article analysis

article analysis

Read item 1–the first article– from your theme reading list for the semester. These articles are available under Course Documents. All of these articles are examples of content analysis.

Briefly summarize the article in terms of

* What questions did the author(s) have when they started this research? What were they wondering about?

* According to the article, what have other researchers said about this topic?

* What hypothesis or hypotheses or research questions were there and what variables were used?

* What type of research was done?

* What were the basic findings?

Then give your response to the article:

* Did you agree or disagree with any hypotheses that were stated? Did you think the research questions were interesting? Do you think the conclusions were correct?

* Did the research seem to be done well? Did the researcher(s) make any of the errors of human inquiry that Babbie describes? How did the researcher(s) try to avoid such errors?

* Based on this article, in your opinion, what new research needs to be done on this topic?

THE “NUTS AND DOLTS” OF TEACHER IMAGES

IN CHILDREN’S PICTURE STORYBOOKS:

A CONTENT ANALYSIS

SARAH JO SANDEFUR

UC Foundation Assistant Professor of Literacy Fducation

University of Tennessee-Chattanooga

LEEANN MOORE

Assistant Dean, College of Education and Human Services

Texas A & M University-Commerce

Children’s picture storybooks are rife with contradictory representations

of teachers and school. Some of those images are

fairly accurate. Some of those images are quite disparate from

reality. These representations become subsumed into the collective

consciousness of a society and shape expectations and

behaviors of both students and teachers. Teachers cannot effectuate

positive change in their profession unless and until they are

aware of the internal and external influences that define and

shape the educational institution. This ethnographic content

analysis examines 62 titles and 96 images of teachers to probe

the power of stereotypes/cliches. The authors found the following:

The teacher in children’s picture storybooks is

overwhelmingly portrayed as a white, non-Hispanic, woman.

The teacher in picture storybooks who is sensitive, competent,

and able to manage a classroom effectively is a minority. The

negative images outnumbered the positive images. The teacher

in children’s picture storybooks is static, unchanging, and flat.

The teacher is polarized and does not inspire in his or her students

the pursuit of critical inquiry.

A recent children’s book shares the sto- quently covered in paint at art time {Miss

ry of a teacher. Miss Malarkey, home Malarkey Won’t be in Today, Finchler,

with the flu, narrates her concern about 1998).

how her elementary students will behave In this text, which is representative of

with and be treated by the potential sub- many that have been published with teachstitutes

available to the school. Among the ers as central characters, teachers are

substitutes represented are Mrs. Boba, a portrayed as insensitive, misguided, vic-

20-something woman who is too busy timizing, or incompetent. We perceive

painting her toenails to attend to Miss these invalidating images as worthy of

Malarkey’s students. Mr. Doberman is a detailed analysis, based on a hypothesis

drill sergeant of a man who snarls at the that a propensity of images painting teachchildren:

“So ya think it’s time for recess, ers in an unflattering light may have broad-

HUH?” Mr. Lemonjello, drawn as a small, er consequences on cultural perceptions of

bald, nervous man, is taunted by the stu- teachers and schooling. Our ethnographdents

with the class iguana and is subse- ic content analysis herein examines 96

41

42 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

images of teachers as they are found in

62 picture storybooks from 1965 to present.

It is our perspective that these images

in part shape and define the idea of

“Teacher” in the collective consciousness

of a society.

Those of us in teacher education realize

our students come to us with previously

constructed images of the profession. What

is the origin of those images? When and

how are these images formed and elaborated

upon? It appears that the popular culture

has done much to form or modify those

images. Weber and Mitchell (1995) suggest

that these multiple, often ambiguous,

images are “. . . integral to the form

and substance of our self-identities as

teachers” (p. 32). They suggest t h a t ” . . .

by studying images and probing their influence,

teachers could play a more conscious

and effective role in shaping their own and

society’s perceptions of teachers and

their work” (p. 32). We have supported this

“probing of images” by analyzing children’s

picture storybooks, examining their

meanings and metaphors where they intersect

with teachers and schooling. It is our

intention that by sharing what we have

learned about the medium’s responses to

the profession, we will better serve teachers

in playing that “conscious role” in

defining their work.

We submit that children’s picture storybooks

are not benign. Although the illustrations

of teachers are often cartoon-like

and at first glance fairly innocent, when

taken as a whole they have power not

just in teaching children and their parents

about the culture of schooling, but in shaping

it, as well. This is of concern particularly

when the majority of the images of

teachers are negative, mixed, or neutral

as we have found in our research and

will report herein. Gavriel Salomon, well

known for his research in symbolic representations

and their impact on children’s

learning and thinking, has this to say about

the power of media:

Media’s symbolic forms of representation

are clearly not neutral or

indifferent packages that have no

effect on the represented information.

