reflection

Just wanted to write a quick reflection of the Kohn facilitation with Ben.  I'd like to echo something Lesley mentioned at the end of class about going through the process with a partner.  It was so helpful to discuss and bounce thoughts off of one another.  Without Ben I wouldn't have gotten past the second paragraph of the reading.  We spent alot of time just trying to figure out what Kohn meant by vertical and horizontal standards, and trying to come up with a logical "lesson plan" for the evening.  It was also especially good for me, because I had so many things swirling around in my head and definitely could not have expressed those thoughts in half as coherent a manner as Ben did during the presentation.  He was the play by play guy, while I was just the color commentator.  This is also meant to compliment all of you who did this assignment individually--I couldn't have done it.
It was also really helpful to have another person around as we went back and reviewed previous authors.

As far as links used, we just followed the links on the assigned Kohn reading for supplemental information.

See you all tomorrow,
GK

laptops

Please bring your laptops tomorrow (as you usually do)--we'll be doing some collaborative work online.   Great blogging.  See you in class. 

GK

he he

Citizenship and Learning

Kliewer writes on page 73, "society itself is hurt when schools act as cultural sorting machines" then references Biklen, writing these are places that "justify a competitive ethic that marginalizes certain students or groups of students...[that] legitimize discrimination and devaluation on the basis of the dominant society's preferences in matters of ability, gender, ethnicity, and race...and [that] endorse an elaborate process of sorting by perceived ability and behavior."
1.  Students not in power are devalued,"sorted", and silenced in schools 
He writes on pages 95-96, "To eliminate a single person through any form of banishment, no matter how benevolent the logic,....makes the community a less democratic and less rich place." And on page 72, Kliewer writes "Freire emphasized, democracy can only occur when no person's voice is deterministically silenced".
2.  Sorting and silencing leads to a less democratic classroom.
On 83 he writes, "Vygotsky found that the culture of segregation surrounding people with disabilities actually teaches underdevelopment of thinking through the isolation of children from socially valued opportunities....Altering the culture of disability requires that a child be recognized as an active learner, a thinker, and a problem solver, but this cannot occur apart from relationships that allow for such engagement." And on page 89 Kliewer writes, "John's hectic schedule, his work, his art, his enhanced communication--these were not the precursors to citizenship; rather, they were the consequences of his community connectedness.
3.  Democratic classrooms promote citizenship for all students.
Also on page 91, "Constructivist education directly reflects Vygotsky's sense of higher mental functions emerging through an individual's connection to the community." And on page 81 Kliewer writes that "Gardner's work...has effectively broadened our interpretation of what it means to be smart."
4.  Citizenship leads to the development of "smart" students
Connecting #1 to #4 above, we can infer that students not in the culture of power, are denied the opportunity to become "smart".

(I may be wrong).

Another important takeaway from the Kliewer reading is that as teachers, we need to get to know our students better.  I mean really get to know them.  Their interests and strengths are important to their learning, and if they can express what they know in a way they know how, they can all be more successful.  Gardner's patterns of learning show us that there are many different types of learners, and we cannot stereotype and judge and assume we know what's best for a certain student without getting to know them.  This is especially true for students with disabilities because their behavior is often misinterpreted by teachers.  Below is an excerpt from an article on the Teaching Tolerance website by a student with Down syndrome.

I'm Smart in a Different Way by Michael Arnold

So when you see me, don't think that I don't know who you are. Tell me "Hi" and I'll do my best to answer you! I want to be friendly! Sometimes I look away from you so I can concentrate and process what you've said to me. It doesn't mean I'm not interested or don't understand. That kind of frustrates me.

I am bashful, quiet and don't talk much unless I am very comfortable. I have a large tongue because of Down Syndrome. That makes it harder for me, than most people, to breathe and talk clearly. That's probably one reason I don't talk much. I'm afraid you won't understand me, might ask me to repeat what I said, or might make fun of me. It's frustrating, so I just don't talk a lot. Some people confuse "not talking much" with "not knowing very much." That isn't true. I know a lot!

Can Culturally Responsive Teaching Create Opera Singers Too?

Delpit wrote about the importance of knowing the rules of the culture of power.  Equity among all students can only be reached if they are taught these rules in school as they are prepared for life in "the real world".  But does learning the rules come at a price?   Can becoming privy to rules for success in public life be disastrous for one's private life?  Carter would say that kids can balance their cultural capital as "cultural straddlers", they can have the best of both worlds if they do it right.  But what happens when the person is so eager to change his public image?  and what happens when the person is a six year old who may not be able to weigh the costs and benefits of his decisions?

