Please answer the following questions and respond to each other on the Blog. In your thorough responses, refer to chapters 3 and 8 in Miller & Norris and chapters 1-4 in Nieto & Bode. Be sure to use proper in text citations, refer to class discussions, and respond thoughtfully to each others' comments. Feel free to pose questions to each other, challenge each other, and invite feedback. Dr. Norris and I will join in the conversation. Rather than have one massive response, post something, come back to it, and then respond to peers. You should respond at least three times.
This Blog must be completed by Tuesday evening prior to class.
About Me
- sjMiller
- I am a funky, fresh, wheelin' dealin kind of PER-son who likes to hip-hop with my hippity hops and learn with the peeps. questions contact: sjmiller@iup.edu
41 comments:
Hi. I am reading Affirming Diversity and following along with the companion website and would recommend that to everyone. The section on Critical Thinking Essay Questions for each chapter poses excellent questions for us to consider as we read these chapters, for example, for Chapter Three: In the chapter Nieto and Bode address the difficulty that many teachers have addressing issues of race and racism. Why do you think racism is so hard to talk about? What can teachers do to combat racism? These are tough questions, especially for privileged white preservice teachers or teacher educators who may not have had a diverse student body in their own secondary schools if they grew up in rural or suburban Western PA. What are some of the ways we can begin to break through and address issues of race, gender, and social class? One way might be to begin with literature discussions of texts like To Kill a Mockingbird, The Drowning of Stephan Jones, or Anne Frank, or any of the listed books and films Dr. Miller suggests in Chapter Three of our book. Let us know what you think. LN
In reading Nieto and Bode I reflected on Dr. Norris’ question, “Why is race so hard to talk about?” I don’t know if anyone really has the answer, and I’m sure I don’t. From the reading of Nieto and Bode, however, I would pose some ideas: First, Chapter 1 notes that multicultural issues are ones of power and privilege, not just race. Considering that 90% of teachers in the U.S. are White (!), one can see who holds the power, and those holding it usually do not want to let go. I think that for some (not all) teachers the recognition of racial issues in education is frightening because that would presume action on their parts such as a review of the canon, changes in lesson plans, review of the racial diversity of school employees and etc. Many people are afraid of change; I think that some educators and institutions just wish that the issue of race would go away. Even as these hegemonic forces dig in their heels, our schools is changing. My feeling is that Nieto and Bode’s aim is to show us that multicultural education is about learning – not learning in a Eurocentric constricted atmosphere, but learning in authenticity, with consideration of all the facts. “There is no contradiction between high standards and multicultural education” (Nieto and Bode, 26). They say that multicultural education is simply “good pedagogy” (59). When I read these texts, I always have a question in the back of my mind, “So what does this mean for me in the classroom”? If I am to institute a “transformationist classroom,” as Dr. Miller noted in her reflection, I have to be aware of race issues and behave in a way that promotes an inclusive learning environment that benefits all students. So, what should I do? First, I think I should critique my own pedagogy. As mentioned on the companion Web site to the text, I should be aware of “unspoken racism” – do my words AND actions reflect true inclusion? Toni Morrison has said (citation?) that race speaks as loudly in its exclusion in a text as in its inclusion. Are the texts I choose culturally responsible? What is on the walls in my classroom? Whose raised hands do I consistently recognize? How do I address my students? (Now I understand why we were to choose in class which pronouns we preferred in reference to ourselves.) Do I know my students? What are my expectations of them? I hope that this isn’t too long. Tell me if it is! This is my first blog entry. I am most interested in how you all would create a culturally inclusive class setting that affirms diversity and individuality. Blog on Norris and Miller book to follow ...
This reflection will be much shorter, I promise! In reference to Miller and Norris Chapter 3, I looked back to my time in junior high and high school. I was the target of sexual harassment from both teachers and peers. I was once the target of sexual harassment from a student teacher. That was an unpleasant situation. I was interested in the idea that violence transcends abuse, harassment and bullying, and moves into oppression, where teachers may either produce violence through oppression or be the targets of it. I like the line on page 49 that reads, “School should not be about survival, it should be about learning ...” I certainly agree with the statement that NCLB produces a “dumbing” down (66) of teachers. This is a difficult career ... we want to push the envelope a little to advance students’ education but are forced by institutional pressures to toe the line if we want jobs. How does one person intuit all this and then incorporate it into his/her teaching practice? Whew! Chapter 8 is the first introduction to standards that I have had at this university. I am trying to unravel it in my head and hope that it will become less daunting as I break it down in my lesson plan.
Being newly married, maintaining a part time job, having 9 masters credits and paying a mortgage, I thank goodness there is a week between classes! With that said, I am posting my thoughts to chapter 3 of Norris and Millers book, thus being the only chapter I have gotten through so far. Chapter three, as you well know, deals with a lot of weighted issues concerning teacher and student rights, legal matters and harassment topics. Sally quoted our text best with the statement, “School should not be about survival, it should be about learning ...(49)” I would like to share an instance in my own teaching experience that has weighed heavy upon my thoughts whilst reading this chapter. For about a year I was a substitute teacher for the Johnstown area schools (the area surrounding and including Johnstown, not to be confused with solely Johnstown High). It is no secret that when a substitute teacher is in the class room, the students will “test the waters” to see what they can get away with and how far they can push this “alien and unknown” teacher before a breaking point is reached. When I was in school, my peers and I would do the same thing, but it usually involved simple defiance. I was in charge of a class comprised of ninth and tenth grade students, most of which were female. While passing back homework from the previous day, I noticed the three girls across the front row making eye contact with me, while sitting; spread legged, in their cheerleading uniforms. I decided to steer clear of any type of confrontation and avoided these three students for the rest of the class. Later that day, I overheard one of this girls talking in the hall; and I quote: “Did you see how that sub in Mrs. _______ class wouldn’t even look at any of us (the girls), he has to be gay.” I assume that this type of language spread and by the middle of the following day, I had lost all control of the classroom. The female students were talking amongst themselves with no regard to my comments, and the male students all seemed to be sizing me up, I assume trying to make their own judgments upon my preferred sexuality. I had to ask that I not return to this school, not because I was ashamed by anything that was being spread, but I truly did not understand how to take control of this situation. After reading chapter 3, I realize that there are many different ways that I could have handled these circumstances, but first and foremost, I should have talked to the proper administrators about the situation I found myself in. I’m curious as to what anyone else would have done, if they were placed into the situation I just described? Speak up….. Up next, Chapter 8……….
