5-31-09
While reading Kozol, “Still separate, still unequal” I found Delpit's argument resonating within me. I was glad we read Delpit first, because Kozol's quotes and comments really clarified Delpit's argument for me. In particular was Kozol's dinner story on page 6 where he told of having dinner with wealthy parents who send their children to private school at the tune of $20,000 a year rather than to an inner-city school. According to Kozol, these are the same affluent people of power who ask questions like, “Can you really buy your way to better education for these children?” “Do we know enough to be quite sure that we will see an actual return on the investment that we make?” “Is it even clear that this is the right starting point to get to where we'd like to go” Yet these same affluent parents spare no expense to send their children to private schools at a cost that most young adults spend a for a year of a college education. Delpit quoted statements by middle-class educators, who said, “I want the same thing for everyone else's children as I want for mine.” This is very hard to swallow as I make connections to Kozol's reminder that so much money by so few is lavished on their own as they, the people with the power, consistently and strategically cut funding for inner-city schools programs, maintenance, professional support and salaries to draw the brightest new teachers to the ranks of education. “Tea Parties” and propositions around the country have cut funding for public schools, given education credits to parents who want to put their children in private school and continue to undermine the institution that gave the ancestors of this country a chance to better themselves, the public school system. Now that they are the ones in power, they are manipulating the rules to keep the wealth for themselves.
Delpit also said, “If you are not a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly the rules of that culture makes acquiring power easier” (pg. 25). Kozol reminds us of the importance of teachers in that role when he described the letters from third graders from the Bronx, New York (pg 4). 27 students sent Kozol letters asking for his help in making their school better. I was struck by the double negatives and word choice in the letters. As little Elizabeth wrote “It is not fair that other kids have a garden and new things. But we don't have that. I wish that this school was the most beautiful school in the whole why world.” As I read their letters, I was shocked that the teacher sent Mr. Kozol unedited letters that represented what he/she was supposed to be teaching in the classroom. Even Kozol planned to help the students edit their letters, but was swept away by their interest in him, his lifestyle and his dogs. Letter writing is, as is all writing, an opportunity for students to learn grammar, spelling and vocabulary, as well as appropriate social expectations in American society. Reading between the lines, I don't know if Kozol realized that he was sharing more than a touching letter from an inner-city school student. What I saw was one of Delpit's key points, that if teachers don't teach the code of power, where will students learn it. I was disappointed with the teacher in the Bronx school for failing to teach students the importance of speaking and writing with the accepted format in this country. Without knowing the grammatical expectation, inner-city students will continue to be shut out of the highest positions in the board rooms, court rooms and classrooms in this country. If that is their aspiration, children from the inner-city will be unfulfilled in their dream.
Finally, Delpit said that “Teachers are in an ideal position to play this role, to attempt to get all of the issues on the table in order to initiate true dialogue”(pg 47). However, Kozol notes that teachers are currently mandated through a “pedagogy of direct command and absolute control” (pg. 7), the inspiration of Skinner, creating robots, not the critical thinkers who could use their own voices to create understanding and make an important contribution to not only America, but the world. Unfortunately, this idea is all too close to the environment in which I work. Teachers in my district do not have the freedom to create student centered learning in the classroom. We are programmed, scripted and turned into the same robots that the “Big Thinkers”, the administrators and curriculum planners who hold the power, would have us turn our students into. When Delpit said that change must come from the top down rather than the bottom up, she included teachers in that order of power. Teachers no longer control the classroom curriculum and daily learning plan. Our teaching day is predetermined, minute by minute, teaching a schedule decided by politicians and administrators, neither of whom understand the unique makeup of my classroom.
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Monday, May 25, 2009
Talking Points
Quote #1:“And I do not advocate that it is the school's job to attempt to change the homes of poor and nonwhite children to match the homes of those in the culture of power. That may indeed be a form of cultural genocide.”
It has been said that America is a “melting pot” where immigrants, in the process of becoming Americans, add their culture to create a blended society different from where they came or what they found when they came to this country. To become part of the American culture, it is possible to lose your culture of origin. Just as when yellow paint is added to blue paint to create green, you can never get yellow back again. It is forever green, until another color is added to the mix. As anyone who has ever played with paint knows, eventually you get a murky brownish black. When this happens with people, there is the potential for cultural genocide. That part of a person, their identity, including language, ideology, and tradition, are lost to that person forever. As well as being lost to the new immigrant, the cultures of those already in the mix have also lost their identity to become American.
As some Americans say, these new immigrants are in America now and have to speak the language and “be American”. This is historically the schools responsibility. It is not, however, the job of schools to unlearn a child's culture in the process of teaching him/her the skills to be successful in America. Unfortunately, this has been happening for generations in this country, as families lose the language of their origin as they learn English. Language is the glue of a culture. One of the first things a conquering nation takes from the invaded country.