Richard Rodriguez (no longer Ricardo) wrote "Today I hear bilingual educators say that children lose a degree of "individuality' by becoming assimilated into public society....but the bilingualists simplistically scorn the value and necessity of assimilation.  They do not seem to realize that there are two ways a person is individualized.  So they do not realize that while one suffers a diminished sense of private individuality by becoming assimilated into public society, such assimilation makes possible the achievement of public individuality. "  

The title "Aria" is apropos of the authors struggle for public individuality.  I can see Rodriguez lost in the crowd as a child, embarrassed and not confident, avoiding the spotlight.  But as he learned the public language, he emerged from the shadows and became a confident young person--ready to have a voice, ready to sing his aria.  Still, I'm surprised at Rodriguez's opinion on all this considering what he gave up in order to achieve his public individuality.  He expresses obvious nostalgia on page 38 "..so many of the Spanish voices I'd hear in public recalled the golden age of my youth."  

   

Collier reminds me of  Bartolome, when she writes, A bilingual teacher..." must affirm the cultural values of both home and school..." (p222).    She is describing culturally responsive teaching here (I think).  She is not saying that teachers should not teach the language of the culture of power --English--to studnts, but that there is a way to do it that "acknowledges the legitimacy of the cultural heritages of different ethnic groups" (quote from this website on culturally responsive teaching).   Collier emphasizes this opinion a number of times including in guideline #6 where she writes, "Once a child becomes literate in the home language, literacy skills swiftly transfer to second language settings."  So, not only is culturally responsive teaching the "right thing to do", but it is also effective--Collier presents evidence for it.  The editors note on the bottom of page 235 states, "Collier points out that a rich but underutilized resource for literacy development is the "funds of knowledge" from language minority home and community that students can share."

I wonder if Richard Rodriguez might still be Ricardo Rodriguez if his nuns shared Collier's perspective.  He might sing a slightly different public aria, and might not think so longingly of the "golden age" of his youth. 

I may be way off with all of this, and not sure if I even made any sense.  It gets trickier to think of this stuff as we add author after author to our arsenal.  Just when things seem clear to me, they quickly blur.  Look forward to discussing tomorrow.  By the way, am I on snacks?  GK 

Promising Practices and a chicken sandwich

The morning started with a keynote speech by Dana Fusco called, "Youth Development--Promoting equity through child and youth agency".  Essentially she explored the question "what happens when school isn't enough?"  When students do not see the significance (link to wesch) in what they are doing, they have a tough time getting motivated to do anything.  Fusco suggests that an after school setting is a good place to inject significance into their learning.  She found that a statistically significant (a different meaning of the word here) difference exists between how middle and high school students feel about "in school" vs. "after school" activities (they find the "after school" experience more enjoyable).  Contributing to the attatchment of significance to after school activities are the following:  strong relationships, celebration of accomplishments, and a relationship between what they are doing to not only their own lives, but to the world.  Basically Fusco says that connection to a greater global good (again link to Wesch), is very important to students--they feel a part of something bigger than just their own lives.  And after school youth develpment groups provide a forum for students to develop connections between what they can contribute on a personal level to the global (or at least a bigger) community.
It was a pretty good start to the day, although the speaker's point was most surely lost on the tens of undergrad students engrossed in whatever was going on in cyber space.  At any given time MANY could be observed retreating to their hand held life lines....not going to lie, it annoyed me.
So off to the first of two workshops:  "Wake Up and Smell the Environmental Racism" put on by ECO youth (Environmental Justice League of RI)

ECO youth is involved with Environmental Justice education--basically they go around giving talks on what Environmental Justice is, but don't really touch on solutions, which is fine, but I didn’t learn much about how to combat environmental injustice in poor urban areas.  So, the content was not really helpful, BUT the keynote was  about youth development and this workshop was put on by high school students---so it was cool to see youth development in action.  Fusco’s keynote in the flesh.  

The next workshop was called "Brain Dominance:  The Neurological Underpinings of Critical Thinking and Social Skills"  Wow, I was excited about this.  But the guy never showed up.  So I went back to the dining hall to see what was up and get a sandwich.  I ended up at a different workshop called "Using Open-Ended Science/ Art Activities to Build Confiddence and Competence".  I felt out of place because it was full of 3rd grade teachers.  But I did take away one nice thought about open vs. closed ended activities (I really like open ended lessons, but I've never been able to figure out how to assess the students).  The instructor suggested to build it into a class participation grade.  Thank you Bonnie Epstein, I will.  

Overall a nice day, some good things to take away.  I was disappointed to find pasta at lunch though.  I ended up buying a chicken sandwich instead.  

GK

check in

Couple of days off were good.  Got 6 recommendations finished--I hope admissions people read these things, because I put a bunch of time into them (probably too much).
Kids are fine.  A little bored but we're getting pretty creative--cooking, painting, and things like that.  (also known as "the good stuff")
we lost internet and cable for a day...I realized how much I am addicted to the web
Not much else is going on here.

GK

Bullying bystanders-- ignoring gendered harassment

Mission from the GLSEN website: 

What does GLSEN do?