Wow, that is a very uncomfortable situation! I probably would have asked to speak with the girls privately outside of class, more than likely with another teacher present since you are of the opposite sex (just in case). However, that could be difficult, especially if you are not sure of how to address the girls, and so it more than likely would be best, I think, to talk to administrators just as you suggested. Regarding Sally's question of how I would set up a culturally inclusive class that affirms diversity and individuality... This is difficult. There are so many factors to consider, but I did like how Nieto and Bode mention that most schools follow Christian holidays, and so one of the things that I would like to do is celebrate all holidays for all religions, regardless if the students in my classes only practice Christianity. While I cannot let every student off of school for every holiday, I would like to at least have them learn a little about each. My classroom would also be multicultural in decorations. However, extreme caution needs to be exercised here because I would not want to perpetuate stereotypes of cultures.
Both assigned chapters in "Unpacking the Loaded Teacher Matrix" discuss standards. The way standards are approached in the text, however, differ. In chapter 3's section on institutional violence, Dr. Miller writes, "Standards do reinforce binary outcomes and box teachers into teaching to the expectations that others have set forth. [...] NCLB impacts the identity co-construction of everyone in its path and hence reinforces governmental control over our bodies and minds" (63-64). In chapter 8's discussion on standards, Dr. Norris writes, "The real goal of using standards is that through them we are able to better discern and confirm why we are teaching what we are teaching to specific students in a specific classroom setting" (228). What is the cause of these two differing approaches to standards? It doesn't seem that it is merely a difference of opinion or viewpoint. Is it because one addresses NCLB, a federal law that imposes policies and standards, and the other addresses Pennsylvania state standards and organizations like NCTE, which consist of standards that may address issues more geographically or professionally specific? Is it how these standards are implemented? For example, is it because, as Dr. Norris writes, "University teacher training programs may be focusing too much on imposing standards and not enough on asking preservice teachers to think about how standards influence or deter them to teach meaningfully, thoughtfully, and responsibly" (228)? I understand the benefits and disadvantages of having and enforcing standards, but I'm not yet sure where I stand on the issue. (I'm sure this will change when I actually begin teaching...) Any ideas?
I would also like to comment on a few things that sparked my interest while I was reading. In Dr. Miller and Dr. Norris's book, the section on drugs and alcohol made me reflect on my own high school and my peers at the time. I don't think educating students about such things is enough. What I mean to say is that students in high school do not care what adults think, they are more concerned with what their peers think. Not to mention, unless they know someone who experienced unfortunate side effects of drugs/alcohol, they are likely to think "that won't happen to me." Side effects and consequences need to be made real to them. Therefore, I think guest speakers would be the most effective for this topic, especially if the guest speaker is close to their age and/or reflects on an experience they had during high school. Another thing that I read, and that really bothered me, was regarding institutional violence, particularly concerning NCLB. The idea of "leveling the playing field" is a terrible rationale for implementing standardized tests, because it does not make sense. What are standardized tests? An evaluation, right? Is that not a final stage to learning? So, shouldn't leveling the playing field start at the beginning, with, for example, equal resources for all schools regardless of its race, ethnicity, gender, socioeconomic status, etc. The government is looking to gain different results without providing a different means, and hardly anyone is benefiting from this.(Can you tell I'm passionate about this? haha). Finally, I really liked Nieto and Bode's book. Multicultural education is extremely important, and I got into teaching to help expand agendas such as this. In my undergrad. program, I was a human services minor and there was one things that was emphasized over and over again to me: Unless you are the same race/ethnicity/gender/socioeconomic status/etc as the person you are helping, then you don't understand. Therefore, it is your duty to become aware; I would suggest this to all preservice and inservice teachers: know your audience. It will help you to become a better teacher, and, in my opinion, a better person.
I read Dr. Norris' post before I dug into Nieto and Bode, but I've been doing a lot of thinking about it over the past couple days. I think in part that a teacher's fear of discussing racism is based on the erroneous idea that discussing the topic may perpetuate the problem. By maintaining an "out of sight, out of mind" stance, many think they can simply forget about the elephant in the corner and focus on "real" education. However, we know that it isn't going to go away without a deliberate focus on the evils of discrimination, and we have to be proactively preventative in order to make any difference. Also, many teachers who are part of the racially "privileged" (you'll remember the statistic that 90% of teachers are White (p21)) may not see that some of their students are being favored above others, either on basis of race, gender, sexual preference, etc (Nieto 45). I'm saddened at how easy it is to pass off a multicultural perspective as frivolous in light of recent events (9/11, for example). The quote on p 43 of Nieto & Bode that says "...now, more than ever, we need to stress our similarities" is just a cop out to not make any effort. We're not perpetuating racism by allowing people to be different in certain ways...and how can we help students feel that they are validated when the only things we focus on are the things that make them like "us" (i.e. like White people)? As a kind of final comment of the moment, I think another reason teachers may avoid the racism topic is that they themselves know people, who they value, who are racist, and attacking their ideas may be akin to attacking their loved ones...does that make sense to any one else? Kind of life kids buying into a religion or a political party for their whole life because their parents would be upset if they didn't uphold the same traditions and values. However, it is our responsibility as teachers to present the truth, not just the way we wish things were (Nieto 45). This means discussing and bringing to light facts about human history that aren't pretty, and are tough to talk about.
