In reading RI Teachers Respond to PARCC A White Paper by Janet D Johnson and Brittany A Richer the problem that they bring up is that "according to the current dominant narrative on public education an achievement gap separates those who academically successful from those that are not".
There were major themes that were discussed throughout the article and those were (beginning on page 4):
" -Student perceptions and responses: students had an overwhelmingly negative response to the test. Teachers reported that the questions were not grade level appropriate, nor were they suited for the students with diverse learning styles and abilities.
-The students lack of understanding was made real by the tears the teachers had to see fall from students faces.
-Impact on teaching: survey data revealed excessive time spent preparing students for the technical and content aspects of the test, leading to significant alterations in the curriculum. Teachers expressed that they do not feel this time spent was worthwhile or that the data will help support their teaching.
-Impact on teacher autonomy and agency: data shows PARCC testing has negatively impacted how teachers teach.
-Ethical compromises: Despite the fact that RI has no formal policy for opting out, data shows 59% of teachers felt pressure to tell students they had to take the test."
Personally I despise standardized testing. Each child learns differently and for some taking a test is so nerve racking that they can't get pest their anxiety to even concentrate on the test. The teachers are forced to teach to the test and not to what the kids truly need help with while learning reading and writing. And it is not a clear picture of where your child is academically at all. PARCC test, I feel is just a frustration for teachers, students and parents. More time should be spent teaching subjects instead of taking these tests that do absolutely nothing to help these students.
Safe Spaces by Annemarie Vaccaro, Gerri August and Megan Kennedy.
While reading this article, it brought me back to my high school days, of those days of being bullied because I had HORRIBLE acne and braces and wasn't the skinniest girl in the school. I remember feeling scared as I walked in the lunchroom and looking around for one of my friends to sit with. And while I was different from some of thee other kids I went to school with, I cannot imagine how it must feel to be truly different, to not know who I am or who will except me for the lifestyle I live. I have had to deal with not knowing who I was, or to be going against the "norm" of being heterosexual. My heart breaks for those kids who do not feel accepted because they are gay or lesbian, bisexual or transgender. There will always be bullies, but its whether or not the adults that are present allow that bullying to continue or do something about it. As the authors state in the opening " LGBT youth that are bullied for being different often feel that that have nowhere to turn....death should NOT be an option". Every parent, teacher, principle, and coach should ensure that bullying is stopped and students are educated on the LGBT community rather than just turning that blind eye when you hear or see it happening. There were a couple of examples in the article that should teachers using these moments as teachable or ignoring them that I found very interesting.
First there was Marcus, who comes from a family consisting of two moms. When he explained to a peer that his mom was gay, that she liked other girls and so he had two moms, the teacher sent him to the principle's office. Instead the teacher should have used this moment to teach the class that all families are different and some kids have a mom and a dad, some have two moms, some two dads, some just one parents and so on. That was the teacher's bad for reacting the way that she did.
The next example that I found exceptional was the teacher named Patrick. He had a student named Derrick who was bullying another student first by calling him gay, and then by calling him bisexual. Instead of ignoring the situation Patrick handled it beautifully. He made Derrick look up the word gay in the dictionary and read it out loud. He then questioned Derrick on whether or not that's what he meant. The next time when Derrick called the student bisexual, Patrick asked what does that mean? When Derrick said "it means you like both boys and girls" , Patrick replied with well I have both male and female friends so I still don't understand what you are getting at". He says if your going to use the language then we are going to talk about it. Johnson would be proud!!
rI was baffled that there are states that ban affirmation of same sex relationships, such as Utah, South Carolina, Mississippi, Arizona, and Oklahoma. OR how about Alabama, who actually comes right out and states that homosexuality posses a health risk. Really people??? I thought we were past the thinking formed in 1982!!! I'm not saying that we openly discuss LGBT with my son in our home, but I am not opposed to him understanding what it is, or leering about it in school. And I definitely support including topics on LGBT in health classes. I actually used the GLSEN site to find an article specifically on incorporating (or lack of incorporating) LGBT in health class and the disservice we are doing for those students. Health class is when we are teaching students about their hormones, their sexual urges and the changes their bodies are going through. Why are we still teaching that as strictly heterosexual?
