• E-mail
• Print
• Comment
• Font Size
• Digg
• del.icio.us
• Discuss article

Exploring Identities in a Reading Specialization Program

Posted on: Sunday, 16 October 2005, 03:01 CDT

By Assaf, Lori Czop

This qualitative study used theories of language and learning to explore the identities of one preservice teacher in a reading specialization program. Data sources included archived online course responses, interviews, journals, and an electronic portfolio. Analysis indicates that the participant used multiple discourses as an immigrant, multilanguage learner, and writer/poet to make sense of her learning in the program. These discourses shaped her identities as a teacher and influenced how her peers recognized her. Analyzing online responses over time added to the uniqueness of this study because it allowed the researcher to tap into shared discourse related to course readings and field-based experiences. Negotiating multiple discourses within a learning community influenced the participant's instructional decisions as a student teacher and fashioned her identity with other future teachers. Implications include the significance of exploring multiple identities in relation to a clearly identified program mission, using computer mediated discussions to nurture collaborative reflection, and understanding how a group's common values and commitments can enhance one's teaching identity.

Knowing what good teachers do, how they think, or what they know, is not the same as knowing how teachers learn to think and act in particular ways and what contributes to their learning. Researchers, policy makers, and teacher educators are beginning to recognize that understanding more about teachers as learners, what they need to know and how they learn their craft, can help in clarifying the role for formal teacher education in learning to teach. (Feiman-Nemser & Remillard, 1995, p. 63)

How do teachers learn to teach? This question is important to many teacher educators and politicians alike. Although some believe that learning to teach can be carried out as a series of technical skills-based training sessions, many researchers of teacher education (e.g., Ball, 2000; Britzman, 1991; Cochran-Smith, 2000; Darling-Hammond, 2000) argue that becoming a teacher is as much a process of grappling with personal convictions and previous assumptions related to teaching and taking on new and complex ideas as it is a process of learning to guide lessons. For Maxine Greene (1981) this process is about identity: "Learning to teach is a process of identity development... it is about choosing yourself, making deeply personal choices about who you are and who you will become as a teacher" (p. 12).

Striving to understand the social and personal nature of becoming a teacher of reading and the importance of teacher education programs, Anders, Hoffman, and Duffy (2000) called for "studies of the complex, personal, and interpersonal understandings that characterize the process of becoming a reading teacher" (p. 732). This call for research seeks to understand how teacher education programs can prepare novice teachers for the "complexities and contradictions of teaching" (Hoffman &. Pearson, 2000, pp. 36-37) by addressing the ways in which identities are constructed and reconstructed as someone learns to become a teacher.

Several studies have taken a close, in-depth look at the processes individuals go through as they learn to become reading teachers (Britzman, 1994; Broaddus, 2000; Clark & Flores, 2001; Danielewicz, 2001; Ritchie & Wilson, 2000). Some researchers have examined the cultural predispositions and selfperceptions held by preservice teachers while working in field-based internships (Broaddus, 2000; Wolf, Ballentine, &Hill, 2000; Xu, 2000); while others have investigated preservice teachers' self-images as future reading teachers (Hagood, 1999) and how teacher candidates come to understand themselves through reflective practices (Ritchie & Wilson, 2000). Few researchers have examined learning to teach reading as an identity-shaping process within the context of a teacher education program. Exploring identity as a personal and social process and understanding the role of teacher education programs is critical to a fuller understanding of how teachers learn to teach reading.

In this study, I draw on Bakhtin's (1981) theories of language and learning and Gee's (2001) notion of identity and group membership to explore how one preservice teacher, Adrianna (all names are pseudonyms), drew on multiple discourses in a reading specialization program to shape her identities as a teacher. The following research questions guided this study: (a) What is the nature of one preservice teacher's discourse in a reading specialization program? (b) How does identity influence the choices one makes and instructional practices one uses as a teacher? (c) What does one's discourse in a reading specialization program reveal about learning to become a teacher? I use the terms identity and identities interchangeably throughout this paper to underscore the perspective that identity is multiple, dynamic, and continually shaped by numerous interactions with others and within different discourses (Holland, Skinner, Lachicotte, & Cain, 1998).

Introducing Adrianna's case

For three semesters, I spent time with Adrianna and 29 other preservice teachers and their university instructors in a reading specialization program at a large university in the southwest. During this time, I observed the preservice teachers as they tutored elementary students. I read and responded to course-related discussions in an online discussion board, and I attended class meetings and group celebrations. Prior to this study, I served as one of three doctoral students who co-taught the literacy courses within the program. Although very familiar with the courses and structure of the program, I did not serve as a course instructor during the time of this study.

In the beginning of this investigation, I paid close attention to how these 30 preservice teachers interacted face-to-face and online to make sense of what they were learning about literacy instruction. I paid specific attention to the online discussions that occurred in response to course readings, tutoring, and student teaching. As I observed the face-to-face and online language used among the individuals in the reading specialization program, I noticed that many of these preservice teachers grappled with course readings and literacy theories that differed from their own experiences in school and their assumptions about children. I began to question how the interactions between members of the program and their discussions about course readings and field experiences influenced their learning as teachers. My wonderings about how these preservice teachers were learning to become teachers led me to a focused analysis of Adrianna.

Adrianna stood out among the other preservice teachers. She was more vocal about her struggles and past experiences in relation to course readings and student teaching. Additionally, she came into the program with a unique history of being a newly naturalized immigrant and multiple language user. Adrianna had changed her career goals from professional writing to teaching children while participating in the program. All of these attributes made Adrianna an interesting case study.

In this paper I report how Adrianna used language-along with the other preservice teachers in her reading specialization program-to negotiate her own lived experiences, assumptions, and deeply held beliefs that shaped her identities as a teacher. In the following sections, I describe theoretical contributions from Bakhtin and Gee. Within each section, I describe relevant research that has used these theoretical frameworks to illustrate the process of becoming a teacher. Next I highlight the use of computer-mediated discussion (CMD) as a viable means to explore dialogue and identity in a teacher education program. Last, I provide a summary of the study's findings, limitations, and implications for further research.