Hi all. There are some really good threads of conversation going on here. JAGE (I have to re-introduce myself...I've forgotten your name, sorry!) -- thank you for sharing the situation with the cheerleaders. That would be tough. One of the reasons I am entering public schools is because the environment is dynamic and always changing. After working in a cube for 10 years, you need this. However, I do think that as a teacher one is often confronted with difficult situations with which we may not know instantly how to deal. Sounds to me like you did a good job, though. I'm sure that even the most experienced teacher will tell you that there are situations that stump him/her. (See Kylene Beers for an example of a decorated teacher who honestly talks about her learning curve.) Jess--I liked your idea of decorating for all holidays, not just Christian ones. However, you made a good point about being wary of stereotyping. I think that is what Louise Rosenblatt always talked about with being socioculturally and sociopolitically aware. Finally, John, I found your comment interesting that teachers are afraid discussion of racism will perpetuate it. That sort of blends in with what I said ... I think teachers need to look at their motives. To me, pretending racism does not exist is not recognizing the elephant in the room. In the case of racism, I often think that our silence is a quiet affirmation of the status quo, when we really should be speaking up because the status quo is unacceptable.
Hi again. Alana -- I liked your thorough discussion about standards. I started working on a comment about standards and then got confused. There seem to be so many of them. And so many of them are ill-advised such as NCLB. I am particularly interested in how teachers actually TEACH in their classrooms anymore without being suffocated by standards. I'd like to believe that NCLB was implemented with good motives, but with all the evidence against its outcomes (much provided by Norris and Miller) it seems to be doing much more harm than good. Yet, we are still beholden to it. One of the things I constantly return to is an internal discussion regarding how I am actually going to TEACH and implement my pedagogy in this changing environment. Teachers certainly appear to be on the front lines of all sort of issues ...
Thank you for your comments. Off subject, how is everyone’s lesson plan coming along?
Standards…oh they frustrate me. Let me rephrase that; I am frustrated by the fact that it isn’t until the very end of our in-class training that we are trained in how to read and understand them. I wish that this methods class could be broken up into two parts; one taught at the beginning of the road to student teaching and another before entering the classroom. What I have learned from Chapter 8 in Miller and Norris would have been really helpful to know before my adolescent literature, teaching writing and teaching literature and literacy classes. In all three of these classes I was asked to compose lesson and unit plans, however, besides my dance curriculum and instruction class I took as a theater major, I had no prior training to writing a lesson plan, let alone writing a lesson plan that corresponded with the educational standards. Sally said on the first day that she felt that this was going to be a meaty class. I have been craving this meat for the past year in the program. Maybe this question is best posed to our professors but I ask you all…what is the rhyme or reason to giving us all of this crucial information right before we enter the classroom rather than at the beginning or strewed throughout our program so that we could utilize it and build upon it in our other courses? If the standards change and evolve I think it would be useful to teachers in training to learn about these standards early on so that we can observe and critically analyze their impact on our pedagogy and our practice of teaching.
I definitely have to agree with Leah here. I have been told that standards are important, and that I will have to become familiar with their usage, but I have had to "use" them in at least 3 classes before this, and I kind of had to fudge my way through it, not really knowing what I was doing. I envy my friends who seemed to go through this program in the reverse order of what I have, because they had these things to build off of for the entirety of their schooling here. As I was reading Dr. Miller & Dr. Norris' book, I realized just how vocal some teachers are against the standards being the end-all be-all of classroom assessment. There are so many other things that going into learning that trying to fit everyone in the same little neat package is not only ludicrous, it's downright discriminatory at times. How can students with seemingly unlimited funding and resources possibly be compared to students (of any background) that are taught in places where there funding is thousands of dollars less per student than their privileged counterparts? That's not even comparing apples to apples. And with the increased stress (on both students and teachers) of ensuring certain literacy skills, it does seem like NCLB is working with the agenda of creating citizens that are unable to criticize the powers that be (Miller 62). It's just a lot to take in, and I wish I had had more time to think about all of this before I jumped into my internship.
Wow! This is a great blog. We can continue talking about several of these points in class this week. Just to respond to the instruction about standards briefly, I agree that this course should be taught early in the MA/TE program. I regret that some of you did not have this information before this course, but what matters is that you do have it NOW before you go to internships and student teaching where knowledge of the standards will be important. Dr. Miller and I are considering trying to implement some changes to the MA/TE curriculum where an introduction to teacher education course would be a first class required for all MA/TE students to familiarize everyone with basic standards and theories to help create teaching philosophies and lesson plan ideas. Hopefully we can create that kind of a course soon. Thanks for your input about it. LN
I’ve just finished reading Chapter 3 of Miller and Norris and would like to tie the discussion back to what Jess and Sally were saying about NCLB. In every education class I have taken I have heard teachers dispute NCLB and standardized testing. I think that Miller and Norris put it best when they write that NCLB is “the most recent weapon against public school in the United States” (62). As Sally put it, NCLB seems to be doing more harm than good. As NCLB has been implemented, it seems that what defines a “good” education has been limited to high scores on a standardized test. It seems that legislation is focused on assessing the product of learning but completely missing the importance of the process of learning. So where does that leave teachers? I do not want to spend my career teaching students how to take tests. Miller and Norris ask, “Do we give our student teachers the tools to help their students do well on the exams or do we teach our student teachers how to be effective in teaching reading, writing, and other skills?” (66). Is their anyway we can learn how to teach these essential skills in an enriching curriculum while fulfilling state expectations at the same time? Furthermore, I agree with Jess when she said that using standardized tests is a terrible way of “leveling the playing field.” Each district is different, each school is different, each student is different, so, how can a standard test possibly be fair to all?
