Queen Bee or Not To Be: Incarcerated Youth and Book Clubs
Kayla Hostetler and Sara Biltz
University of South Carolina
Background
The need for expanded literacy instruction in juvenile correctional facilities is widely
supported by researchers (Brunner, 1993; Christle & Yell, 2008; Krezmien & Mulcahy, 2008;
Vacca, 2008). Interventions that target reading challenges can reduce youth incarceration
(Christle and Yell, 2008) and decrease recidivism rates. Brunner (1993) has shown that
effective reading interventions for juvenile offenders can result in a 20% recidivism reduction,
not to mention an acquisition of significant reading gains (pp. 5-6). The question then becomes,
which reading interventions do we employ with incarcerated youth?
Both literature circles and book clubs have been credited with: motivating students to
read (Lapp & Fisher, 2009); fostering critical discussion (Johnson, 2000; Latendresse, 2004;
Long & Gove, 2003; Sandmann & Gruhler, 2007); improving student comprehension (Sweigart,
1991); and bolstering problem-solving and practical decision-making skills (Blum, Lipsett, &
Yocom, 2002). Yet such literacy structures are not without limitations. Thein, Guise, and Sloan
(2011) have questioned literature circles as forums for discussion, noting several studies which
have determined power laden spaces (Allen, Möller, & Stroup, 2003; Clarke, 2006; Evans, 1996)
and the reinforcement of stereotypes (Alvermann, 1995; Orellana, 1995).
Theory
We believe that reading is a social and critical practice (Luke & Freeeboddy, 1997)
embedded in communities, ways of life, and human relationships (Barton, Hamilton, & Ivanicˇ,
2000; Street, 1995). As such, reading is seen as a socially situated activity pursued within a
context for a specific purpose (Gee, 2000). In agreement with Park (2012), we also recognize
reading as a critical practice in that reading is much more than being able to produce textually
grounded interpretations. Reading should prompt questions about worldviews (Edelsky, 1999;
Shor, 1999), leading to different and deeper understanding of selves, others, and realities (Horton
& Freire, 1990).
We also believe that all people should be treated with dignity and respect. However, we are
aware that marginalized groups experience oppression in numerous ways. Drawing on the work
Freire (1970), social justice theory examines the marginalization of specific populations, which
leads to systematic and systemic oppressions of these groups. This theory “presupposes that all
students should be treated with human dignity, that all are worthy of the same educational
opportunities, and that the contract they enter into with schools must honor their sociocultural
advantages and disadvantages” (CEE Position Statement: Beliefs about Social Justice in English
Education).
We believe that individuals have the ability to construct third spaces. Third space theory
seeks to examine cultural, linguistic and semiotic influences on identity construction. “The
concept of ‘space’ can be viewed not only as a physical concept but also as a mental construct”
(Tracey & Morrow, 2012, 135).Third space theory focuses on the mental construct of a third
space which arises from the intersection of first spaces (home, family and peer influences) and
second spaces (school, work and church) (Tracey & Morrow, 2012).Construction of a third space
enhances student learning because it draws from the most important influences in a student’s life.
Educators can help students create a third space by tapping into funds of knowledge from their
first and second spaces (Moje et al., 2004).
Questions
How do incarcerated youth position themselves within book clubs?
What are issues of power evident during book club discussion with incarcerated youth?
How do incarcerated youth respond to issues of social justice within a book club?
How do book clubs with incarcerated youth facilitate the construction of third spaces?
Methods/Context
Our study was conducted over a six week period at a juvenile corrections facility in the
Southeast. We met with participants five times, each session lasting one to one and a half hours.
Participants and researchers sat in a chairs in a circle located within the library on the premises
of JDC. There was always a guard and a JDC school educator present during the meetings, who
were observers. Our original book club participants (using pseudonyms) were Angie, 14 year old
African American female in 8th grade; Julie, 16 year old Caucasian female in 9th grade;
Ramello, 14 year old African American male in 7th grade; Ronald, 14 year old Caucasian male
in 7th grade; Kevin, 16 year old African American male in 9th grade; Damon, 17 year old
African American male in 9th grade; Mitchell, 18 year old Caucasian male in 12th grade; and
Jakiel, African American male. Only Ramello, Ronald, and Damon attended all of the sessions.
