Blog Post #7
Reflection on “Literacy with an Attitude” by Finn
As we continue our open dialogue on the complexities of institutional oppression within school systems, I’ve found the more in depth I search on this topic, the more difficult it feels to come to terms with. The unfortunate reality of the cruel and frustrating circumstances that surround lower class schools is a look into the abyss that does not blink. It is a horrific amalgamation of understanding that knowledge is a fading treasure, something that needs to be cultivated and preserved lest it be lost to time forever. In the text, “Literacy with an Attitude,” Finn provides quotes, statistics and analysis of a few various schools in New Jersey to argue a greater point on how money dictates environment and inquiry. To fully grapple with what Finn is arguing, we must first understand what inquiry is, and how factors both exterior and interior to the school system affect the quality of education that is received.
Inquiry, in the most simple of terms, is to question. On a broader scale, we can think of inquiry as the backbone to all forms of education. Without curiosity, discussion and question, there is no learning. It is integral to a quality education that inquiry is cultivated within the classroom. To challenge our students to think for themselves is to push for a more developed and richer society. It is crucial to remember that as Shalaby put in her text Troublemakers, our “bad” students are often those who turn out to be writers, actors, scientists - those who become change-makers. In Finn’s text, he mentions that within the lower class school he observed, there was “rarely sustained inquiry,” and therefore a “dominant theme of resistance.” I am often confused by the sheer fact that the schools in which the students have the most complex life experience, the schools that have students below the poverty line, with minority identities and a unique perspective on life are often the schools in which the least care is given. These students are an integral part of the development of society, as they are in the position where they are not disillusioned by the opulence of others. They understand the tumultuous nature of life and therefore are most likely to enter society with the desire to make change, yet we beat this lust for difference out of them by diminishing and stepping on their creativity. Finn notes in his text that there was a distinct lack of creatively based projects, and that any work that involved creativity or sustained outside of the box thinking was labeled as “enrichment.” This points to a much more difficult issue - the stifling of creativity within the classroom encourages students to stay in line and stay away from questioning. This is a frightening revelation, as it reflects the unfortunate circumstances in which institutionalized oppression flourishes. Without inquiry, students are more easily controlled, and as Finn argues in his own text, less likely to learn.
With this post I’ve included a hyperlink to a really great documentary on programs for “bad kids.” I found this documentary really helpful when working through this specific text, as it delves into the ideas around punishing students who are prone to making waves. Check it out!!
https://www.netflix.com/watch/81616648?trackId=252480315
To Share: . In the text, “Literacy with an Attitude,” Finn provides quotes, statistics and analysis of a few various schools in New Jersey to argue a greater point on how money dictates environment and inquiry. To fully grapple with what Finn is arguing, we must first understand what inquiry is, and how factors both exterior and interior to the school system affect the quality of education that is received. How does money dictate the classroom environment and therefore inquiry? What does inquiry mean to you?
