[NLA] Cutting Edge Research

[Catherine B. King]

Hello Tom and Colleagues:

In your note, you say:  "On the Women and Literacy
(Womenlit) discussion list sponsored by the National
Institute for Literacy I recently came across a couple of the
"cutting edge" questions that Dr. Greenberg is struggling
with. I left the list after reading the questions and a couple of
responses to the questions posted by others, one of which
reported the definite 'fact' that 10 percent of the population of
adults is gay,  puzzled as to what particular issues in adult
literacy education these questions were aimed to resolve. I
also wondered how this work might be used to approach the
Bush administration and new Republican-lead Congress to
advocate for the field of adult literacy education. I wonder if
others have any insights as to how this might be done."

Assuming you really want an answer, I have copied Dr.
Greenberg's two questions and then written a brief explanation
(as I understand it) below each question.

But before we do that, Tom,  I would humbly suggest that a
"one-field-fits-all" assumption does not afford us the critical
tools to research and reflect on the realities or complexities
that affect the "data" of our field--adults and our approach to
them in the classroom.  As you well know, these adults sit in
a vast and complex psychological, social, political, and
developmental context.   An exploration of that context is
where we are going to find teaching attitudes and methods
that make for optimum situations in adult education.

Dr. Greenberg, thank goodness, does not limit her thought to
one field or field-method and is not afraid to ask questions that
may be moot, but also that may be surprisingly rich in insight
material.

This openness renders her work more, not less, critical.
Indeed, and unless you have some other meaning for it,
"Cutting Edge" research means just that--(1) to be willing to
question what has been assumed to be unquestionable
current definitions and knowledge, and (2) to be willing to
live for the moment on the uncharted border (edge)
between the known and the unknown.

Further, Dr. Greenberg has shown that she is not afraid to
ask questions, to admit that she is "struggling," and to listen
to others who might have some insights to offer.  This
researcher attitude is, in my view, the essence of open
and fearless collaboration and is essential to the beginning
processes of any critical "cutting edge" research.

Dr. Greenberg writes:

"1. Do you prefer the term learner or student? Do you prefer the term
> teacher or instructor? If you have a preference, why? I am
> struggling with the words that we use, but I don't know enough to
> know why I am struggling. What do we imply when we use the word
> learner vs. student? What do we imply when we use the word teacher
> vs. instructor? Are there other terms that are even better?"

My response:  As in any good theoretical work, Dr. Greenberg is
exploring the common language to be used in her research.  In
this, she is raising common language to the level of theory--giving
common terms technical meaning for clarity in her research.  This
is a critical aspect of any research as often the import of mixed
or confused meaning of terminology may be the source of later
problems in interpretations and conclusions, as you have
said in other notes on this forum.

She is also exploring what others in the field mean by these terms
and, in the process, unearthing some basic assumptions--often
surprisingly different in different people--in the field.  This
seemingly trite and meaningless exercise (to those who do not
understand the import of questions that probe assumptions in
personal or field language) is often a great source of insights that,
in turn, may have great import on the depth and range of meaning
developed in the research.   It may also fall moot.

But that's the risk we take when exploring and probing meaning.
If we wait for a guarantee, or can't abide losing the attention of
some quick-to-judge colleagues who do not understand the
importance of meaning exploration in early stages of research,
we won't ever ask anything.   And, as you have noted, if we go
with the nebulous assumptions of common discourse, then we
may lose clarity as well as some insights that may come from
the exercise.

Dr. Greenberg's second question:

"2. I would like to make sure that the reading materials that we
> offer to our learners/students are as diverse as possible. How do
I ensure this? For example, if I want to include books with characters
> who have diverse orientations-what proportion of the books should
> this be? Also, does anyone know of appropriate books that cover
LGBT [lesbian, gay,bisexual,transgendered] issues/characters that
are written between the 2nd and 7th grade reading levels . . . "

My response:  There is a plethora of research and writing on
diversity going on as we speak in the field.  The approach is
drawn from K-12 research where the "one-size-fit's-all" paradigm
of teaching is becoming recognized as woefully inadequate for
anyone but those middle-class, white, euro-male, hetero, etc.,
groups whose family and cultural orders are completely
congruous with the school culture (and testing) environment.
 I haven't talked to Daphne, but my guess is that she is
attempting to explore "recruitment," or ways to approach
different "out of the loop" groups whose whole approach to their
own education is from the point of view of having been socially,
culturally and educationally disenfranchised.

