Studying critical literacies includes examining how research practices influence what is learned about classroom activity and the world. This article highlights the processes and practices used in studying 1 classroom conversation. The data, drawn from an elementary school classroom of a Critical Literacy in Action teacher-researcher group member, features 2 girls exploring issues of hairstyle, race, and cultural identity. Data were analyzed using 3 lenses—grounded theory, existing typologies for content analysis, and critical discourse analysis. Findings highlight how the students drew on and used diverse textual resources, sources of knowledge, and critical practices, as well as how participants situated themselves within larger social discourse. These findings were then collectively analyzed to further understand the nuances of using each analytic tool and the implications for this classroom and critical literacy research at large. Our research design, experiences, and findings invite further exploration of the promises, challenges, and complexities of studying classroom practices from critical perspectives.
References
1.
AndersonG. L.IrvineP. (1993). Informing critical literacy with ethnography. In LankshearC.McLarenP. L. (Eds.), Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern (pp. 81–104). New York: State University of New York Press.
2.
BartonD.HamiltonM. (2000). Literacy practices. In BartonD.HamiltonM.IvanicR. (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 7–15). New York: Routledge.
3.
BaynhamM. (1995). Literacy practices: Investigating literacy in social contexts.London: Longman.
4.
BeachR. (1992). Adopting multiple stances in conducting literacy research. In BeachR.GreenJ. L.KamilM. L.ShanahanT. (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on literacy research (pp. 91–110). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
5.
BloomeD.BaileyF. M. (1992). Studying language and literacy through events, particularity, and intertextuality. In BeachR.GreenJ. L.KamilM. L.ShanahanT. (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on literacy research (pp. 181–210). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
6.
BloomeD.LandisD. (1999). Classroom discourse and guided construction of knowledge: A review of Neil Mercer's (1995) The guided construction of knowledge: Talk amongst teachers and learners. Qualitative Studies in Education, 12, 104–109.
7.
BomerR. (2004). Dimensions of writing the world: Looking at critical composing from three directions. Talking Points, 16(1), 5–10.
8.
BoozerM. E.MarasL. B.BrummettB. (1999). Exchanging ideas and changing positions: The importance of conversation to holistic, critical endeavors. In EdelskyC. (Ed.), Making justice our project: Teachers working toward critical whole-language practice (pp. 55–76). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
9.
BurkeC. (1998). A focused study as a curricular organization.Bloomington, IN: Inquiring Voices Press.
10.
ChristensenL. (2000). Reading, writing, and rising up: Teaching about social justice and the power of the written word.Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools.
11.
ChristensenL. (2003, March). Acting for justice. Paper presented at the Critical Literacy in Action Workshop, Bloomington, IN.
12.
CisnerosC. (1994). Hairs/pelitos.New York: Knopf.
13.
ClearyB. (1992). Ramona Quimby, age 8.New York: HarperCollins.
14.
ComberB. (2001). Negotiating critical literacies. School Talk, 6(3), 1–3.
15.
ComberB.SimpsonA. (2001). Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
16.
CraftonL. K. (1981). The reading process as a transactional learning experience. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42(1), 154. (No. AAT 8114938).
17.
DukeN.MalletteM. (2001). Critical issues: Preparation for new literacy researchers in multi-epistemological, multi-methodological times. Journal of Literacy Research, 33, 345–360.
18.
EdelskyC. (Ed.). (1999). Making justice our project.Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
19.
EncisoP. (1994). Cultural identity and response to literature: Running lessons from Maniac Magee. Language Arts, 71, 524–533.
20.
EncisoP. (1998). Good/bad girls read together: Pre-adolescent girls' co-authorship of feminine subject positions during a shared reading event. English Education, 30(1), 44–62.
21.
FaircloughN. (1989). Language and power.New York: Longman.
22.
FarrellL. (1998, November). Reconstructing Sally: Narratives and counter narratives around work, education and workplace restructure. Paper presented at the meeting of the Australian Association for Research in Education, Adelaide, Australia.
23.
FlintA.Van SluysK.LewisonM. (2003). Disrupting the commonplace: Teachers researching critical literacy. School Talk, 8(4), 1–2.
24.
FreireA. M. A.MacedoD. (Eds.). (1998). The Paulo Freire reader.New York: Continuum.
25.
FreireP. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed.New York: Herder & Herder.
26.
GeeJ. P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses.London: Routledge.
27.
GeeJ. P. (1999). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method.London: Routledge.
28.
GeeJ. P. (2000). New literacy studies: From “socially situated” to the work of the school. In BartonD.HamiltonM.IvanicR. (Eds.), Situated literacies: Reading and writing in context (pp. 180–196). London: Routledge.
29.
GeeJ. P. (2001, July). Critical discourse analysis. Paper presented at the CELT Rejuvenation Conference, Illinois Beach, IL.
30.
GirouxH. (1993). Literacy and the politics of difference. In LankshearC.McLarenP. L. (Eds.), Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern (pp. 367–378). New York: State University of New York Press.
31.
GlaserB.StraussA. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.Chicago: Aldine De Gruyter.
32.
