What we hoped to understand
Our hope in this lesson study was to empower ALL of our students to share out to the class using academic language, while also engaging our students in a social justice project.
Content Goal: Students will use their knowledge of persuasive arguing to understand the three elements of effective rhetoric to become a more effective writer and passionate community member. (Ethos, Logos, Pathos)
Equity Goal: Increase students’ development of academic language and confidence to share out.
Theory of Action: If we employ (repetitive, low stakes, and multiple modalities of share-outs), then students will improve their development of their (academic language and communication skills) as evidenced by their sharing out to an entire group about ethos logos and pathos in their mind map.
Content Goal: Students will use their knowledge of persuasive arguing to understand the three elements of effective rhetoric to become a more effective writer and passionate community member. (Ethos, Logos, Pathos)
Equity Goal: Increase students’ development of academic language and confidence to share out.
Theory of Action: If we employ (repetitive, low stakes, and multiple modalities of share-outs), then students will improve their development of their (academic language and communication skills) as evidenced by their sharing out to an entire group about ethos logos and pathos in their mind map.
Lesson Plan
Research Insights
In researching more about Social Justice education, it quickly became apparent that similar critques have been levelled against this pedagogy for many years. Many have attempted to address these critques, and we feel that our lesson study attempts to do that as well.
The Ambiguity Critique
The first and most common critique about Social Justice Education is that it can mean too many things and, therefore, doesn't mean very much at all. This critique has been made by both proponents and naysayers against SJE. In response to this, Alison Dover explains that SJE arises from a tradition going back to Dewey and Democratic Education, traces it through Critical Pedagogy, Multicultural Education, and Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. Seen in this way, SJE has more grounding and definition. Others, like Learning for Justice, have more clearly defined SJE through the use of 20 standards divided into four categories, and stratified by grade level for teachers to use in their classrooms.
The Ambiguity Critique
The first and most common critique about Social Justice Education is that it can mean too many things and, therefore, doesn't mean very much at all. This critique has been made by both proponents and naysayers against SJE. In response to this, Alison Dover explains that SJE arises from a tradition going back to Dewey and Democratic Education, traces it through Critical Pedagogy, Multicultural Education, and Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. Seen in this way, SJE has more grounding and definition. Others, like Learning for Justice, have more clearly defined SJE through the use of 20 standards divided into four categories, and stratified by grade level for teachers to use in their classrooms.
The Knowledge Critique
Another common critique against SJE is that by focussing on social justice, students lose out on classtime that could be spent learning content knowledge. Researchers have begun to address this critique. In surveys, teachers who describe themselves as social jusice educators also place great emphasis on the content goals of their classroom. In one case study, a teacher demonstrated how closely connected literacy skills are to activism for students.
Another common critique against SJE is that by focussing on social justice, students lose out on classtime that could be spent learning content knowledge. Researchers have begun to address this critique. In surveys, teachers who describe themselves as social jusice educators also place great emphasis on the content goals of their classroom. In one case study, a teacher demonstrated how closely connected literacy skills are to activism for students.
Application to our lesson study
This was certainly the case in our lesson study where our students were learning about rhetoric to eventually create the most effective slogans possible to convince community members to join them in their fight to address a specific injustice. To teach someone about injustices in the world and to empower them to take action is not only just teaching, it is also good teaching. To engage in this issues, students will need possess literacy skills, reasoning, and other academic skills. Therefore, good teaching is also just teaching. As Marilyn Cochran-Smith says echoing Gloria Ladson-Billings, social justice education is "just good teaching."
This was certainly the case in our lesson study where our students were learning about rhetoric to eventually create the most effective slogans possible to convince community members to join them in their fight to address a specific injustice. To teach someone about injustices in the world and to empower them to take action is not only just teaching, it is also good teaching. To engage in this issues, students will need possess literacy skills, reasoning, and other academic skills. Therefore, good teaching is also just teaching. As Marilyn Cochran-Smith says echoing Gloria Ladson-Billings, social justice education is "just good teaching."