In support of our overall vision, GLSEN's work can be briefly described in this way:

1. Convince education leaders and policymakers of the urgent need to address anti-LGBT behavior and bias in our schools.
2. Protect students by advancing comprehensive and effective safe schools law and policies.
3. Empower principals to make their schools safe places to learn.
4. Build the skills of educators to teach respect for all people.

From the research article "From Teasing to Torment: School Climate in America - A National Report on School Bullying" on the GLSEN site:  “This study clearly illustrates the prevalence of bullying and harassment in America’s schools and that students who experience harassment are more likely to miss classes which can impact a student’s ability to learn,” said Kevin Jennings, Founder and Executive Director of GLSEN.  

and:

“This survey shows how we need to bridge the gap between the support that teachers say they provide to students and students’ perceptions of teachers’ willingness to take action,” said Jennings. “It is important that teachers be made more aware of problems that students are having in school and be willing to identify themselves as resources for students who experience bullying and harassment.”

The mission of GLSEN, the article above, and the Meyer reading all point a finger at educators, saying not enough is done to prevent bullying of LGBT students in schools.   Her goal is to gain a better understanding of the factors that shape how teachers view and respond to gendered harassment in an effort to work towards solutions.  Barriers to teacher response to gendered harassment can be either external or internal.  Meyer divides external influences into social factors and institutional factors, the latter she further breaks into four categories:  administrative structures and responses, curriculum demands, teacher training (or lack thereof), and written policy.  Social factors are divided into three categories:  perceptions of administration (broken down into leadership style, personal values, professional priorities, and policy implementation), teachers interpersonal relationships with administrators, colleagues, students, and parents, and community values.  Internal influences refer to teacher identity and experiences.   

It took me two trips through the reading and a messy self-produced graphic organizer to align all that.  I couldn't focus as I read.  When I started writing this blog, I didn't know where to begin.  I kept thinking of what Meyer wrote in her introduction on page 2: 

"Students report that teachers stand by and allow 

biased and hurtful behaviors to go unchallenged."

I would say that this makes teachers bystanders to bullying.  In Bully, Bullied, Bystander...and Beyond on tolerance.org, the author writes, "injustice overlooked or ignored becomes a contagion".    
The conclusion I make from all of this is  that not only are many educators not doing their jobs (of educating students in a safe challenging environment), but they are in fact guilty of willingly allowing bullying to occur.  

As I mentioned above, Meyer examines the reasons for teachers' non interventions as they pertain to issues of gendered harassment.  Certainly physical bullying and racial bullying are not tolerated in schools---why the lack of intervention for gendered bullying? 
Teachers don't have the time.
Teachers don't feel they have administrative support.
Teachers don't have the training.  
Maybe teachers themselves use inappropriate language and don't realize it (or are at least desensitized to it).  Not only the ubiquitous "gay", but the blatant "cocksucker".  When you stop and think about that...
Meyer writes on page 15, "school culture is much more likely to determine and support what it is that students, teachers, and others say and do then is the formal management system."
So progress will only be made if motivators start to outweigh the barriers for intervention by individual teachers.    Awareness about how this really affects students is the first step.  

GK

Michael Wesch, Anti-Teaching (Gerri August 2.0)

Gerri August 2.0 wordle

So, I clearly think there's a link between August and Wesch.  The common thread between the two readings we examined is that student learning happens best in a democratic classroom.  As we have discussed in class, August has shown how this can be accomplished with teacher facilitated dialogicality.  Wesch contends that it can be accomplished with the creation of a non traditional classroom setting (the virtual classroom) and the subsequent inquiry that is naturally  promoted within it (if Wesch read August-or Bakhtin-, maybe he'd call this "student driven" dialogicality).
Some quotes from Wesch,
1.  "I decided to get to work creating a learning environment more conducive to producing the types of questions that create lifelong learners rather than savvy test-takers" (page 1)
2.  "Good questions are the driving force of critical and creative thinking" (page 1)
3.  "The physical structure of the classrooms in which I work simply does not inspire dialogue and critical thinking" (page 2)
4.  "When students recognize their own importance in helping to shape the future of this increasingly global, interconnected society, the significance problem fades away" (page 3)

In quote 1, Wesch recognizes that traditional learning environments are fine for reproducing knowledge as it passes from gneeration to generation.  But with reproduction only, there is no progress.  A non traditional learning environment can transform knowledge as it passes from generation to generation.
In quote 2, Wesch emphasizes that questions, NOT ANSWERS, drive higher order thinking in students.
In quote 3,  Wesch challenges the status quo with the implication that virtual classrooms inspire today's students more than traditional classrooms do.
In quote 4, Wesch is saying that a non traditional classroom would allow students to discover that they are part of something bigger, something their generation can own--the new grand narrative that revolves around kids and their futures.  Once students learn to collaborate productively  in a virtual classroom and realize the benefits of this collaboration, they may then become naturally curious about how many people they could really reach, and subsequently think about how  they can  make a difference.

