Queens College, City University of New York August 25, 2008 The beauty of this book is the highs
and lows to which it propels the reader. Most times I marveled;
sometimes I argued—the margins are already well worn with
comments and questions! Its worth is immeasurable in terms of
the dearth of intellectually stimulating material on adolescent
development beyond the undergraduate level. I teach a graduate
level Psychology of Adolescence course to teachers and there has
always been a problem with choosing a basic text to go along with
other readings. So delighted was I to learn of its publication
that I immediately assigned it as required reading for this past
semester’s course; thus, my students and I read the text
together throughout the semester, linking together ideas and
concepts threading across all topic areas and chapters.
Well researched and often written
with an almost poetic flow and certainly an elegant style, this
book is certain to enlighten as well as entertain its audience.
Take for example this assertion in the first chapter, “If
we are skilled enough to witness it, adolescents’
theoretical imaginations offer some of the richest, most
critical, and deeply hopeful worldviews we might find” (p.
3). Then, just two pages later they ask the critical question to
which the remainder of the book responds, “Are our
pedagogies, curricula, counseling approaches, and even
disciplinary practices aligned with these efforts, or do they get
in the way?” (p. 5). It is rare, indeed, to find a text
that is not only intellectually stimulating but also presents
ideas and insights in a creative way, honoring not only the
subject area but the subtleties and beauty of the written word.
The first chapter introduces the idea
of reciprocal coauthorship, the notion that just as teachers play
an important role in students’ understanding and
construction of their “life texts,” so it is that the
students also help coauthor those texts for the educators they
encounter. It is an elegant and intellectually stimulating
concept, as supported further by my graduate students’
reactions and discussions regarding this proposition. These
ideas continue into Chapter 2, which addresses identity in
context and the notion that adults in educational contexts grow
along with the adolescents on whom they impact. The chapter
elaborates on the concept of coauthorship; Nikkula and Toshalis
revisit Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development and
further integrate Marcia’s various identity statuses to
understand the identity exploration of adolescent students in
classrooms. The authors’ twist on the static stages of
traditional Eriksonian theory and Marcia’s elaboration,
allows the theory to be examined in a different light; and
permits the reader to understand identity not as an entity to be
reached, but as the exploration of the possibilities of
development and the opportunities offered to teachers and other
educational professionals who interact with them daily. Case
studies are used throughout the book, which lend meaning and
concrete examples to the authors’ novel approaches to
adolescent development. In Chapter 2 Nikkula and Toshalis
discuss how one school psychologist, Mitch, intervenes with a
student struggling with identity issues. In the margin of those
pages, I wrote, “Mitch, the superhero!” because I
recognize how difficult it is for teachers to intervene at that
level, yet these students present themselves on a daily basis in
their classrooms. There are so many of these students in New
York City classrooms, that to assume only one or two students
will need focused intervention is to minimize the actual needs of
so many students in city schools across the country. The authors
do not assume there are easy answers to adolescent issues, but
they neglect to address the difficulties teachers may face
without appropriate support from other school professionals.
This is a theme I have encountered throughout my career working
with teachers—the assumption that if a teacher identifies a
problem there will be prepared and willing support professionals
ready to successfully deal with the challenges they cannot
address in their forty-minutes-a-day encounters with students.
Classroom teachers always react to these assumptions, for they
live these experiences every day. My students found the information in
Chapter 3, Risk Taking and Creativity, to be particularly
helpful in understanding their students. However, no information
is presented on the biological explanation of risk-taking, which
I supplemented with a separate reading on adolescent brain
development, since risk taking in adolescence is essentially
biological in nature (Price, 2005). Lively discussion followed
the reading of that chapter, understandably so because these
teachers were able to consider how they might construct
activities involving appropriate risk-taking related to their
specific curricula. Moreover, the notion that creativity is a
form of risk-taking that can be used in high school classrooms
can be interpreted as statement against the “standardized
testing as educational reform” movement embodied by No
Child Left Behind. In this chapter the authors also
integrate the work of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Parks, allowing for a
full picture of how adolescent reasoning abilities interact with
the need for risk-taking and make a strong case for a
constructivist approach to teaching in high school classrooms.
This is a welcome change to the scripted lessons suggested by
many school districts in an attempt to “teach to the
test” and raise test scores. Teachers have told me that
they find ways to circumvent the “scripted lessons”
policy of their schools so that their students can think more
critically in their classrooms and still perform well on
standardized tests. Further, Noguera (2007) notes that students
themselves may feel cheated by the strong focus on standardized
test performance to the detriment of other achievement or
skills. Thus, Nikkula and Tosahlis offer better ideas, methods,
and “fresh” attempts to deal with the more advanced
cognitive abilities of students at the high school level.
Although my students found the spirit
of Chapter 4, Flow and Possibility Development, to be
interesting and pose some challenges in terms of classroom
praxis, they also found it to be somewhat cumbersome reading
material. Specifically, they found the concept itself to be very
meaningful but the reading to be more convoluted than necessary.
Basically, rather than look at the weaknesses in students,
teachers should focus on their strengths, find what flows for
them, and teach to those possibilities in terms of development.