Theories of Language, Learning, and Identity

Bakhtin's Theoretical Framework

According to Bakhtin (1981), learning is a social and cultural phenomenon that requires appropriating others' words for one's own purposes. In this way, language (written and spoken) serves to organize our experiences and thoughts and can be used to understand the choices we make and who we become as individuals. Bakhtin explained that who we become as individuals-our identity-depends on the "process of selectively assimilating the words of others" (p. 341). This process is messy.

Bakhtin (1981) explained that individuals often struggle to assimilate two distinctive types of social discourse: authoritative and internally persuasive. The struggle or tensions between these two discourses is essential in identity development. Authoritative discourse is inflexible language infused with authority acknowledged in the past; it is socially accepted knowledge or ways of thinking that are rarely challenged. Bakhtin said, "It is a prior discourse. It is therefore not a question of choosing it among other possible discourses that are its equal. For example, [authoritative discourse] includes the authority of religious dogma, or of acknowledged scientific truth" (pp. 342-343). Internally persuasive discourse is more flexible and responsive; it is "denied all privilege, backed by no authority at all, \and is frequently not even acknowledged in society" (p. 342). Internally persuasive discourse is what a person thinks for himself or herself, what ultimately is persuasive to the individual (Freedman &. Ball, 2004). As individuals interact socially, they negotiate and struggle between these two forms of discourse, a process that involves not only taking in and receiving others'words, but also responding to them. Bakhtin (1981) called this exchange dialogism.

Through dialogism we sort out multiple voices and use them for our own purposes. Dialogism is not simple duplication, but rather, a way of Grafting a response to others' voices. Dialogism is significant to understanding identity development because it reminds us that we are always in dialogue with others and our environment and our identity is always in the process of becoming. Dialogism relates to identity by explaining how we learn and how we see ourselves in relation to others.

As individuals answer and respond to experiences and interactions with others in any specific context, such as in a teacher preparation program, they draw on specialized language and the "intentions of others" (Bakhtin, 1981, p. 294) to ''author themselves" (Holland et al, 1998, p. 173). As individuals respond to multiple perspectives different from their internally persuasive discourses, they experience tension and struggle with new ways of thinking. These constant struggles, which shape the way an individual thinks, acts, and understands the world, directly relate to the beliefs, values, and choices teachers make in the classroom.

Classrooms, online discussion boards, teacher education programs, or other community gatherings can be considered dialogic environments where different voices come together and individuals struggle between internally persuasive and authoritative discourses. The coming together of and negotiating different voices within these environments is essential to a person's identity: "Another's discourse performs here no longer as information, directions, rules, models and so forth-but strives to determine the very basis of our ideological interrelations with the world, the very basis of our behavior" (Bakhtin, 1981, p. 342).

Two studies suggest that developing one's self as a teacher and one's changing commitments and instructional practices associated with learning to teach are constantly renegotiated and influenced by discourses bound by lived experiences, social relationships, and institutional contexts. Britzman (1991) used Bakhtinian theories to describe how novice teachers grappled with their own personal convictions (internally persuasive discourse) and the social expectations placed on them by cooperating teachers and school administration (authoritative discourse) as they created their identities as teachers. The struggles these novice teachers experienced, which were quite intense at times, motivated the formation of their identities as teachers. Likewise, Ball's (2000) study of U. S. and South African teachers in a teacher education course identified similar findings: Teachers' developing perspectives about literacy instruction and their commitment to teaching culturally and linguistically diverse students were shaped by struggles between internally persuasive discourses and authoritative discourses. Tensions expressed in reflective journals and class discussions shaped the shifting ideologies of Ball's participants, which in turn influenced their instructional decisions as future teachers.

Gee's Theoretical Framework

In an attempt to understand the role of context in the process of learning to become a teacher, I leaned on Gee's (2001) theories of identity and Discourse. Gee argued that social interaction and specific language practices within particular groups of people are central to understanding identity. For Gee (1999), the process of identity formation can be understood by thinking of language as an "identity kit." Language signals membership in particular groups through negotiations, dialogue, and recognition by others. Gee defined this process as Discourse-identity. Identity formation occurs when individuals come to understand themselves dialogically, through specific conversations, in specific groups.

Gee defined a second perspective on identity called Affinity- identity, which describes identity as related to a group of people who have "allegiance to, access to, and participation in specific practices" that bind them together (Gee, 2001, p. 105). The notion of Affinity-identities offers potential for understanding how individuals negotiate the complexities of becoming a teacher in a wider university-based, teacher preparation program. Central to this perspective is the idea of communities of practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Resnick, 1987).

In a community of practice, learning is a function of activity and social action situated in a specific community in collaboration with others. As individuals in a community of practice participate and perceive themselves as valid members of that community (in this case, reading teachers), they develop an identity with the group that interrelates with the content knowledge and skills necessary to be recognized by others (Wenger, 1998). Gimbert (2001) suggests, much like Gee, that identities are co-constructed through learning communities.

Gimbert (2001) examined student teachers' discourse in an elementary school-based learning community to understand how they came to develop their identities as teachers and found that they developed identities directly related to the values and philosophies held by the school faculty. In other words, the student teachers appropriated the knowledge, values, beliefs, and experiences upheld by the professional development school context and came to understand their own identities as new teachers in this setting. Gimbert concluded that the process of identity development was highly dependent upon the dialogical relations with personnel in the school community, especially university faculty and classroom teachers. These studies suggest that becoming a teacher is an identity-forming process where individuals engage in dialogical language practices with others.

In this study I explore Adrianna's discourse in a reading specialization program. Structured as a cohort, the preservice teachers in the reading specialization program began and ended their coursework together. Although multiple data sources were explored (written artifacts and online responses, interviews, and field- based observations), I mainly focused on Adrianna's online discourse in relation to course readings and comments made by others in the program. By using a Bakhtinian lens and Gee's perspectives on identity, I attempted to uncover Adrianna's identities as they were being socially formed and informed by the context of the reading specialization program.