Data Collection
Content Knowledge and Sharing Out
As our goals of the lesson were to teach about rhetoric and to build confidence for students to share out to the whole group about rhetoric, we collected data on both of these. For the content goal, we collected the students mind maps and also an exit ticket about the student's understanding of ethos, logos, and pathos.
As our goals of the lesson were to teach about rhetoric and to build confidence for students to share out to the whole group about rhetoric, we collected data on both of these. For the content goal, we collected the students mind maps and also an exit ticket about the student's understanding of ethos, logos, and pathos.
Exit Ticket Regarding Rhetoric
"What role does the Ethos, Pathos & Logos play in activism?" |
Observation during class discussion
|
Focus Student 1: They convince the reader/ listener to care about the topic you are advocating for. |
Focus Student 1:
|
Focus Student 2: I don't know |
Focus Student 2: No screen share or discussion |
Focus Student 3: Ethos played a role In LGBTQ+ because thats what they were. Pathos played a role in LGBTQ+ because the felt passiont for that. |
Focus Student 3: FS3 sharing out her organization! Turned on her camera and showed her Mind Map. Logos: experience in LatinX, LGBTQ...sharing rhetoric!!! Great :) |
Discussion:
Our evidence shows a bit of a mixed bag on both fronts of content knowledge and confidence to share out. On one hand, FS1 has a strong grasp of the role that the three elements of rhetoric would play in activism, although he does not go further into each piece of rhetoric and how it might contribute. FS3 has the terms down, but does not fuly express how ethos and pathos could be used within activism. FS2 does not make an attempt, which is also the case for him during the group discussion. On the other hand, both FS1 and FS3 shared out in their small groups (albeit only via chat for FS3), and even shared out about their work to the whole group.
Our evidence shows a bit of a mixed bag on both fronts of content knowledge and confidence to share out. On one hand, FS1 has a strong grasp of the role that the three elements of rhetoric would play in activism, although he does not go further into each piece of rhetoric and how it might contribute. FS3 has the terms down, but does not fuly express how ethos and pathos could be used within activism. FS2 does not make an attempt, which is also the case for him during the group discussion. On the other hand, both FS1 and FS3 shared out in their small groups (albeit only via chat for FS3), and even shared out about their work to the whole group.
Lesson Debrief and Takeaways
In our debrief, our lesson study team, as well as Dr. Teresa Ceseña, Instructor Sarah Strong, and Dr. Curtis Taylor, identified some positives and some areas of growth.
Positives:
Growth Areas:
Positives:
- Getting students to share our early in the lesson by talking about fries (low stakes)
- Being clear about valuing response in the chat or verbally.
- Sharing with students Armando's personal involvement with YANO, leading by example.
Growth Areas:
- Scaffolding towards creating the mind maps
- Sentence starters for discussion and shareouts
- More clarification for breakout rooms (instructions and directions)
Final Thoughts
For some students we achieved the content goal of being able understand ethos, logos, and pathos well enough to use it in their activism project. For others we did achieve the goal of inspiring enough confidence to share out to the whole group using academic language. But we did not achieve this goal for all students. There are reasons why this is the case unrelated to our theory of action, and there are areas we could improve on for next time related to our theory of action (like more scaffolding and clarity surrouding the student design of the mind maps). Overall, however, my takeaway from this lesson study will be the notion of the false divide between teaching for social justice and teaching for content knowledge. Both are important, and there might be days where a teacher's focus is on one or the other, but a classroom in which the focus is purely on idea of social justice without any of the content necessary to becoming an active change agent in this world is self defeating, as is a classroom in which the focus is so tightly zoomed on content to ignore how those skills and knowledge being taught actually connect to the world around us will eventually crumble as well. Both are social justice and content knowledge are important to each other, neither can stand on its own. To be good teachers we must be just. To create justice, we must be good teachers.