Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Graphic
1:
(the
beginning
14
minutes)
Students
B
Teacher
Students
C
We
can
see
from
graphic
1
that
at
the
beginning
of
the
discussion,
all
the
students
are
participating
in
the
conversation
regardless
of
how
familiar
they
are
with
the
book
content.
Even
students
C
who
have
not
read
the
book
are
paying
attention
to
the
dialogue
between
the
other
two
groups,
trying
to
make
sense
of
their
responses
and
making
effort
to
contribute
by
clarifying
and
asking
questions.
The
overlapping
area,
which
indicates
the
interaction,
is
big
enough
to
provoke
a
lot
of
thoughts
generated
from
each
participants
personal
connection
to
the
book.
Students
A
Graphic
2:
(the
middle
15
minutes)
Students
B
Teacher
Students
C
We
can
see
that
in
the
next
15
minutes,
a
student
who
is
very
familiar
with
the
book
content
starts
to
dominate
the
discussion
and
both
students
C
and
students
B
are
getting
less
interactive
with
each
other
as
they
can
hardly
connect
themselves
with
the
discussion
since
the
conversation
is
swirling
around
the
plot
details
that
they
are
not
familiar
with
at
all.
The
teacher
does
not
address
the
occuring
change
and
takes
refugee
in
the
dominant
students
talk
as
she
is
also
having
difficulty
memorizing
the
content
of
the
book.
Graphic
3:
(the
last
30
minutes)
D
Students
B
Teacher
Students
A
Students
C
In
the
last
30
minutes,
it
is
not
difficult
to
see
that
very
little
interaction
is
happening
in
the
discussion
as
the
teacher
even
encourages
the
dominant
student
to
elaborate
a
full
summary
of
the
book,
which
completely
shuts
down
the
communicating
channels
in
the
activity.
There
are
verbal
and
nonverbal
ways
by
which
students
can
participate
in
any
literature
discussion.
The
verbal
cues
that
we
noticed
from
the
video
fall
into
three
broad
themes.
First,
most
book
club
discussions
have
a
few
dominant
individuals
leading
the
discussion.
Second,
the
book
may
be
analyzed
through
a
variety
of
literary
lenses.
Finally,
students
may
find
themselves
making
personal
connections
to
aspects
of
the
story
or
specific
characters.
How
a
teacher
chooses
to
deal
with
these
verbal
cues
is
very
important.
This
would
have
been
the
perfect
opportunity
for
the
teacher
to
expand
the
conversation
and
illicit
opinions
and
personal
stories
from
the
other
students.
While
this
was
a
great
discussion,
it
lasted
only
a
few
minutes
before
the
summary
began.
A
discussion
that
is
filled
with
analyzing
the
text
through
literary
lenses
invites
more
discussion
and
interesting
opinions
the
focus
should
have
been
on
continuing
this
discussion.
One of the first responses a teacher may hear when starting a literature circle is
the
students
personal
response
to
the
book.
A
teacher
should
also
be
ready
to
hear
that
a
student
was
unable
or
unwilling
to
continue
reading
the
book
because
the
emotionally
charged
material
can
potentially
be
linked
to
his
or
her
personal
life.
One
of
the
first
things
we
heard
in
this
video
was
one
girl
admitting
she
could
not
read
the
book
because
she
did
not
want
know
about
what
actually
happened
to
people
from
her
cultural
group.
Or
students
may
read
the
book,
make
those
cultural
connections,
and
are
willing
to
discuss
their
own
cultural
experiences
and
stories
about
a
similar
situation.
The
older
woman
links
the
slaves
belonging
to
a
new
community
to
what
she
personally
knows
about
how
villages
in
Ghana
operate
in
a
similar
way.
Another
way
that
students
made
a
personal
connection
to
the
book
was
to
say
how
much
they
liked
the
main
female
character
for
being
so
strong
and
brave
and
saying
they
could
not
have
done
anything
like
that
at
her
age.
As
English
teachers,
we
will
not
have
a
classroom
full
of
students
who
are
emotionally
linked
to
the
books
we
are
reading.
Adding
a
small
Reader
Response
Diagram
activity
can
help
students
to
confront
the
degree
to
which
they
[are]
unable
or
unwilling
to
have
an
emotional
reaction
to
the
book
(Appleman,
2009,
pg.
