heroes, letters to a mayoral candidate,
and historical personal narratives. Overall, the students’ writing artifacts did not
prove to be the substantial data source in understanding how children incorporated
their lived experiences and background knowledge as I had anticipated.
95
Documents
A variety of school and classroom documents was collected. The principal
proffered the school’s 2003-2004 annual report regarding Newbury School’s
academic status. In 2007, the annual report for the 2004-2005 school year (SD#4)
was accessed via Internet. The teacher passed along a notice regarding staff
development goals. In addition, I was provided with access to students’ cumulative
files in order to determine his or her primary home language (e.g., either English or
Spanish). Often, this information serves as a “proxy” to determine students’
generational status (Rumbaut, 1997, p. 935). There were 11 children whose parents
reported English as a primary home language and 11 children with Spanish as a
primary home language. Six parents identified both English and Spanish languages
spoken in the home and one reported English and Filipino languages. For all children
with languages other than English in their home, I also noted the child’s level of
English proficiency as assessed by the school (see Appendix G, Student Language
Proficiency).
Additional classroom documents included reading and writing class
worksheets, homework, the teacher’s prepared material for standardized testing
practice, and the end-of-year district writing assessment scores.
Data Analysis
At the end of data collection, I had 740 pages of hand-written field notes; 72
pages of typed pivotal moments; and 71 pages of researcher reflections. The
96
interview transcripts for teacher, focal students, school personnel, and parents of
focal students totaled 382 pages. There were 324 pages of students’ writing artifacts.
Reducing data became an important next step in data analysis.
Data Organization and Storage
All data documents were coded and dated (e.g., IN:T#1=first interview
transcript from teacher, FN=typed field notes of pivotal moments, HWFN=
handwritten field notes, OC= observer comments, R#1=reflexivity journal) (See
Appendix H for full coding). Student writing was organized in folders with the date
of writing and content. Data documents were organized sequentially and in
categories in binders and file folders. All data was labeled and cataloged. The data
was stored in a file cabinet in my home office. Computer files were backed up each
week to preserve and protect data.
Confidentially was assured in several different ways. Pseudonyms were used
for participants throughout the research project and in all related research documents.
The data linking pseudonyms to actual participants’ names or other identifying
information was password-protected on the computer to eliminate access by
unauthorized personnel. A professional transcriber transcribed all data collected via
audiotapes. Confidentially was also ensured by alteration of writing samples to
exclude participants’ names.
97
Coding Data and Analytic Steps
Data analysis and data collection were iterative and ongoing processes
throughout data collection and when data collection stopped (Erlandson, Harris,
Skipper, & Allen, 1993; Miles & Huberman, 1994). To manage data analysis, I used
coding and memoing techniques as well as different methods to summarize data
(e.g., summary sheets, memos) (Miles & Huberman, 1994).
Coding of data began with the intent of identifying themes and patterns to
answer each research question. Because the nature of each research question had
different purposes, the analysis of each varied. HyperRESEARCH™ Qualitative
Software Version 2.5 was used for all word-processed data documents. I documented
my analytic steps and recorded the date and nature of analysis. In addition, I used
analytical memoing as a way of recording initial and ongoing speculations. A
codebook was created for the study’s main research question and sub-questions.
Codebooks included the rules, properties and specifications for each code along with
examples and non-examples. The codebook was revised until I was satisfied I had
reached a “stable and meaningful category set” (Lincoln & Guba, 1985, p. 342). All
codebook drafts were saved for analytical and auditing reference. The codebooks,
coding, analytic notes and memos, HyperRESEARCH™ reports, and key quotes,
were organized in binders for reference. Following is an account of the analysis steps
used in answering each research question. As previously mentioned, analysis was
appropriate to the specific question.
98
Analysis of Main Research Question: Students’ Cultural Capital and Sub-research
Question: Its Value in the Classroom
In analyzing the main research question, What is the nature of middle-class
Latino/a students’ cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom’s reading and writing
practices? and the related research sub-question (c), How are students’ different
forms of cultural capital valued in the classroom?, I analyzed the data in the
following manner.
In the initial research design, I had planned to rely on five focal students as
primary data sources. However, early in the study as I began coding the interview
transcripts and field notes for abstracting themes and patterns from these focal
students, there were few instances of students’ drawing upon their cultural capital.
Therefore, in consultation with my university advisor, I shifted and broadened the
data sources to include all students in Room 500.
Because of the nature of the research question, the first level of coding was
deductive. Identifying students’ cultural capital was specific in addressing cultural
capital as outlined by Bourdieu (1986). As a result for the first level, I used a
deductive approach. I began coding my field notes, researcher reflections, and
student interview transcripts for the three types of capital. But as mentioned earlier,
there was a mismatch. Even when prompted by the teacher, Room 500 students
resisted his efforts to tap into their background knowledge. There were greater
instances of students resisting inclusion of their cultural capital. Following the data, I
shifted the analysis from noting children’s cultural capital, to instances when
99
students resisted the teacher’s attempts at keying in to their cultural capital
(Appendix I – Student Resistance). Because there were also instances when the
students exercised their agency in tapping into their background knowledge, these
were analyzed as well (Appendix J- Student Agency).
In the second level of analysis for these research questions, I coded field
notes, researcher reflections, and student interviews transcripts, for instances of
students’ resistance and inclusion of their cultural capital. Once coding was
completed, I used the HyperRESEARCH™ software to create reports for each. In
addition, I re-read my hand-written field notes to include other instances that may
have not been captured in the original typed field notes.
The third level involved analyzing each HyperRESEARCH™ generated
report. I’ll outline in detail the iterations of analyzing students’ resistance to
inclusion of their cultural capital. First, each instance of student resistance was coded
for the following: a) the nature of teacher’s attempt, b) the nature of students’
response, and c) textual source. Including the textual source provided information
regarding both a text’s genre and its official or unofficial place in the language arts
curriculum (e.g., school sanctioned texts or teacher introduced texts). A fourth and
finer analysis was used to identify patterns in the type of cultural capital students
resisted including. This analytic stage was inductive. Reoccurring issues that the
students were most likely to resist discussing included their Latino culture,
discrimination, immigration, and poverty. In analyzing the instantiations of student
agency inclusion of their cultural capital, I used a parallel analytical approach
100
outlined above. A finer analytical iteration revealed students engaged to some degree
in discussions of discrimination Latino culture, and multicultural perspectives.
Tables for both these findings were created and appear in Appendix I and Appendix
J. The findings in Chapter 4 include key illustrative instances from these data tables.
Finally, the analysis indicated another mismatch between teacher-led
discussion and student responses. This was regarding issues of discrimination that
was a cornerstone of the teacher’s pedagogy. Data sources include classroom
observation and were triangulated by individual student interviews and conversations
when students were asked explicitly their perceptions on why the teacher included
discrimination as a class topic. Data was analyzed inductively to identify patterns in
how students perceived discrimination (Appendix K).
Integrating relevant theories. Interpreting the mismatch between students’
resistance and the teacher’s attempts to tap into students’ background knowledge
required additional theoretical approaches. Recognizing that one aspect of students’
historical dimension was their intergenerational immigrant status and how students
resisted its inclusion, I included immigrant theory, specifically ethnic diasporas’
adoption of American Creed (Shain, 1999), to interpret these findings. In interpreting
students’ developing perceptions of ethnic and racial discrimination, Critical Race
Theory provided valuable insight.
In summary, to answer the main research question: What is the nature of
middle-class Latino/a students’ cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom’s reading
and writing practices? and the related research sub-question (c) How are students’
101
different forms of cultural capital valued in the classroom?, a deductive analysis was
initially used. However, findings revealed a mismatch between teacher’s goals and
student response and thus shifted the analysis. Inductive analysis was used to
determine patterns of student responses. Complementary theoretical frameworks of
American Creed and Critical Race Theory were incorporated to interpret the findings
to these questions.
Analysis of Sub-Questions: Characteristics and Structures of Literacy Activities and
Students’ Participation
To answer research the two sub-questions (a) What are the characteristics
and structure of reading and writing activities, that is, norms, routines, and
practices, in this classroom? How do they foster integration of participant’s
background and cultural experiences? and sub-research question (b) What is the
nature of students’ participation in the classroom?, I again used a multi-step
analysis.
First, I created a list of the classroom’s literacy activities using two sources. I
used HyperRESEARCH™ data from the Field Notes and Reflections to generate a
preliminary list of activities. Next, the literacy activities from the 37 Participant
Observation Records were compiled on a research calendar grid. This provided a
high-level look at all the literacy activities throughout the study. Typically each
observation day had two to three literacy activities. This secondary list was more
comprehensive and was triangulated with the preliminary HyperRESEARCH™
report. There were a total of 110 reading and writing activities.
102
Step two required sorting the literacy activities into categories. Reoccurring
reading activities, such as whole class reading of the basal reader, science, and
history texts and read alouds of different picture books were grouped together as one
type of activity, for example, “whole class reading” or “read alouds.” Other activities
such as a school visit from a children’s book author were recorded as their own
activity. The writing activities were more idiosyncratic in nature with their own
goals, processes, and time duration. Therefore each writing activity was recorded as
its own literacy activity. Narrowing the list of 110 literacy activities was reduced to
21 distinctive reading and writing activities (Appendix L, Literacy Activities).
The third step involved applying a sociocultural analysis to each of the
literacy activities. Rogoff suggests the use of “activity” or “event” as the unit of
analysis (1995). Cole (1996) noted that Yuri Engeström’s 1987 model of an activity
setting provided a way to capture the social setting in which the activity occurred.
This model identifies six interdependent components. According to Cole, “The
various components of an activity system do not exist in isolation from one another,
rather, they are constantly being constructed, renewed, and transformed as outcome
and cause of human life” (1996, p. 141; cf. Rogoff, 1995). Using these six
components as a frame, I analyzed each of the 21 literacy activities. The activity
setting components, as conceived by Engeström, include: 1) object of the activity; 2)
participants; 3) mediating artifacts; 4) rules which include the explicit norms and
conventions that constrain actions; 5) the community of participants with the same
object; and 6) division of labor by participants. In addition to these six components, I
103
found it helpful to capture two further aspects: frequency and emerging researcher
analytic notes. Noting the frequency of a literacy activity allowed me to determine
both the regularity and the nature of the school context in which the activity took
place. My researcher analytic notes were the basis of developing questions for
triangulating with the teacher. These researcher notes also prompted the writing of
analytic memos.
While analyzing each literacy activity, I returned to my handwritten
fieldnotes to more fully capture the interdependent components of the activity
setting. Each analysis of the 21 literacy activities took me approximately one to three
hours to complete. There were a total of 46 pages of literacy activity analysis (See
Appendix M for example of activity setting coding).
The fourth stage involved re-reading the activity setting components and
identifying key elements to describe the norms and practices in Room 500.
Information regarding findings for the research sub-question regarding student
participation and how students incorporated their background knowledge was also
analyzed using the components for division of labor and community. The fifth stage
involved creating a chart with each literacy activity and its associated norms,
indication of student participation, and ways in which students integrated their
background knowledge (Appendix N, Literacy Activity Chart).
Because students’ popular culture references were a vital part of their
background knowledge a second-layer of analysis was used. Popular culture
references that children and teacher used were further analyzed into how students
104
and the teacher used popular culture to assist their learning; whether they were
teacher or student initiated; and the classroom official text or other text that
instigated the reference (Appendix O: Popular culture links to learning).
In summary, to analyze the research data to answer the sub-questions (a),
What were the characteristics and structure of reading and writing activities, that is,
norms, routines, and practices, in this classroom?, and the sub-research question (b),
What was the nature of students’ participation in the classroom?, I first compiled a
list of literacy activities from field notes, daily Participant Observation Forms, and
hand written field notes. Next, literacy activities were categorized and reduced to 21
distinct activities. Third, a sociocultural analysis of activity theory was used to
analyze each literacy activity. Fourth, a high level chart was created to document the
norms, routines, and practices, student participation, and integration of their
background knowledge.
Analysis of Sub-Question: Teacher Beliefs
Following are the analytic steps used in answering the last research sub-
question, (d) How was the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of children’s cultural knowledge?
The first step involved coding the teacher interview transcripts.
Triangulation of data was made with the 143 typed pages of fieldnotes and reflection
documents. Using the constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985), I
created a codebook with 35 codes.
105
The second step was to use qualitative software to extract researcher
specified reports. For example, reports of teacher’s quotes were created for each of
the salient main categories, e.g., ‘philosophy of teaching,’ ‘how children learn,’ and
‘students’ cultural knowledge’ were created. The reports ranged from nine to 20
pages in length.
The third step involved a finer analysis of the individual report for themes
and patterns within each. Another example will help illustrate this process: For a
main code for this question was “how students learn,” I employed Spradley’s (1979)
technique of semantic domains for mutual shaping (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) using the
sentence “ X shapes Y”. For my analysis, this translated into “students’ learning is
shaped by _____”. Therefore, within the main code, “how students learn” were
further sub codes.
In the fourth analysis step, I created charts with all the sub-codes The next
step involved re-reading all quotes on the charts and further selecting teacher key
quotes that would have the greatest utility in describing the phenomenon.
In summary, to analyze the research data to answer the last research sub-
question (d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning and perspectives of
children’s cultural knowledge? I used teacher interview transcripts, fieldnotes, and
reflections as data sources, successively reduced data sources into main codes and
then into sub-codes, and compiled the codes into charts. At each step in the process, I
106
documented my analysis steps and recorded the date and nature of each analytic step.
In addition, I used analytical memoing as a way of recording initial speculations.
Memoing and Summary Sheets
Memoing was another technique I used for analysis. It was done each week
formally and at any point in the process as ideas and notions came to mind. The
formal memoing was kept to one page. In order to manage analytical memos, they
were dated, titled with key concepts and linked to specific instances in data (Miles
&Huberman, 1994).
Summary sheets were one-page capsulized summaries of data sources. For
interviews, these were completed immediately after and noted time, place, and
gestures during the interview. Upon reading the interview transcript, the summary
sheet was revised to include the interview’s key points. For all students’ writing
artifacts, a document summary form was used to detail the type of assignment, public
display of work, (e.g., shared publicly with others or private) and a brief summary of
contents, date written, date collected, and status (e.g., draft or final product). A
version of the document summary form was used for other related documents
collected such as class newsletters, school newsletters, or school and district profiles.
Trustworthiness
Lincoln and Guba contend that trustworthiness of qualitative research is an
appropriate alternative to the validity and reliability issues used in quantitative
research. They cite four constructs for determining the goodness of qualitative
107
research that include: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmabilitiy
(1985). In this section, I describe the manner in which each of these was met.
Credibility
Credibility of research was met using five major techniques:
1) Prolonged engagement, persistent observation, and triangulation. The first
two were addressed by the nine weeks in the classroom and 37 days of participant
observation. Triangulation of data was used by gathering multiple interpretations of
meaning and comparison through different data sources. Data was triangulated
through interviews with the different school personnel and parents of focal students.
Triangulation of observational data was conducted through interviews with the
classroom teacher about classroom context and purpose of the activity. Individual
interviews with children also provide clarification about meaning and decisions in
reading and writing activities and literacy-related classroom discussions.
2) Peer debriefing. Regular meetings with colleagues and my university
advisor provided collaborative debriefing and feedback to confirm and disconfirm
initial research hypotheses. These discussions were helpful in strengthening the
soundness of categories and constructs (Isaac & Michael, 1997; Lincoln & Guba,
1985).
3) Negative case analysis. In coding, I used ongoing disconfirming and
alternative examples and/or interpretations of the data (Erlandson et al., 1993).
4) Referential adequacy. I used audiotape recordings during formal
interviews to capture verbatim comments from the participants. These recordings
108
captured emic perspectives and added to the credibility of data. All audiotaped
interviews were transcribed verbatim. Handwritten notes were taken during informal
interviews and augmented immediately afterward.
5) Member checks. All adult participants’ quotes will be taken back to
participants as a means of report sharing (Lather, 1986).
Transferability
In order to provide a thick description of events, practices, and interactions in
the field that would guide a reader into arriving at the same/similar conclusions, I
used expanded field notes as a key source of description as well as verbatim quotes
from participants.
Dependability
An ongoing research audit trail was maintained. This research log was used
to document all steps and dates of analysis in the research process. This log was
maintained each day of the analysis and was available as a reference to chronicle
changes in the research’s focus and direction, and steps in the data collection and
analytic process. While qualitative research is not replicable, the audit trail serves as
a guide to other researchers in following a similar study design and using similar
methods.
Confirmability
Because I had been a public elementary school classroom teacher, I was alert
to my biases and interpretations on the instruction and literacy practices in the
classroom.
109
In order to address these biases, I recorded at the end of each observation
visit, my “speculation, feelings, problems, ideas, hunches, impressions, and
prejudices” (Bogdan & Bilken, 1998, p. 123) that might influence my analysis. In
writing from a Chicana feminist epistemology (Bernal, 1998), I was aware of the
strength in using my own cultural background as a second-generation Latina to add
cultural insight into my analysis. However, I was acutely mindful that the
participants in this study and I came from different social times, places, and histories.
Merely being of the same ethnicity did not privilege my understanding of research
participants (Foley, Levinson, & Hurtig, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 2000).
Other Research Issues
Insider Perspective
Foley, Levinson, and Hurtig (2001) reviewed the contributions of
“insiders/native ethnographers” that have provided insight in presenting individuals
as complex and diverse with much in-group variability (e.g., Moll, 1994; Valenzuela,
1999). Key to these educational studies was an understanding that ethnic identities
are fluid and shifting—not static. Educational research includes examination of
everyday settings within broader historical, social, and political contexts that
construct and shape identities. I was mindful of my responsibility in presenting the
strengths of students’ culture without essentializing features. As a scholar of color, I
have interest in providing insight into Latinos/as and their educational experiences. I
also realize that my ethnicity did not validate any insights.
110
Representation
There is a danger of falling into a dichotomy of romanticizing any one group
as either "resilient and strong" or as "victimized" (Fine et al., 2000) or to essentialize
any cultural differences (Foley et al., 2001). To address this concern, I re-read my
reflexive journal weekly and noted where nuanced and complex representations were
lacking and sought feedback from peers and mentors about early speculations.
Researcher Reciprocity
Store certificates redeemable for merchandise were presented to focal
students ($10) and their parents ($20) for their participation in the study. Parents and
children could choose between a department store and a bookstore certificate. In
recognition of the participation by the teacher and students, the researcher donated
$100 to the classroom for school materials and presented the teacher with a $60
bookstore certificate. At the conclusion of the study, I provided a pizza lunch for all
Room 500 students in appreciation of the research privilege to observe their dynamic
classroom interactions and to ask questions to seek their understandings of their
literacy experiences.
Limitations of the Study
This study’s goal was to present a descriptive snapshot of one group of
middle-class Latino/a children’s literacy experiences in a particular setting and time
to generate educational theory. All research takes place within a specific temporal,
social, and political context. And, as with any qualitative research of a single group,
111
the conclusions are “partial and tentative” (Greene & Abt-Perkins, 2003, p. 15).
Since this study in spring of 2005, subsequent national, state, and local political and
public sentiment towards immigrants, particularly from Mexico and Latin American
countries, has been In the media, this discourse is contested. Conducted today, this
study’s findings might reflect the nature of the current context and present different
findings. However, this does not negate the findings from this study. An effort has
been made in developing the theoretical, research, and practice implications to
account for these contemporary events.
Researcher Reflexivity
While I began this research intellectually aware that a researcher’s identity
and biography infiltrate the research process (Delgado Bernal, 1998; Fine, Weis,
Weseen, & Wong, 2000; Tedlock, 2000), I was pushed and pulled at different stages
confronting my dueling self-perceptions as an American and an individual of
Mexican heritage.
As my research into Room 500 progressed, I struggled with what Fine, et al.
refer to as the “triple representation problem” (2000, p. 120) inherent in a
researcher’s representations in the report, representation of participants, and
representation of “the others,” that is those negatively critiqued by research
participants. As a researcher, indisputably, my history is woven with this study. I
sought to learn more about how second- and third-generation, middle-class English-
speaking students might tap into their culture as currency, especially in the protective
112
safety of their ethnically homogenous, upwardly economically and socially aspiring
neighborhood. I wrestled in avoiding the essentializing of Latino/a students. I’ve
attempted to step lightly, mindful of superimposing my biography onto Room 500
students and in interpreting their educational experiences through the lens of my
own.
Since starting my educational graduate studies, I have been energized by
theoretical perspectives about cultural, ethnic, and racial resilience (e.g., Trueba,
2002); funds of knowledge (Moll & González, 1994); and repertoire of practices
(Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003). I also came to understand that literacy was not neutral
(Apple, 2001; Luke, 1996) but contextualized in particular times and influenced by
historical, societal, and political dimensions (Darder, 1991; Darder & Torres, 2004;
Luke, 1996; McLaren, 1994/1998). I was intrigued with theoretical views of societal
asymmetrical power and hegemony (Foucault, 1972/1980; Popkewitz & Brennan,
1998), and racial and ethnic construction (Omi & Winant, 1994). More specifically, I
was compelled to explore how these sociocultural dimensions interacted
disproportionately with ethnically, racially, linguistically, and socio-economically
diverse students (Darder, 2004; de la Luz Reyes, 2001; Freire & Macedo, 1987).
Initially during my doctoral program, I adamantly resisted being typecast as a
“brown-on-brown” research scholar (de la Luz Reyes & Halcón, 1997, p. 430).
However, the more I participated in graduate research projects and theoretically
explored the educational experiences of Latinos/as, as well as children in poverty,
the more I was galvanized to focus my research within these communities.
113
My beliefs about instruction and literacy acquisition had been shaped by my
scholarly work as well as my professional experience as a teacher. Trained in
sociocultural approaches (Clay, 1991, Tharp & Gallimore, 1987; Vygotsky, 1987)
and critical literacy (McLaren, 1994/1998; Freire, 1970/1996), I valued the social
nature of learning and the impetus to empower students. But my study’s findings did
not entirely meld with these theoretical orientations about classroom literacy
environments or students’ literacy instruction. Given the social justice focus of
Room 500’s teacher, I was surprised when students were not bursting to explore their
background knowledge and life experiences and curious that children kept silent
when the teacher rallied them to be socially aware and critical. When participation
observation methods left me with more questions at the end of the research day and
when the lack of students’ personal narrative writing became apparent, I
incorporated more individual conversations with students to try to gain further
insight into these ambiguities.
Analyzing the complexities of the data led me into further reading of
different theoretical perspectives and educational research that addressed immigrant
experiences and racial and ethnic themes in literacy classrooms. The mismatch in the
teacher’s efforts was interpreted with new reading in ethnic diasporas’ adoption of
American Creed (Shain, 1999; Rodriguez, 1996; Rumbaut, 1997). While this aspect
of immigrants’ and subsequent generational differences is explored in the field of
sociology, economics, and public policy, it is rarely discussed in educational
teaching and learning literature. Another finding of students’ explicit discourse of
114
racial and ethnic discrimination prompted me to explore Critical Race Theory’s
precept that racism is ever present in this country. I’ve come to view race and ethnic
issues as an aspect inherent in interactions in evaluating power imbalances, inequity,
and privilege (Edwards & Schmidt, 2006; Ladson-Billings, 1998, 2004). Sociologists
Omi and Winant (1994) have noted the historical and contemporary social
construction of race. But while other scholars agree that race is a social construct,
they contend, “it is so deeply confounded with racism that it bears enormous power
in our lives and communities” (Fine et al., 2000, p. 112).
I’ve had to face my scholarly reticence to make strong research assertions
that might be misunderstood and mistaken by more conservative groups and might
be used to undermine the important theoretical and pedagogical ground that language
acquisition, literacy instruction, and school reforms have gained. That is, a partial
misreading of students’ resistance to include their cultural resources, or students’
perceptions of racial and ethnic conflict as historical might construe that these
matters are inconsequential and that there should be one common and standardized
curriculum. Also viewing certain classroom practices as typical such as test
preparation without understanding the weight of reform and accountability pressures
that shape them might be considered appropriate pedagogy. My intent is to clearly
present findings, implications, and conclusions that strongly suggest otherwise.
This reflection concludes by evaluating discoveries about my personal
identity in the analytic research process as Delgado Bernal (1998) contends is
integral to a researcher’s work. In retrospect, I have never been at ease with claiming
115
my Mexican heritage. My generation worked hard to shake off our Mexican-ness as
if it were a cloak that could be put aside. Blending in as a White American was
considered entirely possible. Now, I’ve come to understand my identity as multiple
and integrated (Latina, near descendent of Mexican immigrants), historical (raised in
poverty, college drop-out, corporate business career, elementary grade teacher), and
contemporary (educated, middle-class, married). Yet I am aware that different social
contexts serve as reference points for my multiple identities. My brown skin, thick
hair, and mestizo features allow me to comfortably fit in contexts similar to the East
L.A. neighborhood where I grew up. While in other middle- and upper-class
contexts, I experience DuBois’ notion of “double consciousness”–aware of how I see
myself as well as how others might be seeing me (1953/1989 cited in Ladson-
Billings, 2004, p. 55). Like a chimera, I am in a non-linear transformation, never
fully defined in any one moment. For myself, and for students of diverse
backgrounds, what is important is how society, educators in particular, identifies and
accesses these strengths. This understanding is particularly important in a globalized
world of rapidly shifting populations, ideologies, and perspectives.
116
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
In this chapter, I present the study’s findings for the main research and sub-
research questions in four major sections as outlined previously. The first major
section presents the findings for the main research question, What is the nature of
middle-class Latino/a students’ cultural capital in their fifth-grade classroom’s
reading and writing experiences? and the findings of the related sub-question, (c)
How are upwardly aspiring students’ different forms of cultural capital (e.g.,
embodied, objectified, and institutional) valued in this classroom? The second major
section presents findings from sub-question, (a) What are the characteristics and
structure of reading and writing activities, that is, norms, routines, and practices, in
this classroom? How do they foster integration of middle-class Latino/a
participants’ background and cultural experiences? The third major section
presents the findings for sub-question (b) What is the nature of children’s
participation in the classroom? The fourth major section presents findings for
research sub-question (d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of middle-class children’s cultural knowledge? At the beginning of each major
section, I briefly present my research beliefs and theoretical orientation.
117
Theoretical Assumptions
The overarching purpose of this study was to describe how middle-class fifth-
grade Latino/a students, in a well functioning school, incorporated their lived
experiences, background knowledge, and cultural experiences while participating in
their classroom’s reading and writing activities. This question and the
complementary sub-research question, (c) How are upwardly aspiring students’
different forms of cultural capital (e.g., embodied, objectified, and institutional)
valued in this classroom? were to be analyzed using Bourdieu’s forms of cultural
capital (1986).
As I entered Room 500, my beliefs and assumptions about children’s learning
and literacy programs were informed by sociocultural and cultural capital theories as
well as recent literacy research. I believed, and continue to do so, that all children
have a depth and breadth of life stories to share (Dyson, 1993). Children’s lives are
textured and rich in experiences, interpretations, and visions of the world (Cole,
1996; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991, 1998). In a collaborative classroom community,
students could use their “life experiences, history, and language” (Freire & Macedo,
1987, p. 148) as cultural capital. I assumed these study participants living in a
suburban, middle-class, multi-generational Latino community would have
connections to their Latino/a culture. I anticipated students’ oral and written stories
would include charged exchanges recounting their weekend activities and stories
about their family life. The classroom’s authentic and meaningful literacy
118
experiences would be windows into students’ perceptions of their individual dreams,
fears, hopes, concerns, and worldviews (Ferdman, 1990).
Documenting the patterns, repeated events, and instances in this research site
would provide a nuanced look at the experiences of Latino/a students—who were
English speakers, second- and third-generation and beyond, performing academically
soundly (as indicated by the Newbury School’s distinguished school status)—and
provide insight into children as active social agents strategizing and tapping into
their background knowledge. Providing insight into this group would help educators
re-think Latinos/as as a monolithic group (Ferdman, 1990; Suárez-Orozco & Páez,
2002). Perspectives from participants would also provide educators with alternative
views about children of color. Some educators perceive children from diverse
backgrounds as lacking mainstream outlooks and experiences (de la Luz Reyes,
1992; Diaz & Flores, 2001) and adequate cultural offerings to compete successfully
with middle-class peers (Shannon, 1996).
However, there was a mismatch between my initial more “purist” theoretical
approach that led me to search for alternative and relevant theoretical approaches
that facilitated a more comprehensive interpretation of the data. In the following
sections, I report on the study’s findings for each sub-question and offer a
convergence of multiple theories and concepts to help frame these data from the
classroom and raise new theoretical questions about educating children from diverse
backgrounds.
119
Findings of the Nature of Latino/a Students’ Cultural Capital
It is worth repeating that this class and school were selected, in part, due to
their progressive stance on including cultural and contemporary social issues into the
daily life of the classroom and the teacher’s valuing of children’s diverse language
and cultural backgrounds. Nevertheless, despite the teacher’s efforts to encourage
student to talk about discrimination, poverty, and immigration and its intersection
with their Latino/a background, students didn’t necessary align easily into step with
these openings, as might be expected by some school reform research and theoretical
orientations (Freire & Macedo, 1987; Jiménez et al., 1999; Meyer, 2002). Students’
varied responses typically included silence or active avoidance of these topics. They
gravitated towards the more familiar territory of popular culture movies, icons, and
their own notions and beliefs that anchored their secure childhood lives. Students’
writing assignments were primarily geared to meet the school or teacher’s academic
goals. There were marginal demonstrations of internalization or integration of their
background knowledge. Yet students’ responses were nuanced surrounding issues of
culture. At times (albeit less frequently than expected) they did take-up the teacher’s
efforts to engage them in specific topics and selectively participated in discussions of
discrimination. Hence, I felt it was important to carefully examine those instances
when the students avoided engagements as well as those when they actually engaged.
These could lead to theoretical and practical insights regarding the match or
mismatch between the school’s and teacher’s intent and students’ readiness to
participate in such activities.
120
In answering the main research question, the findings reflect this complexity
and thus, this section is answered in four parts. First, I describe the teacher’s attempts
to engage students’ cultural capital. Second, I present key instances when students
were silenced and/or distanced themselves from the teacher’s efforts to engage them
in discussions about their life experiences related to their Latino/a culture, Spanish
language skills, and social issues of discrimination and poverty. Third, I present
instances when students used their agency and selectively included their background
experiences. Charts demonstrating the kinds of comments and content discussed for
each set of findings are provided in Appendix I (Students’ Resistance) and Appendix
J (Students’ Agency). Fourth, I present the findings from the parents’ perspectives
regarding Spanish language maintenance and their children’s educational goals.
Teacher’s Attempts to Engage Students’ Cultural Capital
In this first section answering the main research question about the nature of
students’ cultural capital, I present findings on the teacher’s mismatch in curriculum
to students’ perceptions of their modern and integrated lives. There were two key
aspects: 1) static cultural references were used in the curriculum and 2) students and
their family were in the midst of societal upwardly mobility.
Static cultural references. The teacher seemed frustrated in engaging students
to talk about their Latino/a heritage. In an interview, Mr. Harris recalled his
disappointment at the students’ lack of awareness of commonly referenced Latino/an
activists, heroes, artists, and role models during their study of Latino Heritage month
in September. Room 500 students were unfamiliar with United Farm Workers co-
121
founders César Chávez and Dolores Huerta. They confused César Chávez with the
current boxer Julio César Chávez, Jr. (Teacher, transcript #1). While these
Latino/leaders are commonly referenced in Latino/a multicultural education, their
relevance was not clear to these fifth-graders living in the middle-class Newbury
School suburb. At the mention of legendary baseball player Roberto Clemente,
students drew blank stares. In May, when Mr. Harris asked the historical significance
of Cinco de Mayo during a class discussion, only a few students were able to provide
pertinent details. While aware of its celebration in their community, students did not
have a complete grasp of the historical details (HWFN, #11, p. 10). During an
interview, the teacher elaborated on the frustration he felt during an American
History thematic unit on discovery and exploration earlier in the year. He had
expected students to be more knowledgeable about their cultural history:
We read the story of Quetzalcoatl which is the whole thing with
Cortez. I feel for most of the students that they just don’t know from
either their parents or from their culture how their places came to be.
And they think everything just kind of was there. And for them to
realize that there’s a lot of sacrifice made along the way by, you
know, some of their ancestors. I think that’s valuable. I think that’s
what makes it real. (IN: T#1, p. 7)
At times, students seemed confused with the teacher’s attempts to connect
with their cultural background. In a lesson composing Mother’s Day poems, Mr.
Harris was attuned to the different student ethnicities in the classroom. He provided
two different poems as models for students to use in creating their own. Both poems
were selected from a school-sanctioned text of daily multicultural poems. The first
122
poem was generic in nature; the other entitled, “Matriarch” by Francisco Alarcon,
was culturally specific. It began with the line, “My dark grandmother would brush
her long hair... .” Mr. Harris gave students the choice on selecting which poem to
use as their model. One student, Eddie, a Latino, was puzzled about the adjective
“dark” and approached the teacher, “What does it mean, ‘My dark grandmother’? ”
Caught off guard, the teacher asked Eddie, “What do you think our friend Francisco
Alarcon [with emphasis] wrote about?” It was as if using the author’s Latino
surname provided a sufficient explanation, but Eddie still appeared confused. The
teacher was then explicit, “His [Alacon’s] grandmother had brown skin.” Finally,
Eddie nodded in understanding and returned to his desk to begin writing his own
poem (FN9; HWFN#9; p. 5). His confusion was understandable. For Eddie, the
descriptive detail of a ‘dark’ skin was not a marked difference in his school and
neighborhood populated primarily by Latinos/as.
These curricular attempts to connect students with their Latino/a culture fell
short. Simply presenting multicultural texts or discussing figures, leaders, and artists
with a similar cultural background “is not a guarantee that identification will occur”
for students of color (Sipe & McGuire, 2006, p. 9). This mismatch between the
teacher’s multicultural appeals to students’ background is a common one made by
educators and researchers. What then constitutes culturally relevant education when
culture is continually evolving in a dynamic and fluid state? How does pedagogy
encompass key historical cultural figures and their societal contributions without
cultural stereotyping?
123
Students’ upward pursuits. Room 500 students’ lifestyle was more middle-
class and their interests were mainstream and intertwined with popular culture. (This
aspect is particularly noteworthy and will be discussed in more detailed findings in
the section answering the sub-question on students’ participation.) Indications of the
Newbury School families’ aspirations were reflected in the school’s morning activity
as well as a visual survey in the surrounding neighborhood. As each school day came
to life, newer model Camry’s and Accords and gleaming Ford 150 trucks paraded
through the school parking lot as parents dropped off their children. Accompanying
their child to the school gate, fathers adjusted their ties and mothers’ heels clicked
rapidly on the asphalt. Baby carriages were wheeled to the school gate. Children
greeted their classmates and parents hurriedly asked last minute questions about
homework and lunches. Material acquisition signaled progress. In the neighborhood,
home ownership was another aspect of achieving the American dream. Families
could assume some measure of economic attainment. One Latina student Corina
noted her family’s move from apartment living in Santa Ana, an enclave of primarily
recent Latin American immigrants to the more favorable long-established Newbury
School suburb (SI, lines 145-161). Here children and their families lived among
streets lined with mid-century modest single-family homes with tidy lawns and
gardens and valued in the $450,000 range (IN: Principal, p. 8).
At times during class discussions, the teacher referenced the experiences of
migrant field workers but the students seemed to have little personal connection.
This was apparent when the class was reviewing Scholastic Magazine’s list of
124
suggested summer reading, Mr. Harris drew attention to one book in particular,
Esperanza Rising (Munoz Ryan, 2000) (a fictionalized account of a Mexican girl and
her family’s immigration and subsequent work in the agricultural labor camps of
central California during the 20s and 30s). Mr. Harris recalled previous years when
reading this book that some of his students shared their families’ experiences
working in the fields. However, only Speedy, a Latino, made a connection to
fieldwork and remarked almost to himself, “That’s what I did in Mexico, I worked”
(HWFN#26, p. 15). The teacher then brought up the title of a similarly themed book,
Lupita Mañana (Beatty, 1981) (a fictional work about a young girl who enters the
U.S. illegally to work and financially support her family in Ensenada). Again trying
to connect a text with students’ families, he suggested students “…can share this
[story] with uncles and aunts.” Students remained unfazed and there was no
engagement (R26; HWFN#26, p. 15).
