Welner, Kevin G. & Chi, Wendy C. (Eds.) (2008). Current Issues in Educational Policy and the Law. Reviewed by Robert C. Knoeppel, Clemson University and Deborah A. Verstegen, University of Nevada, Reno

Welner, Kevin G. & Chi, Wendy C. (Eds.) (2008). Current Issues in Educational Policy and the Law. Charlotte, N.C.: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Pp. 276 $40         ISBN 978-1-59311-656-9 (papercover) $80         ISBN 978-1-59311-657-6 (hardcover) Reviewed by Robert C. Knoeppel, Clemson University & Deborah A. Verstegen, University of Nevada, Reno July 8, 2008 What is the purpose of public education? In an era of standards-based education reform, many would argue that the purpose of public education is to afford equality of educational opportunity as measured by student achievement. A more focused reading of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 reveals that the goal of public schooling is to “ensure that all children have a fair, equal, and significant opportunity to obtain a high-quality education” (20 U.S.C. §6301). It is this interpretation that is explored by the editors and contributors to Current Issues in Educational Policy and the Law as they offer several thought provoking chapters that explore five issues relevant to public education: No Child Left Behind, School Finance and Adequacy, School Choice, Equal Opportunity, and Student and Teacher Rights. Each chapter includes a review of legislation and relevant case law from both the federal and state levels as the authors explore how these issues both contribute to and work against the goals of public education. In the introduction to the book, Welner and Chi (Eds.) argue that while education policy issues in the United States may be examined from myriad perspectives, the law holds a unique position because of its influence both historically and in the current context of public education. Redfield (2003) wrote that the relationship between the fields of law and education has become increasingly intertwined since education received its own title in the Code of Federal Regulations. As such, this new text examines education policy through a legal lens with each section bridging issues of law and policy, illustrating interactions and highlighting contexts. Specifically, the editors note that policy and law are entwined by the common theme of equality of educational opportunity. The book is largely successful in achieving its stated purpose. The combination of historical perspective, legal interpretation, and expert opinion on the part of the authors provides an intriguing mix of questions for the reader to ponder. The lead issue in the volume, the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), is highlighted in Section I. The thesis of Chapter 1, “Tipping the Balance—Examining the Federal-State Relationship Through No Child Left Behind and the Future of Public Education Governance,” is contained in its title. The authors (Badoloato, Bucholz and Drake) contend that the historic shift to control by the federal government in educational governance is at a “critical juncture” as NCLB is slated for reauthorization. Trend information based on legal challenges to the law, reauthorization hearings and midterm elections is used to examine current educational governance arrangements, all suggesting “some level of control will be returned to the states even while larger trends point to a continuation of enhanced federal authority" (p. 13). This conclusion is given strength by an analysis using the Borrowing Strength Model of federalist theory developed by Manna (2006). The chapter includes a short history of federal aid and useful lenses to use in considering the current and future role of the federal government in educational governance. “Reconsidering a Fundamental Right to Education in Light of No Child Left Behind” continues the focus on NCLB by examining the tenuous nexus of whether the federal NCLB provides a fundamental right to education (FRTE)--“holy grail of lawsuits attempting to providing full educational opportunity to all students." The authors (Ruckdeschel, Silverstein, and Rabin) trace litigation related to the right to an education and its underpinnings in state constitutions, noting that while 48 states guarantee education in some form, 15 states have established education as a fundamental right. While the expansion of the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act under NCLB contains a great deal of rhetoric about educating all children to proficiency, the authors point out this language sets up an expectation rather than a guarantee. Yet, they contend the law could open up new avenues for legal challenges based on adequacy or negligence—interesting food for thought. They conclude that students “in the United States have no federal FRTE, but they do have NCLB” and encourage lawmakers to extend and strengthen those aspects of the law during its reauthorization that promote FRTE (p. 39). Section II, School Finance and Adequacy” addresses a key issue across the states and the top problem in public education identified in the recent Phi Delta Kappa poll of the public’s attitudes towards the public schools. Chapter 3, “Funding Public Schools: Striving for Substantive Adequacy (Krebs, Tappert, and Van Iwaarden) posits a new overarching framework for courts to use in addressing adequacy that the authors contend “provides guidance and is well grounded in [Equal Educational Opportunity] EEO jurisprudence (p. 46). It is drawn from the 14th Amendment and a Fifth Circuit case, Castaneda v. Pickard (1981), that evaluated the effectiveness of an educational program for removing linguistic barriers to EEO. The authors modify its three-part framework and adopt it to school funding policies. School finance litigation is briefly reviewed by “wave” with each of the three waves evaluated using the authors' adequacy framework. First- and second-wave litigation relied on equity arguments and equal protection analysis, using federal or state constitutions in wave one or two, respectively. Funding equity was the key focus. Wave three, commencing with the historic Kentucky decision, Rose v. Council of Better Education (1989), ushered in the reliance on adequacy in addition to equity issues. Adequacy assures each child has a fair and meaningful opportunity to reach high outcomes. The authors point out that beginning in the 1990s, states developed curricular and performance benchmarks related to what all children should know and be able to do upon graduation from high schools. These could be costed-out to determine the sufficiency of the funding system, a rational basis for analysis of adequacy. While the discussion involving the framework suggested is heuristic and yet to be tested, the authors provide an interesting discussion and consideration of some key issues related to the groundswell of school finance litigation that has enveloped the states. Silverstein, Anderson and Chance, in “Breaking the Nexus: Four State’s Experiences with Reforming School Finance to Increase Student Achievement of Students from All Backgrounds” provide case study data to examine policies and programs designed to address increasing outcomes for at-risk, poor and minority children. The conceptual rational is drawn from the National Research Council’s book, Making Money Matter (1999). After a brief review of school finance policy and litigation, the NRC’s contention that money needs to matter more in bringing all children to high standards by using research evidence in the context of adequacy litigation is reviewed and used to assess how revised school finance policy interacts with school reform to break the nexus in outcomes and student background characteristics. Particularly cost adjustments to funding formula, facilities, technology, early childhood education, class size and teacher quality policies are reviewed and then assessed in the context of four state case studies where litigation has occurred: Maryland, Arkansas, Kansas, and Oregon. The authors conclude with “final thoughts” and state: As more states face litigation or choose to proactively address issues of school finance through legislative action, close attention should be paid to the 1999 NRC report that recommends research-based school reforms. There is no silver bullet…but states should give careful consideration of how additional funding, when carefully allocated, can help meet the challenges in our schools. (p. 91) The third section of the book examines school choice in public schools. Each author chronicles the growth of school choice in American public schools from “a general store’s worth to an entire shopping mall of educational options” (p. 128). They note that an analysis of current rulings by the judiciary reveals a shift from rulings that ensure equal rights through state control to the protection of parental liberties through school choice. This fundamental change in philosophy regarding school choice and the role of parents lead the authors to pose poignant questions with regard to parental decision making and equality of educational opportunity, student self-determination and charter school liability. In criticizing the expansion of school choice, Yettick, Wexler Love and Anderson state that equality of educational opportunity is hindered when parents are either not equally willing or able to access educational opportunity. Their review relies heavily on earlier criticisms of school choice, most notably lack of information to make rational choices, limited parental engagement in the decision making process, and language barriers associated with the interpretation of policy. The authors note that these barriers are prevalent among underrepresented populations and may in effect eliminate the opportunity that the law was intended to provide by causing greater segregation of schools. While not stated explicitly, the chapter infers that although there are documented benefits as a result of increased school choice, many children are left behind in failing schools. A fundamental flaw in this policy is that those children left behind are from underrepresented populations. School policy options that are not aimed at helping all students are counter to current state and national goals. Bondurant, Tappert, and Yettick ask a fascinating question in regard to student rights with regard to school choice. The authors argue that historically, school choice has centered on state vs. parental rights with regard to decisions about education. They note that both “attempts by the state to indoctrinate students” and “instances of strong parental influence” impact student self-determination and in effect deny children the opportunity to access curriculum and to engage in discussions that present views that may be different than those espoused at home or those that may be necessary to survive in the workforce (p. 125). The authors argue for a shift in policy from the “dichotomous