Quote #2: “No, I am certain that if we are truly to effect societal change, we cannot do so from the bottom up, but we must push and agitate from the top down.”
Those people who are living outside the culture of power are not in the position to effect change. Like the “glass ceiling” that allows women to see the goal they want to achieve, but are prevented from reaching the pinnacle, by the people with the power, those same people who don't want to share or give up the power. As teachers we believe that education is the key to personal success and socioeconomic change for our students. Delpit states that that is not the case, that a student without power does not have the power to change the controlling forces of power and therefore their future.
Quote #3: “We do not really see through our eyes and hear through our ears, but through our beliefs.”
As we saw with the S.C.W.A.M.P. exercise and the diversity wheel, ideology and “social reality shapes our lives” (Johnson, 2001). When we listen with our eyes and ears, we are listening with our ideology, prescribed by the culture in power. Few of us are the perfect combination of the inner and outer ring of the diversity wheel, despite our attempt to find perfection in society. When we are reflective, most of us can find a time or place in our life where we felt denied the privileges of the culture of power. Feeling somehow connected to those without the code of rules and the culture of power, empathy may allow us to listen with our hearts and beliefs. Despite the ideology of the power of culture, most of us believe in in the basic right of humanity. That is what brings new immigrants to this country. As the one place in their new country, schools have the ideal place to truly listen with the empathy and humanity that we know is the right thing to do for our students.
Quote #1:“And I do not advocate that it is the school's job to attempt to change the homes of poor and nonwhite children to match the homes of those in the culture of power. That may indeed be a form of cultural genocide.”
It has been said that America is a “melting pot” where immigrants, in the process of becoming Americans, add their culture to create a blended society different from where they came or what they found when they came to this country. To become part of the American culture, it is possible to lose your culture of origin. Just as when yellow paint is added to blue paint to create green, you can never get yellow back again. It is forever green, until another color is added to the mix. As anyone who has ever played with paint knows, eventually you get a murky brownish black. When this happens with people, there is the potential for cultural genocide. That part of a person, their identity, including language, ideology, and tradition, are lost to that person forever. As well as being lost to the new immigrant, the cultures of those already in the mix have also lost their identity to become American.
As some Americans say, these new immigrants are in America now and have to speak the language and “be American”. This is historically the schools responsibility. It is not, however, the job of schools to unlearn a child's culture in the process of teaching him/her the skills to be successful in America. Unfortunately, this has been happening for generations in this country, as families lose the language of their origin as they learn English. Language is the glue of a culture. One of the first things a conquering nation takes from the invaded country.
Quote #2: “No, I am certain that if we are truly to effect societal change, we cannot do so from the bottom up, but we must push and agitate from the top down.”
Those people who are living outside the culture of power are not in the position to effect change. Like the “glass ceiling” that allows women to see the goal they want to achieve, but are prevented from reaching the pinnacle, by the people with the power, those same people who don't want to share or give up the power. As teachers we believe that education is the key to personal success and socioeconomic change for our students. Delpit states that that is not the case, that a student without power does not have the power to change the controlling forces of power and therefore their future.
Quote #3: “We do not really see through our eyes and hear through our ears, but through our beliefs.”
As we saw with the S.C.W.A.M.P. exercise and the diversity wheel, ideology and “social reality shapes our lives” (Johnson, 2001). When we listen with our eyes and ears, we are listening with our ideology, prescribed by the culture in power. Few of us are the perfect combination of the inner and outer ring of the diversity wheel, despite our attempt to find perfection in society. When we are reflective, most of us can find a time or place in our life where we felt denied the privileges of the culture of power. Feeling somehow connected to those without the code of rules and the culture of power, empathy may allow us to listen with our hearts and beliefs. Despite the ideology of the power of culture, most of us believe in in the basic right of humanity. That is what brings new immigrants to this country. As the one place in their new country, schools have the ideal place to truly listen with the empathy and humanity that we know is the right thing to do for our students.
IAT test
I was initially excited to take the IAT test. I enjoy learning about myself and often take Myers Briggs type test in magazines, etc. Once into the test, however, the rapidness caused me some anxiety. I felt my dexterity was being tested, not just my racial preference. I definitely became nervous when I couldn't keep up with the expectation. I was wasn't surprised by my outcome because I think the originators of the test hypothesized the typical response and might have been trying to prove it. I don't have much knowledge of test design. Only one course in undergrad Psych. The dateline video didn't surprise me because I do believe that humans have a preference for the familiar, maybe all species do. If I was raised in Africa, I would probably have a preference for Africans. As we discussed in class, I was left with the question, "Why is it ok for African Americans to have racial pride and not Caucasians? And is it cultural pride as opposed to skin color pride. I am certainly proud of my Irish heritage...especially on St. Patrick's Day, but I can't tell the difference between many Irish decendents and English or French etc. The discussion helps me to understand the difference between equality and equity, but I am optimistic for or society that we will evolve into a place where there will eventually be equality.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Privelege, Power, and Difference
In reading Privelege, Power, and Difference, (Johnson, 2001) my pen and highlighter had a life of their own. I don't think I've ever written so many margin notes in my educational experience. At the end of the reading, I was left with many questions. Johnson described a dinner meeting with a black, female colleague in which he "struggled with how to sit across from her and talk and eat" lunch with her. He said it felt "risky" to discuss the truth of race. I was overwhelmed with the question, "So, can ideology change?" We are all attuned, to some degree or another, that throughout the course of history, change exists. In this country, slavery has been abolished, woman have the right to vote and gays and lesbians have a voice in their future. But, ideology? If a scholar whose profession is teaching about ideology is so troubled by the act of talking honestly about this subject, how can the average American find their way in this complicated dialogue?
