Elizabeth Meyer-Gendered harassment in secondary schools: Understanding teachers’ (non) interventions
Meyer writes that gendered harassment "includes any behavior that polices and reinforces traditional heterosexual gender norms such as (hetero) sexual harassment, homophobic harassment, and harassment for gender non-conformity." (pg.1) I noticed the words: polices, traditional, and non-conformity within this quote and knew that these were intentionally placed into the quote. I have realized from many of these readings that the language in which an idea is stated has a lot of worth. The reality of this quote is that this is done all the time and from my experiences many people look the other way. I remember reprimanding a couple boys last year at lunchtime for using a very derogatory term towards another boy. After telling them that their words were cruel, I immediately walked them down to the principal. In my thoughts, I believed these students would be in a lot of trouble and lose a privilege. I was surprised to see them ten minutes later at recess throwing the football around. To this day, I am not sure what was said in the office to those young boys. If it were my classroom, I would have taken a privilege away as stated in the class rules. I realize that the loss of a privilege is nothing compared to the hurt caused by some students but I don't think administration would let me take it any further for fear of parental involvement. I think that if one of the students hit another student there would have at the least been a one day suspension. Why does physical bullying override any kind of mental or emotional bullying? I know that all kinds of bullying are damaging but in my opinion, emotional bullying can be worse. No student, teacher or principal should encourage an environment where students are allowed to judge, discriminate, and act cruelly towards anyone.
If teachers and principals want the students to act with compassion, understanding, and kindness, they can't allow this to be the elephant in the room that no one wants to address. I read in Meyer's article that some of the teachers felt they had to hurry up and cover the material. These teachers felt very pressed for time and clearly stated that they don't address this close-minded behavior from some students towards other students. One teacher claims, "I don’t stop name-calling if I’m too tired, if there are set things I need to get through in a lesson. I know my lesson is going to take 60 minutes, I’ve only got 70 minutes to deliver it, I’ve got 10 minutes to waste. Right now my job is being a teacher and I have to get through the math before the end of the year. It’s not on my priority list."(pg.9) I don't know why these people choose teaching as a profession if they don't want to address what some of their students have to face from their peers. How can a student retain knowledge and concepts in the classroom when their heads are filled with the fear and anticipation that someone will bully them for being who they are? Meyer raises the idea that perhaps some teachers and administration allow and dismiss certain things in the classroom based on their own beliefs. I believe that this does occur and it is disturbing. This relates to the barriers that Meyer describes in the article. These barriers can be a lack of support from principals, lack of formal education, inconsistent response from colleagues, fear of backlash from parents and a negative community response. If the community has an issue with teachers addressing bullying in the classroom, then perhaps what is valued in the community needs to change. We can not sacrifice the younger generations for fear of what narrow-minded individuals will think. As teachers, we must be advocates for all students. These barriers reminded me of the quote by Jasmine Guy. She said, "I don't much care who is gay or straight or married or not. I mostly notice if they are brave enough to confront bigotry." From this article, I have the opinion that there are many teachers and administrators that are not brave enough to confront this.
The general question for Meyer's research was why don't teachers intervene consistently when students report biases and/or bullying. I think the articles does a good job answering this question through the teacher's responses and experiences but there was one thought nagging me throughout the article. Isn't it our job, duty, and responsibility to automatically do this? If we as teachers place a value on a student's physical well-being, why isn't there an equal value on emotional or mental well-being? It seems like common sense to me. While I agree from the reading that teachers that have had proper training are able to address these issues in the classroom, I don't think that is the only criteria in stopping this. I have always felt that certain people should teach. I strongly feel that if someone has their own biases towards members of society, they should not be in a classroom. I am not sure if we need new policies on bullying but I do know that actually enforcing the ones we have would make positive changes.