In the literacy assignment to write a Friendly Letter, Speedy contrasted his
current greater economic status living with that of his former life in Mexico. While
most students wrote letters to their friends sharing news about a new video game, a
new puppy, or summer plans such as a trip to Mexico or attending summer school.
Speedy’s letter included the following promise to his cousin in Mexico, “If you are
in trouble, if you need money, I will help you. You are my favorite cousin” (Friendly
Letter; 5-26-05). Later, Speedy explained he knew people in Mexico had to work
very hard. Now living in the U.S., he considered himself in a financial position
capable of lending a hand to his cousin who was not as economically fortunate.
125
Overall, students found the experience of migrant workers to be remote to
their families’ current employment. Even Speedy, who acknowledged having done
fieldwork, perceived that by now living in America, he had transcended a lower
economic status and physically demanding lifestyle.
Students’ Resistance to Include Background Experiences
In the second section of findings to the main research question on students’
cultural capital, students resisted the teacher’s efforts to include their background
experiences. They did this in four key ways: 1) resistance to integrating Spanish
language and speaking Spanish at school; 2) resistance to acknowledging an
immigrant heritage; 3) distancing themselves from contemporary discrimination, and
4) distancing themselves from issues of poverty.
Resistance to integrating Spanish language. Mr. Harris valued students’
Spanish language skills. He incorporated Spanish at different times in the classroom
and invited students to use it as well. However, students were not always receptive
when the teacher, not a fluent Spanish speaker, made efforts to speak the language.
One morning, while students were engaged in a writing assignment, the teacher used
the opportunity to contact a Spanish-speaking parent at home. He used the class
phone and all easily overheard his portion of the conversation. Communicating that a
child felt ill and wanted to go home, the teacher explained, “Mi amigo hablar [sic]
con me y quieres regressar a la casa” (Literal English translation: My friend to
speak with me and he wants to return to the house). In the background, students
126
giggled at his Spanish pronunciation and incorrect verb form (FN13: Mon 5-9;
HWFN#13, p. 4).
In another instance, students resisted the teacher’s assumption that their
personal musical repertoires included Spanish language music. In a literacy activity
at the end of the year, students were asked to bring in a favorite song accompanied
with a brief essay on the song’s relevance to them. Two Latinos, Geraldo and Speedy
insisted they only had music with “bad language.” Mr. Harris persevered and
mentioned several Latin American artists he assumed students would be familiar
with:
Teacher: 90% of all families that hablar [sic] español will have
CDs like Luis Miguel.
Several students: No-o-o-o.
Teacher: Jose, Jose.
Students: No-o-o.
Teacher: La Puma or someone likes that…
Speedy: Please don’t tell me that if I went to your house, I
wouldn’t see them.
(FN29; HWFN29, p. 2)
In the above scenario, students initially disavowed any Spanish language
music in their homes but eventually Speedy affirmed one artist’s existence. Finally,
Geraldo realized there was no wriggling out of this assignment and wisecracked,
“We’re screwed, Speedy” (FN29; HWFN29, p. 2). Perhaps students simply did not
want to participate in the public sharing of a personal aspect of them. Yet despite the
teacher’s encouragement, students’ disassociation with and lack of eagerness to
include Spanish language music was clear.
127
“I feel shocked.”: English as a status language. As is common in current
educational reform, the emphasis at Newbury School was on transitioning English
Language Learners (ELLs) to English speaking proficiency. While English-speaking
students in Room 500 showed no outward animosity towards ELLs in the class, there
were apparently strong feelings about their English-speaking status (cf. Schwartz,
1997) and what it represented. There was surprise when Room 500 students learned
that the Spanish-language student was the only one who had passed the beginning of
the year district writing assessment. These reactions reverberated months later. In a
May interview, fluent English-speaker Jessica recalled her feelings of “shock” upon
learning the results (FS#1, p. 3). Oscar was taken aback that his own sure grasp of
English had not favorably affected his effort, “I feel shocked…because she didn’t
speak any English and she passed and I didn’t. I’m like, how was that? That was
shocking” (FS#1, p. 3). He was baffled at the possibility that in an English-
dominated language school someone, lacking the ability to speak the language, could
succeed and even surpasses his own academic performance.
Two other instances reflected students’ aversion about the appropriateness of
Spanish in their classroom. During an environmental thematic unit, students watched
a video about South American rain forests. There was a short segment when a native
park worker was being interviewed; he spoke in Spanish. After a few minutes,
Michael called out derisively, “Speak English” (FN11; HWFN#11, p. 4). In another
instance Connor, a bilingual student, received a Spanish language book from the
Brown Bag Book Exchange literacy activity. He was perturbed and demanded to
128
know, “Who brings Spanish language books to school when it’s only an English
class?” (FN25, lines 114-119). His resentment puzzled me in light of our recent
conversation when he had shared times he enjoyed translating his writing to share
with his Spanish-speaking grandmother. Somewhat annoyed, he retorted, “Yeah, but
I don’t read it as well” (FN25, line 118). At times, it seemed students denied they
knew Spanish or were loathed to be associated with the language. Given the
predominance of English language in the school, students’ gravitation towards the
dominant language was understandable.
“I sound weird.”: Choosing not to speak Spanish. While the class instruction
was conducted in English, I was surprised to find during individual interviews so
many students with some level of Spanish language skills. Yet, despite some
students’ Spanish-speaking ability, they were losing fluency and motivation to speak
it. Students described out-of-school instances when they used their bilingual skills to
support their family members in community, social, and household practices. Denise,
a bicultural student of Mexican-Japanese heritage, shared occasions when she
interpreted for her parents in institutional settings like the hospital or more routinely
at the supermarket (SI, lines 601-602). At home, Oscar translated “things that come
through the mail” and helped his parents with any writing needs (Parent, p. 2). This
dual language practice of bilingual children—termed para-phrasing—translating and
interpreting for their monolingual family members and their attendant and cognitive
skills involved has been well-documented by literacy researchers (e.g., Orellana,
Reynolds, Dorner, & Meza, 2003).
129
Even though some English-speaking students were also capable Spanish
speakers, they expressed an overall reluctance to speak Spanish either at school or at
home. The following comments were made during individual conversations with
students:
I don’t like to speak Spanish at school. It’s weird to me talking in
Spanish in front of my friends. …. I’ll call [another Spanish-speaking
student] on the phone and I talk to her. In Spanish, you can express
your feelings and no one knows what you’re saying. (SI, Evita, lines
205-200)
Other reasons were typically because they had become better at speaking English,
lacked adequate knowledge of Spanish, or because Spanish wasn’t spoken during
school hours:
I don’t pronounce words…My mom wants me…to pass down the
culture to my children. It’s like saving our family from losing Spanish
from losing their culture (SI, Corina, lines 127-143).
I’m used to English. I don’t know how to speak [Spanish] right (SI,
Natasha, lines 251-252).
It’s kinda hard to speak Spanish; you can’t find the right words (SI,
Geraldo, lines 496-497).
I don’t like it because I sound weird. I don’t know how to pronounce
the words anymore (SI, Chloe, lines 540-542).
I think it’s fun talking in English [rather] than Spanish because I
know more English than Spanish (Rosey, lines 641-645).
I don’t like to speak it here at school because no one speaks it here
(SI, Connor, 358-359).
130
Furthermore, Victor, a Latino, found himself a linguistic outsider and what Shain
terms “doubly marginalized” (1999, p. 182) in both the U.S. and in Mexico. He
commented,
Sometimes like when I go to Mexico, I don’t fit in because I don’t
know the language (IN4, lines 44-53).
While students’ Spanish language was cultivated and used outside of school,
Newbury School emphasized transitioning Spanish-language students to English
proficiency. Despite the school’s predominant Latino population, there was little
Spanish-language signage or student work posted around the school. English was
marked as superior and preferred language. Spanish could easily be perceived as a
subordinate language. The children’s mainstream world of popular culture, so
influential in their lives, was also English-language saturated. Students distanced
themselves from their Spanish language skills and gravitated toward the presumed
status and power inherent in speaking English.
Resistance to an immigrant experience. Students’ classroom literacy
engagement included participation in discussions about a variety of quality literature.
While reading aloud from the picture book, Grandfather’s Journey (Houghton
Mifflin, 1993), about early twentieth century immigration to America, the teacher
asked students if they ever “think about the sacrifices your parents made. Those
people who faced discrimination and language issues and worked hard.” Only one
student, Anthony, of Filipino descent, acknowledged his parents’ struggles “but not
my grandparents.” Even with explicit questioning, students still seemed either
131
unaware of their parents’ history or were not inclined to engage in conversations
about immigration struggles. Attempting to draw out students’ engagement, the
teacher suggested there were “lots of interesting immigrant stories.” He shared a
contemporary account of a baseball player so desperate to leave Cuba and come to
the United States that he constructed a raft out of coconuts. Upon hearing that,
Alexis made a connection to the popular culture movie Cast Away (2000, Twentieth
Century Fox) in which the main character built a raft (FN13; HWFN#13, p. 12).
Overall, there wasn’t a memory spark to what students’ parents or grandparents may
have endured as newcomers in dealing with social hostility, economic difficulties,
and language barriers. If they existed at all, these images were not tapped into. In this
instance, Alexis showed the propensity of students to steer the class discussion into
the comfort, familiarity, and safety of popular culture—a pattern that recurred often.
In a grand discussion after reading this same book, Mr. Harris asked students,
“What’s different about the way people come to the U.S. now?” Geraldo
pragmatically answered, “Car and airplane.” The teacher digging deeper prompted,
“Someone with connections to the farm land.” He seemed to be prodding students to
consider migrant workers and perhaps trigger any immigrant experiences from their
own relatives. But no one offered any to share. It seemed students had little first-
hand knowledge about migrant workers’ experience. Instead, the conversation
shifted to what students knew best–singers like Stevie Wonder and Brittney Spears
(FN13; HWFN #13, p. 12-13). Once again, popular culture personalities had greater
132
allure. Whether or not students had direct knowledge of immigration and of border
crossings, they remained silent.
Students exercised their agency in changing discussion topics, aborting
discussions, or choosing their participation level. When certain topics about
immigration and migrant workers arose, students were reluctant to take up these
topics and more likely to veer off into a conversation about something less
troublesome or worrisome. Similarly Sipe and McGuire concluded that young
children’s resistance to some multicultural literature revealed “their insecurities,
anxieties, questions, and struggles” (2006, p. 6). Did Room 500 students’ resistance
reflect their uneasiness viewing their parents as immigrants who in the teacher’s
words “faced discrimination and language issues”; in assessing their Latino culture
as impoverished; or confronting the possibility that being a Latino/a could affect
their acceptance in general society? But immigration topics and the imposing of
Spanish language weren’t the only topics students resisted. There was a mismatch in
the teacher’s efforts to raise their critical consciousness and discuss the salience of
discrimination in their lives.
Distancing from contemporary discrimination. The students shied away from
the teacher’s efforts to discuss any instances of present day discrimination. They
considered that it had “happened back then.” This finding was all the more
interesting because discrimination was one of the cornerstones of Mr. Harris’
teaching philosophy. Discrimination, he explained, was a “running theme” that
students encountered in their fifth-grade American History as well as throughout
133
their middle school history curriculum (IN: T#1). During Black History month, the
students had viewed videos about Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks, and other
civil rights leaders. And he noted, “We’ve done lots of work with discrimination in
this class” (HWFN#7, 4/26, p. 15).
However, student response was nuanced. When the class was reading A River
Ran Wild (Cherry, 1992) (an historical environmental account of the discovery,
degradation, and eventual revitalization of the Massachusetts Nashua River), the
teacher drew students’ attention to a specific line from the text. He problematized the
text’s passive voice structure and omission of details that did not identify how or by
whom Native American rights were taken. He probed, “What does [the phrase]
mean, ‘Indian fishing rights vanished’?” The students offered no speculation. At a
later point in the reading, Mr. Harris shared how Benjamin Franklin had
unsuccessfully pleaded for the Continental Congress to use bows and arrows in their
fight against the British during the American Revolution. Then he contrasted the lack
of choice available to others, “Unfortunately, the Native Americans had to rely on
the bow and arrow to defend themselves” (FN28; HWFN28, p. 4a). Students did not
take up on his point. Interestingly, Kristen, a bicultural student, who often proudly
shared her Native American heritage during class and in conversations with me,
remained silent throughout this discussion.
In another language arts activity, the teacher addressed discrimination while
reading from the school’s basal reader literature selection about James Forten a free
African American in Philadelphia who had served as a mariner during the American
134
Revolution. Mr. Harris brought up societal exclusion of individuals based solely on
the color of their skin. Once again, the students did not take up on the discussion. In
my reflective notes that day, I wondered about the dissonance between the teacher’s
instructional efforts to tap into students’ worlds:
Curiously none of the students shared stories about themselves being
discriminated against or have experiences of personal exclusion. Is it
because they do not perceive these issues to be a part of their lives?
…Perhaps the homogeneity of their school community with its high
Latino population makes them feel secure. The occasional resonance
of the Spanish language by the teacher may provide them with a
cultural touchstone and gives them a sense of belonging in the school
institution, or perhaps they do simply do not feel like outsiders. (R7,
p.1)
Students sharing experiences with discrimination. Seeking a greater
understanding of this disconnect between the teacher’s attempts to talk about social
issues and students’ silence, I begin querying selected individual students for their
definition of discrimination and their interpretation of why the teacher talked about
it. Their views varied. Discrimination was defined as, “Being rude to others” (SI,
Denise, lines 606-614; SI, Rosey, lines 656-664) or as when, “People get treated
differently because of their skin color. Everyone is the same on the inside” (SI,
Michael, lines 439-444). Many characterized it as “things that happened back then”
(SI, Michael, lines 439-444) or “how people were treated in the old days” (SI, Eddie,
lines 744-749). While Connor vividly recalled some of the discriminatory
experiences of African Americans and Mexicans he had learned about earlier in the
year, he echoed his peers’ perception of discrimination as a historical social issue. He
interpreted the teacher’s motivation for addressing the topic as follows:
135
Because [the teacher] wants us to know how people were being
treated. The African Americans and also some Mexican people were
treated badly during discrimination in the 30s. Like some people had
to go to different schools they would get everything bad: textbooks,
reading books [were] ripped up, torn, destroyed. Basically not good.
(SI, lines 363-375)
In students’ estimation, discrimination had been erased through the efforts of
Martin Luther King, Jr. and Rosa Parks who “saved our lives and stopped
discrimination” (SI, Tarry, lines 992-997; cf. Anthony, lines 34-40). Some felt that
Mr. Harris brought it up because discrimination exists “in Africa…[and] in different
parts of the world” (SI, Tarry and Alexis, lines 1052-1057; SI, Geraldo, lines 507-
508) and certainly, “It doesn’t happen here” as one student confidently expressed
(SI, Natasha, 285-288). Somewhat ironically, Natasha, a Latina, also perceived
current negative sentiment towards Mexican immigrants, “I know Governor
Schwarzenegger doesn’t like Mexicans. He wants to send them back” (SI, lines, 279-
280). With the exception of Natasha’s comment, discrimination did not seem to be
salient in students’ present day lives.
Curiously it was only during these individual conversations that a few
students shared their experiences with discrimination gained either through exposure
to popular culture media or personal experiences. Virginia, a Latina, recalled an
episode of the teen television show That’s So Raven, when a black character wasn’t
given an opportunity to apply for a job. Virginia also witnessed discrimination when
she lived in her prior community:
In Long Beach, there was always discrimination in my neighborhood.
Not to us because we didn’t play outside. There were colored people
136
upstairs and there were white people downstairs. Colored people’s
kids were downstairs playing and the white adults would say, “We’re
selling chocolates.” Adults would tell their kids not to play. I thought,
“How sad, we’re all human beings.” (SI, Virginia, lines 820-825)
Brenda remembered discrimination portrayed in the movie Remember the
Titans (Walt Disney Films, 2000) about forced high school integration. In one
particular incident, “White people and Black people return to school. [A White] girl
doesn’t want to shake hands [with a Black person]” (SI, lines 923-928). Brenda, a
Latina, also had a life experience story to tell. She described how her “cousin was
riding her bike and Black people said to her, ‘You don’t belong here.’ [Brenda’s
cousin] cried and told her mother” (Line 930-939). Corina, a Latina, talked about
negative sentiment towards her culture. She contrasted her previous neighborhood,
an enclave of primarily recent Latin American immigrants, to the Newbury School
suburb:
Some kids make fun of [the Mexican culture]. They say Mexico
doesn’t have a clean land and Mexicans feel uncomfortable. Some
people talk about how messed up the road is. They used to say that
when I lived in Santa Ana… .We used to live in an apartment and my
dad wanted to buy a house so [we] moved here…. In [my previous
neighborhood], my friends used to talk bad about Mexico. Here in
[Newbury School’s suburb], the kids don’t know anything about
Mexico, they don’t talk about it ‘cause they’ve never been there. (SI,
Corina, lines 127-143)
Indicating an incipient interest in racial and gender issues during a small
group interview, Jessica, a Latina, observed historical and current discrimination in
the United States presidential office. She motioned towards the portraits of U.S.
presidents lining the classroom wall wryly noting, “…they’re always White. Like
137
men … don’t think that women can do the same things that they can” (FS#3, lines
184-191). She based her latter view partially on her interactions with Room 500 boys
who “always tease us that we [girls in the class] can’t do stuff” (FS#3, line 192).
During a whole class history lesson, she questioned the lack of equal rights for
women in the early twentieth century (HWFN#19, p. 5-6). At the end of the day,
Mr. Harris was gratified she had keyed in to a bigger issues and it was an indication
that “the fire was burning there” (IN: T#1, p. 46). Yet although she had a clear
interest in gender discrimination, Jessica did not often participate in class
discussions. Her voice as a catalyst to larger social issues rarely materialized.
Covert understanding of White privilege. A conversation about
discrimination with two White students revealed subtle understandings about the
perceived privileges of their race. They noted, “Most of the people in this classroom
are Spanish people” and discussed matter-of-factly that if discrimination hadn’t
ended “We wouldn’t be playing with them. We would be in [the] good classrooms
and we wouldn’t have broken chairs [like the Latinos/as students would have]” (SI,
Tarry and Alexis, lines 1060-1070). This distinction between themselves and Room
500’s Latino/a students was based on their perceived higher status inherent in the
color of their skin. Interestingly, these two students spoke not with malice but
pragmatically with the knowledge they had gleaned from learning about historical
episodes of “White people treating colored people bad” (lines 1060-1070) and
preferential treatment towards Whites in society. Known in the classroom as kind
and caring, their remarks were all the more intriguing.
138
While the comments made during these individual conversations clearly
reveal students’ racial awareness, it does not explain what held students back from
bringing up examples during classroom time. Dauite and Jones (2003) noted that not
all students were politicized when reading texts with ethnic and racial discrimination
and that may have been occurring in Room 500. But if race is a pervasive aspect of
our society as Critical Race Theorists contend (DeCuir & Dixson, 2004; Ladson-
Billings, 1998, 2000) and as some individual conversations with Room 500 students
allude, how can researchers better understand how it plays a role in classroom
dynamics, playground interactions, instruction, and curriculum materials? How
might classroom environments be shaped so students feel able to share their personal
stories?
Distancing from issues of poverty. Other social issues the teacher attended to
were social class, particularly poverty, and economic disparity. However when these
issues were brought up, students distanced themselves from any such labels and
instead applied them towards others. After a basal reader literature selection passage
in which the story’s character, James Forten, made a text-to-world connection, the
teacher reflected on a textual connection of his own. He recalled traveling to a Latin
American country and described images of malnourished kids wearing torn clothes.
He nudged students by musing about the economic inequities between the Latin
American country and the United States commenting, “I feel sad for them; I’m not
scared, but I wonder why my family is in a better place. I made a text-to-world
connection just like James Forten made.” Michael, a Latino, spoke next and
139
recounted traveling to the Mexican border and seeing a man with a “very tiny shop.”
He expressed his concern for the proprietor’s business prospects because there
weren’t many people in the vicinity and he concluded the shop owner “won’t have
enough people to come by and make money” (HWFN#7; p.15). Michael picked-up
the poverty theme and related a parallel story about poverty in a distant site.
The issue of poverty arose in another literacy activity. During a writing mini-
lesson, Mr. Harris was teaching students how to generate story ideas. He wanted to
convey the notion that every individual has a story to tell (HWFN#24, p. 5-6). He
was describing authoring strategies such as using journals and photographs for
capturing everyday events they could use later to develop topics. Along this vein, he
urged students to foster curiosity about the perspectives of others. For example, he
talked about specific images: youngsters selling Chiclets in Tijuana—to which many
students in the class raised their hands acknowledging their familiarity with this
scene—or a person standing along the roadside in their community holding up a
“Will work for food” sign. At this point, Victor added to the discussion by sharing an
incident when his family encountered individuals begging for money at the U.S.-
Mexico border. He recalled his mother’s compassionate remark that it was “sad that
people have to live outside and beg” (FN24; HWFN24, p. 5-6).
Their classroom accounts of poverty were inevitably made only in reference
to others—young children in a foreign country, children and adults in Mexico, and
individuals in their neighborhood who were homeless. Students drew a distance
140
between those who were economically disadvantaged and placed them safely outside
their own insulated life (FN34; HWFN33, p. 7-8).
In summarizing this mismatch that arose over the teacher’s pedagogy and
student response, I reiterate key points. While the teacher tried to generate
discussions that honored students’ Latino backgrounds and cultivate social
awareness, the students remained surprisingly silent and actively resisted engaging in
these discussions—at least within the context of whole class discussions. The public
nature of the classroom may have been a deterrent for some students like Kristen
who commented, “Some days I really don’t like to share [my writing out loud]
because it’s really personal” (FS#3, lines 62-63). A more pragmatic reason for not
participating in discussions about social malaise was an inclination to keep adult
concerns in abeyance. Oscar’s words resonated with his father’s views:
When you’re young, you don’t have to worry about anything. You
don’t have to worry about what you’re going to do. You can just live
your life. So, one day after another, you can live the day and you can
play with your friends….My dad told me to enjoy yourself while
you’re young because you’ll grow up soon. You won’t at least get
your dignity taken away from you. (FS#3, p. 9-10).
Oscar, a Latino student, seemed uninterested in the politics of power (cf.
Dauite & Jones, 2003). Other reasons could be students exercising their agency and
their lack of connection to the rather static multicultural references.
But silence, resistance, and distancing weren’t students’ only responses. In
the second aspect of findings to the main research question, I present instances when
students selectively participated in discussions about social issues.
141
Students Exercise Agency to Include Background Experiences
The third aspect of findings to the main research question was that students
exercised their agency when they included their life experiences and background
knowledge. First, occasionally students added to class conversations about Latino
culture and language, discrimination, class, and community issues. Although these
instances occurred less often than instances where they chose not to participate, it is
noteworthy to consider students’ varied responses because “the more hybrid the
discourses, the more unstable (and thus open to social change) the social practice”
(Rogers & Mosley, 2006, p. 483). This nuanced response reflected how students
exercised their agency in topics they deemed important, in which they were
confident they had a voice, and/or had relevance in their lives. Secondly, students
selectively considered racial and ethnic discrimination as it came up in class
discussions.
Integrating Spanish culture and language. The teacher’s sprinkling of
Spanish words and phrases at different moments was accepted during relaxed and
informal classroom moments such the daily reading of the lunch menu or when in a
spontaneous moment he praised students who did well in the school’s Science Fair
telling them, “Excellente esquierzo a mi amigo” (English translation: Great effort by
my friend”) (FN9; Mon 5-2, p. 1). His word choice of “amigo” (friend) also had the
connotation of an endearment than the more formally correct “estudiante” (student).
The following vignette captures the easy flow of Spanish and English languages
between students and teacher during a class auction:
142
Students used their earned classroom scrip and wrote down their bids
for a specific item. The teacher read each bid aloud one-by-one,
“Cuarenta, trenta tres, ochenta.” Interpreting, Geraldo asked out
loud, “Who bid $80?” After reading more bids, “Viente-siete, trenta y
cinco,” Mr. Harris was ready to announce the winning bidder. He
searched for the right verb, “Vende? Vendar?” he wondered aloud to
no one in particular. “Vende,” someone corrected him. Mr. Harris
grandly announced, “Vende, Señorita” as he awarded the item to the
winning bidder. (R20; HWFN#20, p. 15)
When students considered themselves more competent Spanish speakers than
the teacher, they freely corrected him. Mr. Harris readily accepted their help. In
academic reading and writing instruction, the teacher drew upon their Spanish
language skills as strength to bridge students’ vocabulary learning. For example, he
linked Spanish cognates ‘madre’ to ‘matriarch’ (FN9; HWFN, p. 5) and ‘vivar’ to
‘vivid’ (FN29; HWFN#29, p. 15) to connect with English language vocabulary.
However, integrating Spanish language was rare during academic instruction.
More meaningfully, students integrated their language and their background
knowledge during the open-ended and individualized-type of literacy activities that
created space for their personal interests. One notable literacy activity was when
students shared their favorite songs from CDs they brought in from home. Despite
students’ initial resistance at even admitting that they had Latin American artists’
music, when the time came for them to bring in their song their choices proved
otherwise. Of the first four students who participated, two selected songs with
Spanish lyrics. When Nancy, a Latina, played a song by the late Tejana artist Selena,
her classmates listened attentively. As the song ended, Geraldo translated some of
143
the lyrics and Alexis recognized the word “amor.” This gave the teacher an
opportunity to elaborate about cognates and similarities across three different
languages: Spanish (amor), Italian (amore) and English (amorous). When the teacher
finished reading aloud Nancy’s accompanying essay, Victor enthusiastically
proclaimed, “We all love Selena!” (HWFN #31, p. 8-9). According to the teacher,
Selena’s eternal youth and vibrancy keep her as a vital icon in the Latino community
(R31). Later when I spoke to Nancy about her peers’ reaction, she said it did not
bother her that she heard other students initially laugh when they heard the Spanish
song. She insisted she “was proud” of having Selena’s music heard (HWFN#31, p.
18).
Students were somewhat ambivalent about when they would allow any
Spanish language into the classroom. It seemed they controlled its integration at their
discretion.
Selective considerations of discrimination. There was another mismatch
between the teacher’s attempt to forefront social issues, particularly ethnic and racial
discrimination, and students’ disinclination to publicly include personal experiences.
While the teacher considered discrimination as an important component in the
curriculum, students acknowledged discrimination in three specific ways: 1)
empathizing, 2) viewing as historical discrimination, and 3) recognizing it as only as
experienced by other groups (cf. Dauite & Jones, 2003).
During a read aloud of the book Arctic Explorer (Ferris, 1989) a biography of
Matthew Henson, a lesser-known Black member of Admiral Peary’s North Pole
144
expedition party, students discussed the book over several days. Henson had proved
to be an accomplished explorer and indispensable member of Peary’s team. As Mr.
Harris drew their attention to his experiences, the students empathized with Henson’s
contextually changing status:
Mr. Harris: [Matthew Henson’s] doing all these things for Mr.
Peary but when he returned to the United States, he is
just a Black man.
Geraldo: Maybe he should have stayed there [in Greenland].
(HWFN #2, p. 5)
In the next day’s discussion, students considered Henson’s race and how it affected
his social status. Once again, we see how the teacher emphasized making textual
inferences.
Mr. Harris: Why is [the author] Ms. Ferris telling us about, (reads
aloud from the text) “Matthew Henson cleared [all the
dishes] away?”
Alexis: I got confused.
Mr. Harris: What is Matthew’s position? Who is he first?
Oscar: An African American.
Mr. Harris: Even though he’s an assistant to Mr. Peary, he is still a
servant. Underneath all those layers [of contributions
and roles] he is still an African American and it is still
the color of his skin [that makes him a servant].
Male student: That’s kinda sad.
Alexis: Like slavery we read about.
Michael: Why is there discrimination in the first place?
Mr. Harris: We can have that discussion go on for a long
time…when we have discrimination it is sad that the
U.S. has that. But the beautiful thing about the U.S. is
all these people from everywhere, we can learn from
everyone. (HWFN #3, pp 6-7)
There were dual social issues simultaneously explored through this text. One
was the overshadowing of a Black man’s, Matthew Henson, contributions in
145
historical accounts of Arctic exploration. The other issue was in the appreciation of
another culture. As students learned more about Inuit lifestyle and cultural practices
such as their infrequent bathing and mothers licking their children to wash them,
they were repulsed. The teacher offered alternative views about Inuit rich culture
extolling their poetry and songs and different perspectives on lifestyle and survival
instead of formal schooling (FN3, 100-106). Oscar, a Latino, reflected on reasons
underlying cultural misunderstandings and remarked, “We might think Eskimos are
stupid, but if we went to live there, they would think we were stupid.” The teacher
used more palatable vocabulary to build on Oscar’s insight into the contextual
shaping of cultural practices (HWFN#3, p. 5). Mr. Harris allowed students to express
their distaste and revulsion. That is where the conversation began to move forward.
His continual questioning and presentation of alternative viewpoints challenged
students to rethink their suppositions of cultural superiority.
In other instances discussing discrimination, students recognized points in
U.S. history when Native Americans had been thrown off their lands. During one
particular history lesson, the teacher purposely interrupted the reading to
problematize the lack of an explanatory text for loss of Native American land.
Students keyed in to the injustice with indignation:
Teacher: (Reading from American History text) “After the
American Revolution, the United States claimed all
land from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River.
This land had been inhabited for generations by Native
Americans. It included an area called the Northwest
Territory.”
Teacher: (interrupts) There’s something that happened there.
146
Jessica: They forgot to say that the people who came stole the
land.
Ray: They kicked them off.
Teacher: They didn’t say, “Please leave.” What did they say?
Ray: They said, “This is our land. Get off our property.” If
they didn’t do it, they probably shot them.
Alexis: I watch a lot of westerns [movies like] Silverado
(Columbia, 1999). A lot of people get shot.
Teacher: Native Americans didn’t want to give up land.
Southeast used to be part of Mexico. Lot of time, [our]
history book isn’t explicit. They want you to make
inferences. They want you to connect the dots.
(R21; HWFN21, p. 14)
Students empathized with unfair treatment, however, pressed for time the
lesson moved on without further elaboration. Overall students were less likely to
bring any personal experiences with discrimination into the classroom. Dauite and
Jones (2003) assert that empathy is a typical American value grounded in notions of
fairness. It is not a surprising that these students could be empathetic to the plights of
Matthew Henson being overlooked in historical accounts, Native American land
loss, the Jewish Holocaust, or the civil rights struggle of African Americans. Did
students perceive discrimination as an issue applicable only to Blacks, Native
Americans, and Jews in Germany? Given that some students had specific personal
experiences with discrimination and an awareness of race indicates particular issues
were not always easy for students to address even in their supportive and nurturing
classroom. It is worth noting that the terms “racism” and “racial discrimination”
were never used in the class but were alluded to by the more encompassing term,
“discrimination.”
147
Triangulating children’s school experiences and how they perceived their
place in the Newbury School and neighborhood, I interviewed the parents of the five
focal students. From these interviews, the initial impressions of students gravitating
toward upward mobility were confirmed. They also indicated a gap between parents’
and children’s pursuit and maintenance of Spanish speaking skills.
Parents’ Perspectives
In this fourth section of the findings to the main research question. Parents of
focal children indicated 1) interest in preserving their primary language and 2) their
views of education.
Preserving Spanish primary language. Parents of focal students expressed
interest in having their children to be bilingual in English and Spanish. Jessica’s
father asserted, “I would love to see that [my daughter] becomes fully bilingual…[It]
is just an enormous plus for them to be bilingual” (p. 8). But he recognized the
institutional and social environment that might disrupt his hope:
Up here at school and friendships and all that, they’re always going to
be speaking English. …I consider myself very proud to be Mexican.
Fully Mexican. So that’s why I’m trying to pass on to [my daughters]
being proud of their heritage. Their heritage is richer because she’s
not only a U.S. citizen, being born and raised in California [which is]
so multicultural. (Parent, p. 8-9)
Oscar’s mother wanted him to learn “at least three or four [languages] to be
fluent” so he could travel (Parent, p. 5). Clarissa’s mother lamented that her
daughter “can’t read in Spanish or say the correct words….Sometimes I speak to her
in Spanish and she doesn’t understand what I’m saying. If she spoke Spanish, I could
148
help her with things” (Parent, p. 3). Parents seemed caught in-between. They
recognized despite their own desires to hold on to their language and culture, their
children were swiftly leaving behind their language because of the allure of English-
speaking peers and immersion in an English dominated school institution.
Education to achieve a place in “The American system” As many immigrants
perceive, education was conceived as the trajectory to economic success in the U.S.
(Suárez-Orozco, 2000). Jessica’s father, who didn’t go to college, explained with
some regret the lure that earning money had for him and others of his generation and
what he dreams differently for his daughters:
At one point where you start working and you start making money…
I think that was one of the mistakes we made. I don’t want that to
happen to [my daughters]. (p.11)….I believe that we live in a country
where there’s so much opportunity for anybody to become whatever
they want to be. And then to take advantage of the school system, you
know…. there’s so many ways to acquire…the education that is going
to be able to help them for the rest of their lives…Like myself.
Working for companies that, if you do your work, they pay your
check, and they pay your bills. Basically, the American system.
(Parent, p. 10)
Jessica hopes one day to become an archaeologist. Kristin’s mom expressed
her goals for her daughter to be “strong, well-rounded, and have grace as a human…
School’s important” (Parent, p. 4). Oscar’s mother hoped his current attitude and
responsible work habits would continue throughout his middle and high school years
and that he “achieves his dreams” (Parent, p. 5). Since the age of five, Oscar has
wanted to be a veterinarian. Corina’s mom wanted her to go to high school and
participate in sports (Parent, p. 3). Victor plans to become a sheriff like his
149
grandfather in Mexico (FS#2, p. 13). He recalled his father’s counsel about the value
of school,
My dad says that when you study, you go out to places like different
lands. He asks me, “What’s better? Going to places [such as ditching
school to go to the beach] in the same area you grow up or going to
different lands, different places, and being rich [by reading and
studying].” (FS#3 line 233-238)
Counter to the view some educators have that families of diverse backgrounds do not
care about education, these parents clearly wanted their children to succeed and
considered school an instrumental pathway.
Room 500 students likewise recognized education as valuable. In an end-of-
year assignment to compose a letter of appreciation to a former teacher, students
chose their most memorable teacher. Upon reading their letters, I was struck at the
students’ sincere expressions of gratitude for specific learning and academic
achievements, for example, “how to read,” (Eddie); “to learn how to write” (Drake;
Corina); “improving in math,” (Anthony); “inspiring us to write” (Kristen, Michael,
Alexis, Jessica). They also noted the significance of a personal involvement, “you
cared about me” (Nancy) and “you made us laugh and did projects” (Justin).
Students were genuinely grateful to their respective teachers’ efforts and the
contributions in their intellectual development (Literacy Activity: Letters to Former
Teacher, June 7, 2005).
In summary, the second aspect of findings to the main research question
regarding middle-class Latino/a students’ use of their cultural capital indicated that
students selectively included aspects of their background knowledge during informal
150
class contexts. They could contemplate the notion of discrimination albeit from a
historical view. Overall, I re-evaluated my initial expectations (based on prior site
visits) of observing charged classroom discussions and reading children’s rich
personal narratives. Instead, there was often silence and active resistance. Yet there
were more stories to be told.
Individually talking with children during group interviews or catching a few
moments while walking in line from recess, I was struck by glimpses into their life
stories. Even brief interactions offered a slice of children’s breadth and depth of
experiences and insight: Jessica, a Latina, kept a home journal filled with stories her
father tells her (FS2, lines 472-49); Oscar recalled his grandparents’ farm in Mexico
with “a huge river and waterfall and mango trees and kiwis… so no one went
hungry” (FS#4, lines 57-78); Kristen had bootlegged copies of feature films because
her dad works in studio production (IN2, lines 38-44); Speedy, as a five-year old,
carried lunch bags out to the field workers when he lived in Mexico because
“everyone had to work” (FN24, lines 5-26); Ray interpreted the iron bars on
windows and doors in his old neighborhood as adults securing themselves from
outside danger and he wondered, “If it’s bad enough that you have to put bars on
your windows, then what do you think will happen to you when you go out to play?”