Julie attended all meetings, except the final session due to her release.
During the first session students were interviewed on their reading habits, experiences with
reading in different environments, interests in reading, and much more. This session was audiorecorded and then transcribed. Each researcher coded the transcription looking for similar genres
of literature that participants enjoyed. After common genres were found, the researches selected
novels that they believed the participants would enjoy. The participants voted for the novels they
wanted to read. They voted for Cinder by Marissa Meyer, Miss Peregrine’s Home for Peculiar
Children by Ransom Riggs, and Slam by Walter Dean Meyer.
Data collection included audio recorded and transcribed book club sessions, in-depth
interviews, field/observational notes, students’ artifacts (journals, bio-poems, graffiti, and circle
art), surveys, seating charts, and member checking. Data analysis revealed the categories of
gender, race, and power. Following each meeting, researchers “cooked” their field/observational
notes, looking for repeating themes and then compared findings.
Findings
We found through our seating charts that participants voluntarily positioned themselves
physically according to race and gender. Through numerous actions and words participants
positioned themselves as either leaders or followers. We also found that participants were eager
and willing to discuss issues of social justice. We discovered that book club became a third space
for participants and some participants used writing and drawing as a third space.
Discussion/Implications
Our research supported the idea that the length of time of confinement may be short for
incarcerated youth. We had several members from the first meeting get released. We began with
eight original members and ended our last session with three members. Our findings reinforced
the idea that book clubs foster critical discussion. Our youth discussed social issues related to the
texts, such as drugs and peer pressure. Our data supported the idea that literacy is social and all
students are entitled to the same educational opportunities. The youth learned an abundance
about literacy, texts, social interactions, others, and themselves through discussion of the texts
with their peers. Our research revealed that book clubs can help incarcerated youth directly
connect to texts. For example, Ramello cited many similarities between his life, the author
Walter Dean Myers, and the character Slam.
Our data revealed issues of power are present in book clubs, demonstrated by the struggle
for control of the group shown in Julie’s and Damon’s words and actions. Our research also
showed that gender can be a major factor when working with incarcerated youth with book
clubs. This is evident in the discussions that arose and the body language observed between Julie
and the multiple males in the group. Along with the fact that Julie led many of the meetings and
convinced the boys to vote for her book. In addition, our book club indicated that race can be a
major factor when working with incarcerated youth. The seating arrangements in many meetings
showed that the participants of the same race sat beside each other.
Time may be short and a major limitation with incarcerated youth, but book clubs are still
very beneficial if implemented properly. Our book club reinforced the idea that literacy is social.
Therefore, it is critical that incarcerated youth have the opportunity to talk about texts with others
in a discussion based setting. Book clubs can help youth connect to the text and discuss social
justice issues. This will help students see multiple viewpoints and assist them when being
released. Book clubs can give incarcerated youth a safe place where their opinions feel valued.
This allows them to feel important and gives them access to human dignity. Gender influences
the actions of participants within book clubs. Therefore, dividing groups on gender must be
considered before setting up and implementing book clubs with incarcerated students. There may
be a power struggle in book clubs, as evident by Julie and Damon, it is important to establish
procedures and rules so that everyone has a voice and opinions are valued.
Our research revealed a great deal about incarcerated youth and their participation in
book clubs. However, it also created additional questions in our minds. Were the gender issues
that arose because of Julie’s personality or simply because she was female? What would be the
outcomes for an all-female group? How do book clubs affect the youths’ recidivism rates?
Therefore, these questions reveal that there is an urgent need for additional research focusing on
incarcerated youth working in book clubs.
References
Allen, J., Moller, K.J., & Stroup, D. (2003). “Is this some kind of soap opera?” A tale of
two readers across literature discussion contexts. Reading & Writing Quarterly,
19(3), 225-251.
Alverman, D.E. (1995). Peer-led discussions: Whose interests are served? Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(4), 282-289.
Barton, D., Hamilton, M., & Ivanič, R. (2000). Situated literacies: Reading and
writing in context. London: Routledge.
Blum, H.T., Lipsett, L.R., & Yocom, D.J. (2002). Literature circles: A tool for
self-determination in one middle school inclusive classroom. Remedial and
Special Education, 23(2), 99-108.