Indeed elegant, as I previously noted, but also lacking in not
acknowledging the work of Gardner’s theory of multiple
intelligences to guide teachers in identifying student strengths
and classroom pedagogy that may maximize the possibilities
inherent in students. “Possibility” implies not
just a predisposition but also student interests and the variety
of ways in which students prefer to learn and to show teachers
what they know. Thus, radical educators may, and perhaps should,
assert that, yes, education in this country should be all about
“flow and possibility” and developing the kinds of
teachers who address this in the classroom. However, the current
state of education, as criticized by authors such as James Popham
(see, for example, Popham, 2002 and Popham, 2003) often disallows
teachers from exercising best practice, which certainly
exemplifies Nakkula and Toshalis’ notion of “flow and
possibility.” I found myself in agreement with my
students regarding Chapter 5, Relational Identity and
Relationship Development. Once again, it tends to be
somewhat convoluted and overlaps with the coauthorship concept
presented previously. Further, while it is interesting to take a
stroll down memory lane and revisit psychoanalytic and clinical
psychology concepts of development, the inclusion of Sullivan,
and even Selman, make for a bit too much information that is less
relevant and practical for educators. My criticism of this
chapter also is in its use of Kohlberg as a point of departure
for other theories, since his work is much criticized in terms of
gender bias and generalization. The fact that the authors do
briefly review the work of Gilligan, Chodorow, and Baker Miller
does not satisfy my desire for a well-rounded exploration of
relational theory work. However, the chapter ending is intuitive
enough (almost) to forgive the lack of focus on feminist concepts
of relational development. That is, for the authors the
professional ethic of mentoring involves an ethic of learning
through care and support. “Educational mentoring captures
the essence of this model for us; it is educating to
care—for oneself, for others, and for the world around us;
and it is educating through care—through caring for the
students as the pedagogical priority” (p.98). Could this
be stated any better? The authors’ discussion of
gender identity development reveals balanced treatment of females
and males in terms of the issues explored by major theorists in
the field. Their treatment of stereotypes and behaviors
engendered by socialization and the media is thorough and also
gives fair play to issues faced by gay and lesbian youth,
prompting teachers to consider how they may be involved in
empowerment within the construct of identity development. The
focus on relational theory for both female and male gender
identity development and the concepts of “going underground
,” “resistance for survival,” and
“resistance for liberation,” offers the reader an
opportunity to think outside the neat little packaged boxes that
often constrain teachers in educational settings. Chapters such
as this and the three that follow, which address racial, ethnic,
and sexual orientation identity development allow teachers to
analyze, and understand diverse adolescents. These chapters
offer teachers the opportunity to view their students as the
complex individuals they are and not just the students in the
desks before them who need to pass standardized tests that might
reflect on them. Coverage of different stages and orientations
of racial and ethnic identity development is thorough and clearly
described and analyzed. This leaves time for educational
professionals to analyze their own students’ development
objectively and allows the opportunity for these professionals to
be true advocates for the youth in their schools. The authors
encourage teachers to engage students in dialogues about racial
identities; to consider their students’ development in
terms beyond simple identity theory and to place cultural context
at the forefront of this understanding. Kudos to the authors for
including Helms’s model of White racial identity
development, for it is only through the lens of all races and the
diverse cultures embodied therein that we come to understand and
apply the concept of reciprocity for our development as humans in
the service of others. Clearly, Nikkula and Toshalis themselves
seek to empower teachers and other professional educators to
offer “pedagogies of liberation” (see Friere, 1970).
The theme of understanding youth in
schools by focusing on the whole person as exemplified by the
chapters on gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation is
continued as the authors explore Faith and the Development of
Ultimate Meaning, in Chapter 10. They do not take a
simplistic approach to this topic but explore the big questions,
those requiring the level of cognitive development exemplified by
high school students. These are the ultimate life questions,
those that are pondered by most teenagers whether or not they
choose to openly discuss these issues among friends or with
school professionals. In fact, contemplation of these issues
helps young people to solidify their understanding of themselves
and their identity in relation to others and to the world around
them. Few books that deal with adolescent development delve into
this important topic; thus, Nakkula and Toshalis place themselves
in the forefront of helping education professionals understand
adolescents through many colored lenses. While Chapter 11, School to Career
Transitions, offers insights into variables of interest for
career development education, it is the last chapter that
provides a worthy conclusion to this worthy effort. By
considering the context, the ecology, in which adolescents
function and develop, and including not only
Bronfenbrenner’s approach but also the groundbreaking work
of Fordham and Obgu on resistance culture and oppositional
identities, Nikkula and Toshalis offer the framework into which
all other topics may be placed. The authors’ wise choice
of countering the cultural deficit model by citing researchers
who take exception to the concept provides a rich background for
meaningful discussions of the predominant “minority”
vs mainstream view of education. I would have liked a deeper
analysis of the meaning of “mainstream” views, since