Here is the link for the Anti-Bullying Resources page on GLSEN.org
http://www.glsen.org/cgi-bin/iowa/all/antibullying/index.html
Here is a link from a video I found very interesting. This man's testimonial is very eye opening and thought provoking:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f91_zIaP0Hs
Monday, October 29, 2012
GLSEN Reflection
I found many useful resources on www.GLSEN.org. GLSEN ,or, Gay, Lesbian, & Straight Education Network empowers people and provides a community. It is very positive and the members empower students and teachers to bring about a safe and secure environment for everyone. The "Unheard Voices" page was very powerful. These testimonials were very personal and I think the participants are brave to share their stories so that it may change the discrimination that so many have to deal with. Some of the stories made me sad while other made me angry. I couldn't believe a Marine that is brave enough to die for his country couldn't serve because he is attracted to and in love with a man. The other story that I believed to be meaningful was the "LGBT Family Rights" by Terry Boggins. He brought up so many valid points in the two minute clip and it reminded me of Dr. August's article. I was curious to see who was on the GLSEN Board of Directors and noticed that the occupations of the members are varied and many members are employees of powerful companies such as Wells Fargo, HBO, and Cisco. I noticed that there are no chapters of GLSEN in RI, hopefully that will change one day. The statistics were disturbing especially the fact that 8 out of 10 LGBT students faced harassment at school.
Monday, October 22, 2012
“Anti-Teaching: Confronting the Crisis of
Significance” by Michael Wesch
I enjoyed this reading for its many positive points on education. I also felt insightful after reading it because there were many useful ideas presented that we as educators can implement in the classroom. Wesch's overall argument is a good one. He writes, "The problem with education today is the problem of significance itself. Students-our most important critics- are struggling to find meaning and significance in the education." (pg.5) This quote gave me an a-ha moment because it tied everything together for me. The institution of education that we have at the moment clearly needs reform. While I realize standardized testing is here to stay for the moment, there are other things that educators can do in the classroom to give students experiences that offer personal meaning. It reminded me of Johnson by the way he practices what he preaches in the classroom. Both of these writers provide a classroom that is "democratic" and reflects on their students' needs. Wesch wants his students to ask meaningful questions and strives to provide an environment that allows them to think outside the box. This is important for students to make connections to the world around them in their own terms. I believe that is when a student is truly interested and "gets it".
I immediately watched "A Vision of Students Today". It started off eerie with the song playing and empty classroom. It then became jaw dropping as students were shown and started raising their notebooks with the alarming facts on the realities of being at this state college. I felt very fortunate because this was not my experience as an undergraduate at RIC. The most I had in a classroom was 30 and all my professors knew my name after two weeks. It was sad to read the information the students surveyed on themselves such as the debt they will be in, money spent on text books not read, and the lack of sleep they get. It was clear that the students related more to the technological world than the reality right in front them. It is scary that these students were getting very little out of some of the classes they were in. Some of these students will be in debt from taking some classes they get very little out of. That in itself is alarming. The link for "A Vision of Students Today" is below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
Another quote from the article that I found interesting was as follows: "As for myself, I have increasingly focused less on simply trying to convey good information and more on inspiring good questions. It struck me that all learning begins with a good question, and if we are ultimately trying to create “active lifelong learners” with“critical thinking skills” and an ability to “think outside the box” it might be best to start by getting students to ask better questions."(pg.6) This quote stuck out to me because I have been reflecting lately on all the key terms and teacher jargon that go around as best practices but which ones are truly implemented to help all learners. If we as teachers want our students to think critically it will have to be on the students terms and experiences, not what some "experts" think. It had me thinking about how teachers can become more involved with curriculum writing and how what is important for our students should be brought to the table when considering curriculum reform. I don't know if curriculum reform will happen anytime soon but we can start in our own classrooms. I believe it is important for educators to realize it is a changing world and to find ways to connect with their students if the curriculum doesn't reflect what is important.
It is important for students to have a purpose for their own education and to take ownership of it. Wesch writes, "when students recognize their own importance in helping to shape the future of this increasingly global, interconnected society, the significance problem fades away."(pg.7) I think that human beings like to have a mission so to speak and a reason for doing something. I think Wesch is claiming that when students are given a mission or personal reason for doing something, they will take the challenge. One aspect to a global, interconnected world is the use of technology in the classroom. I think any teaching tool is good when used in a way that the students will find meaning and truly learn. I am still not clear on Wesch's standpoint on using technology but based on his article and video, I think that he would be for it if students found meaning in it. I added a link for a very well-written article on technology in the classroom.