(FN24, p. 2); Eddie slyly asking me if I knew what la migra (immigration police)
meant and regaling me with a story about how his mother coaxed him to sleep so he
wouldn’t get “nervous…and puke” thereby jeopardizing the family’s safe re-entry
across the U.S. border (SI, lines 705-713); Geraldo’s one-day absence in the middle
151
of the week celebrating Mexican Mother’s day (May 11) with his grandmother in
Mexico (R15, p. 3); and Victor’s videotaping and providing ongoing commentary
during a recent driving trip to Mexico (FN4). I wondered why all these stories of
children’s life experiences remained untold, unwritten, and unexplored in school. If
school doesn’t provide space for students to imagine and recreate worlds in the
context of reading quality literature and explore the meaning of personal experiences
though composing personal narratives then where do they find space to sort out and
understand their lives?
In the next major section of this chapter, I present findings for the research
sub-question (a) What are the characteristics and structure of reading and writing
activities, that is, norms, routines, and practices, in this classroom? How do they
foster integration of middle-class Latino/a participants’ background and cultural
experiences?
Characteristics and Structure of
Reading and Writing Activities
In this second major section of the research findings, I answer the research
sub-question (a) What are the characteristics and structure of reading and writing
activities, that is, norms, routines, and practices, in this classroom? How do they
foster integration of middle-class Latino/a participants’ background and cultural
experiences? There were five characteristics of Room 500’s literacy activities. These
152
included: 1) use of school sanctioned literacy practices and texts; 2) scaffolding of
students’ learning; 3) whole class instruction; 4) student choice; and 5) a critical
stance to social justice issues which the teacher fostered. Because the nature of
literacy activities was primarily structured to meet school and teacher accountability
goals, there was little opportunity for students’ life experiences to take root.
Following a brief discussion of my initial researcher beliefs and theoretical
orientation, I will present the findings regarding the characteristics of Room 500’s
literacy activities.
Theoretical Assumptions
One theoretical assumption I had upon the start of this research was that
particular types of literacy programs were more conducive to generating student-
centered discussions than others. On one hand, scripted reading programs that
emphasized uniformity of delivery or reductionist reading programs focused on
atomistic features of prints (e.g., phonics, grammar, spelling, vocabulary) narrowed
reading and writing to rote exercises without meaningful context (Gutiérrez et al,
2002). On the other hand, a research-based meaning-based literacy program, like the
one used in Newbury School, that focused on students’ development as strategic
learners would likely foster student talk—especially about their topics of keen
interest. Such lively interactions with texts would help children explore and
understand their world (Ferdman, 1990; Freire & Macedo, 1987). After observing
personal narrative writing and peer collaboration in Room 500 in the fall prior to the
153
start of the study, I assumed these activities would provide the bulk of learning
experiences. I assumed in a discussion-based classroom promoting student choice,
students would animatedly be sharing the rich stories of their families’ lives and
histories and their cultural perspectives of being a Latino/a living in their Newbury
School community. The research findings that follow differed from my
expectations.
Findings of the Characteristics and Structure
of Reading and Writing Activities
Most literacy activities in Room 500 provided little room for incorporation of
students’ cultural and background knowledge. However, there were a few selected
individualized and personalized literacy activities unique to this class that fostered
integration of students’ experiences. First, I will provide a brief overview of the
district’s literacy program that was instrumental in shaping the characteristics of
literacy instruction in Newbury School. Then, I will present the four characteristics
of Room 500 literacy activities. These that included: 1) district sanctioned language
arts activities; 2) whole class instruction; 3) student choice; and 4) teacher-initiated
discussions around social issues. (A chart of literacy activities appears in Appendix
L.) A discussion of each characteristic will address the degree in which students’
background and cultural experiences were integrated.
154
Literacy Context of the School District
Newbury School’s language arts program adhered to the overall district’s
mission of teachers using a “framework of research based strategy for their best
teaching practice” (Literacy Coach J, p. 1-2). This perspective placed literacy
strategies at the center of student learning. The district endorsed a balanced language
arts program of research-based reading and writing activities. Reading activities
included read alouds, independent reading, shared reading, silent sustained reading,
and directed reading; writing activities included process writing, and direct writing
lessons. Daily writing was emphasized. To implement this approach, teachers
received ongoing staff development and each school had trained literacy coaches.
Teachers were encouraged to recognize that students had unique learning styles and
to identify and support the academic and linguistic needs of individual learners (IN:
Lit Coach J; Lit Coach A, p. 3). Instructional decision-making and professionalism
were encouraged. Teachers’ guides from commercially prepared programs were
available as resources—not step-by-step procedural manuals (IN: Lit Coach J, p. 14;
IN: Lit Coach A, p. 12).
With the 2001 No Child Left Behind legislative emphasis on academic
accountability through high stakes standardized testing, the district’s focus was on
aligning their grade-level curriculum to the state’s content standards. Teachers were
expected to collaborate and execute their instructional plan in concert with their
grade level colleagues (IN: Lit Coach, A). In addition to basal reading texts, the
language arts program had complementary texts including quality grade-level
155
literature; appropriate books for students’ varied reading levels; student writing texts;
and a literature based English-language development program.
At Newbury School, language arts activities in Room 500 reflected the
district’s goals. One characteristic of literacy instruction was the adherence to district
sanctioned language arts activities with the teacher using various techniques to
scaffold students’ learning.
Using District Sanctioned Literacy Practices
Student-centered literacy strategies. Mr. Harris used the district-sanctioned
activities of read alouds, small group reading, modeled reading, partner reading,
literature discussions, and process writing. Surprisingly, students’ background
knowledge occasionally emerged in routine lessons. For example, during a
vocabulary lesson, Drake was asked to construct a sentence using the word murky.
He did so and then Natasha spontaneously offered her own sentence:
Drake: Like this morning, I put water in a vase and the water
was murky.
Natasha: When I went to Mexico, people lived near the water
and it was murky.
Speedy: Oh yeah, there’s lots of places like that in Mexico.
(HWFN #18, p. 1)
Even in this rote lesson, Natasha and Speedy who visited relatives in Mexico
proffered their less-than-complimentary recollections and perceptions.
Besides the district sanctioned literacy activities, there were several unique
literacy activities initiated by Mr. Harris. These seven activities included 1)
composing a letter to a mayoral candidate, 2) radio recycling commercial, 3) sharing
156
in a favorite CD from home, 4) end-of-week Brown Bag Book Exchange; 5) “Spell
Off” spelling bee; 6) sharing of an inspirational book, and 7) end-of-year Writing
Portfolios. While these forays from the planned curriculum were not well received
by the principal, it was in these particular activities that students generally were able
to draw from their background knowledge and experiences. (The nature of
engagement will be discussed in the next major section addressing the research sub-
question on student participation.)
Sanctioned texts and alternate texts. Mr. Harris used the California state
sanctioned and district approved textbooks for language arts, history, and science.
He relied on the writing program texts and a literatures series designed to build
English fluency with the class’ English Language Learners. In addition, he added his
own personal stamp to the classroom’s textual repertoire by using books from his
own cache of books drawn from “Mr. Harris’ Magic
Closet”(HWFN, #19; p. 2). He arranged for the weekly delivery of a local newspaper
and subscribed to a commercially published student news publication. He fortified
literacy lessons by including texts from a variety of sources. For example, when
students were involved in standardized testing preparation, he brought in a text
passage with accompanying comprehension questions based on a biography of the
contemporary artist/singer Tracy Chapman.
Using alternative texts was also a facet of his instruction. Mr. Harris believed
students needed accessible texts. He brought in books that dealt with more difficult
story lines, such as Shakespearean stories, but were in a format conducive to young
157
children’s learning. He described their value in appealing to “the language of kid”
(Teacher #1). This phrase was his shorthand for describing the ease of sentence
structure, age-appropriate vocabulary, and vivid graphics and illustrations that
provided strong visual support for students’ comprehension.
During silent sustained reading (SSR), students read texts of personal
interest. Alex perused the NASCAR race car program from an event his parents had
recently attended; Kristen and her seatmate Evita read books from the popular
children’s Lemony Snicket series; Vanessa read biographies checked out from the
school’s library about teen celebrities Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen; Brenda read a
biography of Anne Frank; Speedy consulted his Pokèman statistics book; and Victor
flipped through the pages of a Newsweek magazine. Several students read their
paperback copy of 100 Top Americans they kept in their desks. During SSR, students
were able to bring the books that were of import in their lives.
Scaffolding Learning
A second characteristic was Mr. Harris’ scaffolding of students’ learning with
effective techniques. These including modeling, feedback, questioning, instruction,
cognitive structuring, and contingency management (cf. Tharp & Gallimore, 1988).
During shared reading experiences, he modeled fluency, intonation, and
comprehension by often stopping to ask questions and clarify students’
understanding. In writing activities, he provided modeling by articulating his
metacognitive processes using an overhead projector to demonstrate how he
organized ideas and constructed paragraphs. During peer editing, he sat among
158
students as an equal partner revising one another’s writing. He provided ongoing and
specific feedback in writing or through oral comments on composing efforts. He was
always encouraging and positive. Open-ended questioning techniques were
frequently employed to prompt and support students’ learning. He used graphic
organizers and rubrics to help students organize, structure, and evaluate their writing.
Another norm in the classroom was for students to make connections to other
texts. These intertextual connections were adapted from the teacher’s style and were
specific (e.g., instead of a more general “text-to-text” connection, they made “text-
to-poetry” or “text-to-movie” links). Like stones skipping on the smooth surface of a
lake, these intertextual connections touched and connected to a range of other texts
and modalities. For example, when the teacher was talking about the Tracy Chapman
song Fast Car, he noted, “I’m making a text-to-quote connection” and took a quote
from the book, Winning, with inspirational stories about authors and athletes who
eventually realized their respective goals. He continued, ‘If you dream big, your
dreams will come true’” (HWFN, #3, p. 10). There seemed to be a flow in which
knowledge skipped, ricocheted, and settled on a clear message (DFW, 8-23-05).
Students’ emulation of these fluid intertextual connections was apparent especially
when they referenced popular culture. (Examples are provided in the next major
findings section on students’ participation.)
Whole Class Instruction
A third characteristic of the reading and writing activities was the
preponderance of reading and writing activities were conducted as a whole class with
159
students seated at their desks. During reading activities, the teacher modeled reading
using a variety of texts; students read aloud or engaged in partner reading using basal
readers, history, and science texts. A more relaxed literacy community was created
whenever the teacher read aloud from a picture book and invited students to come
forward. Students sprawled nearby on the ground or propped themselves against the
legs of a desk listening and looking up to catch the illustration as the pages turned.
The benefits of whole class reading provided a community experience. However, in
general, the nature of whole class instruction had limitations on students’ talk time
and access to the teacher.
Writing activities were also generally conducted whole class. While students
had writing notebooks for their personal use, it was common practice for student
writing to be shared publicly. That is, even when students were working on
individual writing projects, a class norm was for them to share their writing aloud.
This practice involved the teacher asking for volunteers, which several always
eagerly did. When volunteers were exhausted, Mr. Harris would pull Popsicle sticks
with students’ names written on them. Generally, students were easy-going about
sharing their work. Yet perhaps this public forum may have inhibited students’
participation because it was essentially performance on-demand.
As advocated in the district, children gathered in small reading groups with
texts using appropriate reading level books. Upon conclusion of small group work
and its inherent fragmentation of the class, Mr. Harris pulled the students back
together to reconstitute their academic community as each group verbally provided
160
an overview of their work. Not only did this activity send a tacit message to the
students that they were accountable for their learning but it also established
intellectual group cohesiveness in their literacy learning.
Providing Student Choice
A fourth characteristic of Room 500’s literacy practices was the provision of
student choice. While the teacher directed and conceived of the writing projects, the
students were provided with choices in how they would take the project and make it
their own. Providing highly individualized literacy assignments was one way the
teacher opened the curriculum to provide a space for students’ sociocultural voices in
the classroom. They did this in their sharing of CD song lyrics, writing journals
(composition books) in which they recorded quotes and poems, reflections on
writing, as well as their original compositions. All writing activities had some degree
of students’ choice whether it involved selecting a topic, genre, or working
arrangements. Offering choice provided students with greater ownership in their
learning (cf. Calkins, 1994).
Critical Stance Towards Issues of Discrimination and Immigration
The fifth characteristic was in the nature of class discussions and questions
poised by Mr. Harris appealing to students to adopt a critical stance. That is, his
questions purposively sought to engage students in critical thinking and to draw
students’ attention to historical victimization and unfair treatment of different ethnic
and racial groups throughout United States history. Another stance was addressing
social justice issues of ethnic and racial discrimination, homelessness, and
161
immigration’s intersection with students’ ancestry. To ignite deeper thinking,
questions were aimed to broaden students’ understanding of about the discriminatory
and immigration experiences of other groups, and to lead students to consider their
own life trajectories. However, in many instances, as noted previously, Mr. Harris’
attempts at critical consciousness were resisted. Students exercised their agency by
not always taking up on his discussion topics.
In summary, this second major section of the research findings answered the
research sub-question regarding the characteristics of Room 500’s literacy activities.
There were five key findings: 1) school sanctioned literacy practices and texts were
used; 2) students’ learning was scaffolded with different pedagogic strategies; 3)
whole class instruction was common; 4) students were provided choice and 5) a
critical stance to social justice issues was fostered by the teacher. In the next major
section, I present findings for the research sub-question (b) What is the nature of
children’s participation in the classroom?
Nature of Children’s Participation in the Classroom
In this third major section of the research findings, I answer the research sub-
question (b) What is the nature of children’s participation in the classroom? Room
500’s literacy activities were partly shaped by the characteristics of reading and
writing activities outlined in the preceding section. There were five key aspects of
students’ participation: 1) using popular culture to achieve varied goals; 2)
collaborating with peers, 3) and sharing in classroom decision-making; 4) engaging
162
in meaningful literacy activities; and 5) participating in literacy as social practices.
After briefly presenting my researcher initial beliefs and theoretical orientation, I
will discuss each aspect of students’ participation.
Researcher Beliefs
Based on literacy research, I believed that children should have choice in
their literacy assignments (Calkins, 1994). From a sociocultural perspective, talk and
language are requisites of a social learning environment (Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003;
Wertsch, 1998). Especially for students who are English language learners, talk helps
provide the fluidity of language in a context with a lowered affective filter. Within a
dynamic classroom environment, children’s background knowledge could provide
the foundation for learning and the teacher could build upon resources from children,
their families, and their community (Freire & Macedo, 1987).
Findings of the Nature of Children’s Participation in the Classroom
Using Popular Culture to Achieve Varied Goals
The first finding was how popular culture was repeatedly accessed by
students and the teacher and served varied purposes. Students in Room 500 seemed
to be more interested in American popular culture than tackling issues of
discrimination, immigration, class, or pursuing their Latino heritage. Asked
individually about discrimination, many thought it already ended during the 1960s
civil rights movement. Yet several students identified discrimination from examples
163
they had seen in movies and television. The role of media in exposing and educating
children to racial and ethnic themes has been documented (see: Cortes, 2004). For
example, when Ray indignantly imagined how Native Americans’ land rights were
handled, he had been informed by Western movies and TV shows’ typical depictions
of force (HWFN#21, p. 22). An episode of the television show That’s So Raven,
current movies such as Mississippi Burning (1988, Orion Pictures), Ray (2005,
Universal Pictures), and Remember the Titans (2000, Disney Films) provided
exposure to present and past discrimination (SI, Virginia, lines 808-818; SI, Michael,
lines 457-459; SI, Brenda, lines 930-939). Similarly, an animated movie sparked
Oscar’s intertextual connections about discrimination. Interestingly, he made
parallels with animated characters and historical discrimination of different groups:
Like, on [the animated film] Madagascar (2005, DreamWorks), [the
characters are] new. …They’re from New York and they treat them
wrong because they’re new. That movie gives me [a] text-to-movie
[connection] because of how they treated Hispanics and Martin
Luther King. Racists and German, that’s [a] text-to-text [connection].
(FS#3, p. 7)
Victor’s personal connection to the same film was about being an outsider,
“Madagascar helps me think about my life. I see people who come to a new place
and they are made fun of, and it helps me think about my life” (FS#3, p. 1).
Popular culture helped cement Room 500 students’ group cohesiveness and
membership that serves as a form of capital (Schwartz, 1997). Oscar described how
talking about popular culture with peers was helpful in “bringing us closer” (FS#2,
lines152-166). Students’ indication of their cultural awareness and hip factor was
164
evident during an incident in their school library time. Clustered around a table
looking through a book on popular culture characters, four Latino students excitedly
identified popular culture characters including the rapper Eminem and animated
character Crash describing him as “tight” (R20).
The students’ popular culture knowledge made them conversant in a common
mainstream discourse. They shared knowledge of Disney movies and musical artists
ranging from the rapper artist Fiddy Cent to the rock musicians Killers, Weezers, and
Green Day. Television shows such as King of the Hill, The Simpsons, and the O.C.
had relevant story lines “because kids [are] getting into relationship problems [and]
always trying to impress each other” (SI, Corina, lines 118-123) and “relate to what
you do in life” (Jessica, IN2; lines 360-377). Peer acceptance required a shared
recognition of pop teen celebrities including Hilary Duff and Mary Kate and Ashley
Olsen. A shared knowledge emerged in having a familiarity with the popular book
series’ Harry Potter (Eddie), Lemony Snicket (Evita and Kristen), and Goosebumps
(Corina, FS2, line 81). Children repeatedly tapped into their wealth of knowledge of
popular culture movies, songs, and personalities for a variety of purposes. (See
Appendix O, Popular Culture Links to Learning.)
Superheroes had their own unique allure and were viewed almost as if they
were real life characters. In a class discussion on the United States’ post-9/11
concern with terrorists, Victor wondered how Spiderman could make a difference
(HWFN#34, p. 3). Michael and Ray intensely argued over whether the superhero
character named Thing was stronger than the superhero Hulk. For evidence, Michael
165
consulted his Marvel Encyclopedia of superheroes and compared their respective
lifting capability statistics to substantiate his case (FN12, Fri, 5-6). When the teacher
introduced a lesson on literary characters’ dynamics and flaws, Victor noted how
superheroes similarly have weaknesses (FN & R Week 4; p. 1). Citing the book
Quasimoto as a personally inspirational text, Oscar reflected, “Quasimoto is kind of
like Spiderman” (FN29; p.7). He then went on and provided elaborate parallels
between the two characters and story plot lines.
Students fluidly wove popular culture into their cognitive work and
particularly during their writing experiences. The following examples reveal how
students initiated the use of popular culture to strengthen their learning. During an
American history discussion, Victor, one of the academically lowest performing
students, noted how nations attempted to resolve conflicts through treaties. He noted
this happened historically (the American Revolution), in a science fiction movie
(Star Wars, 2005, Lucasfilm, Ltd.), and currently in the 2005 proposed treaty in Iraq
(HWFN#22, p. 19). In another history lesson, students recalled how the movie
National Treasure (2005, Walt Disney Pictures) opened with a reference to the
explorer Matthew Henson (whose biography they were reading) and included the site
where the U.S. Constitution was signed (HWFN#2, p. 3). In a science lesson on
animal classifications, a discussion was sparked about creationism and evolution. In
the following scenario, Speedy seemed to have an epiphany connecting his pleasure
reading of Pokèman statistic books with the classroom’s scientific concepts.
Victor: Where did civilization come from?
166
Teacher: [talked about evolution and human as descendents
from apes]
Evita: Didn’t God make us?
Oscar: Look at the saber tooth tiger.
Teacher: As climate changes, animals change too.
Speedy: It’s just like Pokèmon. They evolve. (FN11)
Asked later to clarify his comment, Speedy explained how in “video games,
books, movies, and TV shows,” Pokèman characters were always in the process of
transformation “from a baby to gaining strength” (HWFN#12, p. 11). His expertise
in video games helped cement his understanding of an academic scientific concept.
Writing experiences were also episodes when popular culture intersected with
students’ learning. When Mr. Harris noted Alexis’ narrative writing structure—
starting with the ending first—on a particular assignment, he explained how
professional authors employ a variety of narrative structures. Michael compared her
technique with the non-linear story telling of film director Quentin Tarantino. Her
writing experience was thereby placed within a larger creative literary landscape
(FN23, Wed. 5-25, p. 4). In writing his personal historical narrative, Oscar explained
how his interest in writing an adventure story motivated him to integrate descriptive
imagery of seafaring battles from the movie Master and Commander (2004, 20
th
Century Fox) with facts and details from the basal reader literature selection about
James Forten (RN24, HWWFN#24, p. 10). These connections to popular culture
added to students’ sense making during history, science, and language arts lessons.
The teacher capitalized on students’ cultural resources to scaffold students’
learning as well as maintaining the classroom community intact. Using popular
167
culture references, he established immediate understanding (e.g., vocabulary words),
cognitive structuring (e.g., literacy sequencing of event), classroom management
(e.g., ending an argument between students), and community building (e.g., playing
a song). For example, during reading when a student asked the definition of ‘utopia’,
the teacher used the movie Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005, Warner Bros.)
as a concrete example. Here are some examples: During a reading assignment, one
group was confused on how to sequence a story’s events. It was the literacy term
‘event’ that stymied them. By way of explanation, Mr. Harris asked them to name
several events in the animated movie Lion King (1994, Walt Disney Films). They
did so with ease. He then instructed them to apply that conceptual understanding to
the class text they were reading (FN2). During class discussions whether students
introduced ideas from the Pope (FN4), Governor Schwarzenegger (FN34), or made a
connection to space aliens from the popular culture movie Men In Black (1997,
Columbia Pictures) (FN7, line 17), or to the Bible (FN6, line 60), Mr. Harris valued
and acknowledged students’ tapping into their store of knowledge with a nod or
perhaps a joke all the while keeping the class discussion on target. Just as Bourdieu
suggested that individuals would use cultural resources “for the practical purposes of
getting on in everyday life activities” (Schwartz, 1997, p. 59), similarly Mr. Harris
found popular culture references useful in crystallizing an academic concept or in
bridging students’ current understandings to academic learning.
168
Collaborating with Peers
The second finding of children’s participation in class was that although the
structure of many of the literacy activities were teacher-led and conducted in whole
group instruction, there was still opportunity for peer collaboration. Students were
seated in five table groups conducive to easily pairing with a partner for reading and
writing activities. Students shared texts during partner reading, and collaborated in
discussions, and related literacy activities. For example, reading from their American
History texts one day, students worked with their partner to develop questions from
the text. These questions were then posed to the rest of the class (HWFN#19, p. 5-6).
Students were comfortable relying on their peers for their learning. When
students gathered into small reading groups of six-to-eight students, Mr. Harris
would assign one student to be the “teacher” in each group. It was this student’s job
to oversee the completion of the group’s assigned literacy tasks. Curiously, being
assigned as “teacher” was not perceived as a power issue. All students in the group
worked efficiently and independently while Mr. Harris circulated among the rest of
the groups answering questions and assessing students’ reading. The tacit message
was that Mr. Harris was not the only teacher in the room—students could learn from
their peers.
Consulting with their peers during writing assignments was common. While
students worked on individual writing assignments, they had the freedom to move
around and consult with other classmates or their peer tutor. The purpose was to get
feedback and revision suggestions. Students shared their writing easily and observed
169
closely as the other person might erase or pencil in recommendations sometimes
directly on their paper. In these interactions, students listened to one another. They
accepted each other’s ideas confident that their peer’s suggestions would strengthen
and improve their writing. Kristen recognized the need for varied feedback and
heeded Mr. Harris advice to “not to let only your friends read your work” (HWFN,
#21, p. 10). Denise had her writing read by six of her peers. Having the freedom to
circulate around the room was important for Corina who explained, “I can’t just get
my ideas from thinking [on my own], I need to go around to my friends and that’s
where I get my ideas” (HWFN, #29, p. 10).
While collaborating with one another, students stayed intent on completing
their own goals. Students worked smoothly despite what seemed to be frequent
interruptions from one another. During an observation of four students seated at one
table and working on an assignment to locate regions of the United States, I noted
their intense engagement and concentration and used a jazz session metaphor to
compare their interaction:
The focus was on getting the work done, but each student added his or
her own piece in a free form sense. There was nothing linear.
Individuality and collaboration existed simultaneously. No one person
was in charge or had all the information. Speedy was a resource
student; Oscar was one of the highest academically. The two of them
worked together as equals to figure out how to locate one particular
city. Corina occasionally sought Oscar’s help by tapping him on the
shoulder when she needed his attention; he turned and responded and
without missing a beat continued on with his work. Just as easily,
Corina leaned across the table to give directions to Speedy and or
answer a question for Vanessa. Then she pressed her pencil to her
own notebook balanced on top of her tucked knee. Their movements
were fluid. (R20)
170
Dual language use occurred unencumbered in one particular episode of small
group collaboration. During pre-production for the end-of-the-year class play, the
teacher and most of the students went outside to rehearse. A few students remained
in the classroom working on the scenery, posters, and performance invitations.
Among them was the one student who spoke only Spanish. As they negotiated tasks
and evaluated their progress, students’ language shifted between English and Spanish
reflecting different speaking abilities and comfort level:
Kitty: ¿Qué vamos a hacer?
Val: Éste con puntos. ¿Cúal colores?
Chloe: Mine
Val: Wait, wait.
Chloe: You’re doing good.
Rosey: Like this you guys? (Holds up the banner for
feedback.)
Tarry: Yeah. That’s good.
Virginia: Bien.
(HWFN, #28, p. 16)
Unlike the dominance of English language in their regular classroom
interaction, students’ language during this small group interaction reflected their dual
language capability, understanding, and ease in communication with one another as
well as the desire in creating a comfortable context inclusive of the Spanish-language
speaking student. Differences were simultaneously incorporated and erased.
Shared Classroom Decision-Making
The third finding of the sub-research question regarding the nature of
children’s participation was their decision-making role in some language arts
171
activities. One way was through their input in developing writing rubrics for specific
writing assignments and in evaluating their peers’ work. In their writing of recycling
commercials, students knew a limited number would be selected for reading over the
school’s public address system. As a result, they carefully evaluated which four
commercials would best represent their class. Participating in this literacy
assignment also set the stage for activism in giving students experience articulating a
social problem and appealing for action.
One literacy activity in particular—writing letters to the Los Angeles’
mayoral candidates during the election year—captured multiple ways that students
were involved in decision-making. Prior to composing their letters, students co-
constructed the writing rubric with the teacher. This rubric served both as a guideline
for the letters’ components and student self-assessment of quality. Once letters were
completed, students met in small groups to select which letters would be mailed to
the mayoral candidates. While most concerns addressed littering or the excessive
cutting down of trees, several students used the opportunity to tackle the issue of
homelessness. This was a powerful lesson. It transcended students simply acquiring
the mechanics and form of letter writing—which is precisely what it would have
been had the teacher elected to use the generic writing lesson from the school text.
Mr. Harris infused the literacy experience with greater authenticity and significance.
Engaging in Meaningful Literacy Practices
The fourth finding of the sub-research question regarding the nature of
children’s participation was their engagement in meaningful literacy activities that 1)
172
connected their writing to authentic audiences and 2) provided opportunities to
reflect on their process.
Sharing literacy with authentic audiences. Students shared their writing with
varied outside audiences in widening circles ranging from different Newbury School
grade level classrooms, to the entire student body, to the city’s political candidates.
Visiting another classroom for a few minutes in the morning, two or three students
from Room 500 would share a portion of their American History “Encyclopedia”
report. The entire Newbury School student body served as an audience when Mr.
Harris arranged with the principal to have four students read their radio recycling
commercial during the school’s morning announcements. The principal took-up one
student’s anti-littering message merging it with the school’s institutional goals of
maintaining a tidy campus. In writing letters to the mayoral candidates, students
mailed their letters. They received written responses from both candidates. Mr.
Harris stated one of his goals driving this activity was giving students’ realization
that their voice mattered (IN: T#1, p. 42). He was involving students in the
democratic process in four ways: first, they gained awareness of the current political
context; second, they realized they could communicate their concerns to elected
officials; third, they recognized political candidates’ reliance on meeting their
constituency’s interests; and finally, they articulated environmental concerns of their
immediate neighborhood and the city at large. Then-mayoral candidate Antonio
Villaraigosa began his correspondence to Room 500 noting, “[T]o see people,
173
especially young people involved with concerns that affect the whole world is
admirable” (Class Letter, 6/6/05).
These activities provided students not only with authentic audiences and real
life literacy activities. The students’ voices were interwoven with school institutional
practices and city politics. This outward reach extended the classroom community
beyond the boundaries of its four walls.
Literacy experiences were also extended outside the physical boundaries of
the classroom. When peer partners were engaged in writing dialogue, some chose to
compose outside on the grass or walkway. Writing Portfolios were shared outdoors
(a short vignette appears in the upcoming section). In preparation for their class play,
students rehearsed outdoors as they transformed the raised concrete platform at the
back of the school auditorium into their stage. These out-of-classroom experiences
are deceptively simple. They reflect the authenticity and the real world occurrences
of reading and writing in different contexts—not solely in classroom seatwork.
Understandably providing alternative school literacy contexts for students has its
difficulties because of institutional space limitations. Yet they provide an implicit
and lifelong message to students that reading and writing can take place as clustered
in chairs on the grass balancing a composition book in your lap; or sitting outside
with the morning sun’s warming your back while reading your compositions; or
laughing along with peers while dramatizing language and bringing it to life. In
short, literacy was recognized not strictly as a cognitive isolated in-the-head
174
experience but as a social practice shaped by participants’ mediating artifacts and
purposes.
Reflecting on their process as writers. Room 500 students had opportunities
to reflect on their process as writers. When Kristen, one of the top students in the
class, worked on a peer’s writing, she found it helpful noting, “If I see how to fix
someone’s writing, then I can do it for my own writing” (HWFN#20, p. 3). For
Nancy, it gave her insight in varied viewpoints. She remarked, “You understand
some people have different understandings” (HWFN#20, p. 10). Ray was more
pragmatic adding that revising and editing with a peer, “Helps you know about
grammar” (HWFN#20, p. 10). Michael felt a sense of responsibility noting, “I felt in
charge. ‘Cause I’m usually not in charge at home” (HWFN, #20; p. 10). In most
cases, collaborating with peers helped them improve their writing.
The manner in which students reflected on their writing process was
exemplified in the Writing Portfolios assignment compiled and shared at the end of
the year. Students included a “Dear Reader” letter to introduce their individual
portfolio. This letter strategically developed students’ tacit acknowledgement not
only that potential readers would be interested in students’ motivations, purposes,
and writing process but it also gave students the opportunity to articulate the same.
On the last Friday morning of the school year, students shared their Writing
Portfolios outdoors with one another. This is how the scene looked:
Students were assigned in groups of three to four. About six groups
tucked their portfolios under their arms, grabbed a donut, and carried
their plastic chairs into the bright sunlight. Some set up their chairs on
175
the worn grassy area just outside the classroom…others gathered on
the large raised concrete platform ….The morning sun was reflecting
brightly off their papers. As they listened to their peers read a
selection from their writing portfolio, some students hunched over
thoughtfully in their chairs while others stretched their legs, leaned
back, and closed their eyes. As they took turns, they were laughing
with one another, reading aloud from their work, commenting on
what they liked…. Victor made a point of explaining his efforts to add
humor to his advertisements because his good friend Geraldo wanted
him to do so. When asked to identify his best piece of writing, Victor
without hesitation pointed to his typed personal historical narrative
that he had peer-edited in class several weeks ago with the teacher.
“…I worked hard for weeks and I didn’t like it and I was going to
give up but then Mr. Harris said it was good work. So then I stuck
with it. I went to the extreme.” And he defined “extreme” as working
every night re-writing his story to reflect his best work. (HWFN#37,
p. 3)
This vignette illustrates students’ growth collaborating with one another and
writing as a literacy practice imbued with the social purposes of making connections
and bonding with one another.
Participating in Social Literacy Practices Transcending Traditional Reading and
Writing
The fifth finding of the sub-research question regarding the nature of
children’s participation in the class was that students engaged in literacy practices
that were social in nature and different from typical expectations of school reading
and writing. There were several teacher-conceived and initiated activities in the
classroom that animated literacy, individualized participation, and transformed
notions of reading and writing to different social contexts and purposes. These three
literacy activities included: the Brown Bag Book Exchange, CD song and
accompanying essay, and sharing of an inspirational book. Because they are not
176
traditional school literacy activities and thus easily identifiable, they will be
explained more fully.
The first, Brown Bag Book Exchange, was an activity in which students
brought a used book from their home and exchanged for another. Participation was
voluntary but the teacher generally added in a few books for those students who
forgot or who didn’t have books at home to spare. The activity took place on a
Friday afternoon just before dismissal. Each book brought from home was first
concealed in a plastic bag and then placed in a large cardboard box. Two students
walked around carrying the loaded box as the rest of the students reached in one at a
time and pulled out a plastic bag containing a book. Once everyone had a book, the
teacher gave a signal and the plastic bags were simultaneously pulled off. Voices
shouted out titles; students flipped through pages. For one student, however, there
was also a negative aspect to getting books. As mentioned previously, Conner was
chagrined when his unwrapping revealed a Spanish language book. However, his
reaction was the exception. There was a certain amount of buzzing and talking as
students left to go home. In this activity, there was a rhythm in the cycle of students’
lives entering fluidly into the classroom (with the books) and receding comfortably
back into their lives (with the new book). Books brought from their home were
objectified capital and valued.
A second literacy activity was the sharing of CD songs and accompanying
essays. In the final days of the school year, the teacher who lamented the lack of arts
in the school curriculum, wanted to incorporate more music in the class. He
177
developed a literacy activity in which students would bring in songs that had
significance in their lives. While this literacy activity has been mentioned in an
earlier findings sections when students’ integration of Spanish language was
explored, I will touch on aspects of this particular activity.
One student’s song drew attention to pre-adolescent issues. The chorus from
Evita’s shared song was surprising:
To be left out in the dust
To be kicked when you’re down
Feel like you’ve been pushed around.
No one there to save you.
Welcome to my life.
The song touches on feelings of alienation this student didn’t talk about in
class but was part of her personal journal entries she sometimes shared with me
(R32, p.2). Another student’s participation was noteworthy for incorporating
technology. As a Pokèmon videogame enthusiast, Speedy, a Latino, brought in a
Japanese song to share. The rest of the class was initially mystified by his choice but
he kept reassuring them it would be of interest. Then as the song concluded, he
distributed the English lyrics downloaded from the Internet to make the song
accessible to his classmates. His integration of a Japanese song and English lyrics
downloaded from the Internet is a vivid indication of the access to immediate and
global cultures students have today and the increasing transnational nature of culture
(Suárez-Orozco, 2005).
The third individualized literacy assignment was for students to “Share a
Book that Inspired You.” Students had the opportunity to select and talk about a
178
book that was particularly meaningful to them and hear their peers’ selections. The
discussions centered on a specific memory that resonated with the book. Ray shared
about his second-grade teacher giving him a book right before the start of summer
vacation because “I couldn’t read so good and she wanted me to keep practice
reading.” Virginia’s inspirational book was Anne Frank because, “She was too
young to suffer” (HWFN#29, p. 6). Brenda commented that her nana and grandma
made a song of the book, Circle of Life. Corina, a Latina, found value and meaning
in the message from the young children’s book’s Swimmy (Lionni, 1963) to “be
proud of who you are” (HWFN#29, pp. 5-7). These examples indicate how relevant
books were in students’ lives and in the world of their families. What made these
three activities unique was the opening of space in their classroom when students
were most likely to share something of themselves and of their connections with
their home literacy experiences. There was excitement and energy in these
activities—Brown Bag Book Exchange, CD song share, and inspirational book—in
which students’ home literacy practices merged memorably with school literacy
practices.
Yet even with the district’s curriculum that was student centered, the rigors
and pressures of standardized testing seemed ultimately too time consuming for the
teacher to integrate more innovative literacy activities. Students had four mornings
of state standardized testing and one class period of a district writing assessment.
Typical as in many schools, test preparation was a part of the instruction day. While
there was daily writing and multi-genre assignments, I didn’t observe student
179
autobiographical narrative writing. This type of writing may have provided a space
for students to meaningfully bring in their life experiences and background
knowledge.
In summary, this third major section of the research findings answered the
research sub-question regarding the nature of children’s participation. There were
five findings: 1) students used popular culture to achieve academic, social, and
personal goals; 2) collaborated with peers generated mutual trust and shared
responsibility; 3) shared decision-making included students’ input in evaluating their
own and their peers’ writing; 4) meaningful literacy activities connected students’
writing to authentic audiences and real world purposes; and 5) social literacy
practices transcended more narrow views of literacy as reading and writing. It was
often in these last types of activities that students’ background knowledge was
tapped into. There was limited time for students to experience literacy activities that
tapped into their background resources.