Chapter 8 is a much more sobering look at the standards that teaching professionals have to live and work by. Miller and Norris continue to shake my nerves in their book, and this chapter delivers with deadly accuracy. Perhaps I will look back upon this course, with a gleam in my eye and a skip in my step (or a tear and a limp), who knows? I do know that chapter 8 was the proverbial “kick in the ass” that I needed to get my brain into the O-my-God-I’m-going-to-be-a-major-influence-in-America’s-future!!! mindset. This chapter, by Dr. Norris, takes the same approach to standards that Dr. Miller took to NCLB issues in chapter 3; simply put, although they must be followed, that doesn’t mean that they (standards) are your friend. There are so many standards and guidelines to try and comprehend that one’s head could explode with the influx of it all, but thankfully, after reading some of the other student’s comments, I am receiving this influx now, at the start of my educational career, rather than before my student teaching. I guess, when reading over some of these standards for education, they can be looked at as being both a gift and a curse. I believe in a creative and open classroom. I feel that discussion and debate and technology and fellowship and laughter and seriousness all belong in English 101 with Mr. Gardner (ha!), and that is where I feel that standards could be limiting all of the creative goodness that can swell within a classroom of mixed adolescence. Although, in retrospect, having standards to direct your curriculum by and keep you within check, if you will, can sometimes be beneficial. Think of it as the posted speed limits. Sure, everyone can go very slow and cautious, but that can be just as dangerous as going 100mph. But when everyone is limited to going 55mph, the roads become safer and travel becomes… well… boring! By implementing a standard, the school systems are ensuring that teachers are giving each and every student a safe and proper education, but at what cost? Are students losing all of their creativity? Are the extraordinary students being forced to wait while the general students drag their feet? Will the film Idiocracy really be a glimpse into our future?
In response to Lakyn’s discussion of “teaching to the test,” this subject reminds me of the Measurement and Assessment class Lakyn, Leah, and I took with Dr. Briscoe this summer. He continually reminded us that NCLB does not require teachers to teach to the test. Instead, it forces teachers to teach their students critical thinking skills and not content. Therefore, students will be able to tackle content area questions through the problem solving skills they learned in the classroom. This idea seems a bit idealistic to me… not every student is going to be able to learn the necessary high-level thinking skills that this would require and I don’t think you can completely disregard content. But it does seem like something teachers should strive to accomplish, especially when there isn’t much choice in giving students standardized tests.
To elaborate on what Alana has said, Dr. Briscoe suggested that we all used Blooms Taxonomy (Knowledge, Understanding, Application, Analysis, synthesis and evaluation) If I understand the taxonomy correstly we must move our students throught he taxonomy instead of jumping around it. In doing so students will move past memorization and comprehension and move to problem solving where learning is generalized.
As far as standardized testing goes in general, I think some students are just good test takers while others are not. I would like to believe I could teach all my students the higher level problem solving skills that would help them to achieve high scores, but I do think it is idealistic to believe that everyone can do well on these tests. Honestly, I don't understand why there is so much pressure on teachers and students regarding standardized tests. I don't believe that tests really show the performance level of students-at least not a performance level that matters in the real world. Additionally, after reading Ch. 8 of Miller and Norris I have come to look at standards in a new light. Dr. Norris writes that as preservice teachers we should be forming opinions about the standards. In the few education classes I took as an undergraduate, I had to write lesson plans and I had to include the PA state standards. Honestly, I never actually considered what the standards meant. I just threw them in my lesson plans because they were required. Dr. Norris writes, "preservice teachers can easily become pawns who blindly accept and follow imposed standards, or they can learn to think for themselves" (210). I see how preservice teachers become "pawns." It is easy to just do what someone tells you to and follow the requirements without question. So, if we learn to think for ourselves and question the standards, then what? I also believe in a creative and open classroom (as someone mentioned earlier) and I want my classroom to be a place where students think critically and ask questions. If I expect this of my students, then I must do the same. If I find a particular standard that is questionable what do I do? Do I work around it, ignore it, interpret it in a way I think fits the students in my classroom? How open are the standards to interpretation?
In response to chapter 3 and those who commented on NCLB, I have a few thoughts of my own I wish to share. It seems thus far in this semester one of the primary concerns in a majority of my classes is NCLB and it's affect on both teachers and students. With standardized tests encompassing so much impact on whether a school is employing qualified teachers, one of my biggest concerns about my future as an educator is balancing the content and curriculum yet still teaching students skills to succeed on these tests. I like to think that by teaching students the necessary skills needed to take a standardized test through meaningful contexts, which those skills will transfer over when they take the tests. However, I am realistic in the sense that I know not all students are great test takers whether they have the skills or not. For those students who face high test anxiety as well as the students who may feel that these tests just don't matter, how do we as teachers find ways to lessen anxiety as well as motivate students to want to do well on these tests?
One of the discussions that have been ongoing in my adolescent literature class over the last two weeks has focused on listing characteristics and discussing the nature of those characteristics of adolescents as people and as readers. One theme of this discussion has been that adolescents deal with a wide range of emotions and feelings and in different spacetimes may fall anywhere on a continuum between the extremes of these emotions and feelings. For example, the feelings of hate and love. These are natural feelings labeled generally and have many manifestations. They influence the actions and interactions that students have in accordance with where they are on the continuum at any given spacetime. This is not surprising because the same applies to adults as far as my experience has taught me. Another theme that is prevalent is a need to feel a part of the community, and accordingly the need to be an individual. I feel that the need for adolescents to be a part of the community is a pigment in the color of their interaction with the society they are navigating, and hate, in its different intensities and structures, negatively affects student’s ability to navigate their social community in harmony. I feel that adolescents, like adults, for the most part do not want to be harmful in their actions and interactions. But, like many adults, are ill-equipped to temper the negative effects of hateful speech. They are socialized to react without fully considering the repercussions of their actions.