My second question was even more personal. After taking the IAT on-line profile in class tonight, I returned home to read Johnson. I was struck by my lack of anxiety over the results of my test. I was in fact not disturbed by the results as was implied beforehand. Why was I not disturbed? This question found it's way to my margin notes when Johnson said that "the words are not about me because they name something much larger than me, something I didn't invent or create, but that was passed on to me as a legacy when I was born into society." Even more curious was the guilt by the Caucasian-Americans on the video at the end of class, in comparison to the racial pride of the African-Americans interviewed. Has society approved a new African-American reaction? Is that in fact change? Or, have I spent so many hours exploring socio-cultural issues as a public school teacher and education major, that I understand that my feelings about race are, in fact, "not about me".
The third and final question must, of course, be asked, What is my responsibility to "tap on or crack the pane glass window", as Dr. Bogad described. This is a problem I thought I was solving every day in my classroom and in fact since my childhood. I was raised by a single mother in the 1950's in the inner city of Albany, New York. My mother, at a time in history when racism was overt and common place, taught us through her discussion and behavior, that all people were to be treated equally and with respect. There was no prejudicial language or action allowed in my home. I raised my own children with the same values that my mother raised me. I have chosen to teach in a diverse, inner-city school district, continue to educate myself and live a life I am proud of. Does it just take time for ideology to change, as slavery, voting rights and vocalizing sexual preference where addressed in our society, or is there something that will bring change faster? Or, will there always be those who will not change?
My second question was even more personal. After taking the IAT on-line profile in class tonight, I returned home to read Johnson. I was struck by my lack of anxiety over the results of my test. I was in fact not disturbed by the results as was implied beforehand. Why was I not disturbed? This question found it's way to my margin notes when Johnson said that "the words are not about me because they name something much larger than me, something I didn't invent or create, but that was passed on to me as a legacy when I was born into society." Even more curious was the guilt by the Caucasian-Americans on the video at the end of class, in comparison to the racial pride of the African-Americans interviewed. Has society approved a new African-American reaction? Is that in fact change? Or, have I spent so many hours exploring socio-cultural issues as a public school teacher and education major, that I understand that my feelings about race are, in fact, "not about me".
The third and final question must, of course, be asked, What is my responsibility to "tap on or crack the pane glass window", as Dr. Bogad described. This is a problem I thought I was solving every day in my classroom and in fact since my childhood. I was raised by a single mother in the 1950's in the inner city of Albany, New York. My mother, at a time in history when racism was overt and common place, taught us through her discussion and behavior, that all people were to be treated equally and with respect. There was no prejudicial language or action allowed in my home. I raised my own children with the same values that my mother raised me. I have chosen to teach in a diverse, inner-city school district, continue to educate myself and live a life I am proud of. Does it just take time for ideology to change, as slavery, voting rights and vocalizing sexual preference where addressed in our society, or is there something that will bring change faster? Or, will there always be those who will not change?
Monday, May 18, 2009
First night of class
Hi everyone,
It is nice to see a few familiar faces as we start our summer session in Social Issues in Education. For those of you who don't know me, I am a first grade teacher at Broad St. Elementary School in Providence, Rhode Island. After this class, I just have my practicum to complete in September and I will have completed my ESL Masters. I plan on walking at Graduation in May 2010 with my three daughters cheering me on. Party to follow!!!
I live in beautiful Narragansett. I'm looking forward to summer on Narragansett Beach and doing some golfing and tennis.
Good luck to all of us for an exciting class.
Mary Beth
It is nice to see a few familiar faces as we start our summer session in Social Issues in Education. For those of you who don't know me, I am a first grade teacher at Broad St. Elementary School in Providence, Rhode Island. After this class, I just have my practicum to complete in September and I will have completed my ESL Masters. I plan on walking at Graduation in May 2010 with my three daughters cheering me on. Party to follow!!!
I live in beautiful Narragansett. I'm looking forward to summer on Narragansett Beach and doing some golfing and tennis.
Good luck to all of us for an exciting class.
Mary Beth
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
