Final Reflection

Nicole Rodgers

Sonoma State University

GS02
Introduction:

I grew up hating history, politics, economics, ethical debates, and would have altogether

cringed ten years ago in learning that these topics would be of most interest to me upon my third

through sixth years of teaching. I wasnt alone. Hahn (1997) found that history consistently ranks

the lowest and least favorite out of each of the school subjects. Unfortunately, the technocratic,

white men fight battles and elect presidents, view and bias of history amidst my own public

education classroom setting led me down the path of thinking that history was a neutral, black

and white story. Never was my own practiced religion painted in a good light, therefore I was led

to believe that there was not anything historically good about Catholicism, negating everything I

learned on Sundays and in my home. Little did I realize at the time that I did not have the critical

literacy skills to understand that the information being handed to myself and my peers was

authored and biased in some way. I was unable to make decisions regarding accuracy of

information, slants of understanding, and instead relied on the, Well, it seems like a credible

source, argument to get me through research paper after research paper. I was never taught how

text and media alike were constructed, let alone asked to construct my own text and include

certain information while leaving other perhaps crucial pieces aside. I never understood how

perspective affects all information in some way. I never understood that my teachers had their

own slant and view, therefore I never knew I could have my own, separate from the view that

was handed to me.

Initial Reflection:
 The authenticity of experiencing something worthwhile the first time obviously only

comes along once. After that initial understanding, everything else seems to be another step

along the journey, another connection to what is already known. In this specific case, my journey

from Sonoma, but woven into the threads of my classroom, was critical literacy. Hobbs (1996)

claims the core of media literacy is openly questioning and taking a critical stance toward

messages. Its initial understanding sparked my interest four years ago, and it has been taking

over my pedagogy ever since.

Lemke (2005) states that since medias are converging, there must be a broader definition

of literacy. Students must come to understand that everything is an interpretation and they must

be both critical consumers of information and active producers of media. In order to be a critical

consumer of information, one must look at the information presented and ask themselves two

important questions: What, and why? While who and when are also pieces of this critical literacy

puzzle, the what requires a deeper reflection of not just what is on the page or screen in front of a

reader, but what information is not present. The why requires the reader to search for the purpose

such facts are presented together for a given audience.

Growing up, I was a consumer of information, but not a critical one. Even going through

one of the best State Universities in California, I failed to truly analyze perspective. I knew how

to persuade and how to inform, but these were just words on a rubric to check off. I was a

good reader but I lacked the skills to deconstruct the meaning in a science text or comprehend

the history textbook to be anything more than a listing of dates and wars.

This final project has been a difficult one to wrap my head around. How do you create a

cumulative project based on what you learned, when you cant sum it up in a years worth of
teaching, let alone a ten page paper? So much of what Ive spent the last four years studying and

researching has turned around and had an immediate affect on my classroom in some way, which

has made this final project daunting and exhausting. Determining which educational

technological elements connect to my project and which have just become key components of

my belief as an educator was a difficult distinction. They are all connected, they all combine

together to make digital, critically literate citizens.

This summer, I spent three weeks trying to recreate what, four years ago, had been an

authentic process of uncovering what it meant to be critically literate. As I embarked upon my

journey at Sonoma, I also brought my class along for the ride. In the end, I realized the

uncovering of the eyes was as much about my lack of knowledge as it was the kids I was

teaching. What I had not anticipated was just how much of my pedagogy and implementation

had changed over time to reflect these ideals.

Hahn (1997) defines an Issues-Centered Instruction as an approach that uses social issues

to start controversial conversations in historical contexts. Most teachers at my school would

claim that students arent having controversial conversations about anything except the dress

code, let alone the least favorite subject in school. This was still my mission, after reading

testimonies of how an Issues-Centered Instruction could light a fire in the classroom. Although

trying to implement pieces of this throughout the years, I never quite had the data to look at. I

overheard comments and remembered student attitudes, but couldnt put a finger on what exactly

shifted their thought process.

In my proposal for this cognate project I stated, The first time I taught history to a group

of looped students, I was beginning the master's program and taught a series of disjointed lessons
revolving around media, history, and authorship. Despite my perceived jumping from idea to

idea as my courses at Sonoma State pulled me this way and that, my students became critical

readers and purposeful authors. I anticipated being able to recreate this experience in a more

seamless manner as I now knew all of the required pieces to teaching from a more multiple

perspectives approach. But although I gave credit to the Columbus unit for my students critical

stance on information, there were so many other factors at play. A few lessons on authorship

cant reshape the mind unless it becomes a constant cycle of an active thought process.