With this in mind, it becomes imperative that they are equipped with the skills to deconstruct the societal pressure that dictates that they should perpetuate hate through acting in the status quo. I feel that part of what I want to accomplish when I begin to teach, and something that I believe is part of my immerging pedagogy, is to promote sensitivity training through deconstructing the inequities of social pressure. I do not believe that students would, at least in the frequency that it seems apparent that they do, perpetuate inequalities if they are properly equipped to do so.
A thought that struck me during the discussions in chapter 3 about reporting harassment and bullying is; what are the repercussions of reporting and the repercussions of not reporting on victim and assailant? If a student is acting as they perceive that society dictates that they should act, and in doing so sexually harasses another student, how much is the assailant to blame and how much are the pressures of society to blame? If the assailant is not reprimanded and reported that person who witnesses the incident are perpetuating the problem, condoning it. But, if the assailant is reported and now has a record of sexual harassment, the society that placed pressure on them to act the way that they did now places a negative label on them that will persist. I have not fully explored this line of reasoning in my own mind, and mostly am making a comment to spark discussion.
I guess the overarching theme of what I just regurgitated onto the computer is: where does the blame lie? And is the exploration of blame a productive exploration or is it better to just recognize the problem and work to fix it, or some combination of the two?
One other essential thing I took from chapter 3 was the information on the loaded issues which were discussed and how we are protected under the law. I have been patiently waiting thus far in my career at IUP to learn about what exactly I should do if I am approached by a student regarding issues such as those discussed in chapter 3. I feel more comforted now to know that I am aware of some of the steps I should take as well as the authority that I will possess as a student teacher. In addition, while reflecting back to my second clinical experience and the Burke text that we read, he devoted an entire chapter to how loaded issues of ethics are integrated into the English classroom and how important it is to not shy away from them. The vastness of the English curriculum often opens up ways to discuss and examine these issues, but how do we know when we are closing in on the line that as educators we should and should not let our students cross?
This won't be as long or longwinded.
Woah, there’s so much going on. Jason, pen name The Jage if I’ve forgotten your real name and have now called you something else completely; I appreciate your sharing that tough situation with us. My chest was getting tight thinking about myself in the same situation. The fact that one of our peers has already been placed in a situation related to what we’ve read in Chapter 3 really helps bring what I read home.
To everyone who has commented on NCLB, I am equally as infuriated! (exclamation mark added for virtual emphasis) Some of my friends are out in the greater teaching community and one of the topics I always try to talk to them about is NCLB. Besides their shared hatred of the legislation a current theme in their distaste is that they feel that no teachers were consulted when the legislation was designed. I am not sure of the validity of this concern, having done no research on the subject myself. But it would not surprise me if it was the case. I don’t understand how a room full of politicians, a few of which I’m sure in the prehistoric past were teachers, but politicians none the less, could have the gall to decide that they have the adequate knowledge to put into place overarching legislation that ‘reforms’ public schools!
Another thing that bothers me is the recurring theme that the threat of punishment would curb any undesirable actions or promote favorable action. As I’m sure we’ve all come into contact with during our previous British Literature classes, Dickens in particular, there was a time in England when they were hanging people for picking someone’s pockets and other comparable petty crimes. Instead of curbing theft and crime this just increased the peoples distaste with the government and caused a lot of people who were trying to feed their starving families to be hung. It seems that the government will never get it into its bloody (to use an exclamation in accordance with my British Lit reference) heads that the threat of a negative action does not promote positive actions.
This is a bit off-topic now, but I just finished reading Nieto and Bode’s chapters and I’d like to return to Dr. Norris’s original question. I think Nieto and Bode illustrate one reason race and racism is so hard to discuss - language. It’s hard to discuss complex issues like race when you’re unsure of how to best refer to it and everything that goes along with it. Furthermore, Nieto and Bode also mention how many terms are generalizations and therefore not completely accurate. How can we talk about race in ways that are culturally sensitive without disregarding the many differences within a particular ethnic group itself?
Furthermore, their point that White people generally don’t view themselves as ethnic is interesting. While I don’t think I fall into that category, I think it’s important for us as teachers to recognize our own instances of racism, whether it’s intentional or unintentional, ill-spirited or not. I notice, for example, that when I describe an event to someone that involves an African-American, I say “This black guy…” or “An African-American woman…,” but I never specifically mention when a person is white, implying that being white is the standard and doesn’t need mentioning.
I just got an email that said there were shot (s) fired today on the IUP campus. I was not on campus today. In an unfortunate coincidence, this ties in to our discussion of school violence. How would you handle news of this in your classroom? I foresee that this could generate a huge discussion; perhaps we could discuss in class briefly. I don't mean to get us off track. Just one more piece of evidence of how teachers are on the front lines of social issues -- dangerous ones, at times. Thanks all.
