Empowering vs. Domesticating

Uncovering the Hidden Curriculum
Patrick J. Finn - Literacy with an Attitude: Educating Working- Class Children in Their Own Self- Interest   

Argument:
Finn claims society offers, in their own belief, an equal literacy program throughout all public educational institutions.  Finn very much disagrees with this idea and counteracts with his opinion that in fact the different approaches to learning are split into two systems.  The first system is empowering education, which is directed to the upper-class.  This enables a student to be creative and a problem-solver.  The second system is domesticating education.  This sounded like something in the animal world to me and gave me a negative feeling just reading it.  As I went on, it was discovered domesticating is based on no creativity, fact-based learning.  I believe it was what Bartolome was referring to when she was discussing "dehumanization". My interpretation of these is that empowering education provides a student with knowledge on how to run a factory while domesticating education teaches a student how to work in a factory.  It just seems very unfair and judgemental.  I don't think Finn believes it is an evil conspiracy but rather something that has been adapted to over time.  People automatically take their place in the world.  It goes back to what we have discussed in class where the ones without power notice the inequality.  It is so easy for an upper-class student to yell about the all inequalities, but most of the time after, he/she just goes on with their lives again.  Finn claims that if a working-class student received empowering education it would be "literacy with an attitude".  The fear from those in power is that these students will realize the injustices that are taking place and will perhaps act on it.  This reminded me of the lack of literacy for slaves so that the slaves would not rebel against the "owners".  Finn believes there could be non-violent social change.  I agree with this completely.  Teachers will be the allies to these students during their fight for equality.  Educators will provide these students with potent weapons" in their struggle for a better deal.  I was reminded of Delpit while reading about these potent weapons.  I believe she also wants teachers to form an alliance with students.  As a teacher and Graduate student, it was powerful reading the perspectives of others "in my boat".  Often times we judge how well something works by how well it worked for us individually in the classroom. I know now that I have to break out of this cookie-cutter, one size fits all mentality. 


Quote#1:

"The status quo is the status quo because people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are"

Those in power have the capacity to change what they would like to change.  So that brings me to the conclusion that all that is happening now is for the self-preservation of the "elite".  It is scary and sad that there is this hierarchy presented in society that must somehow be broken  from the top down.  If we are such a "Democratic" nation, how has this been allowed to carry on?  What do we truly value as a society? I thought we valued equality but it is apparent those with the power to change take that ability away from those willing to do so. 

Quote #2:

"Creativity and personal development were important goals for the students at the affluent schools"

While I think this is a wonderful thing, it presents a problem when all students aren't given these opportunities.  It reminds me of a student I had four years back.  He was very bright and artisitic.  This young man was from a "lower- class", urban backgound.  His parents moved from the Dominican Republic when he was a toddler.  His test scores would have shown otherwise to his intelligence but as an eduactor I looked past that.  He had the smashing good looks all the girls adored.  He was quite charismatic for a young man.  The most interesting thing though was how he dealt with his problems.  Every morning I gave my students a journal prompt and they had the choice between the prompt or free write.  Atleast twice a week, he would draw a cartoon.  These cartoons were based on whatever he was dealing with in his private life and I felt blessed that he shared these with me.  Throughout the two years I taught him, I tried to modify the lessons so that his gift would be recognized.  Thinking back he didn't really do the assigment the way I asked.  I  have realized it doesn't matter that he didn't do what I asked.  He did the assigment better. 

 
Quote #3
"This would make literacy dangerous again."

The above quote is from Finn's perspective on what would happen if the lower to middle -class students had a political investment for learning literacy.  Finn discusses what would happen if the teachers really did form an alliance with these students for proper equality.  To the status quo, this would be very dangerous.  They may lose the power that they claim to be their own through innuendos and inequality throughout curriculum.  It would perhaps be a truly free nation.  Free from injustice and inequality. 


Hyperlink:
I found a review for Patrick Finn's "Literacy with an Attitude".  I agree with the reviewer that it is outstanding in the sense of its straightforwardness.  I plan on reading the full text this semester. 

http://wwu.academia.edu/RosalieRomano/Teaching/27429/Review_of_Patrick_Finns_Literacy_with_an_Attitude_2e