Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom

Simon Combe
University of Technology, Sydney

1. Introduction

In a general context of rapid economic, political, socio-cultural and technological

change, the last 20 years has seen an increasing interest in the notion of critical
literacy (or literacies) and its / their place in the curriculum of a variety of educational
contexts (primary, secondary and tertiary, formal and informal; full-time and part-
time). Amongst the material that has been produced as a reflection of this interest
has included chapters, books and newspaper and journal articles on such topics as
the definition of critical literacy(ies),1 its history(ies),2 scope,3 goals and aspirations,4
its applications / applicability in a variety of different contexts (for example,
Australia,5 Singapore,6 and the teaching of English7), its significance in terms of
issues such as gender relations,8 sexuality9 and the ‘post-colonial condition’,10 and

1
See for example Ira Shor (1999) "What Is Critical Literacy?" (in) Ira Shor & Caroline Pari (eds) Critical Literacy
in Action: Writing Words, Changing Worlds. Boynton/Cook, Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH: pp. 1-30.
2
See for example: Gina Cervetti, Michael Pardales & James S. Damico, James S. (2001) “A Tale of Differences:
Comparing the Traditions, Perspectives, and Educational Goals of Critical Reading and Critical Literacy” Reading
On Line 4:9,
3
See for example: Carmen Luke (1997) “Media Literacy and Cultural Studies” (in) Sandy Muspratt et al (eds)
Constructing Critical Literacies Teaching and Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin: Sydney, pp.1-49.
4
See for example Colin Lankshear & Michele Knobel (1997) “Critical Literacy and Active Citizenship” (in) Sandy
Muspratt et al (eds) op.cit. pp.95-122.
5
Luke, Alan (2000) “Critical Literacy in Australia” Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy Vol.43, 448-461.
6
See for example: Yin Mee Cheah (2001) “From Prescription to Participation: Moving From Functional to Critical
Literacy in Singapore” (in) Barbara Comber & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical Literacies in the
Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp.69-82.
7
See for example: Terry Threadgold (1997) “Critical Literacies and the Teaching of English” (in) Sandy Muspratt
et al (eds) op.cit. pp.353-385.
8
See for example Barbara Bee (1993) “Critical Literacy and the Politics of Gender” (in) Colin Lankshear & C.
McLaren (eds.). Critical Literacy Politics, Praxis and Postmodern State University of new York Albany, pp.105-
130.
9
See for example: Wayne Martino (2001) “Dickheads, Wuses and Faggots: Addressing Issues of Masculinity and
Homophobia in the Critical Language Classroom” (in) Barbara Comber & Anne Simpson (eds) Op.Cit. pp.171-
188.

1
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

issues related to its adoption or adaptability in the early 21st century educational
context.11
The aim of this essay is to provide an overview of the ways in which the concept of
critical literacy has been understood and an introduction to the ways in which it has
been justified / rationalised, operationalised, praised and criticised. While the next
section will provide an introduction – to the extent this is possible – to the ways in
which the term critical literacy (and its pluralised form ‘critical literacies’) has been
understood, the third section will look at some of the ways people have sort to justify
and/or rationalise its significance in the present context. Section four will provide a
general picture of the components one might find in a Critical literacy(ies) influenced
curriculum and section five will provide some examples of its application in a variety
of educational settings. Section six will conclude by looking at some of the issues
that have been raised about the application / applicability of critical literacy(ies) .

2. Definitions

While, as noted above, the last 20 years has seen an increasing interest in Critical
Literacy(ies) and its/their role in helping to prepare students for life in what has been
termed by some ‘new times’ (Lankshear & Knobel: 95), not all have been able to
agree as to the meaning of the term ‘critical literacy’ or even whether we should be
talking of critical literacy in the singular or the plural (i.e. critical literacies). Whilst in
part this has been due to the fact that the term has been understood and developed
somewhat differently in differing contexts (for example, it has been noted that ‘critical
literacy’ is understood quite differently and takes different forms in places such as
Singapore, the United States of America and Australia), (Comber & Simpson: ix) it
has also been in part because there has often been a conflation by some of a

10
See for example: Nicholas Faraclas (1997) “Critical Literacy and Control in the New World Order” (in) Sandy
Muspratt et al (eds) op.cit. pp.141-173.
11
See for example: Nathalie Wooldridge (2001) “Tensions and Ambiguities in Critical Literacy” (in) Barbara
Comber & Anne Simpson (eds) Op.Cit. pp.259-270.

