22
May
2008
Is teaching political? Moral? Ethical?
Yes. Undoubtedly teaching is political. Who gets taught what and by whom are all decisions that are politically influenced. Tracking, sorting, socialization, social control are all political in nature and work to perpetuate the stratification of wealth and class in American society. If that’s not political, I don’t know what is.
Teaching is moral in nature. It’s an important and noble profession. One where we get to help shape the minds of future leaders, followers, doctors, teachers, politicians, mothers and fathers. Our reasons for becoming teachers are moral in nature and speak to our own senses of morality, whether we’re teaching for social justice or teaching for a paycheck.
Teaching is emotional. . . unless you’re a computer or a robot I don’t see how it’s possible to teach and not be emotionally invested in your students or your work. The financial payoff isn’t big enough. People who aren’t emotionally or psychologically invested in making a difference in a child’s life probably don’t remain in the classroom longterm – at least I would hope they don’t. Teaching is about relating to other people, if nothing else. To me, it’s not possible to relate to other people without some sense of emotion.
Posted under Uncategorized
22
May
2008
We’ve talked a lot in class about the public school systems in America and whether they work, who they’re working for and how they’re working. In my experience and observation, systems are designed to fail. They’re always full of problems, holes, and unexpected, unforeseeable events that result in maximum functionality of the system never being reached. Think about it: the criminal justice system, the prison system, the health care system. . .
Systems don’t anticipate change, they’re often incapable of adaptation, they frequently don’t take into account the perspectives, needs or wants of people different from their designers so that biases can be incorporated into the way a system “works” without anyone being fully aware of it. And this is how we choose to educate our children?
Public school systems all over the nation are failing our kids, in part, because systems don’t work. Methodologies, philosophies and people who understand that everyone doesn’t think/feel/speak/live the way they do — these could help our kids. I understand that we’re paradoxically trapped in the system, but we’ve got to make the best of it by working around and outside of the system.
Posted under Uncategorized
19
May
2008
Is homosexuality a choice? Is heterosexuality? I don’t remember sitting down with my parents and deciding whether I’d be romantically attracted to males or females. For as long as I can remember, my sexual orientation has been a part of who I am, not a choice.
Some people feel that homosexuality is a chosen “way of life” or a “lifestyle.” Even these terms devalue the humanity of people who are attracted to members of the same sex. I always thought thrill-seeking was a lifestyle: bungee jumping, wrestling alligators, sky diving. Or maybe being a girly-girl is a lifestyle: getting manicures and pedicures and facials and haircuts and styles and dyes, etc. But, I guess being gay is a lifestyle if homosexuals have to constantly combat a flood of disdain and opprobrium from mainstream heterosexual society, in a rush to pass judgment on the “souls of those doomed to hell.”
Then come the questions surrounding same-sex marriage/civil partnerships/civil unions. Should homosexual relationships be recognized under the law? Should gay couples have the same rights as heterosexual couples? Should gay marriage be legal? Should there be gay marriage, or just civil unions and domestic partnerships?
I’ve heard the view expressed that “Marriage is a sacred bond between a man and a woman.” Not two men, not two women. In the difficult battle between church and state, it seems state may be losing. Marriage is a sacred bond? I thought the state could only really deal with legal/secular issues. When things become sacred we’re inserting religious beliefs into our legal system. I guess this is another way that the United States’ underlying Christian foundation manifests itself in our society. To have a truly equal society, shouldn’t we have equal rights – not “separate but equal,” but actual equal rights – for all citizens?
Posted under Uncategorized
16
May
2008
As Pearl pointed out today in class, I am indeed bilingual. I speak fluent English and fluent Ebonics . . . and even some Spanish. I am proud of that fact. I am proud of being able to communicate with different groups of people at different times, in different ways. I think anyone would be.
I also think that it is very important that we not take that ability away from our students. W.E.B. Dubois wrote of the veiled double-consciousness of African Americans and of living both as who each individual is and as the majority sees us. Our students are who they are and can be successful being who they are, if we provide them the tools to do so. One of those tools is knowing how to speak Standard English.
Posted under Uncategorized
15
May
2008
Being an Atlanta native, and the granddaughter of North Georgia natives, I am well aware of the prominent role Sweet Auburn Avenue played in the lives of Atlantans, both Black and White, and in the development of the Civil Rights movement. Auburn Avenue was idyllic in the sense that it proved that Black people could support each other and ourselves. It proved that we were not and are not “savages” in need of “saving.” We showed the world that despite the vestiges of slavery, Jim Crow laws, police brutality, second-class citizenship and other forms of discrimination, we loved ourselves and would support ourselves as a community.
Then we started making head-way. We gained the right to integrate schools, lunch counters, public transportation and other forms of business in American society. We could go anywhere and do anything our White counterparts could do. We were people and the whole world knew it. Sadly, decades later, we’re still trying to expand on that promise of equality.
But even sadder than this is the fact that we lost a lot of our sense of community. Auburn Avenue worked because it had to. There was no where else for Black business to turn. Either we supported ourselves or no one did. With integration came the push towards assimilation. Clearly Black people have been through too much to completely lose our identity, but we apparently haven’t been through too much to lose our sense of community.
