Empowering Education-Shor

"Can education develop students as critical thinkers, skilled workers, and active citizens?"
 "You must arouse children's curiosity and make them think about school".
     I believe the answer to the first quote lies within the second one; in order to make students critical thinkers and skilled workers, schools need to make them use their brains with their opinions. I think it is a good idea to ask students why does the government force us to go to school. It gets children thinking and also teaches them why school is important. I believe if a children think of answers by themselves they would want to go to school more often and perhaps wouldn't hate it. This also gets them thinking and is a way for them to socialize which is an important part of schooling. By teaching children at a young age how to think for themselves this will benefit them in the long run for further schooling and careers. This related to the Anyon reading because middle class schools teach based on the right answer and how that answer was achieved.
     I know throughout my schooling teachers never cared for my reasoning behind anything or what I thought and when I got to college it was completely different. In college most professors ask students why they think of certain things and care about their opinions. For example, my Math 144 class is all about discussion and what we think. Instead of my teacher just teaching he lets us figure it out ourselves and then we discuss the correct answer together as a class. If someone comes up with a different answer my professor does not tell he/she is wrong but instead asks how and why we got that answer. Another class were opinion is important is this FNED class. At first, I was hesitant to say my opinion because I was not used to it but then as class continued I became more open. If I was taught at a young age that my opinion counts I would not be as scared to speak my opinion today.

Schooling with Down Syndrome-Kliewer

"I started to notice that I didn't like the classes I was taking called special education I had to go through almost all my life. I wanted to take other classes that interested me. I had never felt so mad, I wanted to cry".
Reading this article I immediately connected with it. This quote frustrated me because I think that children with down syndrome and any mental illness should be allowed to take other classes other than special education. In high school I participated in a class called Teaching Pathways; this program was one period were select students worked with the special ed children. This was my favorite class because I got to interact with these children and learn their personalities. The students in this class ranged from severe down syndrome to a speech delay. They not only learned a lot from us but we learned a lot from them. They all had special talents and I learned not to judge a book by its cover. In my high school these children had a separate room where they spent most of the day and then for a few classes they joined the rest of the high school population. Even though sometimes this caused problems such as teasing, it helped the children socialize with the rest of the school. It also helps them to not feel left out. I think that the only way teasing will stop is for them to interact with others because children tease because they are afraid; afraid of the unknown or the different, but if they learn they are like normal children just a little different then it will help them fit in. I remember sitting in my art class with a few of the special ed children in it and when one of them had an outburst the rest of the class didn't know how to handle it. But because I was around them I knew it was nothing to worry about and that the aid would handle it or it would blow over soon. So having them involved in so called regular classrooms also teaches everyone how to act. I think all schools should have their special education children in normal classes for some period of the day to benefit everyone.

Social Clas and the Hidden Curriculum of Work-Anyon

In reading this article I noticed several things were different between middle class schools and working class schools. Middle class schools teach based on process while working class schools teach based on getting the correct answers. In working class schools "teachers rarely explain why the work is being assigned, how it might connect to other assignments, or what the idea is that lies behind the procedure or gives it coherence and perhaps meaning or significance...Work is often evaluated not according to whether it is right or wrong but according to whether the children followed the right steps". I do not think is necessarily a bad way to teach because on a test if they got the answer wrong but understood the steps they wouldn't be down graded as much. However, I do not agree with having them memorize the steps because they are not learning anything and will not remember it later on it life and they definitely will not understand it. Another thing that irritated me is when Anyon explains that after kids still did not understand how to solve a specific problem the teacher "made no attempt to explain the concept of dividing things into groups or to give them manipulations for their own investigation. Rather she went over the steps with them again and told them they 'needed more practice"'. I do not think this is the proper way to teach and everyone should be taught like the middle class.
      The middle class teaches based on the right answer and how you got that answer. Here, instead of just giving them steps teaches explain how to solve problems and when children get the wrong answers they do not degrade them and say you need more practice but instead ask how and why they got the answer they got. This will help children understand better and remember these facts for the future.
   I feel like I can relate to both of these classes because some classes I have taken are middle class and others were like working class. My biology class in college was like that of a working class because we only had to simply memorize facts and not necessarily know how they worked or how to do them. For that class I simply just memorized facts and when I was done needing them it was as if they left my brain and got ready for more facts to memorize. However, my math class is like the middle class because it explains how things are done and why they are done that way. I feel like every class should be taught that way.

