Critical Literacy

CRITICAL LITERACY: WHAT’S WRITING GOT TO DO WITH IT? Barbara Kamler, Deakin University Based on Keynote address for The English Teachers Association of Queensland State Conference, Marist Brothers College Ashgrove, Queensland August 16, 2002 My address is entitled Critical Literacy: What’s Here the slippage from ‘writing and reading’ Writing Got to Do With It? If I were to give a to ‘reading practices’ is fairly seamless and succinct reply to this question, I could offer three is symptomatic, I would argue, of a broader words. On the one hand, I would say ‘Everything’ tendency for literacy to get read as reading (one word) because I believe writing is central or enacted as reading practices. In Barbara to the project of critical literacy and that a Comber’s (1994) important text on critical critical approach to student writing can make a literacy, she argues that in practice, critical difference - to student’s capacity to understand literacy involves at least three principles for and manipulate both the stories of their lives and action: the genres of schooling. • Repositioning students as researchers of On the other hand, I would say ‘Not enough’ language (two words) because in classrooms where • Respecting student resistance and teachers are enacting critical literacy as part exploring minority culture constructions of a repertoire of literacy practices, the focus of literacy and language use has been more deliberately on reading than writing. So, too, in the research literature, where • Problematising classroom and public academics examine what critical literacy means texts. in early childhood, middle years, high school I would add that in practice, these principles and adult literacy contexts. Here it is reading have been developed primarily in the context practices and the discursive construction of the of reading – by engaging students as analysts reader, rather than writing, which are centre of media or literature texts, by examining stage. multiple and conflicting texts or the historical and cultural contexts of discourses in texts, I can illustrate by looking at an excerpt from a by reading texts against one another, or by special issue on critical literacy from the journal investigating how readers are positioned by Interpretations, put out by the English Teachers’ ideologies in texts (Luke and Freebody 1997). Association of WA: And the work has been exciting. Sometimes explicitly and always implicitly the contributors argue that writing and I am thinking, in particular, of critical literacy reading are complex cultural processes approaches developed by Hilary Janks (1993) which cannot be divorced either from the in her Critical Language Awareness series or context/s in which they occur or the power by Wendy Morgan (1992) in her Ned Kelly of language to construct subjectivity. All the materials or in Chalkface Press publications writers agree that institutional practices, such as Reading Fictions by Bronwyn Mellor, the discursive networks in which texts are Annette Patterson and Marnie O’Neill (1987). enmeshed, and the ability of society to I am also thinking of critical reading practices legitimate certain meanings and speakers developed in early childhood classrooms by and thus marginalise or exclude others Jennifer O’Brien, who worked in socially diverse are crucial to reading practices, even at low to middle socioeconomic communities the most elementary level (my emphasis) in South Australia to position young children (Hulton & Martino 1997). as text analysts and researchers – using texts Words’Worth June 2017 • Volume 50, Number 2 39 CRITICAL LITERACY: WHAT’S WRITING GOT TO DO WITH IT? ranging from Hansel and Gretel to Mothers’ Day Pedagogy. I will base my address on the ideas catalogues (O’Brien 1994); or by Vivian Vasquez developed in this book about what it means (2001) in a multicultural Catholic school in to develop a critical writing pedagogy. I will Toronto, Canada, where she helped students outline some of the key conceptual principles, develop an ‘audit trail’ -posting key artefacts but primarily I will look at some of the strategies and products of student work as a critical tool I have developed for working with writers to for examining the received curriculum (Comber relocate the personal in its social and cultural 2002). contexts. My aim is to make visible what this But I am still left asking what about writing? work can look like on the ground – so that In their discussion of the critical dimension others can engage with the ideas and take them of literacy, Luke and Freebody emphasise that forward – and so that critical literacy really learners need to: comes to encompass writing practices as well as reading practices. critically analyse and transform texts by acting on knowledge that texts are not ideologically What do I mean by a critical writing natural or neutral – that they represent particular points of view while silencing others pedagogy? and influence people’s ideas – and that their I can best clarify some of the principles of a critical designs and discourses can be critiqued and writing pedagogy