Computer-Mediated Discussions (CMD)

The use of CMD, such as email, online discussion forums, and chat rooms, has had mixed reviews. Some researchers who have studied CMD in teacher preparation programs suggest that online discussions used with students and university faculty can create opportunities for preservice teachers to reflect on their coursework, provide an effective tool for connecting theory and practice, and allow for multiple perspectives to be shared with peers and university faculty (Bean & Stevens, 2002,- Schlagal, Trathen, & Blanton, 1996; Thomas & Clift, 1996; Wade &. Fauske, 2004). CMD, used in university courses, offer numerous extended opportunities for individuals to negotiate meaning through the use of written language (Bonk &. King, 1998). For example, an individual can use online discussion forums to "talk" and "voice" one's thoughts with others (Herring, 1996), more so than in traditional classroom discussions (King, 2001). Asynchronous, text-based discussions can create opportunities for convenient and thoughtful discussions with a range of audiences and viewpoints, thus creating a space for discourse that supports dialogic interactions (Na, 2003).

Despite the positive aspects of CMD, there are some disadvantages. For example, individuals who do not have ready access to a computer or the Internet can be left out of the conversation. Another disadvantage is the discomfort some individuals feel using online technology. Since online conversations lack visual and intonational clues found in face-to-face discussions, some may feel unmotivated or uncomfortable discussing difficult issues with others online (Falser, 2002).

Despite these limitations, online threaded conversations illustrate the dialogic or "discussion" aspect of CMD. Shared online discussions can provide an opportunity for preservice teachers to use written language to expand their own thinking and gain new insight into literacy instruction (Ferdig & Roehler, 2004). These discussions can also be a valuable source of information for researchers and educators studying the interactions of a community of interest. Acknowledging the potential impact and limits of CMD, the foremost goal of this study was to illustrate one preservice teacher's evolving identities in the context of a reading specialization program.

In this study, online course responses served as the electronic discussion forum. For example, according to course requirements, members of the program read an article each week about literacy instruction and posted their responses online for peers to read. Online responses typically included a summary of the article, quotes from the article, and questions related to reading instruction. Peers read online responses and wrote comments to the authors. Responses included answering questions, raising further questions, or debating opinions. Multiple online responses became threaded discussions, meaning that others added to the original message and built upon it, creating an ongoing discussion about reading instructi\on.

Methods

Data collection for this qualitative case study took place over an 18-month period. Constant comparative method and discourse analysis were used to investigate Adrianna's language in relation to the reading specialization program and to conceptualize identity in terms of discourse and group affiliation. Examining identity from this perspective can provide new insights for conceptualizing how novice teachers learn to think and act in a teacher education program.

Participant and Contexts

Adrianna was a 25-year-old preservice teacher (in a group of 30) who participated in an undergraduate elementary reading specialization program at a large southwest university. Adrianna emigrated from Eastern Europe at age 10 and became a naturalized American citizen at age 20. She joined the reading program as a post- baccalaureate student with a degree in English Literature. Adrianna never intended to become a teacher. Her professional goal was to get her Masters of Science degree in poetry. She reluctantly entered the reading specialization program with the ultimate goal of raising her grade-point average and then moving on to graduate school. However, after the fourth week of taking courses in the program, Adrianna changed her mind and decided to pursue a career in teaching. Adrianna was chosen for this study because of her diverse background and dramatic change in professional goals. I was interested in how this transformation occurred and how the reading specialization program may have influenced her identities as a teacher.

Maryville Elementary School. Adrianna interned in a second-grade classroom at Maryville Elementary School for two consecutive semesters. Maryville Elementary School is located in a predominantly Hispanic community. Most Maryville families speak Spanish as their first language, and most of the Maryville students are first- generation immigrants. Nearly all (96%) of the students are on free or reduced lunch. All the teachers at Maryville are either bilingual or hold ESL certifications. Adrianna requested to be placed at Maryville Elementary in order to work in an urban setting with children who were both first generation immigrants and learning English as a second language.

The Reading Specialization Program. The reading specialization program, organized as a cohort (25-30 students), is directed by a faculty member and three doctoral students. It requires that students take additional courses in literacy instruction and complete extended fieldwork beyond the requirements of the general teacher education program. During the three-semester program, students take courses such as Community Literacy, Reading Development and Assessment, and Reading/Language Arts Methods, and they participate in two semester-long, supervised, classroom-based internships. All courses are taught at a local elementary school where students tutor adult literacy students as well as elementary children. They complete multiple assignments that encourage personal and professional reflection such as the First Week of School Journal, a document designed by the cohort leader as a space for students to write about their initial concerns and hopes for their internship experience, and a dialogue journal that students write with their cooperating teachers and university supervisors about their field-based teaching. Additionally, they complete an autobiographical composition on learning to read and a Web-based portfolio illustrating their field-based lessons.

Online technology plays a critical role in the reading specialization program. All students and faculty communicate through a university-supported computer communication network with an easy- to-use online communication program (called "Teach Net" on FirstClass). According to the program director, the purpose of writing online responses and responding to peers was to help preservice teachers develop their thinking, to learn from each other and the university staff, and to chronicle their understanding of reading instruction in connection with their classroom-based internships. Students sent and received emails, posted responses directly related to course assignments, and responded to each other's comments through threaded discussions. All electronic messages were asynchronous. For the first two semesters of the program, students wrote one response per course per week and responded to their classmates' electronic comments at least six times during the semester. In the third semester, students posted one lesson plan related to writing instruction and wrote informal messages related to their student teaching experiences. Throughout the program, noncourse-related electronic postings were placed in a general online folder where students, professors, and doctoral students posted personal and professional announcements, ideas, or questions.

Data Sources and Analysis

I used an "interpretive perspective" in order to examine the context of the reading specialization program and the meaning and intentions behind Adrianna's words. As Lincoln and Cuba (1985) noted, "realities are multiple, constructed, and holistic" (p. 37), and they "cannot be understood in isolation from their contexts" (p. 39). I used a qualitative design to focus on Adrianna's intentions revealed through her language and membership in the reading specialization program.