Chris Colfer talks about being gay

      If anyone watched Glee they know who this is. This is Chris Colfer he plays Kurt on Glee. Kurt's character is gay and they do a good job showing the hardships a homosexual deals with. I agree with him when he says that its good television is discussing and showing homosexual relationships now, as opposed to before when it was frowned upon. They discuss in this clip that Kurt's dad talks to him about being gay and if you watched the episode his dad although he felt uncomfortable doing it, informed Kurt about being gay and  gave him pamphlets to read. I think it was good to show the relationship he has with his father because although he is gay, Kurt's father loves him no matter what and thats what it should be.
     Glee does a great job discussing sensitive issues such as sexual orientation, able bodiness, racism, and also self image. Last night's episode talked about self image and how you should love yourself no matter what. One of the main character's is contimplating a nose job because she has a big nose and does not like it. She finally has an empiphany with the help from her friends on the glee team and decideds not to get it. I think topics like these are important to discuss and what better way to do it than on television because children watch it and it is entertaining. Thank you Glee for keeping us informed =)

How Willy Got His Wheels (Able Bodiness)

Watching Sam's post about the dolphin loosing his fin and the whole concept of able bodiness for animals reminded me of a book I read as a child. This book How Willy Got His Wheels was about a dog who looses his back legs and gets adopted by a woman named Debroah and makes a wheelchair for him. This wheelchair helps him get around better because before he couldnt walk. I always thought this book was so inspiring and still remains as one of my favorites. Sam was correct we do not think about animals when we

think of able bodiness but this book is a good example of it.

Teaching Boys and Girls Seperately

This article made me think a lot on whether or not I agreed with the idea of if boys and girls should be seperated. I feel as though being seperated has its benefits and its downsides. The children can now concentrate on their studies instead of worrying about boys or being made fun of or anything. But it also takes away from social aspect of schooling. Maybe if classes were seperated based on sex then during lunch or recess children should be all together. This way they get the social aspect of being coed. Another downside might be that being seperated is teaching children that they are seperated because they learn differently when that might not always be the truth. Also, if a girl likes doing what boys do or vice versa then she might not fit in with the girls and be left out in an all girl classroom. I do not see the harm in classrooms being coed; afterall, thats how they have always been why change it. I am just fine and I went to coed schools all through life.

"David Chadwell, one of Sax’s disciples and the coordinator of Single- Gender Initiatives at the South Carolina Department of Education, explained to me the ways that teachers should teach to gender differences. For boys, he said: 'You need to get them up and moving. That’s based on the nervous system, that’s based on eyes, that’s based upon volume and the use of volume with the boys.” Chadwell, like Sax, says that differences in eyesight, hearing and the nervous system all should influence how you instruct boys. “You need to engage boys’ energy, use it, rather than trying to say, No, no, no. So instead of having boys raise their hands, you’re going to have boys literally stand up. You’re going to do physical representation of number lines. Relay races. Ball tosses during discussion.' For the girls, Chadwell prescribes a focus on 'the connections girls have (a) with the content, (b) with each other and (c) with the teacher. If you try to stop girls from talking to one another, that’s not successful. So you do a lot of meeting in circles, where every girl can share something from her own life that relates to the content in class."'
-This is a good explanation of how single sexed classrooms work; however, it is also stereotypical. Boys tend to be more rambunxious and girls tend to talk a lot. This statement is basically what Chadwell is saying and is where I disagree. However, I agree with what he says on instead of repremanding the children you enforce it, making boys to be physical and hands on and allowing the girls to talk and communicate. I do think that this should be done in all classrooms whether it be coed or not because no matter the sex child learn differently. I know if I went to school and they did this I would have enjoyed school much more. I will also try to use a similar technique when I become a teacher to keep the children's attention.

Overall, people have their own oppionions of different sex schools and both opinions should be viewed. Sexism still exists and usually is very stereotypical. Not only does sexism exist in schooling but also in many sports. I have first hand with this because I dance and I constantly hear "boys shouldn't dance, they should play football". This statement is ridiculous if the boy likes to dance let him dance. Also, many times girls are not allowed to play sports with boys and if they are they are not treated equally. Luckily, in my high school we had one girl play on the boys football team and she was treated equally, but many times she was called "butch" which I think is wrong. I think sex shouldn't matter if it does not harm anyone.