2
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

number of differing concepts which others have argued are quite distinct (for
example the conflation of ‘Critical Reading’ and ‘Critical Literacy’ noted by Gina
Cerventi, Michael Pardales and James Damico in their article “A Tale of Difference
Comparing the Traditions, Perspectives, and Educational Goals of Critical Reading
and Critical Literacy” (Cervetti et al. 2001). A further factor that has complicated the
matter has related to disagreements as to whether certain pedagodical approaches –
mopst notably ‘genre pedagogy’ can really be said to fall within thye critical
literacy(ies) family (Kamler: 389-392).
Whilst it is true that critical literacy has not emerged as a unitary project, it has over
time, as Luke and Freebody have noted:
“…marked out a coalition of educational interests committed to engaging with the
possibilities that the technologies of writing and other modes of inscription offer
for social change, cultural diversity, economic equity and political
enfranchisement” (Luke & Freebody: 1997, 1).
While, as Luke and Freebody have further noted, there have sometimes been quite
heated debates between promoters over the exact directions and consequences of
the actions that might emerge as a result of the development of critical literacies by
students, it is possible to observe the shared assumption that:
“…literacy involves malleable social practices, relations, and events that can be
harnesses in the service of particular pedagogical projects and agendas for
cultural action and that, indeed literacy education can make a difference in
students lives” (ibid).

3. Justifications
While the proponents of the introduction of a Critical Literacy (ies) focus in the
curriculum have provided many justifications and rationalisations, among the tools,
they have suggested that Critical Literacy might be expected top provide students
have included tools of survival, tools for managing diversity and change, tools for
reflection and tools for action:
With respect to tools for survival, for example, proponents have argued that the
economies and cultures of these ‘post-modern’ or ‘new’ times rely to a great extent
on discourses and texts – both old and new in style Official and face to face
discourse and text have become forms of capital for exchange, it has been argued,

3
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

and who gets access to them, who can manipulate and construct them, who can
critique, refute and second guess them is the key educational issue of the current
century (Luke: 2000).
With respect to tools for managing diversity and change, it has been argued that
information is now reaching us in many ways – many of which had not been invented
15 years ago. As citizens of the 21st century we are at times swamped by information
from across the globe in many different forms. Citizens of the future will need to be
able to take meaning from this vast array of multimedia, complex visual imagery,
music and sound (ibid.).
With respect to tools for reflection, it has been argued that the changes that have
been happening in society have been occurring so rapidly that we need to have both
the time and the ability to think about whether they will have a positive or negative
effect on our ways of living. Asking questions such as “in whose interests”, “for what
purpose”, “who benefits” make changes problematic and encourages us to reflect
upon them. As Luke, for example, has written:
“Literacy is as much about ideologies, identities and values as it is about codes
and skills (Luke: 1993).”
Finally, with respect to the question of tools for action, it has been argued that
critical literacy has the potential providing us with ways of thinking that assist us in
uncovering social inequalities and injustices. It enables us to address disadvantages
and become agents of social change (Comber: 2001).
4. Applications
Although a critical literacy class might take many forms, among the features /
activities the Department of Education for the Government of Tasmania in their
information page on Critical Literacy for English teacher on the internet suggested
students might be expected to be facilitated in include:
The deconstruction of the structure and features of texts be they text in the form
of writing, sound, image or video. Among the questions students might be facilitated
to as of the text would include, why has the text been constructed in the way it has
and why.