An example of this would be the black person who thinks that to
become educated is to become "oreo," or "like whitey," where
"whitey" has most often been experienced as racist.  This leaves
them with untenable choices:  (1) Get an education and betray
my entire culture by going with the enemy, or (2) remain
uneducated and true to my heritage.  Of course, the attitude is
self-destructive; however, it is a recurrent theme in Black
writers who speak about the Black experience in America,
e.g., Henry Louis Gates, Jr., bell hooks, Shelby Steele, etc. ,
and in earlier works:  W.E.B. Dubois "The Souls of Black Folks,"
a classic in Black literature where he talks about an internal
"curtain" and how the Black person self-interprets through the
White racist paradigm leaving them in a self-oppressed state.

The general point is that many who identify closely with
disenfranchised groups are at odds with an educational
system and teachers who carry all the characteristics of
opposing cultural orders and who have not attempted to
"bridge" the cultural chasm that exists between institutions
of education and the institution of the disenfranchised adult.

The research in "diversity" is an attempt to find ways
to bridge these psychological walls, to break through this self-
destructive horizon, and to find ways to "reach" those who
are resting in this mind set with regard to different self-
identified groups.  With adults, the internal barriers are often
ordered around social groups identified with language
and cultural differences and, in its own way, with being
"illiterate."

For a sample list of books on the subject, see
 www.teacherscollegpress.com, and
 www.rethinkingschools.org.  Also, see Smith, Pritchy G. (l998).
"Common Sense about Uncommon Knowledge:  The
Knowledge Bases for Diversity." Washington, D.C. AACTE.
More foundational texts would be Paulo Freire's "The
Pedagogy of the Oppressed," and Albert Memmi's "The
Colonized and the Colonizer." (1965) Boston:  Beacon Press.

Tom, though you seem to eschew Dr. Greenberg's questions
(since you left the list), I think they are courageous in a
personal vein; but more importantly, this kind of questioning
is quite possibly the ONLY thing that holds the possibility
(potential?) for creative change in the field that will
ultimately set the optimum conditions to reach many
adults that have been, up to this point, unreachable.

Regards,

Catherine King
Adjunct Instructor
Department of Teacher Education
National University
San Diego, CA









----- Original Message -----
From: Thomas Sticht <tsticht at znet.com>
To: <nla at lists.literacytent.org>
Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 10:44 AM
Subject: [NLA] Cutting Edge Research


> Recently Dr. M. C. Smith mentioned some people whom he thinks is doing
> "cutting edge" research. One of these was Dr.Daphne Greenberg, a recent
> recipient of one of the five NIFL/NICHD/USED grants to study adult
> reading. On the Women and Literacy (Womenlit) discussion list sponsored by
> the National Institute for Literacy I recently came across a couple of the
> "cutting edge" questions that Dr. Greenberg is struggling with. I left the
> list after reading the questions and a couple of responses to the
> questions posted by others, one of which reported the definite "fact" that
> 10 percent of the population of adults is gay,  puzzled as to what
> particular issues in adult literacy education these questions were aimed
> to resolve. I also wondered how this work might be used to approach the
> Bush administration and new Republican-lead Congress to advocate for the
> field of adult literacy education. I wonder if others have any insights as
> to how this might be done.
> Tom Sticht
>
> On  the Womenlit list Dr. Greenberg said:
>
> Quote:"As I mentioned in one of my previous posts, from time to time I
will
> pose questions that I am struggling with while I am doing my research.
> Here are two questions:
>
> 1. Do you prefer the term learner or student? Do you prefer the term
> teacher or instructor? If you have a preference, why? I am
> struggling with the words that we use, but I don't know enough to
> know why I am struggling. What do we imply when we use the word
> learner vs. student? What do we imply when we use the word teacher
> vs. instructor? Are there other terms that are even better?
>
> 2. I would like to make sure that the reading materials that we
> offer to our learners/students are as diverse as possible. How do I
> ensure this? For example, if I want to include books with characters
> who have diverse orientations-what proportion of the books should
> this be? Also, does anyone know of appropriate books that cover LGBT
> [lesbian, gay,bisexual,transgendered] issues/characters that are written
> between the 2nd and 7th grade reading levels (Mev, I know that you have
> supplied lists, but are any of the books that you have mentioned written
> below the 7th grade reading level)?
>
> Any thoughts ideas about any of the above?
> Daphne" End Quote.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
> http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
> LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
> http://literacytent.org

_______________________________________________
NLA mailing list: NLA at lists.literacytent.org
http://lists.literacytent.org/mailman/listinfo/nla
LiteracyTent: web hosting, news, community and goodies for literacy
http://literacytent.org