Being part and parcel of the

information itself, they influence the

meanings one arrives at, the mental

capacities that are called for, and

the ways one comes to view the

world. Perhaps more important,

the culture that creates the media and

develops their symbolic forms of

representation also opens the door

for those forms to act on the minds

of the young in both more and less

desirable ways, [italics added]

(1997, p. 13)

We see Salomon’s work here as foundational

to our own in this way: if those

images children and parents see of

“teacher” are generally negative, then they

will create a “world view” of “teacher”

based upon stereotype. The many negative

images of teachers in children’s picture storybooks

may be the message to readers that

teachers are, at best, kind but uninspiring,

and at worst, roadblocks to be torn

down in order that children may move forward

successfully.

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 43

Why Study Images of Teachers From

Popular Culture?

As we were preparing to teach a graduate

class entitled “Portrayal of Teachers

in Children’s Literature and in Film,” we

began gathering a text set of picture storybooks

that focused on teachers, teaching,

and the school environment. We

quickly became aware of the propensity of

negative images of teachers, from witch to

dragon, drill sergeant to milquetoast,

incompetent fool to insensitive clod. We

realized early in the graduate course that

many teachers had not had the opportunity

to critically examine images of their

own profession in the popular media. They

were unaware of the negative portrayals in

existing texts, particularly in children’s literature.

Teachers may not have considered

that the negative images of the teacher

“may give the public further justification

for a lack of support of education” (Crume,

1989, p. 36).

Children’s literature is rife with contradictory

representations of teachers

and school. Some of those images are fairly

accurate and some of those images are

quite disparate from reality (Farber,

Provenso, & Holm, 1994; Joseph & Burnaford,

1994; Knowles, Cole, & Presswood,

1994; Weber & Mitchell, 1995).

These representations become subsumed

into the collective consciousness of a society

and shape expectations and behaviors

of both students and teachers. They

become a part of the images that children

construct when they are invited to

“draw a teacher” or “play school,” and

indeed the images that teachers draw of

themselves. Consider, for example, the

three-year old boy with no prior schooling

experience, who, in playing school, puts

the dolls in straight rows, selects a domineering

personality for a female teacher,

and assigns homework (Weber & Mitchell,

1995).

This exploration into teacher images is

a critical one at multiple levels of teacher

education. Pre-service teachers need to

analyze via media images their personal

motivations and expectations of the teaching

profession and enter into teaching with

clear understandings of how the broad culture

perceives their work. In-service teachers

need to heighten their awareness of how

children, parents, and community members

perceive them. These perceptions may

be in part media-induced and not based on

the complex reality of a particular teacher.

If information is indeed power, then perhaps

those of us in the profession can

better understand that popular images contribute

to the public’s frequent suspicion

of our efficacy, and this heightened awareness

can support us in addressing the

negative images head on.

Research Perspectives

How do we as teachers, prospective

teachers, and teacher educators come to so

fully subscribe to the images we have both

experienced and imagined? Have those

images formed long before adulthood, perhaps

even before the child enters school?

Weber and Mitchell (1994) contend, “Even

before children begin school, they have

already been exposed to a myriad of

images of teachers, classrooms and schools

which have made strong and lasting

impressions on them” (p. 2). Some of those

44 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

images and attitudes form from direct experience

with teachers. Barone, Meyerson,

and Mallette (1995) explain, “When adults

respond to the question of which person

had the greatest impact on their lives,

other than their immediate family, teachers

are frequently mentioned” (p. 257).

Those early images are not necessarily positive,

often convey traditional teaching

styles, and are marked with commonalties

across the United States (Joseph & Burnaford,

1994; Weber & Mitchell, 1995).

In addition to the years of “on-the-job”

experience with teaching and teachers that

one acquires as a student sitting and observing

“on the other side of the desk”, a person

has also acquired images and

stereotypes of teaching and teachers

from the person’s experiences with literature

and media. Lortie c a l l s this

“the apprenticeship-of-observation”

(1975, p. 67). These forms of print media

(literature) and visual media are part of

“popular culture,” which is inclusive of

film, television, magazines, newspapers,

music, video, books, cartoons, etc. In the

past decade the literature on popular culture

has grown dramatically as an increasing

number of educators, social scientists,

and other critical thinkers have begun to

study the field (Daspit & Weaver, 1999;

Giroux, 1994; Giroux, 1988; Giroux &

Simon, 1989; McLaren, 1994; Trifonas,

2000; Weber & Mitchell, 1995). Weber and

Mitchell (1994) explain, “So pervasive are

teachers in popular culture that if you simply

ask, as we have, schoolchildren and

adults to name teachers they remember, not

from school but from popular culture, a

cast of fictionalized characters emerges that

takes on larger than life proportions” (p.

14). These authors challenge us to examine

how it is that children—even young

children—would hold such strong images

and that there be such similarity among the

images they hold.