A Particularly Cheap White Wine

"The National Merit Scholarship, which is awarded to 15,000 students each year, based on pre-SAT (or PSAT) score, is distributed proportionately to representatives of each state, so that each state has the same number of winners as they have a percentage of the nation's overall high school graduates (4). Because the quality of schools varies dramatically across states, average scores on the PSAT will also vary wildly, but students in Mississippi will always get their 'fair share' even though many of them wouldn't have qualified had they attended school in a state like Massachusetts" (2).
-Having a merit based scholarship gives me mixed feelings. Yes it is solely based on merit and not race but the standards are different everywhere. I understand lowering the standards in states that have a lower graduation rate allows students there to receive aid, but it also takes away aid from people in other states with higher scores.  For instance there could be a student in Connecticut who scored the same with a person in Missippi but the person in Mississipi would probably receive the aid and not the student from Connecticut. This could happen because the standards are in Connecticut are higher than Mississippi so eventhough they both had the same score the Mississippi ones are lower allowing that student to win the scholarship eventhough they both might have needed it and had the same scores. This reminds me of the qualifications to become a teacher. When I was taking the Praxis a man was talking about how in Connecticut it is much harder to become a teacher because their are more tests one has to take that are much harder than ones for Rhode Island. Similarily, he mentioned that Connecticut and other states are modeling after Colorado because they supposedly have the hardest qualifications. This reminds me of this quote because eventhough I might pass all the test according to Rhode Island I might not have passes according to Connecicut or somewhere else. However, having merit based scholarships is also good because they do this evenly because it allows everyone to get a chance to receive aid instead of just one state with high standards receiving all the aid; leading to the idea that, "to ignore this background context, and to award scholarships based solely on so-called merit, is to miss the ways in which the academic success and accomplishments of white students have been structured by unequal and preferential opportunity, and the ways in which students of color have been systematically denied the same opportunity to achieve" (3).

Overall, I want to say that having scholarships based on race is a double standard. I understand it is done because they try to get rid of racisim and segregation and spread equally, giving other races chances to receive aid. However, in doing this we are seperated by races; so as much as it is trying to eliminate segregation we are very much seperated. I think it actually does the opposite of its purpose, it seperates us more giving people scholarships based on their color.

In The Service of What?

"we try to consider the life and disposition of those for whom we are caring. We attempt to "apprehend the reality of the other" and then to "struggle [for progress] together."8 In so doing, we create opportunities for changing our understanding of the other and the context within which he or she lives".
     In reading this article it made me realize I want to do more Service Learning Projects. Throughout my years growing up I did several and I forgot how they made me feel until reading this. The first project I did was a soup kitchen at my church; here, we served food to the homeless. At first I did not know what to expect, again it was "the fear of the unknown". I thought the homeless people were going to be sloppy mean people who did not shave or have teeth, but to my surprise only few looked like this; the others, looked normal if thats what you would call it, and many were even young. Walking around I only got to serve food but what I really wanted was to hear their stories and get to know them. If I can I am going to volunteer at more soup kitchens because it was rewarding to know that I helped someone get a meal so they would not starve. It made me appreciate what I have more than I did before.
     Another service learning project I did was during high school; we went to a nursing home and helped them make tiny christmas trees. This project was brief but just as rewarding as the soup kitchen. I love the elderly so it made me sad to know some did not get any visitors. Making the decorations was fun and they seemed to enjoy it very much. Also, in high school I worked with the special needs kids on a basketball team. This gave these children an opportunity to play a sport they normally did not get to play. I was new to basketball so we learned how to play together; and the funny thing is some of them were better at it than me. Seeing them score baskets and win the game was one of the most rewarding things I have ever done. Nothing made me more happy than to see them smile because they scored a basket; the grins on their faces were so big they almost did not fit on their faces.
     I think that working with the children in Providence is also a service learning project, even though we need to do it for class. This not only helps the children we're working with but it also betters us to become better teachers. I teach children dance so I know how it feels when I child finally learns a step, or is able to read without messing up. It fills your heart up and you feel so proud of them. I love seeing these children every week .
     Overall, I think everyone should do a service learning project atleast once in their life because it really does change you. I think it should also be a requirement in schools because it teaches equality. A simple act of kindness like giving a homeless person money on the street in my eyes can be seen as just as rewarding as a service learning project, even though it is not as intimate. A simple act of kindness can not only change your life but also the person/people you helped; they probably will never forget that day and neither will you.
    
    

Christensen "Unlearning the myths that bind us"