I will close with my favorite quote from this article on page 15: "Language is a tool. As such we believe that speech is performative-it does things. Words invite or exclude, recognize or erase, empower or intimidate, examine or assume. Far from what the children's chants would have us believe, words are sticks and stones. And those sticks and stones can either build bridges or break bones".
In reading the first article, Aria by Richard Rodriguez, my hear broke the little boy who first felt like he didn't belong in the English speaking world, but then felt like he lost his sense of family and culture when the nuns had asked his family to speak only English in the house and they obliged. Yes I believe that it is very important to be able to understand and speak English, after all that is our language of "power" I'm sure Lisa Delpit would agree. However, I can feel his loss of family values and culture when his family decided to not carry on their Spanish speaking in the home. My great grandparents spoke Italian. Of course they were forced to learn English in order to live and work in America, but with them went my families abililty to communicate bilingually. My grandmother, having to speak English lost alot of her knowledge of the Italian language, my mother and my aunt can understand and speak very little, and my cousins and siblings and I can only swear in Italian. It's sad when you loose parts of your culture that means so much to you.
But then I read Language and Power by Virginia Collier, and I have hope that future generations of bilingual families will absolutely learn the language of power, English, but will not loose their values and culture in the process. I really like that this article gives some answers and advice to those teachers teaching bilingual students, which for the record I have no idea how you do that, it is a very difficult task to accomplish. But the steps that are provided as a guide in the article are tools that make me hopeful that the author is correct in arguing that it is possible to learn to be part of the American culture without losing the culture that yo are already a part of. Number 3 on pg 227 is by far my favorite "Don't teach a language in any that challenges or seeks to eliminate the first language". This is a great goal and I truly hope we can find a way to enforce that culture at home is just as important as culture in school, but that they can be different and still be effective in developing a person. America is known as being a melting pot, but if we eliminate all of the cultures that make us unique than really we are no different than any other country.
I will admit I was very wary of this assignment at first. You see I am one of those people who prefer to be assigned a particular reading and told exactly what I am supposed to do. This was too much freedom. Then I went onto this website. I actually ending up reading a few articles, just because I found them so interesting and informative. This really is a great sight and I have picked up quite a bit from spending some time on there. I decided to blog about the article Unlearning the myths that bind us by Linda Christensen. This article really struck a chord with me on a personal level for a few reasons. One, I grew up watching a lot of the cartoons and movies that she writes about, and as children we played princess, looking for our prince to make us happy so we could live happily ever after. Even when playing barbie dolls there was always a Ken doll that barbie would end up with so they cold get married and live in the big barbie house. Now as an adult, I have nieces that watch those same Disney movies, dress up as the same princesses and play the same way. Nothing has changed in over 30 years. It's still all about finding that price to make you happy. Not about being a strong independent woman who can make herself happy. I know Disney is trying to make a move, with movies like Moana, Mulan and Frozen, but they still portray those underlying themes somewhere in the movies.
Christensen opens with "Our society's culture industry colonizes our students' minds and teaches them how to act, live, and dream, This introduction hits young children especially hard. The secret education, as Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman dubs it, delivered by children's books and movies, instructs people to accept the world as it is portrayed in these social blueprints. And often that world depicts the domination of one sex, one race, one class or one country over a weaker counterpart." In her class, Christensen begins by having her students watch Popeye the Sailor meets Ali Baba's Forty Thieves. Students are asked to watch with a "lens" on, to watch for things like racism and sexism, instead of just watching the cartoons that they love to watch. Students noticed a few things in this particular cartoon. First, all of the "Arab" thieves look and are dressed exactly alike, like people of the non white race do not have any differentiating characteristics. Then there is Olive Oil, the woman who is always in peril and can never save herself. She requires her strong man to come to her rescue. At one point Popeye puts a collar on her and drags her around. That's a wonderful message to send to young women.
