William Cope
Reda Sadki
May Thet Khine Nyein
Eugenia Arvanitis
Pinakini Shah
Jonathan deHaan
Alessandra Coutinho Fernandes
Ketan HeinLiteracy Teaching and Learning MOOC’s Updates
Section 7: Critical Literacy Pedagogy
Critical pedagogies generally acknowledge that literacies are in the plural. They recognise the many voices learners bring to the classroom, the many sites of popular culture and the new media, and the differing perspectives that exist in real-world texts. They support learners as meaning-makers, as agents, as participants and as active citizens. They use the learning of literacies as a tool to enable students to take more control over the ways that meaning is made in, and about , their lives, rather than allow them to be alienated, swamped or excluded by unfamiliar texts – or simply to be confused or grudgingly compliant. More recently, critical literacies have also become sites for the interrogation and creation of media and new media texts.
Section 7 at literacies.com includes some key readings from the proponents of critical pedagogy.
Comment: What, in your view, are the strengths and weaknesses of critical literacy approaches?
Make an Update: Find an example of critical literacies pedagogy in practice. Provide a brief outline of the example you have found, and analyze its strengths and weaknesses. Compare with functional literacy pedagogy—what are the similarities and differences in approach?
An Example of Authentic Literacy Pedagogy: The Process Writing Approach
The process writing approach is an example of authentic literacy pedagogy that emphasizes writing as a recursive, meaning-making process rather than a product of rigid rules. Unlike traditional or didactic literacy pedagogy, which focuses on grammar drills, correctness, and final output, process writing guides students through stages of prewriting, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing. The teacher acts as a facilitator who supports students’ thinking, encourages peer collaboration, and values the writer’s voice and purpose. Writing is taught as communication—a way to express ideas, reflect on experiences, and engage with real audiences.
One major strength of process writing is that it promotes authentic engagement. Students write about meaningful topics, explore ideas, and develop ownership of their work. The emphasis on revision fosters critical thinking and metacognitive skills, helping learners understand that good writing evolves through feedback and reflection. This approach also builds confidence and creativity, as errors are viewed as part of growth rather than failure. Additionally, peer review and teacher conferences encourage collaboration and community building within the classroom.
However, process writing also has limitations. It can be time-consuming, especially in large classes, where individualized feedback and multiple drafts are challenging to manage. Students with weak language foundations may also struggle without explicit instruction in grammar and structure. Furthermore, assessing progress can be complex, since evaluation focuses on growth and effort rather than fixed correctness.
Compared to didactic literacy pedagogy, which is teacher-centered and skill-focused, process writing is student-centered and meaning-focused. Didactic methods stress accuracy and control, while authentic approaches like process writing prioritize creativity, reflection, and real communication. In essence, process writing transforms literacy learning from memorizing language rules to using language as a tool for thinking, expression, and participation in genuine communicative contexts.
“Disrupting the Commonplace: Critical Literacy Practices in the ESL Reading Classroom” by Jihyun Nam (2020)
In an Intensive English Program at a Midwestern U.S. university, five ESL students participated in eight group discussions analyzing selected reading texts. Guided by the “four dimensions model” of critical literacy, the sessions encouraged students to examine point of view, power, and missing voices. The aim was to shift reading beyond comprehension toward critical engagement with social issues and challenging assumptions in texts.
Strengths - Promotes deep thinking & critical awareness, Empowers learners as readers and Relevance to social justice / equity
Weaknesses - Small‑scale & Resource‑Intensive, Time constraints, Assessing outcomes is harder
Similarities
Both seek to make literacy relevant: critical literacy by connecting to power, identity, social issues; functional literacy by connecting to real life tasks.
Both move away from teaching literacy purely as abstract skills; both value context.
Both can involve learner agency: choosing texts, bringing in experiences.
Key Differences
Depth of engagement with meaning, power, ideology: Critical literacy explicitly engages with power, whose voice is present/absent, what ideologies are conveyed; functional literacy is more about usability and practical function, not about critique.
Orientation to social justice vs everyday tasks: Critical literacy leans toward social transformation, justice, voice; functional literacy leans toward utility, livelihood, everyday survival.
Risk vs reward: Critical literacy can provoke resistance but also deeper transformation; functional literacy more likely to show immediate performance gains but perhaps less change in mindset or identity.
References
Nam, Jihyun. (2020). Disrupting the Commonplace: Critical Literacy Practices in the ESL Reading Classroom. International Journal of Critical Pedagogy, 11(1).
janeway.uncpress.org
+1
Stefanova, Svetlana; Bobkina, Jelena; Sánchez‑Verdejo Pérez, Francisco Javier. (2016). “The Effectiveness of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills through Literature in EFL Context: A Case Study in Spain.” International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature.
aiac.org.au
Critical Literacy Practices in an Elementary School Classroom: A Study of Teacher Learning (Pesarchick, 2018)
Uganda’s Functional Adult Literacy (FAL) Program
Outline of the Program
Setting / Participants: Adults (15 years and older) in Uganda who missed out on formal education.
Their purpose is to To link basic literacy (reading, writing, numeracy) to people’s livelihoods and everyday needs — e.g. income generation, self‑reliance, improving living conditions, community participation.
Strengths
Practicality: Because literacy is taught in ways tied to daily life needs (e.g. livelihood, income, community participation), learners are more likely to see value and stay motivated.