GreenJ. L. (1983). Exploring classroom discourse: Linguistic perspectives on teaching-learning processes. Educational Psychologist, 18, 180–199.
33.
GreenJ. L. (1988). Differing views of the academic and social texts of lessons: An introduction. In GreenJ. L.HarkerJ. O. (Eds.), Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse (pp. 5–10). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
34.
GreenJ. L. (1992). Multiple perspectives: Issues and directions. In BeachR.GreenJ. L.KamilM. L.ShanahanT. (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on literacy research (pp. 19–34). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
35.
GreenJ. L.HarkerJ. O. (Eds.). (1988). Multiple perspective analyses of classroom discourse.Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
36.
GreenP. (2001). Critical literacy revisited. In FehringH.GreenP. (Eds.), Critical literacy: A collection of articles from the Australian Literacy Educators' Association (pp. 7–14). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
HarsteJ. C.BreauA.LelandC.LewisonM.OciepkaA.VasquezV. (2000). Supporting critical conversations. In PierceK. M. (Ed.), Adventuring with books (pp. 506–554). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
39.
HerronC. (1999). Nappy hair.New York: Random House.
40.
HicksD. (1995). Discourse, learning, and teaching. Review of Research in Education, 21, 49–95.
41.
JanksH. (2000). Domination, access, diversity, and design: A synthesis for critical literacy education. Educational Review, 52(2), 15–30.
42.
JanksH. (2001). Identity and conflict in the critical literacy classroom. In ComberB.SimpsonA. (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 137–150). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
43.
JanksH. (2002, November). Critical classrooms for critical times. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Teachers of English, Atlanta, GA.
LankshearC.McLarenP. L. (1993). Preface. In LankshearC.McLarenP. L. (Eds.), Critical literacy: Politics, praxis, and the postmodern (pp. xii–xx). Albany: State University of New York Press.
46.
LewisonM.FlintA. S.Van SluysK. (2002). Taking on critical literacy: The journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts, 79, 382–392.
47.
LewisonM.LelandC.HarsteJ. (2000). Not in my classroom! The case for using multi-view social issues books with children. The Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 23(1), 8–20.
48.
LukeA.FreebodyP. (1997). Shaping the social practices of reading. In MusprattS.LukeA.FreebodyP. (Eds.), Constructing critical literacies (pp. 185–223). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
49.
MadrigalA. H. (2001). Erandi's braids.New York: Putnam.
50.
MarshJ. (2000). Teletubby tales: Popular culture in the early years' language and literacy curriculum. Contemporary Issues in Early Education, 1, 119–133.
51.
NietoS. (1999). The light in their eyes: Creating multicultural learning communities.New York: Teachers College Press.
52.
O'BrienJ. (2001). Children reading critically: A local history. In ComberB.SimpsonA. (Eds.), Negotiating critical literacies in classrooms (pp. 37–54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
53.
PearsonP. D. (2001). Life in the radical middle: A personal apology for a balanced view of reading. In FlippoR. (Ed.), Reading researchers in search of common ground (pp. 78–83). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
54.
PiantanidaM.TananisC.GrubsR. (2004). Generating grounded theory of/for educational practice: The journey of three epistemorphs. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 17, 326–346.
55.
RowlingJ. K. (1998). Harry Potter and the sorcerer's stone.New York: Scholastic.
56.
RuddellM. R. (1999). Of stand-up comics, statisticians, storytellers, and small girls walking backward: A new look at the discourses of literacy research. In ShanahanT.Rodriguez-BrownF. V. (Eds.), National Reading Conference yearbook (Vol. 48, pp. 1–16). Chicago: National Reading Conference.
57.
ShannonP. (1995). Text, lies and videotape: Stories about life, literacy and learning.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
58.
ShannonP. (2002). Critical literacy in everyday life. Language Arts, 79, 415–424.
59.
ShorI. (1987). Educating the educators: A Freirean approach to the crisis in teacher education. In ShorI. (Ed.), Freire for the classroom: A sourcebook for liberatory teaching (pp. 7–32). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
60.
ShortK. G. (1999). The search for “balance” in a literature-rich curriculum. Theory Into Practice, 38, 130–137.
61.
SiegelM. (1992). Multidisciplinary research on literacy and the possibility of educational change. In BeachR.GreenJ. L.KamilM. L.ShanahanT. (Eds.), Multidisciplinary perspectives on literacy research (pp. 373–384). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
62.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
63.
StreetB. V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy development, ethnography, and education.London: Longman.
64.
SunC. (Producer/Writer), & Picker, M. (Director/Editor). (2001). Mickey Mouse monopoly: Disney, childhood, and corporate power [Video]. United States: ArtMedia. (Available from Media Education Foundation, 60 Masonic Street, Northampton, MA 01060).
65.
TarpleyN. A. (2001). I love my hair!New York: Brown Children's Books.
66.
Van SluysK. (2005). What if and why? Literacy invitations in multilingual classrooms.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
67.
VasquezV. (1998). Building equitable communities: Taking social action in a kindergarten classroom. Talking Points, 9(2), 3–6.
68.
VasquezV. (2000). Our way: Using the everyday to create a critical literacy curriculum. Primary Voices, 9(2), 8–13.