I enjoyed this reading for its many positive points on education. I also felt insightful after reading it because there were many useful ideas presented that we as educators can implement in the classroom. Wesch's overall argument is a good one. He writes, "The problem with education today is the problem of significance itself. Students-our most important critics- are struggling to find meaning and significance in the education." (pg.5) This quote gave me an a-ha moment because it tied everything together for me. The institution of education that we have at the moment clearly needs reform. While I realize standardized testing is here to stay for the moment, there are other things that educators can do in the classroom to give students experiences that offer personal meaning. It reminded me of Johnson by the way he practices what he preaches in the classroom. Both of these writers provide a classroom that is "democratic" and reflects on their students' needs. Wesch wants his students to ask meaningful questions and strives to provide an environment that allows them to think outside the box. This is important for students to make connections to the world around them in their own terms. I believe that is when a student is truly interested and "gets it".
I immediately watched "A Vision of Students Today". It started off eerie with the song playing and empty classroom. It then became jaw dropping as students were shown and started raising their notebooks with the alarming facts on the realities of being at this state college. I felt very fortunate because this was not my experience as an undergraduate at RIC. The most I had in a classroom was 30 and all my professors knew my name after two weeks. It was sad to read the information the students surveyed on themselves such as the debt they will be in, money spent on text books not read, and the lack of sleep they get. It was clear that the students related more to the technological world than the reality right in front them. It is scary that these students were getting very little out of some of the classes they were in. Some of these students will be in debt from taking some classes they get very little out of. That in itself is alarming. The link for "A Vision of Students Today" is below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dGCJ46vyR9o
Another quote from the article that I found interesting was as follows: "As for myself, I have increasingly focused less on simply trying to convey good information and more on inspiring good questions. It struck me that all learning begins with a good question, and if we are ultimately trying to create “active lifelong learners” with“critical thinking skills” and an ability to “think outside the box” it might be best to start by getting students to ask better questions."(pg.6) This quote stuck out to me because I have been reflecting lately on all the key terms and teacher jargon that go around as best practices but which ones are truly implemented to help all learners. If we as teachers want our students to think critically it will have to be on the students terms and experiences, not what some "experts" think. It had me thinking about how teachers can become more involved with curriculum writing and how what is important for our students should be brought to the table when considering curriculum reform. I don't know if curriculum reform will happen anytime soon but we can start in our own classrooms. I believe it is important for educators to realize it is a changing world and to find ways to connect with their students if the curriculum doesn't reflect what is important.
It is important for students to have a purpose for their own education and to take ownership of it. Wesch writes, "when students recognize their own importance in helping to shape the future of this increasingly global, interconnected society, the significance problem fades away."(pg.7) I think that human beings like to have a mission so to speak and a reason for doing something. I think Wesch is claiming that when students are given a mission or personal reason for doing something, they will take the challenge. One aspect to a global, interconnected world is the use of technology in the classroom. I think any teaching tool is good when used in a way that the students will find meaning and truly learn. I am still not clear on Wesch's standpoint on using technology but based on his article and video, I think that he would be for it if students found meaning in it. I added a link for a very well-written article on technology in the classroom.