Multiple data sources were collected for this study. Students in the reading specialization program were expected to complete numerous class assignments, tutor an elementary-aged student and adult struggling with literacy, intern in an elementary classroom for two consecutive semesters, and participate in multiple asynchronous online discussions. As a participant observer, I collected data from the following sources: (a) observations from class meetings and tutoring; (b) printouts of archived electronic responses, threaded discussions, and general electronic messages Adrianna submitted between January 2001 and June 2002; (c) corresponding electronic messages from peers, the university professor, and graduate students when they were directly related to her electronic messages; (d) two face-to-face, open-ended interviews and follow-up emails; (e) dialogue journal entries written by the participant, her mentor teacher, and the university supervisor; (f) first Week of School Journal; (g) Web-based portfolio that included reading lesson plans, a teaching philosophy, and classroom discipline position paper; and (h) my own reflective research journal. These data provided plenty of written language documenting multiple discourses within multiple contexts that may have shaped Adrianna's identity development.

Data analysis was ongoing and took place over several stages. In the first stage of analysis, I printed out all of the online responses and made copies of the participant's journals, electronic portfolio, and my field notes. Next, I used the constant- comparative method (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985) by reading and rereading the data and identifying units of words or phrases that related to literacy instruction, the reading specialization program, and learning to teach as well as phrases that illustrated tensions between internally persuasive and authoritative discourses. I organized repeated phrases into categories and developed category titles for each set. To best illustrate each category, I used Adrianna's words as much as possible. Each category was reexamined, redefined, and combined with other similar categories until initial themes emerged. For instance, an emerging theme was titled "affiliation with the program." I wrote detailed summaries describing each emerging theme and used these themes to guide my interviews and answer my research questions.

In the second stage of analysis, I conducted two face-to-face interviews with Adrianna in order to verify my initial findings. These interviews occurred during the third semester of the program, two months before Adrianna graduated from the program. During our interviews, I asked Adrianna to describe her development as a teacher in the program, elaborate on her field-based experiences, and identify online responses and journal entries that influenced her as a teacher. I asked her to explain how her professional goals changed over the three semesters, if the reading specialization program influenced her learning, and whether she believed becoming a teacher was an identity-forming process. Next, I asked her to discuss specific online responses that illustrated tensions with course readings and personal struggles with learning to teach reading. She elaborated on lesson plans identified in her electronic portfolio and reflections in her dialogue journal.

In the third stage of analysis, I compared interview data with my initial emerging themes, identifying dominant themes that ran across all data. Next, I entered the coded data into Nudist(TM), a qualitative software program, to systematically organize and reanalyze the data. Fetterman (1998) advocated using qualitative software programs like Nudist(TM) because they are "precise and powerful" (p. 27) and allow researchers to label extended chunks of text based on their meanings. In sum, the first three stages of analysis included an interactive process that moved back and forth from reading the data to refining the coding categories until they accounted for all of the data and a second coding of the data through qualitative data analysis software to assure data organization and display.

In the fourth and final stage, I used Gee's (1999) methods of discourse analysis to uncover the social, cultural, and situated meanings communicated through my participant's online reading responses. Modifying his analytic technique slightly, I used Gee's six building blocks (semiotic building, world building, socioculturally situated identity, relationship building, political building, and connection building) to guide my microanalysis and to unco\ver how Adrianna used language to make sense of her learning in the context of a reading specialization program. Gee (1999) explained, "These building blocks are carried out in negotiation and collaboration with others through language... clues or cues in the language we use help assemble or trigger specific meanings through which the six building tasks are accomplished" (p. 86).

I identified and analyzed six of Adrianna's online responses that represented multiple discourses, such as comments from peers, the program professor, and university supervisors. To analyze them, I asked questions such as, "What social languages are relevant?""What cultural models seem to be at play in this response?""What connections are and are not being made in this response?" As I looked for answers to these questions, I compared my findings with previous emerging themes. I focused on textual (online responses) and contextual (interaction in the program) factors that shaped Adrianna's identities as a teacher and used answers from the building block questions to further inform emerging themes previously identified.

Credibility

Since no study is free of researcher bias, I incorporated several techniques to ensure the quality and credibility of my data. First, I had a prolonged engagement (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985) with Adrianna in multiple settings. As a participant observer, I spent 18 months getting to know Adrianna and other members of the reading specialization program by attending class meetings, cohort gatherings and celebrations, and tutoring. In addition, I visited Adrianna in her student teaching classroom and shared private emails concerning her tutoring and classroom literacy instruction. I felt confident that I had managed to become one of the group. Over my 18- month involvement, I had time to "[learn] the culture, [test] for misinformation introduced by distortions either of the self or of the respondents, and [build] trust" with Adrianna long before our individual interviews took place (p. 301).

In addition to my prolonged engagement with Adrianna and the others in the reading specialization program, I triangulated my analysis by examining multiple sources (my own observations, peer and university supervisor's online responses, comments from cooperating teacher) and methods (observations, online responses, interviews, journals, and lesson plans) through varied means (constant-comparative method, discourse analysis) to insure that the complexity of an issue was fairly represented. For example, Adrianna wrote many online responses about the importance of teaching Standard English to English Language Learners. During our interviews I asked Adrianna to expand on this issue and other tentative themes. Next, I went back to Adrianna's online responses and reflective journals and conducted a discourse analysis to uncover supporting and negative examples. By using multiple sources and methods, I was better able to perceive the fuller meanings of Adrianna's statements as they were communicated in various modes of discourse.

Finally, throughout the process of data collection and analysis, I met with my dissertation cochairs on a weekly or biweekly basis to review what I had done so far and discuss next steps; these discussions served as "peer debriefing" sessions (Lincoln & Cuba, 1985). My chairs also read over several data sources during my initial coding phases, thus serving as peer reviewers and verifying the reliability of my categories and themes. Our meetings helped me to sift through my initial perceptions and make sense of Adrianna's discourses and developing identities.

