People in Pressure Cookers: Enactment of Literacy Identities of Struggling First Grade Readers Across Reading Contexts in a High Stakes Testing Culture
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PEOPLE IN PRESSURE COOKERS: ENACTMENT OF LITERACY IDENTITIES OF STRUGGLING FIRST GRADE READERS ACROSS READING CONTEXTS IN A HIGH STAKES TESTING CULTURE BY BRETT ALAN BROWN DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Curriculum and Instruction in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2017 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Anne Haas Dyson, Chair Professor Brenda Farnell Professor Emerita Violet J. Harris Associate Professor Luz Murillo, Texas State University Abstract Assessing and teaching early literacy in the wake of the Response to Intervention (RtI) model’s tiered instruction and the trend toward greater accountability for schools has lead to the reduction of literacy to mere skills based instruction for many students. At the same time, increased pressure has been applied to teachers and administrators to improve assessment scores. This has led to the labeling of students by schools and the channeling of so called “at risk” students into narrow skills based interventions. This dissertation centers on student enactment of literacy identities in contrast to institutional identities imposed on students under the RtI model. In framing this study, the national and local contexts that created pressure around literacy assessment and instruction are considered. However, most of the data for this study centers around three first grade students as they enacted their literacy identities across several instructional contexts. By observing students as they enacted their identities this study demonstrates the need to challenge narrow skills based assessments which impart identities on to students and funnels them into instruction focused on the aforementioned narrow skills. Further, this project examines the agency of teachers and administrators in the local context as they at times resisted and at times embraced the ideology embedded in RtI. Ultimately, this study advocates for the acceptance of a space to consider students’ literacies and identities from a sociocultural perspective that goes beyond the confines of deficit views and allows student to draw on the literacies they bring to school to build bridges to other literacies. ii To the students of “Allentown” and the educators who believe in them iii Acknowledgements A journey of a thousand miles might begin with a single step, or it might begin with family, friends and colleagues who suggest the journey is indeed a worthwhile undertaking. Before I even wanted to embark on this journey, many people encouraged me to take the first step. In uncoordinated confluence Dr. Jerry Currens, Dr. Klaus Witz and Pete Shimkus provided the original impetus. At the University of Illinois, I would like to express my deepest thanks to Dr. Anne Haas Dyson for her constant support, guidance and encouragement. One day I aspire to be as kind and thoughtful as she already has become. I also want thank my committee members for being a foundational part of my growth as a scholar. Dr. Farnell provided steady guidance and wisdom from the earliest stages. Dr. Harris encouraged me and supported the vision for this project, going far above and beyond the call of duty. Dr. Murillo emphatically believed in the value of “the least of these” and validated the need for a project that acts as a voice for students’ who have been labeled. I am without question in debt to my fellow Advance Qualitative Research sojourners who read many drafts and provided invaluable feedback vital to the writing and structure of this paper. At the onset, when I wasn’t sure what phenomenon I was truly interested in studying Haeny Yoon carefully read my work, listened and helped me clarify my goals. Many thanks to Alice Lee, Amos Lee, Pasha Trotter and Porshe Garner who believed in the project and challenged me to rethink many aspects thereof. Last in this entourage of esteemed colleges, but first in providing motivation, my Google Doc writing accountability partners (Amos Lee, Natalie Mullen, Porshe Garner, Wendy Maa and especially Jenn Raskauskas) spurred me on day by day in the home stretch. iv I like so many others, “stand on the shoulders of giants” and would not be here now without them. My parents were incredible models of support and unending dedication. There can be no proper thank you other than to hand down your mentoring to my children and students. Speaking of my children, I cannot thank them enough for being patient and understanding while I devoted time to this project. Many thanks to Dan Weyerhaeuser for being an extraordinary teacher and kind mentor. As well, my heartfelt appreciation goes out to the many administrators and teachers of “Allentown” who provided their unabashed support for this project throughout the process. And, though he may wince when he reads this, my thanks to the best writer I have read in any genre, Paul Kornkasem. Most of what I know about transferring ideas into print came from your elegant prose. Finally, my thanks to Carin Brown who always, always, always believed. Words will never be enough. v Table of Contents CHAPTER 1: Introduction……..