parent-state balance” to a “trichotomous parent-state-child balance” that enables students to take a more active role in school choice (p. 125). This opinion, while counter to the present political will, certainly raises important questions and is worthy of continued conversation. Finally, Callahan, Krebs, and Bondurant explore liability issues in charter schools. The authors note that the relationship between charter schools and their authorizing agencies have not been fully developed in legislation or the legal system, thus creating several questions in regard to where legal liability rests in multiple areas. The disconnect between charter schools and authorizing agencies is found in the fact that the authorizing agency has little or no supervisory authority over the charter school. As such, the authors question where liability rests. Their review includes such things as personal injury, violations of teacher employment contract (both by the teacher and the charter school), and legal challenges to the process by which states and districts grant charters. The authors provide a brief review of existing charter legislation in the various states in an attempt to frame their review of this emerging topic. The authors note that case law regarding this issue is sparse and suggest more structure to help guide the decision making process in the creation and maintenance of charter schools to avoid future litigation. Equality of educational opportunity is explored in section four of the book with Rabin, Saenz and MacGillvary exploring how recent court rulings and educational policy have brought the nation back to a state of separate but equal. Their review relies heavily on the recent ruling in Parents Involved in Community Schools v. Seattle School District but draws on the historical context of Brown and Plessy to articulate the point that segregation in American schools is accepted as a given while current education policy focuses solely on student achievement. The authors make use of three values to examine current education policy: liberty, achievement, and integration. Integration is discussed not just in terms of the racial composition of schools but as a value to be celebrated due to its ability to create positive student outcomes such as the acquisition of tolerance, critical thinking skills, and preparation for life in a diverse society. The authors truly cause the reader to pause and consider the real nature of equality of educational opportunity. Is it merely the acquisition of skills that are defined in state-mandated curricula or is it the ability to effectively communicate, problem solve, and work collaboratively in a society that is increasingly diverse? Their review questions the current political context and contends that policies such as tracking, No Child Left Behind, school choice, weighted per pupil formulas, site based management, and a focus on ethnocentric curricula have in effect re-segregated America’s public schools. The authors conclude by introducing economic integration as a possible remedy to the solution of segregated schools due to the lower judicial standard associated with socioeconomic status, but they recognize that this solution may not provide the needed change. In a slightly more politically controversial chapter, Love, Bucholz, and Chance consider the issue of equality of educational opportunity by examining access to higher education for undocumented aliens. The authors attempt to use the dual lens of Plyerv. Doe and the proposed federal Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act to argue for equity of access to higher education for children of illegal aliens. More than any other chapter in the text, this chapter devotes much attention to both case law and federal legislation to provide the historical context for the author’s argument that access to education should not be limited to K-12. Their argument is premised on the notion that a college degree is a prerequisite to fully participate in both the economy and civic life in much the same way that a high school diploma was a requirement for past generations. That statement is slightly flawed and not supported by labor statistics that would suggest that some training is certainly required beyond high school to compete in today’s economy. However, that training need not be in the form of a college degree. While the chapter does begin with some degree of bias, the authors fairly recognize both sides of the argument. For example, the authors first rely on the tenets of Plyer in advocating that children of undocumented aliens should not be punished for the illegal actions of their parents in arguing for increased access to higher education. However, they also fairly report that this standard may not apply to college aged students since they are now adults and are aware that they are residing in the United States illegally. The chapter begins by strongly endorsing the notion of increased access to higher education, but the authors conclude that this goal may not be achieved in the foreseeable future due to the political climate in the country. The final section of the book explores student and teacher rights with chapters devoted to zero tolerance policies, teacher speech and the relationship between church and state in public education. MacGillivary, Medal, and Drake provide an extensive review of the development of zero tolerance policies in American public schools. They briefly recognize the benefits of zero tolerance policies such as clearly defined expectations, compliance with due process laws, and a downward trend in weapons violations on school campuses nationwide. However, the authors devote the vast majority of the chapter to the unintended consequences of these policies such as increased suspensions and expulsions, negative changes in the climate of schools, and severe consequences for minor violations. The chapter rightly states that there are tremendous racial disparities in the way that zero tolerance policies are implemented that mirror patterns in the justice system. These patterns certainly have severe consequences in the long run for students who are dismissed from school for violations of zero tolerance policies that include delinquency, incarceration, failure to complete high school, and limitations for economic success. While clearly establishing the deleterious effect that zero tolerance policies have on underrepresented populations, the authors fail to provide the other side of the argument with regard to improved conditions for other children so that they may have better access to a quality education. Little or no case law exists, according to the authors, with regard to zero tolerance policies which limits the effectiveness of the chapter. The authors conclude by offering alternatives to zero tolerance policies that would enable children to complete their education. The most promising would appear to be an increase in alternative education. Teacher freedom of speech rights are examined by Van Iwaarden, Medal and Callahan in a fascinating chapter on how the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act for increased teacher professionalism may actually impede rights of free speech. The authors compare case law from Pickering and Hazelwood to distinguish teacher roles as practitioner and citizen and chronicle how speech inside the classroom and outside the classroom has historically been regarded by courts. They introduce the current opinion in Garcetti which they argue may muddle the distinction between in-school and out-of-school speech and very effectively use this ruling to consider new roles required by teachers in an era of increased teacher professionalism and site-based management to postulate how these new roles combined with the court ruling may actually lead to more teacher reprimands, dismissals, and a decrease in teacher speech rights. It is ironic, according to the authors, that at a time when we expect teachers to be more active participants in school reform initiatives, the courts may have limited what they can say in these discussions. Lastly Saenz, Badolato and Ruckdeschel examine the “eroding” separation of church and state in the final chapter of the book. The authors conclude that the court now allows a closer relationship between religion and public schools than at any other time in our history. Unlike earlier chapters in the book that focus on one topic, the authors make their point by examining six policy initiatives that they state may provide “contentious constitutional and political battlegrounds”: faith-based organizations, school vouchers, scholarships, curricular issues (such as religion and science and abstinence), pledges and prayers, and religious displays. The broad scope of the chapter prevents it from having the same focus as earlier chapters in the book and the questions posed by the authors are not nearly as poignant. However, the authors do provide an analysis, albeit biased, of the costs and benefits of these policies. They form similar conclusions with regard to school choice and the unintended consequences of segregation and isolation of minority students, and a decrease in exposure to a broad curriculum. The authors caution that it is important for practitioners to focus on previous Supreme Court interpretations of the difference between the teaching “of religion” and the teaching “about religion.” The consequences of the latter are that this practice may lead to greater isolation, favoritism of Judeo-Christian interests, and state funding of religious indoctrination. Overall the book presents an important contribution to debate and discussions about the future of education in the United States. The authors challenge the readers to consider new directions, review the past and posit new theory for the future, while raising interesting and formidable issues related to key topics in policy and law. References Manna, P. (2006). School's In: Federalism and the National Education Agenda. Washington D.C.: Georgetown University Press. National Research Council (1999). Making Money Matter: Financing America's Schools. Committee on Education Finance, Helen F. Ladd and Janet S. Hansen, editors. Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Redfield, S.E. (2003). The convergence of education and law: A new class of educators and layers. Indiana Law Review, 36, 609-643. About the Reviewers Rob Knoeppel is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership Studies at Clemson University. His research interests include bridging school finance, education policy, and the practice of educational leadership to achieve equality of educational opportunity. Deborah Verstegen is Professor in the Department of Educational Leadership at the University of Nevada, Reno. She served as visiting O'Leary Chair in Financial Management at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign in 2006-07. Her research focuses on equity, adequacy and equal opportunity.

