Whenever we do these blogposts, I always tend to write about the things I disagreed with. Its just that much more interesting...
"We are nowhere closer to a post racial society".
Although I agree that we still do not live in a society where skin color is not a factor, I think saying that we are "nowhere" closer is a bit exaggerated. Attitudes have changed drastically since Brown vs. Board of Education, and compared to that time, many new opportunities have been open to blacks. In fact, in the eyes of the law black people have all the same opportunities as white people. And that is all that is meant by "equality". Equality is never truly equal, because people cant ever all be equal. All "equality" promises to provide is equal opportunity, and we have certainly achieved that in this country. And like I already said, attitudes have come a long way as well. Racist attitudes have definitely went down, and I think its really reflected in our class discussions. Everyone in our class has favorable attitudes towards people of color, and in my experience its been like that everywhere - at my school, on TV, etc.
Tim Wise also said that the standards for a black president are very high, while the standards for white presidents are rather low. As if any of our presidents have been idiots...He mentioned a bunch of times about how Bush is an idiot. He was definitely playing of the popular opinion that Bush is an idiot. Bush graduated from Yale University and the Harvard Business school. Maybe he didn't turn out to be a great president (circumstances, mistakes) but he is certainly a good businessman. He is definitely just as well qualified as Barack Obama. And that was Tim Wise's best example of an "idiot president". Yes, its true that a black person must be very well qualified to be the president. But so does a white person. And please don't bring up the past, with different standards, and tell me that George Washington barely finished grade school.
The "stereotype argument" was a little "circular" in my opinion. I am sure that Tim Wise would agree that most black people are still not "equal" with white people (in regards to living standards, salaries etc). In fact, proving how black people are still worse of than white people is Tim Wise's entire agenda. If it wasn't true, Tim Wise would not have written his book. However, In the polls, when white people were asked whether they think that most blacks are poorer and less educated and answered yes, Tim Wise was astonished at the negative stereotypes Americans harbor towards blacks! Of course, blacks are less educated. Proving that blacks are stuck in bad schools is the whole point of this class. And I do no judge the people who think that poverty is due to laziness. Like I already said, this country does, by law, offer all the same opportunities to everyone. Most people just don't go as far to examine the complicated intangible factors as to why blacks might be poorer when answering these polls. Stereotypes exist for a reason. They exist because they are often true. And these "negative stereotypes" are really not all that negative when you look at it this way.
And here is a really interesting article about an Asian American about pushing diversity too far. Its kind of the opinion that I hold, but if I wrote this article, I would definitely be judged for being oblivious, or even racist. So its nice that it actually comes from the mouth of a minority student.
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
In the Service of What? The Politics of Service Learning by Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer
This article offers two views of service learning: one based on altruism and the other on critical and pro-active thinking.
"Mr. Johnson's curriculum included only minimal attention to any systematic analysis of the ills his students were helping to alleviate."
This kind of approach focuses on altruism and individual acts of kindness. It helps the students be able to relate to underprivileged members of their communities and fosters the development of self-esteem. Although this approach has many benefits and helps create more caring and involved citizens, Kahne and Westheimer argue that it does not create positive changes on the broader scale.
"Ms. Adams' students, by contrast, began their work with a systematic and critical analysis of the causes of homelessness and of the strategies employed to prevent it. "
This kind of approach focuses more on understanding the problem and learning about how to combat it at its roots instead of alleviating the effects. I think this can be much more affective in the long run than the previous approach. However, I think that it would not be good if all the students did was learn about theory and never actually went out to serve the homeless people. Altruism and charity are still important, and help create more caring citizens who will understand the need by experiencing it firsthand and will be more likely to initiate reform in the future. I think both charity and critical analysis should go hand in hand when it comes to service learning.
"...it is the combination of service and critical analysis, not either by itself, that seems most likely to promote interest in and insight into these complex social issues."
I definitely agree with this statement. It really takes both to get the most benefit out of service learning. I feel like by itself, each approach is a dead end, but together service and analysis can foster the kind of change this country needs.