In the final major section of the research findings, I present findings for the
research sub-question (d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of middle-class children’s cultural knowledge?
180
Classroom Shaped by the Teacher’s
Epistemology, Philosophy, and Perspectives
In this fourth major section of the research findings, I answer the research
sub-question (d) How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of middle-class children’s cultural knowledge? I outline the findings in three
corresponding sections. First, the teacher’s epistemological stance included his belief
that students’ knowledge needed to expand beyond the established curriculum.
Second, the teacher’s philosophy of learning prioritized the maintenance of a flexible
instructional environment. (His perspective was at odds with the principal’s
curricular objectives.) Third, the teacher viewed that children’s cultural knowledge
stemmed from their multiple social worlds and was valuable in enriching their
classroom learning experiences. After briefly presenting my research initial beliefs
and theoretical orientation, I will discuss each of these findings.
Researcher Beliefs
Beliefs about the role of the teacher were shaped in part by Valenzuela’s
(1999) research of U.S.-born Latino/a students’ “subtractive education” experience.
In her study, Valenzuela noted this occurred when teachers didn’t build on the
adolescents’ cultural and language resources or provide a caring atmosphere. By
contrast, Mr. Harris’ honored the students’ biculturalism and had an easy student
rapport. I expected a gateway to unfettered and uncensored discussions as students
181
tapped into their background knowledge and cultural experiences in their safe and
supportive environment. I expected the teacher’s inclusion of social justice themes to
provide a space for students to voice their similar experiences.
Findings on How the Classroom was Shaped by the
Teacher’s Epistemology, Philosophy, and Perspectives
Teacher’s Epistemological Stance
Basically, there seemed to be three types of knowledge that Mr. Harris
promoted: 1) the knowledge to successfully master school grade level content; 2) the
knowledge required to be “a decent human being”; and 3) the knowledge gained
through social interaction.
Knowledge needed to master grade-level standards. In order to be
academically successful as assessed in state and district institutional measures,
students indisputably needed to master the specified grade-level curriculum. This
content knowledge was specified through state standards, school district standards,
as well as Newberry School’s instructional plans. At the beginning of the year,
Newbury’s teachers had collaborated on and established a curricular timeline for
instructional delivery. Students’ content knowledge was measured at the school level
through written reports and tests and was electronically reported.
“Becoming a decent human being.” Yet, despite adhering to established
curriculum and assessments, Mr. Harris saw himself as a “one man rebel” (IN:
T#12, line 78) in considering that a single measure, such as the report card,
182
adequately communicated to parents a multidimensional or formative evaluation of
the whole child. Missing was the child’s social and civic development as a “decent
human being.” One of his teaching goals was to help students establish their footing
as clear thinking, self-monitoring, and self-regulating human beings:
I’ll say [to the students], “You know what, does anyone really know
what grade Lyndon Johnson got in fifth-grade? Does anybody know
that? Do we really personally care whether Ronald Reagan got a B+
in math in fifth-grade or fourth-grade?” I don’t think anyone really
cares about it. But did they a) start becoming a decent human being;
b) can they express themselves; c) do I know how to act?; and d) can I
expand my universe?” You put those things together, you know what,
that was a successful time you spent. Because that’s what each
classroom is. (IN: T #1, p. 32)
All children needed to envision their place and role in society and “be a
citizen of the world” (HWFN#22, p. 15). One way to accomplish this was having
children recognize historical injustices and discrimination experienced by different
ethnic and racial groups because the “exposure to a lot of different worlds makes you
realize that your world is not so small” (IN: T#13, p. 47). He believed students
needed to reach beyond surface level information.
One aspect of expanding students’ universe was developing awareness about
social issues such as ethnic, racial, and gender discrimination. As presented in earlier
findings, this issue was key to his instruction. In the following quote, he justifies its
emphasis:
When you’re getting into things in our [fifth-grade] history book
where you’re talking about the Native Americans and the land that
was taken from them. Or you’re talking about civil rights and the
mistreatment of African Americans for hundreds and hundreds of
183
years and then you realize that when we talk about civil rights, it’s not
really ancient history, it’s pretty current. (IN: T#2, p. 1)
Like threads woven in a tapestry of learning experiences, particular themes
would reappear over the course of students’ schooling. Mr. Harris’ role was to help
establish the foundation for that learning. He wanted to take the discrimination theme
and “broaden the theme…through all the different monthly [multicultural]
activities...I think those offer good opportunities to examine different cultures…”
(IN: T #1, p. 5).
Another aspect of expanding the curriculum was linking it with literacy
activities that could “…get them excited about learning, to give them something
that’s going to help them be successful on their test, successful in their studies, and
successful as human beings” (IN: T#1, p. 42). Empowerment meant giving the
students practical experience to speak up for their beliefs as in writing letters to the
mayoral candidates and recycling commercials described in the preceding sections,
his goal was for students to realize, “Hey you know, what, I can produce something.
I can speak up” (IN:T #1, p. 43). At the end of the year after an animated discussion
in which students talked abut what they could do to change the world, he was
pleased to recognize their sense of activism/involvement and reminded them, “I hope
you have seen [throughout the year] that you can get active and ask questions” (FN
#34; p. 1; HWFN#34, p. 6).
Another ongoing theme in the classroom was immigration. He was attuned
to many of the students’ families’ current or historic immigrant status. While careful
184
not to transform his classroom into “Immigration 101” (IN: T #2, p. 14), he wove
immigration issues into class discussions because “it was a valuable theme for the
[fifth-grade American] history that I teach….it’s hard to talk about the early
Pilgrims, some of the first immigrants, and not focus on any of these other” (IN: T
#2, p. 14). This theme also emanated from his strong connection to his own
grandparents’ immigrant background.
Knowledge was not fixed; there were always multiple perspectives. Human
interaction was not “…as clear-cut as a ‘yes’ or a ‘no’ or a ‘good’ or a ‘bad’ or black
or white” (IN: T #13, p. 58). He encouraged students to consider, “What would it be
like to be that person? You want to give the situation depth and thought” (HWFN
#24, p. 5) and “…wonder about the possibilities in that situation. Look at the
children’s eyes. Maybe you’d get a different point of view if you looked in a child’s
eyes” (HWFN #24, p. 6). He aimed to teach students to actively and constructively
re-imagine situations, explore alternative interpretations, and stretch their
perceptions. While some knowledge was in facts and details, being knowledgeable
required students to reach beyond surface information and take a critical and
questioning stance. To complement this focus, the school sanctioned texts read and
the themes developed in Room 500 addressed racial discrimination.
This focus on empowerment was accomplished in several ways, by the
themes he highlighted (e.g., discrimination, Earth Day) by the unique writing
assignments he created (e.g., letter to a politician, radio commercial); by the
opportunities he provided students (e.g., choice in writing topic, genre); and by
185
providing authentic audiences for students’ writing (e.g., other grade level
classrooms and letters mailed to political candidates).
Knowledge gained through social interaction. While knowledge came from
developing the ability to look at different points of view, knowledge was also
socially constructed. The teacher believed that learning was based on “… many
trains of thought…what I bring to the table, what the students bring to the table, what
their parents bring to the table, all of that is what we start with” (IN: T #1, p. 13).
Family served as the foundation and source of ongoing learning for children:
We always talk about the influences and the teachers in your
life…things that your parents have shared with you, things that your
aunts, uncles, grandparents; that’s a big base in children’s life. (IN:
T#13, p. 16)
The pedagogical role determined some of the way that knowledge was
shared. Mr. Harris perceived of his role as a “guide” serving as a “captain…taking
them on a unique journey” (IN: T #13, p. 49). Students valued Mr. Harris’ feedback
and often sought out his guidance in writing revisions, story idea, and developing
questions.
To support the peer-to-peer social learning process, Mr. Harris assigned peer
tutors at the beginning of the year to “help each other, empower each other” (IN: T
#12, p. 2) during class assignments as well as out-of-class for example, by calling
one another for homework support. During writing assignments, he tacitly endorsed
students seeking their peer tutor’s guidance and created opportunities for them to
work together in small groups. In these groupings, as previously discussed, students
186
tapped into their peers’ strengths through experiences such as listening and sharing
their writing with others in peer editing sessions or working with one another in
small reading groups.
Teacher’s Philosophy of Individual Learning
Mr. Harris believed that learners thrived in classroom environments with
particular characteristics. These included 1) opportunities for students to express
themselves in a classroom; 2) experiencing “magic moments”; and 3) along the way,
developing a love of school and learning. However, his philosophy was not in step
with the administrator’s and there was some tension.
Students “free to express themselves.” According to Mr. Harris, children
should enjoy a degree of “comfort” defined as “free to express themselves” (IN: T#1,
p. 61) in the classroom. They should have a learning space where they could think,
talk, and explore. Otherwise, he wondered, “how are you going to get kids to be
good writers and good readers if they can’t talk and express feelings about what’s
personal to them?” (IN:T #1, p. 14). Ideally, there would be opportunities for
students to express themselves through the arts and music as well as reading and
writing activities. On more than one occasion, he discussed opportunities for
students’ expression as having “value” (IN: T#1, p. 43, 56; IN: T#13, p. 14, 20).
Given the findings discussed previously of students’ silence and active resistance
when topics about their Latino culture, discrimination, social class, and immigration
arose, it is somewhat difficult to reconcile the teacher’s ideals with student response.
187
Mr. Harris advocated a curriculum with space for both students and teacher to
negotiate and maneuver. He was frustrated by the school’s schedule to which he
referred to it as the “Unrealistic Fifth-Grade Daily Schedule” (IN: T#1, p. 16). As a
professional, he expected “some freedom” (IN: T#1, p. 53) in his instructional
decision-making. He used the metaphor of a “rubber band” to describe his curricular
flexibility attuned to the different levels and needs of individual students (IN: T#5, p.
1). He prioritized student interest and felt free to stretch the time allotted or to
redirect the course of an instructional activity. He described his decision-making in
the following manner:
Although I might have a curriculum that suggests that I am today only
going to speak or engage the students about a science concept or a
math concept, once the students start sharing you’ve got two choices
there. You can basically say, “Thank you so much, we’re not going
in that direction—or let’s think about that for a second and let’s
examine that.” (IN: T#1, p. 13)
Even though he felt criticized throughout the year by the principal for going
“off on a tangent” (IN: T#1, p. 42) and in the first week of the study was reassigned
to another grade level, he held steadfast to this view. In an end-of-the-year interview,
he insisted:
I’m going to stop and hear [students’] connections. And if that means
that I have to make a choice between, let’s see, a minor hero of the
American Revolution and a child’s intense connection to something
that happened to their grandfather or somebody that was in a war,
well, I’m going with the child. I mean, that’s how I see the big
picture. The big picture is that I have to make this real for these
students. (IN: T#13, p. 15)
188
One morning, after a particularly animated whole class discussion on race
and discrimination, he commented on students’ extended engagement, “There was
student interest, you can’t just throw it away” (FN7, line 61-63).
Having a flexible curriculum enabled him to focus on individual development
in the recognition that students learned at different rates because “as much as
[educators and school reformers would] like to think that every single student who
walks through that door is exactly Student X and Student Y, it’s not that way” (IN: T
#2, p. 14).
“Magic moment” of teaching. A second teaching philosophy of students’
learning was that it was incumbent upon the teacher to follow when the students had
an intellectual “fire burning” (Teacher #1, p. 46). He wanted to “see kids’ brains
firing” (IN:T#1a, line 10) and it was the teacher’s responsibility to identify these
moments of “teacher magic” (HWFN #5, p. 17). These moments were when the
teacher and students were in sync and learning evolved into discovery. He
considered “the great part of teaching…when you’re watching them have those
[magic] moments” (IN: T#1, p. 57). Magic moments also happened for students.
The teacher described these as times when students had personal accomplishments,
such as a piece of writing they felt proud of, and were able to share the moment in
the company of their peers (IN: T#1, p. 6)
Developing a love of school and learning. A third philosophy regarding
students’ learning was that school and learning could be enjoyable. This would result
189
from students having fun and engaging in unique learning experiences. He described
what that meant for students as well as his role in developing the classroom’s tone:
[E]ach classroom has to have that specialness …’cause what’s the
point of saying, “Hey guess what, you know what? There’s 300 other
fifth-grades in Southern California, they’re all doing the same exact
thing, no surprise here. This is going to be the same as what they’re
going to do.” I’m not working at McDonald’s; I didn’t think so. We
might all be making burgers but I’d like to think that the way my
burger is delivered is going to make you want to come back for more
and send your next person in your family back to the [Mr. Harris]
Burger Factory. I’d like to think so. (IN: T#13; p. 49)
The relationship between teacher and students was key. He believed there
should be “trust…[because] we all come in with our masks in the beginning of the
year” (IN: T #13, p. 38). He treated students with respect. For example, in a
vocabulary lesson, he referred to them as “language experts” (FN13, p. 3). He
recalled one student’s contribution commenting, “I remember what a very strong
author, Miss Jessica wrote when she read this [history passage] last week”
(HWFN#21, p. 14). And he wanted to extend the classroom relationship to students’
families. He initiated weekend family field trips to a sports event and a visit to a
cultural center. This year, when student interest was lackluster, he instead organized
an after school walking field trip to a local pizza parlor inviting parents to join them.
A change in context altered the teacher-student dynamics, he explained. At the pizza
parlor, kids could assume an expert’s role and teach him how to play video games;
he would be the learner. Acknowledging that these excursions were not a part of the
institutional curriculum, he rationalized their purpose as simply to let students “…see
the teacher cares about them” (IN: T#12; p. 3).
190
But despite his efforts, students’ capacity to develop a love of school was
being thwarted by a tightening rein of the curriculum and instructional pacing. This
grew out of the “standards breathing down our necks...” (IN: T#1A, p. 1). One
literacy coach concurred with the effects of a high stakes testing environment on
teaching:
I think that’s the curse of having the test hanging over you, because
there’s so much weighing on that…and that’s only one picture, one
snapshot, and that’s unfortunate, but that the way it is. …The [focus
on meeting the state's standardized testing yearly assigned Academic
Performance Index] is putting a different kind of pressure on teachers
and I think that could cause some of the things that make teaching the
wonderful profession that it is—not happen. (IN: Lit Coach, G, p. 9)
Tension Between Teacher and Principal
Because of his beliefs, values, and philosophy about how children learn, Mr.
Harris was at odds with the principal. This conflict stemmed from what he perceived
as their differing views of learning, appropriateness of fun in the classroom, and his
veering from the grade-level planned curriculum. The principal had shared her
prescription of effective teaching:
You have to focus on your goal, have it be common, have it be
assessed, know where your children are and know what you’re going
to do to help those who are (inaudible)... And get to your goals
through directed instruction. (IN: Principal, p.11)
Mr. Harris’ teaching style of implementing his own unique instructional lessons that
veered from the fifth-grade instructional plan was not in step with these
administrative curricular goals.
191
These differences created tension between the two. He summed up the
situation succinctly noting their split perspectives. I “always let [students] know I’m
a human being. My principal doesn’t always think that’s in the curriculum” (IN:
T#1A: p. 1). In the same way that he valued the distinctiveness of each student, he
cherished educators having a degree of individuality, freedom, and creativity.
Disagreement over curricular issues arose. The principal criticized him for
engaging in activities like the writing of radio recycling commercials by asking him,
“You think your class is so special.” His retort was, “I’d like to think my class is not
the same as everyone else’s class” (IN: T#13, p. 41). He relished having a unique
classroom. When he was informed during the second week of the study that he was
being reassigned to a different grade level, he confided that he felt as if “the wind
had been knocked out of his sails” (R4, line 4). Yet, students were not aware of this
tension between the two or of his reassignment in the coming year.
Perspectives of Children’s Cultural Knowledge
Mr. Harris’ viewed students as “little pieces of history” (IN: T #13, p. 19).
They entered the classroom with a store of knowledge gained from multiple social
worlds including their 1) Latino culture, 2) their families, 3) the communities they’ve
grown up in, 4) immersion in popular culture and 5) religion. Mr. Harris recognized
that children drew upon these multiple resources in their learning and he sought to
integrate children’s cultural knowledge into their learning experiences and not have
it “be thrown away when they walk into the classroom” (IN: T#13; p. 29).
192
Latino culture. Because of the high number of Latino/a students, he chose to
launch the school year with Latino History Month. This, he reasoned, would provide
the foundation for other multiculturally themed monthly lessons. Over the years, he
had found a homework poem-writing assignment about César Chávez useful in
generating family discussion. He describe how invariably students returned to school
saying, “Oh, I talked to my uncle,” or “I talked to my grandma and she says that she
knew somebody who worked in the same fields...” He was confident the connections
to their heritage gathered through family interviews were “like an awakening for
them” (IN: T #1, p. 10).
The teacher believed Newbury School’s Latino/a students had a “lot of
pride…A lot of these students take family trips back to their roots. A lot of them go
down to Mexico [and further Latin American countries] at Christmas time and
during the holidays and in summer…Each one of those [countries] has a remarkable
history…art and culture” that teachers should “honor” (IN: T #13, p. 29). While not
all Room 500 students were of Latino heritage, he asserted Spanish language was
one of the “sounds of Los Angeles” (IN: T #2, p. 3) and all students would benefit
from hearing the language incorporated into the class. Yet, as presented previously in
the findings, trying to provide connections for Room 500 students with their Latino/a
culture wasn’t always a sure thing.
Family social context. In Mr. Harris’ view, children drew upon their familial
experiences with “…influences and …things that your parents have shared with you,
things that your aunts, uncles, grandparents. That’s a big base in children’s life” (IN:
193
T #13, p. 6). The students’ social worlds extended beyond their family into their
interactions in their neighborhood as well. He noted, “[Students] learn from what’s
acceptable in their homes, what’s acceptable in their classroom, what’s acceptable in
their community. All those things….” (IN: T #13, p. 19).
Popular culture. Students’ intense interest in popular culture resulted from its
saturation in their everyday lives. While the previous findings section regarding
students’ participation described more fully how students’ integrated popular culture
in their classroom, here we have the teacher’s perspective on its significance:
[A]s much as…teachers and educators…like to think only the things
in our classroom are what stands in their brains…The reality is
popular culture is so strong and they’re getting a taste of that in so
many different directions. (IN: T#13, p. 32)
His propensity to use popular culture as academic touchstones was substantiated by
its utility in conveying concepts and information quickly to students.
But drawing upon movies, songs, and videos was not always viewed
positively by the administration. Here the teacher and the principal also differed:
This whole week [in our class], we’ve had a very interesting
connection between the American Revolution and the [currently
released] film National Treasure. Now some other people have said...
“Why are you talking to your students about some movie that’s in the
theaters” and da, da, da. Well, the reality is that that particular film
has a lot to do with American History. And I really particularly liked
when I heard one of my students say, “Oh, Mr. Harris, in the
beginning of the film it starts off talking about Matthew Henson
[whose biography students were reading] and I was the only person in
my family who knew who Matthew Henson was.” Hey, you know
what? There’s some value in there. (IN: T #1, p. 24)
194
Religion. A powerful resource for some students was religion. Classroom
discussions sometimes opened up to religious connections: a student’s personal
journal entry tied into out-of-school experiences and the importance of religious texts
and lessons to her life; the decisions made by the new Pope became a current event.
Mr. Harris did not rebuff these students’ connections, but he always brought the
classroom conversation back on content. He described how he respected student
input without going off on tangents:
There’s been a few times when we’ve gotten into some situations
where we were talking about heroes and different things like that and
students start referring to the Bible and things like that. Now, I can’t
take away those experiences from them. I can’t say, “Hey, those
experiences are not valid to be talking about in class.” However,
what I can do is I can kind of rein it in and bring it back. “We were
talking about George Washington and you mentioned Jesus Christ.
Okay. You know what, I see that that’s very important to you but
let’s go back to the Revolution and let’s talk about some of the
contributions Mr. Washington and his army [made]...” (IN: T #1, p.
23)
He recognized that students had many layers in their life and religion was just
one of those layers. While as a public school employee, he could not build on this
specific knowledge; he did not belittle it either.
Mr. Harris perceived children as having minds that were interested and
interesting. They were active and engaged individuals and not empty boxes or
vessels waiting to be filled with information. They brought their novel ideas into the
classroom. They were alive with rich experiences drawn upon multiple social
contexts and multiple communities. He was frustrated by not being able to pursue
195
particularly pedagogic practices and discouraged with his perception that he couldn’t
“use ‘fun’ and ‘school’ in the same sentence” (IN: T#10, p. 1).
The teacher contested the norms and practices in the field of the school. He
resisted the notion that his classroom had to stick to the curriculum mapping. He
wanted to integrate his interests in art and integrate themed lessons (e.g., the
recycling unit incorporated science, writing, and art). He was acutely aware of state
grade-level standards but resisted the notion that every child was the same as the
next. Eventually he conceded to stay “inside the box” (TI, #d, line 8). In a final
interview, Mr. Harris reflected on the past year as tumultuous when interacting with
the school and district administration but rewarding in interactions with students:
[E]ven though this was probably my most difficult year in teaching
because of a lot of the administrative situation…the second I walked
into that classroom I just couldn’t help but feeling those feelings of,
“Wow. What are we going to do today? What are we going to do to
get this class excited and challenged and all of that?” (IN: T#13, p.
44)
Children’s View of the Teacher
At one unexpected moment during a small group interview, children
spontaneously shared their admiration for their teacher. Kristen credited him for the
academic progress of two of the lowest performing students (R33; IN2). Oscar
described him as “the best teacher…He’s really funny…He makes learning
interesting” (FS#3, lines 249-251). Victor described his seamless teaching style
using an inimitable metaphor of “a ‘smoothie” describing how Mr. Harris combines
“comedy, learning, teaching, and love for kids. They just blend into one smoothie
196
and that’s how he teaches” (FS#3, lines 255-258). Students recognized how the
teacher made instruction interesting, demonstrated care for children, and supported
the more academically struggling and socially vulnerable students in the classroom.
At the end of the year, when students excitedly shared their writing portfolios with
one another, the teacher reflected aloud about the dynamic between his teaching and
students’ learning:
There’s a few of you that I try not to smile too much to show you I’m
proud of you. I’d like to think its something I do, but I think it’s all
about you. (HWFN #33, p. 5)
In summary to the research sub-question regarding the teacher’s beliefs there
were three aspects. First, his epistemological stance viewed multiple forms and
sources of knowledge. Knowledge was also constructed through social interaction.
Secondly, his philosophy prioritized the maintenance of a flexible instructional
environment. Third, he acknowledged children’s cultural resources emanating from
their varied social worlds including: Latino culture, family, religion, popular culture,
and religion. While the tension between the teacher and principal was not fully
resolved, the teacher held steadfast to his ideals on how children learn best.
In Chapter 5, I will summarize the findings from Chapter 4. The chapter will
also include implications for theory, research, and practice.
197
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS, AND CONCLUSION
The overarching purpose of this study was to explore the nature of how
middle-class Latino/a fifth-grade English-speaking students incorporated their lived
experiences, background knowledge, and cultural knowledge into their classroom’s
reading and writing activities. In the preceding chapter, I detailed the findings for the
main research question and the four sub-research questions. In this final chapter, I
will discuss the major findings of the study for each question, and relate that
discussion back to the extant theoretical and research literature in the field. Given
the findings of this study, there was some agreement and some differences from the
current research, and these differences pose further questions regarding the
educational experiences of children from diverse backgrounds. Thus, each discussion
section includes implications for further theory, research, and practice.
This discussion organizes the study’s key findings into the following four
major sections:
The Nature of Students’ Cultural Capital
The Characteristics and Structures of Literacy Activities
Students’ Participation in Room 500
The Classroom Community as Shaped by Teacher Beliefs
In the first major section, The Nature of Students’ Cultural Capital, I will
discuss the study’s findings as they relate to the main research question. This section
198
addresses the mismatch between the teacher’s instructional overtures and the middle-
class intergenerational immigrant students’ resistance to inclusion of their Latino/a
cultural background and life experiences in their classroom’s literacy-related
discussions. Students’ integration in contemporary American mainstream and their
perceptions of discrimination, a frequent classroom topic, are also explored. In this
section, theoretical views of immigration, specifically using conceptualizations of the
American Creed, contemporary conceptions of culture, and Critical Race Theory,
were used to interpret these findings. Because the first section presents an analysis of
the main research question’s key findings, it comprises a greater proportion of this
discussion chapter. In the second, third, and fourth major sections, I will discuss the
remaining three research sub-questions.
The second major section, Characteristics and Structures of Literacy
Activities, discusses the socially oriented reading and writing practices in Room 500.
This second discussion section reviews the micro interactions of the classroom in the
context of a national educational turn towards academic accountability via
standardized assessment.
The third major section, Room 500 Students’ Participation, discusses
students’ academic involvement in their classroom. Mainstream popular culture is
presented as a form of students’ embodied capital having currency within their
classroom to achieve social, academic, and personal goals. It also reflects the fluid
notion of culture as members take on newer social practices.
199
The fourth major section, Classroom Community Shaped by Teacher Beliefs,
provides insight into the teacher’s epistemology, philosophy, and perspectives on
students’ learning. An understanding of the teacher’s instructional focus to include
students’ textured selves in his classroom and to promote social justice issues
sharpens the mismatch between his intentions and students’ responses.
The purpose of these three sub-questions was to provide multi-faceted
perspectives of the school and classroom context. As a result, these discussion
sections explore the broader social, political, and historical context, and the
institutional forces shaping the classroom instruction in Room 500. These sections
do not delve into issues of ethnicity and culture relative to the degree that the first
discussion section does.
The Nature of Students’ Cultural Capital
In this first major section, I will answer this study’s main research question,
What is the nature of middle-class Latino/a students’ cultural capital in their fifth-
grade classroom’s reading and writing experiences? and the related sub-research
question (c), How are upwardly aspiring students’ different forms of cultural capital
(e.g., embodied, objectified, and institutional) valued in this classroom? As
previously discussed, students’ integration in contemporary society and their
perceptions of discrimination required multiple perspectives to interpret the
phenomenon (cf. Labbo & Reinking, 1999). Therefore, in concert with the
sociocultural and cultural capital theoretical frames and contemporary conceptions of
200
culture as fluid, permeable, and dynamic (Merry, 2006), I incorporate the
complementary theoretical perspectives of the American Creed (Shain, 1999) and
Critical Race Theory (Ladson-Billings & Tate, 1995) to interpret this study’s
findings. The three major findings from the main research question about the nature
of upwardly aspiring Latino/a students’ cultural capital during reading and writing
activities include: 1) a mismatch between the teacher’s instructional overture and
students’ inclusion of their Latino/a cultural background; 2) students’ selective
engagement of aspects of their Latino/a background; and 3) students’ tendency to
exclude particular life experiences from the classroom domain. Each key finding will
be linked to this study’s theoretical frameworks.
Mismatch Between Instruction and Student Inclusion of Latino/a Cultural Capital
Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital assumes an individual strategically uses
their embodied, objectified, and institutional capital to gain status in any field (1986).
Another claim is that the gatekeepers for a given field decide whose and which type
of capital counts (Kingston, 2001). According to this theory, this classroom’s
environment with the teacher’s avidity (as gatekeeper) for promoting students’
Latino/a heritage seemed an ideal context for students to purposively draw upon their
Latino/a culture (embodied capital) in jockeying for high status positioning. Yet,
there was a mismatch in students’ disinclination to include their embodied capital.
As a result, the complementary theoretical perspectives of the American Creed,
Critical Race Theory, and contemporary conceptions of culture provide
201
understandings of this ethnic diaspora group’s variable engagements with
accommodation, negotiated cultural identity, and agency.
The six explanatory aspects underlying the mismatch between the teacher’s
instructional intent and student response were: 1) students’ adoption of the American
Creed; 2) the classroom’s static portrayal of Latino/a culture; 3) homogeneity in
school and neighborhood contexts; 4) families’ upward socioeconomic aspirations;
5) gravitation towards English language; and 6) students’ reticence to engage in
political and social issues.
Adoption of the American Creed. In this study, cultural capital was defined as
students’ “background knowledge, experiences, and language” (Freire & Macedo,
1989, p. 148). Cultural capital, thus expansively defined, includes students’ full
range of experiences. One aspect of their experience was their status as multi-
generational descendents of the Mexican diaspora adapting to American society.
Other facets included active participation in multiple micro-cultural communities
that was continually shaping their identity (Erickson, 2004). Students’ identities were
not fixed but influenced by modernity and their attempts to accommodate within
U.S. culture. They preferred speaking English; participated in community Little
League sports; and knowledgeably tuned into popular culture media “texts”
including books, movies, video games, and TV shows. This finding is consistent
with Shain’s assertion that ethnic diasporas are interested in transforming their
outsider status and becoming a part of the American lifestyle (1999). Room 500
202
students’ mainstream knowledge and community participation served the social
goals of peer affiliation and societal inclusion.
Static, historic, and uni-dimensional portrayals of Latino/a culture. A second
explanatory aspect of students’ resistance to inclusion of a Latino/a heritage was a
static, historic portrayal of Latino/a culture in their classroom pedagogy.
Multicultural texts portrayed a uni-dimensional view of the Mexican
diaspora. Similar to all immigrant groups in today’s globalized world (Suárez-
Orozco, 2001), the Latino/a students in Room 500 had a range of backgrounds and
experiences that defied a simplified “‘one-size-fits-all’ categorization” (Rumbaut,
2004, p. 1169). Transcrossing fields of anthropology and education, scholars are
increasingly conceptualizing culture as permeable and open; groups are not fixed
(Abu-Lughod, 1991; Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003; Merry, 2006). Room 500 students
embodied a dynamically evolving modern individual that contrasted with the
classroom’s rather static images. These repeated representations of one facet of the
ethnic diaspora’s history froze cultural images. They did not capture the ethnic
diaspora’s subsequent generational economic gains, social mobility, educational
attainment, varied employment, varying ties to other cultures and countries,
linguistic proficiencies (cf. Orellana, 2003), and interest in participating in American
culture (cf. Shain, 1999).
Simply presenting multicultural texts in the curriculum did not automatically
ensure, or even initiate, a cultural identification from the students. This finding
resonates with other literacy explorations into the use of multicultural texts (e.g.,
203
Brooks, 2006; Sipe and Maguire, 2006; Smolkin & Suina, 1997). For example, in
exploring students’ response to culturally responsive literature, Brooks (2006) notes,
regardless of students’ shared racial or ethnic composition, “cultural complexity
must be acknowledged from the beginning” (p. 41). Such complexity, specifically
contemporary reflections of Room 500 students were absent in both the classroom
texts and multicultural pedagogy. The classroom’s curriculum did not adequately
reflect their changing individuality which constituted their embodied cultural capital
(Bourdieu, 1986). As Olneck contends, “schools rarely recognize the transnational
aspects of their immigrant group identities and lives” (2004, p. 383).
This mismatch between students’ experience as middle-class, modern
participants in society and the static portrayals of Mexican Americans as migrant
laborers underscores a need for refining perceptions of Latinos/as in society and
among educators. The political analyst Gregory Rodriguez notes the irony of
Mexican-Americans constituting the majority population in a region and their
consistent labeling by policymakers as a “minority group” (2003). In education,
multicultural instructional approaches can inadvertently reinforce an undesired
outsider position. This can be problematic for ethnic diasporas who readily embrace
American values and seek integration (Shain, 1999). While sociocultural theory
forefronts the political, social, and historical aspects of students’ lives (Cole, 1996),
instruction addressing children’s dynamic nature is difficult when classroom
instructional pacing is regimented, curriculum is prescribed, and focus is on
204
standardized test scores. Rumbaut has noted the importance of local context (2005)
yet a standardized education does not address the idiosyncratic nature of locality.
Homogeneity of context. A third explanatory aspect of student disinclination
to draw upon their Latino/a background was the relative ethnic homogeneity of the
context. Room 500 students lived, attended school, and socialized in a like-ethnic,
aspiring, middle-class community. Students held a majority status in their school and
community contexts and differentiating themselves from other racial and ethnic
groups have seemed inconsequential.
Pursuit of upward mobility. A fourth explanation for students’ resistance was
the strong pull of upward mobility for themselves and their family. Newbury School
families were attaining middle-class status signified by material attainment, career
orientation, and English-language acquisition. Home ownership in the more stable
Newbury School neighborhood contrasted with other Southern California
communities of recent-entry immigrants. Shain asserts “people of Mexican origin
have emerged as an important community with distinctive cultural characteristics
and growing economic and political power” (1999, p. 194). While this entry by
Mexican-Americans into middle class strata has been noted by scholars and
demographers (Rodriguez, 1996; Shain, 1999), it remains under-explored because of
little research interest and funding (Rodriguez, personal communication, April
2007).
Newbury School families perceived schooling as a gateway to future societal
success. They were acquiring English-speaking skills that gave them the cultural
205
capital to effectively navigate the school system. This finding was consistent with
extant research that immigrants regard education as instrumental to economic
security (Perez & de la Rosa Salazar, 1997) and to overcome the effects of
discrimination (Olneck, 2004). Parents of focal students articulated their long-range
college and university goals for their children. Seemingly to have internalized their
parents’ aspirations, their children iterated similar ambitions. This finding echoes
observations by researchers López and Stanton-Salazar (2001) of second-generation
students of Mexican origin who linked educational aspirations with socioeconomic
achievement.
Bourdieu’s theory of cultural capital (1986) is based on an entrenched social
hierarchy entered by birth into elite families or accumulated through investment of
“time, energy, and money” (Kingston, 2001).Yet, as these families of the students in
Room 500 have indicated, the educational credentials, considered by Bourdieu to be
institutional cultural capital, can be acquired. Cultural capital, therefore, is more fluid
in its acquisition than it has been conceptualized by Bourdieu.
Gravitating towards English language. A fifth explanatory aspect to the
mismatch between the teacher’s efforts to tap into students’ Spanish speaking ability
and student resistance was the strong pull of the English language. Room 500
children gravitated toward the presumed power inherent in English and the
acceleration it afforded toward mainstream inclusion. This is consistent with
Kymlicka’s (1996) argument that in many cases, immigrants voluntarily choose to
leave behind their homeland and in the process, elect to integrate into the host
206
country adopting its language and customs (cited in Shain, 1999). This view is also
aligned with Rumbaut’s assertion that language cements membership because it “lies
at the core of national identities” (2004, p. 1192). (For alternative views see Suárez-
Orozco, 2000.)
Any group’s interests and community practices are shaped by the
socioeconomic, historical, and political contexts (Merry, 2006; Shain, 1999) in
which they have emerged. In the state of California, the political primacy given to
the English language has overshadowed bilingual skills and triggered a “backlash
pedagogy” into classrooms (Gutierrez et al., 2002). It was not surprising that in this
charged environment families were increasingly opting for English language
instruction. Olneck has noted that bilingual programs that are often taught outside—
rather than integrated in the regular school program—are perceived by parents to
highlight differences and perpetuate marginalization (2004). The “persistent negative
stereotypes” (López & Stanton-Salazar, 2001, p. 59) target various immigrant groups
including the Mexican ethnic diaspora. A more explanatory aspect underlying
families’ linguistic pursuits is Shain’s assertion of the American Creed in which
ethnic diaspora groups seek to be part of the mainstream (1999).
Yet there were generational tensions regarding the erosion of Spanish
language competency. Parents of focal students expressed the desire for their
child/ren to be bilingual and were disappointed as their children’s English-speaking
skills expanded, while their Spanish-speaking abilities receded at school and among
peer interactions. This finding is consistent with the anthropologist’s Merry’s (2006)
207
contention that locality and temporal influences contribute to group change. Within
the porous nature of culture it is expected that there will be contradictions and
clashes as group members adopt new practices. This perspective is consistent with
educational researcher Carol Lee’s observation that “belief systems and practices
associated with cultural groups are always under negotiation with new generations
and new material as well as with social conditions” (2003, p. 3). This linguistic
adaptation of Room 500 students and their families resonates with López and
Stanton-Salazar’s (2001) observations of intergenerational immigrant adolescents
whose “Mexican identity wanes among the second generation.” They further
contend “it is logical to expect it to be even weaker among the third” (p. 781).
While many of Room 500 students acknowledged their parents’ bilingual
goals, they were motivated nonetheless to speak English for a variety of reasons
including the stigma associated with speaking Spanish among their school peers.