4
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

The examination of the underlying values within the text: considering, for
example, the ways in which they as readers, listeners and / or viewers were
positioned to view the world. This would be done in order for students to develop an
understanding of positions that might be opposed to theirs.
The exploration of alternative readings to consider what has been included and
what has been excluded. To consider, for example, which aspects of life the ‘author’
/ composer valued when constructing the text. And, to consider what would have
been produced has they viewed the text from a different angle and whether the text
presented or represented different positions of power.
The exploration into the beliefs and values of the ‘author’ / ‘composer: to
consider, for example, the time and culture in which the text was produced. To
consider in what ways the views represented in the text were similar to those held
‘today’; to consider whether these differences were psychological, social, cultural
and/or political in origin.
Finally, having conducted the above forms of exploration, students might be
expected in a Critical Literacy class to reflect on the ways in which were being
manipulated by language in all its forms in order to become ‘agents of social change
working towards the removal of inequalities and injustices’ (Dept of Education, Gov
of Tasmania).
5. Case Studies
While the aims and objectives of Critical Literacy(ies) might be seen to be
appropriate for senior level students – most notably those which encourage students
to become involved in action for social change, commentators such as Luke and
Freebody (2000) have argued that to become successful communicators, students
need to see themselves as text analysts from early childhood that critical literacy(ies)
should not be seen as a special curricular item for students in their later years of
schooling or as a media studies unit Students need to be provided, they have
argued, with opportunities to become socially critical at all levels of schooling
One particularly interesting case study of work done with students at the infants
level for is that provided by Jennifer O’Brien detailing her work as an early childhood

5
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

teacher in South Australia. Stating that she was inspired by the work of feminist post-
structuralist educators and the tools provided by critical discourse analysis, O’Brien
‘set about re-positioning the young learners in her classroom to interrogate
texts’(O’Brien: 38).
While during the course of her work O’Brien invented and developed her practice
around different questions, types of tasks and types of texts, of particular interest
was work she conducted with two different groups of children focussed on Mothers
Day. Asking students in her class to collect the junk mail that came into their homes
for a couple of weeks prior to Mothers day, she then got students to pool their texts
and start to read them asking questions such as: “What presents do you expect to
find?”; “What don’t you expect to see?”; “Who gets the most out of Mothers Day?”;
and, “How are the catalogue mothers like / not like real mothers?” By doing so,
O’Brien claimed she was able to help her students take a research perspective and
treat the texts they had collected as data They were able to cut up the material,
reassemble it to show the patterns they found about the representations of
mothers.12 The students were then invited to make new catalogues for Mothers Day
“full of things to disrupt the dominant sexual and domestic images of women and
mothers’ (O’Brien: 45).
While O’Brien’s case study documented her work with infants students in an
Australian urban context, Urvashi Sahni’s case study focused on her work with
primary level students in a north Indian rural context namely Janaki Bagh, a small
village in Lucknow District, Uttar Pradesh. Starting her work by attempting to
‘reconstruct the social structure of the classroom, assigning different roles to each
participant (teachers and students) with corresponding rights, responsibilities sand
duties’, Sahni then acted to facilitate the community of learners she established to
develop the curriculum (Sahini: 20).
Deciding that the curriculum should be woven around poetry, song, drama and story,
among the ‘literary events’ that took place during the course of her work at the

12
Not surprisingly, Comber reports, what students found was a “preponderance of young, “wealthy looking”,
beautiful white ‘mothers’ often in dressing gowns and the like.