Next they begin to look at Disney movies. You know, the movies we all grew up watching such as Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, Sleeping Beauty, Beauty and the Beast, The Little Mermaid. What's sad is I love these movies and now I don't know that I will be able to look at them the same way since reading this. The following clip sums up all of the movies pretty well:
One student, named Elijah says " I've noticed that women can't do anything without a man, and women are supposed to cook and clean and make the man happy. It happens in the world we live in today. A lot of women are dependent on men to make them happy. " And it is so true. There are so many women out there who think their lives are not complete unless they have a man by their side. I'm not saying its wrong to BE happy WITH a man but to rely on anyone to make you happy is absurd. Yet that's exactly what these cartoon are portraying. Never mind the way they portray people of color. Christensen states that "by the time we look at people of color in cartoons, the students have already noticed that the majority of their roles are as villains". One example they used was the The Lion King. I actually never noticed this, but it is true, Scar and the hyenas, who are the villains in the movie are much darker and have black hair, compared to Musafa and Simba, who are considered the good lions.
It's almost as if Disney wrote the S.C.W.A.A.M.P concept themselves. Don't get me wrong, I still love and treasure those movies, but I will never be able to look at them the same way again.
I promised myself I was going to read this entire excerpt, I wasn't just going to skim through chapter 13, but I was going to read the entire thing. I really wish I hadn't. I am no saying that this piece did not have some interesting facts, or that thee writer did not make some great points, because he did. But I have to be honest and say that I dozed off more than once while reading this. It was not as captivating as the other readings we've done and I struggled to follow along with some of it. I believe that his argument is in line with Lisa Delpit's on that those with the power receive a better education than those without. In fact in the preface one of the quotes that stuck out to me was: "There have been times in history when the prospect of literacy of the have-nots has been a source of endless angst of the haves". I also felt some Johnson in there when he state, again in the preface, " The status quo is the status quo because people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are. It takes energy to make changes and the energy must come from the people who will benefit from the change. But the working class does not get powerful literacy and powerful literacy is necessary for the struggle". Then again I heard Delpit when Finn said " I was from the working class and I knew how working class and poor kids related to authority. They expected people in authority to be authoritarian".
I honestly do not understand what Paulo Freire 's teachings were, that whole chapter went over my head
I found Anyon's study to be very interesting, and I can definitely see the validity in her assessment and conclusion's. pg 20 " The working class children were learning to follow directions and mechanical low paying work, but at the same time they were learning to resist authority in ways sanctioned by their community. The middle-class children were learning to follow orders and so the mental work that keeps the society producing and running smoothly. The affluent professional children were learning to create products and art, symbolic capital, and at the same time they were learning to find rewards in work itself and negotiate from a powerful position with those who make the final decisions....They were learning to become masters of the universe."
The last quote that really hit me was from pg 25, " Those who are the smartest and work the hardest go furthest? Who's kidding whom? When students begin school in such different systems, the odds are set for them."
Sunday, June 25, 2017
The Problem we all live with podcast, with Ira Glass and Nikole Hannah Jones.
Wow. What a changes from last weeks assignment. I will begin by saying that I truly enjoyed listening to this podcast, as well as reading along. It opened my eyes to the fact that there is still serious racism and segregation happening, even in 2017. I mean I don't live under a rock, I realize that there is still an abundance of racism, but I was not aware that in this day and age there was still segregation in school and people fighting to keep it that way. There were parts while listening to this that I wanted to reach through my computer and slap people. How dare they make those kids from Normandy feel like they aren't good enough to attend Frances Howell. Who are they, judge, jury and executioner? Like Nikole stated, how do they know that one of those trouble makers from the other side of town won't be the one in ten years to save your life? It amazed me that ere are people out there who still posses the audacity to think that they are better than someone else because of the color of their skin. It brings me back to Johnson's mention of the Watermelon Man. These are the people who need to wake up one day with a different skin tone. These are the people who need to walk a mile in another's shoes so that maybe they would be less judgmental. This also made me totally rethink those teachers that I judged so harshly in Delpit's article. It's because of the white people that were present in that town hall meeting that black teacher's feel like they need to just smile and ignore what white people are saying. I can honestly say I am appalled and mortified by the way those people were speaking. Sorry Armstrong and Wildman, but colorblindness is not an issue here. These people have no qualms about expressing their racism.