Olneck has noted the potency of peer circles to “beckon them away from the worlds
of their families and communities” (2004, p. 389). (For similar findings with Chinese
immigrant adolescent students see McKay & Wong, 1996.) This finding disrupts
popular folk beliefs that members and children of the Mexican ethnic diaspora
persist in maintaining their language at a cost to the nation’s social unity (cf. Jensen,
2001). As multigenerational immigrant children enter into a political context in
which their language is consistently devalued, Room 500 students were linguistically
negotiating among, what Erickson (2004) has noted, the various everyday micro-
cultural communities of family, peers, and schools.
208
Erickson (2004) critiques Bourdieu’s notion of cultural capital as a static
view of culture that overlooks the variability and constant evolution of culture.
Viewing culture as vibrant and continually negotiated by cultural groups as they take
on new and different ways of acting is a perspective more likely to be found in
contemporary social science disciplines (cf. Merry, 2006; Rogoff, 2003).
Disinterest in politicized discourses. The sixth explanatory aspect of
students’ reticence in including their cultural background, despite the teacher’s
interest, as gatekeeper, to include their life experiences, was perhaps a lack of
interest in politicized discussions. This was not an unusual finding as some studies
steeped in Critical Race Theory (CRT) have similarly found. CRT scholars Dauite
and Jones noted that even with a classroom curriculum specifically addressing racial
and ethnic conflict, some “ethnic minority students” (2003, p. 196) weren’t
motivated to engage in the discussions. Similarly in Room 500 while the classroom
teacher initiated discussions of social justice issues, students exercised their agency
aborting talk through silence, choosing their participatory level, or redirecting
conversation to less worrisome topics such as American popular culture. Perhaps like
the students in Möller and Allen’s study (2000) who created “safer places” (p. 175)
away from present-day worries, Room 500 students may have found a parallel
conversational refuge in relatively benign popular culture topics. (This pattern of
students’ referencing popular culture is presented more fully in the upcoming
discussion on the research sub-question regarding students’ participation.)
209
Room 500 students’ lack of engagement in these discussions may have been
their reluctance to conceive of their neighborhood as impoverished or the prospect
that being a Latino/a could adversely affect their mainstream inclusion. Room 500
students’ disinclination to connect discrimination and poverty issues arising from
their classroom texts to their contemporary experience may have been shadowed by
a negative societal sentiment towards Mexican immigration. Halcón (2001) warns of
the underlying effects by which the “negative rhetoric…filters down from the mass
media and the larger sociopolitical context to Mexicano/Latino homes, to their
parents and their children who embrace it, subconsciously and uncritically without
understanding it” (2001, p. 73). Room 500 students may have been using “engaged
resistance,” a student response to multicultural texts Möller and Allen (2000, p. 172)
found in their study (cf. Sipe & McGuire, 2006). This notion of engaged resistance
describes students’ deep involvement in a text but nonetheless disconnecting from it
due to their mounting sense of “helplessness” in confronting themes and experiences
too close to their own reality (cf. Robertson, 1997).
On a more pragmatic basis, several students in Room 500 spoke of enjoying
their unfettered youth. Perhaps students simply viewed themselves more integrated
in American mainstream, as Shain (1999) asserts, and found discussions of
differences moot. This finding contrasts with Erickson’s contention that classroom
pedagogy needs to address social issues. He cautions, “When such issues as racism,
class privilege, and sexism are left silent in the classroom, the implicit message for
students of color appears to be that the teacher and the school do not acknowledge
210
that experiences of oppression exists” (2004, p. 49). This finding gives rise to the
instructional question of how social issues rooted in students’ lives can best strike a
balance between imposition and pedagogic integration.
In summary, the first finding of the nature of children’s cultural capital was
of the mismatch between the teacher’s instructional overture and students
disinclination to include their Latino/a cultural capital. Defining cultural capital as
students’ “background knowledge, experiences, and language” (Freire & Macedo,
1989, p. 148) expansively encompassed the breadth and depth of their experiences.
Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital applied to a classroom assumes the teacher is
the primary determinate of what counts as cultural capital. However, Room 500
students’ response did not automatically align with the teacher’s efforts. As a result,
Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital as an explanatory theory for the main
research’s question findings was complemented by incorporating views of culture as
open and dynamic, American Creed to frame these middle-class students’ and their
families’ aspirations in embracing American beliefs and values, and findings from
studies using Critical Race Theory to explain Room 500 students’ lack of
engagement in social justice issues. In the next section, I will discuss the second
finding, which relates to students’ integration of their background knowledge.
Students Selectively Included Their Background Experiences
In this second subsection, I discuss the second key finding of the main
research question on the nature of students’ cultural capital, which was that students
exercised their agency at particular moments and specifically when they claimed
211
their Latino/a heritage. This finding draws attention to contemporary perceptions of
an individual’s culture as fluid and changing (Lee, 2007; Merry, 2006; Rumbaut,
1995). This finding is consistent with Olneck’s observation that “ethnic identity
expression may vary situationally” (2004, p. 39).
When students linguistically glided between English and Spanish languages
during collaboration, they positioned themselves as bilingual. In this instance,
Bourdieu’s (1986) notion of a strategic use of embodied cultural capital seemed to
apply. However, while students chose to use Spanish in informal classroom
interaction, they rarely used it for official school purposes. Students’ practices
superseded the teacher’s declaration of what counted as cultural capital in the
classroom. Sociocultural theory and the concept of the American Creed provided
more relevant theoretical understandings to this finding.
Sociocultural theory views language as an integral cultural tool mediating
activity (Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991, 1998). At times, Room 500
students’ language use was consistent with extant literacy studies noting children’s
use of their dual linguistic resources in fostering peer affiliations and alliances (e.g.,
Gutiérrez et al., 2001). From the complementary perspective of how perceptions
influence social practice, American Creed offers an additional framework. Shain has
noted that an ethnic diasporic group may experience conflicting tensions between the
newly adopted country and their homeland (1999). Specifically, Shain contends that
Mexican Americans often feel the challenges of a split allegiance that “compromises
their identity in the eyes of the other” (1999, p. 179). In Room 500, this can be
212
explained in a number of ways: Perhaps children feared that displaying affection for
Mexico by using Spanish or talking about their family visits would have made them
appear less American in front of their peers. Perhaps students had internalized the
societal, negative perception of immigrants (cf. Halcón, 2001) and negative
sentiment towards Mexico, and within the classroom’s public forum, the students
chose to disassociate themselves from these negative perceptions.
Context shaped the nature of student conversation. The caliber of
conversation in small groups compared with Room 500’s whole class discussions
echoes Dauite and Jones’ (2003) observations about the instrumental role of social
contexts in shaping student discourse. Often in the forum of whole class discussions,
Room 500 children were silent or verbally distanced themselves from ties to Mexico;
it was in the social space of small group or individual conversations with the
researcher that students’ connections to Mexico took on a more gentle tenor. In these
moments, students nostalgically described their travels, the landscape, border-
crossings, and warm interactions with extended family members living in Mexico.
This finding resonates with Shain’s observation that Mexican Americans struggle
between a disillusionment in their homeland yet still seek the “emotional and cultural
solace of Mexico” (1999, p. 175). It also provided glimpses into the transnational
nature of culture (Merry, 2006) experienced by these students. This finding also
emphasizes the need for schools’ and teachers’ awareness of students’ contemporary
integrated identities and caution in “assuming a priori what defines entities as social
groups” (Orellana & Bowman, 2003, p. 30).
213
Keeping Personal Discriminatory Experiences Outside the Classroom Domain
In this subsection, I discuss the third finding to the main research question
regarding the students’ use of their cultural capital, which consisted of students
minimally sharing their personal discriminatory experiences.
In interpreting these findings, the theoretical perspectives of the American
Creed and Critical Race Theory (CRT) were instrumental. First, conceptualizations
of the American Creed assert that ethnic diasporas adopt American values of equity
and fairness (Shain, 1999). Secondly, literacy research using a CRT framework
provided parallel insights of elementary students’ complex responses to discussions
of ethnic discrimination. There were four aspects to this finding: 1) students
perceived discrimination as historical; 2) students sought to avoid being identified
with an outsider status; 3) students promulgated American values of equity; and 4)
students’ developing awareness of social conflict was shaped by popular culture.
Students perceived discrimination as historical. The first aspect of this
finding was that Room 500 students perceived discrimination as either a historical
event culminating during the 1960s civil rights efforts or as an experience that only
happened to others. In the classroom setting, they seemed to have determined that
discrimination had little bearing on their current lives. This finding is similar to
observations by other literacy researchers. For example, Rogers and Mosley (2006)
noted how elementary students believed that racism had been eradicated. In another
study, Möller and Allen concluded that students considered “things were safer [now]
than before Martin Luther King, Jr.” (2000, p. 165). These studies indicate the
214
discomfort children encounter when considering ethnic and racial discrimination in
contemporary society. Perhaps it was a similar discomfort that Room 500 students
felt as well.
The preponderance of historical accounts of discrimination in school texts is
problematic in creating misleading perceptions that discrimination no longer exists
(Ladson-Billings, 2004). Such was the case in Room 500 where the basal reader
selections and literature were unquestionably rich texts and provided positive
cultural portrayals of specific ethnic, racial, and gender groups. According to CRT’s
tenets, such counternarratives are crucial in educational contexts (Ladson-Billings,
2000). However, it was problematic that the Newbury School’s sanctioned texts were
typically historical—not contemporary—stories. Social struggles and racial conflicts
appeared to have been resolved. Inadvertently such positive texts helped shape a
perception that racism and discrimination were archival events.
The teacher attempted to problematize the language of school texts that
omitted the “power or privilege [of] the dominant class” (McLaren, 1994 cited in
Ladson-Billings, 2004, p. 53). His instructional discourse was aligned with CRT’s
critiques of the neutrality of classroom texts and how the “muting or erasing of …
voices is done subtly, yet effectively” (Ladson-Billings, 2004, p. 59). However,
Room 500 students generally appeared nonplussed by the teacher’s efforts. In the
ethnic homogeneity of their neighborhood, they did not express knowledge of, or
imagine the possibility of, discriminatory encounters.
215
Avoiding status as an outsider. A second aspect of this finding was that
students distanced their contemporary modern lives from discriminatory experiences
recounted in the classroom texts. Thus, for them, discrimination was merely an
academic exercise. Although they were adept in making textual connections to self
and other texts (a reading comprehension strategy identified by Keene and
Zimmermann [1997]), when it came to talking about the marginalization of ethnic,
racial, or gender groups, Room 500 students did not draw personal or parallel
connections during whole class discussions. Perhaps it was because differences, as
Joppke (1999 in Shain, 1999) notes, translate to exclusion. Perhaps any self-
identification as a member of an “outsider” group would erode their desires to be
absorbed into the American mainstream (Shain, 1999). These alternative
explanations resonate with López and Stanton-Salazar’s (2001) study with second-
generation Mexican American adolescents who, although able to acknowledge
discrimination in their environment, elected to “downplay their personal
vulnerability to discriminatory and institutional forces” (p. 75-76). This finding
brings attention to the integrated identity Room 500 students had as Americans, a
status Shain contends ethnic diaspora groups seek (1999).
Promulgating American values. A third aspect of students minimally sharing
their personal discriminatory experiences was their adoption of American values.
Pluralistic views, espoused through multicultural perspectives, portray an
American society eager to accept the cultural, intellectual, and artistic contributions
from varied groups (Banks, 2004). Such an optimistic rhetoric of American values
216
may have made it difficult for Room 500 students to conceive of ongoing
discriminatory practices in this country. Their expectation of societal cohesiveness
may have derived from internalization of these values. Shain has noted it is through
such unwavering convictions in American beliefs and values, that ethnic diaspora
groups serve a vital role as a “moral compass” (1999, p. 199) in nurturing, and
promoting the American value of justice.
Equity and fair play are commonly espoused American social values. In
studying elementary students’ responses to texts dealing with racial and ethic
discrimination, CRT scholars Dauite and Jones (2003) assert that empathy is a
typical American value steeped in expectations of fairness. During Room 500’s
language arts and American History reading, students empathized with the
historically negative treatment of African Americans and injustice towards Native
Americans. It was not surprising that Room 500 students inculcated in the American
creed of equity and justice would be empathetic to the unwarranted plights of others.
However, unlike students in Möller and Allen’s (2000) literature circle group, Room
500 students were not similarly inclined to bring forward a “discussion of racial
discomfort into the present” (p. 161).
The classroom context shaped student discourse. One explanatory reason for
students’ reluctance to share personal discriminatory experiences was perhaps
shaped by the highly public nature of the classroom. In a whole class forum, students
would have had to reveal exclusionary experiences that had the potential to be more
personally humiliating than educationally illuminating. Another reason may be the
217
difficulty in discussing troubling topics. Robertson (1997) notes that emotionally
laden themes in school texts may be difficult for some children to confront and
process. López and Stanton-Salazar (2001) remind educators that talking about
discrimination and prejudice is easier for adults than children. Greene and Abt-
Perkins (2003) make the point that adults have difficulty trying to address their own
feelings on racial and gender issues. This existing research along with this study’s
finding heightens the need for pedagogic practices to sensitively address issues of
social conflict.
Developing notions of discrimination shaped by popular culture and personal
experiences. The fourth and final aspect of this finding to the main research question
was that while Room 500 students distanced themselves from whole class discussion
about these topics, it became clear during individual conversations that students’
lives were not immune from exposure to ethnic, racial, and gender discrimination.
Racial issues and themes of discrimination are commonly found in the media “texts,”
that is, movies and TV shows (Cortes, 2004; Ladson-Billings, 2004), and Room 500
students gleaned knowledge about racial and ethnic discrimination from popular
culture as well as their personal life experiences. These repeated exposures and
personal experiences shape children’s notions of how the social world operates
(Dyson, 2003). This finding draws attention to the need for educators to be aware of
students’ multiple and out-of-school knowledge sources and their respective
messages.
218
When describing personal experiences with racial discrimination, students
cast themselves in the role of “witness” and not as personally experiencing conflicts.
Maintaining a “witness” role kept discrimination at a safe distance (cf. Lopez &
Stanton-Salazar, 2001). They recounted episodes and instances of discrimination
depicted in popular television shows and movies aimed at young audiences;
experienced by family members; and as it occurred in their former neighborhoods.
Perhaps the topic of discrimination was kept at bay to avoid addressing anxieties and
worries about what it means to be a person of color in this country today.
Overall, these findings regarding ethnic and racial discrimination, particularly
the exposure and experiences that Room 500 students encountered through popular
culture and the candor of these students, resonate with Critical Race Theory’s
assertion that race “continues to be salient in U.S. society” (Ladson-Billings & Tate,
1995, p. 195). As such, there are clear implications for addressing it in the school
curriculum.
In conclusion, this discussion section of the main research question regarding
students’ use of their cultural capital and the sub-research question of how cultural
capital was valued in the classroom is summarized and includes implications for
theory, research, and practice.
219
Summary and Implications of
the Nature of Students’ Cultural Capital
In this section, I will review the three key findings of the main research
question regarding the nature of students’ cultural capital and the sub-research
question of how cultural capital was valued in the classroom and present the
theoretical, research, and practice implications.
Students deflected the inclusion of their cultural capital, that is, their “life
experience, history, and language” (Freire & Macedo, 1987, p. 148), when it came to
uni-dimensional and traditional depictions of their Latino/a culture, Spanish
language use, and sharing personal experiences with discrimination and immigration.
Shain’s assertions regarding the expectations of ethnic diasporas (1999) were
consistent with this study’s findings that students perceived themselves as integrated
individuals in American society. Consistent with contemporary conceptions of
culture as permeable and evolving, students were weaving in views and beliefs
stemming from their modern world interests and concerns and in their social
adaptation process. Students also were selective about including their experiences
and background. They kept personal experiences with discrimination outside the
classroom domain. Yet they were exposed to popular media formations of social
conflict resolution. Implications for theory, research, and practice are listed below.
220
Implications for Theory
The anthropologist Merry contends the manner in which culture is perceived
guides the creation of institutional policy and reforms (2006). Therefore, the first
implication for theory is focused on the application of culture to education.
First, the term culture is often applied to children from diverse backgrounds
and can inadvertently categorize them in negative ways. The concept of culture,
therefore, needs to move away from a fixed, essentialized view to one that is
dynamic, fluid, and evolving. Educational theories about the learning experiences of
children would benefit from interdisciplinary approaches that have developed and
continue to wrestle with contemporary views of culture. Since the 1980s, the U.S.
has been experiencing a peak period of immigration expected to last through the next
10 to 15 years (Meissner, 2007). This population shift in the landscape of schooling
requires insight from other social science fields including anthropology, cultural
studies, sociology, psychology, and public policy applied to the learning experiences
of children of ethnic diasporas living in today’s modern society.
Second, in developing theory, the temporal, distal, and proximal contextual
characteristics in which of a study takes place is key. For example, Bourdieu’s theory
of cultural capital (1986) asserts children from privileged backgrounds have inherent
characteristics they strategically employ to gain advantage in a particular field. A
view of the contemporary nature of an ethnic diaspora’s adoption of American
values and beliefs (Shain, 1999) indicates that cultural capital isn’t necessarily
inherited but rather is pursued and acquired by individuals. Kingston (2000) claims
221
that the horizontal and pluralistic nature of American society is distinctive from the
hierarchical French society where Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital theory was
developed. Addressing historical, sociopolitical, and temporal elements of
individuals’ experiences would strengthen theories of human development, learning,
and socialization.
Third, findings from this study note how children’s changing generational
status and socioeconomic status shaped their responses to curriculum and classroom
instruction. Shain’s American Creed framework (1999) suggests a need for
educational theories that account for the continual transformation of individuals in
modernity. Cross-cultural and within-group research will add to greater
understanding of group experiences and lead to theories of how individuals make
meaning of these experiences.
Fourth, further theoretical approaches regarding the outside resources and/or
repertoires of practice (Gutierrez & Rogoff, 2003) children tap into while negotiating
through their multiple micro-cultures are needed. How might these repertoires of
practice be transferred to an educational setting? How can school reform restructure
traditional instruction to include students multiple microcultures in their learning
outcomes?
Implications for Research
First, as Ladson-Billing (2004) contends, today’s telecommunication brings
“cultural images of how to be and act in the world [and] means that our conceptions
of culture can no longer be simplistic, one-dimensional, and essentialized” (p. 63).
222
As a result, the uniquely integrated identities of children, their families, and
communities are crucial for future research. This inter-group variance includes
ontological descriptors such as group characteristics including generational status,
motivation for migration, connection to home country/region, prior educational and
socioeconomic status, receiving social network, linguistic ease, and current
socioeconomic strata that intersect with students’ educational experiences (Jimenez,
1999; Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003; Orellana & Bowman, 2003; Shain, 1999; Torres-
Saillant, 2002).
Second, further research questions arising from this study include: How is the
contemporary and transformative nature of student populations perceived in schools
and classrooms? How do students perceive their experience as members of an ethnic
diaspora? How do the school and students’ immigrant and intergenerational status
mutually constitute the school context, curriculum, and practices? How do these
participants’ variant characteristics intersect with student academic outcomes and
their perceptions of themselves as vital participants in society? How can schools
gather the evolving interests and needs of their communities? How can schools best
capture students’ expectations of their future academic performance and their life
trajectories? What is the nature of the interactions between new immigrants and co-
ethnics of second and third generation students? How might these expectations
intersect with their specific stage of schooling (e.g., elementary, middle, and high
school)?
223
Third, clarity and precision in representing group characteristics is needed in
research. Children from diverse backgrounds are integrated individuals. This strength
gives them rich perceptions and textured conceptual views. Labels such as
“minority,” “urban,” and “at risk” are increasingly proving to be of less benefit or
descriptive in addressing the vibrancy of their experiences. Too often these terms are
conflated with children from low-income homes (Lee, 2003).
Fourth, research is needed to consider combinations of factors that shape
students’ academic success or failure.
Fifth, including substantial formal and informal conversations with children
and their families would enhance research methods.
Implications for Practice
First, children require the abilities to interact in globalized political,
economic, and social contexts. Banks (2004) suggests that educators must start early
to help students “acquire the attitudes needed to survive in a multicultural and
diverse world” (2004, p. 23). With children’s environment saturated with popular
culture media “texts” (Ladson-Billings, 2004) and the Internet, educators need to be
aware of students’ multiple and out-of-school knowledge sources and its respective
content. A multicultural approach that critically analyzes social issues and deciphers
written and social texts is vital (King, 2001; Ladson-Billings, 2004).
Second, school and classroom curriculum must support students’
understanding of, and coping with, social conflicts at the interpersonal, community,
national, and international level. This must be done with sensitivity. When these
224
issues are not adequately addressed in a school setting, children’s understanding is
vulnerable to being shaped by out-of-school and popular culture portrayals of how
societal conflict is resolved (Andersen & Collins, 1998).
Third, multicultural instruction needs to expand beyond the trinity of race,
ethnicity, and gender to include diverse ideologies and beliefs that have polarizing
potential (sexual orientation, for example, is an obvious one) (Beach, 1997). A
multicultural curriculum should have the elasticity to include evolving experiences
of learners as they circulate in multiple communities. Curriculum and instructional
approaches are needed to support teachers in extending a text’s message beyond
literacy comprehension to social awareness.
Finally, teacher training should be provided for both pre-service and in-
service teachers that will address the fluid identities of the children of an ethnic
diaspora. Students from any cultural group (including race, ethnicity, gender,
socioeconomic, and interests) do not act in a fixed and static manner. Möller and
Allen (2000) note that teachers play an “essential role in helping students…rather
than letting them struggle alone with confusing, uncomfortable, and frightening
emotions” (p. 152). Educators require an awareness of the difficult social issues
students are exposed to and the risks involved when using emotionally laden themes
in classroom instruction.
In the upcoming second, third, and fourth major sections, I will discuss the
three remaining research sub-questions regarding: characteristics and structures of
literacy practices, student participation, and teacher’s beliefs. The purpose of these
225
three sub-questions was to widen the view from Room 500’s classroom interaction to
the broader social, political, historical context, power, and institutional forces of
coordinating curriculum, testing mandates, and instructional pacing. Therefore, these
last sections do not delve into students’ experiences with issues of ethnicity and
culture relative to the degree of the first major section. The next major discussion
section explores findings for the research sub-question regarding the characteristics
and structures of the classroom’s literacy practices.
Characteristics and Structures of Literacy Activities
In this second major section, I discuss findings for the research sub-question
question (a) What are the characteristics and structure of reading and writing
activities, that is, norms, routines, and practices, in this classroom? How do they
foster integration of middle-class Latino/a participants’ background and cultural
experiences? The purpose of these questions was to describe the ways in which the
literacy practices of the classroom community mediated the inclusion of students’
resources. This was done by capturing the institutional, political, and social context
of Room 500’s learning environment and does not delve into issues of ethnicity and
culture as the previous section does. First, I will discuss the national educational
context of the mandates and content-based standards that shaped Room 500’s norms
and routines. Second, I will address the social nature of the reading and writing
learning experiences that occurred in the classroom. Finally, I will discuss Room
226
500’s literacy activities that were most conducive to tapping into students’ lived
experiences and background knowledge.
Current Federal Mandates and Content-Based Standards
In this section, I discuss how the federal 2001 No Child Left Behind (NCLB)
legislation and content-based standards influenced the classroom. From a
sociocultural perspective, the influences of cultural and institutional power
intersecting with human development are apparent (Cole, 1996; Gutiérrez & Stone,
2000; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991, 1998). A description of the school setting in
Chapter 3 and findings in Chapter 4 pointed to the weighty influence NCLB has had
in coordinating the practices and activities of the school district, school, teacher,
curriculum, and ultimately Room 500 students. Newbury School’s district, which
determined the school’s language arts program, was driven to meet federal
standardized testing goals or risk deleterious consequences. Although intent on
meeting their NCLB yearly assessment targets, the district steered clear of adopting a
prescriptive or reductionist language arts program as other California school districts
have done (e.g., Los Angeles Unified School District). Instead, it was a positive
aspect that the district for Newbury School would advocate and provide staff
development in literacy instruction that was student-centered and incorporated
balanced literacy components. Yet, a literacy coach conceded the district’s teachers’
creativity was being subsumed in the current pressures created by a climate of
accountability and reform. This finding concurs with previous research observations
that educational reforms, even those designed to promote educators decision-making,
227
have the potential to undermine teachers’ professionalism when rigidly implemented
(MacGillivray, Ardell, Curwen, & Palma, 2004).
Cummins (1994) has contended that the effects of macro educational reforms
filter into the micro-interactions between students and teacher. Mindful of Newbury
School’s need to increase standardized test scores, there was some test practice that
was used to maximize students’ performance. Instructional pacing was aligned with
state curriculum standards. Although pacing had been developed through grade-level
collaboration, it left little pedagogical freedom for spontaneity and innovation.
Literacy scholars contend that the classroom environment is a social practice
in which students gain an understanding of literacy and learning (Gee, 1997). This
learning environment “prepare[s] them for knowing how to engage in particular
forms of language and literacy activities” (Gutiérrez & Rogoff, 2003, p. 22). In
Room 500’s classroom environment, the test prep activities, testing, and a set grade-
level instructional pace were establishing students’ view of what constitutes literacy.
Whole Class Instruction
One norm in Room 500 was the predominance of whole class instruction.
This was partly due to the pacing of the instructional day. The teacher used a more
traditional “instruction-response-evaluation” style noted by Cazden (2001) that
admittedly limits student talk, participation, and student ownership. While a
“[sociocultural] approach does not prescribe the use of specific methodological
tools” (Rogoff, 1995, p. 160), it recognizes how learning is mediated by
interpersonal interaction (Cole, 1996). Similar to the classroom interaction in a study
228
of different teaching styles in which a teacher-led style dominated (Gutiérrez, 1993),
Mr. Harris’ whole class instruction hampered student talk and participation. But in
keeping step with lesson pacing, whole class instruction was more expedient.
However, the costs of whole class instruction constrain cooperative learning
opportunities, student talk, and access to the teacher (Cazden, 2001). The highly
public classroom atmosphere for sharing in Room 500 also inhibited some students’
exploration of personal narrative writing.
Darder (1997) contends that classroom environments must provide a space
for all students, especially those from diverse backgrounds, to:
voice more clearly what constitutes the cultural differences they
experience and unfurl the conflicts as they struggle together to
understand their own histories and their relationships with others. (p.
342)
In a classroom governed by institutional influences, it was not always easy to
make this happen. One strength underlying a sociocultural approach’s examination
of the classroom’s characteristics and structures its capacity to simultaneously reveal
the “practices and problems” in schools as well an opportunity to examine literacy
(Gutiérrez & Stone, 2000, p. 153). The filtering of current macro educational
reforms, that is institutional pressures of standardized testing and pre-planned
curriculum, into students’ adoption of literate behaviors and understandings has
created implications for how children perceive school literacy and how they
participate in their learning environment.
229
Social Nature of Literacy Experiences
In this section, I discuss the second key finding for the characteristics and
structures of literacy activities which, despite the institutional influence, had a strong
social component in Room 500’s literacy activities—particularly their writing
experiences.
Sociocultural theorists contend that individuals’ joint activity plays a role in
the construction of meaning (Lee & Smagorinsky, 2000) through guided
participation in purposeful and culturally valued activities (Rogoff, 2003). In general,
the norms and practices of the district and Room 500’s pedagogy were consistent
with sociocultural views of learning environments. The district advocated student-
centered literacy instructional strategies. These literacy strategies were inherently
developmental and social in nature (e.g., shared reading, read alouds, guided reading,
process writing). The teacher’s role was to guide and scaffold students’ learning
within their zone of proximal development (Vygotsky, 1987). In Room 500, the
teacher provided students with frequent formal and informal opportunities for joint
activity in group work, peer tutoring, or dyads. The social norms and practices of the
classroom’s writing and reading activities are discussed next within the context of
their writing and reading experiences.
Writing engagement as social. The writing instructional approach used in
Room 500 emphasized purpose, student choice, peer feedback, and publication
(Calkins, 1994). This practice was consistent with a sociocultural view of writing as
“simultaneously a process of meaning-making and process of social interaction”
230
(Lee & Smagorinsky, 2000, p. 9). One norm of Room 500 students’ composing
process was to be provided with choice. Another norm was the sharing of students’
work both inside their classroom and throughout Newbury School. This social
interaction situated students’ writing in larger social, institutional, and civic realms.
Lee and Smagorinsky (2000) use sociocultural theory to conceive of
writing’s purpose as “an act of social responsibility through which students need to
understand themselves as social agents who contribute to the construction of a
community, for good or ill” (p. 9). This view was consistent with Room 500’s
writing practices in which the teacher developed writing assignments that positioned
students as social agents. Writing practices ranged from appreciative letters to former
teachers (building social community) to plying mayoral candidates into civic action
(social responsibility) to advocating recycling (environmental responsibility). In this
manner, some writing assignments were connected meaningfully to real life
purposes.
Reading engagement as social. The reading experiences in Room 500 were
typified by what Routman (2003) terms shared reading experiences. That is, the
teacher would read aloud from a text when only one book was available or when the
lesson was designed to accommodate the students’ varied reading levels. Another
norm was the use of small reading groups with a text appropriate to students’ reading
level. In this way, the teacher was adopting a sociocultural approach of mediating
learning with appropriate tools within individuals’ zone of proximal development
(Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1998). Room 500’s practice of partner reading
231
was consistent with sociocultural views of individuals working in purposeful activity
with “guided participation” (Rogoff, 2003). Another aspect of reading as a social
experience was the teacher’s varying of instructional approaches to scaffold learning.
Tharp and Gallimore’s (1988) theory of assisting learners’ performance have
identified six strategies. The teacher consistently practiced three of these: modeling,
cognitive structuring, and questioning. In addition to comprehension questions, the
teacher often posed probing questions. He attempted to develop students’ critical
stance towards issues of discrimination, poverty, and immigration. His actions were
aligned with Banks (2004) contention that educators have a responsibility to present
“concepts, issues, events and themes from the perspectives of different ethnic
groups” (p. 15). Yet, as previously noted in Chapter 4’s findings and the preceding
discussion section, even with the teacher’s forefronting of social justice issues,
students did not consistently participate in these types of discussions.
In the next section, I address the third key finding of this research question
regarding the characteristics and structures of literacy practices and note the
activities that best integrated these middle-class students’ background knowledge.
Integrating Students’ Background Knowledge
The third key finding of characteristics and structures of literacy practices
was that there were very few that integrated students’ background knowledge. There
were only three literacy activities that successfully drew upon Room 500 students’
cultural capital. All were initiated by the teacher.
232
Sociocultural theory argues that learning is mediated through cultural tools
including individuals’ knowledge and resources (Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003, Wertsch,
1991, 1998). However, tapping into students’ knowledge was not a frequent practice
due to constraints of time and curriculum pacing. The three literacy activities that
integrated students’ cultural capital occurred closer to the end-of-the-school year
after standardized testing.
In these three literacy activities, the teacher was able to acknowledge the
“multiple communities” (Rogoff, 2003) in which individuals participate. Although
idiosyncratic, these lessons weren’t capricious; they addressed grade-level standards
albeit in a less didactic manner. For example, in the literacy activity when students
brought in their song lyrics, they had opportunities to analyze textual content,
explore inference, adopt a point-of-view, and make personal connections. All
strategies acknowledged as literacy tools to facilitate text comprehension (Routman,
2003). These lessons also provided glimpses of Room 500’s fluid participation in
their everyday multiple communities. Students demonstrated their range of multi-
linguistic interests from English-language rock, to Spanish-language love songs, to a
Japanese song mediated by English-translated lyrics. Their topics spanned childhood
and pre-adolescent interests from superheroes, love songs, self-identity, and
alienation. Room 500’s student response resonated with Dyson’s (2003) study of
primary elementary students who appropriated media symbols from their
environment and recontextualized them into their literacy learning to explore their
self-identity. In a second literacy activity when Room 500 students shared a
233
personally relevant book, it became clear the book’s meaning transcended its textual
message and evoked memorable and poignant social relationships—even years later.
Their response is consistent with emerging notions of literacy as a social practice.
For example, Barton (2001) has noted the importance of the social meanings and
purposes of literacy surrounded in any textual event.
It was these teacher-initiated literacy activities that tapped into and integrated
children’s cultural capital. Their eclectic interests reflect their absorption and
integration into mainstream culture, family experiences, and in some cases Internet
interactions, into their development as learners. These pursuits are consistent with
the Shain’s (1999) views that the ethnic diaspora’s experience is transformative and
integrative. They underscore his specific observation that the Mexican diaspora is
interested in societal inclusion.
Summary and Implications of
Characteristics and Structures of Literacy Activities
In this section, I will provide a summary of the characteristics and structures
of students’ literacy experiences.
This discussion section explored the “constellation of factors” (Gutiérrez &
Rogoff, 2003, p. 22) and broader institutional and sociohistorical context (Orellana
& Bowman, 2003) in which this study occurred. For Room 500, the institutional
authority of federal legislation filtered into the micro-interactions of their classroom
(cf. Cummins, 1994). The district’s endorsement of literacy strategies that were
234
child-centered and social in nature was hopeful, but they were sequenced at a rapid
rate leaving little curricular elasticity for the teacher to integrate students’ personal
interests, life experiences, and background knowledge. Ultimately, it was the few
teacher-initiated literacy activities that were successful in incorporating students’
background knowledge. In this classroom’s literacy context, shaped by broader
institutional federal and state mandates, students developed their own understandings
of what activities constituted reading and writing. Implications for theory, research,
and practice will follow.
Implications for Theory
Based on an analysis of this study’s findings, there are questions that should
guide us in developing educational theory. First, how are other types of non-
interactive learning situations, such as uni-directional and ancillary learning,
explained? Examples of uni-directional learning environments are religious
institutional settings, conferences, etc. Examples of ancillary learning are
individually acquired behaviors and habits implicit in a learning environment (e.g.,
persistence, risk taking).
Second, how do negative experiences affect the nature of learning and
individual motivation?
Implications for Research
First, in a globalized world, children need to be prepared in “learning to
learn” (Wells & Claxton, 2002, p. 23). The current NCLB school accountability, vis-
à-vis high stakes testing, measures student progress by test scores. Further research is
235
needed to understand how standardized tests evaluate students’ analysis of ideas,
how they reconstruct knowledge, and the degree of critical thinking that is (or not)
fostered. These skills are needed by individuals to interact in a technologically
instantaneous, information intense, and semiotic multi-media world (Luke, 2003).
Second, further research is needed into how children differentiate school
literacy from other literacy practices they engage in their home and social domains.
How do children adopt literate behaviors and understandings and participate in
particular learning environments? This area of research is needed especially with the
institutional pressures of standardized testing and pre-planned curriculum shaping
classroom literacy.
Third, research needs to study the differential outcomes for students with
differential schooling experiences including public, charter, and private schools.
Charter schools and private schools have greater instructional freedom and a
different quality of education than public schools.
Fourth, research is needed into the curricular components forfeited (e.g., art,
music, physical education, science, recess) in focusing on meeting standardized
testing goals. Ramifications of school reform on students’ overall educational
experience are missing from many educational studies.
Implications for Practice
First, Claxton (2002) contends that classrooms should become communities
in which children cultivate the “transferable capabilities and dispositions of effective,
real-lifelong learning” (p. 32). Curriculum content standards have played a role in
236
outlining expectations for grade levels. It is, however, problematic in how they are
implemented. Teachers must have the instructional time and capacity to be
responsive to individual and class interests. Educational reforms should strike a
balance between guidance, oversight, and pedagogical independence. To do this,
ongoing and continual evaluation of education reforms could determine effectiveness
of processes and progress.
Second, students need more opportunities for writing in varied genres. This
would provide opportunities for creating their own counter-narratives that Critical
Race Theorists consider important for students, especially for those students from
diverse backgrounds.
Third, classrooms should provide more aesthetic learning (e.g., art, music,
physical education). With lower cognitive demands, these types of environments
support multiple learning styles and support second language acquisition for English
Language learners.
In the next major section of this chapter, I will discuss findings for the
research sub-question regarding the nature of students’ participation in the
classroom. The purpose of this question was to gather insight into a broader view of
classroom interaction. As such, issues of Latino/a ethnicity and culture were not a
critical component of this discussion.
237
Room 500 Students’ Participation
In this third major discussion section, I will addresses the sub-research
question (b), What is the nature of children’s participation in the classroom? First, I
will use sub-sections addressing the three key findings and conclude this section with
a summary and implications. Students’ participation included: 1) tapping into
popular culture 2) collaborating with peers and sharing classroom decision making,
and 3) engaging in authentic literacy activities.