Monday, October 15, 2012
Calling All Dream Keepers
Prudence Carter- Keepin' it Real: School Success Beyond Black and White
This was an interesting read by Carter which summarizes her experiences and qualitative data found in a study conducted in Yonkers over a 10 month period. The article was opened with a quote by Mark Gould which I found to go along with much of what Delpit writes. Interestingly enough, she instantly describes the "culture of power" phrased by Delpit herself. I believe Carter's overall stance on the culture of power is that "they" control curriculum, how a person should present self and how the overall society is presented. She also described practices represented in different cultures. One area of study that has always been interesting to me is how certain cultures regard one gesture as respectful while another culture may regard something as disrespectful. The following quote discusses a trip to South Africa and the result of a lack of cultural awareness:
Quote#1:
"Several White teachers of Anglo and Afrikaans backgrounds described their initial displeasure with many of their Black students of Xhosa, Zulu, and other ethnic backgrounds who refused to look at them while being disciplined. Unbeknown to the teachers, the students' cultures taught them that no eye contact was a sign of deference to elders ."(pg.48)
This made me mad because while the students were acting in a way they were use to and what they considered submissive, they were getting in deeper trouble by the teachers. It was odd to me that these teachers didn't do more research or inquiry as to the practices implemented with the meaning of them and the forms of reprimand the students are use to. The fact that the South African teacher knew eye contact was a symbol in the culture of power and often stood for confidence was meaningful because it spoke for her own understanding of different cultures . I think the notion that these students did not make eye contact speaks volumes about what is within a culture and why. I think this is an example of a conflict that was avoidable.
The in depth look at cultural capital in different forms was meaningful to me as I start to put these different pieces of the puzzle together. Embodied capital are the "schemes of appreciation for music, art or an elite sport. " Objectified capital are "inhered in things such as books, artwork, and music collections." Lastly, institutionalized capital "helps one attain professional success by attaining credentials and higher degrees." With Bourdieu in mind, it is with these capitals that will bring a student to a higher success in the world. There will be some kind of social and economic kick back. My question as a teacher is how can students from a Black or Latino background or low socio-economic status gain access to these in a meaningful way that will add to the experiences in the classroom? I know the answer starts with the teacher and student collaboration in the classroom but how can we implement these things so that all students will have a chance to access these capitals. There must first be consistency of what is being taught from district to district. The curriculum will have to mirror all students and not just those that fall into the culture of power.
One of the students in the study said something very interesting. Moesha challenged the notion of language. I think she is trying to say that language differentiates people. She considers "Black English"useful at certain times but claims that Standard English shows intelligence. I think she, at a young age, know that it symbolizes what she needs to succeed. She is considered a cultural straddler because she acts one way with her friends but then acts differently at school and work. She has gained a cultural capital of knowing how to act in certain situations. She has adopted this dual linguistic capital that will help her in both social and professional situations. She knows when to "code switch" and does successfully. Below is a quote from Moesha discussing this:
Quote#2:
"See I know people who can act ignorant as anything, but they are also smart, and can also talk in an intelligent way. It's just that when you talk with your friends, you talk in a certain way, or when you're at work or wherever at, you have to act intelligent". (pg.61)
The above quote goes against what Adrienne, another student, claims. Adrienne believes that Black English is silly and not useful. She is often called "white girl" from her black peers and feels isolated from them. I felt bad reading how her peers make fun of her but am not naive to think it wouldn't happen. I know that if she took part in Black English and other things valued by these Black peers this would not happen. I think she is taking a risk but is doing so in order to gain access to cultural capital represented in the culture of power.
Quote #3:
"Not only are these underpaid civil servants expected to produce literate populations but they are also asked to serve as entertainers, psychologists, surrogate parents, and confidants..." (pg. 73)
I am going to put myself out there and say that entertaining my students is a fun aspect to teaching. I think it depends on the individual teacher and what their philosophy of teaching is. The students get enjoyment out of seeing their teacher in this light and often consider them "real". The word entertain can mean so many things but that is how I view it. There is also the idea that many teachers don't mind at all listening to their students "growing pains". I had an open door policy for all my students and if something was bothering them they could always come see me. I felt honored that they would trust me in such a way. But like I wrote earlier in the paragraph, all teachers may not like doing such a thing depending on their own teaching
philosophy. While I don't think it is my place to "parent" a child, it sure is my place to tell a child when they are acting disrespectful and like a parent try to help that child with his or her actions and find out the underlying meaning or reasons for such actions. I think it is the parent's responsibility to care for the child in the home but the teacher can play a role in that. The same goes for a parent involvement in the classroom. I feel like many of the strategies for parent involvement in the classroom are superficial. This is a concept I have been interested in since I started teaching five years ago. Below is a useful article discussing parent/teacher collaborations.