at one point the authors present Carter’s conclusion that
“urban Latino(a) and African American adolescents subscribe
to the basic values of mainstream education and a productive work
ethic as much as and, in some cases, even more than Whites”
(p. 258). As educators perhaps we might
question the very understanding of values in education; do we
really value a “productive work ethic?” If we take
an honest look at the past twenty years of education in this
country, we might question the work ethic issue. Beginning with
the release of A Nation at Risk in 1983, education began
to focus on narrow definitions of the work necessary for success
in school. Some of us may view the current testing frenzy as
anathema to a truly productive work ethic. Productive
intellectual work involves high levels of critical thinking and
the ability to reflect on the status quo and see oneself as an
agent of change. The current state of education seeks to
reproduce the hegemony that has defined and dictated education in
this country for many years. What, also, are these other
“values” of mainstream education? Nakkula and
Toshalis miss an opportunity to critically evaluate the meaning
of these terms while addressing some of the resistance to
mainstream education by students from lower SES communities and
“minority” students. That discussion might be
productive for teachers to understand an alternate reality to
which they might be witness, while also validating the values and
experiences that non-mainstream students may bring with them to
our classrooms. However, I do not want the above
points to detract from the beauty of this chapter. During the
read, I visualized a large concept map connecting the reciprocal
relationships among all the topics covered in the book. I would
have liked a different ordering of the chapters, with those
chapters addressing basic identity issues together, and
positioning the chapter on flow and possibility at the end to
allow educators to reflect on how all other chapters might assist
in their understanding of this concept and allowing them to
ponder the application of their new knowledge to classroom and
other professional practice. Further, I am not sure the chapter
on school-to-career transitions is necessary or adds to the body
of knowledge addressed in the text. Perhaps the topics addressed
in that chapter might have been integrated throughout others. As
it stands, the chapter might be titled, Identity,
Interrupted, since it interrupts the “flow and
possibility” of understanding the material addressed in the
other chapters. I would be remiss, however, if I left
the reader of this review to consider that Nakkula and
Toshalis’ book is anything but wonderful. They have done
an exemplary job of writing from their vast knowledge of
adolescent development and of intellectually dissecting and
reconnecting many theories of import, yet it is very obvious that
they have written from their heart as well. Their desire for
readers to see the possibilities public education can offer
adolescents during this crucial time in their development is
obvious to the reader. I am ending this review with a
quotation from the book that, the authors say, is a composite of
conversations with various adolescents. It is powerful and
points to the possibilities education can offer our high school
population. If we want our high school students to feel this
way, then education must find ways to motivate and excite
adolescents to learn in their classrooms: “There’s
nothin’ like it, man…that feeling like you’re
really just focused and nothin’ can get in the way. I feel
that sometimes when I’m rappin’. I feel like, man,
the words are just flowin’ out of me like someone’s
back there just pourin’ ‘em out. And they just come,
man, they just keep comin’…” (p. 61).
Let’s get that flow goin’…. References Aronson, E. (2000). Nobody left to hate:
Teaching compassion after Columbine. New York: Henry Holt
& Co. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the
oppressed. New York: Continuum Press. Noguera, P. A. (2007). How listening to students
can help school to improve. Theory into Practice, 46(3),
205-11. Price, L. F. (2005). The biology of risk
taking. Educational Leadership, 62(7). 22-27.
Popham, W. J. (2003). Trouble with testing: Why
standards-based assessment doesn’t measure up. American
School Board Journal, 190(2), 14-17. Popham, W. J. (2002). Right task, wrong tool.
American School Board Journal, 189(2)
18-22. About the Reviewer Rosaria Caporrimo has been involved with adolescents and adolescent education for over twenty years. Her research/writing has focused on issues of social justice, multicultural education, educational equity, metacognition, and classroom learning. She earned a B.A. in Psychology from Montclair State University, and a Ph.D. in Educational Psychology, with a concentration in Learning and Instruction, from the Graduate School and University Center of the City University of New York. For several years, she consulted to the New York City Department of Education in the department of Assessment and Accountability, and maintains a private practice working with adolescents and their families. She is currently Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology at Queens College, CUNY and teaches undergraduate and graduate courses. She is also project director for the MYTI Program (Minority Youth Teaching Initiative), to recruit New York City high school students into the teaching profession. |
Tuesday, July 1, 2025
Nakkula, N.J. & Toshalis, E. (2006). Understanding Youth: Adolescent Development for Educators. Reviewed by Rosaria Caporrimo, Queens College, City University of New York
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Strong-Wilson, Teresa. (2008). <cite>Bringing Memory Forward: Storied Remembrance in Social Justice Education with Teachers. </cite> Reviewed by Patricia H. Hinchey, Pennsylvania State University
Strong-Wilson, Teresa. (2008). Bringing Memory Forward: Storied Remembrance in Social Justice Education with Teachers. Ne...
-
Ravitch, Diane. (1996) National Standards in American Education: A Citizen's Guide. Washington: The Brooki...
-
Chomsky, Noam. (2000). Chomsky on MisEducation , (Edited and introduced by Donaldo Macedo). New York: Rowan and...
-
Education Review/Reseñas Educativas/Resenhas Educativas Howe, Kenneth R. (1997) Understanding Equal Educationa...
No comments:
Post a Comment