Silencing, by Michelle Fine’s definition, “signifies a terror of words, a fear of talk” (Fine, 1992, p. 14); in other words, it is enacted by those in power to quiet any voices of dissent, in order to control and maintain the status quo. Upon first reading Fine’s article, I immediately thought of The Invisible Man and Vygotsky’s Theory. Both help forward Fine’s point in proving how detrimental silencing is to the learning process, while simultaneously demonstrating the significance of interweaving students’ community and culture into the classroom to improve provide a superior learning experience for students.
First, let us consider Vygotsky’s Theory (social constructivism); to neatly sum up this multi-faceted theory, a student does his /her best learning while collaborating within a classroom community. Vygotsky’s theory of social constructivism, as incorporated in many classrooms, is antithetical to silencing in that it requires a classroom social culture and interactions of discourse to effectively construct learning (“active learning,” as Fine would say); silencing is clearly ineffective in that it is teacher-centric and does not call for students to utilize their peers as tools to fabricate their own education.
Next, as a future English teacher, I think of one of my favorite books: The Invisible Man. In this novel, the protagonist himself faces many instances of educational silencing (i.e. the scene with Dr. Bledsoe); this novel is perfect for students because not only is it deemed acceptable literary canon, but it also contains countless examples of scenes that could be used to inspire discussion and critical analysis for students, particularly in low income urban contexts, because of their abilities to relate to the Man’s struggles. I know that in my classroom, I would want to incorporate literary works tailored toward the cultures, communities, histories, and adversities of my students in order to provoke productive interest and engagement (while also discouraging silencing).
I consider the low-income urban adolescents whom Fine writes of, all of the risks that they face both at home and individually (Murray & Naranjo, 2008, p.14), and I can genuinely understand how an educator’s act of undermining and alienation via silencing can engender disturbing results of ambivalence or resentment toward education. With so much adversity already obstructing the educational journey toward knowledge, I wonder, “how could any authentic educator legitimately consider silencing?” With the consequences at stake (dropout), silencing should never be an option.
Hello Diana,
I agree with your opinion on silencing. It’s definitely not effective for learning because it blocks the channel for teachers to receive feedbacks and reflections from students, and gradually diminish students’ attention and interests to class, which, to some degree, increase the drop-out rate. Silencing is against our basic pedagogical approaches, and leads to low study efficiency.
I was thinking the reasons for some teachers to use silencing method for teaching is partly due to teachers’ low sense responsibility and lack of education strategies. In Murray & Naranjo’s research (Poor, Black, learning disabled, and graduating, Remedial and Special Education, 145-160, 2008), one student stated “some teachers just give you work, and when you ask them to help you , they get an attitude and say, you gotta do it yourself, or, ask your mama to help you”. As a future English teacher, I think we should constantly remind ourselves that our behavior and attitude can have serious effect on our students.
Your readiness to connect theory to practice should be praised. By identifying Ellison’s Invisible Man as a way to invite and structure critical discourse in the classroom, you have actualized one of the major learning outcomes of this reading. I find your approach very interesting. Invisible Man is an example that deals directly with educational silencing (great Bledsoe connection – I would also point to his re-education with the Brotherhood which GIVES him a voice through naming), and thus is quite a direct approach to holding conversations about disproportionality and silencing. Personally, I embrace being so direct and honest. It is also encouraged by Fine. While Invisible Man might also serve the English classroom with the broad spectrum of racially based social issues that it invokes, choosing to focus on issues of silencing has the potential for greater impact. Instead of momentarily giving students a voice through singular discussions, discussing silencing itself gets at the root of the problem and begins to alter the socio-political and ideological structures that cause such problems. Your post sets a good example of how the English curriculum can be planned with sensitivity to the students social and cultural worlds and how, within a curriculum, there are myriad opportunities for socially empowering teaching that operate on varying levels of depth and directness.
Talk soon,
Adam
Great work and great contributions to the conversation, Alva and Adam!