6
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

school on a new purposively built curricular stage were: Poetry and Songs – the
recitation of rhymes, poems and songs, copying teacher and peer models from the
blackboard, teacher and peer dictation of poems and songs, and composing poems
through extending and modelling official samples; Stories: reading stories from text
and library books, and using child-produced texts, recomposing stories
collaboratively, collaboratively copying composed stories from the blackboard,
teacher dictation of collaboratively recomposed stories, semi-dictated composing,
retelling stories heard or read, composing stories, ‘narrativizing’ events and
experiences, real and imagined, extending story-starters and story ideas provided by
teacher, and picture compositions; Drama: enacting stories from the text for each
other as a class and for the rest of the school; getting students to act whilst the
teacher or fellow students narrated stories, poems or songs, getting the teachers and
or students read dramatically (Sahni:23).
A further study of the application of a critical literacy(ies) approach in a somewhat
different setting was that provided by Pipa Stein in her article “Classrooms as Sites
of Textual, Cultural and Linguistic Reappropriation”. In this paper, Stein a researcher
for the University of Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, reported on work she had
conducted with a post-graduate student of hers who was teaching secondary level
students in a school in a Black township on the outskirts of Johannesburg In this
project, students were divided up into groups centred on their first language and then
encouraged to write stories about political leaders which were then performed orally
in front of the class with translations provided for the rest of the class by other people
in their groups (Stein: 154).
Stein reports on how the project, which was initially envisaged as ‘simply’ attempting
to re-validate disparaged local oral traditions of story telling, ended up combining
these local traditions with contemporary media through the use of video technology
to dissect and contest the realities of a South Africa in transition from the Apartheid
to post-Apartheid periods of its history (Stein: 151). In concluding her case study,
Stein however noted some issues that needed to be considered when conducting a
project of this type. There was for example, she noted, a real danger when working
7
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

with theories of culture and popular cultural forms of homogenizing people from
different and varied communities and contexts in South Africa. We have to, she
further noted:
“… be particularly vigilant of stereotypes and the old apartheid way of
categorizing people into different cultures, languages, and identities (eg
classifying Black people as “the oral people” and White people as “the literate
people”) [Stein:: 168].
A final study demonstrating the ways in which Critical Literacy has been introduced
into school curriculum’s is that documented by Catherine Wallace from the University
of London in her article “Critical Literacy in the Second language Classroom: Power
and Control” which documented her work in the provision of a critical reading course
that was offered to tertiary level students on a one year placement at the Thames
Valley University in West London. While the course was designed as an optional
module for students on a 1-year placement at a British University, the course was
also open to other students who had been judged to be having intermediate to
advanced level proficiency in English (Wallace: 218).
The course was a 15 week one semester course meeting for 2 hours per week and
was the successor, Wallace reports, of ‘a number of similar courses, all of which
shared two basic principles: an interest in everyday community texts and legitimate
objects of study and the development of some specific linguistic tools as a means of
analysis’. The procedure of the lessons was that after the teacher presented the text
(already read at home), the class would engage in a discussion about the genre of
the text; the introduction of other example of the genre from students as well as the
teacher; the analysis of the text in groups; and finally, a sharing of interpretations. It
was this final feedback session, Wallace claimed, that was particularly important for
the critical literacy classroom as it allowed students, through their selected
spokespersons, “the opportunity to make explicit their grounds for judgements and
opinions and to open them up to other pairs and groups”. However, in a note of
caution similar to that of Stein’s, Wallace however noted that, whilst such
discussions could be sites where teachers exercised ‘judicious control of
proceedings, offering support clarifying, and contributing their own views’, they could

8
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

also be sites where ‘teachers conversely exercise power in unacceptable ways’

(Wallace 226).
6. Issues
Whilst most commentators have found the emergence of Critical Literacy (ies) as
significant and worthy of comment, not all have agreed as to its value or the degree
to which it has been a success. While many of those raising concerns about Critical
Literacy (ies) and its/ their incorporation in the curricula’s of many Education
Departments in both Australia and overseas13, a large number of questions and
concerns have also been raised by those essentially in favour of critical literacy and
its development.14
Among the concerns that have been raised about Critical Literacy (ies) approaches
to teaching in general and the teaching of languages and English in particular have
related to the place of politics in the classroom and the propriety of teachers
making clear their political views to students during the course of their lessons. In
one particularly forthright argument in the pages of the Australian newspaper The
Age, Kevin Donnelly targeting an editorial in an edition of the journal English in
Australia by the President of the NSW English Teachers Association Professor
Wayne Swayer (Sawyer: 2005) claimed that ‘in the modern classroom, literacy had
become defined as socio-cultural literacy, and texts were deconstructed to show how
disadvantaged groups, such as girls and women, were marginalised and disposed’.
As a result, he claimed, “traditional fairytales such as Jack and the Beanstalk and
children’s classics such as the Magic Faraway Tree are criticised for presenting boys
as masculine and physically assertive and for failing to show girls in dominant
positions”. While, he continued, “the English classroom was once a place to learn
how to read and write, …this more traditional approach was now considered
obsolete and the English classroom in the words of Wayne Martino, as quoted by

