0195182863.pdf

(Barry) #1

Michaels, “Narrative Presentations”; Philips, “Participant Structures and Communicative
Competence.” Philips’s early study underlined the crucial role of language in education;
she demonstrated the serious misunderstandings that followed when Anglo teachers failed
to understand Native American children’s norms for talk. Philips, The Invisible Culture.



  1. See Anyon, “Social Class and School Knowledge”; J. Gee, “The Narrativization
    of Experience in the Oral Style”; Michaels, “Sharing Time”; and sources cited in notes 55
    and 61–63.

  2. James Gee concludes that the student’s narrative makes sense of her world:
    She works out the problems in a quite sophisticated way, in terms of a conflict of
    natures (the Greeks, an oral society that ultimately gave birth to Western literacy,
    would have understood this perfectly). She carries it out with a full utilization of
    prosody, time and sequence markers, an intricate aspect system (actional, habitual,
    iterative), and parallelism and repetition, and as suspenseful thematic development.
    (J. Gee, “The Narrativization of Experience in the Oral Style,” 24)

  3. See Collins, “Language and Class in Minority Education”; Collins and Michaels,
    “Speaking and Writing”; Heath, Ways with Words; Labov, “The Logic of Nonstandard
    English”; Mehan, Learning Lessons.

  4. See Collins and Blot, Literacy and Literacies; Calhoun and Ianni, The Anthropo-
    logical Study of Education; Roberts and Akinsanya, Schooling in the Cultural Context.

  5. See Bernstein, Class, Codes, and Control; Bourdieu and Passeron, Reproduction;
    Bowles and Gintis, Schooling in Capitalist America; Eggleston and Gleason, “Curriculum
    Innovation and the Context of the School.”

  6. See, e.g., Parsons, “The School Class as a Social System.”

  7. See, e.g., Bowles and Gintis, Schooling in Capitalist America.

  8. Apple, Ideology and Curriculum and Teachers and Texts; Giroux, “Theories of
    Reproduction and Resistance in the New Sociology of Education.”

  9. Apple explicitly builds on Gramscian theory, which imputed importance to the
    role of culture and insisted on attention to the ways that people resist dominant cultures.
    See Apple, Ideology and Curriculum. A similar argument is currently being made about
    politics and law generally. See discussion in Mertz, “Legal Loci and Places in the Heart,”
    973; key current works on resistance include Comaroff and Comaroff, Of Revelation and
    Revolution, vols. 1 and 2; Lazarus-Black and Hirsch, Contested States; Scott, Weapons of
    the Weak and Domination and the Arts of Resistance.

  10. Carnoy and Levin, Schooling and Work. Some might argue that there is not nec-
    essarily an inherent antagonism between these two functions, because the individual-
    ist “rights” orientation in U.S. society can arguably be understood as serving and resonating
    with a liberal conception of the autonomous, isolated citizen-subject. On the limitations
    of rights models, see Bumiller, The Civil Rights Society; but see Williams, Alchemy, on the
    power of a concept of rights for the subordinated.

  11. See Leacock, “Education in Africa: Myths of ‘Modernization.’”

  12. See Bourdieu and Passeron, Reproduction; see also Bourdieu, Distinction and
    Homo Academicus.

  13. That is to say, schooling contributes to reproduction of social structure both
    through recruitment and through the messages that are inculcated during the process of
    education. Bourdieu, “Cultural Capital and Pedagogic Communication.”

  14. Collins, “Literacy and Literacies.”

  15. Yon, “Highlights and Overview,” 423.

  16. Id.


234 Notes to Pages 24–25

Free download pdf