http://www.educationoasis.com/resources/Articles/working_with_parents.htm
This was an interesting read by Carter which summarizes her experiences and qualitative data found in a study conducted in Yonkers over a 10 month period. The article was opened with a quote by Mark Gould which I found to go along with much of what Delpit writes. Interestingly enough, she instantly describes the "culture of power" phrased by Delpit herself. I believe Carter's overall stance on the culture of power is that "they" control curriculum, how a person should present self and how the overall society is presented. She also described practices represented in different cultures. One area of study that has always been interesting to me is how certain cultures regard one gesture as respectful while another culture may regard something as disrespectful. The following quote discusses a trip to South Africa and the result of a lack of cultural awareness:
Quote#1:
"Several White teachers of Anglo and Afrikaans backgrounds described their initial displeasure with many of their Black students of Xhosa, Zulu, and other ethnic backgrounds who refused to look at them while being disciplined. Unbeknown to the teachers, the students' cultures taught them that no eye contact was a sign of deference to elders ."(pg.48)
This made me mad because while the students were acting in a way they were use to and what they considered submissive, they were getting in deeper trouble by the teachers. It was odd to me that these teachers didn't do more research or inquiry as to the practices implemented with the meaning of them and the forms of reprimand the students are use to. The fact that the South African teacher knew eye contact was a symbol in the culture of power and often stood for confidence was meaningful because it spoke for her own understanding of different cultures . I think the notion that these students did not make eye contact speaks volumes about what is within a culture and why. I think this is an example of a conflict that was avoidable.
The in depth look at cultural capital in different forms was meaningful to me as I start to put these different pieces of the puzzle together. Embodied capital are the "schemes of appreciation for music, art or an elite sport. " Objectified capital are "inhered in things such as books, artwork, and music collections." Lastly, institutionalized capital "helps one attain professional success by attaining credentials and higher degrees." With Bourdieu in mind, it is with these capitals that will bring a student to a higher success in the world. There will be some kind of social and economic kick back. My question as a teacher is how can students from a Black or Latino background or low socio-economic status gain access to these in a meaningful way that will add to the experiences in the classroom? I know the answer starts with the teacher and student collaboration in the classroom but how can we implement these things so that all students will have a chance to access these capitals. There must first be consistency of what is being taught from district to district. The curriculum will have to mirror all students and not just those that fall into the culture of power.
One of the students in the study said something very interesting. Moesha challenged the notion of language. I think she is trying to say that language differentiates people. She considers "Black English"useful at certain times but claims that Standard English shows intelligence. I think she, at a young age, know that it symbolizes what she needs to succeed. She is considered a cultural straddler because she acts one way with her friends but then acts differently at school and work. She has gained a cultural capital of knowing how to act in certain situations. She has adopted this dual linguistic capital that will help her in both social and professional situations. She knows when to "code switch" and does successfully. Below is a quote from Moesha discussing this:
Quote#2:
"See I know people who can act ignorant as anything, but they are also smart, and can also talk in an intelligent way. It's just that when you talk with your friends, you talk in a certain way, or when you're at work or wherever at, you have to act intelligent". (pg.61)
The above quote goes against what Adrienne, another student, claims. Adrienne believes that Black English is silly and not useful. She is often called "white girl" from her black peers and feels isolated from them. I felt bad reading how her peers make fun of her but am not naive to think it wouldn't happen. I know that if she took part in Black English and other things valued by these Black peers this would not happen. I think she is taking a risk but is doing so in order to gain access to cultural capital represented in the culture of power.
Quote #3:
"Not only are these underpaid civil servants expected to produce literate populations but they are also asked to serve as entertainers, psychologists, surrogate parents, and confidants..." (pg. 73)
I am going to put myself out there and say that entertaining my students is a fun aspect to teaching. I think it depends on the individual teacher and what their philosophy of teaching is. The students get enjoyment out of seeing their teacher in this light and often consider them "real". The word entertain can mean so many things but that is how I view it. There is also the idea that many teachers don't mind at all listening to their students "growing pains". I had an open door policy for all my students and if something was bothering them they could always come see me. I felt honored that they would trust me in such a way. But like I wrote earlier in the paragraph, all teachers may not like doing such a thing depending on their own teaching
philosophy. While I don't think it is my place to "parent" a child, it sure is my place to tell a child when they are acting disrespectful and like a parent try to help that child with his or her actions and find out the underlying meaning or reasons for such actions. I think it is the parent's responsibility to care for the child in the home but the teacher can play a role in that. The same goes for a parent involvement in the classroom. I feel like many of the strategies for parent involvement in the classroom are superficial. This is a concept I have been interested in since I started teaching five years ago. Below is a useful article discussing parent/teacher collaborations.