I think it is really interesting what Alana said about pointing out that a person in a story is black, but not when a person is white. This is something that I am sure happens more often than people even realize, but I also believe/know (at least in some cases) that people of other races do that when talking about white people. So, I guess what I'm getting at is that I believe most people consider their own background as the standard to compare/contrast themselves with others (I'm not arguing that white isn't THE standard though, just that we use what we know as a basis). We do the same thing with language, although that is not as touchy of a subject. We use our own dialects as the basis to which we view other dialects; anything not like our's is different or weird,etc. If only it were as easy to discuss race as it is to discuss language, huh? But, as difficult as it may be to discuss race/racism, it is necessary. We can't be afraid to address the topic because then we are perpetuating all of the negativity that goes along with it. If no one ever addressed slavery, it wouldn't have just went away. The same with the right to vote for women (and many more feats that go with this one). Now, I'm not saying that racism is just going to disappear by talking about it, but there needs to be some discussion if any progress is to ever be made. Oh, and Sally, I just read something, I think in that meadialiteracy.com book, where a teacher used disasters (she meant weather disasters, but I think gun violence could be included)to get her students to discuss such topics. She found they were fascinated with stuff like that. Then, she planned lessons around the disasters, like getting them to write articles about it. I think this is a good idea, not for issues such as Columbine, but for issues like the one that happened here: a non-IUP student firing shots into the air. (In case you didn't know, luckily no one was hurt).
I was just reading Chapter 3 of Nieto and Bode and could not help but think of the movie Crash (which I just happened to watch Saturday night). Anyone who hasn’t seen it definitely should. It focuses on issues of racism and the tension that arises when people deal with race one-on-one. Now, I feel that I am personally culturally limited. Honestly, I never spoke to an African American until I went to college. Even as an undergrad at a small, private, Catholic school there was little diversity. Race is a really difficult issue to discuss, especially for someone like me who has very limited experience with people who are of a different race than I am. I agree with Alana that language can be a barrier for discussing race. When talking about races other than myself, I find that I become worried about whether I am being politically correct or not. Nieto and Bode mention that White people may feel guilty when discussing race because they have been the privileged ones (47). I took an African American lit course over the summer, and I had experiences in that class where I was nervous to speak up when we were discussing race. The reason I was nervous is because there were several African American students in the class. Honestly, I felt intimidated. I don’t know if I felt somewhat guilty because I am White or if I just felt like I really had no room to talk compared to the other students. What is really interesting is that I took an African American lit class as an undergrad and always had something to say in classroom discussions, but there were no African American students in that course. I think that it is easy for White people to talk about issues of race amongst each other, but it becomes difficult when actually talking with those of a different race than us. At least, that is my experience. What I do really like about Nieto and Bode is that they point out, “students from the dominant culture need multicultural education more than others because they are generally the most miseducated or uneducated about diversity” (51). In the dominantly White rural community we reside in, this is especially important to remember. The only way I have ever really experienced racial diversity is through literature, movies, and music. My African American lit class as an undergrad really did open up a lot for me. I actually ended up writing my senior thesis on Richard Wright’s Native Son, but I really do think that if there was one African American in my audience during my thesis presentation I would have been extremely nervous. I really want to incorporate multicultural literature, movies, and music into my curriculum when I am a teacher. I am just hoping that I feel confidant enough to discuss the issues of race in my classroom that really need to be talked about.
I don't know how many of you have ever been bullied, but I remember being bound and gagged and shoved into my teacher's closet in 5th grade. Back then, the teacher just laughed it off, cut me loose, and sent me back to my seat. The method of harassment changed, but it remained present throughout high school. It wasn't until I got to college and got a fresh start that people started to actually notice me for who I am, and I think a lot of kids feel the same way. Unfortunately, the degree of their harassment may go to such an extreme, whether overt or completely inconspicuously, that attending class becomes torture for them. As a pre-service teacher, I'm already imagining the kinds of things I'll see, and it makes me kind of anxious. To junior high and high school kids, school is pretty much the extent of their life. I don't really think people of that age can fathom just how large the world is, or understand how deeply their actions impact other people. I hope I never see anyone treated that way again, but I know it's going to happen. I'm just hoping I can help instill a sensitivity in my students as to what harm they are capable of doing to other people and themselves by perpetuating needless hatred towards others who may be different than they are. I think the only way I can is to teach them the ways that senseless hatred has been used to oppress whole groups of people for hundreds and thousands of years, and help them to bridge the connection from those times to their own lives.
I appreciate the comments from all and would add that thinking about what you can teach in your own classrooms that open up these issues discussions through uses of films like Crash or books like Native Son would be valuable. I'll share one more piece of my response for this week and look forward to talking more with you on Wed.
I wanted to mention how the Nieto & Bode text reminded me of teachers I had who mentored me in school and who nurtured gifts and talents like my love of theater and performance versus ones who devalued me, mainly because of my gender (p. 80). One specifically crushed my belief that I could do math. Although it is more difficult for me as a white person to know or experience what people of color may feel in terms of constant devaluation (and I am ashamed of this), as a female, I experience a similar kind of devaluation frequently with the hurtful attitudes and insensitivity often coming, from of all people, other female family members who perpetuate raising up dominant males and suggest through their words and actions that a patriarchal society is best. I mention this because it is not just in schooling that racism and predjudices rear their ugly heads, but devaluation begins at home and is taught through parents and the bad examples they set when they place one gender, race, or class above others.
For Chapter 8 from our book, I’d like to emphasize that what I wrote on p. 228 is the key point of the chapter for me: “The real goal of using standards is that through them we are able to better discern and confirm why we are teaching what we are teaching to specific students in a specific classroom setting.” When we read the excerpt from Kristen’s journal on p. 224 and understand what happened in her class that day, we can begin to learn how standards overlap, intersect, connect and become meaningful (or are revealed to a new teacher) in the classroom. My hope is that this chapter helps preservice teachers with an awareness of the power of standards and where that power comes from as well as gives us some practical advice for how to develop lessons, units, and other artifacts that reflect our developing pedagogies in useful portfolios. I also tried to emphasize the four domains of teaching and how they are enacted in our program and would like to discuss these further.