Using Popular Culture to Achieve Social, Academic, and Personal Goals
The first key finding regarding the nature of students’ participation in Room
500 was the students’ propensity for tapping into their background knowledge vis-à-
vis mainstream popular culture to form affiliations, make connections to school
learning, and interpret their world through the prism of popular culture.
Knowledge of popular culture had particular cachet and was one type of
students’ embodied cultural capital. Bourdieu (1986) asserts cultural capital has
value within a particular field and that a “general cultural awareness becomes a
power resource” (Schwartz, 1997, p. 43). Similarly, students’ found integration of
popular culture had currency in supporting their social and academic goals. A shared
knowledge of popular culture—movies, books, songs, and icons—cemented group
cohesiveness and membership (cf. Schwartz, 1997). It helped them to become
insiders.
Knowledge of popular culture had a role in their cognitive development. The
thread and commonality of popular culture songs and references wended its way
238
through the collective classroom consciousness. Students’ integration of popular
culture was consistent with sociocultural theorists Wells’ and Claxton’s (2002)
assertion, “Human development depends on the appropriation and reconstruction by
each individual of the resources that have been developed within their culture” (p. 7).
In Room 500’s reading experiences, students linked present knowledge with new
understandings and concepts. In their writing experiences, popular culture provided a
trove of imagery, characters, and story ideas. It served to position a particular writing
style within a larger literary and creative landscape. The teacher recognized the
currency and inclusionary potential of students’ popular culture knowledge. He
capitalized on this knowledge to bridge their insights and crystallize academic
concepts. His receptiveness to including popular culture is consistent with Dyson’s
(2003) proposition that educators find ways to be responsive to students’ interests.
To some degree, students used popular culture messages and images to
organize and interpret their world. Children marveled and were captivated by pop-
teen celebrities and their generational cultural icons. They were intrigued with
superhero characters and incorporated superhero values of fairness and helpfulness
into their sense making. Dyson (1997) noted how primary grade students often
appropriate media images because of their “powerful and compelling” nature (p.
181). Interestingly, students rarely used their school texts to accomplish similar
social, academic, or personal sense-making goals—despite the fact that many of their
school texts had themes of social conflict, immigration, poverty, discrimination, and
239
societal barriers. This finding has implications for how effectively texts, particularly
multicultural texts, are used in the classroom.
Participating in Peer Collaboration and Decision-Making
The second key finding regarding the nature of student participation
concerned peer collaboration and classroom decision-making. In collaborating,
students mentored, advised, and tutored one another. This finding is consistent with
sociocultural theorist Rogoff (2003) who contends that individuals engage in
activities through guided participation from peers as well as experienced others. Peer
collaboration was an instructional strategy endorsed by the school district, Newbury
School, and the teacher. The classroom’s table grouping arrangement reflected this
priority and was conducive to smooth transitioning from individual work to group
and/or partner work. Students circulated at ease and were comfortable consulting
their peers. The degree with which they stayed focused on assignments despite the
seemingly continual interruption of their peers’ questions and comments was rather
surprising. Students were academically responsible and completed their assignments.
Another practice in the classroom was students’ involvement in decision-
making, which typically occurred during their writing activities. Students co-
constructed writing rubrics, selected their own peer partner/s, and evaluated and
critiqued their peers’ writing. They had a greater degree of choice in writing
activities than in reading activities. On one hand, this capacity for choice may have
reflected the teacher’s training in process writing where student choice is paramount
(Calkins, 1994), as well as Newbury School’s ongoing staff development. In
240
contrast, student choice in reading activities was limited. Outside institutional
influences of the district’s reading program, content area texts, and state standardized
testing pre-determined and prescribed the reading selections. This was another
example of macro factors influencing micro interactions of the classroom (cf.
Cummins, 1994).
Engaging in Authentic Literacy Practices
The third finding regarding the nature of students’ classroom participation
pointed to some of the authentic literacy practices in which students engaged. Some
reading and writing activities were conceived and developed as more student
centered. This was consistent with sociocultural theorists view that learning is more
than an individual “in-the-head” activity (Cole, 1996; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1998).
The teacher incorporated language arts activities in which students simultaneously
acquired a specific literacy understanding and recognized its transformative
potential. For example, in two writing activities, students articulated a social
concern and appealed for action. Students also frequently shared their writing with
various audiences in the school community. By doing so, they connected their
writing efforts to meaningful communities; embedded their work in larger contexts;
and pursued greater social purposes. Opportunities for students to read and write
outside their classroom tap into emerging theoretical views of literacy as a social
practice in which a specific textual event extends to wider social meaning and
connection (Barton, 2001; Barton & Hamilton, 2000).
241
Tapping into students’ life experience, history, and language. It was during
the three teacher-initiated literacy activities that students’ embodied cultural capital
(Bourdieu, 1986) entered into the classroom more fully. Because these activities
were highly individualized, students tapped into their unique “life experience,
history, and language” (Freire & Macedo, 1987, p. 148). Students’ learning
emanated from a variety of out-of-school sources that included: religious beliefs and
practices, songs lyrics, family experiences, and Internet resources. Their integration
of life experiences resonates with Dyson’s (2003) observation that children’s cultural
resources serve as an experiential base in their literacy learning.
Other literacy episodes revealed students’ varied interests and draw attention
to current scholarly perspectives of culture, ethnicity, and race, not as static entities,
but as evolving, and transnational (Ladson-Billings, 2004; Merry, 2006; Suárez-
Orozco, 2001, 2005), and dynamically shaped by larger contextual contexts and
processes (Lee, 2003; Orellana & Bowman, 2003). Shain’s assertion that ethnic
diasporas are in a state of continual transformation (1999) dovetails with these
sociocultural perspectives.
Summary and Implications of
Room 500 Student’s Participation
In this section, I will first review the three key findings of the research
question regarding the nature of students’ classroom participation and then provide
theoretical, research, and practice implications.
242
In summary, student participation included drawing upon their embodied
capital of popular culture to achieve social, academic, and personal sense-making
goals. Students participated in peer collaboration and decision-making. The teacher
made efforts to have their literacy experiences be authentic and extend beyond the
walls of their classroom. Students’ interests reveal their evolving, transnational
nature. Implications for theory, research, and practice follow.
Implications for Theory
Children’s engagement in everyday practices, for example, video games,
popular culture movies and TV experiences shape their cognitive development. How
do these experiences intersect with their academic learning?
Implications for Research
First, researchers can explore how children interact with popular culture and
how it shapes their beliefs, perceptions, and expectations for their role in society.
Second, collaborative learning is often considered a desirable aspect of
classroom learning. It would be useful to explore the range of collaborative learning
that takes place; social roles that children assume during collaboration; and positive
and negative learning outcomes.
Implications for Practice
First, educators need to be aware of students’ diverse out-of-school resources.
The immediacy of technology and media enables children to access vast amounts of
information. How this learning enters the classroom is incumbent in many ways on
the teacher’s knowledge and skill.
243
Second, by tapping into students’ everyday literacy interests, educators can
also “attend to issues of power, authenticity, and culture embedded in social
practices” (MacGillivray & Curwen, 2007, p. 368).
In the final major section of this chapter, I will discuss findings for the last
research sub-question regarding the teacher’s beliefs, views of learning, and
concerns about the school context affecting his professional role as an educator.
Classroom Community Shaped by Teacher’s Beliefs
In this fourth major discussion section, I will present findings from the sub-
research question (d), How is the classroom community shaped by the teacher’s
epistemological stance, philosophy regarding individual learning, and perspectives
of middle-class children’s cultural knowledge? Room 500’s classroom environment
was shaped by the teacher’s 1) epistemological stance of multiple aspects of
knowledge; 2) philosophy that student learning thrived in comfortable learning
environments where they were “free to express themselves”; and 3) perception that
children’s knowledge and experiences were of value in their learning.
Multiple Aspects of Knowledge
The first key finding was that the epistemological view held by the teacher
was that knowledge was not fixed but instead had multiple aspects.
The first aspect of knowledge was established by the state’s curriculum
content standards that made it important for the class to meet standardized testing
goals. Mr. Harris recognized his role in scaffolding students along that path using
244
both district sanctioned texts and district-advocated literacy instruction. However,
the official school knowledge was not neutral or objective (cf. Apple, 2001; Luke,
1996 for further discussion). Using his professional judgment, the teacher made
efforts to tap into other knowledge resources.
The second aspect of knowledge was student interest and need. He sought to
meet their interests by making frequent intertextual connections (a comprehension
strategy developed by Keene and Zimmermann [1997]), pursuing textual inferences,
problematizing text omissions, and bringing in real world examples to concretize
students’ discussions. The teacher repeatedly drew attention to other groups’ and
individuals’ experiences and points of view. Banks (2004) similarly believes that the
teacher’s role in multicultural education is to encourage students to “see how
knowledge is formed and reflects the experiences of various ethic and cultural
groups” (p. 6). In presenting different points of view, the teacher forefronted
classroom topics that evoked social justice themes of discrimination, poverty, and
immigration. But as previously noted there was a mismatch between the critical
consciousness that he fostered and the agency students displayed.
A third form of knowledge was the shared and social construction of
knowledge, as students learned from one another (cf. Cole, 1996, Rogoff, 2003;
Wertsch, 1991, 1998). The teacher arranged a peer tutoring structure to promote
interdependence; configured the classroom’s physical space to facilitate group talk;
and created frequent learning opportunities for peer interaction. In essence,
knowledge was not pre-established by institutions but organically constructed.
245
“Free to Express Themselves”
The second key finding centered on the teacher’s philosophy that children
learned best in an environment in which they were “free to express themselves.” This
tenet was integral to his instructional approach because he considered children’s talk
a prerequisite to their development as expert readers and writers. Teaching was a
human endeavor, not technologically formulated, where the unpredictable course of
children’s conversation resisted scripting and teacher responsiveness superseded
preplanning. He prized the “magic moment” of teaching when children grasped a
new idea, tackled with a novel concept, and felt energized by their learning. These
were the types of spontaneous moments impossible to include in a published
teacher’s guide or a pre-planned curriculum. With his value of synergistic learning, it
was easy to see how he was frustrated at times by an instructional day framed by
institutional requirements of curricular pacing, firm adherence to grade-level
curriculum planning, and the pressures of high stakes testing.
Building trusting relationships was essential to his creation of a comfortable
classroom environment. Similarly having the support of caring teachers was an
educational experience deemed important in Valenzuela’s (1999) study of Latino/a
youths. Mr. Harris made efforts to cultivate trusting and caring relationships. He
respected children as unique individuals and used atypical classroom management
techniques that appealed to students’ community inclusiveness.
His love of teaching was apparent in his speech, action, and style. When
several focal students spontaneously reflected on his teaching, they recognized that
246
he not only made their learning enjoyable and interesting but he had helped students
who needed help. As much as possible, he cultivated a curricular elasticity that
shielded Room 500’s academically struggling and socially vulnerable students.
While the school institution or typical peer jostling might have marginalized these
students, he continually included them in the classroom community by building on
their academic and social strengths. In this way, the teacher modeled equity, fairness,
and pluralism. His actions embodied the values of what Shain asserts are the essence
of the American Creed (1999). The teacher’s ideal of societal inclusiveness began
with the classroom community he sought to develop in Room 500.
Valuing Students’ Multi-Textured Selves
The third key finding centered on the teacher’s perspective of children’s
cultural capital. This perception was encapsulated in his description of children as
“little pieces of history.” His belief was consistent with sociocultural perspectives of
the multi-textured experiences of individuals (cf. Cole, 1996; Freire & Macedo,
1987; Rogoff, 2003; Wertsch, 1991, 1998).
The teacher welcomed and vigorously sought to integrate the multiple layers
of students’ lives into Room 500’s learning environment. He recognized that
students’ families were their first and ongoing teachers and formed a foundation in
their lives. Another layer was students’ Latino/a heritage and Spanish language.
Religious beliefs shaped some students’ perspectives and were a knowledge source.
Popular culture saturated the children’s lives. His aim to incorporate students
background knowledge, life experiences, and language was consistent with Dyson’s
247
(1993) view that educators should foster classrooms with a “permeable
curriculum…[that] attempts not only to create bridges between worlds, but to
support children’s own naming and manipulating of the dynamic relationships
among worlds” (p. 217).
But as previously noted in the first discussion section, there was a mismatch
between the teacher’s efforts to tap into students’ background and the unevenness of
student response. Primarily students resisted the one-dimensional presentation of
their culture, were wary of inclusion of the Spanish language, and were not inclined
to include their personal experiences without discrimination. This finding was
consistent with Gutiérrez and Stone’s (2000) observation that participants’ diverging
goals in an activity setting (such as a classroom) can give rise to tension.
There were outside influences as well. Federal and state influences and
current academic accountability pressures exerted a role in defining Room 500’s
literacy activities. Mr. Harris seemed to walk a tightrope between meeting school
curriculum plans and his desire to draw upon his own professional innovativeness
with literacy reading and writing events. Despite his intentions, the district and
Newbury School’s focus on No Child Left Behind accountability, standardized
testing, and state content standards were exerting greater weight in shaping the
classroom literacy more than he was.
248
Summary and Implications
of the Teacher’s Beliefs
In this section, I review the three key findings of the last sub-research
question regarding how the classroom context was shaped by the teacher’s
epistemology, philosophy, and perceptions and provide implications for theory,
research, and practice.
In summary, the teacher attempted to create a learning environment that
valued multiple forms of knowledge, establish a trusting environment with freedom
for students to express themselves, and integrate the social and historical layers of
children’s experiences. But there was a mismatch when students didn’t take up on
his overtures to be socially critical. The institutional power of NCLB was having a
greater impact on shaping the classroom instruction than he was. Implications for
theory, research and practice follow.
Implications for Theory
How are teacher beliefs and practices shaped by their professional training,
classroom experiences, and institutional external pressures? How are they altered?
Implications for Research
Several research questions arise from these findings. First, what is the nature
of public school teachers’ experiences in the current environment of accountability
as they interact with increasingly diverse classrooms? How do educators perceive
their agency in the school environment? How do they exercise their agency? How is
the definition of “teaching” changing for educators?
249
Second, how does a school and its respective staff respond to standardized
testing results? What practices and interventions do schools and individual educators
adopt to increase test scores? How are these practices selected? How is their
effectiveness gauged?
Third, how would instruction change if students could let the teacher know
how they perceive the instruction? How is immediate feedback different from
reflective feedback?
Implications for Practice
First, classroom teachers are encouraged by literacy scholars to find ways to
“teach between the cracks” (Short et al., 2005). However, this may have negative
repercussions on teachers’ careers. A more concerted effort, perhaps legislated, by
teachers to participate in the curriculum is necessary.
In the next section, I will provide a conclusion for the overall discussion in
Chapter 5.
Conclusion
This study highlights one group of students who were aspiring towards
middle-class status, which is not the typical perception created when educators and
policy makers identify Latino/a children as “minority,” “non-mainstream,”
“marginalized,” and “at risk” (Lee, 2003). These children disrupted common
educators’ stereotypes and media portrayals of them as “deficits or dysfunctions”
(Rodriguez, 1996, p. 1). They were in the process of re-defining what it means to be
250
Latino/a in today’s modern world. School change and reform need to be based on
contemporary aspects of diverse groups.
Using varied theoretical lenses helped provide interpretations and
understandings of the integrated nature of Room 500 students. One aspect of the
findings indicated that Room 500 Latino/a students were of varied immigrant
generational status (cf. Jimenez, 1999). They were accepted in their ethnically
homogeneous community and recognized their families’ pursuit of the American
lifestyle. They readily immersed themselves and adopted the ethos of American
beliefs of justice, human rights, freedom, equality, pluralism, self-determination, and
democracy (cf. Shain, 1999). The desire of students and their families to maintain
some of their cultural identity as descendents of Mexican heritage was idiosyncratic.
A notion of group differences has been brought to the forefront by educational
researchers. An individual’s cultural identity is shaped by their different generational
status, experiences of traveling to Mexico, the strength of ties to family members in
Mexico, and their facility and fluency with the Spanish language, among other
characteristics (cf. Jimenez, 1999; Orellana & Bowman, 2003). In essence, the ethnic
identity of the students in Room 500 was shifting and fluid. Other findings revealed
an underlying awareness of race and discrimination that had the potential to
undermine students’ optimistic enthusiasm for being American.
Students were exploring and negotiating with the ongoing processes of their
lives as transnational citizens (Merry, 2006). In a globalized world of instantaneous
information and communication (Suárez-Orozco, 2001, 2005), students were in the
251
process of shaping their ethnicity. Some scholars have considered the positive
duality of immigration and culture and posited cultural borderlands (Anzaldúa, 1987)
or a “bicultural hybrid” (Pedraza, 1998, p. 381). But instead of residing in these
liminal spaces, students in Room 500 were continually shifting, morphing, and
evolving into a new generation. From their vantage point of living in a bicultural
world, they merged two landscapes (and sometimes more) into a comprehensive
vista. They simultaneously explored being members of an ethnic diaspora and being
American (Shain, 1999). Their accessibility to information and images by new
technologies informed their convictions and shaped their sensemaking. Given the
unique social, political, and economic contexts at any point in time, through each
influx of newer immigrants, subsequent generations will be similarly unpredictable
and undefined.
School serves as a socializing agent and thus is responsible for inculcating
the values of the society (Ferdman, 1990). Room 500 students were attempting to
understand their shifting cultural identities as well as the discrimination personally
experienced and seen in popular culture media. In essence, through their
disinclination and disinterest, Room 500 students were creating their own counter-
narrative to the teacher’s instruction and to the school multicultural pedagogy that
attempted to label them. Without many classroom writing and reading opportunities
to create, document, or explore their own counter-narrative stories, these students
seemed to be enacting their counter-narrative and defining themselves.
252
Overall, there was a lack of classroom time available to follow students’
interests. Instructional time was governed by federal and state testing policies, the
uniformity of standards, and a tightly scheduled curriculum. Students were wrestling
with notions of what it means to adhere to the American creed, racial awareness, and
discrimination without the benefit of available classroom discourse. This is a
particularly perplexing finding when one considers the parallels of discriminatory
and racial themes available in their school sanctioned texts and their own life
experiences. Government and institutional policies decontextualize students’
learning and left them not only “educationally standardized” (Alemán, 2006, p. 27)
but vulnerable to navigate fully in the economic, social, and political demands of a
globalized world.
By the year 2050, it is estimated that one-in-four school age children will be
of Latino/a descent (Gibson, Gandara, & Koyama, 2004) and attention must be given
to their contemporary individual characteristics, inter-group differences, and the
backdrop of specific temporal, social, political, economic, and historical contexts
that influence who they are as learners. As the anthropologist Merry contends, “The
way culture is conceptualized determines how social change is imagined” (2000, p.
15).
253
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Abu-Lughod, L. (1993). Introduction. In Writing women’s worlds: Bedouin stories
(pp. 1-42). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Alba, R., & Nee, V. (1997). Rethinking assimilation theory for a new era of
immigration. The International Migration Review, 31(4), 826-874.
Alemán, A. M. M. (2006). Latino demographics, democratic individuality, and
educational accountability: A pragmatist’s view. Educational Researcher,
35(7), 25-31.
Allington, R. (2002). Big brother and the national reading curriculum: How
ideology trumped evidence. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Andersen, M., & Collins, P. (1998). Introduction. In M. Andersen & P. Collins
(Eds.), Race, class and gender: An anthology (pp. 1-10). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions and globalization.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Apple, M. (1995). Education and power. New York: Routledge.
Apple, M. (2001). Educating the “right” way: Markets, standards, God, and
inequality. New York: RoutledgeFalmer.
Au, K., & Raphael, T. (2000). Equity and literacy in the next millennium. Reading
Research Quarterly, 35(1), 170-188.
Banks, J. A. (2004). Multicultural education: Historical development, dimensions,
and practice. In J. A. Banks & C. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of
research on multicultural education (2
nd
ed., pp. 3-29). San Francisco: Jossey
Banks.
Barrera, M. (1997). A theory of racial inequality. In A. Darder, R. Torres, & H.
Gutiérrez (Eds.), Latinos and education (pp. 3-44). New York: Routledge.
Barton, D. (2001). Directions for literacy research: Analyzing language and social
practices in a textually mediated world. Language and Education, 15(2 & 3),
92-104.
254
Barton, D., & Hamilton, M. (2000). Literacy practices. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, &
R. Ivanic (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 7-
15). London: Routledge.
Beach, R. (1997). Students’ resistance to engagement with multicultural literature. In
T. Rogers & A Soter (Eds.). Reading across cultures: Teaching literature in
a diverse society (pp. 69-94). New York: Teachers College Press.
Bernal, D. (1998). Using a Chicana feminist epistemology in educational research.
Harvard Educational Review, 58, 555-579.
Bhabha, H. (1994). The location of culture. New York: Routledge.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An
introduction to theory and methods (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). Forms of capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory
and research for sociology of education (pp. 241-258). New York:
Greenwood.
Bourdieu, P. (1989). Social space and symbolic power. Sociological Theory, 7, 14-
25.
Brooks, W. (2006). Reading representations of themselves: Urban youth use culture
and African American textual features to develop literacy understandings.
Reading Research Quarterly, 41(3). 373-392.
Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University Press.
Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
California Content Standards for Curriculum. California State Board of Education
Retrieved January 15, 2007 from: http://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/index.asp
California Department of Education Educational Demographics Unit. District
Enrollment by Ethnicity, Los Angeles Unified School District, 2005-06.
Retrieved January 24, 2007 from:
http://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/DistEnr2.asp?The name-
Lo+Angeles+&cSeelct=1964733
255
California Testing Bureau. California English Language Development Test. Test
Interpret Guide-English version. McGraw Hill Reporting and Interpretation
Materials: Retrieved January 7, 2007 from:
www2.ctb.com/state/CA/celdt/forme/celdt_2005_test_interpret_guide.pdf
Catanzarite, L. (March, 2003). California’s growing Latino population: Census 2000
dismantles stereotypes (Latino Policy and Issues Brief, No. 5, p. 1). UCLA
Chicano Studies Research Center, Los Angeles, CA.
Cazden, C. (2001). Classroom discourse (2
nd
ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Chapa, J. (2002). Affirmative action, X percent plans, and Latino access to higher
education in the 21
st
century. In M. Suárez-Orozco & M. Páez (Eds.),
Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 375-388). Berkeley, CA: University of
California Press.
Clay, M. (1991). Becoming literate. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Claxton, G. (2002) Education for the learning age. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.),
Learning for life in the 21
st
century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future
of education (pp. 21-33) Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge,
MA: Belknap Press.
Compton-Lilly, C. (2003). Reading families: The literate lives of urban children.
New York: Teachers College Press.
Cortes, C. (2004). Knowledge construction in popular culture. In J. Banks & C.
McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2
nd
ed., pp. 211-229). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cummins, J. (1994). From coercive to collaborative relations of power in the
teaching of literacy. In B. Ferdman, R. Weber, & A. Ramirez (Eds.),
Literacy across languages and cultures (pp. 295-330). Albany, New York:
SUNY.
Daiute, C., & Jones, H. (2003). Reading race and ethnicity in and around children’s
writing. In S. Green & D. Abt-Perkins (Eds.), Making race visible (pp. 178-
200). New York: Teachers College Press.
Darder, A. (1991). Culture and power in the classroom. New York: Bergin &
Garvey.
256
Darder, A. (1997). Creating the conditions for cultural democracy in the classroom.
In A. Darder, R. Torres, & H. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Latinos and education (pp.
331-350). New York: Routledge.
Darder, A., & Torres, R. (2004). After race: Racism after multiculturalism. New
York: New York University Press.
DeCuir, J. T., & Dixson, A. (2004). “So when it comes out, they aren’t that surprised
that it is there”: Using critical race theory as a tool of analysis of race and
racism in education. Educational Researcher, 33(5), 26-31.
de la Luz Reyes, M. (1992). Challenging venerable assumptions: Literacy instruction
for linguistically different students. Harvard Educational Review, 62(4), 427-
446.
de la Luz Reyes, M., & Halcón, J. (1997). Racism in academia: The Old Wolf
revisited. In A. Darder, R. Torres, & H. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Latinos and
education (pp. 423-438). New York: Routledge.
de la Luz Reyes, M., & Halcón, J. (2001a). Introduction. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J.
Halcón (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical perspectives on literacy for
Latino students (pp. 1-37). New York: Teachers College Press.
de la Luz Reyes, M., & Halcón, J. (2001b). Unleashing possibilities: Biliteracy in the
primary grades. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J. Halcón (Eds.), The best for our
children: Critical perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp. 96-121).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Introduction: The discipline and practice of
qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (2
nd
ed., pp. 1-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Diaz, E., & Flores, B. (2001). Teacher as sociocultural, sociohistorical mediator:
Teaching to the potential. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J. Halcón (Eds.), The best
for our children: Critical perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp.
29-47). New York: Teachers College Press.
Dillon, D. (2003). In leaving no child behind have we forsaken individual learners,
teachers, schools, and communities? In C. Fairbanks, J. Worthy, B. Maloch,
J. Hoffman, & D. Schallert (Eds.), 52
nd
Yearbook of the National Reading
Conference (pp. 1-29). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference, Inc.
257
DuBois, W. E. B. (1953/1989). The souls of Black folk. New York: Bantam Books.
Dyson, A. H. (1993). Social worlds of children learning to write. New York:
Teachers College Press.
Dyson, A. H. (1997). Writing superheroes: Contemporary childhood popular culture
and literacy. New York: Teachers College Press.
Dyson, A. H. (2003). Popular literacies and the “all” children: Rethinking literacy
development for contemporary childhoods. Language Arts, 81(2), 100-109.
Edwards, P. A., & Schmidt, P. R. (2006). Critical Race Theory: Recognizing the
elephant and taking action. Reading Research Quarterly, 41(3), 404-415.
Emerson, R., Fretz, R., & Shaw, L. (2001). Participant observation and field notes. In
P. Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.),
Handbook of ethnography (pp. 352-368). London: Sage Publications.
Enciso, P. (2003). Reading discrimination. In S. Greene & D. Abt-Perkins (Eds.),
Making race visible (pp. 149-177). New York: Teachers College Press.
Erickson, F. (2004). Culture in society and educational practices. In J. A. Banks & C
.A. M. Banks (Eds.). Multicultural education: Issues and perspectives (5
th
ed.)(pp. 31-60). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Erlandson, D., Harris, E., Skipper, B., & Allen, S. (1993). Doing naturalistic
inquiry: A guide to methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Ferdman, B. (1990). Literacy and cultural identity. Harvard Educational Review,
60(2), 181-204.
Ferdman, B., & Weber, R. (1994). Introduction. In B. Ferdman, R. Weber, & A.
Ramirez (Eds.), Literacy across languages and cultures (pp. 3-30). Albany,
New York: SUNY.
Fetterman, D. M. (1998). Ethnography: Step by step (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage Publications.
Fine, G., & Sandstrom, K. (1988). Knowing children: Participant observation with
minors. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
258
Fine, M., Weis, L., Weeseen, S., & Wong, L. (2000). For whom? Qualitative
research, representations, and social responsibilities. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S.
Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 107-131).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Foley, D., Levinson, B., & Hurtig, J. (2001). Anthropology goes inside: The new
educational ethnography of ethnicity and gender. In W. Secada (Ed.), Review
of research in education, Vol. 25 (pp. 37-98). Washington, D.C.: American
Educational Research Association.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2001). The interview: From structured questions to
negotiated text. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (2
nd
ed., pp. 645-672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Foucault, M. (1970/1980). Two lectures. In Power/Knowledge: Selected Interviews
and other writings 1972-1977 (pp. 79-108). Edited by Colin Gordon. Trans.
By C. Gordon, L. Marshall, J. Mepham, & K. Soper. New York: Pantheon
Books.
Freire, P. (1970/1996). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Freire, P., & Macedo, D. (1987). Literacy: Reading the word and the world.
Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Gall, M., Borg, W., & Gall, J. (1996). Educational research: An introduction. White
Plains, NY: Longman Publishers, USA.
Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In
The interpretation of cultures (pp. 3-30). New York: Basic Books.
Gibson, M. A. (1997). Complicating the immigrant/involuntary minority typology.
Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 28(3), 431-454.
Greene, S., & Abt-Perkins, D. (2003). Introduction. In S. Greene & D. Abt-Perkins
(Eds.), Making race visible (pp. 1-31). New York: Teachers College Press.
Gee, J. (1997). Meaning in Discourse: Coordinating and being coordinated. In S.
Muspratt, A. Luke, & P. Freebody (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies:
Teaching and learning textual practices (pp. 273-313). Cresskill, NJ:
Hampton Press Inc.
Gee, J. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis. London: Routledge.
259
Gee, J. (2001). Foreword (pp. xv-xix). In C. Lewis, Literacy practices as social acts.
Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates.
Gibson, M., Gándara, P., & Koyama, J. P. (2004). The role of peers in the schooling
of U.S. Mexican youth. In M. Gibson, P. Gándara, & J. P. Koyama (Eds.),
School connections: U.S. Mexican youth, peers, and school achievement (pp.
1-17). New York: Teachers College Press.
Gimenez, M. (1997). Latino/ “Hispanic”-Who needs a name?: The case against a
standardized terminology. In A. Darder, R. Torres, & H. Gutiérrez (Eds.),
Latinos and education (pp. 225-238). New York: Routledge.
Goldenberg, C., Rueda, R., & August, D. (2006). Synthesis: Sociocultural contexts
and literacy development. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing
literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel
on language minority children and youth (pp. 249-267). Mahweh, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
González, N., Moll, L. C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge:
Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum.
Grogger, J., & Trejo, S. (2002). Falling behind or moving up? The intergenerational
progress of Mexican Americans. Public Policy Institute of California.
Retrieved October 4, 2004 from www.ppic.org/content/pubs/R_502JGR.pdf
Gupta, A. & Ferguson, J. (1997). Discipline and practice: “The field” as site,
method, and location in anthropology. In A. Gupta & J. Ferguson (Eds.)
Anthropological Locations (pp. 1-46). Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Gutiérrez, K. (1992). A comparison of instructional contexts in writing process
classrooms with Latino children. Education and Urban Society, 24(2), 244-
262.
Gutiérrez, K., Banquedano-Lopez, P., & Alvarez, H. (2001). Literacy as hybridity:
Moving beyond bilingualism in urban classrooms. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J.
Halcón (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical perspectives on literacy for
Latino students (pp. 122-139). New York: Teachers College Press.
260
Gutiérrez, K., Asato, J., Pacheco, M., Moll, L., Olson, K., Horng, E. L., Ruiz, R.,
Garcia, E., & McCarty, T. L. (2002). Conversations: “Sounding American”:
The consequences of new reforms on English language learners. Reading
Research Quarterly, 37(3), 328-343.
Gutiérrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or
repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 19-25.
Gutiérrez, K., & Stone, L. (2000). Synchronic and diachronic dimensions of social
practice: An emerging methodology for cultural-historical perspectives on
literacy learning. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian
perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through
collaborative inquiry (pp. 150-164). Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Hagood, M. (2000). New times, new millennium, new literacies. Reading Research
and Instruction, 39(4), 311-328.
Halcón, J. (2001). Mainstream ideology and literacy instruction for Spanish-speaking
children. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J. Halcón (Eds.), The best for our
children: Critical perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp. 65-77).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Hillocks, G. (2003). Fighting back: Assessing the assessments. English Journal, 63-
70.
Horvat, E. (2003). The interactive effects of race and class in educational research:
Theoretical insights from the work of Pierre Bourdieu. Penn GSE
Perspectives on Urban Education, 2(1), 1-25.
Isaac, S., & Michael, W. (1997). Handbook in research and evaluation for education
and the behavioral sciences (3
rd
ed.). San Diego, CA: EdITS.
James, A. (2001). Ethnography in the study of children and childhood. In P.
Atkinson, A. Coffey, S. Delamont, J. Lofland, & L. Lofland (Eds.),
Handbook of ethnography (pp. 246-256). London: Sage Publications.
Jensen, L. (2001). The demographic diversity of immigrants and their children. In R.
G. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children of immigrants in
America (pp. 21-56). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Jiménez, R. (2000). Literacy and the identity development of Latina/o students.
American Educational Research Journal, 37(4), 971-1000.
261
Jiménez, R., Garcia, G., & Pearson, P. D. (1996). The reading strategies of bilingual
Latino/a students who are successful English readers: Opportunities and
obstacles. Reading Research Quarterly, 31(1), 90-112.
Jiménez, R., Moll, L., Rodríguez-Brown, F., & Barrera, R. (1999). Latina and Latino
researchers interact on issues related to literacy learning. Reading Research
Quarterly, 34(2), 217-230.
Jimenez, T. (2005). Immigrant replenishment and the continuing significance of
ethnicity and race: The case of the Mexican–origin population. Working
Paper 130. The Center for Comparative Immigration Studies, University of
California, San Diego. Retrieved: 3-23-07 from: www.ccis-
ucsd.org/PUBLICATIONS/working_papers.htm
Joppke, C. (1999). Multiculturalism and immigration: A comparison of the United
States, Germany, and Great Britain. Theory and Society, 25(4), 449-500.
Kalmijn, M., & Kraaykamp, G. (1996). Race, cultural capital, and schooling: An
analysis of trends in the U.S.. Sociology of Education, 69(1), 22-34.
Keene, E., & Zimmermann, S. (1997). Mosaic of thought: Comprehension in a
readers’ workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
King, J. E. (2001). Culture-centered knowledge: Black studies, curriculum
transformation, and social action. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.),
Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 265-290). San
Francisco: Jossey Banks.
Kirk, J., & Miller, M. (1986). Reliability and validity in qualitative research. Beverly
Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
Kingston, P. (2000). The unfulfilled promise of cultural capital theory. Sociology of
Education, 88-99.
Knapp, M., & Woolverton, S. (2004). Social class and schooling. In J. A. Banks &
C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education
(2
nd
ed., pp. 656-681). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kvale, S. (1996). From speech to text. Interviews: An introduction to qualitative
research interviewing (pp. 160-175). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
262
Kymlica, W. (1996). Social unity in a liberal state. Social Philosophy and Policy,
13(1), 105-136.
Labbo, L., & Reinking, D. (1999). Negotiating the multiple realities of technology in
literacy research and instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(4), 478-
492.
Ladson-Billings, G. (1998). Just what is critical race theory and what’s it doing in a
nice field like education? Qualitative Studies in Education, 11(1), 7-14.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2000). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemologies. In N.
K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.,
pp. 257-277). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2004) New directions in multicultural education: Complexities,
boundaries, and critical race theory. In J. Banks & C. McGee Banks (Eds.),
Handbook of research on multicultural education (2
nd
ed., pp. 50-65). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ladson-Billings, G. & Tate, W. (1995). Toward a Critical Race Theory of education.
Teachers College Record, 97(1). 47-68.
Lather, P. (1986) Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 257-277.
Lamont, M., & Lareau, A. (1988). Cultural capital: Allusions, gaps, and glissandos
in recent theoretical developments. Sociological Theory, 6(2), 153-168.
Lareau, A., & Horvat, E. M. (1999). Moments of social inclusions and exclusion.
Race, class, and cultural capital in family-school relationships. Sociology of
Education, 72, 37-53.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral
participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, C. D. (2003). Why we need to re-think race and ethnicity in educational
research. Educational Researcher, 32(5), 3-5.
Lee, C.D. (2007). Culture, literacy, and learning: Taking bloom in the midst of the
whirlwind. New York: Teachers College Press.
263
Lee, C. D., & Smagorinsky, P. (2000). Introduction: Constructing meaning through
collaborative inquiry. In C. D. Lee & P. Smagorinsky (Eds.), Vygotskian
perspectives on literacy research: Constructing meaning through
collaborative inquiry (pp. 1-15). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.
Lee, C. D., Spencer, M. B., & Harpalani, V. (2003). “Every shut eye ain’t sleep”:
Studying how people live culturally. Educational Researcher, 32(5). 6-13.
Levine, R. (2005). Assimilation, past and present. Public Interest, 159, 93-108.
Lin, R. (2003). Standards-based accountability: Ten suggestions. Los Angeles:
National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Students Testing.
Retrieved December 29, 2004, from
http://www.cse.ucla.edu/products/newletters/policypaper.pdf.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Publications.
