1 Biliteracy, Empowerment, and Transformative Pedagogy Jim Cummins University of Toronto The continuing concern about preparing students for the technologically sophisticated workplace of the 21 st century with its requirement of higher literacy levels among workers has given rise to concerted efforts at school reform in countries around the world. However, in most countries, despite the fact that linguistically and culturally diverse students tend to be strongly over- represented in school failure categories (e.g. dropout rates), few of the prescriptions for school reform specifically address the causes of educational failure among such students. Even fewer contemplate bilingualism and biliteracy as part of the solution rather than as part of the problem. I argue in this paper that biliteracy must become an essential component of educational reform efforts directed at under-achieving Latino/Latina students. However, literacy or even biliteracy are insufficient as educational goals if they remain at the level of "functional literacy" and fail to promote “critical literacy.” In other words, students must learn not only to "read the word," but also to "read the world" (Freire & Macedo, 1987). I argue that the public focus and apparent political commitment to improving the ability of students (and adults) to "read the word" represents a facade that obscures an underlying societal structure that continues to discourage students from "reading the world." This reality implies that educators who strive to create educational contexts within which culturally-diverse students develop a sense of empowerment, through acquisition of cultural and critical literacy, are of necessity challenging the societal power structure. By "power structure" I am referring to the division of status and resources in the society and also to the ways in which discourse is mobilized through the media to legitimate and preserve the current division of status and resources. A further distinction relating to the societal power structure is useful to make at this point. Throughout the paper I distinguish between coercive and collaborative relations of power. Coercive relations of power refer to the exercise of power by a dominant group (or individual) to the detriment of a subordinated group (or individual). The assumption is that there is a fixed quantity of power that operates according to a balance effect; in other words, the more power one group has the less is left for other groups. Collaborative relations of power, on the other hand, operate on the assumption that power is not a fixed pre-determined quantity but rather can be generated in interpersonal and intergroup relations, thereby becoming "additive" rather than "subtractive." In other words, participants in the relationship are empowered through their collaboration such that each is more affirmed in her or his identity and has a greater sense of efficacy to effect change in her or his life or social situation. Thus, power is created in the relationship and shared among participants. In educational contexts, cooperative learning activities and sister class networks constitute documented examples of the academic and personal benefits that accrue when coercive relations of power shift to collaborative relations of power (e.g. DeVillar & Faltis, 1990; Cummins & Sayers, 1995). Within this context, empowerment refers to the collaborative creation of power. Transformative pedagogy refers to interactions between educators and students that foster the collaborative creation of power. These terms will be further elaborated throughout the chapter. A fundamental argument of the present chapter is that the root causes of academic failure among subordinated group students are to be found in the fact that the interactions between educators and students frequently reflect and reinforce the broader societal pattern of coercive relations of power between dominant and subordinated groups. Reversal of this pattern requires that educators resist and challenge the operation of coercive relations of power and actively seek to establish collaborative relations of power both in the school and in the broader society. The next section focuses on the issue of biliteracy and examines the public debate on bilingual education in light of the research data. The goal is to demonstrate that biliteracy is a feasible educational outcome for all students and what requires explanation is the public discourse that vehemently denies this reality. I then shift from a focus on "biliteracy" to the broader issue of literacy itself. I suggest that not only are many educational policies dedicated to reducing bilinguals to monolinguals, they are also structured to constrict the possibilities for students' identity formation and to limit the scope of their ability to think, or in Freire's terms, to read the world. Finally, drawing on Ada's (1988a, 1988b) work, I suggest an alternative pedagogical orientation designed to promote critical biliteracy and student empowerment.