Studies of children’s literature have previously

examined issues of stereotyping

(race, gender, ethnicity, age) as well as

moral and ethical issues within stories

(Dougherty & Engel, 1987; Hurley &

Chadwick, 1998; Lamme, 1996). Recently

Barone, Meyerson, and Mallette (1995)

examined the images of teachers in children’s

literature. They found a startling

paradox: “On one hand, teachers are valued

as contributing members of society;

on the other hand, teachers are frequently

portrayed in the media and literature

as inept and not very bright” (p. 257).

Barone, et al. (1995) found two types

of teachers portrayed: traditional, non-child

centered, and non-traditional, more

child-centered. The more prevalent type,

the traditional teacher, was not usually

liked nor respected by the students in the

stories. The non-traditional teacher was seldom

portrayed, but when the portrayal was

presented, the teacher was shown to be a

valued and well liked. They contend that

the reality of teaching is far too complex

to fall into two such simple categories; that

the act of teaching is complex. They

point out that”… the authors of children’s

books often negate this complexity of

teaching and learning, and classify teachers

as those who care about students and

those who are rigid or less sensitive to students’

needs” (p. 260). Their study led to

several disturbing conclusions: (a) The

ubiquitous portrayal of traditional teachers

as mean and strict make schools and

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 45

schooling appear to be a dreadful experience,

(b) The portrayal of teachers is frequently

one in which the teacher is shown

as having less intelligence than the students

have, (c) Teachers are portrayed as having

little or no confidence in their students and

their abilities. Weber and Mitchell (1995)

assert that “the stereotypes that are prevalent

in the popular culture and experience

of childhood play a formative role

in the evolution of a teacher’s identity

and are part of the enculturation of teachers

into their profession” (p. 27). Joseph

and Bumaford (1994) address the numerous

examples of caricatures or stereotypes

as being somewhat different, but”… all

are negative and all reduce the teacher to

an object of scorn, disrespect, and sometimes

fear “(p. 15).

What Research Framework Guided

Our Study?

To answer our questions concerning the

elements of the children’s texts, we

required a methodological framework from

which we could examine the “character”

of the texts. We found that framework in

accessing research theories from anthropology

and literary criticism which suggested

an appropriate approach to content

analysis.

Submitting that all research directly

or indirectly involves participant observation,

David Altheide (1987) finds an ethnographic

approach applicable to content

analyses, in that the writings or electronic

texts are ultimately products of social

interaction. Ethnographic content analysis

(ECA) requires a reflexive and highly interactive

relationship between researcher and

data with the objective of interpreting

and verifying the communication of meaning.

The meaning in the text message is

assumed to be reflected in the multiple elements

of form, content, context, and other

nuances. The movement between

researcher and data throughout the process

of concept development, sampling, data

collection, data analysis, and interpretation

is systematic but not rigid, initially structured

but receptive to emerging categories

and concepts.

As we proceeded through the multiple

readings of the picture storybooks, we

attempted to foreground three main concept:

(a) To attempt to discover “meaning”

is an attempt to include the multiple elements

which make up the whole: appearance,

language, subject taught, gender

issues, racial/ethnic diversity, and other

nuances as they became apparent; (b)

The multiple readings of the selected sample

of children’s literature to understand,

and to interpret the structures of the texts

are not to conform the texts to our analytic

notions but to inform them; and (c) In

the intimacy of our relationship with the

data we are acting on them and changing

them, just as the data are changing us

and the way we perceive past and present

texts. As we encountered new texts,

we attempted to consistently return to previous

texts and to be receptive to new or

revised interpretations that were revealed.

What Was Our Research Methodology?

We used Follett Library Resources’

database to find titles addressing “teachers”

and “schools.” This resulted in a list

of 62 titles and 96 teacher images published

from 1965 to present (Appendix A). No

46 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

chapter books or Magic Schoolbus series

books were reviewed, as they did not qualify

under the definition of “picture storybook”

(Huck, 1997, p. 198). We

specifically did not attend to publication

dates or “in print/out of print” status, as

many of these texts appear on school and

public library shelves decades after they

have gone out of print. Our approach

provided us with the majority of children’s

picture storybooks available for purchase

in the United States for purchase or

available through public libraries.

To better guide our examinations about

the images of teachers, ensure that we

reviewed the titles consistently, and in order

to record the details of the texts we

reviewed, we noted details of each teacher

representation in aspects of Appearance,

Language, Subject, Approach, and Effectiveness.

The specific details we were seeking

under each category for each teacher

represented in the sample literature are further

described below:

Appearance: observable race, gender,

approximate age, name, clothing,

hairstyle, weight (thin, average, plump)

Language: representative utterances by

the teacher represented in the book or

as reported by the narrator of the book

Subject: the school subject(s) that the

teacher was represented as teaching:

reading/language arts, math, geography,

history, etc.

Approach: any indicators of a teaching

philosophy, including whether children

were seated in rows, were working

together in learning centers, were reciting

memorized material, whether the

teacher was shown lecturing, etc.

