Hull &Rose:
- Why is freeing students from closed, canonical (and necessarily terminal) interpretations vitally important if we hope to help young people think critically about the sociocultural identities that are available to them?
- What do the authors mean when they argue that “hesitancy and uncertainty are central to knowledge making” (pp. 297 of original text)?
It is essential for students to be given the opportunity to make their own interpretations of a piece of literature in order to think critically about the true meaning of the text. Hull and Rose depict this issue beautifully in the case of Robert, who was unable to make the same interpretation as Rose in Hongo’s poem not due to unintelligence, but due to being unaware of how someone from the middle class would interpret the piece. Robert was not aware that the image of shacks was a sign of poverty because he had seen shacks before. It is essential that we stress more open interpretations in schools so as to address variations in interpretations between social classes. It would be beneficial to address a piece in several different lights, perhaps by analyzing it as a group and teaching how different people might interpret it based on their class. One of the major issues in schooling is that in a given K-12 class, the students are of similar socioeconomic statuses. This becomes problematic because if a teacher who comes from a higher social status poses one interpretation that is not fully matched by his or her students and dismisses the students’ inadequacy as being unintelligent, then those students will be left behind. Today, students are tracked from the second they arrive at school and their failure to pass this simple task has implications on their future successes. Freeing students from the closed, middle class interpretation of a piece and helping them understand different socioeconomic identities is important to give them the chance to rise up the socioeconomic ladder by being able to critically analyze a piece through different lenses, particularly the lens that their teacher perceives the world with.
ReplyDelete- Kathy Shen
Hesitancy and uncertainty are central to knowledge making:
ReplyDeleteUsing history as a brief synapses to this question-- during the Renaissance era of enlightenment, "knowledge" of the church was challenged by philosophers, artists, differing clergy and variable scientists. Using this example, they challenged the dominate authority and thus spawned new thought and knowledge which catalyzed and perpetuated contemporary thought. To a lesser extent, Rose points out that the pedagogical domination of the instructor often smothers and ignors the opinions and experiences (and knowledge) of the subordinate student.
Every student, even those who are not deemed "functionally literate" in the dominate discourse ( in this case, literary analysis) has their own discourse to challenge the dominate discourse. Correlating this to later readings, Lam calls this dialectic conflict of discourses the "contact zone").
The point is that there are multiple interpretations based off of ones experiences through which, in this case, literature can have variable meaning-- thus spawning new knowledge by challenging the dominate thought incite. Furthermore, hesitating to accept fact as fact, especially in literature, contributes to greater abstract thought than simply accepting the dominate role. It derives new considerations with a wealth interpretation.
In the contemporary definition of literacy, factors like socioeconomic status, race, geography, and culture play a huge role. Worldview is affected by all these factors and that directly influences a pupil’s interpretation of coursework. This reading addresses these things through the authors’ anecdote about a student, Robert. Robert and Rose read a poem and end up with two completely different interpretations, representative of their two completely different world views. This learning moment is common in underprivileged schools. Many teachers come from middleclass backgrounds and their ignorance of what life is like in the lower class can create frictions or barriers between them and their pupils. However, seizing moments like Hull and Rose had with Robert are excellent opportunities to form bonds with students and learn from them.
ReplyDeleteHesitancy and uncertainty are vital to knowledge making because these aspect usually signify that a challenge of our previous beliefs is taken place, thereby expanding our point of view accepting of new ideas. For instance, Rose was sure that the poem could only be analyzed one way in the beginning. It was only until Robert posed a new analysis of the poem that his certainty was shaken. This hesitancy could only happen if there was a new idea that challenged the teacher’s already drawn out idea. In this case, Robert’s analysis of the poem clashed with the R0se’s in many different ways. Not only was Rose exposed to a different analysis, he also was exposed to a new point of view from a different culture than his, and he also was able to be enriched by this new interpretation of the poem by adding even more meaning to it, as was shown with the relationship with the wind and the alkaline earth. Through this example, we can see that it was not Robert who benefited most from this interaction, but Rose through Robert’s challenge of his analysis of the poem. Challenge brings forth uncertainty, which in turn makes it possible for the individual to be open his/her mind to new ways of thinking and new knowledge.
ReplyDelete