"Mr. Johnson's curriculum included only minimal attention to any systematic analysis of the ills his students were helping to alleviate."
This kind of approach focuses on altruism and individual acts of kindness. It helps the students be able to relate to underprivileged members of their communities and fosters the development of self-esteem. Although this approach has many benefits and helps create more caring and involved citizens, Kahne and Westheimer argue that it does not create positive changes on the broader scale.
"Ms. Adams' students, by contrast, began their work with a systematic and critical analysis of the causes of homelessness and of the strategies employed to prevent it. "
This kind of approach focuses more on understanding the problem and learning about how to combat it at its roots instead of alleviating the effects. I think this can be much more affective in the long run than the previous approach. However, I think that it would not be good if all the students did was learn about theory and never actually went out to serve the homeless people. Altruism and charity are still important, and help create more caring citizens who will understand the need by experiencing it firsthand and will be more likely to initiate reform in the future. I think both charity and critical analysis should go hand in hand when it comes to service learning.
"...it is the combination of service and critical analysis, not either by itself, that seems most likely to promote interest in and insight into these complex social issues."
I definitely agree with this statement. It really takes both to get the most benefit out of service learning. I feel like by itself, each approach is a dead end, but together service and analysis can foster the kind of change this country needs.
Thursday, March 4, 2010
"Unlearning the Myths that Bind Us" - Christensen
I thought that this was an interesting article and after reading this I would like to see some Disney movies and analyze them. However, I thought that Christensen's emphasis on the idea that children's stories and cartoons are damaging isa bit exaggerated. Again, I can’t say for sure since I did not yet see and discuss the specific films myself, but I definitely thought that he made it sound much worse than it is in reality.
Here are some quotes that I disagreed with:
"Many students don't want to believe that they have been manipulated
by children's media or advertising. No one wants to admit that they've been "handled" by the media. They assure me that they make their own choices and the media has no power over them -as they sit with Fubu, Nike, Tim berlands or whatever the latest fashion rage might be".
This is one instance where I think he is really exaggerating. Every culture has things that are considered "popular". Every culture has its own ideas of beauty and style. I agree that American culture is much more based on consumerism than any other culture, but I am not about to stop buying things I like just to prove some point, or to prove that I am an "independent thinker" or that I "have not been handled by the media". What other option is there? Am I going to sew my own clothes? Everybody follows trends to some extent, and I think its totally OK. I think I would be one of those students so judged by Christensen.
“For some students the cartoon unit exposes the wizardry that enters our dreams and desires, but others shrug their shoulders at this. It's okay for some people to be rich and others poor; they just want to see more rich people of color or more rich women, Or better yet, be rich themselves, they accept the inequalities in power and exploitative economic relationships”.
Again, I think I am one of those students he is talking about. I accept it as well. Its has been so all throughout history. I accept the fact that I am always going to be poorer than someone else. And its normal. Its not perfect -but its normal. If power and wealth were measured in gold thousands of years ago, and now they are measured in designer clothes than so be it. Its all the same and I see nothing discriminatory about that. Its no reason to start a movement against cartoons.
“The messages, or "secret education," linked with the security of their homes, underscore the power these texts deliver. As Tatum's research suggests, the stereotypes and world view embedded in the stories become accepted knowledge”.
This quote is the basis of everything Christensen talks about in the article. I do agree that her argument is primarily true. But I think its like that everywhere. Every culture has its own stories, its own stereotypes, and its own values. Values have often been based on stories. Again, I really do not think there is something inherently evil about that. Certain specific stereotypes can be evil or discriminatory, but I think there is nothing wrong in the big picture.
Here are some quotes that I disagreed with:
"Many students don't want to believe that they have been manipulated
by children's media or advertising. No one wants to admit that they've been "handled" by the media. They assure me that they make their own choices and the media has no power over them -as they sit with Fubu, Nike, Tim berlands or whatever the latest fashion rage might be".