Findings

In this first section, I explore Adrianna's discourses revealed in her online responses, reflective journals, and interviews. I address the following questions: What is the nature of one preservice teacher's discourse in a reading specialization program? How does identity influence the instructional choices one makes as a teacher? I highlight the tensions Adrianna experienced in the reading specialization program, review the online discourses coconstructed by members of the program, and give examples of Adrianna's teaching practices as a student teacher. To wrap up, I answer the final question: What does one's discourse in a reading specialization program reveal about learning to become a teacher? As I uncover Adrianna's identities as a teacher, I attempt what I know to be impossible: to portray an individual (momentarily) by isolating the discourses that inspired her self as a teacher and that seemed to-at least for the time that I conducted this study- define features of her identities. I use Gee's notions of Discourse- identity and Affinity-identity and Bakhtin's theories on dialogism to describe Adrianna's discourse during her preservice program. Because her program focused on reading specialization, I also focus on how her identities influenced her understandings and decisions related to literacy instruction.

Discourse Identity: Immigrant/Multilingual Discourses

Adrianna described herself as an "Eastern European," one who "struggled with learning English" and greatly "values being an American citizen." She said, "I was born in Romania and moved to Hungary months after my birth. When I was two years old, we moved to Israel to stay with relatives." Adrianna lived in Israel for six years, then moved to the United States. At the age of 8, she spoke four languages: Romanian, Hungarian, Hebrew, and English. When Adrianna immigrated to the United States, she experienced many hardships. She had "little money as a child" and was "ridiculed by teachers and peers." She said, "When I started attending Catholic school, I became the Jew, the outsider, the immigrant. My teachers told me I talked funny and it destroyed me."

Determined to "fit in and speak English," Adrianna made the decision "to learn as much English as she could" and "to teach herself" to read and write. Adrianna recalled learning English at age 9 by watching soap operas and Sesame Street with her mom. She explained, "Sesame Street was a religious experience for me as a kid. I learned so much. That is why I speak English." Adrianna's struggles with learning a new language continued until she was in fifth grade. She confessed, "It wasn't until fifth grade that I could express myself with confidence." Several years later, as a senior in college, Adrianna became a naturalized American citizen.

Gee (2001) explains that within a group, such as the reading specialization program, identity development is fostered by how an individual comes to see herself as well as how she is "being recognized as a certain kind of person in a given context" (p. 99). Throughout Adrianna's tenure in the reading specialization program, she consistently defined her self as an immigrant and English Language Learner who spoke multiple languages. She drew on these experiences as she conversed with peers and university faculty both in class and online. Adrianna's self-identity as an immigrant and multilingual person was recognized by her peers and university supervisors and became a resource for her to view herself as a teacher.

Recognition as a Language Learner in the Group. Adrianna's experiences as a multilingual speaker and immigrant appeared to inform her internally persuasive discourses and were valued by members of the reading specialization program. For example, her peers often asked Adrianna to explain what it felt like to come to America as a young child and how to work with children who had similar experiences. Others asked Adrianna how to involve non- English-speaking parents in their classrooms and ways to help new immigrant children feel welcome in school (field notes 11-01-01).

Identity Influencing How She Learns about Literacy Instruction. At the same time, Adrianna's self identification as an immigrant and multilingual speaker influenced how she came to be recognized by her peers in the program and shaped her understanding of literacy instruction. In an online response to the chapter "Literacy for Stupification: The Pedagogy of Big lies" (Macedo, 1994), Adrianna used her immigrant/multilingual experiences to make sense of literacy and the freedoms it should provide. Adrianna wrote,

I could really relate to this article. When I was in high school, I wasn't allowed to say the pledge of allegiance (because I wasn't officially an American and all). I even got detentions and in-house suspensions for it when I did. But the beauty of this country is that we can openly question and discuss these issues... Macedo loves his country and is proud to be an American because he is critical of it and expects so much more and exercises his right to speak and write freely. Isn't that what literacy is all about? This is eye opening, nauseating, headache inducing, and vertigo causing-but so, so true. Why haven't we read more articles like this? (4-10-01)

Adrianna connected to Macedo's critical perspectives because they resonated with her past experiences and values of becoming an American citizen. She used her story of getting in-house suspensions to underscore the value of literacy and freedom. Adrianna did not experience any tensions with this article because it clearly matched her internally persuasive discourses prior to joining the program. However, at other times throughout the three-semester program, Adrianna experienced tensions with course topics and struggled to negotiate her multilingual/immigrant discourses with new learning.

Dialogic Tensions. On several occasions Adrianna struggled with concepts related to teaching English Language Learners. She dialogically interacted with the course article, responding to the tension she felt between her own past experiences and the authoritative discourse of course readings. In an online response to the chapter "Explaining Reading Difficulties" (Taylor, Harris, Pearson, & Garcia, 1995), Adrianna wrote that she strongly resisted the autho\rs' philosophies of teaching English:

On top of p. 33-"devoting attention to the linguistically unique child, the child who comes to school speaking a language or a dialect different from the dialect or language spoken in school and used in reading materials...." First of all, this is a huge mistake! There's an enormous difference between a dialect and a language! These two should not be put in the same category! This grouping is both unprofessional and insulting! It trivializes languages (with their own speech patterns, culture, history, EVERYTHING that comes with a foreign language) to the same level of a regional dialect-I beg to differ! Furthermore, how far are we as teachers to allow these suggested "accommodations?" I am not referring to bilingual education-I am referring to the ENCOURAGEMENT of incorrect/ unprofessional written and spoken language.... These "accommodations" are a recipe for doom-this reminds me of how gypsy slang was worshiped in Romania during the time of totalitarian communism (where being a well-read educated person was bad and being an ignorant peasant was good). (04/16/01)

Adrianna voiced her belief that teachers should have high expectations for their students and teach them Standard English. This position, also described by Delpit (1995), claims that educators must equip students with the tools to maneuver in a "culture of power" (p. 283). Issues of power in the classroom include the codes or rules for talking, writing, dressing, and ways of interacting. For Adriana, allowing students to communicate in their cultural dialect creates disadvantages and does not give them the tools to succeed in cultures of power.

At the end of this response, however, Adrianna grappled with her initial statement showing her willingness to interact in a dialogic process as she forms her teacher self. She wrote, "My teachers told me I talked funny and it destroyed me. Then again it also built character... would saying to a child: You're speaking incorrect English be too harsh?" In considering her own experiences as an English Language Learner and the authoritative discourse of the course reading, Adrianna shifted her thinking and reconsidered the negative consequences of rejecting a child's home language.

