4+Dimensions+Findings

How did podcasting around social themes and texts foster critical literacy?

In all the podcasts, students developed their use of critical literacy resources.

With the first podcast on Banned Books, the third graders and the sophs focused on the **personal**, more than the social. The third graders introduced a range of **multiple perspectives** on books for young kids, reflecting on the power of books to impact young children both positively and negatively. The sophs became book defenders, defending their favorite titles that had been banned and **advocating for the third graders** to have freedom to choose their own texts. Literacy and emotion were connected in both podcasts and while the sophs emphatically rejected book banning, the third graders were more tentative, and asserted that younger students (younger than third grade!) might need some protection from books.

Alexis' quote: Let them take a peek at it... High Schooler's Quote:Nora: the opposition doesn't stand a chance!

With our second podcasts, we felt that the third graders took on more critical views of literacy. They broadcasted information about disparity in access to literacy world wide, citing global statistics from the literacy site as well as presenting multiple perspectives on what literacy can do for citizens everywhere. The sophs focused more on literacy as a source of personal pleasure.

Cameron's quote. If you have more books, you have more literacy. High School quote: ... so everyone can be happy and read.

In our third and final podcasts, the two groups veered in their topic focus. But in both groups, social and political issues were explored. Third graders focused on the ways our legal system has disenfranchised citizens through the use of literacy tests. They connected language with power with segments on language used to restrict civic access (literacy tests) and language used to gain civic access through voting, civic protests and the freedom schools use of literacy for collective social action. The sophs presented strong indictment of government control and censorship of internet sites. Both groups presented multiple perspectives and voices with these podcasts, taking on identities of people from the past and present who have risked their lives and freedom to exercise basic rights such as voting and public expression.

Social issues and multiple perspectives were critical resources developed through podcasting. Taking action for justice was also developed in that the students felt they were creating podcasts that could influence their audience, but we did not create opportunities for students and teachers to reflect on ways besides podcasting that we could take action about some of the political issues we illuminated in the podcasts. We talked about two action projects in the second podcasts: The Literacy Site and the Pass the Book program, but focusing on these actions did not lead to an interrogation of the root causes of literacy injustice or any form of collective action.

Likewise, disrupting the commonplace was not a developed resource for the students or their teachers. There were missed opportunities to connect the personal and the social, to inquire more deeply about how the status quo perpetuates unfairness when it comes to literacy. There were unique, outlier, statements communicated by individual students that, had we paid attention to them, could have led to productive critique and deeper connection between the personal and the social in our lives. An example of this is when Isaac connected literacy tests for voting from the past to present day standardized literacy testing in schools, which are both "hard and confusing" for students. The sophs explorations of internet censorship worked to bring a modern connection to the third graders' historical view of ways governments censor the right to freedom of expression. But in both podcasts, we focused on political issues, without connecting these to our own lives or disrupting commonplace assumptions about how state control of literacy is part of our lives.

Quotes from each?

3rd graders: high schoolers: "Are opinions a right or a privilege? Is this fair? I don't think so!"

Social and political issues:

a few others felt that books should not be restricted at all for kids, most kids were more middle ground, grappling with issues of kid choice versus kids' need for protection. Political rights (freedom of choice) for kids vary according to age levels. || Most defended their personal favorites. Most came out strong against book restrictions. || Racism and "dumb laws" are root causes of Mr. Baker's illiteracy. Literacy gives you access to the politics of daily life: daily functioning, pleasure of reading, economic success || Literacy is a personal resource that brings pleasure and learning. Pass the Book is a grassroots organization that allows literacy to be shared. This can be seen as a rejection of capitalized literacy. Literacy can be denied in other countries, (but not the U.S.?) May not be in this podcast, but it might be interesting to state that one podcast claimed Dyslexia to be the cause of Mr. Baker's illiteracy. || daddy's Gift || The legal system has used literacy to deny political power/ access. Mandated standardized tests are modern day literacy tests. Voting rights require literacy, and allow power to citizens. Social action groups like the Freedom Schools used collective action to promote and use literacy for social change. || Students explicitly talked about rights of citizens in different governments. They asserted that opinions and ideas should not be censored by governments. The internet should be a way that people can gather information and express their opinions. Governments should not filter the internet, as it's a way teens and adults can learn and speak out. ||
 * SP || 3rd Graders || High Schoolers ||
 * Banned books || A few kids stayed at a more personal response,
 * George Baker || Unfair distribution of literacy resources world wide and in the U.S.in the past. - schools and books
 * Grand