"...My waist didnt dip into an house glass; in fact, according to the novels I read my thick ankles doomed me to be cast as the peasant woman reaping hay while the heroine swept by with her handsome man in hot pursuit"
      What would you think if your child ever said this? We'll this is what many children are being taught according to the "secret education" of Disney novels, cartoons, and literature. Christensen said "our society's culture industry colonizes their minds and teaches them how to act, live and dream". He is correct many children's books, and media often show sterotypes and do not represent all races. They teach children the wrong ideas and wrong image of themselves as well as others. Parents are scared of what their children are learning in school but really they should be scared of what they are teaching children at home with the books they read. Reading Christensen's article I liked towards the end when students graded Disney cartoons; it opened my eyes to what they were actually teaching children. For instance, I did not know the Duck Tales only taught about money and how one needs money in order to be hapy. That is the wrong thing to teach children, one should teach children money doesnt buy happiness.
      Also, in this article it was mentioned that Disney "depicts one sex, one race, one class, or one country over a weaker counterpart". I fully agree because just until recently there was no African American Princess and most of the princesses were white. This reminds me of a project I did in my high school pyschology class; we had to watch a Disney movie and say how it was wrong for children. In all Disney movies the bad people are often a darker race or color than the good people. Also, woman are portrayed to be sexy. Two example movies that I remember are Aladdin and Madagascar. In Aladdin, Japhar is a darker color than Aladdin and also has an accent. When he captures Jazmine she tries to seduce him in order to distract him from Aladdin. She is also wearing a skimpy outfit which shows that woman should be sexy and shaped like an hour glass. Also, in Madagascar the Uncle has a darker shade of fur than the father or nephew. It also seems to be quite scary for young children especially when he is captured in the beginning. All-in-all, I think we should think twice about we show or children.

Gayness, Multicultural Education and Community

        "I want to suggest that public schools play an important role in helping build a new democratic, multicultural community, one in which sexual identity (like markers of difference including class, gender and race) is recognized, in which inequities are challenged, and where dialogue across difference replaces silencing and invisibilty practices". I agree that in today's schooling children should learn about gayness as early as they can understand the basic concepts. I think by doing this will help normalize gayness. The earlier a child learns about things such as this the better off they are understanding it. It also allows them to form their own ideas instead of listening to society and their parents. This relates to the movie we watched in class; these children were much smarter than I thought and they also asked very good questions. One thing i remember from the movie is when a little boy asked why people do not treat gay people equally and why they cannot get married. I remembering him saying something like "they are people too just like us". This young makes a good point gay people are normal people and diserve the same treatment as everyone else. Someone in our class made a good point that you dont have to like everyone just dont say anything. That reminds me of the saying "if you have nothing nice to say...dont say it at all". I fully agree with this quote because I try to treat everyone as fair as possible.

         Another problem I have is when people especially parents think that a child can turn gay. I think this is a false statement one  is born gay and does not turn gay, it just might take some people longer to figure it out. It irritates me to no end when fathers put their sons in manly sports so they will not "turn" gay. For instance, my dance teachers son dances and his father puts him in a numerous amount of masculine sports so dance does not turn him gay. This is dumb especially if the child likes to dance and doesnt like to play other sports. A parent should also love their child no matter what their sexual orientation.

        Also, in class we discussed the terms like gay, fag and so on and I must confess to using these slang terms every now and then. After discussing where the word "fagit" comes from I am disgusted to say that Ive used that word sometimes. But i can honestly say that after discussing these topics I will make a conscious effort and try not to say these terms because of where they came from and how they make people feel.

Why Cant She Remember That

   One of my most vivid memories as a child was my parents reading to me before bedtime. I liked this time because it gave me something to look foward to and I got to spend time with my parents. By having my parent read to me it allowed me to be more imaginative and made me explore more books. The books I ranged were from the human body to How the Grinch Stole Christmas; but perhaps my favorite was I Love You Stinky Face. This book my mom used to read to me and eventhough it sounded funny and absurd it reassured me that my mom would love me no matter what because as a child that is a concer. I think intergrating reading and storytime into schooling is a necessary part of education.
    I agree that reading is a helpful tool to use in the classroom. Meirer states that by having storytime helps children work on many different skills necessary for later years of schooling and life. Some of these skills are listening, using their imaginations, remembering questions, and raising their hands. It shocked me when Meirer says that kids from different backgrounds understand stories and questions differently. I thought it was quite amuzing when the little Spanish girl says "why cant she remember that". Using this I could completly picture. I also found it interesting that the teacher would not think girl to be smart; instead, she might think she needs extra help when in fact she is actually smart and pointing out the obvious. I also agree with Meirer saying books need to be able to relate to the children because if not then they will not be interested; I remember it being the worst when a book was boring. I also thought it was a good idea to make books come alive with props and using different voices because after all most children are very visual. Another thing I think could be done would be to have a different child read to the class every week taking turns; this way, it works on their reading skills as well as class interaction.
   In reading this article it brought back memories of when I was in Kindergarten and we had reading buddies. Reading buddies was when a fifth grade class would come down to the Kindergarten and be paired up to read with a child. This was my favorite part of Kindergarten and I always looked foward to hearing my buddy read. It was a good way to interact with the older kids as well as work on my skills. It also worked both ways because when I was in fifth grade I was so excited for it to be my turn to read to the kindergarten. Nothing made me happier to see their smiling faces when it came time to read. I think reading should always be a necessary part in the classroom.