Effectiveness: indicators included narrator’s

point of view, images or language

about children’s learning from

that teacher; images or language about

children’s emotional response to the

teacher, etc.

We also attempted to note the absence

of data as well as the presence of data.

For example, we noted the occurrences

of a teacher remaining nameless through

the book, of a teacher not being represented

as teaching any curriculum, or of a teacher

failing to inspire any critical thinking in

her students.

We entered data in the foregoing categories

about each teacher representation

onto forms, which we then reviewed in

order to group the individually represented

teachers into four more specific categories:

positive representations, negative

representations, mixed review, and neutral.

A teacher fitting into the category of “positive

teacher” was represented as being sensitive

to children’s emotional needs,

supportive of meaningful learning, compassionate,

warm, approachable, able to

exercise classroom management skills

without resorting to punitive measures or

yelling, and was respectful and protective

of children. A teacher would be classified

as a “negative teacher” if he or she

were represented as dictatorial, using harsh

language, unable to manage classroom

behavior, distant or removed, inattentive.

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 47

unable to create a learning environment,

allowing teasing or taunting among students,

or unempathetic to students’ diverse

backgrounds. A teacher was categorized as

“mixed review”if they possessed characteristics

that were both positive and negative:

for example, if a teacher were

otherwise represented as caring and effective

in the classroom, but did nothing to

halt the teasing of a child. The fourth category

for consideration was that of “neutral,”

in which a teacher was represented

in the illustration of a text, but had neither

a positive nor a negative effect on

the children.

A doctoral student focusing on reading

in the elementary school and who is

well-versed in children’s literature served

as an inter-rater for this part of the analysis.

After having conferred on the characteristics

of each category, she read

each text independently of the researchers

and categorized each teacher as “positive,”

“negative,” “mixed review,” and “neutral.”

We achieved 100% agreement in the category

of “positive representations of teachers”

and 93% agreement regarding the

“negative” images. We had 75% agreement

on the “neutral” images and 100% agreement

on the category of “mixed” images

(two images). Upon further discussion of

our qualifications for “neutral,” we were

able to agree on all 14 images as having

neither a positive nor negative impact on

the children as represented in the text.

What Were The Findings?

Our findings regarding the preponderance

of the images are detailed in the following

paragraphs.

The teacher in children’s picture storybooks

is overwhelmingly portrayed as a

white, non-Hispanic woman. There were

only eight representations of African-

American teachers, and only three of them

were the protagonists of the books: The

Best Teacher in the World, (Chardiet &

Maccarone, 1990); Show and Tell, (Munsch,

1991); and Will I Have a Friend?,

(Cohen, 1967). Two Asians, no Native

Americans, and no other persons of color

are shown in the 96 teacher images,

making the total number of culturally

diverse images represented at only 11 % of

the total.

The teacher in picture storybooks

who is sensitive, competent, and able to

manage a classroom effectively is a minority.

The teacher who met the standards

we described for a “positive teacher,”

which include an ability to construct meaningful

learning environments, compassion,

respect, and management skills for a group

of children, exists in only 42% of the

teacher images in our sample. This means

only 40 images out of a total 96 images

were demonstrative of teacher efficacy.

Some examples of the “positive

teacher”are found in Mr. Slingerland in Lilly’s

Purple Plastic Purse (Henkes, 1996),

Mr. Falker in Thank You, Mr. Falker

(Polacco, 1998), and Arizona Hughes in

My Great-aunt Arizona (Houston, 1992).

The negative images outnumbered the

positive images. Teachers who were dictatorial,

used harsh language with children

were distant or removed, or allowed

teasing among students comprised 42% of

the total number of 96 teacher representations.

Examples of the “negative teacher”

are found in the nameless teacher in

John Patrick Norman McHennessy-The

48 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

Boy Who Was Always Late (Bumingham,

1987), Miss Tyler in Today Was a Terrible

Day (Giff, 1980), and Miss Landers

in The Art Lesson (dePaola, 1989). There

were only two teachers in the sample

who received a “mixed review,” which was

by definition a generally positive teacher

with some negative strategies, approaches,

or statements (Mrs. Chud in Chrysanthemum

[Henkes, 1991] and Mrs. Page

in Miss Alaineus: A Vocabulary Disaster

[Frasier, 2000]). Fourteen teacher images,

or 15% of the total number, were represented

as “neutral,” meaning that the

teacher in the text had neither a positive

nor a negative impact on the students. The

nameless teachers in Oliver Button is a Sissy

(de Paola, 1979) and Amazing Grace

(Hoffman, 1991) are representative of

“neutral” teacher images.

The teacher in children’s picture storybooks

is static, unchanging, and flat. An

unexpected finding in this content analysis

was that teachers in picture storybooks

are never shown as learners

themselves, never portrayed as moving

from less effective to more effective.