This is one instance where I think he is really exaggerating. Every culture has things that are considered "popular". Every culture has its own ideas of beauty and style. I agree that American culture is much more based on consumerism than any other culture, but I am not about to stop buying things I like just to prove some point, or to prove that I am an "independent thinker" or that I "have not been handled by the media". What other option is there? Am I going to sew my own clothes? Everybody follows trends to some extent, and I think its totally OK. I think I would be one of those students so judged by Christensen.
“For some students the cartoon unit exposes the wizardry that enters our dreams and desires, but others shrug their shoulders at this. It's okay for some people to be rich and others poor; they just want to see more rich people of color or more rich women, Or better yet, be rich themselves, they accept the inequalities in power and exploitative economic relationships”.
Again, I think I am one of those students he is talking about. I accept it as well. Its has been so all throughout history. I accept the fact that I am always going to be poorer than someone else. And its normal. Its not perfect -but its normal. If power and wealth were measured in gold thousands of years ago, and now they are measured in designer clothes than so be it. Its all the same and I see nothing discriminatory about that. Its no reason to start a movement against cartoons.
“The messages, or "secret education," linked with the security of their homes, underscore the power these texts deliver. As Tatum's research suggests, the stereotypes and world view embedded in the stories become accepted knowledge”.
This quote is the basis of everything Christensen talks about in the article. I do agree that her argument is primarily true. But I think its like that everywhere. Every culture has its own stories, its own stereotypes, and its own values. Values have often been based on stories. Again, I really do not think there is something inherently evil about that. Certain specific stereotypes can be evil or discriminatory, but I think there is nothing wrong in the big picture.
Friday, February 26, 2010
Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community by Dennis Carlson
"Over the past several decades representations of lesbians and gay men have begun t0 surface."
I think this is definitely true. I often see gay people, not only in movies, but on public television.
"To some extent this is because gay people have found
more acceptance within the middle class and among the college-educated than within the working class. Similarly, gay culture has been overwhelmingly "white"...
This statements is also very true. In my experience, all of the gay people I have encountered were white. I cannot really claim to know whether they were middle or working class, but most certainly appeared to be middle class whites. Here are some gay demographics.
"Major church groups also lined up against 'he Rainbow Curriculum including the Bronx Hispanic Clergy Association, the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, Christian fundamentalists, and Orthodox Jews. Yet twenty-five Protestant and Jewish clergy formed a council to counter the attack from the Right ("Liberal Groups" 1993).This points to the growing battle within the religious community over sexuality."
It makes no sense for a religious community whose writings and whose God condemns homosexuality to proclaim that they are in support of homosexuality. The two simply cannot go together. You cant change the Bible around. It says what it says.
I think this is definitely true. I often see gay people, not only in movies, but on public television.
"To some extent this is because gay people have found
more acceptance within the middle class and among the college-educated than within the working class. Similarly, gay culture has been overwhelmingly "white"...
This statements is also very true. In my experience, all of the gay people I have encountered were white. I cannot really claim to know whether they were middle or working class, but most certainly appeared to be middle class whites. Here are some gay demographics.
"Major church groups also lined up against 'he Rainbow Curriculum including the Bronx Hispanic Clergy Association, the Catholic Archdiocese of New York, Christian fundamentalists, and Orthodox Jews. Yet twenty-five Protestant and Jewish clergy formed a council to counter the attack from the Right ("Liberal Groups" 1993).This points to the growing battle within the religious community over sexuality."
It makes no sense for a religious community whose writings and whose God condemns homosexuality to proclaim that they are in support of homosexuality. The two simply cannot go together. You cant change the Bible around. It says what it says.
Thursday, February 18, 2010
"Teaching Multilingual Children" by Virginia Collier
As a former ESL student myself, I found the articles for this week very fascinating to read. I was in an ESL classroom during the second half of fourth grade and first half of fifth grade, so I think i have the benefit of first hand experience when it comes to the issues of this topic.