Ramanathan, Vaidehi. (2005). The English-Vernacular divide: Postcolonial language politics and practice. Review by Jeffrey Bale

Ramanathan, Vaidehi. (2005). The English-Vernacular divide: Postcolonial language politics and practice. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. pp. v-xii + 143 ISBN 1-85359-769-4 Review by Jeffrey Bale Arizona State University January 7, 2007 The academic fields of postcolonial studies and language policy and planning have intermingled for some time now. One result of this fusion has been greater attention paid not just to the effects of globalization within postcolonial language contexts, but also to how local practices and cultures in turn react to, resist and reshape the forces of internationalization (Canagarajah, 2005). Vaidehi Ramanathan’s latest work makes an invaluable contribution to better understanding these processes through an analysis of how local power structures in the Indian state of Gujarat conform to and confound the pressures of English as a global language. In particular, her book reflects an important shift in our understanding not just of constant pressures of English, but also of the dynamics of how such colonial languages have been nativized within postcolonial contexts. Of equal importance to this study is its focus on how individual actors negotiate this interaction, what Ramanathan calls “postcolonial hybridity” (p. vii), in ways that at once challenge and reinforce the deep social divisions that characterize specific countries. An particular strength to this research is that its author, now an associate professor at the University of California, Davis, was schooled in one of the institutions included in the study. Thus, we gain an important, if at times conflicted, perspective on the social dynamics at work in Gujarat of a simultaneous insider-outsider. The book is built around an ethnographic study the author conducted over the span of seven years of site visits in Gujarat, India primarily during the summer months. The focus of the study is what the author characterizes as a divide between English and Vernacular languages (here, Gujarati) and how specific language policies and social practices at once exacerbate and overcome this divide. Ramanathan situates her book thus: From particular vantage points, this book highlights the English-Vernacular chasm by focusing on particular social stratifications on the ground—class, gender, caste—where individual efforts are not necessarily foregrounded. But from other vantage points, the book is also oriented toward capturing local resistances by calling attention to how particular teachers and institutions engage in critical practice by negotiating with the larger labyrinth to mitigate English’s divisive role and to bridge the English-Vernacular gulf proactively. (p. 4, italics in original) The author focused on three institutions of higher education in Gujarat to explore these themes. One institution is a Vernacular-medium (VM) college for women who are predominantly low-income. The second is a private business college that uses English as its medium for instruction (EM), although it does admit a few VM students. The third institution is a co-educational Jesuit institution that is primarily an EM college, but that in recent years has taken active steps to create tracks to admit and educate low-income, low-caste VM students. Over the course of her study, Ramanathan conducted over eighty interviews with VM and EM students, as well as another 21 interviews with faculty members at the three institutions. Additionally, the author spent over 100 hours observing classes and other daily practices at the three colleges. The third and final source of data for this study came from documents found at the three institutions as well as in other educational contexts in Gujarat, ranging from textbooks used at the K-12 level to college circulars, newsletters, and internal documents. Before turning to the specific findings of her study, Ramanathan first situates her study against the backdrop of official language policies, both historical and contemporary, in India. She briefly traces the historical development of pro-Vernacular language policies from Ghandi to the Remove English Lobby to contemporary language policies in the state of Gujarat. Her discussion is on the one hand practical, identifying specific policies that mandate the manner and timing of how second language instruction is to be implemented in EM and VM tracks at the K-12 level. On the other, Ramanathan looks at the impact of these language policies on social practices, stressing how the history of language policies discussed has led to a specific assumption nexus (pp. 36-37) that explains what middle class, English-dominant Indians have come to expect both socially and educationally as a result of their command of the English language. Three broad themes emerge from the findings of Ramanthan’s study. The first concerns what she calls divergent pedagogical tools. The discussion is based on analysis of textbooks used for English language instruction in VM and EM schools at the K-12 level in Gujarat. While both sets of texts share a common framework of being structured around “minimal levels of learning” (akin to standards-based learning in the US) and of infusing language instruction with secular values, it is the divergences between these two sets of textbooks that stand out most starkly. English language instruction in the VM is described as focused on developing survival English by acquiring discrete grammatical skills by means of rote, patterned activities. In contrast, language and literature activities in the EM textbooks are centered around self-discovery, expressing the students’ voice in their writing and more creative and analytical responses to the texts they read. In addition, the texts in the VM books are almost exclusively of local themes and traditions, using native cultural constructs to teach English. The texts in the EM books, on the other hand, are works from the traditional British “canon” that challenge EM students not only to acquire and master the English language, but also to adopt a vision of culture that is framed by the British. The effect of these divergences in EM and VM English textbooks is to produce two very different types of literacy in English. The author identifies how the limited, survival-oriented approaches to English in the VM track of K-12 education precludes most VM students from acquiring advanced levels of English proficiency. This process acts as a gatekeeper, preventing VM students from passing the state-mandated exams that allow them to enter more prestigious EM institutions of higher education, or to study more prestigious EM majors, such as engineering and technology. The second theme in Ramanthan’s findings emerges from a comparative analysis of texts and practices at the VM women’s college and the EM private business college. Based on observations and interviews, the author finds English language instruction at the VM women’s college to be more focused on the acquisition of discrete grammar skills. She documents how local Hindu practices of choral reading and recall are infused in English-language instruction so that students have a familiar entryway into practicing English vocabulary and grammar. Because the Vernacular is used in instruction to translate almost word for word the English literary texts, the author argues that students feel distanced from the works they are learning. In both cases, emphasis is on finding the correct answer to problems posed to students. By contrast, English instruction in the EM business college is based on group work that emphasizes collective approaches to acquiring the language. Moreover, English is taught in context, using business themes that students are learning in their other courses. The author then analyzes specific attempts at critical practice by instructors at both institutions to bridge class, gender and caste divides. These efforts include student oragnizations at the women’s college to promote students’ ability to be confident actors outside of their traditional roles as women in low caste society, as well as tutoring programs at the business college for the few VM students who have matriculated. The third theme in this study’s findings addresses the consequences of tracking at the Jesuit college. The institution draws on four Jesuit conceptions of social justice to take active steps in encouraging low caste VM students to attend what otherwise is a predominantly EM college. Part of these initiatives comes in response to state mandates to track VM students in EM institutions. At this Jesuit college, this has meant in practice the creation of two programming tracks for VM students at the college, differentiated only by the number of years of English-language instruction the students have had. The faculty’s commitment to VM students is seen, however, in that one track for VM is reserved almost exclusively for low caste Dalit students. Ramanathan finds conflicting practices related to this tracking, some that maintain the EM-VM divide, others that attempt to challenge it. She approves of the bilingual approach to English language instruction for the tracked VM students, but finds that the focus is still on grammar, which limits the level of proficiency these students ultimately acquire. She also cites the frustration of some English faculty who feel their focus should be on literature, but who are most often expected to teach language. Finally, she cites the efforts of the new president of the college, trained at Georgetown University in applied linguistics, to use his training to foster a multilingual environment while creating English courses that better meet the needs of the institution’s students. Ramanathan’s findings enrich our understanding of the processes of linguistic imperialism (Phillipson, 1992), which often tend to focus exclusively on external pressures on postcolonial societies. The author affords the reader a fascinating look at how a colonial language has been nativized in such a way that local power structures now take on the role of policing society, linguistically and otherwise, to maintain those social divides. What makes the analysis even more insightful is the author’s commitment to identifying attempts to challenge the tremendous and constricting weight of power and social divides. Still, I am left with certain questions and concerns. Some of the strongest challenges to the class, caste and gender divides that characterize the society in which this study takes place are heavily influenced by outside traditions. That is, neither the Jesuit tradition nor the master’s degree that the president of the Jesuit college received at Georgetown University are indigenous to Gujarat. I wondered about the relationship between these “outsiders” and the commitment the author ascribes to them in challenging social divides in Gujarat. Are these other examples of nativized external experiences, or is there really a direct influence from the outside that helps explain the level of commitment to aiding low caste VM students? A second question concerns what appears to be an inconsistency in how Ramanathan analyzes the use of local cultural and literacy constructs in English language instruction for VM students. In her analysis of K-12 textbooks, she argues that the use of VM concepts is limiting for those students as compared to the British texts that empower EM students to acquire the type of English literacy that will later act as a springboard to a more prestigious college education. Yet in her discussion of the women’s college and the VM track of the Jesuit college, Ramanathan reflects a more approving attitude toward the use of the native language and native cultural and literacy practices in the teaching of English. It is unclear why infusing English language instruction with native cultural concepts and the native language is not a positive practice in all instances investigated here. My concern about this book is the impact of social theory on its construction. On the one hand, Ramanathan points out the limitations of post-modern conceptions of a fluid reality when they confront the deep social chasms she observed in Gujarat along class, caste, gender, and linguistic lines. I tend to think that the assumptions of post-modernism in its claims that reality is too constructed, too multi-faceted, too complex to be captured and analyzed systematically have led to almost nihilistic excesses that disempower us from understanding, confronting and overcoming oppressive social practices. Ramanathan suggests that the social divisions she observed in India are so profound as to challenge these post-modern assumptions. This theme could have been developed more explicitly throughout the text to a good end. Social theory serves to complicate the language Ramanthan uses at particular points. Her discussion of the findings of her study—as well as how those findings relate to any number of theoretical frameworks in applied linguistics, literacy and cultural studies interspersed brilliantly throughout the book—is lucid, clear, and moving, This discussion is framed, however, by two chapters that are more theoretical in stance. And it is here that Ramanthan goes astray. Her commitment to questioning the assumptions made about knowledge, society and research leads her to use a sort of language that leaves her readers behind. No amount of quotation marks, parenthetical affixes [e.g., (dis)empowering] and portmanteaus (e.g., s/he) can adequately capture the epistemological and social assumptions that guide this book. Instead, such wordsmithing is distracting and ultimately detracts from what otherwise is a powerful, meaningful study. I obviously do not agree with the assumptions behind post-modern ideologies; however, there are plenty of other studies that do share these epistemological perspectives that still manage to present their ideas and findings in crystal clear language (e.g. Kouritzin, 1999; Li, 2002; Tobin, 2005). References Canagarajah, A. S. (2005). Introduction. In: Reclaiming the local in language policy and pratice. A.S. Canagarajah (Ed.) Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. Kouritzin, S.G. (1999). Face[t]s of first language loss. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and Associates. Li, G. (2002). East is East, West is West: Home literacy, culture, and schooling. New York: Peter Lang. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Tobin, J. (2005). Scaling up as catechresis. International Journal of Research & Method in Education 28(1), 23-32. About the Reviewer Jeffrey Bale is a PhD student in education language policy at Arizona State University. His dissertation will focus on the ideological and practical consequences of linking language education advocacy to national security needs. As an intern with the Language Policy Research Unit at ASU, he also is investigating historical and contemporary efforts to maintain Arabic as a heritage language in the United States. A final strand of research takes a comparative look at the dynamics of globalization at institutions of higher education, in particular ASU's "New American University" initiative. He holds a Master's degree in German linguistics and literature from Georgetown University.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (Eds.). (2005). A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers our Children Deserve. Reviewed by Hailing Wu, Michigan Sate University

Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (Eds.). (2005). A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers our Children Deserve. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pp.112 ISBN 0-7879-7466-8 Reviewed by Hailing Wu Michigan Sate University January 17, 2007 The past few years have seen a marked increase in attention to the issues of teacher quality. One might argue that since the release of No Child Left Behind, the requirement to provide “highly qualified” teachers for every classroom has been the number one task to be accomplished in the field of education. At the same time, there have been many studies critiquing traditional teacher education programs for their ineffectiveness in educating “highly qualified” teachers. Under these circumstances, it is especially valuable to have research on how to improve the quality of teacher preparation and, in turn, the quality of teaching and student achievement in each classroom. A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers our Children Deserve (Darling-Hammond & Baratz-Snowden, 2005), among some others, represents a major effort to address this issue. A Good Teacher in Every Classroom seems destined to be a highly influential. It is sponsored by the National Academy of Education (NAE), “a highly visible organization with an influential voice in the educational community” (Cochran-Smith, 2004, p. 111). Shortly after its publication, it was given loud applause by the National Education Association (NEA, May 24, 2005). One of the editors of the book is Linda Darling-Hammond, a well-known educational researcher from Stanford University. Darling-Hammond has served as co-chair of the NAE’s Committee on Teacher Education. The other co-editor, Joan Baratz-Snowden, is director of Educational Issues at the American Federation of Teachers. She has worked for several other educational associations as well.. A Good Teacher in Every Classroom originates from what the National Center for Alternative Certification calls “a groundbreaking new study” (NCAC, 2006), that is, Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do (Darling-Hammond & Bransford, 2005). It is also a much slimmer volume than its parent. A Good Teacher in Every Classroom, in about 90 pages, summarizes the 600-page book’s recommendations, encapsulating the ideas of more than thirty contributing authors by reviewing an abundance of research on learning, effective teaching, teacher learning, and teacher education. In other words, it is an executive summary and policy report for Preparing Teachers for a Changing World. Such a distillation always raises the concern that some arguments or evidence might have been lost in the process of summarization. I am reviewing the short book as a free-standing piece, without regard to how well it reflects its much longer parent book. In this brief book, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden hope to improve the quality of teacher preparation, traditional and alternative, by outlining a professional and scholarly consensus on what makes a good teacher, thus giving suggestions to teacher education programs and policy-makers at different levels. In addition to the preface and the introduction, the book includes four chapters centered around four questions: What do teachers need to know? How can teachers learn? What should teacher preparation program do based on the answers to the questions above? What should policy do to enhance the quality of teacher education? The first chapter is the most important one of the book for two reasons. First, it seems that for a long time there has been no agreement on what should constitute teacher preparation curricula. The fact that these authors are able to forge a consensus represents a major accomplishment. Second, the answer to the question, “What do teachers need to know?” should and does lay a foundation for the next three chapters, especially the policy recommendations in the last chapter. Figure 1 below provides a schematic illustration of their answer. The central label reveals the author’s argument that teaching should be perceived as a type of professional practice much like medicine. Although Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden do not define their notion of a “profession,” they mention repeatedly throughout the book that in recent history medical education has gone through a process of professionalization by establishing a common curriculum and convey the idea that teacher education should learn from medicine to try hard to come up with a core curriculum. The authors say less about why they choose medicine as their primary reference point. Without examining the similarities and also the differences between teaching and medicine, their argument lacks force and could be misleading to some people. The second important message conveyed in Figure 1 is that new teachers should be aware that learning and teaching should take place in a democratic environment, and the purpose of education is to let students “participate fully in political, civic, and economic life” (p. 6). This is a helpful reminder to reformers who think of education as primarily a means to foster an efficient labor force for the country or to realize social mobility for the individual. The third, and ultimately most important, point depicted in Figure 1 is that to be professional, a new teacher needs to acquire three “interdependent” (p. 5) domains of knowledge: knowledge of learners and their development in social contexts, knowledge of subject matter and curriculum goals, and knowledge of teaching. Put into such a broad classification scheme, these ideas are not particularly new or enlightening. It is already acknowledged that an effective teacher has a good understanding of how to deal appropriately with the triangle: learners, subject matter, and teaching. The problem that has plagued teacher education for years is defining what is included in each domain. The text accompanying Figure 1 does elaborate each domain with some, but limited, examples. The first circle in Figure 1 deals with understanding of the learner. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden conclude that in this domain beginning teachers need to learn three things: how students learn, how students develop, and how students acquire language skills. No doubt, each of the three aspects is important for student teachers to know. However, it would help to understand the logical relationship among them. For instance, there is considerable overlap between learners’ learning and their development. And language acquisition is part of students’ learning and development. It is understandable why Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden single out the language issue. In recent years, there has been an enormous growth in the population of English Language Learner (ELL) students in U.S. public schools. Despite this, one may question if there is a better way to frame what beginning teachers need to learn and understand about learners. The second section has to do with subject matter. In this section, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden emphasize that “teachers must know the subject matter they will teach and understand how to organize curriculum in light of both students’ needs and the schools’ learning objectives” (p. 14). They appear to discuss subject matter in terms of what to teach and why, or “curricular content knowledge” (1986) in Shulman’s words. This reminds me of Shulman’s other category of knowledge: “subject matter content knowledge,” a concept that is missing in Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden’s discussion. Although the authors do not attempt to “focus on the format, length, or location of teacher education” (Darling-Hammond & Baratz-Snowden, 2005, p. 4) in the book, some readers would likely be happier if Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden had responded to the following practical questions: How much subject matter content knowledge should student teachers learn in order to teach elementary or secondary schools? Where should student teachers learn subject matter content knowledge? From the teacher education program, the department in a subject area, or some other place? Should student teachers take advanced subject matter courses at the college level which seem irrelevant to what they will teach? The third circle in Figure 1 represents knowledge of teaching. A genuine understanding of teaching includes knowledge of how to develop content-specific pedagogies, how to teach diverse learners, how to assess students, and how to manage classroom activities. In discussing each domain of knowledge, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden offer a useful rubric for student teachers and teacher educators to check if they have learned or are learning what they need to learn. This is one of the book’s most useful contributions. However, the first chapter is not that satisfactory in two respects. First, this chapter centers on what beginning teachers should learn rather than what they actually learn from specific teacher preparation programs. In fact, little of the latter is touched on. I believe that if Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden had intertwined the latter with the former, their recommendations would be more powerful and convincing. Second, with regard to what student teachers should learn, the authors might need to do some revision to Figure 1 and to unify the vocabulary a bit. There seems to be a degree of arbitrariness in their decision to put eight sub-points into the framework shown in Figure 1. Moreover, too many terms appear in this chapter and give the impression of messiness rather than comprehensiveness. With this framework established, Chapter Two addresses the question “How can teachers acquire the knowledge they need?” This is another important question, given that traditional teacher education programs are blamed for their uneven quality in preparing future teachers, and given that more and more people enter and are prepared for teaching through alternative approaches. In this chapter, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden describe some general rules of teacher learning and development. They outline three major problems of learning to teach, viz., misconceptions about teaching or “apprenticeship of observation” as Lortie called it; the problem of enactment; and the problem of complexity. In their opinion, student teachers should learn about practice in and from their own and others’ practice. Therefore, teacher education programs should offer student teachers “consistent opportunities to apply what they are learning, analyzing what happens, and adjust their efforts accordingly” (p. 31). This chapter illustrates the tradeoff between depth and breadth: the brevity of this book is refreshing, but at the same time, reading a chapter like this makes the reader yearn for more on the “how” aspects of teacher learning and development. Chapter Three provides suggestions to teacher preparation programs, whether traditional or not. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden list the problems existing in traditional teacher education programs: “being overly theoretical, having little connection to practice, offering fragmented and incoherent courses, and lacking in a clear, shared conception of teaching among faculty” (2005, p. 37). Based on some research on exemplary preparation programs, they bring forward a framework for learning to teach, displayed here in Figure 2. In this framework, several points are emphasized for student teachers to develop: a vision of good practice, knowledge of subject matter and how to make it accessible to diverse students, conceptual and practical tools for use in the classroom, a repertoire of teaching strategies for practice, and a set of dispositions or habits of thinking and action about teaching. In addition, learning to teach had better occur in professional communities, which means that teacher education programs should cooperate closely with schools to educate prospective teachers. According to Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden, the framework in Figure 2 “mirrors the knowledge and skills teachers need to be successful with all students, illustrated earlier in Figure 1.1[Figure 1 above]” (2005, p. 39). This might be confusing for some readers. Since from their perspective the framework in Figure 2 is pretty much the same as that in Figure 1, one may wonder why they did not just stick to the first framework and keep it coherent and consistent throughout the book. There seem to be differences between the two frameworks, at least in use of terms. It would have been better if they had integrated them into a single, more unified framework. After introducing the framework in Figure 2, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden suggest that teacher preparation programs should deploy specific pedagogies to cultivate future teachers, namely, student teaching and internships under close supervision, performance assessments such as teaching portfolios, analysis of teaching and learning represented in various types of documentation, case methods, and action research by focusing on a specific issue of learning and/or teaching and collecting data to analyze and improve it. Here, they are cautious to argue that “none of these pedagogies is a silver bullet. Each has particular strengths and limitations, all can be implemented well or poorly, but in combination these strategies have the potential to greatly enhance the learning of new teachers” (p. 42). Also, a useful rubric is provided under each type of pedagogy. With regard to this part, I agree with Stephen Dinham, who in his review of this book wrote, “there is nothing particularly ground-breaking or innovative here, but it is a useful frame of reference” (Dinham, 2006, p. 96). The last chapter focuses on policy implications. As pointed out earlier, A Good Teacher in Every Classroom is a policy-oriented report. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden believe that a higher quality of teacher preparation will not only contribute to better teaching in the classroom in the short and long terms, but also help reduce the high rate of attrition in teaching. In past decades, some reforms have attempted to promote the quality of teacher education, but unfortunately the results are, as Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden note, not “straightforward” (p. 54). The reason is that “the plethora of policies has sometimes worked in contradictory ways” (p. 54). Under these circumstances, it is of great importance to come up with well thought out policies related to accreditation of teacher education programs; use of licensing standards; and recruitment, induction, and retention of beginning teachers. With respect to teacher preparation program accreditation, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden make a list of ten so-called “rigorous” (p. 59) criteria, and advocate that the federal government, states, and institutions should incorporate them into program evaluation and also should motivate programs to adopt the curriculum recommendations described in the book. Even more, they argue for the development of high-quality teacher preparation programs in poor urban and rural communities that attract local residents and provide a pipeline from preparation to hiring. Regarding licensure examinations, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden point out three serious problems: testing knowledge and skills that are almost irrelevant to teaching practice, using low or even no cut scores, and having inconsistent requirements across states. One major reason is that there has been no “consensus on a core curriculum upon which to build a rigorous test” (p. 62). To solve the problems, they put forward two suggestions to Congress. First, Congress should sponsor an independent professional authority to work with state professional standards boards and licensing authorities to develop a national performance-based testing program that assesses the body of knowledge, skills, and dispositions presented in the volume through actual demonstration of teaching practice. Second, Congress should adopt strategies to make sates accept such assessments. In the last section, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden begin with the assumption that teacher shortages are caused by two major reasons: the uneven allocation of teachers across schools, districts, and regions; and the high attrition rate of beginning teachers. As a response, they contend that the federal government should supply large-scale service scholarships and forgivable loans to teachers who prepare to teach in shortage areas and go to locations with high needs. Furthermore, they suggest that states and the federal government should support high quality induction programs which will help new teachers improve teaching and stay in the classroom. Such programs, lasting at least one year, should include the following characteristics: trained mentors who are expert teachers with regular time to coach and model, reduced teaching loads, and sound performance assessment to guide teaching. These policy recommendations struck me as clear, concise, comprehensive, and inspiring. Policy-makers would do well to heed them. Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden also seem to think that, without a core curriculum for teacher preparation across the whole U.S., these policies will probably not work effectively. My biggest concern here is with whether the core curriculum proposed in the report is convincing enough for most teacher educators to accept. Given its significance, I think that the two co-editors need to work with contributing writers more to refine the core curriculum and make it more unified and coherent. They also might need to keep asking questions, suggestions, and comments from other scholars, teacher educators, and the like. Finally, the book is written in “a broad brush, fairly pragmatic approach that is a little light on some matters” (Dinham, 2006, p. 96). Apparently, Darling-Hammond and Baratz-Snowden want it to reach a large audience: student and beginning teachers, teacher educators, policy-makers at different levels, and the like. For this reason, those who like detail and complexity might be disappointed with this report and will want to read the more comprehensive one: Preparing Teachers for a Changing World. References Cochran-Smith, M. (2004). Ask a different question, get a different answer: the research base for teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(2), 111-115. Darling-Hammond, L., & Baratz-Snowden, J. (Eds.). (2005). A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers our Children Deserve. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Darling-Hammond, L., & Bransford, J. (Eds.). (2005). Preparing Teachers for a Changing World: What Teachers Should Learn and be Able to Do. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dinham, S. (2006). Review of "A good teacher in every classroom". Australian Journal of Education, 50(1), 95-96. NCAC. (2006). Comprehensive New Framework for Teacher Education. Retrieved January 16, 2007 from http://www.teach-now.org/newsdisp.cfm?newsid=72 NEA. (May 24, 2005). NEA Reaction to National Academy of Education Publication "A Good Teacher in Every Classroom: Preparing the Highly Qualified Teachers Our Children Deserve". Retrieved January 16, 2007 from http://www.nea.org/newsreleases/2005/nr050524a.html Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: Knowledge growth in teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. About the Reviewer Hailing Wu is a doctoral student in teacher education at Michigan Sate University.

Fashola, Olatokunbo (Ed.). (2005). Educating African-American males: Voices from the field. Reviewed by Jeff Maher, College of Notre Dame of Maryland

Fashola, Olatokunbo (Ed.). (2005). Educating African-American males: Voices from the field. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Pp. vii + 287 $34.95   ISBN 1-4129-1434-5 Reviewed by Jeff Maher College of Notre Dame of Maryland It is time to realize that the lack of academic achievement for African American males presents a major crisis…. (p. 286) As much attention of late is focused on eliminating the achievement gap between student groups, Olatokunbo Fashola draws specific attention to one student group, African American males in Educating African American males—Voices from the field. The chapters in this text are reports presented to a conference on African American male achievement, presented by Howard University and co-sponsored by Howard University and the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Educational Research and Improvement. In it, Fashola, as editor of this collection, brings together some powerful studies and extraordinary research to guide educators in reaching this population of students. It is clear that this text is more than just a collection of research essays, but rather a call to action, challenging educators to take what we know about what is not working and what we know will work, to help African American males succeed academically and in society. The text opens with an expressed question, “Why are African American males not succeeding academically in schools?” (p. ix). However, Fashola does not seem satisfied with that question, instead, she challenges the reader to do something with what we learn. From the preface to the conclusion, such persuasive evidence is presented to raise the urgency of ensuring that these youth, specifically African American males, succeed academically. Calling it a “crisis” throughout the text, it becomes clear from the very beginning that the compelling arguments presented by the authors of each chapter must not be overlooked, but should be the basis for action. Throughout the text, Fashola draws upon research across three major themes: societal and cultural influences on academic achievement, in chapters 1, 3, and 7; school-based influences on academic achievement, in chapters 4, 5, and 6; and extra-curricular and community support programs, in chapters 2 and 8. Each chapter begins by focusing on challenges facing African American males and data that illustrates the need for intervention and reform. In most cases, the need is articulated quite masterfully with a degree of urgency and presents an imperative for change. In the first chapter, “Cultural Issues in Comprehensive School Reform,” Robert Cooper and Will Jordon present a case for comprehensive school reform suggesting that black males more than any other group in American society face challenges that impede their success in schools. They present a case that the societal challenges such as unemployment, poverty, and a poor public health system that affects African Americans coincides with “an educational system that produces intergenerational poverty rather than transforming it” (p. 2). Cooper and Jordan further cite the need to reform schools, lest the cycle of poverty and underachievement continue. This chapter begins the case presented throughout the book that schools must be reconceptualized (p. 7) and that school norms and school culture must be reformed. Chapters 3 and 7 continue with the theme that the challenges facing black males also occur in schools. In perhaps the most compelling chapter, “The Trouble with Black Boys,” chapter 3, Pedro Noguera argues effectively that while African American males are “in deep trouble” (p. 51) in society leading the nation in homicides (as victims and perpetrators), in incarceration, and often unemployment, as well as school suspensions, expulsions, and an disproportionality in special education, schools can counter the effects of these societal forces (pp. 51-53). Noguero suggests that schools have historically continued patterns that exist in society, stigmatizing and labeling black males as disruptive. He posits that misinterpretation of behaviors and attitudes by black males presents conflicts with the school norms and expectations. The powerful research presented by Noguero illustrates that African Americans, particularly male African Americans, do not feel their teachers support them or care about their success. For example, in his study, 80% of black males stated they disagree or disagree strongly with the statement, “My teachers support me and care about my success in this class” (p. 67). This compares with 46% of white male respondents. This study epitomizes the argument that teachers can and do make a difference in motivating and engaging students. In