13
See for example Slattery, Luke (2005) “Put literacy before 'radical' vanity” The Australian 30 July.
14
Among other issues that have been raise have been related to such questions as assessment (how do
teachers et State standards to assess students); teacher preparedness to undertake the teaching / facilitation of
critical literacy(ies) and, what do you do is students resist (see for example Angel Lin: 2001).

9
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

Donnelly, must be “conceptualised as a socio-political site where alternative reading

positions can be made available to students outside of an oppressive male-female
heliocentric signifying system for making meaning” (Donnelly: 2005).
In reply, Paul Sommers, President of the Australian Association for the teaching of
English in a piece entitled “Politics in the Classroom: A Riposte” asked ‘why should
people be horrified that educationalists had political opinions and were prepared to
engage in public debate’. What did this say about the education systems, the
government and the media, he asked. The attack by Donnelly and others, Sommer
argued, all had an element of nostalgia about them. The first of these nostalgia’s
ignored the fact that English teachers had moved beyond believing that ‘whole
language’, ‘phonics’ or any other methods in themselves were sufficient in teaching
literacy skills. Critical approaches, he argued, “were based on a simple
understanding:
Some students may struggle with reading but they can still think. It’s not about
suggesting that we will teach students how to decode and then we will let them
comprehend and think critically about a text. It all happens concurrently and has
the extra benefit of engaging students in their learning”. (Sommer: 2005)
The more dangerous intellectual nostalgia however was the idea that children are
identified as having literacy problems that could be ‘cured’ with the application of a
particular methodology. “This”, Sommer wrote, “is a very simplistic notion and does
not begin to address the complexity of student life today” (Sommer: ibid)
In a related, though distinct set of arguments, concerns have also been raised as to
whether in the rush to promote critical literacy in the English curriculum, there has
been a relegation of aesthetics, imagination and pleasure to the sidelines.
While many of those who have raised this issue have been essentially against the
Critical Literacy (ies) project, this has not universally been the case. Among the later,
for example, has been Dr Kerry Mallan, Senior Lecturer in the School of Cultural and
Language Studies at the Queensland University of Technology. As reported by
Margaret Cook in an article in The Age newspaper “Critical Need to Keep Fun in
Literacy”, Dr Mallan is reported to have argued that whereas previously ‘syllabuses
comprised mainly novels, plays and poetry, and students were taught to take a

10
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

critical approach to their literary qualities’: including taking a pleasure in the words
and stories. Current syllabuses were broad and included such items of popular
culture as television, film, magazines and advertisements and looked at these texts
much more in terms of their themes and ideologies (Cook: 2005).
In response to this critique, Prue Gill – the President of the Victorian Association for
the teaching of English is reported to have argued that Dr Mallan’s concerns were
unfounded. In an argument similar to that put forward by Paul Sommer in related to
the issue of politics in the classroom, Ms Gill is reported to have stated that:
“Critical literacy is highly regarded by teachers but its doesn’t dominate the
classroom… and its not a matter of teachers using one approach or another.”
“Pleasure, imagination, aesthetics and the joy of tussling with stories”, she stated,
“are still there.” (Cook: ibid.)
A further question, again raised by those both supporting and criticising the
development of Critical Literacy (ies) in the curriculum fore English and other
subjects, has been the extent to which developments in the practice and
curriculum’s have been making a difference and indeed whether those students
whom it has been argued have been marginalised by traditional approaches to
literacy are any better off.
Among the concerns for example that have been raised with respect to this issue is
the extent to which students from non-English backgrounds have found it difficult to
question the authority of texts because, as Kathy Mallan has suggested, their cultural
backgrounds “are not attuned to that” (Cook: Opcit.). Rather than benefiting such
students, the imposition of a Critical Literacy (ies) agenda, it has been argued, might
have further marginalised such students and made them less sure of their abilities to
act effectively. In another case reported by Hillary Janks in her article “Identity and
Conflict in the Critical Classroom” , a project with high school students in a mixed
race school in Johannesburg, rather than leading to convergence, classes for the
development of Critical Literacy skills exacerbated existing gapes between black and
white students of the one hand and male and female on the other (Janks: 2001).