47).
book
club
is
that
it
established
a
norm
that
undid
the
English
teacher
mode
mentality
where
the
teacher
directs
all
discussion
because
he/she
knows
best
how
to
discuss
literature.
This
purposeful
relinquishment
of
control
allowed
for
an
evolving
norm
that
took
root
in
this
book
club
that
established
the
students
as
the
drivers
and
initiators
and
the
teachers
as
receivers
and
participants.
This
participatory,
teacher-as-learner
role
is
exemplified
by
her
silence
for
most
of
the
discussion.
Her
non-verbal
participation
was
actually
speaking
volumes.
Bloome
(1985)
describes
the
goings-on
in
a
literary
event
such
as
a
book
club
as
the
social
context
of
reading
(first
page).
We
noticed
that
there
were
certain
accepted
roles
within
the
group,
such
as
the
young
woman
who
seemed
to
take
the
role
of
the
summarizer
for
those
who
had
not
read
the
story.
Was
her
role
an
accepted
role
that
actually
helped
weaker
readers
or
those
who
would
rather
hear
the
story
than
read
it?
What
were
the
social
realities
developed
over
the
several
years
prior
that
had
established
her
in
this
role,
and
did
the
other
young
girls
accept
her
role
for
her
sake
or
for
theirs?
Bloome
(1985)
suggests
that
there
are
cultural
dynamics
to
group
reading
sessions
like
this
one
that
might
determine
reading
and
discussion
practice.
Since
these
are
all
black
girls,
are
there
cultural
dynamics
that
we
are
not
privy
to
that
make
this
extended
focus
on
one
person
in
this
group
more
acceptable?
These
questions
have
forced
us
to
acknowledge
the
reality
of
a
social
context
within
this
book
club
that
we
are
not
privileged
to
understand
as
insiders.
A
final
observation
of
established
norms
for
this
book
club
was
that
we
only
saw
evidence
of
one
book
beside
one
girl.
Even
the
teacher
did
not
have
the
book
in
hand.
No
one
opened
the
book
to
read
from
it
or
to
check
details.
The
missing
book
bothered
us
somewhat,
and
we
did
not
know
if
this
was
an
accepted
norm
within
the
group
or
if
this
was
one
aspect
that
could
have
been
improved
upon.
It
is
possible
to
argue
that
by
allowing
the
girls
to
sit
and
discuss
without
the
pressure
to
read
aloud
or
reference
any
text,
the
space
was
provided
for
these
girls
to
focus
on
what
Gee
(2001)
calls
acquisition
which
tends
to
only
come
from
more
naturalised
settings
and
happens
on
a
subconscious
level
without
a
process
of
formal
teaching
(p.
3).
Perhaps
the
presence
of
the
book
and
the
deliberate
handling
of
the
text
would
have
made
the
book
club
more
threatening
to
the
participants,
all
readers
of
varying
strength,
or
made
the
book
club
too
much
like
school?
What
these
young
women
were
acquiring
through
increased
comfort
with
discussing
literature
together
with
their
peers
would
more
likely
result
in
implementation
in
the
learning
environment
of
their
classrooms.
of
the
participants
and
how
this
demonstrated
their
individual
levels
of
engagement.
With
arms
crossed,
some
girls
did
not
seem
to
be
paying
attention
to
the
conversation
that
was
going
on.
One
girl
checked
her
phone.
Others
were
holding
eyebrow
conversations
with
participants
across
the
room.
Sometimes,
girls
were
whispering
with
one
another.
Were
the
girls
bored,
especially
during
the
long
summary
provided
by
the
summarizer?
One
young
woman
sat
slumped
over
the
arm
of
the
couch
for
most
of
the
discussion.
At
one
point
this
young
woman
made
an
attempt
to
join
the
conversation
and
another
girl
said,
No,
you
dont
get
it,
and
this
young
woman
went
back
to
slouching,
communicating
disengagement
and
even
appearing
antsy
at
times.
However,
she
did
maintain
eye
contact
with
the
summarizer.
Is
the
girl
slouching
on
the
couch
not
a
strong
reader
and
therefore
values
the
summary?