chapter 7, “Black Male Structural Conditions, Achievement, Patterns, Normative Needs, and ‘Opportunities’,” by Dena Phillips Swanson, Michael Cunningham, and Margaret Beale Spencer, the connection between child development, adolescence, and achievement is elaborated. The authors suggest that “structural racism” still exists in America, and this can transfer to the school as well. They argue that early intervention is necessary, as is parental support and high expectations (p. 235). As Swanson, Cunningham, and Spencer point out, teacher expectations and societal biases become clear to students and African American male students become very aware of negative stereotypes, barriers, and White American values (p. 238). Teachers and schools have a profound influence on students’ success. In chapter 3, Noguero states that students need to see that schools are places where help and support are needed. In Chapter 7, the same conclusion is reached, noting that African American males need to especially see schools as a place where high expectations go hand in hand. Chapters 4, 5, and 6 build on the idea that responsive teachers and schools can make a difference. In chapter 4, “Teachers’ Perceptions and the Black-White Test Score Gap,” Ronald Ferguson reinforces the position presented by Noguero that teacher expectations and perceptions matter in terms of student success. Ferguson provides evidence of a study presented by Casteel (1997) to this point, stating that for 81% of black females and 62% of black males, pleasing the teacher is a motivating factor for students in their achievement (this compares to 28% of white females and 32% of white males) (p. 92). He further makes the point that while students are motivated by teachers, they are also affected by teacher bias, especially if they see the teacher is favoring one group of students over another. Chapter 5, “Early Schooling and Academic Achievement of African American Males,” by James Earl Davis, and Chapter 6, “What’s Happening to the Boys? Early High School Experiences and School Outcomes Among African American Male Adolescents in Chicago,” by Melissa Roderick, highlight specific academic achievement differences that African American males experience in comparison to that which is defined as successful. Specifically, Davis notes the clear connection between underachievement in the early grades and success later in life. Davis further elaborates that African American males are more disengaged in school activities because they perceive them as “feminine and irrelevant to their masculine development” (p. 133), especially after grade 4. Disengagement occurs early in the learning process, but has lasting effects. In chapter 6, Roderick reinforces the position noting that expectations get higher; however, there is often a decline in motivation and engagement (p. 152), especially in secondary schools and as students transition between middle school and high school. Roderick calls this “a time of choice” for adolescents where they are faced with dramatic changes in their peer groups and greater autonomy in larger school settings. As she points out with powerful examples from Chicago’s South Side High, it is essential that students make connections and build relationships. These examples emphasize the point that engagement and strong support from teachers is essential. The third area of emphasis explored in this text is the impact of extra-curricular and community-based support programs on the achievement of African American males. In chapter 2, authored by Fashola, “Developing the Talents of African American Male Students During the Nonschool Hours,” black males are described as “an endangered species” (p. 20). Fashola iterates that after-school programs provide an avenue of success, and that these programs may include both academic and non-academic programs to build a sense of belonging and support. Both school-based programs and community programs such as Big Brothers/Big Sisters are reviewed and discussed. In chapter 8, “Athletics, Academics, and African American Males,” by Jomills Henry Braddock II, athletic programs are discussed as opportunities for learning, socialization, and social bonding to foster social and academic development for African American males (p. 256). In this chapter, Braddock suggests that those in sports have a better chance of success educationally and that without other extra-curricular participation, success may not be realized (pp. 263-264). For African American males, as Braddock explains, participation in sports may have more of an impact on self-esteem, attitudes, and academics. Therefore, Braddock signifies the importance of connecting the curriculum to sports. If students are motivated and engaged, they are more apt to be successful. Fashola concludes the text synthesizing the key ideas and reemphasizing the point that the research presents an imperative for change. She notes that there are no easy answers to solve the tremendously important issue of academic achievement for African American males, but the dialogue is opened. Fashola offers some closing suggestions, such as providing incentives to draw African American males to teaching to provide role models for young black male students. Throughout, it is clear that schools must take action to engage students and provide opportunities to make connections. In terms of organization, the chapters selected for this volume support the purpose and premise that Fashola presents, that there is an explicit need for attention to be paid to reforming an educational system that is not meeting the needs of African American males. However, the chapters are organized in a disjointed fashion. As stated in this review, three themes emerged through the research studies presented, yet the text is not organized in a way that makes these themes clear to the reader. In some cases, the order of the chapters does not follow the theme cohesively. Save this one critique, Fashola’s presentation of these studies is compelling. Fashola’s collection of these powerful research studies is both persuasive and well-documented. Studies and evidence provided by Noguero, Ferguson, Roderick, and others help to achieve the goal of promoting the dialogue about why African American males are not succeeding academically and what schools can do about it. This book is a call to action to reverse the trends of academic underachievement. Calling it a “major crisis” (p. 286), Fashola compels schools to focus efforts and high expectations for teaching and learning for African American males. About the Reviewer Jeff Maher is the Director of Professional and Organizational Development for St. Mary’s County Public Schools in Leonardtown, Maryland, where he is co-chair of the school system’s Blue Ribbon Task Force to Eliminate the Achievement Gap. He is currently also a doctoral student in Educational Leadership for Changing Populations at the College of Notre Dame of Maryland. His interest is in new teacher support and professional development. Mr. Maher has been a middle school teacher, a staff development specialist, an elementary school principal, as well as an adjunct instructor for McDaniel College (formerly Western Maryland College).

Branco, Angela Uchola & Valsiner, Jaan. (Eds.) (2004). Communication and Metacommunication in Human Development. Reviewed by Cynthia Crosser, University of Maine

Branco, Angela Uchola & Valsiner, Jaan. (Eds.) (2004). Communication and Metacommunication in Human Development. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc. Pp xvi +318     $34.95     ISBN 1593112548 Reviewed by Cynthia Crosser University of Maine January 26, 2007 Branco and Valsiner have compiled a book that combines research, theory and commentary on the subject of communication and metacommunication in human development. Angela Branco is coordinator of the Laboratory of Microgenesis of Social Interactions (LAMBIS) at the University of Brasilia in Brazil. Jaan Valsiner is professor of psychology at Clark University. The purpose of the book is to present research and theoretical perspectives from LAMBIS and authors with related interests and viewpoints. In order to appreciate this book it is necessary to have some prior background in both sociocultural constructivism (or co-constructivism) and the microgenetic method. The best preparation for understanding this version of the sociocultural approach is Branco and Valsiner (1997). Readers who are unfamiliar with this work, should bear in mind three things: human psychology is socially derived, index variables such as gender, age, and social class cannot be separated off from the time-bound developmental process, and the interpretation of the research setting is always the activity of the subject. Readers who need more information on the microgenetic method should consult Siegler and Crowley (1991) for a readable and clear explanation of the history and uses of this method. Siegler and Crowley compare before and after photographs of a tornado hitting a neighborhood to traditional research methods, and a movie of a tornado wrecking havoc to the microgenetic method. The microgenetic method can be used in naturalistic, experimental, or interview settings. The contributors to Communication and Metacommunication in Human Development make use of all three research options. The book is divided into three parts. Part I is titled “Communication and Metacommunication: Basic Issues.” Part II is titled “Communication and Metacommunication Processes within Specific Personal-Cultural Domains.” Part III is titled “Communication and Meaning Construction.” Although this book was written in English, most of the authors are not native speakers. Some of the chapters would have benefited from editing by a native speaker/writer of English. However, none of the small grammatical problems interfere with comprehending the text. Although the book is divided into three parts, it is easiest to divide the discussion of the book into communication, metacommunication, and combined chapters dealing with both communication and metacommunication. The communication theme includes chapters three, and eight, and nine. The metacommunication theme includes chapters one, two, and five. The combined communication and metacommunication theme includes chapters four, six, seven, ten, the first two commentaries, and chapter eleven (the concluding chapter by the editors). Chapter three by Carvalho and Pedrosa (pp.83-108) presents research and theory on communication in early infancy. This chapter will interest readers who are interested in language development. Carvalho and Pedrosa present us with examples of recorded communication behavior in a day care center. The authors deal with expressive communication, referential communication, and joint attention. This behavior is analyzed within a functional framework for language development that compares ontogeny to phylogeny. This framework is based on the assumption that human social behavior has a strong biological basis (Hinde, 1974). Chapter eight by Rey (pp. 249-270) and Chapter nine by Arendt (pp. 271-284) are devoted to communication theory. Rey makes an interesting case for considering subjectivity in communication before moving into a discussion of personality development. The connection between personality development and subjectivity in communication is not immediately clear, and readers may find it off-topic. However, it is in keeping with Valsiner’s (1998) view that one of the forces driving the evolution of personality is the construction of human signs (semiotics) in social relationships. Arendt discusses the difficulty of incorporating social context into modern psychology. This chapter makes important points about the limitations of using universals and general laws in understanding human behavior. Arendt’s chapter does a better job in keeping the focus directly on communication issues in psychology. Commentary three is by James Wertsch (pp.307-312), a well-known scholar in the sociocultural approach to developmental psychology. He discusses chapters seven to ten in terms of communication and meaning construction. Wertsch broadens his discussion to include the contributions the chapters make to sociocultural studies in general. Readers who are unfamiliar with the topic of metacommunication will benefit from reading Chapter two by Fatigante, Fasulo, and Pontecorvo (pp.33-82) before reading the other chapters dealing with metacommunication. Chapter two discusses some of the most important influences on research in metacommunication that have influenced the authors’ present research: Bateson (1972), Goffman (1974), and Hymes (1974). Bateson is a critical influence because he posited that metacommunication includes an understanding of the relationship of the participants. Goffman’s work on frame theory provided a way of organizing recurring social contexts in a given culture. Hymes’ work on sociolinguistics produced a model for breaking out the social and language components of a communication event. Chapter two provides conversational examples of family relationships in Italian families of Jewish culture living in Rome. The authors provide analyses that examine the relationships of the participants, the situation in the context of the culture, and the conversation itself. The authors’ views are compatible with Scheflen’s (1973) view of the metacommunicative act, which is defined as