Globalization has magnified the world and we are able to see
more and more societies with diverse groups of people with varying cultural
beliefs, values, traditions and practices. This diversity is also very close to home existing in the
classrooms/centres with the children, families and colleague interacting and
working together. From here, we
can see the different learning styles of each person and this provokes the
necessity of understanding how different social contexts, to which each
individual is embedded in, affect how s/he represents, communicates and
interprets the world. Literacy
enables us to make our representations, communications and interpretations
palpable. As educators of and
learners with children, if we cannot acknowledge that literacy practices are
different for all children we are not only ignoring aspects of their mental and
emotional strengths but we are also suppressing their overall development. To successfully and ethically support
children’s literacy learning, it is important to “understand what reading and
writing goes on in the home” (Barton, 1989, p. 1) and to understand what values
are placed in such practices which motivate or discourage children to
participate.
Barton (1989) speaks about the “literacy brokers” (p. 7) in
children’s lives and these could range from the parents, older siblings to the
grandparents, aunts and uncles all of which interact and engage in various
literacy related practices – “reading and writing…listening, viewing and
drawing, as well as critiquing” (Jones Diaz, 2007, p. 32). These relationships are important to
acknowledge because significant learning occurs in these interactions. “[R]eading
and writing [are] not just an individual affair; often a literate activity
consists of several people contributing to it” (Barton, 1989, p. 7). The narrowed view that literacy exists
in isolation or that it is a “skill” (Comber & Reid, 2007, p. 46) that can
be taught and eventually mastered within just reading or writing places little
value on the learning that does occur in children’s social contexts and
therefore restricts the possibilities of different literacy experiences that
children can use to make meaning and to express themselves.
With all this in mind, I question how we respond to immigrant
parents/families who are resistant in sharing their literacy practices at home
for fear of being judged as not “doing enough” or because their priority is to
have their child master reading and writing in English? How can we honour their wishes and also
ensure that we are not imposing our emergent ways by wanting to know how
literacy is practiced at home?
Reference:
Barton, D.
(1989). Making sense of literacy in the home.
Jones Diaz, C.
(2007). Literacy as social
practice. In L. Makin, C. Jones
Diaz, & C. McLachlan (Eds.), Literacies
in childhood: Changing views, challenging practice (2nd ed. pp.
31-42). Marrickville, NSW:
Maclennan & Petty – Elsevier.
Comber, B., & Reid, J. (2007). Understanding
literacy pedagogy in and out of school.
In L. Makin, C. Jones Diaz, & C. McLachlan (Eds.), Literacies in childhood: Changing views,
challenging practice (2nd ed. pp. 43-69). Marrickville, NSW: Maclennan &
Petty – Elsevier.
I wonder if it is the immigrant parents/families that are resistant to sharing their literacy practices at home, or if it is our resistance to inviting them to share their practice. Do we have these conversations with parents/families? Do we actively pursue a sharing of literacy practices? Do we put ourselves, whether knowingly or not, into the role of the one who 'knows' the 'right' way to engage in literacy or do we allow ourselves to be equals with parents, or even people who could learn from parents?
ReplyDeleteYour questions of “how we respond to immigrant parents/families who are resistant in sharing their literacy practices at home for fear of being judged as not “doing enough” or because their priority is to have their child master reading and writing in English? How can we honour their wishes and also ensure that we are not imposing our emergent ways by wanting to know how literacy is practiced at home” remind me of my own literacy learning experience in Canada. With my parents, they do not see literacy practices as “fully integrated with, interwoven into, constitute part of, the very texture of wider practices that involve talk, interaction, values and beliefs” (Gee, 1990, as cited in Diaz, 2007, p. 33) but simply reading, writing and speaking skills. For parents who need their children to be “literacy brokers”, they only want their children to be able to translate for them. Therefore, reading and speaking is the most important goals for their children to achieve. For most Chinese families, I will say that “normal” literacy practice at home for children is usually reading books, doing homework, understanding the texts in text books, instead of communicating with others, watching television and interacting with others. I do not feel that parents do not want to share their practice at home with others, but they want to ensure that their children are doing good enough so they can share how they “train” their children to learn to speak English “successfully”; otherwise, they feel that their children are not doing good enough in learning to speak and to read. However, Diaz (2007) explains that “[t]he literacy practices that are important to the everyday lives of children do not take place in isolation to other social practices and interactions with adults, older children and peers”. When my parents put so many pressures on us, we lose our interests in learning English. I think It is not only important to acknowledge educators the various ways of literacy learning for children, but also letting the parents to know interaction plays a significant role is their children’s learning.
ReplyDelete