How
did
she
feel
when
the
only
time
she
tried
to
talk,
the
talkative
one
to
her
left
told
her
that
she
didnt
get
it?
As
Atwell
(1998)
points
out
about
literature
circles,
we
invite
the
messiness
of
human
response--personal
prejudices,
tastes,
habits
and
experiences
(p.
30).
So
perhaps
the
messiness
of
what
we
have
observed
is
actually
what
we
should
expect
when
a
book
club
is
functioning
authentically.
As
outside
observers,
the
apparent
lack
of
engagement,
the
body
language,
the
predominance
of
only
two
or
three
speakers
out
of
the
whole
group,
these
factors
make
it
difficult
for
us
to
corroborate
some
of
the
evaluations
found
in
Kooys
article
(2013).
For
example,
according
to
Rebecca,
one
of
the
other
teachers
in
the
book
club,
the
girls
were
hanging
on
every
word
when
the
summarizer
went
through
all
the
chapters.
Rebecca
also
describes
the
discussion
as
electrifying
(Kooy
&
Colarusso,
2013,
p.
8).
It
is
true
that
we
have
only
watched
a
small
segment
of
the
whole
book
discussion.
However,
the
girls
body
language
did
not
communicate
to
us
that
the
girls
were
so
enthralled
because
we
observed
action
unrelated
to
the
book
discussion
itself
as
noted
above.
However,
while
this
gap
between
how
the
participants
describe
the
experience
versus
our
arm-chair
analysis
as
outsider
may
make
this
dichotomy
a
case
of
you
just
had
to
be
there
to
know
what
we
mean.
We
must
acknowledge
that
we
were
not
part
of
the
historical
shift
in
this
book
club,
the
shift
from
student
non-participation
to
student-
led
participation.
Good
teachers
can
read
their
students
better
than
anyone
else,
and
the
fact
that
these
two
teachers
had
spent
four
years
with
these
same
young
women
means
they
are
a
better
gauge
of
what
electrifying
meant
in
that
context.
Bloome
(1985)
states:
We
need
to
understand
reading
events
not
as
they
appear
to
us,
but
rather
as
they
are
understood
by
the
people
participating
in
those
reading
events
(last
page).
Bloomes
caution
to
us
is
entirely
appropriate.
We
must
acknowledge
that
there
is
a
great
distance
between
us
as
outside
observers
of
a
recorded
session
and
those
who
sat
in
the
book
club
time
after
time
for
four
years.
to
active
readers
and
talkers
in
the
book
club.
These
teachers
actually
became
connoisseurs
of
the
girls
lives
and
literacies
(Simon,
2012,
p.517)
by
doing
the
non-
English
teacher
thing
to
do:
let
the
girls
talk
as
much
as
they
wanted
in
the
way
they
wanted
and
about
what
they
wanted.
Although
this
apparent
wantonness
in
the
teachers
stance
is
what
first
put
us
on
red
alert,
it
seems
clear
that
we,
as
aspiring
English
teachers,
have
not
yet
had
the
privilege
of
experiencing
the
freedom
that
is
possible
when
we
have
truly
helped
our
students
love
literature
(Atwell,
1998,
p.
33).
Reference:
Appleman, D. (2009). Critical encounters in high school English: Teaching literary theory to
adolescents, second edition. New York: Teachers College Press & Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Atwell, N. (1998). Learning how to teach reading. In In the middle: New understandings
about writing, reading, and learning 2nd ed. (pp. 27-50). Portsmouth, NH:
Boynton/Cook.
Bloome, D. (1985). Reading is a social process. Language Arts, 62(2), no pages listed.
Christensen, L. (2009). Teaching for joy and justice: Re-imagining the language arts
classroom. Milwaukee, WI: Rethinking Schools, Ltd.
Gee, J.P. (2001). What is literacy? In P. Shannon (Ed.), Becoming political too: New
readings and writings on the politics of literacy education (pp. 1-9). Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Kooy, M. & Colarusso, D. (2013). The Space in between: a book club with inner-city girls
and professional teacher learning. Professional Development in Education 2013 (pp. 117).
Simon, R. (2012). 'Without Comic Books, There Would Be No Me': Teachers as
Connoisseurs of Adolescents' Literate Lives. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
55(6), 516-526.