Brunner, M.S. (1993). Reduced recidivism and increased employment opportunity
through research-based reading instruction. Washington, DC: Department of
Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention.
Christle, C.A. & Yell, M.L. (2008). Preventing youth incarceration through reading
remediation: Issues and solutions. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 24, 148-176.
Clarke, L. W. (2006). Power through voicing others: Girls’ positioning of boys in
literature circle discussions. Journal of Literacy Research, 38(1), 53-79.
Comber, B. (2003). Critical literacy: What does it look like in early years? In N. Hall, J.
Larson & J. March (Eds.) Handbook of early childhood literacy (pp. 355-368).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Edelsky, C. (1999). Making justice our project: Teachers working toward critical
whole language practice. Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Evans, K.S. (1996). Creating spaces for equity? The role positioning in peer-led
literature discussions. Language Arts, 73(3), 194-202.
Gee, J.P. (2000). The new literacy studies: From “socially situated” to the word of the
social. In D. Barton, M. Hamilton, & R. Ivanič (Eds.), Situated literacies:
Reading and writing in context (p. 180-186). London: Routledge.
Horton, M., & Freire, P. (1990). We make the road by walking: Conversations on
education and social change. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Johnson, H. (2000). “To stand up and say something”: “Girls only” literature circles at
middle level. New Advocate. 13(4), 375-389.
Krezmien, M.P. & Mulcahy, C.A. (2008). Literacy and delinquency: Current status of
reading interventions with detained and incarcerated youth. Reading & Writing
Quarterly, 24, 219-238.
Lalik, R., & Oliver, K.M. (2007). Differences and tensions in implementing a pedagogy
of critical literacy and adolescent girls. Reading Quarterly, 42(1), 46-70.
Lapp, D. & Fisher, D. (2009), It’s all about the book: Motivating teens to read. Journal
of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52(7), 556-561.
Latendresse, C. (2004). Literature circle: Meeting reading standards, making personal
connections, and appreciating other interpretations. Middle School Journal,
35(3), 13-20.
Lather, P. (1986). Issues of validity in openly ideological research: Between a rock and
a soft place. In Y. Lincoln & N. Denzin (Eds.), Turning Points in Qualitative
Research: Tying Knots in a Handkerchief (pp. 185- 215). New York, NY: Alta
Mira Press.
Lewison, M., Seely Flint, A., & Van Sluys, K. (2002). Taking on a critical literacy: The
Journey of newcomers and novices. Language Arts 79(5), 382-392.
Long, T.W., & Gove, M.K. (2003). How engagement strategies and literature circles
promote critical response in a fourth-grade, urban classroom. The Reading
Teacher, 57(4), 350-361.
Luke, A. (1998). Getting over method: Literacy teaching as work in new times.
Language Arts, 75(4), 305-313.
Luke, A., & Freebody, P. (1997). The social practices of reading. In S. Muspratt, A.
Luke, & P. Freebody (Eds.) Constructing critical literacies: Teaching and
learning textual practice (pp. 188-226). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for
teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms.
Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132-141.
Orellana, M.F. (1995). Literacy as a gendered social practice: Tasks, texts, talk, and
take-up. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(4), 674-708.
Park, J. Y. (2012). A different kind of reading instruction: Using visualizing to bridge
reading comprehension and critical literacy. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 55(7), 629-640.
Sandman, A., & Gruhler, D. (2007). Reading is thinking: Connecting readers to text
through literature circles. International Journal of Learning, 13(10), 105-114.
Shor, I. (1999). What is critical literacy? In I. Shor & C. Pari (Eds.), Critical literacy in
action: Writing words, changing worlds (pp. 1-30). Portsmouth, NH:
Boynton/Cook-Heinemann.
Street, B.V. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development,
ethnography and education. London: Longman.
Sweigart, W. (1991). Classroom talk, knowledge development, and writing. Research
in the Teaching of English, 25(4), 469-496.
Thein, A. H., Guise, M., & Sloan, D. L. (2011). Problematizing literature circles as
forums for discussion of multicultural and political texts. Journal of Adolescent
and Adult Literacy, 55(1), 15-24.
Vacca, J.S. (2008). Crime can be prevented if schools teach juvenile offenders to read.
Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1055-1062.