In the following semester, Adrianna continued to wrestle with ESL instruction and literacy. In a conversation related to an article about subtractive schooling (Valenzuela, 1999) that described students who lose their home language and become disconnected to their parents and their own cultural background, Adrianna replied, "I disagree so much with this. I had to count to ten. It hurt my feelings. It raised my blood pressure, it made me want to call this lady and invite her to Maryville or Suez Elementary" (field notes 10- 13-01). In an online response to this same topic, Adrianna discussed the importance of cultural and linguistic flexibility and used her experiences of learning many languages as a justification for this perspective. She wrote:

ESL students can also be encouraged to continue their native language usage at home. Not everyone drops their native language and switches to English. In fact, in many cases, holding on to their native language, practicing it, being proud of it encourages linguistic and cultural flexibility, (i.e., most of the 2nd grade kids in my class, the 4th grade boys I tutor, and me-I'm still fluent in Hungarian and Romanian, and I can get along in Spanish and still feel like a human). (10-16-01)

Adrianna's internally persuasive discourse of being an immigrant and multilingual influenced how she interpreted teaching ELL students. She resisted the idea of children losing their home language and believed that teachers must build on a child's home language and past experiences to teach reading. She applied this thinking with the adult English language learner she tutored and reflected on these experiences online after responding to the article "Making Dialogue Dialogic: A Dialogic Approach to Adult Literacy Instruction" (Fallen, 1995). She wrote,

I made a list and am now working on creating vocabulary books that he (the adult tutee) can practice from. These are words he knows in his own language and those from English. I am encouraging him to listen to recordings of me reading in English and then I want him to be able to record his own stories giving accounts of his days... just like Freire's reading one's world! (online response 3- 7-01)

Adrianna voiced beliefs about teaching English language learners resembled her own past literacy experiences. This example, among others, suggests that Adrianna's lived experiences of being an immigrant and multiple language user were infused in her internally persuasive discourses, which informed her choices as a literacy instructor.

Conclusion. Even though Adrianna experienced some resistance to course-related readings, her past experiences and values were considered personal resources by the program faculty and peers alike, thus she was encouraged to apply these resources in her field- based classroom and online responses and use them to inform professional decisions. For instance, in her First Week of School Journal, Adrianna wrote about why she wanted to teach at Maryville Elementary, a school where 88% of the student-population were first- generation immigrants from Mexico:

The East Side is an amazing place (magical, in my opinion). I lived in Israel. That community, most assuredly, was much more varied-lots of Moroccans, Egyptians, Israelis, Russians, even Italians. All of whom, aside from speaking their native language, spoke Hebrew. Many of my family ties were very similar to what is prevalent on the East Side-commitment, devotion to uniqueness/ individuality and cultural pride. (First Week of School Journal 9- 15-01)

In another example, Adrianna shared that her identity as an immigrant and an English language learner influenced her commitment to teach at Maryville Elementary. She explained,

I have a huge deal of empathy and this probably has to do with the fact that when I was little I was an immigrant and a new immigrant and very, very, very poor. And so I think empathy has a lot to do with being a teacher. I had some rough experiences when we first moved to the states. I lived in an area that was pretty bad and pretty dangerous and went to a school-a public school that I think traumatized me and raised a lot of questions about my future as an American and as a part of this country and so learning English was a big deal and I want to be around to help kids who have problems learning this too. (interview 4-25-01)

Immigrant/multilingual discourse permeated Adrianna's online responses, written reflections, and speech over the three-semester program. This discourse permeated her responses and dialogical interactions within the reading specialization program. At the same time, Adrianna leaned on a writer/poet discourse to make sense of her past experiences and new learning in the program.

Discourse Identity: Writer/Poet Discourse

When Adrianna joined the reading specialization program, she described herself as "an experienced writer and poet." She explained, "As a young child, I began writing short stories and poetry for my parents. As I grew older, my writing developed. I wrote everyday and decided to get a degree in writing." In 1999, Adrianna graduated with a degree in English Literature and since graduating had published several short stories and poems and had an extensive -writers' portfolio. Throughout the three-semester sequence, Adrianna became recognized as an experienced writer/poet. She used her writer /poet experiences to situate herself as a knowledgeable writer in the reading specialization program.

Recognition as a Writer in the Group. Adrianna seemed to be considered an excellent writer by her peers and someone who the other preservice teachers modeled their writing instruction after (field notes 10-31-01). For instance, Adrianna created a special journal for her elementary-aged tutee during the second semester of the program. She posted an online message describing her journal and how she used it in her tutoring lesson. Within two days after she posted her message, 12 other students responded to her message asking if they could borrow her journal idea and use it in their own tutoring lessons. From that day on, Adrianna became "infamous for her J.A.M. Journal" (interview 3-25-02). In another example, the program director posted a public online message stating, "Adrianna, you write beautifully and open your thinking for everyone to engage with. Please don't stop!" The writer/poet discourse positioned Adrianna in the program and fashioned her identity in the group. In other words, she became recognized by this discourse. This recognition, as Gee might suggest, played a role in her identities as a reading teacher in the reading specialization program.

Identity Influencing How She Learns about Literacy Instruction. Adrianna aligned herself with other great authors/poets and used this discourse as a lens to make sense of course readings and literacy instruction. For example, in March 2002 in an online response to Creative Teacher (Ashton-Warner, 1963), Adrianna connected to Tolstoy's teaching past. She wrote, "Leo Tolstoy! He is one of my favorite all time authors incidentally but now I'm insane with amazement! I want to be like him! A great writer and a teacher!" Adrianna made similar comments about William Ayers's abilities as a writer and a teacher. She commended, "His style is impeccably poetic and natural. He is just an amazing writer! I can't believe how 'with it' Ayers's writing is-style and methodologies" (field notes 11-15-01).

Through a writer's lens, Adrianna made many personal connections to the course readings and related her own writing experiences to what she envisioned to be high-quality literacy instruction. For example, in response to "Stories as Ways of Acting Together\" (Heath, 1994), Adrianna wrote, "I really like the idea of gaining literary perspective through the process of writing, rewriting, telling, retelling, framing, reframing. These are the universal truths of editing! A crucial element to writing-the sooner learned/ appreciated the better" (2-7-01).