11
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

Alan Luke, writing in 2000 in reference to this issue, noted that the search for
definitive evidence on the efficacy of critical literacy programs was underway. The
problem however had been, he noted, that while there had been extensive
qualitative descriptions of change, most conventional indications of literate success –
standardized tests – were oriented towards very different operational definitions of
literacy. That said, Luke noted that “for what it was worth”, reading achievement test
scores in Queensland had been improving. Whether this was attributable to any of
the innovations introduced in that state however, “remained moot” (Luke 2000).
Conclusion
In conclusion, one mighe note an issue related to Critical Literacy(ies) has been put
forward almost exclusively by those favouring Critical Literacy(ies) – or at least not
opposed to it. While there are a number of dimension to this final issues, central has
been the question of the danger of the appropriation of dissent by the State as a
result of the incorporation of elements of critical literacy in school curriculums.
Among those who have raised this issue has been Alan Luke – himself at the time
an academic turned bureaucrat in the Queensland Department of education. Noting
that the German philosopher Herbert Marcuse had used the term “repressive
violence” to describe how the modern capitalist state dealt with dissent and had
argued that instead of suffering critiques, the strategy developed by the modern state
was tolerate it and thereby remove its potentia threat to existing social and
economic relations, Luke raised the question whether in the process of getting
critical literacy into the state schools, those promoting it watered down its potential
for effective social analysis and action.
The answer for Luke to this question depended on how the normative possibilities
and limits of a critical literacy agenda were envisaged. If one took the position being
advocated by those promoting genre based approaches and for a pedagogy of multi-
literacies – where the principle aim was to enhance the capacities of students to
design social futures then the danger of appropriation was less. If one tool on the
Friereian agenda and the belief in the ability of critical literacy to query and disrupt

12
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

the given social and economic order then the chances of both failure and
assimilation were greater.
References
Bee, Barbara (1993) “Critical Literacy and the Politics of Gender” (in) Colin
Lankshear & C. McLaren (eds.). Critical Literacy Politics, Praxis and Postmodern
State University of New York Albany, pp.105-130.
Cervetti, Gina, Pardales, Michael J. & Damico, James S. (2001) “A Tale of
Differences: Comparing the Traditions, Perspectives, and Educational Goals of
Critical Reading and Critical Literacy” Reading On Line 4:9,
Cheah, Yin Mee (2001) “From Prescription to Participation: Moving From Functional
to Critical Literacy in Singapore” (in) Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds)
Negotiating Critical Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:
Mahwah, N.J., pp. 69-82.
Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (2001) “Preface ” (in) Comber, Barbara &
Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp.ix-xv.
Comber, Barbara (2002) “Critical Literacy: Maximising Children’s Investments in
School Learning” Draft Discussion Paper presented at the Resource Teachers:
Literacy Training Programme Christchurch College of Education, New Zealand July
12-13, 2002
Cook, Margaret (2002) “Critical need to keep the fun in literacy” The Age 31 July
2002
Department of Education, Tasmania, School Education Division (n.d.) “Critical
Literacy” http://www.education.tas.gov.au/english/critlit.htm
Donnelly, Kevin (2005) “Cannon fodder of the culture wars” The Australian 9
February 9, http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3024
Faraclas, Nicholas (1997) “Critical Literacy and Control in the New World Order” (in)
Muspratt, Sandy, Luke, Alan & Freebody, Peter (1997) Constructing Critical
Literacies: Teaching and Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin Sydney, pp.141-
173.
Janks, Hilary (2001) “Identity and Conflict in the Critical Literacy Classroom” (in)
Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) (2001) Negotiating Critical Literacies in
the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp.137-150.
Lankshear, Colin & Knobel, Michele (1997) “Critical Literacy and Active Citizenship”
Muspratt, Sandy, Luke, Alan & Freebody, Peter (in) Constructing Critical Literacies:
Teaching and Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin Sydney, pp.95-122.
Lankshear, Colin et al (199..) “Critical Social Literacy For The Classroom An
Approach Using Conventional Texts Across The Curriculum” (in) Lankshear, Colin et
al Changing Literacies Open University Press: Buckingham, pp. 40-62.