commenting on the allowability of behavior in the immediate present. Example 6 provides a good illustration of this. The mother says, “This is not like a dinner. I mean a simple one. It’s a happening.” (p. 70). The mother is reclassifying the event because of the game that is being played at the dinner table. In chapter one Branco, Pessina, Flores and Salomao (pp. 3-32) begin their discussion of metacommunication by limiting the scope of their interest to the relational level (see Wilmot, 1980). Their research deals with metacommunication as an examination of the relationship between participants in a communicative event. Examples are presented from research on teacher-student interactions and child-child interactions. All of the examples are interesting, but the chapter is difficult to follow in a single reading. Chapter five by Amorim and Rosetti-Ferreira (pp. 127-149) utilizes tape from a baby’s illness at a day care center to show changes in metacommunicative behavior between the baby’s mother and the staff. This research shows the microgenetic method at its best. The relationship between the mother and the day care staff is also presented in a sociohistorical context. This is especially useful for readers who are unfamiliar with Brazil and would not understand the underlying cultural context. This is one of the strongest chapters in the book. The chapters dealing with both communication and metacommunication have varying success in discussing both aspects at the same time. Chapter four by Maciel, Branco, and Valsiner (pp.109-126) discusses the co-construction of knowledge in a teacher-student transaction. This chapter does what the book title promises. It deals with both communication and metacommunication in human development. This chapter will be of interest to teachers because it illustrates the concepts in a meaningful way. Chapter six by Madureira and Branco (pp.151-190) discusses the construction of gender identity from both communication and metacommunication perspectives. The most interesting part of this chapter is the discussion of the historical role of gender in Brazilian culture. This background information helps to set the context for the research that is presented and illustrates the usefulness of the sociocultural approach. However, the background information is much more extensive than the actual discussion on the role of communication and metacommunication in gender construction. The authors discuss a narrative study to examine communication aspects of gender awareness. A naturalistic study of children at a daycare is used to discuss metacommunication in terms of gender construction and the role it plays in communication between males and females. Chapter seven by Valsiner (pp. 227-248) discusses communication in terms of conversational strategies. Valsiner begins with a powerful example of social interaction in a short conversation between two German law students discussing politics in 1933. This example is powerful because readers know that this conversation could have significant repercussions to the speaker criticizing the Nazi party. In the interaction the reader follows the speech of both participants and the thoughts of the speaker who is criticizing the Nazi party. This example is followed by a discussion of game theory, hypergame theory, and their relevance to conversation strategies. Game theory was developed as a means to discover what strategies rational players will follow and what their expectations should be for other players strategies (Harsanyi & Selten, 1988). In classic game theory both the strategies and the payoff for strategies are known. However, there is a variation called hypergame, in which strategies and payoffs may not be clearly seen by all players (see Inohara, Takahashi, and Nakano, 1997). Valsiner discusses conversation as a type of hypergame in which both the strategies and their payoffs emerge during the process of the game. This is a fascinating chapter, which looks at conversation in a way that demonstrates the significance of examining both communication and metacommunication. The first two commentaries discuss chapters four through six. Commentary one by Lourenco (pp.191-208) is critical of the sociocultural approach while commentary two by Silva (pp.209-226) is a defense of this approach. Readers will be interested in both viewpoints. Chapter ten by Brockmeier (pp.285-306) presents a case study on narrative discourse. Brockmeier presents the concept of narrative coherence as a socially negotiated phenomenon between the speaker and the hearer who provides feedback to the story construction. He provides examples illustrating this process. This chapter does a good job in showing how communication interacts with metacommunication for narrative discourse. Chapter eleven by Branco and Valsiner (pp.313-318) attempts to tie the book together by discussing the focus on subjectivity in many of the book’s chapters. The book ends with a short discussion on the challenges of subjectivity. What really ties the book together is the sociocultural approach and the microgenetic method. This book can be hard to follow for readers who are not familiar with the authors’ previous works. This book will be more useful for graduate students and researchers than for undergraduates. For this reason I recommend the book for university libraries that serve graduate programs in communication, psychology, or sociolinguistics. Researchers in education may find individual chapters useful. References Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to ecology of mind. New York: Ballantine Books. Branco, A. U., & Valsiner, J. (1997). Changing methodologies: A co-constructivist study of goal orientations in social interactions. Psychology and Developing Societies, 9(1), 35-64. Harsanyi, J. C., & Selten, R. (1988). A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Hinde, R. A. (1974). Biological bases of human social behaviour: McGraw-Hill. Harsanyi, J. C., & Selten, R. (1988). A general theory of equilibrium selection in games. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Hinde, R. A. (1974). Biological bases of human social behaviour: McGraw-Hill. Hymes, D. H. (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics; an ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Scheflen, A. E. (1973). How behavior means. New York: J. Aronson. Valsiner, J. (1994). Bidirectional cultural transmission and constructive sociogenesis. In W. De Graaf and R. Maier’s (Eds). Sociognesis Reexamined New York: Springer-Verlag, 47-70. Wilmot, W. W. (1980). In D. Nimmo (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 4. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Transaction Books. About the Reviewer Cynthia Crosser is a Social Science and Humanities Reference Librarian/Education and Psychology Subject Specialist at the University of Maine. In addition to her M.S. in Library Studies from Florida State University, she has an M.A. in Linguistics from the University of Florida with a specialization in language acquisition and an extensive background in developmental psychology.

Hiebert, J., Carpenter T. P., Elizabeth F., Fuson K. C., Wearne D., Murray H., Olivier A., & Human P. (1997). Making Sense: Teaching and Learning Mathematics with Understanding. Reviewed by Aslıhan Osmanoğlu, Middle East Technical University

Hiebert, J., Carpenter T. P., Elizabeth F., Fuson K. C., Wearne D., Murray H., Olivier A., & Human P. (1997). Making Sense: Teaching and Learning Mathematics with Understanding. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann xx + 184 pp.     $22.50     ISBN 0-435-07132-7 Reviewed by Aslıhan Osmanoğlu Middle East Technical University January 31, 2007 What is learning with understanding and how is it achieved? How does one design classrooms that foster such learning? Making Sense provides answers to these questions. The researchers leading four different projects come together in this book with the purpose to come to an agreement on the core features of classrooms that foster meaningful learning and increase students’ understanding of mathematics. The projects are called Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI), Conceptually Based Instruction (CBI), Problem Centered Learning (PCL), and Supporting Ten-Structured Thinking (STST) directed by Carpenter, Fennema, and Franke; Hiebert and Wearne; Human, Murray, and Olivier; and Fuson, respectively. When such high-quality researchers who work on instruction in order to improve conditions of education come together and cooperate, it is predictable that a strong, well designed book will result. The book frames the core features of classrooms that support learning with understanding in five dimensions: The nature of classroom tasks, the role of the teacher, the social culture of the classroom, mathematical tools, and equity and accessibility. These dimensions are explained in detail in individual chapters. The chapters in the book are organized into four main parts: The introduction providing an overview-chapter 1; description of five dimensions of classrooms that foster meaningful learning-chapters 2, 3, 4, 5, 6; stories of classrooms from the four projects-chapters 7, 8, 9, 10; and the conclusion-chapter 11. As a foreword, Mary Montgomery Lindquist, past-president of NCTM, clearly describes why it is important to understand mathematics. She gives some real-life examples to draw a picture of how students see mathematics. One example is telling; a student says that no matter how meaningless a statement is, it might be assumed to be true in mathematics. Lindquist’s mentioning the history of perspectives in education provides a comprehensive understanding of understanding, and her explanations of the reasons for little progress in achieving learning with understanding help readers see the purpose of the book. In the first chapter, the authors explain why it is necessary to learn mathematics with understanding, and they go on to show how to design classrooms that foster such learning. The dimensions that they describe--tasks, teachers’ role, social culture, tools, and equity--provide the reader, especially teachers, a good chance of applying what they read to their own experiences. These features also seem closely connected to the U. S. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) Principles for School Mathematics. According to these principles, “effective mathematics teaching requires understanding what students know and need to learn and then challenging and supporting them to learn it well,” “students must learn mathematics with understanding, actively building new knowledge from experience and prior knowledge,” and “excellence in mathematics education requires equity—high expectations and strong support for all students.” One of the principles in NCTM is the curriculum principle, according towhich a curriculum should connect mathematical topics in order for students to build relationships between them, and understand mathematics. Actually, this is the aim of new curricula versus traditional curricula mentioned in several studies and articles. The new curricula are meant to create an environment for children to connect mathematical ideas and get a deep understanding of mathematics. What is lost sometimes is what those authors mean by learning with understanding when writing about the gains of such curricula. At this point the book gives a clear definition of what we need to understand when we talk about understanding. Thus, it is important that the authors have given a clear definition of understanding in their book especially with examples (p.4). Understanding is defined as connecting or relating what is learned to other things that are known. But the work does not end there. As they claim, not every connection is useful, and it is necessary to look into the processes of reflection and communication that play important roles in making useful connections. These two processes make a lot of sense when we think about how we come to an understanding. If understanding is making useful connections between what we learn and what we know, then the processes that we experience internally (reflection) and externally (communication) while building those connections play an important role in understanding. I believe these two processes constitute the most important basis of the book as the five dimensions that are explained in the book are mainly based on those processes as well. In the second chapter, the authors focus on the first dimension of classrooms that support learning with understanding, namely, the nature of classroom tasks. They claim that tasks play an important role in building understanding. The tasks that lead to building relationships between various ideas or between what is already known and what is learned help students with understanding. They are also important in shaping students’ perceptions of the subject. What is important is that the tasks should be problematic and interesting and that this problematic side of the tasks should come from mathematics. They also should be appropriate for students’ level of skills and knowledge in order for them to leave some mathematical value behind. According to the authors, what is important is for teachers to select tasks that encourage reflection and communication, that are suitable for the use of tools, and that leave some residues behind like mathematical relationships