Through a writer's lens, Adrianna made many personal connections to the course readings and related her own writing experiences to literacy instruction, For example, in an online response to the chapter, "The Importance in the Act of Reading" (Freire, 1973), Adrianna wrote,

The three main points [Freire] presents are that reading consists of critical perception, interpretation, and rewriting what's been read. His opinions and poetic style of communication are especially relevant to me as I spend much of my free time writing and publishing poems/ short stories-tons of them about my childhood language challenges. (1-23-01)

Adrianna connected her own life experiences of being a writer/ poet to Freire's theories of critical literacy. She made similar connections to writing and critical literacy in response to "Writing as a Foundation for Transformative Community in the Tenderloin" (Heller, 1994):

I think even the title of this article reflects the poetry and poetic voices within it. I realize how universal the need to write is, what a deep desire it is among many of our nation's poorest people.... Articulating and reflecting, creating a name for ourselves, saying something, being heard, these are connections that all writers share: graffiti artist, novelists, poets, and children alike-regardless of race or SES. This article moved me to tears- it's connected to everything I believe in. (3-26-01)

These two online responses illustrate how Adrianna articulated her belief that writing is a means for personal transformation-as it had been for her as writer/poet. Adrianna did not appear to struggle with these articles because they matched her writer/poet discourses. However, there were other times throughout the semester that her writer/poet identities clashed with social norms of teaching.

Dialogic Tensions. As Adrianna worked to achieve her identity as a writer and poet within the reading specialization program and make sense of reading instruction from these ideologies, her self- identity as a writer/poet and self-identity as a novice teacher collided. During the last semester of the program, when Adrianna started interning at Maryville Elementary, she was forced to confront her self-image as a writer/poet and conform to the social expectations of being a teacher. When Adrianna joined the reading specialization program, she described herself as an "artist and a European" and dressed "like a bohemian." She wore vintage clothing, little (if any) makeup, and no bra (field notes 04-15-01). She explained, "I am an artist. My mother is an artist, and she never wears a bra. It is just the way I am. I don't need a bra. I am a poet" (field notes 2-15-02). However, during Adrianna's first week as a student teacher, the vice principal told Adrianna that her style of dress was unprofessional and that she needed to wear a bra or leave the school (field notes 2-15-02). Adrianna was outraged and insulted by "having to change who I am." She explained,

This is the way I am. I don't wear a bra. I bust my butt for these people, and I don't even get paid. How can they? This is my body and these are my boobs... how can they ask me to change who I am to teach at their school? (interview 3-25-02)

Adrianna conformed to the vice principal's requests because she wanted to continue working as a student teacher, but she remained resentful about the "superficial mask" she was expected to wear in order to be accepted as a teacher. Two months after the "bra incident," Adrianna shared, "Now I show up earlier, dress up more than I have to and despite this whole thing, I want to make sure my focus remains on the kids" (online response 4-01-02). As a result of conforming to the administrator's dress code, Adrianna believed she received "more respect and compliments" from the teachers she worked with. She confessed, "Now that I've changed, there is more respect, and people nod and say hello and compliment me." In fact, Adrianna's self-image, in her own words, shifted from a writer/poet to a "real teacher." She noted, "Now the vice principal says things like, Oh my goodness Adrianna, I can't believe you are doing all of this stuff. You are setting such a fine example for the other teachers'" (interview 3-25-02).

Adrianna's peers in the program became very angry when Adrianna was asked to wear a bra. Many of them thought that Adrianna should not be forced to become someone different just because she did not wear a bra (field notes 2-25-01). Yet Adrianna believed this incident was a "growing experience" and an indication that it was time to "grow up" and "do more than just write."

The "bra incident" forced Adrianna to revise her identities as a writer/poet and to include being a teacher. As her perceptions changed from writer/poet to teacher, so did her language. She explained,

I am still a very big writer, but at the same time, compared to what we are doing in the reading program, it blows anything out of the water. The usefulness of being a teacher comes from the fact that this is something (teaching reading) that can make people better and can make people vote and can make people choose better, to make better choices and make better lives for themselves and educate themselves ... Suddenly for me there is this whole new dimension where I am going... .This is worthwhile. I still really want to get a MSA in poetry and be the writer I am meant to be and go nuts and do my own thing. But why do that now... I love being a teacher, (interview 3-25-02)

Adrianna's reflection illustrates how she negotiated preconceived notions of herself as a writer/poet with new competing images of being a teacher, revealing the complex, social, and personal process of learning to teach. As a member of the reading specialization program, Adrianna and her peers were expected to act and dress as "real teachers." The process of taking on this identity for Adrianna was eased by her allegiance to her peers and their common desire to teach.

Affinity-identity: Allegiance to the Group and Coconstructed Discourses

Affinity-identity, according to Gee, is one way to understand how one's identity is bound to a group of people who have a common allegiance or connection with others. Adrianna felt a strong bond with the other students and the university faculty in the reading specialization program. Her membership in this group motivated her identity as a reading teacher and helped her to understand herself through conversations and ongoing interactions with others.

Immediately upon joining the program, Adrianna expressed a deep connection or affiliation to her classmates and university faculty. She shared, "I just fell in love. I fell in love with Dr. H. and other students and the readings!" She explained:

I love the cohort. ... I feel so blessed. When I see them it inspires me and it brings me a new sense of hope.... I really like them a lot and that was a huge change.... And then I thought, oh my God, I want to be a teacher! That is what I want to do. [First Week of School Journal 8-23-01)

From the first week of the program until she graduated, Adrianna was proud of her association with the reading specialization program and inspired by her peers' common commitment to teach. Her association with the program influenced her learning and shaped how she viewed herself as a teacher.