http://www.educationoasis.com/resources/Articles/working_with_parents.htm
Monday, October 8, 2012
Gerri August, Making Room for One Another
This reading was interesting to me because it was so real. The overall question was, what is the result when a child is raised by lesbian parents? The answer was revealed through a description of various dialogues and interactions that took place in Zeke's Kindergarten class focused on a boy named Cody with assistance from his classmates and family. I believe Dr. August claims that students from a nuclear family will not have to walk on egg shells when referring to their own families because this has been the preconceived idea of what a family is. This would take the pressure off a student when creating a family portrait or sharing experiences about his/her family. A student from a nuclear family with a mom and a dad would not have to be consciously aware of how to word something ahead of time. This,seems to me, like a very stressful situation for a youngster. The idea that a family can only be a mom and a dad was argued in the reading with evidence to back up the reality that a family is not a cookie cutter, uniformed institution. If the child sees in textbooks or other resources in the classroom that a family is a mom or dad, he/she will surely question his/her own family structure. A teacher's own biases towards one family structure versus another will directly affect a child's experience. If the teacher does not view or accept a non-dominant family structure, the child will feel left out and cast aside. The classroom discourse will have to match the reality that a family can be many things. If a child from a non-dominant family has to keep up with the classroom discourse as it is, he or she will ultimately have a very negative experience in school and may have a negative view on society at such a young age.
In a way, I can relate this to Finn when he says "the status quo is the status quo because people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are". If we as teachers have the vital task of creating a democratic classroom, we will have to challenge the status quo and micro manage our classrooms in a way that will benefit children from dominant and non-dominant family structures. If we as teachers are political as many people suggest, we will somehow have to change the language of these politics.
Quote#1:
Dr. August is discussing Cody, a student in the ZK, in which most of the qualitative data is based on:
"Cody came into the ZK with keen perceptions of personal social risk. Although he readily, even eagerly identified with his Cambodian heritage, Cody worried about his color, his adoption, and his family structure".
The first thing I thought when I read this was it seemed to be a lot of pressure put on a little boy. He came in knowing that the things he said and the way he acted could be used against him in a social setting by his peers. The advantage this boy had was being placed into a classroom with a teacher that had a wonderful approach to dealing with the diversity in which he received in these youngsters. I don't believe Cody's worrying was an innate response. I believe that somehow he perceived himself as different. This may have happened by hearing other students' responses in the classroom. By hearing other students say mom and dad, he may have thought "that is different from me". By realizing he is different in some ways from the other students, he may not have wanted to take the risk and offer information that the children may criticize.
Quote#2:
Zeke is talking to Cody in the classroom after Cody becomes offended by what a classmate says to him:
"But Cody you do have to know that sometimes you're going to be on the side that has less, right? Because it's your own brain and that's what you were thinking, right?
I know that Zeke used this statement as a response to a situation in class but based on the other things Zeke said I believe he meant much more. I think he was doing what some of the readings we've done in class urge teachers to do. That is to give the students "weapons" that they can use in life to get what the culture of power keeps from them. He tells the child that he may in fact be in a situation where he will have "less", but to carry on with what he truly believes is right. I think this was a wonderful response to this situation.
Quote#3:
Zeke was asking the students for information on who Martin Luther King Jr. was. Many of the children made things up.
"Still, Zeke persisted in enlisting the students' participation."
I have read many times in these course readings that the gap is widened by the lack of participation and experiences that come from each individual student. Zeke challenges this by constantly seeking out the thoughts, opinions, and ideas from his students. Even with the young age of these children, he provides them with an environment in which they can have a voice and it directly helps this positive teaching environment. The language in which he teachers is much different than many other classrooms because he challenges the beliefs of the culture of power.