13
 Critical Literacies and the Language Classroom {November 2005]

Lin, Angel Mei Yi (2001) “Resistance and Creativity in English Reading Lessons in
Hong Kong” ” (in) Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical
Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp. 83-
118.
Luke, Alan (2000) “Critical Literacy in Australia” Journal of Adolescent and Adult
Literacy vol.43 http://www.btr.qld.edu.au/papers/critlit.htm
Luke, Carmen (1997) “Media Literacy and Cultural Studies” (in) Muspratt, Sandy,
Luke, Alan & Freebody, Peter (in) Constructing Critical Literacies: Teaching and
Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin Sydney, pp.1-49.
Martino, Wayne (2001) “Dickheads, Wuses, and Faggots”: Addressing Issues of
Masculinity and Homophobia in the Critical Literacy Classroom” (in) Comber,
Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical Literacies in the Classroom
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp.171-188.
Muspratt, Sandy, Luke, Alan & Freebody, Peter (1997) Constructing Critical
Literacies: Teaching and Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin Sydney.
O’Brien, Jennifer (1994) “Critical Literacy in an Early Childhood Classroom”
Australian Journal of Language and Literacy 17 1, pp.346-355.
Slattery, Luke (2005) “Put literacy before 'radical' vanity” The Australian 30 July,
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/printpage/0,5942,16089271,00.html
Sawyer, Wayne. "Editorial.", English in Australia; Issue 141; Spring 2004; 3, 8.
Shor, Ira (1999) "What Is Critical Literacy?" (in) Ira Shor & Caroline Pari (eds)
Critical Literacy in Action: Writing Words, Changing Worlds. Boynton/Cook,
Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH: pp. 1-30.
Sommer, Paul (2005) “Politics in the classroom: A riposte” On Line Opinion 11
February 2005 http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=3028
Stein, Pippa (2001) “Classrooms as Sites of Textual, Cultural, and Linguistic
Reappropriation” Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical
Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., pp.151-
170.
Terry Threadgold (1997) “Critical Literacies and the Teaching of English” (in)
Muspratt, Sandy, Luke, Alan & Freebody, Peter (in) Constructing Critical Literacies:
Teaching and Learning Textual Practice Allen & Unwin Sydney, pp.353-385.
Wallace, Catherine (2001) “Critical Literacy in the Second Language Classroom:
Power and Control” (in) Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating
Critical Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J.,
pp. 209-228.
Woolridge, Nathalie (2001) “Tensions and Ambiquities in Critical Literacies(2001) (in)
Comber, Barbara & Simpson, Anne (eds) Negotiating Critical Literacies in the
Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, N.J., 259-270.
Yin Mee Cheah (2001) “From Prescription to Participation: Moving From Functional
to Critical Literacy in Singapore” (in) Barbara Comber & Simpson, Anne (eds)
Negotiating Critical Literacies in the Classroom Lawrence Erlbaum Associates:
Mahwah, N.J., pp.69-82.

14