I think Wesch would consider himself a learner, rather than a teacher, in his "World Simulation".  He appears to me to be an open-minded, humble educator who has put trust in his students.   The power is shifted to all members of  a democratic virtual classroom, and the teacher simply becomes the one who  plants the seed and enjoys watching it grow.  Watering occasionally as needed of course.

As I read Wesch I kept thinking how kids in lower socioeconomic classes might participate if they do not have access to the internet or cell phones outside of school.  The Spring 2011 edition of Teaching Tolerance addresses this (as well as the never-ending and wearisome debate of whether or not we should use Web 2.0 tools in the classroom).   In Getting Past the "Digital Divide" , Sean McCollum writes "For kids to be given a fair shake in a modern economy, they are going to have to be computer literate.  Kids who aren't will be at a terrible disadvantage, especially America's poor children.  And for many of them, school is the only place they'll have the chance to learn it."  If schools can provide the technology and the right teachers, it seems all students can have a voice in a virtual classroom, even if access is limited outside of school---and maybe in this scenario, the socioeconomic differences can become obsolete.
GK

Spending Cultural Capital-a balancing act for minority students

Carter writes that there are two types of cultural capital:  dominant cultural capital which is "a resource that can eventually yield some economic and social returns.  It constitutes the cultural knowledge and skills of high-status racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups"(oage 49), and nondominant cultural capital, which  is any resource "used by lower status group members to gain authentic cultural status positions in their respective communities"(page 50).  Carter writes that black students can possess dominant cultural capital, nondominant cultural capital, or both.  She refers to students who have dominant cultural capital as "cultural mainstreamers".  These students emulate those in the culture of power, and are most susceptible to being ridiculed by peers for acting white.  She refers to students who have nondominant cultural capital as "noncompliant believers".  These students do not conform to teachers expectations regarding music, dress, physical gestures, etc, but on the other hand are viewed as "keeping it real" by their black peers.  The most successful students in terms of being accepted inside (by teachers) and outside (by peers and family members )of school, are those Carter terms "cultural straddlers".  These students are more likely to be successful  academically (and later in the workplace) while maintaining their cultural identity.  They are better able to balance the capital they earn and spend between both arenas. 
There are obvious parallels to Delpit here.  But with this reading, I was thinking much more about the responsibility of society, the teacher, and the minority student as far as balancing dominant and nondominant cultural capital.  It's a reality that a culture of power exists, but should that simply be accepted?  Is the culture just too heavy and widespread to lift, no matter what we do?  How sad is it that teachers have to clue black students into how the culture of power works, rather than try and change it?  Carter suggests that teachers, and schools in general, should be more open-minded when it comes to those students who are "keeping it real"; we should be less judgmental of how a student looks and acts, and instead challenge them with high expectations.  From page 72, Carter writes, "until educators grasp the value and functions of black and other nondominant forms of cultural capital, they will continue to have difficulty in engaging many African American students."  But does she mean we should ignore teaching the black students about the culture of power?  That can't be the case, because we'd be setting them up for future failure, right?  And what about the students?  The majority of the cultural straddlers Carter interviewed were older kids already in the workforce.  These kids figured out how to balance their cultural capital as they experienced prejudice in their lives as young adults.  So, are we to put that burden on young black students who may simply be too immature to take this on?  I think it's too much to ask.  Will these kids be performing balancing acts for the rest of their lives?  Even if schools abolish tracking systems that keep minorities from having a chance at social mobility (from Kozol), what happens when they reach the real world?   Help me out Corey.There are a ton of initiatives out there to prevent kids from wearing saggy pants.  I came across a bunch, this one is pretty original:  Pull Up Yo Pants

GK 

The Best Butter

The Hatter was the first to break the silence. `What day of the month is it?' he said, turning to Alice: he had taken his watch out of his pocket, and was looking at it uneasily, shaking it every now and then, and holding it to his ear. 

Alice considered a little, and then said `The fourth.' 

`Two days wrong!' sighed the Hatter. `I told you butter wouldn't suit the works!' he added looking angrily at the March Hare. 

`It was the BEST butter,' the March Hare meekly replied. 

`Yes, but some crumbs must have got in as well,' the Hatter grumbled: `you shouldn't have put it in with the bread-knife.' 

The March Hare took the watch and looked at it gloomily: then he dipped it into his cup of tea, and looked at it again: but he could think of nothing better to say than his first remark, `It was the BEST butter, you know.' 

