“Literature, Geography, and the Untracked English Class” by Joan Kernan Cone: Summary and Critique

1. The Problem: Challenges of an Untracked Classroom

• Cone describes the transition from a four-track English class system to a two-track system, eliminating lower-level ability grouping (Cone, 1990, p. 60).
• She expresses concerns about balancing instruction for students with widely varying reading and writing abilities (p. 61).
• Quote: “What if the parents of the higher-achieving students objected to having their children mixed with students who read and wrote poorly?” (Cone, 1990, p. 61).

2. A Solution: Teaching English Through Geography

• A student’s misconception that India is in Africa led Cone to design a geography-based English curriculum (p. 60).
• The approach aimed to create a shared foundation of knowledge and eliminate ability-based divisions.
• Quote: “Instead of building a multidimensional classroom around the teaching of required texts and discourse modes, I would concentrate on geography or, more precisely, cultural geography” (Cone, 1990, p. 60).

3. The Journey Begins: Classroom Strategies

• Maps and a banner with the quote “If you don’t read, you are limited to living only one life in only one place” set the theme (p. 60).
• The curriculum was structured as a journey through various countries, incorporating literature, film, and writing assignments.
• Quote: “We would take a journey around the world, reading and writing and talking our way in and out of countries, cultures, and centuries” (Cone, 1990, p. 60).

4. Engaging Students Through Literature and Discussion

• Cone used Julie of the Wolves (George, 1972) to introduce Alaska, fostering discussion and collaborative meaning-making (p. 61).
• Reading was supplemented with geography exercises and discussions about culture and identity.
• Quote: “The time spent reading in class paid off because it encouraged talk: my students quickly became used to asking questions, predicting events, putting themselves into the main character’s predicament” (Cone, 1990, p. 61).

5. Expanding the Model: Brazil and Critical Reading

• The class studied Brazil through various sources, including Time and San Francisco Chronicle articles, introducing students to nonfiction analysis (p. 62).
• Students engaged in cooperative learning groups to summarize articles and refine reading comprehension.
• Quote: “Many of them had read little exposition and argumentation in English class; fiction and biography are the two genres used almost exclusively with students in low reading and writing tracks” (Cone, 1990, p. 62).

6. Films as Learning Tools

• Cone initially resisted using films but discovered their effectiveness in reinforcing literary themes (p. 64).
• Movies like Never Cry Wolf and The Emerald Forest provided visual narratives that deepened understanding.
• Quote: “Once I decided on the journey idea, however, I began to see the vital role films could play” (Cone, 1990, p. 64).

7. Collaborative Learning and Student Engagement

• Students took ownership of the curriculum, suggesting additional films and texts to explore different cultures (p. 64).
• Cone facilitated cooperative learning, reducing the hierarchical teacher-student dynamic.
• Quote: “This emphasis on negotiating meaning with everyone participating has contributed greatly to the breaking down of barriers erected by years of ability grouping” (Cone, 1990, p. 64).

8. Writing and Personal Reflection

• Assignments included personal narratives, interviews, and cultural comparisons, fostering critical thinking and self-reflection (p. 65).
• Students conducted interviews with ESL peers, broadening their perspectives on global experiences.
• Quote: “Here was a group of students who were clearly filled with information and questions and excitement about learning” (Cone, 1990, p. 63).

9. The Final Assessment: Measuring Growth

• The final exam required students to reflect on a book, discussing its main character’s journey and its impact on their own learning (p. 66).
• The year ended with a student-led reading session of interviews they had conducted.
• Quote: “At the end of the period, I read my contribution to the literary magazine. It began with a review of our journey and ended with an acknowledgment of them as students” (Cone, 1990, p. 66).

10. Lasting Impact and Future Plans

• Cone planned to expand the geography-based curriculum, adding texts like Night by Elie Wiesel and Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe (p. 67).
• The untracked classroom model proved effective in promoting equity and engagement in English education.
• Quote: “The journey and the year are still open. We’ll go where our literary and media tastes and wanderlust take us” (Cone, 1990, p. 67).

1. Reader-Response Theory

• Encourages students to interpret texts based on personal experiences rather than traditional analysis (Cone, 1990, p. 61).
• Quote: “The time spent reading in class paid off because it encouraged talk: my students quickly became used to asking questions, predicting events, putting themselves into the main character’s predicament” (Cone, 1990, p. 61).
• Students engage in meaning-making through discussion, making literature more interactive and personal.

2. Constructivist Literary Pedagogy

• Advocates for an active, student-centered learning approach where students construct meaning through exploration and collaboration (p. 64).
• Quote: “This emphasis on negotiating meaning with everyone participating has contributed greatly to the breaking down of barriers erected by years of ability grouping” (Cone, 1990, p. 64).
• Literature is not a fixed set of ideas but an evolving conversation shaped by student engagement.

