This qualitative case study presents the perceptions of Derrick, a Black urban adolescent male who enjoys reading but believes that inconsistent school discourses hinder his success and enjoyment as a reader. Findings show that Derrick's purposeful work while reading was limited and misunderstood because, among other factors, there was a pervasive effect of test-driven reform. I argue that his critique of formal reading instruction reveals that even progressive approaches to education are not immune to the discursive power of the accountability and standardization movement, and that resultantly, the active and avid reading engagement of this Black adolescent male was ultimately neglected, inhibited, and dismissed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AbramsL. M., PedullaJ. J., & MadausG. E. (2003). Views from the classroom: Teachers' opinions of statewide testing programs.Theory into Practice, 42(1), 18–29.
2.
AfflerbachP. (2005). National Reading Conference policy brief: High stakes testing and reading assessment.Journal of Literacy Research, 37(2), 151–162.
3.
AuK. H. (2007). Culturally responsive instruction: Application to multiethnic classrooms.Pedagogies: An International Journal, 2(1), 1–18.
4.
AuK. H., CarrollJ. H., & ScheuJ. A. (1997). Balanced literacy instruction: A teacher's resource book.Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
5.
BarronB., & Darling-HammondL. (2008). How can we teach for meaningful learning? In Darling-HammondL. (Ed.), Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding (pp. 11–70). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
6.
BogdanR. C., & BiklenS. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
7.
BrozoW. G., WalterP., & PlackerT. (2002). “I know the difference between a real man and a TV man”: A critical exploration of violence and masculinity through literature in a junior high school in the 'hood.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45(6), 530–538.
8.
CimbriczS. (2002). State-mandated testing and teachers' beliefs and practice.Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10(2), 1–22.
9.
CollinsJ. (2000). Bernstein, Bourdieu and the new literacy studies.Linguistics and Education, 11(1), 65–78.
10.
ComberB. (2012). Mandated literacy assessment and the reorganisation of teachers' work: Federal policy, local effects.Critical Studies in Education, 53, 119–136.
11.
CumminsJ. (2007). Pedagogies for the poor? Realigning reading instruction for low-income students with scientifically based reading research.Educational Researcher, 36, 564–572.
12.
DuncumP. (2004). Visual culture isn't just visual: Multiliteracy, multimodality, and meaning.Studies in Art Education, 45(3), 252–264.
13.
DutroE., & SellandM. (2012). “I like to read, but I know I'm not good at it”: Children's perspectives on high-stakes testing in a high-poverty school.Curriculum Inquiry, 42, 340–367.
14.
DysonA. H., & GenishiC. (2005). On the case: Approaches to language and literacy research.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
15.
EnriquezG. (2009). To be a reader: Urban students of color performing reading and identity in an English language arts classroom (Unpublished doctoral dissertation).Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
16.
FairbanksC. M., & AriailM. (2006). The role of social and cultural resources in literacy and schooling: Three contrasting cases.Research in the Teaching of English, 40(3), 310–354.
17.
FechoB., CoombsD., & McAuleyS. (2012). Reclaiming literacy classrooms through critical dialogue.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 55, 476–482.
18.
FinnP. J. (1999). Literacy with an attitude: Educating working-class children in their own self-interest.Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
19.
FisherM. T. (2007). Writing in rhythm: Spoken word poetry in urban classrooms.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
20.
FloodJ., LappD., & Bayles-MartinD. (2000). Vision possible: The role of visual media in literacy education. In GallegoM. A., & HollingsworthS. (Eds.), What counts as literacy: Challenging the school standard (pp. 62–84). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
21.
FoucaultM. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977 (GordonC., Ed.). New York, NY: Pantheon.
22.
FoucaultM. (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison.New York, NY: Vintage.
23.
FountasI. C., & PinnellG. S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all children.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
24.
FreireP. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York, NY: Continuum.
25.
FuhrmanS. H., & ElmoreR. F. (Eds.). (2004). Redesigning accountability systems for education.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
26.
GallagherS. (1999). An exchange of gazes. In KincheloeJ. L., SteinbergS. R., & VillaverdeL. E. (Eds.), Rethinking intelligence: Confronting psychological assumptions about teaching and learning (pp. 69–84). New York, NY: Routledge.
27.
GallegoM., & HollingsworthS. (Eds.). (2000). What counts as literacy? Challenging the school standard.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
28.
GeeJ. (1990). What is literacy? In MitchellC., & WeilerK. (Eds.), Rewriting literacy: Culture and the discourse of the other (pp. 3–11). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc.
29.
GeeJ. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses (2nd ed.). London UK: Taylor & Francis.
30.
GeeJ. P. (1999). Critical issues: Reading and the new literacy studies: Reframing the National Academy of Sciences report on reading.Journal of Literacy Research, 31(3), 355–374.
31.
GlaserB. G., & StraussA. L. (1967/1999). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.New York, NY: Aldine deGruyter.