Like the nameless teacher in Miriam

Cohen’s “Welcome to First Grade!” series,

if she is a paragon of kindness and patience,

she will remain so unfailingly from the

beginning of the text to its conclusion. If

he is an incompetent novice, like Mr.

Lemonjello in Miss Malarkey Won’t Be

in Today (Finchler, 1998), he will not be

shown reflecting, learning, and reinventing

himself into an informed and effective

educator by book’s end. Perhaps the evolution

from mediocrity to effectiveness

holds little in the way of entertainment value,

but it could hold great value in the

demonstration that teachers are complex

human beings with a significant capacity

for growth. The potential to paint realistic

portraits of teachers is present, but we

see little evidence of the medium’s desire

to construct such an image.

The teacher in children’s picture

books is polarized. Other researchers have

also noted our concerns that we as teach-

. ers represented in picture storybooks are

“healers or wounders . . . sensitive or callous,

imaginative or repressive” (Joseph &

Burnaford, 1994, p. 12). Only 15% of

the teachers presented in our sample are

neutral images, neither positively nor negatively

impacting the children in the fictional

classroom, and only two images out

of the 96 examined qualified as a “mixed

review” of mostly positive characteristics

with some negative aspects of educational

practice. Therefore, approximately

84% of the teachers represented in our sample

are either very good or horrid. The

teacher paragon in picture books “generally

is a woman who never demonstrates

the features of commonplace

motherhood—impatience, frustration, or

possibly interests in the world other than

children themselves-demonstrates to children

that the teacher is a wonderfully

benign creature” (Joseph & Burnaford,

1994, p. 11). Ms. Darcy in The Best

Teacher in the Whole World (Chardiet &

Maccarone, 1990), and Mrs. Beejorgenhoosen

in Rachel Parker, Kindergarten

Show-off (M&nin, 1992) fit neatly into

the mold of “paragon.” They are not

represented exhibiting any less-than-perfect,

but realistic, characteristics of exhaustion,

short-temperedness, or lapses in good

judgment

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 49

Several texts offer “over the top” representations

of bad teachers. The oftenreviewed

Black Lagoon series depicts

the teachers in children’s imaginations as

a fire-breathing dragons or huge, green

gorillas. The well-known Miss Nelson

series (AUard) has created substitute

teacher Viola Swamp in the likeness of a

witch, complete with incredible bulk, large

features, warts, and a perpetual bad hair

day. The teachers in The Big Box, (Morrison,

1999), put a child who “just can’t

handle her freedom” in a big, brown box.

Other books offer slightly more subtle, but

still alarming, representations of negative

teaching practice. Consider Miss Tyler,

the heavy-lidded, unsmiling teacher in

Today Was a Terrible Day (Giff, 1980),

who humiliates Ronald five times in the

course of the story; or Mrs. Bell, who in

Double Trouble in Walla Walla (Clements,

1997), takes a child to the principal for her

unique language style. Even worse is the

nameless teacher who repeatedly (and

falsely) accuses a student of lying and

threatens to strike him with a stick {John

Patrick Norman McHennessey-The Boy

Who Was Always Late, Bvxmn^dsa., 1987).

In less drastic representations, but still of

concern to those of us who believe that literature

informs expectations about reality,

teachers are represented as failing to protect

children from their peers’ taunts.

Teachers are shown doing nothing to

stop the teasing of children in Chrysanthemum

(Henkes, 1991), The Brand New

Kid (Couric, 2000), Today Was a Terrible

Day (Giff, 1980), and Miss Alaineus:

A Vocabulary Disaster (Frasier, 2000). If

children are learning about teachers and

school from the children’s books read to

them, we propose that there is cause for

concern about the unrealistic expectations

children could develop from such polarized

and unrealistic images.

The teacher in children’s picture

books does not inspire in his or her students

the pursuit of critical inquiry. The

overwhelming majority of texts which represent

teachers in a positive light — and

these number in our sample only 42% of

the total number of school-related children’s

literature — show them as kind caregivers

who dry tears (Miss Hart in Ruby

the Copycat, Rathmann, 1991), resolve

jealousy between children (Mrs. Beejorgenhoosen

in Rachel Parker, Kindergarten

Show-off, Martin, 1992), restore selfesteem

(Mrs. Twinkle in Chrysanthemum,

Henkes, 1991), teach right from wrong

(Ms. Darcy in The Best Teacher in the

Whole World, Chardiet & Maccarone,

1990). However, few teachers are represented

as having a substantial impact on

a child’s learning. Joseph and Burnaford

(1994) found that teachers are not seen

“leading students toward intellectual

pursuits — toward analyzing and challenging

existing conditions of community

and society…. The ‘successful’ teacher

[in children’s literature]… does not awaken

students’ intelligence. Such teachers value

order; order is what they strive for, what

they are paid for” (p. 16).

Our analysis confirms their findings.