and strategies or methods that students understand. In the third chapter, the focus is on the second dimension, the role of the teacher. The most important role of the teacher is defined as creating an environment for children to be able to reflect on and communicate about mathematics. The responsibility of the teacher is to provide direction and help students with creating their own understanding without a great deal of interference. The teacher is responsible for selecting and sequencing appropriate tasks that permit reflection and communication. The authors suggest that teachers use their own learning goals for students, and set tasks and select sequences of tasks with those goals in mind. Another responsibility of teachers is that of being able to provide relevant information. How much information a teacher should share with her students is well explained by the statements taken from Dewey. It is important that teachers do not provide too much information, unless it is necessary, or tell the students the right answer directly without letting them find it on their own. This would reduce the interaction between the students, and also prevent them from having discussions which might open their minds (Leinhardt, 1988). The fourth chapter deals with the social culture of the classroom, the third dimension. The authors state that students’ working on problems together and sharing the methods that they develop is doing mathematics, and a social culture that fosters such interactions is needed. They underline the importance of such a social culture as it is only possible to bring it about when students have opportunities to build understanding through communicating and interacting with each other, to share different problem solving methods, and to approach problems from different points of view. Such an environment makes it possible for students to experience cognitive conflicts that bring about reevaluating and then reorganizing their thinking. It is also crucial that the social culture of the classroom should permit students learning from teaching others while explaining their solution methods; it should value mistakes as opportunities for learning, and give the responsibility of determining correctness to students through working on problems. The fifth chapter focuses on the mathematical tools. What is meant by tools is language, materials, and symbols. According to the authors, it is a necessary condition for students to spend time with using tools to be able to develop meaning for them. Construction of meaning requires that students interact with the tools, so active use of them is a necessary condition. Also the discussions held during the interaction with the tools are very important as construction of meaning for tools happens through communication. The tools also should be used to connect what is learned to what is already known in order to make sense of what is done. Their use also makes it easier for students to work on problems as they leave space for focusing on more creative aspects of the problem rather than trying merely to memorize things. The teacher’s role becomes critical at this point in that only the appropriate use of tools leads to opportunities for students to shape their thinking and develop understanding. The sixth chapter deals the fifth and last dimension of mathematics classrooms, equity and accessibility. This chapter explains why it is important to give equal chances to any child to learn with understanding. This dimension may be the hardest one to accomplish, but also the most critical and necessary one. It is well explained in the book that one can not expect students to learn to the same degree. Providing equal chances for learning with understanding to everyone can and will decrease the gap between different groups. According to the authors, again the responsibility of the teacher to create a learning environment in which equity and accessibility is achieved plays an important role. Not only does the teacher have an effect on building such an environment, but also the other dimensions mentioned so far have shared effects. In the third part of the book, the authors provide four different stories from the four projects that they lead. In my opinion, this part is the most useful as it makes what the authors try to explain throughout the book clear and concrete. Reading real stories from actual classroom settings is a best way to digest what is read as well as to reflect on our own experiences. In chapter 7, a story from a Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI) classroom is shared with the readers. The CGI program focuses on teachers’ understanding of their students’ thinking. In the episode, the teacher deals with a diverse class in several ways. The choice of tasks, valuing different strategies, the interaction between the students, connecting mathematics with real life experiences and with other subjects, students’ spending sufficient time with tools, giving equal word to every student, and the variety of activities chosen are all related to what the authors provide in theory. The reader is expected to connect the theory to the given episode, and digest it through making connections between the idea of designing classrooms that foster learning with understanding and what they read in the episode. This is a good way of portraying what it means to talk about effective classrooms. All the details provided in the episode help the reader to visualize that classroom, and the conversations between the teacher and her students provide a deeper understanding of the structure of the lesson. The teacher’s role, use of multiple strategies, learning from mistakes, the use of tools, and the sharing atmosphere in the episode lead to an understanding of the design of a classroom in which understanding is supported and developed. In chapter 8, the authors mention the Conceptually Based Instruction (CBI) project first, and then give an example of a classroom. This project provides an alternative instruction, and focuses on students building relationships between their previous knowledge and new knowledge, on different ways of representations, and on multiple strategies. This focus fits with the definition of understanding that the authors present in the first part of the book, and gives clues to the design of the classroom in this episode. In this episode, it is possible to see how real-life problems are chosen, different representations are constructed and discussed by students, different approaches are valued, the teacher make use of any opportunities to create discourse, and misconceptions are valued as opportunities for learning. Chapter 9 provides background information on the third project, Problem-Centered Learning (PCL) first, and then follows with a story of a problem-solving session. In PCL, the focus is on the conceptual development of students, and it is achieved through working on problematic and meaningful computation problems. In this project also it is possible to see evidences of reflection and communication as well as the facilitator role of the teacher who doesn’t intervene much or quickly. Here, the main aim is to create a learning environment for children to personally construct meaning. Social interaction and communication are taken as the ways to increase reflection. The episode explains well enough how a classroom environment fosters children’s mathematical understanding through discussing a challenging problem with their peers and turning the ideas around in their minds in a way that results in personal construction of meaning at the end. This episode is especially useful for the reader to see what happens when teacher intervention is quite low and the students work on their own. In chapter 10, the authors share a story from a Supporting Ten-Structured Thinking (STST) classroom. The focus of the project at the beginning of the year is on student learning through decomposition of numbers and transforming their stories into word problems. These are very helpful for students to understand mathematics as they provide several opportunities for them to approach mathematics from different directions. The way that the students are asked to pose different questions about numbers given in a situation seems like a great opportunity for them to engage in mathematical thinking. Also the responsibility is placed on students for being active, sharing their thinking with others, and helping others foster learning. As in the other episodes, the reader sees the importance of task selection, the role of the teacher, the necessity of a classroom culture that fosters meaningful learning, the use of tools as supports for mathematical thinking, and finally how equity is maintained through giving the role of teaching others to every student and helping them to try their best to work on advanced methods that they are capable of. Although it is obvious that reading real life classroom stories provides easy understanding of what the authors talk about, the reader may think that to what extent the teachers in these episodes represent the teachers that we see in real classrooms. The teachers in these episodes sound like experts who can accomplish to design classrooms that foster meaningful learning. Selection of such teachers and episodes make sense since the authors try to draw a picture of how a classroom would look like if understanding is the target. The problem is that not every teacher can achieve to carry out all dimensions as these teachers do. How much is expected from teachers to get out of this book or how much teachers can make use of it is somewhat unclear. It would be naïve to expect every teacher to be able to fulfill the responsibilities laid out in the book. The last part of the book--chapter 11--is the conclusion and summary. In this chapter, the authors revisit the core features of classrooms that foster meaningful learning, and this time support them with examples from the stories of classrooms that they share with the reader. This helps the reader to see more clearly how the core features of classrooms explained throughout the book come to life in those episodes from actual classrooms. The authors conclude the book by putting the responsibility on teachers’ shoulders to design classrooms that provide students learning with understanding. They hope the teachers make use of what they read about the dimensions and core features of classrooms as well as the episodes from the project classrooms. In spite of the fact that much of the responsibility is placed on the teachers to design instruction, some of the duties need to be carried out by administrators, parents, and students as well. Teachers are already asked to do much, and the expectations are very high (Lortie, 1975). So, supportive administrators should make teachers’ work easier for them by providing them an environment that enables creating classrooms that foster understanding. Parents should be willing to send their children to schools where understanding rather than memorization and test-preparation is valued. Students themselves should be interested in learning with understanding, and willing to help to establish equity in their classrooms. Designing classrooms for understanding requires a team work. What is missing in the book is that the authors seem to neglect the importance of classroom conditions on being able to foster understanding. They seem to assume adequate classroom conditions. Although Cohen (1998) thinks that the classroom conditions are not sufficient to account for teachers’ resistance to engage in adventurous instruction, it would be naïve to think that it is easy to accomplish teaching for learning with understanding in classrooms with a large number of students. Delay, denial, interruption, and social distraction are all produced by the crowded conditions of the classroom (Jackson, 1990). What about time and the teacher’s responsibility to cover a lesson plan? In the first episode, the class spends 40 minutes of the lesson on solving two problems, and then the students share their solutions. In real life, the lesson plans ask teachers to cover more in a class period. This book is a powerful statement about the necessity of teaching for mathematical understanding, and it provides teachers a chance to examine their teaching and make changes in their instruction through reflecting on the explanations and episodes provided. I believe all teachers should read this book if they want to improve their teaching. Although I think that it is not possible that every teacher can make use of this book to the fullest degree, still I believe there are many lessons to be learned here, especially from the stories of actual classrooms. References Cohen, D.K. (1998). Teaching Practice: Plus Ca Change. The National Center Research on Teacher Education, 88-3. Jackson, P. W. (1990). Life in Classrooms (pp. ix-33). NY: Teachers College Press. Leinhardt, G. (1988). Expertise in Instructional Lessons: An Example from Fractions. In Grows, D. A., Cooney, T. J., Jones, D. (Eds.). Perspectives on Research on Effective Mathematics Teaching, 1, 47-66. Lawrance Erlbaum. Lortie, D. C. (1975). School Teacher: A Sociological Study (pp.134-161). Chicago Press. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Principles and Standards for School Mathematics. Retrieved November 23, 2006, from http://standards.nctm.org/document/chapter2/.