While it would be an understatement to say this cognate invigorated, excited, and

motivated my students, it wouldnt be genuine to say it all occurred the way I anticipated, or that

restrictions on content and curriculum wont get in the way from creating more authentic

experiences for my students this upcoming school year. Time was a huge factor in the

completion of this project, but regardless of what was completed in the short amount of time I

had, it was important groundwork for the upcoming school year with eighth grade. McKnight

and Chandler (2009) argued that in order for students to improve unjust conditions, they must

have a classroom climate that questions, analyzes, and evaluates history in a meaningful, in

depth way. We definitely broke ground on this important foundation.

Cognate/Reflection:

After spending five years teaching third through fifth grade, I was nervous to make the

jump to eighth. Unfortunately, a lot of my work from the masters program had been created for

fourth and fifth graders, and my jump to eighth grade meant I would be using my single subject

math credential and saying goodbye to the teaching of history, what I once despised but
eventually grew to like. I was lucky to be asked to work with a small group of fifteen eighth

graders in the month of June for summer school enrichment, where I could teach whatever

content interested me. This allowed for the opportunity to create a somewhat cumulative, but not

necessarily ideal, activity around history, bias, and authorship to finish my cognate work.

Week 1: Days 1-3 Movie Trailers

Some students were at Extended School Year because they wanted to be. Others were

forced by their parents. Some students came because they knew we always take a field trip, and

others were there so they could hang out with their friends. Regardless of their reasons, each of

them showed up, and participated. Knowing that I wanted students to eventually create book

trailers for the history texts, I decided to start with a low entry level activity of having students

learn to create book trailers by playing around with iMovie on a book that they had already read.

My assumptions of my tech savvy kids failed me again. It took almost three days for

groups of three to properly manipulate iMovie to create a three minute book trailer on a book

they had already read. While I tried momentarily to teach them the basics of creating a movie, I

realized an importance of movie making I had learned long ago, that you learn more from failing

and trying than you could ever learn from watching someone else. They reported that it was fun,

a lot of work, and a lot of work.

Media manipulation alone doesnt necessarily require critical thinking (Hobbs, 2004), but

the best perhaps part of this activity was watching groups of three find that the only books all of

them had read, were bad books. How do we make this interesting? This book sucked. They

each made it their mission to include story elements that might speak to the audience, and use
other visual elements and sound to entice their audience. The most enticing component of

making a trailer, they realized, was that they could create one to encourage people to read their

favorite book during the school year. They played with music and light to create visually

appealing images and despite this activity being a big chunk of the first week, it was more than a

worthwhile experience. Would you like to make a movie trailers in ELA next year? The

answer to this question was a resounding yes.

Again, I stressed about time. Will we get done with the entire project? What I didnt

realize at that time was that they were already beginning to create multimedia with an audience

in mind. In addition, they had bad content and were forced to make it interesting using

whatever techniques they could, leaving out whatever they needed to leave out. Alverman (2004)

claims that new media and technologies are fundamentally affecting how ideas get representing

in texts and communicated, and that all texts promote or silence particular views, (p. 78).

Week 1: Days 4-5 United States Textbook: Columbus

Next, we grabbed the eighth grade United States History texts and opened up to chapter

one. Many of them knew the story of America and were familiar with Columbus and all that he

did. While they were engaged with the text, this is always my favorite part of giving students a

multiple perspectives approach to history. They give the right answers, but are otherwise

unenthused. Factually, they could go back into the text to find the answer to a question, but the

google form asking about authorship, content, and perspective got quite a few blank stares, from

even the brightest of students.

 Lewis and Jhally (1998) state that the general public are readers and have a high level of

comprehension, but their textual analysis lacks the ability to examine the specific conditions in

which texts are created and understood. This was true of my students. They are great readers. I

was a great reader. That doesnt mean everything.

Week 2: Days 6-8 Biography: Who Was Christopher Columbus

Moving into a childrens style biography, I read aloud Who Was Christopher Columbus,

much like I had to my first group of fifth graders. They caught right on to creating Columbus

commercials with the same theme of the biography even after claiming the book to be boring.

At this point, students were still answering questions the way they thought I wanted them

answered. When I asked Why was this content made? they gave me a cookie cutter answer like

This was made to show young readers about history and finding America. Its a boring answer.

It was a boring book. Its a mind that isnt truly captivated.