…………………………………………………………………1 CHAPTER 2: Review of Literature………..………………………………………………….......8 CHAPTER 3: Methods…..………………………………………………………………………37 CHAPTER 4: The National Context: Pressure from Washington…………………….…………62 CHAPTER 5: The Local Context: Conflicting Ideologies Intersect………………………...…104 CHAPTER 6: Counternarrative: Uncovering Unmeasured Literacies of Labeled Students…...145 CHAPTER 7: Identities Across Literacy Contexts……………….…………………………….171 CHAPTER 8: Conclusion………………………………………………………………………203 REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………215 vi Chapter 1 Introduction Background and Purpose On the ninth day of school, six-year-old Katie had been taken out of her classroom to the hall and sat down face to face with a teacher she had never met before. The teacher mechanically repeated the same assessment script that she had already read at least thirty times that day. “Here are some letters.” Pointing to the top left corner of a page covered with one hundred letters she went on, “Begin here and tell me the sound of as many letters as you can.” She clicked the timer button on AIMSweb’s website and waited. Katie began, “T.” But, she was quickly cut off, “Remember to tell me the sound the letter makes, not its name.” Katie started again, “/m/, /p/, /i/…” The teacher marked “/i/” wrong because Katie chose the long vowel sound instead of the short sound. “… /k/, /w/” Pausing at “h” Katie glanced down the hall where her friends were hearing the same script she just heard from other teachers. Three seconds past. The teacher marked “h” incorrect and pointed to the next letter, “What sound?” Katie stated again, “.../z/, /e/, /m/.” Looking up at the teacher Katie offered, “My mom’s name starts with /m/, Maria.” Three seconds had passed again. The teacher marked “u” incorrect. At the end of this sixty second test AIMSweb instructional recommendation for this assessment placed her in on a list of students in need of intervention in which she would receive daily remedial instruction for her “literacy” deficit. Much in the realm of current practice in early literacy teaching and learning, such as skills based assessments and data driven instruction, were born out of the politically vogue accountability movement which relies on narrow conceptions of literacy. Widely employed assessments like 1 AIMSweb’s TEL-CBM (Test of Early Literacy – Curriculum Based Measurement) published by Pearson Incorporated (2001) and its strikingly similar competitor DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) (Good & Kaminski, 2002) were based on a conceptual framework that reduced literacy to a set of skills to be isolated, taught and assessed in a parts-to-whole assembly line manner. This view of literacy did not appear in a vacuum. Political voices that predate No Child Left Behind (NCLB) (2001, 2007) a powerful piece of legislation that increased accountability in schools and publications such as A Nation at Risk (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) helped paint a picture of failing schools for the public eye. Part of the political response to the perception of failing schools was a call for greater accountability. In the day to day lived experience of students in schools with a narrow conception of literacy, “accountability” tends to equal more assessment. Not just any assessment has served the purpose of the accountability movement; but assessment that can be quickly administered, quantified and used to shape instruction became a priority. Thus, AIMSweb and DIBELS became as common place to elementary school culture as staff meetings, and often the topic thereof. Many schools also embraced the Response to Intervention (RtI) model because the data provided by both AIMSweb and DIBELS pipelined students into RtI’s tier system (Benchmark [on grade level], Strategic [below grade level] and Intensive [significantly below grade level]) and made specific instructional recommendations for each group while documenting both the school’s attempts to improve student test scores and their actual “progress” on those assessments. Functionally RtI has served to ensure that students who enter school without the narrow literacy skill sets reflected in AIMSweb and DIBELS receive strikingly different instruction – which is focused on decontextualized skills - than their 2 “benchmark” peers. This has especially been the case in schools that primarily serve students