Delpit: "The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children"

Morgan Buonanno

EDC 552:  Social & Cultural Contexts of Schooling

Dr. Bogad

Fall 2011

Delpit:  “The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People’s Children”

            Lisa Delpit’s “The Silenced Dialogue:  Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People’s Children” tackles the “skills versus process approaches” (23) to writing instruction, and elucidates that these pedagogical methodologies directly affect students who do not belong to “the culture of power” (24).

            According to Delpit, “the culture of power” in our educational system is comprised of “children from middle-class homes tend to do better in school than those from non- middle-class homes because the culture of the school is based on the culture of the school is based on the culture of the upper and middle classes—of those in power” (25).  These students’ success in school is associated with the inherited acquisition of ‘cultural capital,’ or discursive patterns and values that are reflected in linguistic forms, communicative strategies, and presentation of self.  Furthermore, students who do not possess the advantageous gains of the cultural privilege, predominantly students who are minorities or of an impoverished social class, tend to struggle in school because they must learn implicit language codes and ideological systems.  For Delpit, “when implicit codes are attempted across cultures, communication frequently breaks down” (25).  Thus, students who are not privy to “the culture of power” are being held accountable in the classroom for discerning a set of rules that is nonexistent, and absent from their cultural milieu.  I pose the questions:  Is this just?  Would you test a third grader on Calculus?  Would you expect a Kindergartener to write a five-paragraph essay?  No!  How can we assess students on a skill set that they do not possess?

            Delpit explains that liberal teachers hold “beliefs include striving for a society based upon maximum individual freedom and autonomy” (26); nevertheless, I tentatively consider myself a liberal teacher following Delpit’s definition.  Burdened by the power struggle outlined by Delpit, I am left with an unsettling feeling that I am functioning like a power broker rather than a teacher.  For Delpit, many of these teachers (myself included) have been advocating the “process approach” to teaching literacy.  I have a copy of Daniels and Zemelman’s Subjects Matter:  Every Teacher’s Guide to Content-Area Reading on my desk as I type.  I am searching for a pre-reading activity prior to beginning “The Most Dangerous Game” with my freshmen—an activity that is student-centered and advocates indirect instruction.  Nevertheless, Delpit claims that this technique may be effective with students who are included in the “culture of power,” yet marginalized students are “cheated” (32).  In the article, “many people of color” (whom I teach everyday), for instance, “expect an authority figure to act with authority” (35).  Does it mean that I am not doing by job by encouraging student-centered learning activities, and shirking my responsibilities due to the fact that I do not use ‘chalk and talk’ all the time?

            Pondering the aforementioned question, I took to the Internet for some research on the benefits of direct instruction vs. indirect instruction.  Please see the following link: http://nichcy.org/research/ee/learning-strategies.  According to the website and accompanying article, “Even better, this method of instruction is appropriate and effective for students who have disabilities, as well as for those who do not. That’s right, all students can benefit from understanding the strategies that good learners use. What’s more, a skillful teacher can play a critical part in guiding students to use strategies until their use becomes an automatic part of each student’s repertoire.”  All students includes all students—those who are part of the dominant culture and those who are not.

            Despite my questioning of Delpit’s explanation of “liberal” and the debate over approaches to instruction, I do concur with Delpit’s admissions that students who are not part of what she considers excluded from “the culture of power…need to establish their own voices…and to coach those voices to produce notes that will be heard clearly in the larger society” (46).  According to Delpit, I possess “the power of culture” (Sigh!), yet I am roused to take the initiative of “get[ting] all the issues on the table in order to initiate true dialogue” (46).  This must be done.  As an educator, I take responsible for my teaching, and aim to provide for all students.  With trepidation and backed with data on instructional approaches, I will begin to discuss the “power realities in this country” (46).  The verdict is still out if this acknowledgement with aid in lessening the power-based societal gap, but I am willing to begin the dialogue.