by deconstructing the title of my redesigned in novel and hybrid ways (Luke & book, Relocating the Personal: A Critical Writing Freebody, 1999). Pedagogy. I would argue that this learning applies equally 1. A to writing as to reading – perhaps even more I use the term A critical writing pedagogy rather so, given the emphasis here on design and than The – to signal that I am not offering the redesign – on redoing and transforming texts. answer, or the latest and greatest orthodoxy, or a It may be, however, that writing has not been new set of recipes for teachers. I want to disrupt given the same attention as reading because it debates about THE best method (Luke 1998) and is more difficult to do – more difficult to gain argue that there is not one generic critical literacy. distance on the texts students write – to see It is, as Barbara Comber (2002) argues, an evolving their writing as a representation, rather than the concept, which is locally contingent, dynamic truth. It is certainly more difficult to examine and subject to revisions in terms of its effects the way student texts silence particular points of (Kamler and Comber 1996; Luke 2000). In the view, without simply being seen as humourless, most productive critical literacy work, researchers or positioned as a teacher criticising the writer, specify how critical literacies are constituted in their life, their point of view. different teaching situations (Comber & Simpson My question then is: How do we create sufficient 200l, Knobel 1998). distance between the writer and her text so that My book takes a similar position in developing it is possible to do this kind of critical work? four case studies of writers in high school, How do we relocate student writing in its social, undergraduate and graduate university courses cultural and political contexts? And what effects and in adult/ community contexts. I offer many does this distancing and relocating have - on the examples of student writing, many glimpses of writing, but also on the body and mind of the specific strategies I have tailored for local contexts. writer? My aim is to work against the notion that there These are key questions I address in my recent is one right way to be critical and invite readers book published by AATE Interface Series to use the book as a starting point for their own Relocating the Personal: A Critical Writing explorations. 40 The English Teachers Association of Queensland CRITICAL LITERACY: WHAT’S WRITING GOT TO DO WITH IT? 2 .Critical on the subject and discourse to accomplish The term critical signals my concern with relocation of the personal. addressing questions of language, power and A major strength of this critical writing representation – the way language operates as a pedagogy is its use of multiple frameworks social practice, inescapably linked to networks of (process, genre, systemic linguistic, critical power and authority. My argument is that student discourse analytic, poststructuralist feminist) writing is never simply neutral or innocent. The for working with the personal. In particular, I meanings students produce are as ideological as develop at least four kinds of literacy practices those in the texts they read and are also involved in for working with student writers in particular producing, reproducing and maintaining relations institutional contexts: of power which are unequal. It follows that in 1. writing process practices for crafting and order to develop critical writers, teachers need to revising text help students detect and handle the ideological dimensions of writing and call attention to the 2. genre-based practices for developing text relations between language and power. This structure involves helping them ‘move between the micro 3. systemic linguistic practices for features of the text and the macro conditions of thematising, modalising, nominalising institutions, focussing on how relations of power and building authority in text work through these practices’ (Comber 2002). 4. poststructuralist practices for examining In my experience, however, this is where many questions of subjectivity, power and the teachers get uncomfortable because critical ways in which texts are produced. literacy calls attention to the fact that language/ writing is political. To see language as political As a writing teacher, it is the way these practices does not mean selling a political point of view. It intersect that is of interest to me. I don’t means that language is ideological and has effects promote one at the expense of the other, but on readers and writers whether we acknowledge it use them in combination – foregrounding some, or not (see for example, Comber & Kamler 1997). backgrounding others – and incorporating these within a larger set of political purposes that treat 3. Relocating writing as social action. The term relocating signals my concern with I am thinking of parallels here with the inclusive developing a writing pedagogy which aims to approach taken by Freebody and Luke (1990, create sufficient distance between the writer 1997) in their four resources model of reading.

Load more