Last week we read Shapiro who wrote in 2011, "Whether Democrats or Republicans occupy the White House or State House, there is wide agreement that the first priority of schooling is to ensure increasing productivity and economic competitiveness."  Attempts to accomplish this objective often involve students memorizing what their teachers tell them and regurgitating the information back on a  test.  Freire termed this the "banking model of education" and rejects it " in favor of problem-posing education in which students act as "critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher."  The banking model appears to be based on monological discourse in which the information is transmitted from teacher to student in an authoritative manner, leaving no room for dialogue, negotiation, or interpretation.  You can be an expert on a certain subject and have the best intentions for your students, but if monological discourse is your approach, you may end up gumming up the gears of a perfectly good watch with butter, albeit "the best butter, you know".   **As an abstract sequential thinker I personally appreciate an instructor who is an authority on a certain topic and like to be treated as a vessel to be filled, so I certainly think that there is a time and place for monologicality in the classroom.**  Anyway, August argues that dialogicality can be used as a tool with which a democratic learning environment can be created and fostered in the classroom.   She extensively studied how the kindergarten teacher Zeke attempted to create a democratic classroom using the tool of, what she termed "dynamic dialogicality".  
Chapters 5 and 6 detail the interactions among Zeke and his students, particularly Cody, an adopted Cambodian boy with two lesbian moms.  August originally set out to see how Zeke, armed with dynamic dialogicality, might interpret what happens when a child with lesbian moms tells family stories in a classroom.  But when Cody didn't bite during several of the topics during the "family" unit,  "Zeke and August discover he was more uncomfortable with his status as an adopted child, revealed after the reading of "Tango Makes Three," a story about an adopted penguin" (Corey's blog 10/07).  I think Corey's connection that "Clearly, August was surprised by this turn of events, but it still was a fascinating turn in her research.  The reading taught me that, as teachers, we make mistakes like that, too.  We may only see a piece of a bigger puzzle, not the big picture with our students.  The teacher, Zeke, was able to find out this information because he was successfully able to "stretch" Cody's notions of his life and his power in it."  So August got more than she was expecting by the end of her research in Zeke's kindergarten class, but still the conclusion emphasizes her idea that participation in a democratic classroom would allow students to explore, unrestrained by crumbs in the butter, "the way the world works and what can work in the world."
GK

Education Without Meaning

Shapiro's "Clinton and Education:  Policies Without Meaning", is about very misguided (good?) intentions.  Last week we read pieces by Finn and Kozol, who described the dangers of tracking, scripted curricula and pre-packaged lessons; before that, Bartolome and her commentary on the pitfalls of focusing on methods; and before that Delpit and johnson, who introduced us to privilege and power in society and in the classroom.  It seems to me that the common thread here is that (especially with regard to the underprivileged, non-scwaamp ers), the education system as a whole stifles creativity, suffocates critical thinking and problem solving, and prevents social mobility while preparing students to be tax-paying robots.  Shapiro writes about Clintons approach on page 46, "the most alarming feature of your approach to education is the greatly increased emphasis on the notion that public education exists to service the needs of corporate America, that education is preeminently about preparing kids for the job market."

Shapiro writes, further down on page 46, "(education) is about creating and nurturing the individual's capabilities to live critically aware, humanly sensitive, and socially responsible lives. "  And in case you think his views have changed, this is a snippit from a 2011 article titled "Educating for Peace", based on his book Educating Youth for a World Beyond Violence: Pedagogy for Peace :

"Despite our deep hopes, the Obama administration has continued on the same path for schools: one that emphasizes more testing and more competition, values only a narrow range of knowledge types, envisages teaching as mainly preparation for work and meeting corporate needs, and forgets education’s responsibility for nurturing the deeply thoughtful, spiritually sensitive, and morally concerned citizens of our future world." 

*remind me in class to tell you about a conversation I had with a superindendent regarding this issue.  I don't feel comfortable writing it in a public blog.  It really emphasizes the fact that teachers need to be "rebels".  from Rachel's Bartolome blog:

"We are suppose to teach children, ALL children. But how when the stakes are against them and the people in charge set up a system that will ensure that these students remain where they are. As teachers we will have to take over our own classrooms for these students. Is there any other way but to be a rebel?

So our job becomes a balancing act:  prepare the students for standardized tests, which will allow us to keep our jobs and look good in the newspapers, while secretly incorporating the responsiblity, morality, and relevant connections to real life that our students need. 

Segue into my election topic:  environmental stewardship.
Links:  Arctic Wildlife Refuge: Why Trash an American Treasure for a Tiny Percentage of Our Oil Needs?
and
Why Drilling in Alaska's ANWR Is a Bad Idea

My reason for choosing this topic is two-fold:  1.  there is evidence that drilling in the Artic National Wildlife Refuge will not yield much oil:  ANWR is estimated to have 10,000 million barrels of oil--the US uses 21 million barrels per day (this would service 58 million of the 240,000,000 cars in the US (with 15 gallon gas tanks)), for 13.5 years.  The problem is, the oil pipeline --the Trans Alaska Pipeline--can only transport just over 2.1 million barrels per day.  Incidentally, this wouldn't even happen for ten years--2023-- (it would take this long for any actual oil production to occur).  And it would not make much of a difference at the pump (90% of the profit would go to the state of Alaska, leaving a  difference of mere pennies/ gallon for the rest of the country).  2.  that being said, the bigger issue --for me at least-- is that this land was set aside to be preserved for future generations.  We have a responsibility to protect some places on Earth... "wilderness" defined in the Wilderness Act (1964): “A wilderness, in contrast with those areas where man and his own works dominate the landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where the earth and community of life are untrammeled by man, where man himself is a visitor who does not remain.”
my old buddy Carl Sagan said it well:  please enjoy Reflections on a Mote of Dust.