Lipman, P., & Gutstein, E. (2001). Undermining the struggle for equity: A case study
of Chicago school policy in a Latino/a school. Race, Gender & Class, 8(1),
57-80.
López, D. E., & Stanton-Salazar, R. (2001). Mexican Americans: A second
generation at risk. In R. G. Rumbaut & A. Portes (Eds.), Ethnicities: Children
of immigrants in America (pp. 57-90). Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Lubienski, S. T. (2003). Celebrating diversity and denying disparities: A critical
assessment. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 30-38.
Luke, A. (1996). Genres of power? Literacy education and the production of capital.
In R. Hasan & G. Williams (Eds.), Literacy in society (pp. 308-338). London:
Longman.
Luke, A. (2003) Literacy and the Other: A sociological approach to literacy research
and policy in multilingual societies. Reading Research Quarterly, 38(1), 132-
142.
MacGillivray, L., Ardell, A. L., & Curwen, M. S. (2004, December). Diverging
definitions of literacy. Paper presented at the 54
th
Annual meeting of the
National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.
264
MacGillivray, L., Ardell, A., Curwen, M., & Palma, J. (2004). Colonized teachers:
Examining the implementation of a scripted reading program. Teaching
Education, 15(2), 131-144.
MacGillivray, L., & Curwen, M. (2007). Tagging as a social literacy practice.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 50(5), 354-369.
Manyak, P. C. (2001). Participation, hybridity, and carnival: A situated analysis of a
dynamic literacy practice in a primary-grade English immersion class.
Journal of Literacy Research, 33(3), 423-465.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3
rd
ed.).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
McGinley, W., & Kamberelis, G. (1990). Personal, social and political function of
children’s reading and writing. In J. Zutell & S. McCormick (Eds.), Literacy
theory and research: Analyses from multiple paradigms. Thirty-ninth
Yearbook of the National Reading Conference. Chicago: National Reading
Conference.
McCarthey, S. (2001). Identity construction in elementary readers and writers.
Reading Research Quarterly, 36(2). 122-147.
McCarthey, S., Dressman, M., Smolkin, L., McGill-Frazen, A., & Harris, V. (2000).
How will diversity affect literacy in the next millennium? Reading Research
Quarterly, 35(4). 548-552.
McCarthey, S., & Moje, E. (2002). Identity matters. Reading Research Quarterly,
37(2). 228-238.
McIntyre, E., Kyle, D., Moore, G., Sweazy, R. A., & Greer, S. (2001). Linking home
and school through family visits. Language Arts, 78(3), 264-272.
McKay, S. L., & Wong, S. (1996). Multiple discourses, multiple identities:
Investments and agency in second-language learning among Chinese
adolescent immigrant students. Harvard Educational Review, 66(3), 577-608.
McLaren, P. (1994). White terror and oppositional agency: Towards a critical
multiculturalism. In D. T. Goldberg (Ed.), Multiculturalism: A critical reader
(pp. 45-74). Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
McLaren, P. (1994/1998). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the
foundations of education. New York: Longman.
265
Meissner, D. (2007, January 26). Immigration and America’s Future: A New
Chapter. Immigration and Integration Speaker Series. University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California.
Mercado, C. (2005). Reflections of the study of households in New York City and
Long Island: A different route, a common destination. In N. González, L. C.
Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in
households, communities, and classrooms (pp. 233-255). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Merry, S. E. (2006). Introduction: Culture and transnationalism. In Human rights
and gender violence (pp. 1-35.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Meyer, R. (2003). Phonics exposed: Understanding and resisting systematic direct
intense phonics instruction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Moll, L. (2001). The diversity of schooling: A cultural-historical approach. In M. de
la Luz Reyes & J. Halcón (Eds.), The best for our children: Critical
perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp. 13-28). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Moll, L. (2002). Afterword. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the
21
st
century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 265-
270). Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.
Moll, L., & González, N. (1994). Lessons from research with language minority
children. Journal of Reading Behavior, 26(4), 439-456.
Moll, L., & González, N. (2004). Engaging life: A funds of knowledge approach to
multicultural education. In J. Banks & C. McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of
research on multicultural education (2
nd
ed., pp. 699-715). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Moll, L., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for
teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms.
Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.
266
Moll, L., & Ruiz, R. (2002). The schooling of Latino children. In M. Suárez-Orozco
& M. Páez (Eds.), Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 362-374). Berkeley, CA:
University of Calif. Press.
Moll, L., & Whitmore, K. (1993). Vygotsky in classroom practice. Moving from
individual transmission to social transaction. In E. Forman, N. Minick, &
C.A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in
children’s development (pp. 19-42). New York: Oxford University Press.
Moll, L., Saez, R., & Dworin, J. (2001). Exploring biliteracy: Two student case
examples of writing as social practice. The Elementary School Journal,
101(4), 435-449.
Möller, K., & Allen, J. (2000). Connecting, resisting, and searching for safer places:
Students respond to Mildred Taylor’s The Friendship. Journal of Literacy
Research, 32(2), 145-186.
Monkman, K., MacGillivray, L., & Leyva, C. (2003). Literacy on three planes:
Infusing social justice and culture into classroom instruction. Bilingual
Research Journal, 27(2), 247-257.
Monkman, K., Ronald, M., & Théraméne, F. (2005). Social and cultural capital in an
urban Latino school community. Urban Education, 40(1), 4-33.
Ogbu, J. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of
an explanation. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18(4), 312-334.
Ogbu, J. (1991). Immigrant and involuntary minorities in comparative perspective.
In M.A. Gibson & J. U. Ogbu (Eds.) Minority status and schooling: A
comparative study of immigrant and involuntary minorities (pp. 3-33). New
York: Garland Publishing.
Ogbu, J. (1994). Racial stratification and education in the United States: Why
inequality persists, Teachers College Record, 96(2), 264-298.
Ogbu, J. (1995). Cultural problems in minority education: Their interpretations and
consequences—Part two: Case studies. The Urban Review, 27(4). 271-297.
Olneck, M. (2004). Immigrants and education in the United States. In J. Banks & C.
McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Multicultural Education (2
nd
ed., pp. 381-403). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
267
Nieto, S. (2001). Foreword. In M. de la Luz Reyes & J. Halcón (Eds.), The best for
our children: Critical perspectives on literacy for Latino students (pp. ix-xi).
New York: Teachers College Press.
Nieto, S. (2003). Afterword. In S. Greene & D. Abt-Perkins (Eds.), Making race
visible (pp. 201-205). New York: Teachers College Press.
Olneck, M. (2000). Can multicultural education change what counts as cultural
capital? American Educational Research Journal, 27(2), 317-348.
Olneck, M. (2004). Immigrants and education in the United States. In J. Banks & C.
McGee Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (2
nd
ed., pp. 381-403). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Omi, M., & Winant, H. (1994). Racial formation in the United States. New York:
Routledge.
Ono, H. (2002). Assimilation, ethnic competition and ethnic identities of U.S.-born
persons of Mexican origin. The International Migration Review, 36(3), 726-
745.
Orfield, G. (2002). Commentary. In M. Suárez-Orozco & M. Páez (Eds.), Latinos:
Remaking America (pp. 389-397). Berkeley, CA: University of California
Press.
Orfield, G., & Chungmei, L. (2005). Why segregation matters: Poverty and
educational inequality. The Civil Rights Project, Harvard University,
Cambridge, Massachusetts. Retrieved February 17, 2005, from:
www.civilrightsproject.Harvard.edu/rsearch/deseg/Why_Segreg_Matters.pdf.
Orellana Faulstich, M., Reynolds, J., Dorner, L., & Meza, M. (2003). In other words:
Translating or “para-phrasing” as a family literacy practice in immigrant
households. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(1), 12-34.
Orellana, M. F., & Bowman, P. (2003). Cultural diversity research on learning and
development: Conceptual, methodological, and strategic considerations.
Educational Researcher, 32(5), 26-32.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative interviewing. In Qualitative evaluation and
research methods (2
nd
ed., pp. 277-368). Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Publications.
268
Pearl, A. (2002). The big picture: Systemic and institutional factors in Chicano
school failure and success. In R. Valencia (Ed.), Chicano school failure and
success (pp. 335-364). London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Pedraza, S. (1999). Immigration in America at the turn of this century: Assimilation
or diasporic citizenship? Contemporary Sociology, 28(4), 377-381.
Perez, S., & de la Rosa Salazar, D. (1997). Economic, labor force, and social
implications of Latino educational and population trends. In A. Darder, R.
Torres, & H. Gutiérrez (Eds.), Latinos and education (pp. 45-79). New York:
Routledge.
Polkinghorne, D. E. (1995). Narrative configuration in qualitative analysis.
Qualitative Studies in Education, 8(1), 5-23.
Popkewitz, T. & Brennan, M. (1998). Restructuring of social and political theory in
education: Foucault and a social epistemology of school practices. In. T.
Popkewitz & M. Brennan (Eds.), Foucault’s Challenge: Discourse,
Knowledge, and Power in Education (pp. 3-35). New York: Teachers College
Press.
Portes, A. (1997). Immigration theory for a new century: Some problems and
opportunities. The International Migration Review, 31(4), 799-825.
Portes, A., & Rumbaut, R. (2001). Legacies: The story of the immigrant second
generation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Razak, S. (1998). Looking white people in the eye: Gender, race, and culture in
courtrooms and classrooms. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Rist, R. C. (2000). HER Classic: Student social class and teacher expectations: The
self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Education Review,
70(3), 257-265.
Rodriguez, G. (1996). The emerging Latino middle class. Pepperdine University
Institute for Public Policy. Retrieved December 26, 2006 from:
http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/davenportinstitute/reports/latino/latino4.ht
ml
Rodriguez, G. (2003). Mongrel America. The Atlantic Monthly, 291(1), 95-97.
Rodriguez, G. (2004, October 10). Assimilation happens—deal with it. Los Angeles
Times, Section M, page M1.
269
Rodriguez, G. (2006a, February 5). The politics of Espanol. Los Angeles Times,
Section M, page M5.
Rodriguez, G. (2006b, February 26). Taking history to the streets. Los Angeles
Times, Section M, page M5.
Rogers, R., & Mosley, M. (2006). Racial literacy in a second-grade classroom:
Critical race theory, whiteness studies, and literacy research. Reading
Research Quarterly, 41(4), 464-495.
Rogers, T., & Soter, A. (1997). (Eds.) Introduction. Reading across cultures:
Teaching literature in a diverse society (pp. 1-9). New York: Teachers
College Press.
Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory
appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. Wertsch, P. del
Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139-164). New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Roscigno, V., & Ainsworth-Darnell, J. (1999). Race, cultural capital, and educational
resources: Persistent inequalities and achievement returns. Sociology of
Education, 72, 148-178.
Routman, R. (2003). Reading essentials. Portsmouth, MA.: Heinemann.
Rubin, J. (2004, November 28). Are schools cheating poor learners? Los Angeles
Times, California; Metro; Part B, p. 1.
Rueda, R., & Moll, L. (1994). A sociocultural perspective of motivation. In H. F.
O’Neil & M. Drillings (Eds.), Motivation: Research and theory (pp. 117-
140). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Rueda, R., & McIntyre, E. (2002). Toward universal literacy. In S. Stringfield & D.
Lands (Eds.), Educating at-risk students. One hundred first yearbook of the
National Society for the Study of Education, Part II. Chicago: The University
of Chicago Press.
270
Rumbaut, R. (1995). The new Californians: Comparative research findings on the
education progress of immigrant children. In R. Rumbaut & W. Cornelius
(Eds.), California’s immigrant children: Theory, research and implications
for educational policy (pp. 17-69). San Diego: University of California at San
Diego, Center for U.S.-Mexican Studies.
Rumbaut, R. (1997). Assimilation and its discontents: Between rhetoric and reality.
The International Migration Review, 31(4), 923-960.
Rumbaut, R. (2004). Ages, life stages, and generational cohorts: Decomposing the
immigrant first and second generations in the United States. The
International Migration Review, 38(3), 1160-1205.
Sánchez, G. (1997). History, culture and education. In A. Darder, R. Torres, & H.
Gutiérrez (Eds.), Latinos and education (pp. 117-134). New York:
Routledge.
Sánchez, G. (1999a). Race and immigration history. The American Behavioral
Scientist, 42(9), 1271-1275.
Sánchez, G. (1999b). Race, nation, and culture in recent immigration studies.
Journal of American Ethnic History, 18(4), 66-84.
Schwandt, T. (2001). Dictionary of qualitative inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Shain, Y. (1994). Marketing the democratic creed abroad: U.S. diasporic politics in
the era of multiculturalism. Diaspora, 3(1), 85-111.
Shain, Y. (1999). Marketing the American creed abroad: Diasporas in the U.S. and
their homelands. Harvard: Cambridge University Press.
Shannon, P. (1990). The struggle to continue: Progressive reading instruction in the
United States. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Shannon, P. (1996). Poverty, literacy, and politics: Living in the USA. Journal of
Literacy Research, 28(3), 429-449.
Shannon, P. (1998). Reading poverty. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
271
Short, K., Schroeder, J., Kauffman, G., & Kaser, S. (2005). Thoughts from the
editors. Language Arts, 82(3), 167.
Sipe, L., & McGuire, C. (2006). Young children’s resistance to stories. The Reading
Teacher, 60(1), 6-13.
Smolkin, L., & Suina, J. (1997). Artistic triumph or multicultural failure?: Multiple
perspectives on a “multicultural” award-winning book. The New Advocate,
10(4), 307-322.
Spencer, M. G., & Harpalani, V. (2006). What does “acting White” actually mean?:
Racial identity, adolescent development, and academic achievement among
African American youth. In J. U. Ogbu (Ed.), Minority status, collective
identity and schooling. Mahweh, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Spradley, J. P. (1979). Ethnographic interviewing. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Wilson.
Spradley, J. P. (1980). Participant observation. Australia: Thompson Learning.
Stanton-Salazar, R., & Dornbusch, S. (1995). Social capital and the reproduction of
inequality: Information networks among Mexican-origin high school
students. Sociology of Education, 68(2), 116-135.
Stake, R. (2000). Case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of
qualitative research (2
nd
ed., pp. 435-454). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, A. (1998). Basics of qualitative research (2
nd
ed.), Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Street, B. (2001). Literacy events and literacy practices. In K. Jones (Ed.),
Multilingual literacies: Reading and writing different worlds (pp. 17-29).
Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing.
Suárez-Orozco, M. (2000). Everything you ever wanted to know about assimilation
but were afraid to ask. Daedalus, 129(4), 1-29.
Suárez-Orozco, M. (2001). Globalization, immigration, and education: The research
agenda. Harvard Educational Review, 71(3), 345-365.
Suárez-Orozco, M. (2005). Rethinking education in the global era. Phi Delta Kappa,
87(3), 209-212.
272
Suárez-Orozco, M., & Páez, M. (2002). (Eds.), Introduction. Latinos: Remaking
America (pp. 1-37). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Swartz, D. (1990). Pierre Bourdieu: Culture, education and social inequality. In K. J.
Dougherty & F. M. Hammack (Eds.), Education and society: A reader (pp.
70-80). San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace Jovanich.
Swartz, D. (1997). Culture & power: The sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Tate, W. F. IV (1997). Critical race theory and education: History, theory, and
implications. In M. Apple (Ed.), Review of research in education, (Vol. 22).
(pp. 195-247). Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.
Tedlock, B. (2000). Ethnography and ethnographic representation. In N. K. Denzin
& Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2
nd
ed., pp. 455-
486). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Tharp, R., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Tierney, W. G. (1991). Utilizing ethnographic interviews to enhance academic
decision making. New Directions for Institutional Research, 72, 7-21.
Torres-Saillant, S. (2002). Problematic paradigms: Racial diversity and corporate
identity in the Latino community. In M. Suarez-Orozco & M. Paez (Eds.),
Latinos: Remaking America (pp. 435-455). Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Trueba, H. (1988). Peer socialization among minority students: A high school
dropout prevention program. In H. Trueba & C. Delgado-Gaitan (Eds.),
School and society: Learning content through culture (pp. 201-217). New
York: Praeger.
Trueba, H. (2002). Multiple ethnic, racial, and cultural identities in action: From
marginality to a new cultural capital in modern society. Journal of Latinos
and Education, 1(1), 7-28.
U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Census. Retrieved September 2005.
273
Valencia, R. (1997). Introduction. In R. Valencia (Ed., The evolution of deficit
thinking: Educational thought and practice (pp. ix-xvi). Stanford Series on
Education and Public Policy. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.
Valenzuela, A. (1999). Subtractive schooling: U.S.-Mexican youth and the politics of
caring. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Vasquez, O. (1994). The magic of La Clase Mágica: Enhancing the learning
potential of bilingual children. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy,
17(2), 120-128.
Van Maanen, J. (1988). Tales of the field. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Vélez-Ibañez, C. (1988). Networks of exchange among Mexicans in the U.S. and
Mexico: Local level mediating responses to national and intentional
transformations. Urban Anthropology, 17(1), 27-51.
Vopp, L. (2000). Blaming culture for bad behavior. Yale Journal of Law and
Humanities, 12, 89-117.
Wells, G., & Claxton, G. (2002). Introduction: Sociocultural perspectives on the
future of education. In G. Wells & G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for life in the
21
st
century: Sociocultural perspectives on the future of education (pp. 1-18).
Oxford, England: Blackwell Publishing.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.).
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky, Volume 1. Problems
of general psychology. (N. Minick, Trans.). In R. W. Riber & A. S. Carton
(Eds.), New York: Plenum Press.
Weaver, C. (1998). Reading process and practice. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
Worthy, J., Rodriguez-Galindo, A., Czop Assaf, L., Martinez, L., & Cuero, K.
(2003). Fifth-grade bilingual students and precursors to “subtractive
schooling.” Bilingual Research Journal, 27(2), 275-294.
274
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA:
Sage Publications.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Applications of case study research (2
nd
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications.
Zecker, L., Pappas, C., & Cohen, S. (1998). Finding the right measure of explanation
for young Latina/o writers. Language Arts, 76(1), 49-56.
275
REFERENCES
CHILDREN’S TEXTS AND MOVIES
Books
Beatty, P. (1981). Lupita mañana. New York: Morrow.
Bunting, E. (1996). Going home. New York : HarperCollins Publishers
Cherry, L. (1992). A river ran wild: An environmental history. San Diego, CA:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Ferris, J. (1989). Arctic explorer: The story of Matthew Henson. Minneapolis:
Carolrhoda Books.
Munoz, Ryan, P. (2000). Esperanza rising. New York: Scholastic Press.
Sachar, L. (1998). Holes. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Say, A. (1993). Grandfather’s journey. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Guthrie, W. (1998). This land is your land. Boston: Little, Brown.
MOTION PICTURES
Cast away. Starkey, S., Hanks, T., Zemeckis, & Rapke, J. (Producers), & Zemeckis,
R. (Director). (2001/2000). [Motion picture]. United States. 20
th
Century Fox.
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. –Grey, B., & Zanuck, R. (Producers) & Burton,
T. (Director). (2005). [Motion picture]. United States. Warner Bros. Pictures.
Madagascar - Soria, M. & Cheng, T. (Producers), & Burton, M., Frolick, B., Darnell,
E., & McGrath, T. (Writers) (2005). [Motion picture]. United States:
DreamWorks Animation .
Lion King. –Hahn, D. (Producer) & Allers, R. & Minkoff, R (Screenplay).
(1994/2003). [Motion picture]. United States. Walt Disney Pictures.
276
Master and commander, the far side of the world. –Goldwyn, Jr., S., Weir, P., &
Henderson, D. (Producers) & Weir, P. (Director). (2004/2003). [Motion
picture]. United States. 20
th
Century Fox.
Men in black –Spielberg, S. (Executive Producer) & Solomon, E. (Screen Story and
Screenplay). (1997). [Motion picture]. United States. Columbia Pictures.
Mississippi burning –Zollo, F. & Colesberry, R.F.. (Producers) & Gerolmo, C.
(Writer). (1999/1998). [Motion picture]. United States. Orion Pictures.
National treasure –Bruckheimer, J. & Turteltaub, J. (Producers) & Turteltaub, J.
(Director). (2005). [Motion picture]. United States. Walt Disney Pictures.
Remember the Titans –Bruckheimer, J. & Oman, C. (Producers) & Howard, G. A.
(Writer). (2001/2000). [Motion picture]. United States. Walt Disney Pictures.
Ray –Baldwin, H. et al. (Producers) & Hackford, T. (Director). (2005). [Motion
picture]. United States. Universal Pictures.
Silverado –Kasdan, L. & Kasdan, M. (Writers) & Kasdan, L. (Producer/Director).
(1999/1985). [Motion picture]. United States. Columbia Pictures.
Star wars. –McCallum, R. (Producer) & Lucas, G. (Writer/Director). (2005). [Motion
picture]. United States. Lucasfilm Ltd.
277
Appendix A: Classroom Layout
Teacher’s
desk
c
o
u
n
t
e
r
bookcases
whiteboards
student desks
278
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH TIMELINE APRIL-June 2005 (page 1 of 2 )
RESEARCH
ACTIVITIES
Week 1
April 18
Week 2
April 25
Week 3
May 2
Week 4
May 9
Week 5
May 16
Week 6
May 23
Week 7
May 30
Week 8
June 6
Week 9
June 13
Participant
observation: Phase 1:
broad overview
Daily-full day
5 visits
(#1-#5)
17 hours
3 visits
(#6-#8)
12.5
hours
Phase I:
8 visits
29.5
hours
Participant
observation: Phase II:
Focused observations
Daily-full day
4 visits
(#9-#12)
19 hours
4 days
(#13-#16)
18 hours
Phase II:
8 visits
37 hours
Participant
observation: Phase
III: focal students
Daily- full day
4 days
(#17-#20)
18 hours
5 days
(#21-
#25)
24 hours
2 days
(#26-#27)
10 hours
5 days
(#28-#32)
28 hours
Phase
III:
16 days
80 hours
Participant
observation: Phase
IV: confirmation of
hypotheses and exit
interviews
Daily- full day.
5 days
(#33-
#37)
21 hours
Phase
IV:
5 days
21 hours
Total:
Weeks: 9
Observation Participation visits: 37
Hours: 167.5
Standardized
Testing:
3 days
8:30-10:30
Standardized
Testing:
1 day
279
APPENDIX B: RESEARCH TIMELINE APRIL-JUNE 2005 Continued (page 2 of 2 )
RESEARCH
ACTIVITIES
Week 1
April 18
Week 2
April 25
Week 3
May 2
Week 4
May 9
Week 5
May 16
Week 6
May 23
Week 7
May 30
Week 8
June 6
Week 9
June 13
June 20
Recruitment of
participants
Daily-full day
X
Interviews: teacher
3 formal
9 informal
Informal
5-1-05
Informal
5-6-05
Informal
5-9-05
Formal
Interview
(#1)
5-19-05
Informal
5-23-05
5-26-05
5-26-05
Informal
5-30-06
Informal
6-8-05
Formal
Interview
(#2)
6-10-05
Informal
6-23
Formal
interview
(#3)
7-12-05
Interview: principal
1 formal
6-2-05
Interviews: Three school
and district stakeholders
1 formal with each
6-2-05
6-2-05
6-3-05
Interviews: children
4 interviews each triad
5-27-05
5-26-05
6-2-05
6-2-05
6-10-05
6-10-05
6-14-05
6-15-05
Interviews: parents of five
focal children (5
interviews)
6-20-05 6-21-05
Conversations with
children
6-2-05 6-21-05
280
Appendix C: Participant Observation Guide – Sample completed
Day: Tuesday date: 4-26-05
Observation: #__7______
Time started: 8:45
Time concluded: 3:50
Total hours:
Lesson/literacy activities: 4-26-05
1___misspelled words
2___partner reading
3___written summary & main idea
4___read aloud (by teacher)
5___independent reading
6. writing a cover “Letter to Reader”
Materials used: 4-26-05
(Curriculum, textbook, teacher handouts-linked to lesson)
1) T. writes on whiteboard
2) H.M. text-James Forte, basal reader p. 316-320
3)” “ and loose leaf paper
4)” “ James Forten, basal reader p . 316
5) self-selected texts
6) SBWP student example, blank typing paper
School institutional events:: 4-26-05
(shortened instructional day, school assembly)
Science Fair in cafeteria throughout the day. Grades
3, 4, and 5 participate. Outside judges brought in to
determine winners.
Open House tomorrow night.
Classroom environment:: 4-26-05
(Description of relevant changes, e.g. student
work on bulletin board, maps, student-made
posters)
Teacher included more student material on
the bulletin board.
Student writing collected: 4-26-05
-none—
Read the students’ odes to an American Revolutionary
hero of their choice. (These are going to be displayed for
Open House tomorrow night.)
Classroom events: 4-26-05
-Throughout the day, selected students are being called out individually or with their partner to give an oral
presentation on their science project to science fair judges.-Principal walks into class today. Observes for
a few minutes, makes a comment and leaves.
School /district environment: 4-26-05
-Teachers are wearing black again today as a way of
protesting the district’s proposed plan to cut their
benefits.
Research events: 4-26-05
-I’m late. First time there is heavy traffic on 605. Left at 7:50 and arrived at 8:35
-Informal interview with Matthew after recess
-Positioned myself in a chair in front of the south whiteboard during L.A. This made a difference in
quality of student talk and observations captured.
-Informal interview with t. Stayed after and talked to t. as he was readying class for Open House
tomorrow night. He discussed tension with principal. We talked about candidates for focal students.
-Recruiting participant. Gave a “Reminder Parent Letter” and Parent Consent form to the one
student who hasn’t returned form.
Larger context: 4-26-05
-CAT6 testing starts next week
281
Appendix D: Ten Pivotal Moments - Sample
FIELD NOTES: (FN9) Pivotal Moments
Observation day/date: Monday, May 2, 2005
Observation: #9
Overhear student & her mom speaking Spanish in the parking lot in the a.m. before school starts (p.
1)
OC. Note the different sounds of language on the campus in the morning so different from the day-to-
day official school life.
Students Read Earth Day Commercials over PA system (p. 2)
Anthony and Evita read their commercials over the P.A. system in the a.m. Anthony is barely audible
and students in class start to laugh. Mr. Harris reminds them that Anthony and Evita are speaking to
the entire student body of 600 students at the school over the P.A. system and it is their job to support
one another.
OC: Also, cultural capital is being asked to read over the p.a. system.
Teacher builds on the sense of community. When others step out and take a risk, it is incumbent on
the others to support them.
Tells them he is proud of them (p. 2)
Teacher tells students he is proud of them for their recent efforts. He remarks,“Excellente esquierzo a
mi amigo”. He compliments their odes telling them some of you hit a home run. And he brings to
attention the placement in the Science Fair of 4 of the students.
OC: Note Spanish language that the t. uses.
The month of May and multicultural days listed on the board (p. 5)
The month of May has many special days for Pacific Islander/Asian Americans, Mother’s day, cinco
de mayo, Older American day.
O.C: Different recognition for differing groups of individuals.
‘Madre’ & ‘matriarch’ (p. 5)
Teacher writes the first three letters for ‘madre’ on the whiteboard and makes the connection between
this word and “matriarch”
OC: Tap into students’ Spanish language to help them understand English.
“What does it mean ‘My dark Grandma’?” (p. 5)
Eddie has read one of the poems on the board is confused by the adjective “dark”. He doesn’t realize
that the reference is to dark skin. The teacher responds by asking, “What do you think our friend
Francisco Alarcon wrote about?” Then he elaborates and is specific, “His [Alarcon] grandmother
had brown skin.”
OC: Eddie doesn’t see much differentiation between skin color between him and the other Latino
students in the class. Another instance of kids seemingly oblivious to their race/ethnicity. And the
teacher prompts him about the author’s Latino last name as if that were a sufficient explanation.
282
Spontaneous clapping for Evita’s poem (p. 6)
O.C. Students applaud after she finishes reading her poem aloud and I wonder how Evita feels and
evaluates peers’ generous feedback. Note how supportive students are of one another in this instance.
Poems for important women, aunts, and grandmas
Natasha wrote a poem and read it aloud. It is about her grandmother coming from Mexico (p. 6)
OC: The teacher seems to achieve many purposes in this activity by having students write poems,
giving them two different models to choose from, and having them read them aloud in the classroom.
The students write to their mother or grandmother, but they are also able to tap into their ancestry and
explore it more in the classroom.
5 students walk up to teacher to share their poem one-on-one. (p. 7)
Teacher has called on students to read their poems. He talks about Oscar’s as being “a home run
hitter”. The activity is completed right before recess and five different students walk up to him to
share their poems.
OC: interesting that after such an intense writing and sharing session, so many students chose to come
up and share with the teacher.
Corina’s poem and the Language Arts book. A text-to-text connection (p. 6)
The teacher reads Corina’s poem aloud as he often does with her reading because she doesn’t have a
loud voice. Afterwards he comments that he is “making a text-to-text [the Soar to Success book]
where he sees the couple dancing. This illustration was from an Eve Bunting book, I believe, in which
the teacher shared how much he enjoyed this particular illustration of a man dancing with his wife
because it reminded him of his own wife.
O.C. It was the teacher that made the text-to-text connection. I wonder if Corina wrote her poem with
that intention.
283
Appendix E: Interview Protocols
Focal Students
Four semi-structured group interviews
• Who is a good reader in your classroom? A good writer?
• What do you like to write about in your classroom? (e.g., topics)
• What do you like to read about in your class?
• Tell me about some of your hobbies and interests? Tell me about a time when you wrote
about these in class.
• Can you describe how you decided to write this particular story [student writing sample] in
class?
• How do you feel about reading and writing?
• What are some of the favorite stories/books that you’ve read in your classroom?
• Do you read different things at home? Do you write different things at home?
• Do you share your writing with anyone? Why or why not?
• How do you feel when people are reading your writing?
• What TV shows do you like to watch?
• What books are you currently reading?
• When you’re not in school, what other activities do you like to do?
• Besides “using lots of detail,” what do kids need to do to be a good writer?
• How do TV shows and movies help you be a better reader or writer?
• What is “discrimination”?
• Why does Mr. Harris talk about it in class?
• Do these class discussions remind you of anything?
• Do you think there is discrimination today? How do you know?
284
Classroom Teacher
Three semi-structured formal interviews
• How do students learn about reading?
• How do students learn about writing?
• How do you recognize when students are developing as readers/writers?
• Describe materials in your classroom other than the language arts textbooks that are helpful
to students’ learning.
• What are some of the school and district measures for assessing student progress?
• What would you like to see differently in a language arts classroom?
• What is working best in your classroom? How do you know?
• What is your philosophy on how students best learn to become good readers and writers?
THEMES
• How would you define discrimination?
• Why is that a theme with these students?
• Do you think Room 500 will encounter discrimination?
PEDAGOGY
• You use a lot of popular culture references, e.g., to define “utopia” you used “Willy Wonka
Chocolate Factory” (6/6). Why these when there are other shared classroom experiences to
draw upon such as James Forten or Betsy’s Truck? (5/31)
• How much of your teaching is informed by having taught at the middle school?
• Principal tells him, “You think your class is special.” Tell me more about these types of
interactions. What do they mean to you?
• You choose alternative texts and stories that deal with discrimination and other social issues?
Can you tell me about those choices? (4/26)
285
Parents/Guardians of focal children
One semi-structured interview
Review: Confidential information and not shared with anyone
Questions about children’s reading and writing
1) What types of reading does your child do at home?
2) What types of writing do they do at home?
3) How is your child progressing as a reader and writer?
4) Does your child watch TV or videos at home?
5) How do you feel about the time he/she spends watching TV/videos?
6) What language do you speak at home?
7) Do you want your child to be fluent in another language?
8) What are your hopes for your child’s education in middle school? After middle
school?
286
Appendix F: Writing Artifacts Collected
Writing Assignment
Date/s written
Collected from:
1 A summary written after listening
to the song, “Fast Car”
April 21 Whole class
2 Recycling Radio Announcements
April 27-28 Whole class
3 Writing journals: Mother’s Day
poem
May 2 Whole class
4 Response to Scholastic Magazine
Time for Kids writing prompt
May 12 Focal students and
selected students who
read in class
5 Persuasive letter to mayoral
candidate
May 11, 12, 13 Whole class/final
drafts
6 Writing journals: Response to
poem of the day
May 16 Whole class
7 Personal historical narratives May 17 Whole class
1
st
and 2
nd
drafts
8 Personal historical narratives
May 21, 23, 24, 25,
26
Drafts
9 Writing a Friendly Letter
May 25 Whole class
10 Personal historical narrative:
Published final
May 27 Whole class
11 Response to literature guide
(practice for district writing
assessment)
May 31 Focal students
12 Letter to a former teacher
June 7 Selected students
13 Essay on relevance and meaning
of CD song
June 8 Selected students
14 Writing Portfolio
June 16 Focal students
287
Appendix G: Student Language Proficiency
Room 500 Student Roster and Language Assessment
Five focal students are differentiated in gray shaded rows
Student
Names
Norwood School
Home language survey
(self-reported)
California English
Language Development
Test (CELDT)*
1 Alex English
2 Alexis English
3 Anthony English/Filipino, Visaya n.a.
4 Brenda English
5 Carolina Spanish Early Intermediate
6 Chloe English
7 Connor Spanish Early Advanced
8 Corina Spanish Advanced
9 Denise English
10 Drake English/Spanish Early Advanced
11 Eddie Spanish Early Intermediate
12 Evita English
13 Geraldo Spanish n.a.
14 Jessica Spanish n.a.
15 Jesus Spanish Intermediate
16 John English/Spanish ELD Level 5
17 Justin Spanish Early Advanced
18 Kitty n.a. n.a.
19 Kristin English
20 Michael English/Spanish FEP
21 Nancy Spanish n.a.
22 Natasha Spanish n.a.
23 Oscar English/Spanish n.a.
24 Ray English
25 Rosey Spanish Intermediate
26 Speedy Spanish Intermediate
27 Tarry English
28 Vanessa English
29 Victor Spanish Intermediate
30 Virginia English/Spanish Early Advanced
31 ----- English
32 ----- Spanish
* There are five rankings for CELDT test based on numerical scores: Beginning, Early Intermediate,
Intermediate, Early Advanced, and Advanced. CELDT is required for each year for English learners
from K-12. Room 500 rankings were from their 4
th
grade scores. “n.a.” denotes unavailability of
student info.
288
Appendix H: Coding Data
CODING FOR DATA SOURCES
_____________________________________________________________________________
FIELDNOTES
FN# ___, ____ = Fieldnotes (typed pivotal moments),
Observation participation visit, line numbers
R# ____, ____ = Reflections (typed), observation participation visit, line numbers
FW, ____, ____ = Daily Focused writing (analytic memos), date, page number
HWFN, _____, _____ = Handwritten field notes, observation participation visit, page number
OC = Observer’s Comments
INTERVIEWS
( IN: ___________, ________, _______ )
Coding of interviewees:
T = Teacher
____ = focal student –always will include a name
SI = individual conversations with students, always will include a name
Parent = parent
Principal = Principal
Lit Coach = Literacy coach
Dist Lit Coach = District Literacy Coordinator
DOCUMENTS
SD, ___ = School Document, numbered
Transcript
number
Page or line
numbers
individual’s
code
289
Appendix I: Students’ Resistance
Teacher’s efforts to
tap issues of
Textual basis Instantiation Nature of student response
LATINO CULTURE
1 Latino culture [preparation for literacy
activity]
Teacher insists students have music at home by various Latin
American artists to share in a literacy activity.
(HWFN #29, p. 2)
Students disavow they have music from
any of these groups.
2 Latino culture ----- Teacher recounts students’ limited knowledge of Latino culture
during Latino Heritage month in Sept. (TI, #1)
Students don’t recognize Latino activists
from 60s and 70s
3 Latino culture Literacy activity: Brown
Bag Book Exchange
Spanish-language book in Friday’s Brown Bag Book Exchange
(FN25)
Connor makes it clear he is not happy with
the book.
4 Latino culture CD song lyrics; student
essay
Nancy brings in Spanish-language song to share with class. Teacher
prefaces it by telling students “Those people who speak foreign
language will be a certain percentage smarter than other people.”
(HWFN#31, p. 8)
Nancy recalls peers initially laughing as
the song started to play. After teacher
reads her essay, positive response from
several students
5 Latino culture School-text:
Esperanza Rising by
(Munoz Ryan, 2000)
Teacher recounts last year when some students shared their families'
experiences about working in the fields.