Although I was not a huge fan of "Aria" by Richard Rodriguez, I thought that "Teaching Multilingual Children" by Virginia Collier was a very insightful article.
Many of the statements Collier made I really agree with and have experienced first-hand in my own life:
"Academic skills developed in the first language tend to automatically transfer to the second language".
I actually thought of this same concept even before I read that part in the article ( and when I read it i thought "So true!"). I wondered why some kids learn a second language much faster than others. Although I do think that much depends on personal ability (some people are just better at learning languages than others) I quickly realized that a lot of it tends to do with how rigorous your schooling was in your home country. I am not completely sure anymore because fifth grade was a long time ago, but I think some kids in my class did not even go to school in their home countries. As a result, not only did they not speak English, but they also had no concept of reading, writing, and math. Obviously, with sucha situation, I can see what Collier means when she says that it could take them "from five to seven years to master commonly accepted age-grade norms".
I was rather surprised by this statement however:
"It is worse for many students who are placed in English-only classrooms with teachers who have no training in second language acquisition and who use an English-only curriculum".
Although I am not an expert and certainly do not have research to back me up, it seems to me that being completely immersed in a foreign language is actually beneficial for foreign language learners. My ESL classroom was certainly English-only, since the diversity of the students made it impossible to accommodate to all their languages, and we were even forbidden to speak our native languages to peers. It seems to me that complete immersion into a second language helps the student focus on, and rely on, that language so much more. I think that the danger of bilingual classrooms is that kids will just speak whatever language is most comfortable and ignore the second language if they can get by without it. When you know you cant survive without learning to speak English it really makes a difference in how quickly you learn.
Finally, I thought the six features of "Caregiver speech" were all excellent points. One of my favorites is, "Caregivers provide models to children by saying for them what the children seem to want to say". I like this one cause I think these kids need to be given a break! Sometimes its just hard to think of words, even if you know them, and I think its a good thing for teachers to help them out. Also, its easier to understand than it is to speak, so if I child has problems saying something the teacher should lead them to the right words and model the right words. A child will probably understand, even if they could not have said it themselves, and will hopefully remember what to say next time in a similar situation.
Overall, I thought this article was great. It was easy to read, to the point, and very insightful. I think the "Caregiver" points are an essential for all ESL teachers. In class, I would like to discuss bilingual teaching methods more, since its something I really do not know much about. Although two languages are definitely better than one (I assume this kind of teaching is mostly directed towards Spanish-speaking students), I do see many problems that could come with bilingual teaching.
Although I was not a huge fan of "Aria" by Richard Rodriguez, I thought that "Teaching Multilingual Children" by Virginia Collier was a very insightful article.
Many of the statements Collier made I really agree with and have experienced first-hand in my own life:
"Academic skills developed in the first language tend to automatically transfer to the second language".
I actually thought of this same concept even before I read that part in the article ( and when I read it i thought "So true!"). I wondered why some kids learn a second language much faster than others. Although I do think that much depends on personal ability (some people are just better at learning languages than others) I quickly realized that a lot of it tends to do with how rigorous your schooling was in your home country. I am not completely sure anymore because fifth grade was a long time ago, but I think some kids in my class did not even go to school in their home countries. As a result, not only did they not speak English, but they also had no concept of reading, writing, and math. Obviously, with sucha situation, I can see what Collier means when she says that it could take them "from five to seven years to master commonly accepted age-grade norms".
I was rather surprised by this statement however:
"It is worse for many students who are placed in English-only classrooms with teachers who have no training in second language acquisition and who use an English-only curriculum".
Although I am not an expert and certainly do not have research to back me up, it seems to me that being completely immersed in a foreign language is actually beneficial for foreign language learners. My ESL classroom was certainly English-only, since the diversity of the students made it impossible to accommodate to all their languages, and we were even forbidden to speak our native languages to peers. It seems to me that complete immersion into a second language helps the student focus on, and rely on, that language so much more. I think that the danger of bilingual classrooms is that kids will just speak whatever language is most comfortable and ignore the second language if they can get by without it. When you know you cant survive without learning to speak English it really makes a difference in how quickly you learn.
