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
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Sunday, October 28, 2012
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:
- Convince education leaders and policymakers of the urgent need to address anti-LGBT behavior and bias in our schools.
- Protect students by advancing comprehensive and effective safe schools law and policies.
- Empower principals to make their schools safe places to learn.
- 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
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
Sunday, October 21, 2012
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
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.
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
Sunday, October 14, 2012
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
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
Sunday, October 7, 2012
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)