Examples are common in which teachers

actually provide roadblocks to children’s

success. Tommy in The Art Lesson (dePaola,

1989) must wage battle to use his

own crayons, use more than just one

sheet of paper, and to create art based on

his own vision and not the tired model of

50 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

the art teacher. Miss Kincaid in The Brand

New Kid (Couric, 2000) actually establishes

the opportunity for children to tease

the new boy who is an immigrant: “We

have a new student. . . His name is a different

one, Lazlo S. Gasky.” Young Lazlo’s

mother must help him find his way into

the culture of the school and community.

In David Goes to School (Shannon, 1999),

young David is met with negatively framed

demands from his nameless and faceless

teacher: “No, David!”, “You’re tardy!”,

“Keep your hands to yourself!”, “Shhhhh!”,

and “You’re staying after school!”

Only six books in our sample represent

teachers as intellectually inspiring. Mr.

Isobe in Crow Boy (Yashima, 1967) is represented

as child-centered and appreciative

of Chibi’s knowledge of agriculture

and botany, who values his drawings and

stays after school to talk with young Chibi.

He is represented as the catalyst for the

crow imitations at the school talent show

which gain Chibi recognition and a newfound

respect among his peers. In Lilly’s

Purple Plastic Purse (Henkes, 1996) Mr.

Slingerland is such an effective teacher that

he inspires Lilly to want to be a teacher

(when she isn’t wanting to be “a dancer

or a surgeon or an ambulance driver or a

diva . . .”). Mr. Cohen in Creativity,

(Steptoe, 1997), uses the arrival of a new

immigrant in his class to teach about the

history of immigration in this country

and to deliver a message about tolerance

and shared histories. Mrs. Hughes in My

Great-aunt Arizona (Houston, 1992) teaches

generations of children about “words

and numbers and the far away places

they would visit someday.” The nameless

teacher in When Will I Read? (Cohen,

1977) helps young Jim come to the realization

that he is a reader, and Mr. Falker

in Thank You, Mr. Falker (Polacco, 1998),

helps fifth-grader Trisha learn to read in

three months and cries over her achievement

when she reads her first book independently.

Although these are excellent

examples of how teachers can be represented

as dedicated supporters of learning,

only six texts out of the 62 in our sample

construct images of teacher as an educated

professional.

Discussion

Other researchers have found bias, prejudice,

and stereotypical presentations of

characters in children’s books, and our

study specifically about images of teachers

does not dispute those findings (Barone,

Meyerson, & Mallette, 1995; Hurley &

Chadwick, 1998; Hurst, 1981). From our

extensive 62 book sample of picture storybooks

widely available to children,

parents, and teachers, we have found a

parade of teachers who discourage creativity,

ignore teasing, and even threaten

to hit children with sticks. We have also

found teachers in children’s literature who,

in great devotion to the human good and

the educative process, save children: from

boredom, from illiteracy, and from the devastating

effects of social isolation. Our deep

concern is that the books in which the

teacher is demonstrated as intelligent and

inspiring (six in our 62 book sample) are

dwarfed by the number of books in which

the image of Teacher is one of daft incompetence,

unreasonable anger, or rigid

conformity.

We do not find images of teachers as

transformative intellectuals, as educators

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 51

who “go beyond concern with forms of

empowerment that promote individual

achievement and traditional forms of

academic success” (Giroux, 1989, p. 138).

Instead, we find representations of teachers

whose negatively metaphoric/derogatory

surnames indicate the level of respect

for the profession: Mr. Quackerbottom,

Mrs. Nutty, Ima Berpur, Miss Bonkers, and

Miss Malarkey.

Referring back to the graduate class we

taught on representations of teachers in

popular culture, we perceived a naivete

in these teachers as to the power of the

media, to the power of stereotypes to shape

the teaching profession, and the power that

teachers have to combat the negative

images. An overwhelming majority of our

graduate students valued the traditional

teacher who maintained order, was nurturing

and caring, and whose focus was on

the emotional well-being of the child. They

failed to notice that it was an extremely rare

image in picture storybooks that showed a

teacher as an intellectually inspiring force.

Teachers cannot effectuate positive

change in their profession unless and until

they are aware of the internal and external

influences that define and shape the

educational institution. We want to encourage

reflection and conversation about

schooling and teaching, careful evaluation

of extant images in popular culture in order

to develop meaningful dialogue about

the accuracy of those images, and to

encourage teachers to examine their own

memories of teachers and how they form

current perceptions.

Implications For Future Research

Our explorations into the representations

of teachers in picture storybooks have

led to other and further questions regarding

images that cultures create of its

education professionals.

There is much information to be

gleaned from a careful study of the portrayals

of school administrators in picture

storybooks. How are teachers and

administrators represented in basal literature?

How often do basal publishers select

literature or write their own literature

that has school as a setting and what is

the ratio of positive representations to negative

ones? Do children’s authors in other

cultures and countries create similar

negative images of educators with the same

frequency and ire as they do in the U.S.?