This is probably my favorite assignment so far. I found this podcast to be heart wrenching and real and honest. Before I get into the quotes that really stood out to me I am copying the link for the .TAL, which I have to be honest I am not entirely sure if I did that correctly. The first portion that struck me was the discussion on how basically bad schools, in the poverty portions of town, stay bad, while the good schools stay good. Looking at this and thinking about Rhode Island you can see how this statement rings true. Compare Providence or Pawtucket schools to Barrington or East Greenwich. The poverty areas, which are mostly black and Latino, Providence for example, cannot keep up with a fluent school district like Barrington, which is predominately white. And I can only imagine what a town meeting in Barrington or East Greenwich would sound like if they were told that South Providence was going to be busing their kids into the schools. I would probably be just as appalled as I was with the parents of Frances Howell. But in doing so it would be doing what Nikole was talking about, integrating and getting those black kids what the white kids already have, access to quality teachers and quality instructors. I truly did not realize the extent of segregation that is still affecting our society until I listened to this and sat back and looked around.
It truly does need to end. All of our students should be given the same opportunities no matter where they live, or what color their skin is. Look at Mah'Ria. She was an excellent student, and once she was attending Francis Howell, she was making the honor roll, on the volleyball team, and had friends. Yet her mother had to fight to keep her there as opposed to sending her to a school with non-accredidation. Really?? So instead of offering this bright child everything we can, we are going to send her to a district that is destined to fail because of the color of her skin. It's just despicable.
The other quote that truly pulled at me was Nedra saying " I literally, mentally, had a vision of a herd of cattle being pushed back on a truck, being herded back to where they came from". That is just awful. It's awful that it is being done and it's awful that a parent has to feel that her child is part of an unwanted "herd". Life is hard enough, let's give these kids a fighting chance, and let's make school a place where they feel equal and safe and all can learn. I keep going back to Rodney King's " Can't we all just get along?" . How many times will that question be asked before it starts to sink in and mean something.
The next thing I am enclosing is the link to Michael Brown , being that they mentioned his name often throughout the interview. The shooting and death of Michael Brown is believed to have been one of the reasons that the Black Lives Matter movement was started. Lastly, I am also adding in a song that can be considered a response to Nikole stating that she feels like no noe is even trying anymore. Some of us still are. And if enough of us can keep trying, then we shall be free.....If you have the 3 minutes seriously, watch this...it's worth it. We Shall Be Free
Ok, this article was a little more difficult for me to swallow. I actually read it two days ago and am just now bringing myself to be able to write about it. I can honestly say I do not like Lisa Delpit's style of writing at all. I understand and even somewhat support her argument that in the field of education dialogue around race has become silenced. According to the previous articles we have read, dialogue around race is silenced or difficult in an adult setting, so of course its going to be going on in the schools as well. Up until this point I have agreed with and judged myself on the need to end racism and to stop people from pitting one race or gender against the other. But then I read this. I felt attacked. I felt like she was actually contributing to pitting one race against another by some of the comments in the article, such as:
pg 21 " White folks are going to do what they want to do anyway. It's really hard. They just don't ;listen well. No they listen, but they don't hear..."
pg22 " they wear blinders and earplugs"
pg29 "some had added that the liberal educators believe themselves to be operating with good intentions, but that these intentions are only conscious delusions about their unconscious true motives"
She goes on about how white parents ask their children to do things while black parents have to give more instruction and then once they are in school and the teachers are asking them to do things instead of giving instruction, black students are struggling. The only time I ask my son to do something is if its to help me with something, otherwise I am constantly giving detailed instructions on what he needs to do. He is a child, albeit a white middle class male, that still requires INSTRUCTION!!! To say that race determines how a child reacts, responds or learns to me is just too general.
I will say that there were a few things that I agreed with. Those were:
pg37 " Children have the right to their own language, their own culture. We must fight cultural begemony and fight the system by insisting that children be allowed to express themselves in their own language style. It is not they, the children who must change, but the schools. To push children to do anything else is repressive and reactionary" pg46 " To put our beliefs on hold it to cease to exist as ourselves for a moment and that is not east" This is my absolute favorite line from the article. It touches on what Johnson was saying. We need to put aside our discomfort and our prejudices and come together as one.