What does the author believe of Columbus? Huh? What? I got many answers such

as, This isnt opinion. They didnt use I or me. They were however able to see that the main

idea of this text was to show that Columbus did a lot for riches and glory. Again, students had a

blast creating an exciting and captivating commercial, playing with sound and images to create a

theme of adventure. This process, however quick and easy I imagined it to be amazed me with

its intricate details and all that it required students to do and think about. What can we include

to make the audience our friends want to read this book? Uh well we cant include

that. Students took the role of the music lead or the text lead, and worked together better than I

anticipated.
Week 2: Days 9-10 A Young Peoples History: Columbus and the Indians

Following this biography, we read Howard Zinn chapter one. Although at first angry

much like my first group of students, they were also very critical in analyzing what Zinn did to

relay the message he had to give. It was so emotional. This focused more on the perspective

of the Native Americans, but how do we know exactly what happened? Just because it was a

different view that was easy to grab didnt mean my students were done analyzing the message

or where it came from. This wasnt the case with my fifth graders four years ago. As expected,

their responses to the google form did not disappoint, and they remained eager to continue to

learn and research more information about the topic.

What does this author believe of Columbus? That he was a bad guy. We discussed

what made this informational text different from the textbook and different from the biography.

Many perspectives were left out from each text. Each text had a different purpose. Each text had

a different message.

It was at this point in the project that I had a choice to make. With only one week left, I

could have scrapped the second topic and spent the final days creating commercials or book talks

or whatever they chose, or I could have scrapped the concept of Columbus, let it die, and move

on to another period of history. I chose the latter.

Week 3: Days 11-13 United States Textbook: The Mexican-American War

Although I originally intended and planned to allow them to pick a topic of their

choosing at this point in the project, the idea of reading the textbook with a small group or

independently did not sit well with them. I gave them three topics to choose from that I had
multiple texts to support. The first topic was the American Revolution, the second was the Civil

War, and the last was the Mexican-American War. SInce it was a small group of only twelve to

fifteen students, and each group wanted to study the Mexican-American War, we strayed from

the plan to explore this topic together.

This is more exciting than the entire year we had in history I think I learned more

about history in the last hour than I did in all of seventh grade. These were comments I heard

from students as we read the textbook chapter of the Mexican-American War together. These

werent comments made for my benefit, they not only could answer basic comprehension

questions out of the text, but they were asking deeper questions beyond the text. Did the

Californios listen to the Mexican government being that they were so far away? If the troops

marched into disputed territory, how can either side call it their land? Did everyone support the

war? What were the Native Americans doing at this time? Why did they pay Mexico for the

land if they won it in the war?

Their excitement wasnt anything I was doing. I was just reading a textbook chapter

the same as I had done two weeks prior. Their engagement though, was in a different realm.

Clearly due to their ability to look beyond the facts presented and take notice that there must be a

whole slew of facts revolving around this topic that had not been described in the chapter,

students were alert and thinking as we were reading. They werent focusing on the words, they

were focusing on the structure, what was on the page, and what wasnt on the page.

Responses to the google form after reading just the textbook chapter on the

Mexican-American war was chilling. I anticipated critical comparisons after reading another

couple of texts on the topic, but their minds had already started circling around authorship and
what facts were included in the chapter to portray a certain message. This content was made to

teach/show the history of America, what happened, and who was responsible for shaping it for

what it is today. This was a response to the question, Why was this content made? This is an

answer miles away from the to teach eighth graders, responses I received just a week prior.

Students began putting into context the information, and deciding its importance on their own

terms in the grand scheme of history.

Readers need to know what people from the past went through to get what they wanted.

Other book publishers with books that include the same topic but different opinions could be

harmed from this message. The reader might be shocked and not agree with the text. They

might be mad because the textbook doesnt cover the bad parts, just the good parts. This is my

home. I need to know how it got pieced together the struggles as well as the victories. My

ancestors were stupid. The author believes that the war helped America grow and claim a lot

of western territory. What happened to the mexicans and native americans after the war?

People need to know how culture and racism continued in the new part of America. The vast

complexity of answers cant be covered in sixteen slides (included) let alone this paper.

Anyon (1979) states that textbook content is influenced by parents, school boards and

state selection committees, and capitalizes on particular groups in society and blatantly excludes

others. Without realizing it, my students chose to study a topic that blatantly excluded them. The

Mexican-American War, in the spirit of Manifest Destiny, as the textbook claims, quite literally

took the ground from beneath people. The textbook mentioned how unfortunate it was for

Mexican-Americans during the time of the acquisition of Americas new land, because often

they lost land they owned because they had to pay lawyers and transportation fees to prove the
land was theirs in the first place. Mentioned, but not capitalized. It was another paragraph,

followed by a paragraph about how cultures merged and cities were named after Spanish words

and native goods were sold in the markets. My students, strong mexican heritage, did not read

over these harsh situations easily. We still have tension in our country with Mexicans and

Americans. Is this where it started? I wonder what would have happened if Mexico won

Without prompting, again, my students were analyzing texts, comparing information

against each other, and questioning content. Its very us vs them. After the land was United

States, werent they all Americans? McKnight and Chandler (2009) address the reason for a

technocratic approach to teaching history as a way to keep tensions at bay by leaving out

controversy, resistance, and revolution. In this instance, it was easier to say, Things improved

between the Mexican and American cultures, because it wouldnt be believable to say there

wasnt any tension to start with after listing the events of the war.

