Blending Experience and Practice: Analyzing my High School Class Experiences Through Multiliteracies Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning
Reflecting on the past few weeks of the course, I have been thinking a lot about my high school experiences and how many of them did not engage me in multiliteracies learning beyond Overt Instruction. In many of the classes at my high school, students were taught right from the textbook. The teacher would teach their content, writing notes on the board or projecting them onto a screen from an overhead projector. Students would take notes on what the teacher was saying â usually copying verbatim from the board or projector â and then the class would move on either to worksheets, individual reading, or textbook questions. While some of my teachers would include more creative projects or analysis and application of the lessons through group activities, most of the classes were about taking notes and then completing questions.
Even when my teachers planned interactive activities, like dramatic re-enactments of texts in English, there was not often an opportunity to connect what we were learning in class to our lived experiences. For instance, in grade twelve English, my teacher had us write and perform dramatic Dr. Phil-style skits about the play Hamlet and the family relationship between Polonius, Laertes, and Ophelia. The teacher had us write these skits using the text as a guideline, which engaged us in the application of the textâs events to a new context to assess our understanding. This activity was fun, but I did not find much meaning in it, as we were connecting the text to a real-world circumstance that did not have any significance for me. I did not watch Dr. Phil, and so the teacherâs use of Transformed Practice and the context she chose did not help me to learn the content. While this activity reinforced the events that were happening in Hamlet, the connections that my group and I made to the real world did not do any work to develop our understanding. Instead, they acted as another way for us to bolster our rote memory of the textâs events.
In some of my other classes, my teachers aimed to make use of Critical Framing. The critical analysis that teachers asked us to complete inspired text-to-text connections and did not often move beyond the realm of the classroom or the school. My teachers did not usually ask us to interrogate the texts for power dynamics or biases. We critically read and analyzed literature to learn more about characters or themes. For example, when we read To Kill a Mockingbird in grade nine, we discussed its themes surrounding racial justice, but this conversation did not move beyond the classroom and the content of the text. Our whole discussion focused on the textâs world and what occurred in it. We did not interrogate how the racial injustices in To Kill a Mockingbird are still present in todayâs society. We also did not discuss the biases inherent in the book due to Harper Lee being a white woman, nor did we discuss its use of the white saviour trope. As Ginette Roberge writes, âTo become critically aware readers, students must move beyond simple comprehension of text to a deeper understanding of the underlying meanings, a critical reflection on the textâs purpose and an awareness of the techniques used to influence the readerâ (Ontario Ministry of Education, What works, 2013, p. 2). The skills of examining a textâs purpose and the goals an author had when writing it were ones I briefly got to exercise while studying George Orwellâs 1984 in grade eleven, but I did not deeply engage with these ideas and develop these skills until I entered into my postsecondary degree.
As I have made clear, most of my high school experience consisted of Overt Instruction with limited Critical Framing and Transformed Practice. Even when our teachers introduced new topics, they did not often use Situated Practice or draw on studentsâ funds of knowledge. The teachers related most of the new concepts introduced to previous content we covered. They did not often include student experiences, and there was very little focus on differentiated instruction. The vast majority of my teachers did not make use of Universal Design for Learning (UDL). When we had assignments, there were no choices; everyone had to do the same work. In daily instruction, most of our time was spent taking written notes either from the board or an overhead projector and then completing worksheets or textbook questions. Teachers occasionally showed videos, but for the most part, our learning was text-based and required strong reading and writing skills from all students. Students who did not enjoy this teaching style had to struggle through it.
One notable exception to all of the experiences I discussed above is the French teacher I had for all four years of high school. While we did some note-taking in her class, she also had us reading texts aloud, she would show us videos and have us listen to music, and her final projects always offered a choice of several activities. She focused on two of the key tenets of UDL, which are âuniversality and equityâ and âflexibility and inclusivenessâ (Ontario Ministry of Education, Learning for all, 2013, p.14). My French teacher focused on providing multiple forms of engagement, representation, and action and expression for her students (for a further explanation of how teachers can do this, see the CAST chart below). We used to read one French novel each year, and we always had meaningful, critical discussions when we read these texts. We would analyze the textual events, but we would also connect them directly to what we were learning about French society in the class. In grade twelve, we participated in debates about serious issues like animal testing and womenâs rights. These debates forced us to critically analyze power structures in society and make use of our spoken French to debate our side of the issue. The students cared about these issues, so we were very involved in the work and learned a lot from it. Due to our teacherâs varied and challenging activities, French class was always engaging, and I had to work hard to succeed. However, I always wanted to put this work in, as I felt that it was meaningful and worthwhile. In some of my other classes, I worked hard, but I was not as engaged and was instead doing the work to finish it and get a good grade.
Overall, my high school experiences offer me a lot of guidance when I think about designing lessons for the students that I will teach. I recognize the importance of making use of Situated Practice, Overt Instruction, Critical Framing, and Transformed Practice, and I aim to make sure that my lessons regularly make use of all of these types of literacies. Further, I want to make sure that I am regularly thinking about differentiation and aiming to make use of UDL in my lesson designs. I find it helpful to keep the diagrams I included throughout this post in front of me while lesson planning so that I can refer to them and ensure that I am inclusive of all studentsâ needs.
References
CAST. (2018). Universal design for learning guidelines [Infographic]. http://udlguidelines.cast.org/
Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (n.d.). The âhowâ of multiliteracies across the curriculum [Infographic]. https://newlearningonline.com/multiliteracies/theory
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2013). Learning for all: A guide to effective assessment and instruction for all students. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/general/elemsec/speced/LearningforAll2013.pdf
Ontario Ministry of Education. (2013). What Works? Research into Practice: Promoting critical literacy across the curriculum and fostering safer learning environments. http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_PromotingCriticalLiteracy.pdf
[Photograph of an overhead projector]. (n.d.). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overhead_projector