One of the most daunting parts of navigating through the matrix seems to be the balance of a teacher’s beliefs with the actual political and social climes of the school environment. How can a teacher appear neutral and unbiased while still promoting social justice? Not in a classroom with students (because this is the learning environment where the teacher is best trained to listen to the students‘ voices), but in the larger arena of the institution itself? If a teacher holds the belief that education truly guarantees a better life, but the school curriculum and treatment of social justice issues do not reflect the teacher’s beliefs, how can a teacher endeavor to procure a more equitable academic environment? Matrix and Affirming Diversity do not propose that they can completely solve these problems, but are exceedingly helpful in their ideas of application of standards and multicultural education, respectively.
No matter how democratic our country, we are still effected by legislation that takes time and money and work to change. Change takes time and the ideas of standards, testing and teaching to the test are parts of the curriculum that will not simply disappear anytime soon. Even though the students & teachers are being held “accountable” by this system, their voices about change are not necessarily the first to be heard. As teachers and students we must persevere toward change, yet still maintain a workable academic environment during school reform movements so that teachers and students do not allow learning and knowledge to be compromised. This is why the ideas of learning how to use the standards and creating a curriculum that caters to the imagination by thinking outside of the box of the oppressive aspects of the standards is important.
If we are critical thinkers promoting critical inquiry in pedagogy, we have taken leaps and bounds in not only localized education, but school reform and social movements in general. I feel that the example on page 54 of Affirming Diversity that talks about students not understanding the First Amendment is due to lack of critical pedagogy. When they hear the words of the First Amendment, they do not know how to apply its relevance to their daily lives. This connection has been lost and it is THE most essential connection to bridge the gap between confusion/complacency and understanding. The verbiage of the Amendment itself may seem too far from the students’ grasp of reality because it doesn’t seem to hold any litigations or restrictions with it. The one-dimensional view of the Amendment as complete freedom without values behind it is shattered then left unexplained, resulting in confusion. Its similar to reading a fairy tale without critical analysis of the symbolism or moral of the story. Surely if a student can understand a fairy tale, they can understand the true implications of one of their rights under the constitution if they are taught that they can question a statement and then research to understand its meaning. No system is perfect and meaning should not be manufactured, by standards or in the classroom. Every citizen of the United States should be able to read & critically analyze the constitution & laws to best understand their rights and construct social consciousness. If critical pedagogy was taught how to be APPLIED along with multicultural education, students would have higher critical skills that would increase their capabilities of learning and applying this to standard tests to heighten the academic integrity of their tested writing. Critical literacy and reading/writing are not mutually exclusive! We can teach WAYS to critically analyze and then ask the students for examples of applications from their imaginations to make these applications clear & tangible. Compartmentalization of the imagination is detrimental.
I agree with Dr. Norris' last comment that we have all experienced some sort of unpleasant experience in our lives because of what we look like or who we are, or how people perceive us to be. This is why I feel that there is not as much of a difference between the terms RACISM and PREJUDICE as the text AFFIRMING DIVERSITY puports. All it takes is for one individual to create an idea. Individuals become powerful because they create institutions. An institution can simply be one more person. Try to tell a human being being treated differently by one individual because of their race that what they are experiencing is simply prejudice and not far-reaching because it is not an institution affecting many people. We must remember that landscapes and realities exists in psychological realms & levels as well. A sensitive person can suffer life-long effects from what the book labels as "prejudices". Yes, when the masses are effected it is always more conspicuous, but I think we also need to look at those who have suffered at the hands of prejudice as well and not disqualify their experiences because institutions are comprised of individuals assigning to a doctrine created by...an individual.
I like Dr. Norris's suggestion to use books like Native Son to broach controversial discussions such as race in the classroom. I want to incorporate the use of similar books, films, etc. into my own teaching. I grapple with whether or not they are appropriate, however. With Native Son, for example, there are very overt discussions of rape and violence. Is it appropriate for secondary students to read these types of texts with that extremely explicit content? There's always the option of sending a note home if parents or students have objections, but it is seems almost too explicit for the classroom. Is there a point you shouldn't cross, even with necessary precautions?
Alana, I agree with your concerns! I think there are definitely limitations on what can be shown in the classroom or considered effective.
Sometimes when something is too overt and graphic it loses its original intent or message because the brain is in a state of sensory overload. Registering overly graphic images and ideas can cause it to be in a state of shock, which may not always be very conducive to learning because sometimes the content will take over the lesson. Any new image is difficult for the brain to fully process. I believe there must be more subtle teaching techniques to help students identify with the gravity and depth of a topic while keeping a mindful, critical pedagogy.
Hi everyone- I have enjoyed reading your comments and thought I'd join in the conversation. I appreciate the comments and want to begin with a comment that Sally made: "Many people are afraid of change; I think that some educators and institutions just wish that the issue of race would go away." Sally, I appreciate your perspective and offer a different perspective. I think what COE wants is not that race goes away, because in fact, it never will, but it's that it race/ethnicity is in fact treated equitably and that all students are treated fairly and with dignity. Depending on one's theoretical lens, race can be seen as a theoretical constrcut that has been essentialzied within the research in critical race theory. If we begin from that stance than we can look at other comepting theories in order to better understand how to support and nurture students who walk in with imposed expectations- such as how they have internalized oppression and hence, oppress themselves with low expectations, etc.
I think Galrick understands this idea fairly well- so I want to send out a thought- how and where should we begin to talk about ethnicity in the classroom? It is quite loaded and unless you've looked at your own prejudices and biases any activity around this topic has the potential to explode. How do you know your ready to unpack such loaded topics?
I will begin some key work with you all tomorrow around these ideas and I am eager to watch it unfold.
