Documentos de Académico
Documentos de Profesional
Documentos de Cultura
October 2009
doi:10.1598/JA AL.53.2.1
© 2009 International Reading Association
(pp. 96 –104)
c o m m e n t a r y
Ernest Morrell
A ll over the globe those who “have” are outperforming the “have-nots”
in literacy education, with serious implications. Generally, the differences in
achievement are easily predictable along the lines of race, class, gender, and
language background (College Board, 2005; Perie, Grigg, & Donahue, 2005).
Certainly there are structural and cultural contexts, including inequitable ac-
cess to resources and institutionalized racism, that problematize the concept of
the achievement gap, but these differences in academic performance still carry
significant social, economic, and political consequences. At a time when we
need to expand our literacy research horizons to address issues of equity and
excellence in literacy education, research practices are often narrowly focused
on large standardized measures that make it difficult to tease out the nuances
of exemplary classroom practice. In the United States, for instance, many state
departments of education rank schools only according to aggregate test scores.
These standardized tests are generally taken in the spring and the results are
made available the following school year. Schools that perform poorly are
often threatened with takeover or the loss of resources, and administrators are
challenged to offer more basic and traditional curricula delivered through a
teacher-centered pedagogy to increase their scores by a number of percentage
points.
Taken as a whole, these tests do not tell us a great deal about what is hap-
pening or what is possible in language and literacy education. They do not
help us understand how teacher experience, institutionalized racism, cultur-
ally alienating curricula, or test anxiety affect the scores of schools serving
populations that are largely nonwhite or low income. What’s more, the tests
do not tell us about the tremendous opportunity gaps that exist between the
wealthiest and the poorest students (Hilliard, 2003). They do not tell us about
what is working in settings where individual students or classrooms are excel-
ling; furthermore, these tests tell us nothing about how teachers informally
96
assess students throughout the academic year, how they make connections be-
tween students’ lived experiences and the world of academic literacy, or how
students become motivated to see themselves as intellectuals and empowered
readers and writers. Such tests do not measure the ex- measures of achievement and the actual opportunities
tent to which our students are becoming powerful, to learn that have been provided for students. In other
humane, culturally affirmed, and engaged citizens. words, the challenge is ours, as a field, to figure out
In response to our most recent literacy crisis, how to better educate students. Regardless of termi-
the U.S. government and professional collabora- nology, Hilliard contended that higher quality teach-
tives such as the National Reading Panel (National ing is needed to produce excellence in classrooms
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, for students that have been historically underserved.
2000) and the National Research Council (2005) Quite simply, these students need to achieve higher
have called for more scientific research in literacy forms of excellence if they are to exist as powerfully
education. That is, policymakers and certain mem- informed and affirmed humans. Hilliard, in this vein,
bers of our field feel as though the only valuable re- was tapping into a long history of African American
search is conducted via randomized experiments that education that associated literacy learning in schools
tell us, essentially, how certain curricular reforms af- with the project of human freedom (Anderson, 1988;
fect aggregate achievement as measured by the same Perry, 2003). Critical research, I argue, can help us to
sorts of problematic standardized outcomes or by identify quality teaching in literacy classrooms even as
scores on artificial assessments designed by teams of it helps us to refine (or even redefine) our notions of
university researchers. Although standardized mea- curricula, pedagogy, literacy, and achievement.
sures provide an important perspective on the per-
formance of young people in schools, it is only one What Is Critical Research?
perspective, and taken out of context this perspective Critical theory is a term that has been with us for nearly
can be extremely problematic—both in how it posi- a century now. First coined by the philosophers of the
tions certain groups of students and in how it limits Frankfurt School in the 1930s, critical theory chal-
the discussion of possible alternatives to traditional lenged the biased nature of all knowledge, specifically
classroom literacy practices (Pressley, 2001). In the knowledge that was transmitted via dominant insti-
end, we are still left with very few images of the tutions such as schools and the media. Proponents of
powerful literacy classroom to help us understand critical theory such as Adorno (2002), Horkheimer
the challenges that teachers and students face and the (2002), and Marcuse (1964) argued that the culture in-
conditions that turn tragedies into triumphs. dustries of their time served to deceive the public and
In essence, research in K–12 literacy education create a population that would readily accept the op-
2004, 2008). Rather than rely solely on the perspec- are using to critique and act more powerfully upon
tives and analyses of trained university researchers, I their social world.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
interview students, teachers, and other participants in high school that served an almost exclusively Chicano
the educational arena. However, when these tools are population. These teachers, while experiencing some
used in critical research they take on new significance
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
ate PowerPoint presentations, and put together short the past decade, we have been able to develop models
documentary films. At the culmination of each semi- of instruction that would not have been possible in-
nar the research groups (numbering four or five) make side of traditional classrooms, but we have also been
their presentations and show their films to an audi- able to inform classroom practice through what we
have learned and demonstrated in the seminar space.