Inclusivity: Targets marginalized populations (women, people who missed formal education) and often local community involvement.
Weaknesses
Quality of Instruction / Facilitators: If facilitators are under‑trained, or the curriculum is not well adapted to learners’ levels, the functional literacy instruction may either be too easy (boring) or too difficult
Resource Constraints: Implementing such programs well requires materials, trained facilitators, consistent funding, and community infrastructure. These are often lacking or variable.
REF: https://www.uil.unesco.org/en/litbase/functional-adult-literacy-fal-programme-uganda
Growing up in the 1990s, before the rise of the internet and smartphones, the way people learned to read, write, and communicate was very different from today. Now, as someone born in the 1980s and raised before digital technology dominated everyday life, I find it fascinating how apps like TikTok, CapCut, and Instagram have become powerful tools for learning new literacies in innovative ways.
TikTok, for example, is not just a place for entertainment—it’s a platform where users create short videos to share ideas, stories, tutorials, and challenges. This app encourages creativity and communication in a very visual and fast-paced way. People learn how to convey messages effectively in seconds, mastering digital storytelling much differently than writing a paper or reading a book like I did in school.
CapCut, a popular video editing app, complements TikTok by allowing users to easily edit their videos with effects, transitions, and music. It teaches young people digital skills like editing, sequencing, and multimedia composition. Watching users make engaging, polished content on their own made me realize how literacy now includes knowing how to operate digital tools creatively, not just how to read and write text.
Instagram, on the other hand, blends photo-sharing with storytelling. Users combine images, captions, hashtags, and comments to express themselves and connect with communities worldwide. It’s a social space where visual literacy—the ability to interpret and produce images—is just as important as verbal literacy.
What’s innovative about these platforms is how they transform literacy from static reading and writing into multimodal communication that mixes text, visuals, sound, and interactivity. They foster skills like critical thinking about media, digital production, and social interaction in online spaces. For someone raised in the 90s, these tools represent a radical shift from traditional literacy education to a more dynamic, tech-driven way of learning and communicating that fits our digital age perfectly.
Khan Academy is a contemporary example of didactic pedagogy that delivers structured video lessons and practice exercises across subjects such as math, science, and history. Its strength lies in its accessibility, as it provides free, high-quality education to learners worldwide, and in its clear, step-by-step instruction that works especially well for procedural subjects. The platform also allows students to learn at their own pace by pausing, rewinding, and revisiting lessons, while built-in exercises provide immediate feedback to reinforce understanding. However, its didactic nature also presents limitations. The one-way delivery resembles a traditional lecture, offering little space for dialogue or collaborative learning. This structure may encourage surface-level mastery rather than deeper critical thinking or creativity. Additionally, the platform depends heavily on the learner’s motivation and discipline, and its largely uniform approach may not fully cater to diverse learning styles. Overall, Khan Academy exemplifies the strengths and challenges of didactic pedagogy in a digital age.
It's a really interesting topic, my views about the strengths and weaknesses of critical literacy pedagogy is, I can say that it's like a lens of closed-circuit television or CCTV in one community, because just like cctv it can recognized the actions, the voices of the learners, can sites of popular culture and capturing the different perspectives that exists in real-world scenarios. And they have the same function: critical literacy pedagogy is to check or test the students knowledge through learning experiences and to examine power structures and patterns of inequality within society while CCTV to monitor and record activities for security and safety purposes. It allows administrators and security personnel to observe student and faculty behavior.
In my view, one of the greatest strengths of critical literacy is how it empowers learners to question texts and connect them to real issues in society. Instead of just reading for information, students learn to analyze hidden messages, biases, and perspectives. I like this approach because it encourages deeper thinking and makes learning meaningful. As I experienced while studying pedagogy at NTC, critical literacy allows teachers to guide students to reflect on social realities in the Philippine setting, like poverty, gender roles, or cultural diversity. This not only develops reading comprehension but also nurtures empathy and active citizenship, which are skills learners can carry beyond the classroom.
The weakness, however, is that critical literacy can be challenging to apply consistently in real classrooms. For younger learners or those still struggling with basic reading, it may be too abstract and overwhelming. Teachers also need strong preparation and confidence to guide discussions about sensitive issues, which is not always easy in traditional school settings. In the Philippines, where many schools already struggle with limited resources, focusing heavily on critical literacy might feel unrealistic if students have not yet mastered foundational skills. As a future teacher, I believe the challenge is finding balance, combining critical literacy with basic skill-building so students can both read fluently and think critically about the world around them.
Critical literacy encourages creativity because students are not only reading texts but also creating their own interpretations and even producing their own media. This helps them develop confidence in expressing ideas and connecting them to real-world issues, which is very empowering.
On the other hand, a possible weakness is that it might be challenging for some learners if they are not yet confident in basic literacy skills. It can also take more time compared to traditional methods since it requires discussion, reflection, and deeper engagement with texts. Teachers need to be well-prepared to guide these conversations so that they remain productive and respectful.
I think one of the biggest strengths of critical literacy approaches is that they empower learners to think deeply and question what they read and see. Instead of just accepting information, students learn to analyze, evaluate, and even challenge texts, which makes them more active and informed citizens. It also values the voices and experiences students bring with them, making learning more inclusive and meaningful.