3. Cultural Studies and Postcolonial Literary Theory

• Uses literature and geography to explore diverse cultures, histories, and global perspectives (p. 65).
• Quote: “Instead of building a multidimensional classroom around the teaching of required texts and discourse modes, I would concentrate on geography or, more precisely, cultural geography” (Cone, 1990, p. 60).
• Encourages students to analyze cultural differences, challenging Eurocentric narratives in literary studies.

4. Critical Literacy Theory

• Encourages students to analyze media, nonfiction, and literature critically to understand underlying biases and power structures (p. 62).
• Quote: “Many of them had read little exposition and argumentation in English class; fiction and biography are the two genres used almost exclusively with students in low reading and writing tracks” (Cone, 1990, p. 62).
• Develops students’ ability to question dominant ideologies in literature and media.

5. Multimodal Literary Theory

• Integrates different forms of media—films, maps, news articles—to enhance literary understanding (p. 64).
• Quote: “My experience this year reversed my position on using film in the classroom. In fact, I attribute my students’ excitement about the curriculum in large part to the films we saw and the added dimension they brought to our understanding of the print media we used” (Cone, 1990, p. 64).
• Expands literary analysis beyond written texts, incorporating visual and digital media.

6. Social Constructivist Theory in Literature

• Promotes collaborative learning, where students develop literary meaning through group discussions and shared interpretations (p. 62).
• Quote: “Students of different academic abilities had worked relatively cooperatively” (Cone, 1990, p. 62).
• Literature is understood not individually but through collective discussion and engagement.

7. Culturally Responsive Literary Pedagogy

• Selects texts and themes relevant to students’ backgrounds to make literature more inclusive and meaningful (p. 65).
• Quote: “The selection of diverse texts and global themes made literature relevant to students from different backgrounds” (Cone, 1990, p. 65).
• Challenges the traditional literary canon by integrating global and marginalized voices.

8. Progressive Educational Theory in Literary Studies

• Advocates for student agency, where learners have control over what they read and study (p. 64).
• Quote: “Students influenced the curriculum by suggesting books, films, and discussion topics, shifting ownership of learning from the teacher to the students” (Cone, 1990, p. 64).
• Literature is a tool for empowerment, encouraging students to take an active role in their learning.

1. Overgeneralization of Student Engagement

• While Cone presents her approach as universally effective, student responses to literature and geography-based learning may vary.
• Not all students may engage equally with geography as a foundation for literary analysis.

2. Lack of Rigor in Literary Analysis

• The emphasis on personal connections and cultural geography might overshadow deeper textual analysis.
• Cone’s approach may prioritize accessibility over traditional literary criticism, limiting students’ ability to engage with complex literary theories.

3. Potential for Unequal Learning Outcomes

• Untracked classrooms may still produce disparities in learning, as higher-achieving students may not be sufficiently challenged (Cone, 1990, p. 61).
• Some students might struggle with self-directed learning without structured guidance.

4. Over-Reliance on Multimodal Learning

• The heavy use of films and visual media might reduce emphasis on textual interpretation and critical reading skills.
• Critics might argue that literature should be analyzed primarily through close reading rather than supplementary media.

5. Practical Challenges in Implementation

• The geography-based curriculum requires extensive preparation and access to diverse resources, which may not be feasible in all schools.
• Teachers with limited training in geography or cultural studies may struggle to implement Cone’s interdisciplinary approach effectively.

6. Limited Focus on Traditional Literary Canon

• The article suggests moving away from traditional English curricula, which may disadvantage students preparing for standardized tests or academic literary studies.
• Critics may argue that foundational texts should not be sidelined in favor of contemporary and culturally diverse works.

7. Risk of Superficial Cultural Representation

• While Cone aims for inclusivity, her approach could unintentionally lead to surface-level engagement with cultures rather than deep critical analysis.
• Some critics may argue that discussing different cultures without in-depth historical and political context risks reinforcing stereotypes rather than dismantling them.

8. Insufficient Emphasis on Writing Skills

• Although Cone integrates writing tasks, her focus is largely on discussion and interpretation rather than formal writing instruction.
• Some students might not develop strong analytical writing skills needed for higher education.

9. Resistance from Traditional Educators and Parents

• Parents of high-achieving students may resist mixed-ability grouping, fearing that their children’s learning pace will slow down (Cone, 1990, p. 61).
• Traditional educators may view Cone’s student-led learning as lacking discipline and structure.

10. Overlooked Challenges in Assessing Growth

• Cone uses pre- and post-tests to measure knowledge but does not provide clear metrics for evaluating literary comprehension and critical thinking progress.
• Critics may argue that assessments should be more rigorously structured to track student learning outcomes effectively.