Reframing the Conversation

Obviously I haven't had a lot of time to blog lately, but sometimes I find an article that is too important not to share.  This is one of those times.

I just finished going through Reframing the Conversation About Students With Limited or Interrupted Formal Education: From Achievement Gap to Cultural Dissonance by Andrea DeCapua and Helaine Marshall.  It is not a long article, but it neatly ties together many of they most important themes in the SLIFE literature.  First off, they describe they key characteristics of SLIFE and the challenges they face.  They emphasize the importance of understanding the learning paradigm of SLIFE and how it may differ from our own.  Next, they summarized the main components of Culturally Responsive Teaching and showed how the Mutually Adaptive Learning Paradigm, which they have promoted, connects with these components.

I was particularly taken by the section of this article where the authors identify three major instructional barriers to learning experienced by SLIFE: (1) the credibility of future reward, (2) classroom discourse routines that emphasize individual participation, and (3) the focus on standardized testing.  In that section, I found a number of passages that accurately describe many of the students at my school.  One particularly relevant section for me was the following:

"the U.S. educational system posits the promise of future reward from education, reflected in the significantly better earning potential of high school and college graduates (National Center for Educational Statistics, n.d.). Members of largely marginalized groups find this promise less than credible given racial, ethnic, and income inequalities, and a lack of strong role models (Altshuler & Schmautz, 2001; Nieto, 2009; Noguera, 2003). Moreover, when SLIFE have long-term future goals, such as wanting to become a doctor or journalist, they are frequently unaware of what they need to do specifically to reach these goals, and whether or not these goals are realistic given their previous educational experience relative to their age. Many SLIFE also become discouraged quickly and give up their goals and efforts to achieve them as they encounter failure and disappointments in school (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2010; Suárez-Orozco, Suárez-Orozco, & Todorova, 2008)."

This quote succinctly captures one of the biggest challenges faced by my students.  It is, however, the challenge that I feel is least understood in my community, even among educators.  I know that I will find myself paraphrasing this description in future conversations with colleagues and other community members.

DeCapua and Marshall conclude by arguing that we must re-frame the conversation from deficit talk to focusing on cultural dissonance.  This is necessary, they explain, for us move ahead with a culturally responsive approach so that we can lessen, if not remove, the barriers to school success for SLIFE.  I have tried, on this blog, to share stories and articles which have helped me to re-frame my thinking.  Not surprisingly, I have often referenced the work of DeCapua and Marshall in these prior posts.  I think that in this article, however, they move the topic significantly forward by deepening our understanding of the challenges faced by SLIFE and by making explicit connections to Culturally Responsive Teaching.  I hope that it will be widely read and discussed among educators of SLIFE.


DeCapua, A. & Marshall, H.W., NASSP Bulletin 0192636515620662, first published on December 4, 2015 doi:10.1177/0192636515620662
http://bul.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/12/02/0192636515620662.abstract