The following article was interesting to me. It asks the question, "what happens to children raised by gay parents?"
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sectionfront/life/what-happens-to-kids-raised-by-gay-parents-488758/
This reading was interesting to me because it was so real. The overall question was, what is the result when a child is raised by lesbian parents? The answer was revealed through a description of various dialogues and interactions that took place in Zeke's Kindergarten class focused on a boy named Cody with assistance from his classmates and family. I believe Dr. August claims that students from a nuclear family will not have to walk on egg shells when referring to their own families because this has been the preconceived idea of what a family is. This would take the pressure off a student when creating a family portrait or sharing experiences about his/her family. A student from a nuclear family with a mom and a dad would not have to be consciously aware of how to word something ahead of time. This,seems to me, like a very stressful situation for a youngster. The idea that a family can only be a mom and a dad was argued in the reading with evidence to back up the reality that a family is not a cookie cutter, uniformed institution. If the child sees in textbooks or other resources in the classroom that a family is a mom or dad, he/she will surely question his/her own family structure. A teacher's own biases towards one family structure versus another will directly affect a child's experience. If the teacher does not view or accept a non-dominant family structure, the child will feel left out and cast aside. The classroom discourse will have to match the reality that a family can be many things. If a child from a non-dominant family has to keep up with the classroom discourse as it is, he or she will ultimately have a very negative experience in school and may have a negative view on society at such a young age.
In a way, I can relate this to Finn when he says "the status quo is the status quo because people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are". If we as teachers have the vital task of creating a democratic classroom, we will have to challenge the status quo and micro manage our classrooms in a way that will benefit children from dominant and non-dominant family structures. If we as teachers are political as many people suggest, we will somehow have to change the language of these politics.
Quote#1:
Dr. August is discussing Cody, a student in the ZK, in which most of the qualitative data is based on:
"Cody came into the ZK with keen perceptions of personal social risk. Although he readily, even eagerly identified with his Cambodian heritage, Cody worried about his color, his adoption, and his family structure".
The first thing I thought when I read this was it seemed to be a lot of pressure put on a little boy. He came in knowing that the things he said and the way he acted could be used against him in a social setting by his peers. The advantage this boy had was being placed into a classroom with a teacher that had a wonderful approach to dealing with the diversity in which he received in these youngsters. I don't believe Cody's worrying was an innate response. I believe that somehow he perceived himself as different. This may have happened by hearing other students' responses in the classroom. By hearing other students say mom and dad, he may have thought "that is different from me". By realizing he is different in some ways from the other students, he may not have wanted to take the risk and offer information that the children may criticize.
Quote#2:
Zeke is talking to Cody in the classroom after Cody becomes offended by what a classmate says to him:
"But Cody you do have to know that sometimes you're going to be on the side that has less, right? Because it's your own brain and that's what you were thinking, right?
I know that Zeke used this statement as a response to a situation in class but based on the other things Zeke said I believe he meant much more. I think he was doing what some of the readings we've done in class urge teachers to do. That is to give the students "weapons" that they can use in life to get what the culture of power keeps from them. He tells the child that he may in fact be in a situation where he will have "less", but to carry on with what he truly believes is right. I think this was a wonderful response to this situation.
Quote#3:
Zeke was asking the students for information on who Martin Luther King Jr. was. Many of the children made things up.
"Still, Zeke persisted in enlisting the students' participation."
I have read many times in these course readings that the gap is widened by the lack of participation and experiences that come from each individual student. Zeke challenges this by constantly seeking out the thoughts, opinions, and ideas from his students. Even with the young age of these children, he provides them with an environment in which they can have a voice and it directly helps this positive teaching environment. The language in which he teachers is much different than many other classrooms because he challenges the beliefs of the culture of power.
The following article was interesting to me. It asks the question, "what happens to children raised by gay parents?"
http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/sectionfront/life/what-happens-to-kids-raised-by-gay-parents-488758/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)