How are teachers and administrators portrayed

in literature for older children, as in

beginning and intermediate chapter books,

young adult novels? How have the images

of teachers and administrators evolved over

time in our culture? Was there a time in our

history that teachers were consistently portrayed

in a positive light, and was there

perhaps a national event or series of events

which caused the images to take on more

negative characteristics?

Conclusion

Before we began this study we came

across a book entitled Through the Cracks

(Sollman, Emmons, & Paolini, 1994),

which we decided not to include in our literature

sample as we perceive this text to

be more for teachers and teacher educators

than children. The text now takes on

new importance in light of our findings.

52 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

It chronicles change on one school campus

through the eyes of an elementary-age student,

Stella. Early in the story Stella and

some of her peers begin to physically

shrink and literally fall through the

cracks of the classroom floor because of

boredom — boredom with both the content

and delivery of the school curriculum..

The teachers initially are illustrated as lecturing

to daydreaming children, running

off dittos, and grading papers during

class time; one image even shows a teacher

sharply reprimanding a child for painting

her pig blue instead of the pink anticipated

in the teacher’s lesson plan. The children

have become lost in a kind of

academic purgatory under the floorboards.

Here they remain until substantial changes

are made on their campus. The children

at first watch, then come up through the

floor to become involved in, a curriculum

that has become relevant,

child-centered, and integrative of the

arts. Teachers are then represented as supporting

children’s learning through highly

integrated explorations of Egypt, the American

Revolution, geometry, life in a

pond. Their images are shown guiding the

children in recreating historical and social

events; supporting student inquiry; exploring

painting, building, drawing, dancing,

and playing music as a way of knowing;

cooking; becoming involved in community

clean-up projects; interviewing

experts; conducting science experiments;

and more.

Linda Lamme (1996) concludes that

“… children’s literature is a resource with

ample moral and ethical activity, that, when

shared sensitively with children, can

enhance their moral development and

accomplish the lofty goals to which educators

in a democracy aspire” (p. 412). Our

point in sharing the contents of Through

the Cracks is this: the picture storybook

format has the potential to share with readers

the reality of an effective and creative

teacher. As opposed to an object of ridicule

or scathing humor, a teacher can be represented

as an intellectual who inspires

children to stretch, grow, and explore,

previously unknown worlds and communicate

that new knowledge through multiple

communicative systems. The picture

storybook has the potential to encourage a

child to anticipate the valuable discoveries

that are possible in the school setting;

it can also demonstrate to parents how

school ought to be and how teachers support

children in cognitive and psychosocial

ways. Children’s literature can

also provide positive enculturation for preservice

teachers and validation for inservice

teachers of the possibilities inherent

in their social contributions. Positive

representations of teachers have the potential

to empower all the partners in the

academic community: the children, their

parents, teachers and administrators, and

the community at large.

References

Altheide, D. (1987). Ethnographic content analysis.

Qualitative Sociology, 10{\), 65-76.

Barone, D., Meyerson, M., & and Mallette, M.

(1995). Images of teachers in children’s literature.

The New Advocate, 8{A), 257-270.

Crume, M. (1989). Images of teachers in films and

literature. Education Week, October 4, 3.

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 53

Daspit, T. & Weaver, J. (1999). Popular culture

and critical pedagogy: Reading, constructing,

connecting. New York: Garland.

Dougherty, W. & Engle, R. (1987). An 80s look

for sex equality in Caldecott winners and honor

books. The Reading Teacher, 40, 394-398.

Farber, P., Provenzo, E. & Holm, G. (1994).

Schooling in the light of popular culture.

Albany. New York: State University of New

York Press.

Giroux, H. (1988). Teachers as intellectuals:

Toward a critical pedagogy of learning. Granby,

MA: Bergin and Garvey.

Giroux, H. (1989). Schooling as a form of cultural

politics: Toward a pedagogy of and for

difference. In Henry A. Giroux & Peter. L.

McLaren (Eds.), Critical pedagogy, the state

and cultural struggle, (pp. 125-151). Albany,

NY: SUNY Press.

Giroux, H. (1994). Disturbing pleasures. New

York: Routledge.

Giroux, H. & Simon, R. (1989). Popular culture,

schooling and everyday life. New York: Bergin

& Garvey.

Huck, C, Hepler, S., Hickman, J., & Kiefer, B.

(1997). Children’s literature in the elementary

school (6th ed.), Boston: McGraw.

Hurley, S., & Chadwick, C. (1998). The images

of females, minorities, and the aged in Caldecott

Award-winning picture books, 1958-1997.

Journal of Children’s Literature, 24 (1), 58-

66.

Hurst, J. B. (1981). Images in children’s picture

books. Social Education, 45, 138-143.