I think Shapiro would enjoy Sagan.  From the bottom of page 53 to the top of 54 he writes about his view of discipline, "discipline means acting in ways that are mindful of the needs and rights of others.  It arises from social standards and moral behavior that resist the disregard for human life shown on our streets, just as it opposes wasteful and unrestrained consumerism and the irresponsible destruction of the Earth and its resources.  Inculcating this sort of discipline requires teaching methods that contest the indifference, callousness, and self-indulgence of our individual and collective behaviors, conveying the importance of acting with regard to limits and with respect for human life (indeed, of all life)."

GK

Northern Cities, Practice What You Preach

One of the best descriptions of anything I've ever read: 
"Childhood is...a perishable piece of life"
The entire paragraph:
"Admittedly, the economic needs of a society are bound to be reflected to some rational degree within the policies and purposes of public schools.  But, even so, there must something more to life as it is lived by six-year-olds, or by teenagers, for that matter, than concerns about 'successful global competition'.  Childhood is not merely basic training for utilitarian adulthood.  It should have some claims upon our mercy, not for its future value to the economic interests of competitive societies but for its present value as a perishable piece of life itself."  (Kozol page 19) 
Kozol reveals the sad state of the physical conditions of inner city public schools.  Coupled with disproportionate government spending and "Success For All" (or similar) scripted systems, many schools have taken backward steps toward resegration. 
Kozol writes powerfully, "There is no misery index for the children of apartheid education." (Kozol page 16)
The end result is that white students have run to the hills, heading off to better schools outside their neighborhood or to private schools, leaving the inner city schools racially isolated.  
Kozol is good writer and does well to illustrate the savage inequalities that exist in the schools he has visited with primary sources that tug on heartstrings.  I can imagine the students he interviewed don't have the greatest life outside of school, and first and foremost, the schools need to meet the basic needs of students.  They don't.  So not only are students exposed to a learning environment that operates like a factory, they can't comfortably eat in the cafeteria, or use the bathroom, or exercise during recess.  Even my pet tarantula at least receives benign neglect.  This is just pure neglect. 
Bartolome would clearly be opposed to these deplorable conditions and the rigidity and military-like implementation of the scripted curriculum.  Talk about power in the classroom. 
What was most troubling to me were the thoughts I had after reading the paragraph on page 8 regarding teacher salaries.  I can only surmise that less is spent on teacher salaries, because teachers don't stay at the inner city schools for very long.  There must be a huge amount of turnover, because any good teacher most certainly would realize that trying to teach there is futile.  New teachers are shuttled in and paid new teacher salaries, while teachers in suburban areas make more and more money because they remain at their cushy jobs much longer.  This fact must skew the numbers. But I asked myself,"would I give up my cushy job at a predominantly white, upper/middle class suburban school and take a shot at teaching at an inner city school in Detroit?  St. Louis or L.A.? Milwaukee? South Bronx?"   With sadness and embarrassment...no chance.
"A Tale of Two Schools"

GK

Best Practice...