Amazing Grace-Kozol

     Immediately I was shocked when reading this article and there were several issues that sadden me and made me sick, and some even warmed my heart. It takes places in New York which was the first thing that shocked me because it so close to here. iIt made me sick when Kozol says "in Humid summer weather roaches crawl on virtually every surface of the houses...rats emerge from holes in walls, and outside the restlessness and anger that are present in all seasons intinsify under the stress of the heat". I found this quite disturbing and sad to know this is how some people live and it also creeped me out the fact that rats crawl through holes in walls. When the little boy was interviewed I noticed a few things; he was very mature for his age, he was religious, and knew everyone.
     When Kozol talked about this little boy he met I felt like I just wanted to hug this child and take him out of the hell hole in lives in. This young child saw many things a kid should not see; for example, peopke dying and getting shot, people doing and selling drugs, and poverty. If you ask me no one should experience this let alone a young child. For this reason I feel as though he was very mature for his age because he had to grow up fast to deal with his hardships. Also, I noticed that even though he had so many hardships he was still very religious and giving; when a man on the streets was starving he generously gave him a slice of pizza even though it was his meal. When explaining why he gave this man food the young boy responded, "god tells us to share". I thought this was very noble and kind of this young boy.
     The last issue that sickened me was the fact that statesmen and everyone knows about the poverty in New York and everywhere and they really do not seem to do anything about it. One woman explains that they just make it worse by dumping things in their neighborhoods to make it worse. For example, the city added a garbage dump just down the street from her neighborhood. She then explains that people dump whatever they want here making the neighborhood more dumpy.
     Finally, the last line of this article gave me chills, it explains the herion drug dealers seem to laugh when they yell at "DOA" because they are "laughing at their lives and at yours". Also, I think the title represents the little boy because out of his miserable life he is like the "Saving Grace" that helps people and makes the best of situations. What is your interpretation of the title?

Elementary School all over Again

Last weeks class the VIPS people came in and what I learned blew my mind. I had to admit when they started showing us the powerpoint I thought "oh no this is going to be sooo boring", but as Whinnie started talking I was surprised it was very interesting. I liked how Whinnie told us her teaching methods of phonemes and things; i found it really helpful and could see how children would like that. When we had to say the sounds outloud I felt a little dumb because half of the letters I could not say. I also found it interesting to know that some Spanish people or Spanish speaking people have trouble determining the "sh" and "ch" sounds. By going over these sounds outloud I was able to relate to an Elemenatry child learning and it really helped. I also like when we got to play the games children play, and I have to admit the "snake rhyming game" was harder than it look (well atleast for me it was). When VIPS left I was excited to share what I had just learned but I am also nervous to go into the schools and teach children, well its a nervous exciting feeling. I hope I do a good job and I hope the children like me. =) Does anyone have the same feelings?

Judging a Book by Its Cover

After reading the introduction, King's Question, and We're in Trouble I understand what the our class is about. In the introduction I agree when the author mentions people being able to change their social class. It made me think about what I learned about in Sociology last semester; here, we discussed statuses that one was born with and ones that were achieved. We also discussed, how society has a huge impact on race and gender and that for many women have to have the "perfect" body or image in order to be considered pretty. I do not think that it is right to judge someone based on their looks, beliefs, gender, or social status. Media is one reason for the way we view people; it especially effects children because they see television shows promoting violence, racism, and sexism giving children the wrong impression of the world. While reading King's Question I was puzzled to why we can not get along and just wish we could because everything would be so much better. I think we can not get along because of two simple facts: one people are thick headed living in old ways and not wanting change, and the other is because they can not do it alone or are afraid they will be judged themselves. Also, I think that people tend to put these senstive issues to the side and try and forget about them when in fact they are there and are not going anywhere without fixing.
     Putting issues such as racism, and sexism on the back burner is explained in We're in Trouble. Here the author uses a dog analogy saying that dogs go after food unless they are stopped and like dogs humans will do the same thing unless stopped. He then explains that we are stopped; stopped from giving everyone equality. He also explains that even though these subjects exist and are so easily done, they are not easily talked about which is ironic. I agree with him in order to start to end these issues like racism one does not necessarily need to like the everyone, trust treat them equally; "treat everyone the way you would want to be treated". Before I end this blog I end with a question for you: In your opinion how is that with all the advances in the world such as technology, why can't we stop racism? Because in comparision I do not believe that ending racism or other issues should be harder than operating on people or making other advances in technology.