32.
GrangerD. A. (2008). No Child Left Behind and the spectacle of failing schools: The mythology of contemporary school reform.Educational Studies, 43, 206–228.
33.
GriegC., & HughesJ. (2009). A boy who would rather write poetry than throw rocks at cats is also considered to be wanting in masculinity: Poetry, masculinity, and baiting boys.Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 30, 91–105.
34.
HaddixM. (2009/2010). Black boys can write: Challenging dominant framings of African American adolescent males in literacy research.Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53, 341–343.
35.
HansenC. C., & ZamboD. (2010). Boys in the club: Exploring positive male archetypes with preschool males.Literacy Research and Instruction, 49(1), 40–66.
36.
HeathS. B. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
37.
HigginsK., & MouleJ. (2009). “No more Mr. Nice Guy”: Preservice teachers' conflict with classroom management in a predominantly African-American urban elementary school.Multicultural Perspectives, 11(3), 132–138.
38.
JanesickV. J. (1994). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In DenzinN. L., & LincolnY. S. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 209–219). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
39.
KamlerB., & ComberB. (2005). Contesting deficit and designing turnaround pedagogies. In ComberB., & KamlerB. (Eds.), Turn-around pedagogies: Literacy interventions for at-risk students (pp. 1–14). Newtown, NSW: Primary English Teachers Association.
40.
KunjufuJ. (1982). Countering the conspiracy to destroy Black boys.Chicago, IL: African American Images.
41.
Ladson-BillingsG. (1992). Reading between the lines and beyond the pages: A culturally relevant approach to literacy teaching.Theory into Practice, 31(4), 312–320.
42.
LankshearC., & SnyderI. (2000). Teachers and techno-literacies: Managing technology and learning in schools.Sydney, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin.
43.
LappD., WolseyT. D., FisherD., & FreyN. (2011/2012). Graphic novels: What elementary teachers think about their instructional value.Journal of Education, 192(1), 23–35.
44.
LeeC. D. (1993). Signifying as a scaffold for literary interpretation: The pedagogical implications of an African American discourse genre.Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
45.
LukeA. (2000). Critical literacy in Australia: A matter of context and standpoint.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43(5), 448–461.
46.
LukeA. (2012). After the testing: Talking and reading and writing the world.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 56(1), 8–13.
47.
MarchantG. J. (2004). What is at stake with high-stakes testing? A discussion of issues and research.Ohio Journal of Science, 104(2), 2–7.
48.
MarshallC., & RossmanG. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49.
MatthewsJ. S., KizzieK. T., RowleyS. J., & CortinaK. (2010). African Americans and boys: Understanding the literacy gap, tracing academic trajectories, and evaluating the role of learning-related skills.Journal of Educational Psychology,102(3), 757–771.
50.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
51.
MillardE. (1997). Differently literate: Boys, girls, and the schooling of literacy.London, UK: Falmer.
52.
MorrellE., & Duncan-AndradeJ. (2004). What they do learn in school: Hip-hop as a bridge to canonical poetry. In MahiriJ. (Ed.), What they don't learn in school: Literacy in the lives of urban youth (pp. 247–268). New York, NY: Peter Lang.
53.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.Washington, DC: Authors.
54.
NogueraP.A. (2003). The trouble with Black boys: The role and influence of environmental and cultural factors on the academic performance of African American males.Urban Education, 38(4), 431–459.
55.
ParisS. G., RothJ. L., & TurnerJ. C. (2000). Developing disillusionment: Students' perceptions of academic achievement tests.Issues in Education, 6(1/2), 17–45.
56.
PearsonP. D. (2007). An endangered species act for literacy education.Journal of Literacy Research, 39, 145–162.
57.
RosenblattL. (1978). The reader, the text, the poem: The transactional theory of the literary work.Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois Press.
58.
StanovichK. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy.Reading Research Quarterly, 21(4), 360–407.
59.
StreetB. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical perspectives on literacy in development, ethnography, education.London, UK: Longman.
60.
StuckeyJ. E. (1990). The violence of literacy.Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
61.
TatumA. W. (1999). Reading and the African American male: Identity, equity, and power.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 43(1), 62–64.
62.
TatumA. (2005). Teaching reading to Black adolescent males: Closing the achievement gap.Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
63.
TaylorD. (2004). Not just boring stories: Reconsidering the gender gap for boys.Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 48(4), 290–298.
64.
WheelockA., BebellD. J., & HaneyW. (2000). Student self-portraits as test-takers: Variations, contextual differences and assumptions about motivation.Teachers College Record. Retrieved from https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=10635.
65.
Zacher PandyaJ. (2011). Overtested: How high stakes accountability fails English language learners.New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
66.
ColferE. (2001-2012). Artemis Fowl series. New York, NY: Viking.
67.
ShanD. (2004-2008). Cirque du freak series.New York, NY: Little, Brown, & Company.