I don't claim to be the best teacher in the world, but it seems to me that "culturally responsive instruction" and "strategic teaching" are simply good teaching practices and frankly, common sense approaches.  Providing options, allowing students to choose, and relating subject matter to the real world, seem to me to be things that should happen frequently in any classroom setting--especially those comprised of diverse students with varying cultural backgrounds.  I mean, creating relevant lessons?  Using graphic organizers?  If teachers don't do this on a daily basis, they have no business teaching.  That being said, the reality is that many lazy, complacent, inflexible, and biased teachers are more concerned about their plans for the upcoming weekend than about student learning.  I feel a rant coming on...How many times do you hear "It's friday!" after saying hello to a teacher the day before a weekend?  How many times do you see students watching movies and eating snacks in classrooms the day before a vacation?  How many times do you hear teachers chatting away during professional development workshops?  It's unfortunate that papers such as this one by Bartolome even have to be written. 
It's pretty obvious how Bartolome feels about privilege and power in the classroom.  On page 176, she writes a few choice words that describe marginalized students (schools have denied their humanity, robbed them of their culture, reduced them to subhumans, etc). 
She writes, "the creation of learning environments for low SES and ethnic minority students, similar to those for more affluent and White populations, requires that teachers discard deficit notions and genuinely value and utilize students' existing knowledge bases in their teaching.  In order to do so, teachers must confront and challenge their own social biases so as to honestly begin to perceive their students as capable learners.  Furthermore, they must remain open to the fact that they will also learn from their students.  Learning is not a one-way undertaking." (p 182)  The problem with this is that I'm just not sure the majority of teachers reflect on their teaching with this in mind.  
One example that Bartolome cites on page 179 highlights "teachers who uncritically follow school practices that unintentionally or intentionally serve to promote tracking and segregation within school and classroom contexts continue to reproduce the status quo." I can pretty much guarantee that this is the farthest thing from most teachers minds during the school year.  But on the other hand, teachers teach the classes assigned to them by administration, and in most cases, can't help if they are given an AP, honors, college prep, or lower level courses.  
Bartolome writes that teachers need to be more culturally sensitive.  This should manifest itself in the classroom with the teacher offering students choices and taking into account their different backgrounds in order to encourage them to take ownership of their education.  In addition, teachers need to prepare students with skills they need to be "independent and metacognitively aware".  It's the skill building that students really need in order to succeed in their classes and in their lives beyond school.  Again, in my opinion,these are just best teaching practices that ALL teachers should be employing on a daily basis.   
video link:  culture based education, Kamehameha schools
GK

addendum

Regarding differences between Johnson and Delpit:

I think the Delpit reading was more constructive (meaning, she at least offered what I took as a solution).  Johnson wrote that privilege exists and didn't seem to lay out a solution (although he implies that recognition and discussion of privilege is the first step---or maybe there is no solution), while Delpit writes (maybe i'm wrong) that the culture of power exists and rather than right that wrong, if "we" clue everyone into the culture, and collaborate with others, we can at least level out the playing field in the classroom. 

Also I re-read my post and I have no clue where the Babe reference came from.  Sounds a little ridiculous at second glance....

Baa, Ram, Ewe

Coming soon to a theater near you, Lisa Delpit's adaptation of Babe.  Here's a preview: 

Farmer Hoggett:  "That'll do pig."
Babe:  "You know why 'that'll do'?  Because I got the damn password from the sheep!  That's right.  Otherwise you, with your veiled, "liberal" herding commands, would have looked like a moron in front of all these people.  Do you really think that by treating me like a sheep dog I was all of the sudden able perform like a sheep dog?  No.  Fly ran all the way home to the farm to get the secret password so I could do it.  You don't want to acknowledge that you have the power in this relationship, do you?  It's ok, you're supposed to have the power, and I'm fine with it.  Stop thinking you're going to offend someone and just tell me explicitly how to herd sheep.  It actually makes me feel worse when you attempt to deemphasize your power and act progressively, because it makes me feel like I'm missing something that I should already know.  It's makes me feel inferior, not equal.  I don't know where I'd be if I didn't have that password.  My guess is the dinner table."

Delpit argues in The Silenced Dialogue, that a "culture of power" exists in classrooms and that, "if you are not already a participant in the culture of power, being told explicitly the rules of taht culture makes acquiring power easier."  The problem is, she continues, "members of any culture transmit information implicitly to co-members.  However, when implicit codes are attempted across cultures, communication frequently breaks down.  Each cultural group is left saying, 'why don't those people say what they mean?' as well as, 'what's wrong with them, why don't they understand?'"
Delpit also says that even when those well-intentioned "liberal" taechers, swho strive towards maximum individual freedom and autonomy, attempt to deemphasize power they, "remove the very explictness that the child needs to understand the rules of the new classroom culture." 
Not all students go home after school and have the same experiences.  They may have very caring parents who "would transmit those codes (of the culture of power) to their children, (but instead) they transmit another culture that children must learn at home in order to survive in their communities."  These families don't fit into the "priviliged (as Johnson would call it) ideology" (Delpit addresses "whiteness" here) and those that are priviliged need to realize that (my favorite quote in the reading from Massey, Scott, and Dornbusch, p 45) "oppression can arise out of warmth, friendliness, and concern."  It will be painful for (us) "liberal" teachers but we need to "learn to be vulnerable enough to allow our world to turn upside down in order to allow the realities of others to edge themselves into our consciousness," and have meaningful interactions and conversations with ALL teachers in order to balance the culuture of power that exists in classrooms.  Good intentions are not enough. 



***the "scientist" (i'm not really a scientist) in me feels I should point out a rebuttal by Stephen Jay Gould-- Harvard zoology professor, author and supreme evolutionary biologist --to The Bell Curve (referenced by Delpit on page 31 (I assume)).  An excerpt from the article "Curveball" published in teh New Yorker, November 28, 1994:  He writes, "Herrnstein and Murray's second claim, the lightning rod for most commentary extends the argument for innate cognitive stratification to a claim that racial differences in IQ are mostly determined by genetic causes—small difference for Asian superiority over Caucasian, but large for Caucasians over people of African descent. This argument is as old as the study of race, and is most surely fallacious." and, "The authors omit facts, misuse statistical methods, and seem unwilling to admit the consequence of their own words."