Taking on Social Discourses and Identities as "Teacher." Adrianna's strong sense of belonging within the group seemed to provide for her ways of thinking about issues related to instruction, such as child-centered pedagogy, assessment, and teachers' sense of agency. For example, over the three-semester period, Adrianna and her peers consistently wrote about child- centered literacy instruction and nontraditional teaching, both of which matched their course readings and field-based experiences. Adrianna and her peers wrote online about the importance of learning about a student's family background, understanding children's reading interests and abilities, and making reading meaningful and engaging. When described within this discourse, a child is conceptualized as being a product of social, cultural, historical, and political forces (Berk&Winsler, 1995). At the same time, discourse valuing a child's literacy experiences outside of school and empowering the child to make sense of his/her life through reading and writing was prevalent throughout the threesemester period. The group's common commitment to child-centered instruction matched many of Adrianna's beliefs as a writer/poet, and this alignment nurtured a deeper sense of allegiance with her peers and eased the way for her new self-identity as a teacher. She wrote, "I'm insanely proud to be in this totally dedicated and inspired cohort, full with future teachers who agree that the student is everything." By the end of the program, Adrianna had appropriated a child-centered discourse. She explained, "In my student teaching, the kids take center stage in my life. I want them to feel that way by asking them constantly what is going on in their lives, about their sports, their families" (interview 3-25-02).

Adrianna and her peers often criticized traditional reading instruction and high-stakes testing and struggled with their agency as teachers. Within this "teaching against the grain" discourse (e.g., Cochran-Smith, 1991, p. 281), Adrianna wrote about the challenges she might face as a classroom teacher. She wrote,

How can I be sure I don't end up teaching in a school system that advocates out-of-the-textbook worksheet type of mind numbing routine? What steps do teachers who do learning logs or reading clubs take to enhance their forthright\ness?

Additionally, she questioned her responsibility as a teacher and the validity of high-stakes testing. For instance, Adrianna wrote about her cooperating teacher "teaching to the test, using worksheets, and ignoring the individual needs of her students." Angered by her teacher's actions and the district's policies on testing, she wrote,

I refuse to believe what we are doing with kids [high-stakes testing] is right. We must change it. Let's start with taking personal responsibility: Talk about it as much as possible to people- not on a soapbox, but just bring it up in conversation as much as possible for starters. Then petitions, boycotts, and then maybe a revolution, (online response 3-18-01)

Adrianna and her peers held up an "against the grain" (Cochran- Smith, 1991) discourse and sustained their common commitment to teach nontraditionally. In teaching against the grain discourse, teachers actively attempt to reform teaching and schooling. Embedded in this discourse is the belief that schools are institutions that perpetuate the status quo by shaping the social identities of children and reproduce inequities (McLaren, 1989), yet by working together teachers can reinvent schools and change current inequities. In another instance, a classmate posted an online response about high-stakes assessment. She wrote, "We must do more than just prepare children to pass high-stakes assessments. We must teach children to be successful in life." Adrianna agreed and responded, "Yet we must grow as responsible teachers-teachers who care about students not tests." Teaching against the grain discourse united the group and gave them a means for articulating their agency as future teachers. Adrianna and her peers wrote about things worth fighting for such as controlling one's class schedule, blocking out time for literacy instruction, and reading for the sake of enjoyment. "Teaching against the grain is not easy," Adrianna explained. "It is so difficult to go out there with typical teachers. It is hard to stand up and say no thanks to a stack of worksheets or to practice for [the state-mandated test] when everyone else around you is worrying about crap like that."

Conclusion. These discourses shaped how Adrianna and her peers came to see themselves as future teachers. For Adrianna, becoming a teacher in the reading specialization program was a dialogic process sustained by the group's common values and beliefs about teaching and their group identity as nontraditional teachers. One month before graduation, Adrianna reflected on her self as a teacher in relation to her peers in the program.

I look at things and my goals and my role in life now-being in the program has enhanced my consciousness and has completely frozen my awareness of the privilege and the honor and the responsibility that comes with this title of teacher. ... And it is cool to think that is exactly what we are and what we have become-totally heroic and chivalrous and responsible. It is an honor. I have become a lot more sensitive of my identity. I am at home, emotionally, politically, and spiritually. ... Even with people I don't talk to for a long time-I will say I am a teacher now-there is so much implication with thatbeauty-I love it. ... I love being that, (interview 4-15-02)

Adrianna's membership in the program eased the way for new learning and allowed for a smoother transition into who she was becoming as a teacher. Specifically, her identity as a teacher was being shaped by how the group discussed teaching and learning and how they viewed themselves as future teachers. Furthermore, Adrianna's identities, revealed through multiple discourses in the reading specialization program, influenced her instructional decisions as student teacher.

How Adrianna's Identities Influenced her Teaching Commitments and Practices

The multiple discourses that helped to shape Adrianna's identity as a teacher in the reading specialization program also influenced her instructional choices as a student teacher. For example, as she wrote about her childhood experiences learning English and feeling different from other students, she expressed and honed her commitment to work with students who had similar experiences. She wanted to extend students' cultural interests and bring her own experiences into the classroom. She described one of the first responsibilities as a student teacher:

I always did a read aloud. And with those I have tried to incorporate some sort of cultural interest that the kids were having. I would try to introduce them to the rest of the world. And my background lends itself to lots of fun discussions and Eastern European folktales, (interview 4-25-02)

She also wanted to work in a Spanish community where she could improve her Spanish fluency. Teaching in a Spanish-dominated community influenced her identity as an immigrant/multilanguage learner and her shifting self as a teacher. She explained, "My father always said, you are as many languages as you know. Now my identity is changing again because my Spanish is getting a lot better" (interview 4-24-02).

As a poet and writer, Adrianna believed that writing should be used to transform individuals and society, and she used her identity as a writer/poet to shape her reading instruction with students. For example, Adrianna requested to take over her cooperating teacher's writing workshop after the first week of her internship. Her first mini-lesson was on reading and writing poetry. In addition, Adrianna created a Good Citizen unit with her second-grade students. In this unit, Adrianna's students explored their responsibility as citizens. Together they created a school-wide recycling program. Adrianna taught her students how to research issues related to pollution. They read books and wrote poetry about the environment as well as explored the city's recycling policies and invited two local politicians to speak with the class about the costs of recycling. Stu

Source: Journal of Literacy Research; JLR

More News in this Category