Finally, I thought the six features of "Caregiver speech" were all excellent points. One of my favorites is, "Caregivers provide models to children by saying for them what the children seem to want to say". I like this one cause I think these kids need to be given a break! Sometimes its just hard to think of words, even if you know them, and I think its a good thing for teachers to help them out. Also, its easier to understand than it is to speak, so if I child has problems saying something the teacher should lead them to the right words and model the right words. A child will probably understand, even if they could not have said it themselves, and will hopefully remember what to say next time in a similar situation.
Overall, I thought this article was great. It was easy to read, to the point, and very insightful. I think the "Caregiver" points are an essential for all ESL teachers. In class, I would like to discuss bilingual teaching methods more, since its something I really do not know much about. Although two languages are definitely better than one (I assume this kind of teaching is mostly directed towards Spanish-speaking students), I do see many problems that could come with bilingual teaching.
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Response to Kozol
Amazing Grace by Jonathan Kozol
Very eye-opening article! Its definitely easy to forget that so many people not far away from you are living in complete poverty and in conditions so terrible that you'd think the article is describing a third world country!
Here are some quotes that I thought were particularly important:
Go hear for one man's theory for how to beat the system:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Weekend/story?id=7134484&page=1
This article was very intense and certainly appealing to people's emotions. I felt very sorry for the people who have to live in these conditions and can only wonder how bad it must be.
I would love to see more blacks rise out of the rubble, beat the system, and become successful despite the odds.
The only question I have is WHY so few of the people who live in Harlem work. The article did mention that many are too sick to work, but I cannot imagine that such a majority would be so disabled rendering it impossible to work on at least some kind of job. Are jobs simply not available? Are there other factors that might be withholding people from job posts?
Very eye-opening article! Its definitely easy to forget that so many people not far away from you are living in complete poverty and in conditions so terrible that you'd think the article is describing a third world country!
Here are some quotes that I thought were particularly important:
- "There are children in the poorest, most abandoned places who, despite the miseries and poisons that the wurld has pumped into their jives, seem, when you first meet them, to be cheeerful anyway." ~ Kozol
Its hopeful to think that children's spirits can be so resilient to the evil that is going on around them. It makes you realize that there is a lot of potential in those children, and if they were given the opportunity they could become just as successful as anybody else. Its so sad that with time those spirits can be dampened and put out completely as these children turn into teenagers and enter the world of drug use and prostitution. It makes you want to rescue them while they are still cheerful, hopeful, and full of life and potential.
Its amazing that people living in the poorest of conditions can have so much compassion for others when they themselves are suffering. Its amazing that he would give his pizza away with so much willingness, and makes me wonder whether I would even do the same.- -"three slices, one for my mom, one for my dad,
and one for me"-he says he saw a homeless man who told
him he was hungry. "But he was too cold to move his
mouth! He couldn't talk!"
"How did you know that he was hungry if he couldn't
talk?"
"He pointed to my pizza."
"What did you do?"
"I gave him some!"
"Were your parents mad at you?"
He looks surprised by this. "Why would they be mad?"
he asks. "God told us, 'Share!'"
- "I have yet to figure out what she has done that was irrational".
Go hear for one man's theory for how to beat the system:
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Weekend/story?id=7134484&page=1
This article was very intense and certainly appealing to people's emotions. I felt very sorry for the people who have to live in these conditions and can only wonder how bad it must be.
I would love to see more blacks rise out of the rubble, beat the system, and become successful despite the odds.
The only question I have is WHY so few of the people who live in Harlem work. The article did mention that many are too sick to work, but I cannot imagine that such a majority would be so disabled rendering it impossible to work on at least some kind of job. Are jobs simply not available? Are there other factors that might be withholding people from job posts?
Response to Kozol
I am Yana Stetsyuk, I am majoring in Elementary Education and and I hope that this blog will be a great medium to discuss issues related to education.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