(HWFN#26, p. 15)
Only Speedy responds, “That’s what I did
in Mexico.”
6 Latino culture School-text:
American History text
Teacher leads discussion about Native Americans
(HWFN#21, p. 14)
Students had very little to say. Victor was
engaged in conversation. Talk turned to
popular culture movies Silverado and
Pocahontas.
7 Latino culture School-text:
Multicultural poems
Teacher provides option of two multicultural Mother’s Day poems.
One is titled “Matriarch” by Latino author.
(HWFN#9, p. 5)
One student’s confusion over descriptive
detail: "What does it mean 'My dark
Grandmother'?"
8 Latino culture One-page handout about
holiday celebrated in
Arizona, New Mexico and
Calif.
Teacher reads aloud and queries students about significance of cinco
de mayo. (HWFN#11, p. 10)
Limited knowledge: “Something to do
with fighting the French.” Victor had most
to share.
9 Latino culture Phone conversation Teacher’s conducts in-class phone conversation with parent in
Spanish. (HWFN#13, p. 4)
Students giggle among themselves over his
vocabulary and pronunciation
10 Latino culture Video on rainforests Teacher shows video on South American rainforests; spokesperson
speaks briefly in Spanish (HWFN #11, p. 4)
Student calls out derisively, "Speak
English."
290
DISCRIMINATION
1 Discrimination School-text:
A River Ran Wild (Cherry,
1992)
Teacher asks, “What does it mean, “Indian fishing rights vanished”
and remarks that "Unfortunately, the Native Americans had to “rely
on the bow and arrow to defend themselves.” (HWFN#28, p. 4a)
No response from students
2 Discrimination School-text:
Basal reader literature:
James Forten
Teacher asks about possibility of a black man wanting to have a
relationship with a white woman.
(HWFN#7, p. 8)
Student notes similar situation arose in
popular culture movie “Holes”
3 Discrimination School-text:
Basal reader literature
selection: James Forten
Teacher notes individuals were excluded from society based on the
color of their skin.
(HWFN#7, p. 15)
Students focus on answering text’s literal
comprehension questions
4 Discrimination School-text:
American History text
Teacher notes undesirable land was given to American Indians. “In
2005, American Indians are building casinos.” Evita wonders, “Why
is everyone getting mad at them?” (HWFN#21, p. 14)
Rest of students, notably Kristen, who
shares a Latina and Native American
heritage, is silent throughout this
conversation
IMMIGRATION
1 Immigration School-text:
Grandfather’s Journey
(Say, 1993)
Teacher recounts many different immigration stories, particularly
one of a baseball player who desperately constructed a raft out of
coconuts to come to U.S. from Cuba. (HWFN#13, p. 12)
Tarry connects ‘raft’ to popular culture
movie “Castaway”
2 Immigration School-text:
Grandfather’s Journey
(Say, 1993)
Teacher asks students if they “wonder about sacrifices your parents
made? Those people who faced discrimination and language issues
and who worked hard." (HWFN#13, p. 12)
Anthony brings up grandparents’ efforts—
not parents. No one else commented.
3 Immigration School-text:
Grandfather’s Journey
(Say, 1993)
Teacher prods, ”What is different about the way people come to
U.S. now? Someone with connection to land?”
(HWFN#13, p. 12)
Students change topic to discuss pop
singers Stevie Wonder and Brittney
Spears.
4 Immigration
Lupita Mañana (Beatty,
1981)
Teacher suggests that students’ relatives might be interested in a
particular text.
(HWFN#26, p. 15)
Silence.
291
Teacher’s efforts to
tap into issue of
Textual basis Instantiation Nature of student response
POVERTY AND SOCIAL CLASS
1 Poverty,
discrimination, etc.
Lyrics to the song, Fast
Car, by Tracy Chapman
(1988)
Teacher asks if students were musical artists what issues they would
write about (HWFN#3, p. 12)
Issues include: boys bugging them,
siblings bugging them
2 Poverty/
economic disparity
School-text:
Basal reader literature
selection: James Forten
Teacher ponders the economic disparity between America and a
specific Latin American country, “I wonder why my family is in a
better place.” (HWFN#7, p. 15)
Silence. Students do not share the
similar wonderings.
3 Social class Lyrics from student CD
song, “Heroes”
Teacher remarks, “[President’s] family comes from a long line of
money [and] probably does not relate to a lot of people in this class
who "are not swimming in money.”
(HWFN#31, p. 8)
Phone rings and discussion topic
changes to homeless people.
4 Social class Lyrics from student CD
song, “Heroes”
Teacher leads discussion about individuals who are homeless.
(HWFN#34, p. 7)
Vanessa shares an unsympathetic
story about the homeless.
5 Social inequity School-text:
A River Ran Wild (Cherry,
1992)
Teacher draws students’ attention to unfair and dangerous working
conditions for children during the Industrial Revolution. (HWFN#29;
p. 15)
Students unfazed. One student asked,
“What would happen if kids died
there [in the factory]?” Then follows
up with a question about their class’
library time.
ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
1 Environmental
issues
School assignment:
Letter writing
activity to mayoral
candidate
Teacher creates writing activity for students to compose a letter to
mayoral candidates requesting action on environmental issues. (May
10 –May 20)
A few weeks later, Oscar describes
detritus in nearby river and asks in
exasperation, "But what can I do?"
(HWFN#29, p. 15)
2 Multicultural
perspectives
School-text:
The Good Writing Guide
Teacher advises students, "Everyone has a story… Maybe you'd get a
different point of view if you looked in [a homeless person’s or a child
selling Chiclets in Mexico] eyes.”
(FN24; HWFN#24, p. 5-6)
Students have counter examples in
their neighborhood experience.
Oscar tells story of individual posing
as a homeless person to get money
(HWFN#24, p. 5)
292
Appendix J: Students’ Agency
Issue Discussed Textual basis Instantiation Nature of student response
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES
1 Cultural differences Arctic Explorer (Ferris,
1989)
Teacher notes values in cultural differences Student agrees
2 Cultural differences;
need for tolerance and
understanding
Song lyrics: Heroes Oscar brings in song “Heroes”
(HWFN #34, p. 4-6)
Students talk about homeless
people, tolerance for others, and
importance of apologizing.
DISCRIMINATION
1 Discrimination
experienced by parent
Grandfather’s Journey
(Say, 1993)
Teacher asks students to think of sacrifices their
parents made. (HWFN, 13, p. 12)
One student mentions her mother
had incident in a public park and
was told to go back to Cuba
2 Discrimination in
general
Arctic Explorer (Ferris,
1989)
Discussion about book character subjected to
discrimination (HWFN #3, p. 6)
Students ask questions about why
there is discrimination, and if
there is slavery today.
3 Discrimination in text Arctic Explorer (Ferris,
1989)
Teacher notes the book’s character was black. (HWFN
#3, p. 6)
Student speculates more
opportunity in another country
4 Discrimination in text Arctic Explorer (Ferris,
1989)
Teacher notes “color of skin makes him servant”
(HWFN #3, p. 6)
Empathy.
5 Discrimination in text Arctic Explorer (Ferris,
1989)
Discussion about discrimination against Matthew
Henson (HWFN #5, p. 3)
One student brings in book to
share with teacher
6 Discrimination toward
others
Chinese Nursery Rhymes,
Robert Wynham
Discussion of internment camps (FN23, p. 16) Incredulous. Connection to
popular culture movie, The Hulk
7 Discrimination toward
others
American History text Inferential questions about Native Americans (R21,
HWFN)
Students discuss unfair treatment
8 Discrimination toward
others
Student writing his
historical personal
narrative
Peer editing; adding description of Nazi soldiers
(HWFN #23, p. 8-9)
Student connected Nazi’s
treatment of Jews to US racial
segregation during 50s and 60s
293
Issue Discussed Textual basis Instantiation Nature of student response
LATINO ANCESTRY AND SPANISH LANGUAGE
1 Latino ancestry Mother’s Day graphic
organizer
Mother’s Day Interview: Recording parent’s origin of
birth (FN12)
Students excited about using
Atlas for finding correct spelling
of Mexico’s cities and states.
2 Latino ancestry -
Immigration
Mother’s Day poems Mother’s Day: poems (FN9) One student writes about
grandmother immigrating
3 Latino culture Basal reader literature
selection: James Forten
Teacher draws attention to illustration in text:
1) Asks what students notice.
2) What does it mean to be ‘men of color’?
3) Then what does it mean to be people of color
today?
4) What does it mean when they say ‘brown skin”?
(FN7, HWFN, p. 15)
Students response (in order):
1) Student: “colored”
2) Student: Black men.
3) Students reply (almost
exuberantly): “The whole world”.
4) Student: “My skin.”
4 Spanish language ------- Teacher speaks Spanish during informal class
activities of class auction and reading school lunch
menu
Students respond easily in
Spanish.
5 Spanish language Vocabulary words in text Using Spanish language cognates: madre, vivir Students recognizes word
POVERTY AND SOCIAL CLASS
1 Poverty in another
country
Basal reader literature
selection: James Forten
Teacher highlights economic disparity between a Latin
American country and U.S. (HWFN #7; p. 10, 15)
Student shares story of man
living in poverty in Mexico
2 Societal issues Tracy Chapman song
lyrics to the song “Fast
Car”
Discussion about global societal issues Broader societal issues:
homelessness, war, welfare
294
Appendix K: Students’ Perceptions of Discrimination
HISTORICAL
1 It means people treat others unfair. Like white people used to treat black people. Like slaves. (SI, Eddie , 744-749)
2 It’s good since we’re knowing history and how the people were treated. That’s sad. And we go like, “Why did they do that?” He wants to make us
think like why’d they do that. (IN2; Lines 261-265)
3 They have freedom now thanks to Martin Luther King. Martin Luther King stopped discrimination.” (SI, Anthony, 34-40)
4 So you can know about things that happened back then. (SI, Michael, 439-444)
5 He wants us to know how people were treated in the old days. (SI Eddie , 744-749)
6 White people treat colored people bad. I took my history book home and read the whole thing on history. I’m glad it happened [because now things
are better], you want to know about what happened (SI, Tarry & Alexis, 1060-1070.
7 Most of the people in this classroom are Spanish people and we wouldn’t be playing with them. Martin Luther King and Rosa Parks are like a team
and now everyone is equal. (SI, Tarry & Alexis, 1060-1070
If Martin Luther King hadn’t spoken up, we would be in good classrooms and we wouldn’t have broken chairs. (SI, Tarry & Alexis, 1060-1070
INFORMED BY POPULAR CULTURE
1 Like “Remember the Titans” white people and black people return to school. White people going on strike. Guy introduces his [inaudible].
Girlfriend doesn’t want to shake hands. (SI, Brenda, 923-928)
2 Like on the episode, “I’m So Raven”, [the lead character] was trying to get a job. (SI, Tarry & Alexis, 1052-1057)
Her friend Chelsea who was white got the job. (SI, Tarry & Alexis, 1052-1057)
3 Because Mr. P. told us, and there’s T.V. shows. (Jessica - IN3; Lines 155-166 )
4 Yes in Louisiana and Mississippi. I now because of the movie “Mississippi Burning.”(SI, Michael, 446-454)
5 On an episode of That’s So Raven, ___ and Chelsea went to mall to get a job. … Lady threw [the application] into the garbage because he was
black. (SI, Virginia, 808-818)
PERSONAL EXPERIENCES
1 In Long Beach, there was always discrimination in my neighborhood. Not to us because we didn’t play outside there were colored people upstairs
and there were white propel downstairs. Colored people’s kids were downstairs playing and the white adults would say, “we’re selling chocolates.”
Adults would tell their kids not to play. I though, “How sad, we’re all human beings.” (SI, Virginia, 820-825)
2 I used to live in Compton. I went to school called Ralph J. Elementary and there were a lot of African Americans there. I was there nine months
and I was this thing called Safety Monitor, the whole school had. There was this one kid. I was monitoring on the street and he would tell people
that I was stupid. His Mom was a teacher and she was mean. (Victor - IN3; Lines 319-336)
295
PERSONAL EXPERIENCES (continued)
3 [Michael tells me about an incident where he used to live]
“The manager had a sink. The kid pushed me [and the sink broke]. His mom started to tell her son, ‘You don’t want to be like Michael.’ Made me
look bad.” (SI, Michael, 457-459)
4 I was at my nana’s house. My cousin was riding her bike. These black people said to her, “You don’t belong to me.” She cried and told her mother.
(SI, Brenda, 930-939)
STUDENTS DEFINING THE CONCEPT OF “DISCRIMINATION”
1 People get treated differently because of their skin color. Everyone is the same on the inside.(SI, Michael, 439-444)
2 I think that discrimination means like calling other people names. Like if somebody wears glasses and some people will be like calling them four-
eyes and stuff like that. (Corina IN3, 167-216)
3 It’s like when somebody’s an African American and somebody else is white, the white person would say something mean or bad to the African
American…And when he says like they don’t belong in this state just because they’re a different color. (Jessica - IN3; Lines 155-166)
4 Like when [student in class] says something about Chinese people or something, Mr. Harris always reminds us with a good quote. “If you live in
glass houses, don’t throw stones.” (Oscar, IN3; Lines 141
5 Then, you’re getting very personal like say if you’re a Caucasian person and then you start saying that an African-American is treating them really
bad, like saying you can’t play with us, that person discriminating is afraid of something new. Kristin - IN3; Lines 319-341
6 People who don’t like other people’s culture. For example, a white person doesn’t like the black people. And the black people was really mad.”
And some people from other countries that come to the U.S. don’t have freedom. They have freedom now thanks to Martin Luther King. Martin
Luther King stopped discrimination.” (SI, Anthony, 34-40)
7 It means the blacks and whites getting separated. The colored always had dirty bathrooms. When I was watching the movie, Our Friend Martin, I
saw a part, where the colored were on strike. The police had the dogs on them. They sprayed them with a water hose
8 Don’t judge a book by its cover. [(SI, Matthew, 500-505)
9 Being rude to others. Sometimes they can be jealous and mean to them. (SI, Denise, 606-614)
10 Making fun of other people, name-calling and I think it also means to making people feel bad and making them want to change tot personality to
make them [be] like them. (SI, Eddie 751-752)
11 If [for a ] certain reason, you don’t look like them and have a different color skin or don’t look like them, then they don’t let you play. (SI, Brenda)
12 People treating other people unfairly-unequally. (SI, Tarry, 992-997
13 People treating other people like they are nothing. They judge you by your skin color and the way you speak. (SI, Alexis, 1040-1047)
296
Appendix L: Literacy Activities
ROOM 500’S LITERACY ACTIVITIES
(Listed Alphabetically)
1. Basal Reader/Content Area Texts (reading)
2. “Brown Bag Book Exchange” *
3. Class play and performance on literature selection (reading and dramatization)
4. District writing assessment (writing)
5. Historical personal narratives (writing)
6. Letters to former teacher (writing)
7. Letters to mayoral Candidates (writing)
8. Read alouds
9. Partner reading
10. Recycling radio commercials (writing) *
11. “Share a Book that Inspired You” *
12. Spelling Bee/ “Spell Off” *
13. Silent sustained reading (SSR)
14. Small language arts reading groups
15. Student sharing CDs and essay (writing) *
16. Standardized testing preparation
17. Visiting authors (reading and writing)
18. Writing odes of an American historical figure
19. Writing, revising, and editing with peers
20. Writing dialogue with peers
21. Writing Portfolios *
* Teacher initiated literacy activities
297
Appendix M: Literacy Activity Analysis - Sample
Analysis: May 18, 2006 Thursday
LIT ACTIVITY-LETTERS TO MAYORAL CANDIDATES
Date:
Week #4: Tues. 5/10
Week #5: Fri. 5/20
Goal of the activity (object)
The goal was for students to write a persuasive letter regarding an environmental issue to a
real life politician.
Who participates (subject):
Whole class
Teacher
Mediating artifacts
Writing rubric
[Was there any brainstorming?]
[Did students reference their new writing text?]
Rules, Explicit Norms, Conventions
The teacher decides on the assignment. Students write their letters and the teacher helps them
devise a rubric for acceptable letters.
When letters are finished, the teacher reads selected ones out loud. Students vote on which
letters are going to be mailed to the different mayoral candidates.
Some students type their letters.
The teacher mails off the letters and hopes the mayoral candidate will respond.
When, How Often, Frequency
One time.
This lesson was adapted from a similar writing of letters to the governor that the teacher has
done previously with other classes.
Division of labor
Teacher role:
Decides on the writing lesson activity
Assigns students the general topic
[DID HE MODEL WRITING?]
Leads students in devising a rubric
Researches and writes on the whiteboard the mailing addresses for their selected
letter recipient.
298
Reads the students finished letters aloud
Mails off letters to the appropriate recipient.
Students’ role:
Write letters
Have choice in deciding who they want to write to.
Have choice in selecting an environmental issue that is important to them.
Assist in developing their writing rubric
Community
The students got a response from both mayoral candidates. First, they got a response from
the incumbent mayor who sent a lot of artifacts from the mayoral office like pencils and lapel pens for
the students. They had almost given up getting a response from the opposing candidate when his letter
came in one day. Better still, he reference specific comments made by two of the students and referred
to the students by name.
When the class received the second response, Mr. H. let Speedy read the letter aloud to
everyone else. Speedy was flushed with delight at being asked to do so. Apparently, the letter had
come when Mr. H was doing small group instruction in the morning of which Speedy was a
participant. It was good to see Speedy get some of this glory.
Students also had the opportunity to hear and know what their peers were capable of and in
turn, what was expected of them. Students spontaneously applauded their peers’ after Oscar’s letter
was read aloud. It was a glorious thing to see and hear the students appreciate one another. [Write
Analytic Memo] What made them applaud their peers’ work? What made them feel so good about
someone else’s words that they wanted to indicate their approval, agreement, or shared sentiment?
The teacher described one purpose of this activity was to give the students a voice and
realization that their voice counts. In this sense, the students are gaining awareness that their academic
work has a reach beyond the four walls of this classroom. In this literacy activity, they are able to
communicate to real politicians and get a response. [Write Analytic Memo] If they seemed
nonplussed by the response from the politician/s perhaps it is because they are kids and do not realize
the uniqueness of literacy activities like this—even though the teacher tells them.
[Write Analytic Memo] This writing was one of the few authentic purposes not just
assigned for writing purposes. Writing was included in the class for reasons of connecting with the
outside world. Students realize their world and their place in the world are cemented by their words
and their effort. Their writing has authentic and real purposes. The writing articulates their concerns to
the larger world. Their words leave the classroom and go out into the world where the words engage,
influence, and affect others
Students recognize that they are able to do more than just write in a composition book or a
journal. Some of the students were so motivated that they typed their letters. They cared about how
their letters looked and how they would be received.
This activity pulled together the theme of Earth Day with activities ranging from the
recycling t-shirt art project, discussions on recycling, and national Earth Day April 21. The teacher
is connecting students to American values in the national Earth Day and is further inculcating
them in the democratic process of having their voices heard. He is linking these different activities
299
for the students. His connections are not conveyed explicitly but the theme of recycling, and
individual responsibility, and democracy permeates this lesson.
Mr. H. taped a copy of the letter from the mayor proudly on the door. He photocopied the
letter so that every student would have a copy to include in his or her writing portfolio. Victor
ignominiously started writing on the back of his letter. The teacher seemed to post the letter as
proclamation and proof that he does indeed have writing in his classroom and that students’ writing is
for authentic purposes.
Although the teacher has done similar lessons before, e.g. writing to the governor. This is not
a canned lesson. I looked in the writing textbook that the teacher had as a resource. In it, the students
would write a canned persuasive letter with no choice and certainly not to a real person. Their chances
of having their words reach anyone were zero because that wasn’t the focus of the assignment.
The downside of this activity:
The principal did not like the teacher’s attention paid to Earth Day and recycling issues.
Questions remaining:
Did the teacher use modeled writing with the students?
Note [Analytic memos] codes and comments highlighted by bold face type.
300
Appendix N: Literacy Activities Chart
Literacy
Activity
Norms Students’ Participation Student’s
Background
Knowledge
1 Basal
reader/Language
Arts
Content area
texts
Scaffolding thru
questions
District text
-Sets foundation of common
knowledge
-reading community established
--------------
2 “Brown Bag
Book
Exchange”
-T. adds in books
-Friday afternoon
activity
-voluntary donating and
receiving a book
-festive atmosphere
-animated literacy
-book ownership shared
Sharing a book
from home
3 Class Play and
Performance
-school text
-end-of-year activity
-students memorize
their parts
-live performance
-pre-production rehearsal and
preparation are unifying
-reflection on other fifth-grade
performances
Small group
collaborating in
class code-
switching
English-Spanish
4 District writing
Assessment
-T. shares info
regarding overall
prior scores
-graphic organizer
as scaffold
-individual writing efforts
-sharing assessment practice
efforts
-individual effort
-------------
5 Historical
Personal
Narratives
(writing)
-writing model in
L.A. teacher’s guide
-T. models his
writing
-student choice
-students move
freely through room
-critique peers’ work
-peer editing
-students decide who they want
to share work with.
Oscar included
descriptive
action scenes
from popular
culture movie.
6 Letter to Former
Teacher
(writing)
-end of year -student choice
-collaborative work if desired
---------------
7 Letter to
Mayoral
candidates
(writing-
persuasive)
-scaffold writing of
rubric
-letters read aloud
-T. assigns general
topic
-T. models writing
-literacy directed out
of class
-assist in developing rubric
-individual persuasive writing
(not canned letter)
-evaluate/critique peers’ writing
-select best letters
-student reads letter from Mayor
Hahn
-spontaneously applaud peers’
efforts
-trash in streets,
cutting down
trees, homeless
people.
-knowledge of
political process
and telling
candidate their
parent will vote
for them.
8 Read alouds -students cluster in
front of room
-school texts and T.
texts-varied genres
-relaxed atmosphere
-ask questions about text as
interest arises
-grand conversation re: text read
----------------
9 Partner reading -school texts -students develop comprehension
questions and pose to their peers
------------------
301
Literacy
Activity
Norms Students’ Participation Student’s
Background
Knowledge
10 Recycling
radio
commercials
(writing-
persuasive)
-scaffold with graphic
organizer
-student choice
-students select best 4
commercials.
-read over P.A. system
becomes part of institutional
school routine
-principal took up theme
-authentic audience
-----------------
11 “Share a
Book that
Inspired
you”
T. comments on ideas
shared—not quality of
writing
-share value and meaning of
literature in their lives
Brenda
recounted how
nana and
grandma made
song of a book;
Ray shares
significance of
book given by
second grade
teacher
12 Spelling
Bee/“Spell
Off”
T. initiates lit activity
based on the ongoing
national spelling bee
-engaging and lively.
-participating in habits and
dispositions toward school-like
events
-----------
13 Silent
sustained
reading
(SSR)
-students selected text
-silent reading
-school sanctioned
-expectations and communal
experience of shared
participation
Alex reads race
car program
14 Small
language
arts reading
groups
-established groups
-use of additional text
resources
-T. selects text level and
determines related L.A.
activities.
-aware of their reading group
members
-easily move into reading group
-one student selected to be
teacher
-all students aware of reading
activities by other groups
-work cooperatively &
independently
----------
15 Student
sharing CDs
and essays
-end of school activity
-T. models
-students listen to lyrics and
student’s essay.
-respond to meaningful lyrics
-extended discussion after some
songs
-bring CDs
from home
Spanish
language songs
included.
Speedy brings
in Japanese
song
302
Literacy
Activity
Norms Students’ Participation Student’s
Background
Knowledge
16 Standardized
test
preparation
-worksheets
-atomized language
-reading passages
-T. provides his own
alternate materials
-explicit in nature of
activity as test
preparation
-students change
classrooms to focus
on “testing”
language
-complete work on their own
-share as a class
-----------
17 Visiting
authors
-whole school
activity
-read aloud author’s
books
-attend presentation
-T. models
thoughtful questions
-prepare three questions to ask
author
-positive environment
-access to real authors
------------
18 Writing odes
of an
American
historical
figure
-text-to-text
connection:
integrating history
and Gary Soto ode
-work displayed
bulletin board
- reader letter
-writing “Dear Reader” letter
implies that students’ though
process is of value and interest to
others.
-public sharing of writing
------------
19 Writing with
peers
Peer collaboration in
revision w/in a
comfortable space
-move freely throughout
classroom
-confidence in their peers’
suggestions
-seek feedback from several peers
------------
20 ----------- -T. selects topic
-new genre of
writing
-collaborate with partner
-whole class talk about the
process afterwards
Student
compares
activity to
talking on the
internet or text
messaging on
cell phones.
21 Writing
Portfolio
-T. scaffold with
model
share product with
peers/peer sharing
-student choice of
writing included and
theme
-an introductory ‘letter to reader’
implies prospective reader will be
interested in their process and
also value writing process.
-collecting writing in one volume
honors their work.
-interaction with each other
outside
303
Appendix O: Popular Culture Links to Students’ Learning
Learning
Textual basis Popular
culture
source
Instantiations:
Students and teacher tapping into popular culture
Initiated
teacher(T)
or student
(S)
LANGUAGE ARTS
1 Literacy
sequencing
School text: Students
small group reading
Movie-
animation
Teacher used the movie Lion King to provide a cognitive structuring of the
literacy term ‘event’ & help students grasp narrative sequencing (FN2)
T
2 Literary
characters
Literacy lesson Superheroes Victor connects literary characters’ dynamics and flaws to superheroes
who similarly have strengths and weaknesses (FN & R week 4).
S
3 Character
similarities
Literacy activity:
Sharing inspirational
book:
Quasimoto
Superhero When Oscar shared the book, Quasimoto, as a personally inspirational
text, he noted, “Quasimoto is kinda like Spiderman.” He noted parallels
between the two characters and the story’s theme “it’s okay to be
different” (FN29; p.7).
S
4 Literature
themes
Literacy activity:
Sharing Inspirational
book.
Movie-
animation
Corina shares the book Swimmy by Leo Lionni as her inspirational text
because the message is to be proud of who you are. Another student
recalled this was the same theme in the animated film, Finding Nemo
(FN29; 6-07).
S
5 Text-to-text
connection
School
Multicultural text:
Yeh-hsien
Movie-
animation
Connection made to the emotion of losing a parent in Yeh-hsien (Chinese
tale retelling of Cinderella) and the movie, Lion King in which an animal
character loses a parent.
S
6 vocabulary School assignment:
Vocabulary lesson
Movie When Conner recites a sentence that includes the new vocabulary word,
‘despise’, the teacher elaborates, “Oh, if you are part of the Octavious’
contingent then you ‘despise’ Spiderman.” (FN7, Tues. 4-26)
T
7 vocabulary School text: A River
Ran Wild
Movie When Victor asked for the definition of ‘utopia’ from a text they were
reading, Mr. Harris used the current movie, Willy Wonka and the
Chocolate Factory as an example (HWFN#28, p. 3).
T
304
Learning Textual basis Popular
culture
source
Instantiations:
Students and teacher tapping into popular culture
Initiated
teacher (T)
or student
(S)
LANGUAGE ARTS (continued)
8 vocabulary School text:
History text
Movie When several students used context clues and still incorrectly guessed the
definition of the word “mutiny” during the reading of their American
History text, Mr. Harris queried, “How many of you have seen [the
movie] Master & Commander? Drake came up with a definition: “an
ambush” (R14, p. 4).
9 text-to-movie
connection
School text:
History
movie Students recalled how the movie National Treasure (2005, Walt Disney
Pictures) opened with a reference to the explorer Matthew Henson
(whose biography they were reading) and had the site where U.S.
Constitution was signed (HWFN#2, p. 3).
S
10 recall School text:
Geri Ferris’ texts
TV game
show
Classroom Jeopardy-style Game at end of day includes a category to
name different books titles written by the school’s visiting author (FN5:
61-75)
T
WRITING
1 Writing:
descriptive
writing
School writing
activity.
Movie As teacher models writing, Ray commented about the similarity of a
scene from the movie Pirates of the Caribbean to the teacher’s personal
historical narrative. (FN & R, Week 5)
S
2 Genre: adventure
writing
School text:
Basal reader literature
selection
Movie In writing his personal historical narrative, Oscar’s interest in adventure
stories led him to integrate facts from the basal literature, James Forten,
with descriptive images from a movie (RN24).
S
3 Genre-humor
writing
School text:
Writing assignment
Superhero Ray included a superhero Hulk sticker on his Mother’s Day card and
added inscription, “You rule with an iron fist.” (FN12, Fri. May 5)
S
4 Genre-persuasive
writing
School text:
Writing assignment
Media:
Television
commercials
Teacher compared recycling commercials to the advertising students hear
on television. He stressed advertising’s purpose was to persuade
individuals to actively respond (FN6, Mon. 4-25).
T
5 Writing ---- Movie Oscar noted how popular culture science fiction and fantasy entered his
academic life, “because I like to…write stories about [the movie] Star
Wars and robots (FS#1, p. 6).
S
305
Learning
Textual basis Popular
culture
source
Instantiations:
Students and teacher tapping into popular culture
Initiated
teacher(T)
or student
(S)
WRITING (continued)
6 Writing summaries School lesson:
writing summaries
Movie Teacher used a summary of the movie Titanic to help students
understand what constitutes a summary. (R26: HWFN#26, p. 12)
S
7 Writing: narrative
structure
School lesson:
writing
Movies Michael compares peer’s non-linear storytelling writing technique and
its similarity to the narrative structure of Quentin Tarantino films
(FN23).
S
DISCRIMINATION
1 Discrimination --- Television
show
Virginia recalls discriminatory episode between a White and Black
character on the TV show That’s So Raven (SI, lines 820-825)
S
2 Discrimination School text:
A River Ran Wild
(Cherry, 1992)
Movie Ray indignantly imagines how Native Americans might have been
treated by U.S. in relinquishing with regards their land rights
(HWFN#21, p. 22). Informed by Western movies with their depictions
of force (SI, Ray).
S
3 Discrimination ------------ Movie-
animation
Victor noted how characters in animated feature Madagascar were
treated differently for being ‘new’ (FS#3, p. 1)
S
4 Discrimination Text-to-text
connection
Movie-
animation
Oscar drew intertextual connections between how characters in the
movie Madagascar were treated differently for being new and
connected it to discrimination against Hispanics, Blacks, and Jews.
(FS#3, p. 7).
S
5 Discrimination ------------- Movie Michael claimed discrimination exists today because he has seen
instances in two movies: Mississippi Burning and Ray (SI)
S
6 Immigration School text:
Grandfather’s
Journey
movie Alexis connects a story of individual using a raft to immigrate from
Cuba with the character in the movie Cast Away (who built a raft)
(HWFN#13, p. 12).
S
306
Learning
Textual basis Popular
culture
source
Instantiations:
Students and teacher tapping into popular culture
Initiated
teacher(T)
or student
(S)
ACADEMIC CONCEPTS
1 Concept: arranged
marriages
School text:
Basal reader–
James Forten
Movie-
animated
Discussion about arranged marriages in some countries, Alexis made a
connection to arranged marriages in China. Victor remembered
character in the Disney film Aladdin and added “Like Abu!” (FN7,
Tues. 4/26).
S
2 Concept: political
treaties
School text:
American History
text-
Movie
Victor recalls how different groups—historically, in movies, and in
current events—resolve conflict through treaties. Specifically,
American Revolution Treaty; Star Wars treaty; and 2005 proposed
treaty in Iraq. (HWFN#22,p. 19)
S
3 Concept: cultural
practices
School text:
Arctic Explorer
Movie Victor connects the dog sledding that he saw in the movie Ice Dogs to
textual accounts of dog sledding in Greenland. (FN3)
S
4 Concept: scientific
evolution
Science activity:
animal
classification
Video game
statistic
Speedy understands the concept of scientific evolution because
Pokèman video characters are “always evolving” (FN12).
S
5 Concept: starvation
(Note: unstable)
School text:
Anne Frank book
Popular
culture
celebrities
Two students recall how teen celebrities Mary Kate and Ashley Olsen
starved (anorexic) and drew parallels to the women’s starvation in
concentration camps during the Holocaust.
S
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
1 Classroom
management
-- Movie Teacher references the movie Circle of Life and it effectively ends a
developing argument between two students. (FN6: 4/25)
T
2 Community building --- Movie While students were engaged in an art activity, teacher played the
song, ‘Spirit’, from the movie Circle of Life. Students hum softly along
with the song. Later, Oscar described playing songs had a unifying
aspect (FS2, lines).
T
307
Learning
Textual basis Popular
culture
source
Instantiations:
Students and teacher tapping into popular culture
Initiated
teacher(T)
or student
(S)
OTHER
1 Math –statistics Marval
Superhero
Encyclopedia
Michael argued with Ray over whether [the superhero] Thing was
stronger than [the superhero] Hulk. For evidence, he consulted his
Scholastic Marval Superhero Encyclopedia and compared their vital
statistics (FN12, Fri, 5-6)
S
2 Use of technology School literacy
activity. Shared
CD lyrics
Internet Speedy, a Latino student shared a CD song that was in Japanese. He
downloaded the English translated lyrics from the Internet. (T#13)
S
3 Understanding school
social relations
--- TV show Victor recalled a specific episode of the TV show King of the Hill in
which the dad was trying to make his son, who was being treated like
loser at school, feel better (IN2).
S
4 Understanding social
relations
--- TV show Nikki observed the usefulness of cartoons or characters on TV because
they ”….relate to what you do in life…like how it is at school” (IN2;
p. 360).
S
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
The overarching purpose of this qualitative study was to understand the specific dynamics of how upwardly aspiring Latino/a students, in a well-functioning elementary school setting, incorporated their cultural resources, background knowledge, language, and lived experiences during their literacy engagement. By the year 2050, it is estimated that one-in-four school age children will be of Latino/a descent. This study adds to the literature regarding the educational adaptation of children of intergenerational immigrant status.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Latino parental aspirations and literacy practices related to children's reading engagement
PDF
The overlooked Latino middle class: deep roots and continued growth
PDF
Backing each other up "like in basketball": an examination of literacy and the forms of capital among peers in an elementary school classroom community of practice
PDF
Student, staff, and parent perceptions of the reasons for ethnic conflict between Armenian and Latino students
PDF
The relationship of parental involvement to student academic achievement in Latino middle school students
PDF
A mixed method examination of available supports for secondary school students’ college and military aspirations
PDF
Examining parent involvement activities in two mmigrant-impacted schools: a comparative case study
PDF
The lived experiences of Latino Male Elementary School Teachers
PDF
Identifying resiliency factors viewed by fourth and fifth grade teachers that foster academic success in elementary minority Hispanic students in Orange County
PDF
The perceptions of cross cultural student violence in an urban school setting
PDF
The experiences of successful higher education Latino administrators and educational leaders in selected western United States community colleges
PDF
A community cultural capital approach: bilingual teachers' perceptions and impact in their dual language immersion classroom
PDF
The impact of cultural capital on advancement via individual determination students from two southern California high schools
PDF
Personal agency and educational decision-making: insights from middle- and emerging-middle-income school parents in Costa Rica
PDF
Motivation and the meanings of health behavior as factors associated with eating behavior in Latino youth
PDF
The interaction of teacher knowledge and motivation with organizational influences on the implementation of a hybrid reading intervention model taught in elementary grades
PDF
Strategy use and metalinguistic awareness in vocabulary learning while reading: two microgenetic case studies of fifth grade readers
PDF
The lived experience of first-generation latino students in remedial education and navigating the transfer pathway
PDF
The role of school climate in the mental health and victimization of students in military-connected schools
PDF
Parental involvement and student motivation: A quantitative study of the relationship between student goal orientation and student perceptions of parental involvement among 5th grade students
Asset Metadata
Creator
Curwen, Margaret Sauceda
(author)
Core Title
The nature of middle-class Latino/a students' cultural capital in a fifth-grade classroom's reading and writing activities
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Education (Curriculum
Publication Date
12/14/2009
Defense Date
04/24/2007
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
American creed,culture,curriculum,elementary,immigrant mobility,immigration theory,instruction,Latino,Literacy,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Advisor
Astor, Ron Avi (
committee chair
), Hoskins, Janet (
committee member
), Ruedam, Robert (
committee member
)
Creator Email
curwen@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m971
Unique identifier
UC1429145
Identifier
etd-Curwen-20071214 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-486405 (legacy record id),usctheses-m971 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Curwen-20071214.pdf
Dmrecord
486405
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Curwen, Margaret Sauceda
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
American creed
elementary
immigrant mobility
immigration theory
instruction
Latino