Our final reading this week, chapters 1-4 in Affirming Diversity, was simply fascinating to me. The high school that I attended had not one African-American, nor Asian or Hispanic children, and at the time, Spanish was the only offered foreign language. Needless to say, my early years of schooling were not diversified in the least. When speaking about World War II, the subject of the Holocaust would be touched upon briefly, yet we would spend weeks upon the heroics of our white grandfathers. MLK was looked at as a sort of “super hero,” just as the book described, and we only listened to the first 2 paragraphs of his “Dream” speech. I had never met a person of color, as broad and sweeping as that term is, until setting foot on IUP’s main campus 9 years ago. Even back then, there seemed to be such a hush-hush around anything involving race or religion. And as everyone knows, ignorance breeds fear. It wasn’t until I was out of college and working in society that I started to associate and mingle with non-whites. That is where my real racial education came from. I understand, and sincerely hope, that in today’s high schools and other educational areas, diversity is being taught more thoroughly than it was at the end of the 20th century!
Chapter 3 of our reading was my favorite and it opened up a lot of unique ideas about how we view race. The example of the “flesh colored” band-aid was so simplistic, yet absolutely mind blowing! All sorts of products are considered “flesh” or “nude” in color, but only if that color is the shade of a slightly tan white person. Lakyn brings up a great point, in quoting from Nieto and Bode, that “students from the dominant culture need multicultural education more than others because they are generally the most miseducated or uneducated about diversity." From my opening paragraph I would say that I am living proof of that fact, but why? Why are our schools so afraid to talk about what affects us all as human beings? Why is race such a touchy subject in today’s classrooms? And now, because of NCLB, teaching diversity in the classroom is being further and further pushed to the way side, along with science and arts. What, honestly, is NCLB really doing for the American school system? I’m half afraid to bring a child into a world that is only concerned with math and reading scores; where are our artists and our musicians? Our scientists and basketball coaches; will they be shunned because they focus more upon what interests them, even if it isn’t reading or mathematics? NCLB seems to me to have only one long term goal, and that is creating a society of over weight non-thinkers that see nothing wrong with living in a “yes, sir” society! And that is a society that I no longer feel comfortable surviving in…
After reading our assignment and reading the reflections and responses on this blog I must say that I have come to agree to a large extent with The Jage when he says, “NCLB seems to me to have only one long term goal, and that is creating a society of over weight non-thinkers that see nothing wrong with living in a “yes, sir” society!” If students are not taught to think then they will become adults who are easy to control. A side note, did anyone listen to the speeches that were given at the RNC, besides what they said being immensely frightening to me, and if you have a differing opinion you are as entitled to it as I am to mine, the mechanics of their speeches was interesting. Did anyone notice all the repetitive chanting? Repetition is one means to stifle conflicting opinion. If you say something enough, in a group big enough, it will become very difficult to hold onto and firmly believe a conflicting opinion, it’s almost a form of hypnosis. To carry that thought, if students are not taught that its ok to have a different opinion and that perhaps they should decide for themselves what that opinion is then they will become adults who are easy to control. Standardized testing does little more than teach people how to take standardized tests. But the idea of standardizing knowledge stems from an idea of correct knowledge. That the people producing the tests are correct and in order for you to make it you must agree with their assumptions. It is a frightening monster to tackle, but I feel more comfortable with the task because we are having this conversation before we all have to tackle it.
Just to play off from Leah's comment about multiculturalsim, I personally believe that one of the main reasons that race and culture is such a touchy subject is because not everyone is exposed to such differences. My high school was dominantly white and all of my friends were white. Even when I started school at UPJ, one of the first things I noticed was the overwhelming number of white students. When I came to IUP, the exact opposite occured, I noticed the many different cultures first. Reading Nieto and Bode's chapter 3 really made me think of my own schooling history and I would have to agree with their comment that "teachers in primarily white schools might think that multicultural education is not meant for their students" (50). As a product of the so-called "white" school, I feel that with appropriate exposure to multiculturalism, a student is better prepared for what lies ahead.
While I do not believe myself as the norm and most important of any culture, the diversity of IUP is awesome! This is truely the first time that I have really been exposed to such a multiculturalism. This experience will truely help for me to become a teacher.
I am interested to learn about the multiculturalism on other undergrad colleges. Has anyone had the same experience as me?
While I was reading back at some comments, many of you were talking about NCLB. Nieto and Bode stated, "as a result of the law, there has been immense pressure on teachers and administrators to 'teach to the test' and to devote a lion's share of the school day to reading and mathematics" (26). I remember when I was a junior in high school we had to take the PSSA tests and it became a huge distraction. The curriculum in many classes was focused specifically on these tests and some students even rebelled and refused to take them. I found it funny because administration bribed the students by saying we would have a special sticker or notation on our diploma that stated our proficiency on the PSSA tests. Sure enough...at graduation the big topic was "did you get a sticker" because nobody got one, regardless if a student did well or not.
Unfortunately, NCLB prohibits teachers from teaching material that some students really need exposed to. For instance, I could have used more exposure to multicultural education. Nieto and Bode really "hit the nail on the head when they wrote, "the pressure that teachers and administrators are under to meet 'adequate yearly progress, as defined by standardized tests, has resulted in little support for the arts and even for such subjects as social studies and science, much less for innovation and creativity in curriculum and instruction" (26).
Don't forget to print this!
This comment is related to Dr. Miller's question of when ethnicity should be taught in the classroom. Every student is exposed to different aspects of life at different ages. I think the issue on ethnicity is a lot like sex education because it is such a touchy subject. So I think addressing the issue of diversity early in education may erase some of the prejudices students form. This coincides with Nieto and Bode statment, “students from the dominant culture need multicultural education more than others because they are generally the most miseducated or uneducated about diversity." By cathing this issue early, I think students will be more open to the differences among people. Unfortunately we live in a world full of prejudice that is hard to overcome through education only. Many students learn their prejudices through parents and friends.
Post a Comment