Research Blog #3

Shor, Ira. “What Is Critical Literacy?” Journal for Pedagogy, Pluralism & Practice 4.1

(1997): n. pag. Web. 3 Oct 2011. 

http://www.lesley.edu/journals/jppp/4/shor.html

Shor explicitly explains the practice of critical literacy and also “shows” opportunities for critical literacy through an ongoing narrative of social experiences in 1950’s-1990’s. Critical literacy operates on the premise that the sense of “self” globally is a social construction. Traditionally literacy is a “social action through language in a large culture” (Shor), yet the only way to question this “social construction” is to “learn to read and write as part of the process of becoming conscious of one’s experience as a historically constructed within power relations” -- the ideal practice of critical literacy. 

The narrative functioned well as a supplementary tool for the application of this type of theory, and to validate it as not just a radical subjective retaliation to social powers. Social powers were defined as the status quo guided by white supremacy. The status quo was symbolized by social connotations of the “ business suit”. The narrative described the perception of a East European minority living in the slums of New York City. The narrator’s experiences were described and opportunities where critical literacy could have provided clarity or change was inserted. For example, a classroom scene was described in a 3rd grade classroom recently integrated. The classroom teacher attempted to use real world connections to the material and orally surveyed which students’ fathers wore a “suit” to work. The narrator described only white children to have raised their hands and identified this scene as an opportunity for critical literacy. 

Shor demonstrates an appropriate familiarity with respected rhetoricians such as: Kenneth Burke, Pauls Freire, Michel Foucault and Raymond Williams. He validates the rhetorical significance for critical literacy practice by juxtaposing Burke’s “symbolic action” with language acting as a social force and critical literacy as a means to “remake ourselves and our country” (Shor). 

This article confirmed I take for granted the “no brainer” idea that everyone is aware of the social constructions of literary practices. Critical literacy seems reminds me of basic common sense. It may be a bad idea to solely rely on critical literacy during written instruction in the public sector because it seems to lack the strategies common core standards require. However, from a rhetorical standpoint the act of critical literacy is reflective of the initial stage of undergraduate rhetorical study discussed in Brereton. The intent of the discipline as Brereton cited, “...a discipline that must last the student through life, must be his resource whenever he has occasion to write...it is preparing in secret for that future when the student shall begin to think for himself..” 136. Those original intentions of rhetorical study are ideal intentions of ELA teachers in the public setting and the ultimate goal of ELA standards for communication via writing.