Other People’s Children
The politics of Teaching Literate Discourse pg 152-166
James Paul gee- literary specialist







Argues that literacy is much more than reading and writing, but rather that it is part of a
larger political entity. This entity he calls a discourse, construed as something of an
“identity kit” meaning “saying-writing-doing-being-valuing-believing”
Adds one never learns simply to read or write, but to read and write within some larger
discourse, and therefore within some larger set of values and beliefs.
Primary discourse- learned in the home
Secondary discourse- attached to institutions or groups one might later encounter.
All discourses are not equal in status. Some are socially dominant- social power and
access to economic success.
Individuals born into a particular discourse tends to be maintained because primary
discourses are related to secondary discourses of similar status in our society (middle
class home discourse and school discourse.
2 aspects of Gee’s arguments that are problematic
o That people who have not been born into dominant discourses will find it
exceedingly difficult, if not impossible, to acquire such discourse. Gee argues
that discourses cannot be “overtly” taught, particularly in a classroom. But it can
be acquired by enculturation in the home or by “apprenticeship” into social
practices. Must have access to that discourse. Colleagues argue now not are you
all determined by genes but also locked into your place in a lower-class status by
your discourse. Teacher can feel powerless to effect change and student feeling
hopeless.
o That an individual who is born into one discourse with one set of values may
experience major conflicts when attempting to acquire another discourse with
another set of values. Gee defines this to “women and minorities,” when they
seek to acquire status discourses they may be faced with adopting values that
deny their primary identities. When teachers believe that this acceptance of selfdeprecatory values is inevitable in order for people of color to acquire status
discourses, then their sense of justice and fair play might hinder their teaching.
o If teacher were to adopt both of Gee’s premises not only would they see a new
discourse in a classroom impossible to achieve, but they also view the goal of
acquiring such a discourse questionable.
Overcoming obstacles to acquisition

A story of African Americans whose parents did or did not even have a high school
education, but in his school picture was able to point out all the people who made it,
principal VP of a computer co.,VP of a bank.
o Both stories attribute their ability to transcend the circumstances into which they
were born directly to their teachers. First their teachers successfully taught what
Gee calls the “superficial features” of middle-class discourse- grammar, style,
mechanics- features that Gee claims are particularly resistant to classroom
instruction. And students successfully learned them. Teachers insisted that
students be able to speak and write eloquently, maintain neatness, think carefully,
and conduct themselves with dignity. Teachers held visions of the students that
they may not have seen possible, they were determine their students could achieve
what they did not.
o Show how people, given the proper support, can “make it” in culturally alien
environments.
o Teachers can make a difference if they are willing to make the commitment.
Acquisition and Transformation







Question is not whether students can learn a dominant or secondary discourse in the
classroom but rather should they attempt to.
Herb Kohl- “not learn”- when someone is dealing with personal family loyalties, to agree
to learn from a stranger who does not respect your integrity causes a major loss of self.
The only alternative is to not-learn and reject the stranger’s world. Students who choose
not-learn to resolve the problem teachers “not-teach”, believing they will teach to those
within the language and style of the students’ home discourse.
Teachers must acknowledge and validate students’ home language without using it to
limit students’ potential. Students’ home discourses are vital to their perception of self
and sense of community connectedness.
The point must not be to eliminate students’ home languages, but rather to add other
voices and discourses to their repertoires.
Teachers must recognize the conflict Gee details between students’ home discourses and
the discourse of school.
Teachers can acknowledge the unfair “discourse-stacking” that our society engages in.
acknowledgment= liberating
Conclusion- when teachers are committed to teaching all students, and when they
understand that through their teaching change can occur, then the chance for
transformation is great.