GK

ignorance WAS bliss

Some of you may find this of transitory interest.  I began my teaching career as an eager young(er) man with a purpose.  Science had always interested me and I felt that as a teacher, I could share this interest with young people and teach them some cool stuff about the natural world.  But as I got deeper and deeper into the subject matter, well the following quotes from Carl Sagan say it better than I:

1.  The brain is like a muscle. When it is in use we feel very good. Understanding is joyous.

 --the more I taught, the more I wanted to learn.  And it felt really good.  So deeper I went into matters of the history of life on Earth, and how we have defied probability in simply existing...

2.  Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people. 

 --Ok Carl, this is getting a little intense.  And kind of depressing.  Am I better off knowing all this?

3.  For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.

--So that's it.  In order to make any sense of this, we should do what we can with the incredibly short amount of time that we have to deal more kindly with one another. 

So I came to grips with all of this. 
Vonnegut said, "we are here on EArth to fart around, and don't let anybody tell you any different".  So, as I've been farting around, I've really tried to be a decent and moral person.  I've tried to be a good teacher and role model.  I've tried to show patience, and flexibility, and empathy toward my students.  Then I get this slap in the face right out of the gate from the first reading of my first graduate course.  From page vii of the introduction to Privilege, Power, and Difference written by Allan G. Johnson, "We all know that a great deal of trouble surrounds issues of difference in this society, trouble relating to gender and race, sexual orienatation, ethnicity, social class," and "All of us are part of the problem."
I was taken aback and kind of angry. But I trudged on to hear what he had to say. 
I think Johnson knew he might get this response out of me, because he spent the entire three chapters explaining how as a white, heterosexual, middle class male, that I was part of the problem.  And it worked.  What I was blissfully ignorant of prior to this reading, I'm now committed to examining and to working towards a solution to the problem.  If it's anything like Sagan's Pale Blue Dot, I'm in for a real awakening.  But excited for it.
I know the first three chapters are just part of a book that I assume in later chapters lays out some solutions, but I think just defining and acknowledging the problem, and using proper language is the beginning. 
I felt reassured when at the beginning of chater 3, Johnson writes, "The trouble is rooted in a legacy we all inherited, and while we're here, it belongs to us.  It isn't our fault.  It wasn't caused by something we did or didn't do.  But now that it's ours, it's up to us to decide how we're going to deal with it before we collectively pass it along to the generations that will follow ours."  I think that even though I have never really considered the privileges I clearly have, it's not too late for me to work on making th e situation better for the next generation.
Johnson goes on to write (page 36), "...privilege doesn't dreive from who we are or what we've done.  It is a social arrangemnt that depends on which category we happen to be sorted into by other people and how they treat us as a result."  Ok, so he's not saying every individual "WHMCM" (as a teen might text) is necessarily guilty, but that "privilege is more about social categories than who people are."  This just furthered my buy in.  Nonetheless, "privilege itself still exists as a fact of social life" (p39). 
I watched a good Ted Talk by Richard Wilkinson called "How Economic Inequity Harms Societies" .  In it he explains that those countries with the greatest difference in income between the richest 20% and the poorest 20% have the worst gaps in health and social issues (including imprisonment, trust, obesity, life expectancy, math and literacy, and social mobility).  These steep social gradients cause general social dysfunction because people think about the inequality in their daily lives.  IN fact tests were carried out by Dickerson and Kinney ("Acute stressors and cortisol responses", Psychological Bulletin, 2004 vol 130) who found that test subjects exposed to threats to self esteem and social status when performing certain tasks, had significantly higheer levels of cortisol (a hormone released during times of stress) in their blood than others that did not experience those threats (stress has been linked to chronic health issues such as cardiovascular disease.  *another study suggests a link between racial discrimiation, stress and health).
The US has the second highest income gap behing Singapore.  And incidentally, those countries with greater disribution of wealth (Japan, Sweden) had far fewer problems regarding health and social issues...
Johnson writes on page 24, "the ease of not being aware of privilege is an aspect of privilege itself, what some call 'the luxury of obliviousness'".  After reading Johnson, I'm no longer oblivious to privilege and I don't think I can ever go back to simply "farting around". 
  
GK

Meatball Sandwich

Your first post should be a short introduction to you:
who are you  G Kelsey
where you teach  orr
why you decided to do a masters in ASTL  Professional certification
what you do in your spare time  SPARE?! time?  I've got three kids:  almost 6, 2.5, and very new.   Most time is spent back and forth to hockey practice, cooking chicken nuggets and mac and cheese, and cleaning up poop
etc.  Very excited to be a part of this cohort!