Taking Action for Justice

Books || Reflection, but limited action upon book banning. Some advocacy for kids making choices, but many students want to restrict choices for younger students in order to protect kids (similar to book banning stance). || Strong statements against book banning. Rejection of adult control of literacy. Solidarity with younger partners. Using the podcast to impact listeners. || George Baker || Presentation of literacy as having multiple purpose: pleasure, daily functions, ticket to econ. success. Broadcasting the importance of literacy for all citizens in this podcast, and sharing global statistics about the lack of literacy access. Taking action for justice can be done as individuals by clicking on the literacy site. || Taking social action by promoting reading to younger partners. Taking action on site by transforming course curriculum. Limited connections betw language and power in podcast texts. Literacy and pleasure, rather than power, connection? || Gift || Reflecting on the ways LAWS have been used to restrict voting rights. Presenting freedom schools as collective social action movement, using literacy to resist status quo and enfranchise citizens. Language and power are connected- voting, protest work, learning at freedom schools to beat the test. || Implying that literacy is a way to gain power, and that's why governments don't want "the population" questioning laws. The kids researched instances of censorship around the world and reacted to the articles in the podcast. They made strong statements against censorship, especially access to information and social networking. Defending the web as a legitimate source of knowledge, information, and community. ||
 * TA4J || 3rd Graders || High Schoolers ||
 * Banned
 * Mr.
 * GD's

Multiple Perspectives

books || Mult. perspectives on suitable books for kids shared. Reflecting on the power of books on certain kids, especially youngers. Lots of books exist for kids, so this might not be a big deal? Kids contradict Lee's opinions. || All oppose book banning and reject claims of book banners. Students and teacher in agreement. KC aware of power/privilege of her narrative. || Baker || Contradiction presented: Literacy is a basic right, but there's lack of access to literacy: schooling and books. (No interrogation of why this is so). Literacy is presented as having multiple purposes. Students are surprised that there are adults who don't know how to read. There are kids who don't go to school. This also was surprising. We had talked about inviting representatives from the VITAL program in to talk with the kids. This would have brought more voices into the mix. Also, I wish I had talked more about why these inequities exist. || General agreement that literacy is positive, and is a source of pleasure. Some avoidance of issues of race and poverty in the texts, but some focus on age. || scripts to present views of historical figures from fiction and real life. (Learned this from the sophs). Shining attention on voices of civ rights workers from the past. || Two students took on identities of Iranian teens and discussed wanting to post opinions on their Facebook pages. Other groups were newscasters, and all presented a unified view that censorship is wrong in every case. ||
 * MP || 3rd graders || Sophs ||
 * Banned
 * George
 * GDG || Confident use of dramatic readers theater

Disrupting the commonplace

books || distinction made btw books that could be banned and books that wouldn't. Students disrupt my assumptions about book banning and point out that young kids do need protection from scary books. Gendered books are brought up, and I did not pursue that. || Defending books and kid choices. Rejection of book banners' positions that books can impact kids negatively. Playful use of pop culture. || Podcasters take up identities of literate persons who know that others don't have access to books and schooling. Literacy site is an action project that can get books to kids, but does not disrupt the status quo. We did not do much interrogating about why discrepancies exist, just pointed out that they do. || GB - not a legitimate text for course. Little disruption of status quo. People can learn at any age. Idealizing of Mr. Baker. Some critique of other countries, but none of US policies. Inclusion of pop culture and media. || with dramatic retellings of civil rights activists from the past. Voting presented as a source of power and a way to change unfair laws and check the power of politicians. (status quo). One podcaster disrupts the sqo by likening standardized testing to literacy tests, pointing out that they can be hard and confusing for kids. || Used language of hope to discuss the power of the internet, especially for teens. Asserted that unless the internet was uncensored, it would be hard to get the whole story or the true story. Expressed the idea that using literacy to disrupt the status quo by expressing opinions is positive. Some status quo ideas and behaviors in the final segment, which includes some false information and deliberate mispronunciations. ||
 * DtC || 3rd gr || Sophs ||
 * Banned
 * Mr. GB || One podcaster brings up historical reasons for mr. baker's illiteracy.
 * GDG || Lang of crit and hope evident. Exuberant reader's theater scripts