The students decided that an appropriate action for the textbook chapter summary would

simply be a summary. They decided a childrens book or comic would be the most basic way to

summarize the information in the same way it was presented to them in the textbook. Four

groups chose to do a childrens book. One chose to make a comic. Buckingham (2007) states that

reproduction of media usually involves young children representing their learning for younger

audiences. It makes sense that students would recreate a message in the same way it was given to

them, but what about changing the presentation to give the message in a different way? It was

easy for my students to follow the theme of the textbook in a childrens book because they knew

the meanings, representations, and reality the textbook meant to convey. It was humorous to find

them all end with some theme of Manifest Destiny, or to follow up a tensions slide with a
cultures meet slide. They were laughing about it in a sarcastic way, and conveyed expansion of

the United States message with ease, regardless of their beliefs.

Week 3: Days 13-15 A Young Peoples History: The War With Mexico

Reading A Young Peoples History at this point was a formality. It was part of the cycle.

We critique what some might call one extreme, and then we critique another. This is high level,

descriptive text. My students read it with ease. A Young Peoples History chapter on the War

with Mexico includes many of the same facts. It also claims that the purpose of the war was

partially to acquire new slave states. While the textbook did mention slavery being an issue, it

painted America with Manifest Destiny as its purpose for doing all that it did to attain new land.

We had an engaging class discussion the last fifteen minutes of Extended School Year

calling out differences between the content. Every student was able to share a piece of

information that was different. On page _, it states they paid Mexico 15 million dollars after the

war so they could say they bought it. Certain newspapers wished the Mexican government to

win the war. Some soldiers left the American militia for the Mexican side which had better pay

and working conditions. They knew they had a better chance of winning on the US side, but they

left anyway.

While we ran out of time to create a movie or a book or a trailer, a few students decided

to write a comparison paragraph about what made the Zinn chapter different from the textbook

chapter. Mostly, they realized the theme was different. The events catalogued in each respective

text supported that theme. They read effective writing. They critiqued effective writing.

The textbook told us the cause of the war was over land. It wanted us to believe that the main reason the war

started was because they wanted Texas to be part of America. Chapter 8 claimed that the cause of the war was when
Taylor and his men camped out of the Rio Grande, Mexico attacked a few of their men, and Mexicans crossed into

American territory, Congress declared war. Although Mexico had fired the first shot, they were just doing what

America wanted them to do. On page 123 in chapter 8, they gave us the perspective of one of the colonels (Ethan

Hitchcock) with the diary and the things he wrote in it. One of the things he had written was, My heart is not in

this business, but as a military man. I am bound to orders. Chapter 8 also claimed that the point of the war was to

lug new slave states in. Zinn not only gives the perspective of the Mexicans, but also colonels, and religious

people.

Conclusion

This project wasnt the end but the beginning. I truly mean that. It wasnt perfect and the

pieces that were produced werent much to write home about, but I had fifteen days. Fifteen days

to try to encourage fifteen students that cracking open a textbook and flipping the on switch to

your brain isnt the most boring thing in the world. I perhaps bit off more than I could chew, but

the many skills and concepts I learned from the Curriculum, Teaching, and Learning program

needed to be woven together in this way. The most important artifact I collected was the answers

to the Google Form. It was in reflecting upon their responses after the fact that I saw the honest

impact of the work that had been done. They went from one to two word answers about a topic

they knew a lot about (Columbus), to writing three to four sentence answers on a new topic for a

question they replied What? to a week prior.

We discussed our own biases in this experience. We raised our hands if we identified

Mexican-American and about fifty percent of the summer school group claimed to identify as

such. Would we have been so puffed up and defensive if this was the Canadian-American war?

I realized that together we had picked an appropriate topic. This was their history, but it is also

all of our history. I cant be sure that the in depth questioning will hold with a new content, but I
am eager to continue the conversation anyway. Students agreed that they might not have been so

critical if it wasnt a chapter about Mexico, but you cant go back from analyzing content the

synapses have been fired.

I started on this quest because Hobbs (1996) claimed the core of media/critical literacy is

openly questioning and taking a critical stance toward messages. If my students were able to do

this in fifteen days, on a topic they couldnt care less about, I cant wait to take next steps with

them in the fall.