Boys and Literacy (part two)

 

At the heart of most research is the idea that there is a disparity between the literate world of boys in and out of school. Those who struggle with reading and writing in traditional English classes often display colorful and diverse literate behaviors at home or while socializing with their friends. The nature of this difference provides an opportunity for educators and other stakeholders in the literate lives of boys to design a bridge of curriculum that would meet the requirements of traditional academia while allowing boys to manifest their personal literacy interests. If the goal is not only to raise literacy among boys but to instill in them a lifelong appreciation for reading and writing, only a thoughtful design that integrates their unique interests while gently introducing new, traditional, and perhaps more sophisticated reading and writing skills will work. Author and educator Tim Fredrick (2006) conducted an action research project that did just that. He found that early on he had to marry the interests of the boys in his class with predetermined schedules of accepted curriculum in order to realize success both personally and professionally. Luckily, Fredrick had the courage to set aside his own expectations of literary accomplishment and venture onto unfamiliar paths. Using tools such as Literary Circles, mini lessons on reading skills, zines (small, student generated magazines), informal class surveys that tracked his progress, tallies of student choices, and his own observations, he was able to shift his expectations and allow freedom of choice. Professionally, Fredrick was able to meet specific goals of the curriculum that required mastery of English reading and analysis skills while still engaging the interest of the boys. By personally taking a leap of faith separate from the way he, himself, had learned English literature and how he had traditionally taught it, Fredrick was able to harvest the passion of the boys in his class and engage them in the success of the instruction. It’s important to note that he fortunately had the support of his principal, which certainly helped ease the curriculum transition. In addition, assisting his research into helping boys with literacy, he utilized and consequently cited the work of several authors, including Michael Smith and Jeffrey Wilhelm and their 2002 study of adolescent boys, Reading Don’t Fix No Chevys.