Skerrett, A. (2014). Religious literacies in a
secular literacy classroom. Reading
Research Quarterly, 49, 233-250. doi:10.1002/rrq.65
Research Quarterly, 49, 233-250. doi:10.1002/rrq.65
III.
The research questions and their
[broad] answers (p. 241):
- How did a literacy teacher engage her students’ Christian religious literacies in school?
- (1) The teacher’s pedagogy of multiliteracies, in recruiting students’ entire cultural, linguistic, and multiliterate repertoires for academic learning, also drew on students’ religious literacies for teaching and learning in school.
(1)
Mrs.
Campbell implemented pedagogy of multiliteracies, employing NLG, which
encourages connections among student’s lifeworlds, identities, and language and
literacy practices to support their development of academic identities and
literacies.
- How did students, in response to the teacher’s invitations and through their own agency, engage their religious literacies in the classroom?
- Students, with their teacher’ s support, recruited their religious literacies (2) for analyzing and understanding secular literature and (3) for producing academic writing.
(2)
A
story of Monkeyman where several of the focus students draw upon religious
literacies to meaning making, associating Monkeyman to Jesus on the cross. As a
foreground, they are preparing for the state standardized test in reading and
at present discussing symbolisms.
Monkeyman’s
story is making a stance against violence of gang members in the neighborhood
and challenged them, asking his godmother and grandfather to be with him but
not defend him. Monkeyman, during the encounter refused to fight back and
stretched out his arms, as if offering himself up to be battered.
Other
students draw pictures of the event with the godmother, which students
associated with Mary. A pictures which brought identified students to
ahhh-moment. We can witness communal meaning making in-action right here.
Religious
literacies are developed outside the class. As such, students create
opportunity in school to building his religious literacies in conjunction with
his academic literacies.
One
question I have as I read along this
part, which I thought would have been discussed already is: What components of
literacy?
The
author hasn’t given the distinctive components as to which component of
literacy it is but brushed it collectively as academic and religious
literacies, with, perhaps with assumed thoughts of the readers prior
understanding on its composition. At least in the present discussion, it would
satisfy us to assume that the component is meaning making. But I would say that
this is still quite narrow than the promise of exploring religious literacies.
Going
back to the class, Mrs. Campbell, however, hasn’t assisted this connection more
deeply through additional overt instruction. This raises a concern of the
teacher’s knowledge of her own student’s religions and religious pedagogical
knowledge because the teacher could’ve have shaped these opportunities for
academic learning with religious literacies.
But
consideration of multiliteracies as employed in this secular learning space
allowed student to transact their religious literacies for academic learning.
It
is important to note that Mrs. Campbell hasn’t disclosed her religious
affiliation which the researcher respected. Therefore, we can see that the
control for religious interpretations lean on the students than the teacher.
This freed her of policing permissible boundaries of acceptable meanings. In
the Protestant tradition, communal and individual meaning making is encouraged
and it is seen to be at work in this secular space.
The
teacher, however, was credited by the researcher to have given guided
instruction of drawing different literate tools, identities and forms knowledge
in meaning making. This instructional practices themselves involved a critical
reframing of literary curriculum as teacher and student.