Integration was more than just the right to shop at White businesses, learn in mixed schools or ride wherever we wanted to on the bus. Integration was a sense of “taking what was owed,” what we’d been denied for so long – a respectable, legitimate place in American society. Sadly, in the process of taking our rightful place next to White people, we overlooked what was beneficial about having our supportive places next to each other. Blacks emulated White flight, got our money and got out of the hood – on to bigger and better things. What is left is a sense of a history of a self-sufficient, supportive, loving Black community – but not the community itself.
Posted under Uncategorized
15
May
2008
It is clear that many people, both White and people of color, fought and died to gain civil rights that were allegedly guaranteed in the Constitution. These heroes changed the prevalent, outward attitudes and actions that espoused racism, discrimination and segregation. They minimized the violent displays of the KKK, and stymied the bombings of Black churches. Schools and neighborhoods are integrated and antidiscrimination laws are now enacted and enforced to protect what our heroes fought so hard for.
But, de facto segregation, evidenced in White flight to the suburbs, among other societal trends such as the economic disparities in education, transportation, housing and home and business loans, still exists. When I’m 60% more likely to be denied a home loan than a White woman, even when factors like education, employment, geography and financial means are equal, how can we suggest that racism either (1) no longer exists or, (2) is more subtle today than it’s ever been before?
Clearly, racism still exists, but a comment in class that racism is more subtle than in the past, still has my blood boiling. As a Black woman, I know that racism is still palpable and perhaps there is no more obvious a statement of where I stand in American society than being denied financial means to home ownership. When a Black child’s family applies for a home loan, but is denied over and over again, the message, that our society and economy and neighborhoods value people of color less than Whites comes across loud and clear.
Posted under Uncategorized
15
May
2008
perhaps a poor substitute for being included in that top 10% of the nation that holds 70% of the nation’s wealth, but we can’t change what we don’t acknowledge, and we can’t acknowledge what we don’t know exists. Besides this, there is definitely power in knowing where and who we are in both an absolute sense (name, education, occupation, background, experiences, etc.) and a relative sense. It’s one thing to know you enjoy certain privilege in life, but it’s quite another to understand where those privileges come from and how they work for and against certain groups in American society.
Posted under Uncategorized
11
May
2008
I have a disdain for mainstream Hip Hop/rap music because I believe that it negatively impacts and shapes the very students I’m trying to help. When a nine-year-old Black male sees 25-year-old Black males on TV riding in cars with big, shiny wheels, wearing big, shiny gold chains and devaluing half-naked, shiny Black women, there is minimal encouragement for that nine-year-old to grow up and find solutions for a better world, society or neighborhood. That’s just one of many examples. As hard as I try not to be insulted by mainstream music, I am. I feel that certain Hip Hop music undermines my ability to shape my students’ minds. If I go into a classroom everyday and teach my students to start thinking critically and analytically about who they are in relation to the rest of the world, and then drive home listening to music that denigrates them, am I really acting as an agent of social change?
I guess what I’m struggling with is a conflict of interest between my personal tastes and my professional life. Individual agency is only as good as the collective agency behind it. I am fearful that my individual agency will be overshadowed by a collective agency that probably does not have my students’ best interests at heart.
Posted under Uncategorized
8
May
2008
So, our program has an ESOL endorsement. I think that’s fantastic, but I’m wondering if it will be enough to truly teach students who speak other languages at home. In class, we defined culture as “the way we do things around here.” I think that’s a good working definition, but I also think that the way things are done is highly influenced by a group of people’s shared language, history, homeland and social mores and values.
When we teach students of different ethnicities and cultures, our teaching goes beyond the curriculum and delves into socialization and an introduction to American culture. I asked Augustin, one of the visiting Mexican teachers, what it was that we, as teachers could do to help Mexican students to adjust to school and life in the US. His answer was that we should learn and understand the history and culture of Mexico, and celebrate it with our students.
The question I have now is slightly more perfunctory in nature. Is it better, or worse, for students (both those raised in American culture and those raised in other cultures) to learn in a bilingual classroom, where both Spanish and English are spoken? Would teaching in this manner put any students at a disadvantage? Once a teacher starts teaching in both English, the language of the cultural and political majority, and in Spanish, a language of an ever-growing minority, is she obligated to learn other languages to bridge gaps for other groups of students?
Posted under Uncategorized
7
May
2008
I found it interesting that a lot of people thought Mr. Chew, the teacher who refused to give the Washington Assessment of Student Learning to his class, should have pursued lobbying as an avenue for change, rather than his act of civil disobedience. I disagree with this contention.
Lobbying is time consuming, costs money, and requires hish spheres of political influence to be effective. While it may ultimately be more effective than Mr. Chew’s civil disobedience, in that the end result of lobbying is the legislature changing the law, lobbying requires a greater effort. Plus, these laws are federally “mandated,” in that public schools don’t receive federal funds unless they do standardized testing. We all know how strapped for cash public schools are. I guess my point is that lobbying isn’t really a viable option for an average teacher.
I think that civil disobedience, on the other hand, is a great example for Mr. Chew’s students. Maybe I’m just the child of radical parents, but I was always taught to stand up for what I believe in, while being prepared to suffer the consequences. Civil disobedience is not a violent act, nor does it cause an inordinate amount of disruption.
Many people felt that Mr. Chew was skipping out on his kids and not “being there” for them. I understand the sentiment, but my true hope is that Mr. Chew taught those kids to stand up for themselves and to find their own sources of strength inside themselves, based on who each of those students actually is. If so, then I don’t feel he left those kids hanging at all.
Posted under Uncategorized