Joseph, P. B. & Bumaford, G. E. (1994). Images

of schoolteachers in Twentieth-Century America.

New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Knowles, J. G., & Cole, A. L. (with Presswood,

C. S.) (1994). Through preservice teachers’

eyes: Exploring field experiences through narrative

and inquiry. New York: Merrill.

Lamme, L. L. (1996). Digging deeply: Morals and

ethics in children’s literature. Journal for a just

and caring education, 2 (4), 411-419.

Leitch, V. B. (1988). American literary criticism

from the 30s to the 80s. New York: Columbia

UP

Lepman, J. (Ed). (1971). How children see our

world. New York: Avon.

Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological

study. Chicago: University of Chicago

Press.

McLaren, P. (1994). Life in schools: An introduction

to critical pedagogy in the foundations of

education. White Plains, New York: Longman.

Salomon, G.(1997). Of mind and media: How culture’s

symbolic forms affect learning and

thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78{5), 375-380.

Sollman, G., Emmons, B., & Paolini, J. (1994).

Through the cracks. Worcester, MA: Davis

Publications.

Trifonas, P. (2000). Revolutionary pedagogies:

Cultural politics, instituting education, and the

discourse of theory. New York: Routledge.

Weber, S. & Mitchell, C. (1995). That’s funny, you

don’t look like a teacher’: Interrogating

images and identity in popular culture. Washington,

D.C.: The Falmer Press.

54 / Education Vol. 125 No. 1

Appendix A

Children’s book references

Allard, H. (1985). Miss Nelson has afield day. Dlustrated by James Marshall. New York: Scholastic.

Allard, H. (1982). Miss Nelson is back. Illustrated by James Marshall. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Allard, H. (1977). Miss Nelson is missing. Illustrated by James Marshall. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Bumingham, .J. (1987) John Patrick Norman McHennessy-The boy who was always late. New York:

Crown.

Chardiet, B, & Maccarone, G. (1990). The best teacher in the world. Illustrated by G. Brian Karas.

New York: Scholastic.

Clements, A. (1997). Double-trouble in Walla-Walla. Illustrated by Sal Murdocca. Brookfield, CT:

Millbrook.

Cohen, M. (1977). When will I read? Illustrated by Lillian Hoban. New York: Bantam.

Cohen, M. (1967). Will I have a friend? Illustrated by Lillian Hoban. New York: Aladdin.

Couric, K. (2000). The brand new kid. Illustrated by Majorie Priceman. New York: Doubleday.

de Paola, T. (1989). The art lesson. New York: Putman.

de Paola, T.(1979). Oliver Button is a sissy. San Diego, CA: HBJ.

Finchler, J. (1995). Miss Malarky doesn’t live in Room 10. Illustrated by Kevin O’Malley. New

York: Scholastic.

Finchler, J. (1998). Miss Malarkey won’t be in today. Illustrated by Kevin O’Malley. New York: Walker

Frasier, D. (2000). Miss Alaineus: A vocabulary disaster. San Diego, CA: Harcourt.

Giff, P. R. (1980). Today was a terrible day. New York: Puffin.

Hallinan, P K. (1989). My teacher’s my friend. Nashville, TN: Ideals.

Henkes, K. (1991). Chrysanthemum. New York: Greenwillow.

Teacher Images in Children’s Picture Storybooks…/ 55

Henkes, K.(1996). Lilly’s purple plastic purse. New York: Greenwillow.

Hoffman, M. (1991). Amazing Grace. Illustrated by Caroline Binch. New York: Scholastic.

Houston, G. (1992). My great-aunt Arizona. Illustrated by Susan Condie Lamb. New York: Harper-

Collins.

Martin, A. M. (1992). Rachel Parker, kindergarten show-off. Illustrated by Nancy Poydar. New York:

Holiday House.

McGovern, A.(1993). Drop everything, it’s D.E.A.R. time.’ Illustrated by Anna DiVito. New York:

Scholastic.

Morrison, T. & Morrison, S. (1999). The big box. Illustrated by Giselle Potter. New York: Hyperion.

Munsch, R. (1991). Show and tell. Illustrated by Michael Martchenko. Toronto, Canada: Annick.

Munsch, R. (1985). Thomas’snowsuit. Illustrated by Michael Martchenko. Toronto, Canada: Annick.

Polacco, .P. (1998). Thank you, Mr. Falker. New York: Philomel.

Rathmann, P. (1991). Ruby the copycat. New York: Scholastic.

Schwartz, A. (1988). Annabelle Swift, kindergartner. New York: Orchard.

Seuss, Dr. (1978). Gerald McBoing Boing. New York: Random House

Shannon, D. (1999). David goes to school. New York: Scholastic.

Yashima, T. (1965). Crow Boy. New York: Scholastic.

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT 🙂

© 2020 customphdthesis.com. All Rights Reserved. | Disclaimer: for assistance purposes only. These custom papers should be used with proper reference.