53(2)
dropout problem in our city. In many of the schools of educational research and policy. Each summer we
the students attended, fewer than one third of the stu- tackle a widely discussed issue and attempt to inform
dents who start high school finish with diplomas four that issue with research that is largely conducted by
years later and many of those who finish do not have teachers and students. At the same time, the seminar
the classes or grades needed to enroll in four-year uni- itself is designed to create powerful learning outcomes
versities. The student-researchers wanted to under- for the participants who are heavily involved in the
stand the conditions that lead to student investment research process. Learning outcomes are measured by
and increase student engagement and achievement. textual production, by the development of critical lan-
Each of the five student groups in 2008 focused on guage awareness (Fairclough, 1995), by demonstrations
a particular geographical area of the city where they of engaged citizenship, and by actual praxis. We have
102
interviewed adult powerbrokers such as the superin- also been able to follow several of the teachers back
tendent and school board members, interviewed and into the classroom to understand how the seminar has
surveyed students, visited school sites and community affected their teaching and their academic scholarship.
The seminar is an example of the steps that critical the kind of research that has been described in this ar-
research in literacy education can take on several lev- ticle. Although we need courses at each of these levels
els. First of all, it is possible to create laboratory spaces that are aimed at the specific needs of preservice teach-
to test out our ideas that exist outside of the general ers, Masters students (some of whom may be practic-
parameters of academic schooling with its mandates, ing teachers), and doctoral candidates, it is also possible
short periods, confined spaces, and established rela- to imagine how graduate schools of education might
tionships between teachers and students and among create spaces for these populations to come together to
teachers, students, the texts they read, and the world learn more about the applications of critical research
at large. Many of these parameters and constraints are methodologies to literacy education. For example, it is
the result of theories about learning and literacy that possible to create research seminars that allow students
need to be challenged and rethought. These labora- to explore specific research questions in specific class-
tory spaces can take the shape of summer programs, room contexts. Perhaps doctoral students can work
after school programs, special courses, or designated closely with preservice and practicing teachers inside
units within more traditional courses. The seminar is of a classroom as they enhance their teacher-researcher
also a potentially powerful model in that it shows how identities while developing innovative curricula and
teachers and students can play more profound roles figuring out the most appropriate ways to document
in academic research even as we create empowered the learning and the challenges that accompany these
models of teaching and learning through the pro- particular classroom practices. Although learning
cess itself. That is, teachers and students can help us doesn’t have to be standardized, it would be helpful to
to learn more about empowering literacy pedagogies begin developing a consensus around appropriate and
through the process of critical research that is itself an powerful ways to convey literacy learning in English
empowering example of literacy pedagogy. classrooms. How can teachers best do this? How do
critical educators work within oppressive conditions
Recommendations for the Future that constrain what it is they teach and how they are to
of Critical Research teach? How can university researchers better contrib-
Critical research can be an important component of the ute to the classrooms where they are working while
repertoire of teachers and university researchers who also informing the field? How do university research-
want to develop and understand pedagogical practices ers balance these dual responsibilities while also try-
that lead to excellence and power for all students. When ing to communicate effectively to their colleagues via
freedom. New York: Routledge. Reading Conference. Chicago, IL: National Reading
Horkheimer, M. (2002). Traditional and critical theory. In C. Conference.
Calhoun, J. Gerteis, J. Moody, S. Pfaff, K. Schmidt, & I. Virk
(Eds.), Classical sociological theory (pp. 304–318). Malden, MA:
Blackwell. Morrell teaches at the University of California, Los
53(2)
Kincheloe, J., & McLaren, P. (1998). Rethinking critical theory Angeles, USA and is the associate director of the Institute
and qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.),
The landscape of qualitative research (pp. 260–299). Thousand for Democracy, Education, and Access (IDEA); e-mail
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy
104