Literacy Letters

Although Brodkey published this article in 1989, the topic continues to challenge educators. From the perspective of a secondary instructor, the relationship between the student and the teacher is constantly a point of debate. Granted, I deal with teenagers as opposed to adults, as depicted in The Literacy Letters, but the subject is the same. That is, the students have a different position in society than the teacher, so is the pedagogy platform oppressive or is it a place for the students to further develop their ideologies and beliefs on their terms? This is a difficult question and there is no easy answer. For example, my students are teenagers and they need guidance. On top of this, some of my students come from difficult socio-economic circumstances or even worse, very minimal support at home. One of my students has foster parents who he constantly fights with. I am aware of this because I have my students write in their composition books on a regular basis and allow them to write about what is one their mind (While I still insist on more structured and rigorous writing tasks, I also want them to do more personal writing on a regular basis). I rarely read their personal writing, just skim over it to see that they are reaching the appropriate length per week, but sometimes a red flag will make me pay attention. One of my students elected to address one entry to me and explain how his circumstances at home are affecting his grades. He is currently failing my class and consistently does not meet my expectations. Although I’ve referred him to the appropriate places to try and get him some help, what can I do about the fact that he is not making appropriate progress in my class?

As implied in Brodkeys’s piece, this student has “changed the subject’. And although I am aware how his circumstances at home are affecting his education, he still has to perform appropriately on the same tests and standards as his peers, regardless of his personal situation. Bearing this in mind, I decided to write a response to his narrative suggesting that although I realize he has difficult circumstances at home, to not let that get in the way of his passions and dreams, asking him to further address this topic in hi writing and perhaps think about some of the struggles that becomes apparent in others when we read classical works of fiction. Now, I don’t know if this is going to “save” him, but I do hope I’ve opened a door for him.

The way I approached the writing of my student is different than the example Brodkey gives in her essay where “Don” responds to the bad things that are happening in “Dora’s” neighborhood in one of the excerpts from the literacy letters: “I got call back to work today. I am very nervous about it. It like started a new job.’ In his next letter, in which he makes no mention of her job, Don follows yet another extended narrative about a day at the beach with ‘Keep cool and write soon!’ But this time Dora ignores both the narrative and the imperatives and does not write again” (133). Here, Don missed the possibility respond to the student in a way that would open the door for her to further elaborate on this experience, as opposed to ignoring what she had to say.

I agree with what Brodkey appears to be suggesting that “[w]hat is ultimately challenged is the ideology that class, and by extension race and gender differences, are present in American society but absent from the classrooms. If that’s not true, it is only true because the representation by students of those concerns inside educational discourse go unarticulated by teachers” (140). Now perhaps I am missing the point by talking about a student with some problems at home as opposed to the topic of race or gender but I am making the point because my students have a place to express their true voice when they write, I learn about who they are and give them a place to express themselves using writing as a vehicle. Perhaps in this capacity, differences such as race and gender do not need to be ignored in academic discourse. In fact, I beg to differ that discourse such as this can lead to, as Brodkey suggests, “a practice in cooperative articulation on the part of students and teachers who actively seek to construct and understand the differences as well as similarities between their respective subject positions” (140).