Talking Points #5: "In The Service of What? The Politics of Service Learning"

Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer

Argument:

In this article Kahne and Westheimer argue that Service Learning is a varied curriculum that derive moral, intellectual, and political ideologies of students but promote good, critical thinking, citizens with a higher self-esteem.

Quotes:

1. "helping those they serve, such service learning activities seek to promote students' self-esteem, to develop higher-order thinking skills, to make use of multiple abilities, and to provide authentic learning experiences-all goals of current curriculum reform efforts."

Kahne and Westheimer outline the critical parts of educational reform here. They are saying that by using this curriculum students are able to learn from experience and think critically about issues while promoting self-esteem. Here students are responsible for their own learning. It is an illustration of internships or work studies in which students have the opportunity to experience hands on learning. They are out their in the field learning about a trade. This model supports multiple learners visual, tactile etc. Students have the opportunity to learn outside the classroom and experience the world.

2. "Citizenship requires that individuals work to create, evaluate, criticize, and change public institutions and programs."

Kahne and Wesstheimer show the importance of citizens in the United States democracy. Citizens must be active in their community to create change, challenge government and better the lives of each other. Through service learning students can have the opportunity to be a part of this process. They can begin to see what a difference they can make in the community. Students can also see the problems that people face in urban areas of poverty which can motivate them to advocate for change to their local and national governments.

3. "when asked what they gained from the experience, many students said simply that it taught them 'that people can be different' from what you expect."

This quote from Kahne and Westheimer is in response to parents negative comments towards students performing a concert in the neighborhood school of poverty. This shows that students learned that people in these areas are not what they think. As they learned from their parents the stereotypes of crime, bad kids, misbehaved, and dangerous environment of students living in poverty are mostly untrue. This just goes to show how service learning can change the thinking of students and show them what the world is really like. It is an eye opening experience.

Questions/Comments/Points to Share:

I found this article a little bit difficult to get through. Kahne and Westheimer use a large variety of difficult vocabulary and it was more like a research study. I think I got a good sense of what Kahne and Westheimer are getting at in this article. I believe they argue that service learning can be implemented in a variety of ways and there are some flues in the curriculum, like many other curriculums nothing is perfect, but that they promote moral, political, and intellectual growth while promoting good, critically thinking, informed citizens who can create change in society. I think that service learning is a great way to get students to learn and think critically about their community. Rather than researching, reading, and discussing the world outside of the classroom these students have the opportunity to experience the world for themselves. It is great for students with a variety of learning styles and gives students hands on experience while creating lasting relationships with people in their community. Like Johnson advocates it also creates a dialogue about ideologies and stereotypes which promotes change. Like the students who performed the concert in the neighborhood school of poverty, students are able to see for themselves what the world is like and not see it through the eyes of others who believe in the stereotypes created by society.

Talking Points #4: "Unlearning the Myths that Bind Us"

Linda Christensen

Argument:

In this article Christensen argues that children's cartoons, literature, and films teach stereotypes and bias created by society. Christen describes how to read these forms of media, analyze, and take action.

Quotes:

1. And often that world depicts the domination of one, sex, one race, one class, or one country over a weaker counterpart. After studying cartoons and children's literature, my students Omar wrote: 'When we read children's books, we aren't just reading cute little stories, we are discovering the tools with which a young society is manipulated.'"

Here Christensen shows how the privileged groups of society are depicted in children's cartoons and books creating an "ideal" image for young people to emulate. This is similar to Delpit's "culture of power." The rules and codes of the culture of power are depicted in these forms of children's media.

2. "We are not only taught certain styles of violence, the latest fashions, and sex roles by TV, movies, magazines, and comic strips; we are also taught how to succeed, how to love, how to buy, how to conquer, how to forget the past and suppress the future. We are taught, more than anything else, how to rebel."

I was a little confused by this quote from Dorfman (quoted in Christensen). I think he is saying that children's media teaches violence sex roles and how to succeed in society. I compared this to Delpit's "rules and codes" of power. Perhaps Dorfman is saying that in order for children to overcome these stereotypes, bias, and racism they must learn to recognize and rebel.

3. "Though critiques and the discussions that follow, they are helping to transform each other- each comment or observation helps expose the engine of our society, and they're both excited and dismayed by their discoveries."

Christensen seems to be saying that the more we critique, analyze, and discuss these observations of stereotypes on sex roles, race, and social status the more we can challenge society to acknowledge these things and make a change. This is similar to Kozol's argument about creating a dialogue.

Questions/Comments/Points to Share:

I found this article hard to get through. I think I understand what Christensen is saying about recognizing these underlying ideologies in children's cartoons and creating a dialogue around these ideas but I am not sure that I completely agree with her. I do realize that children's cartoons all have these underlying stereotypes but I am not sure how heavily this influences children's ideologies. These things are products of the privilege given certain groups by society. I too like many other adults today grew up on these cartoons and I think that many of these stereotypes, bias, and racist ideologies have been challenged by many people of my generation. I think that it has a lot to do with family morals and values. Though I grew up watching these cartoons and reading these books I think that my parents instilled morals and values about diversity, acceptance, helping those who are underprivileged and hard work. I do recognize how these ideologies are prevalent in children's media but I think it also has a lot to do with what children see in society. Society holds these values and ideologies and whether children get them for cartoons, the news, or books they are going to get them some how and it is up to parents as well as teachers to show students the stereotypes, bias, and underlying messages of these media.

Our Kids, Our Future

Hey Election Project Group.I posted a link to a video clip on Obama's website. I just thought I would post this because I think this clip gives us a good overview of Obama's Education plan. It's pretty long but you can skip to the reform part in the last 15 minutes of the speech. But I really think that you should watch the whole thing to get the full effect of the speech. See you on Monday!

Click herer to see the clip

Talking Points #3: "Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community"

Dennis Carlson

Argument:
Carlson argues that public schools play an important part in building a tolerance, dialogue, and "gay" identification in a diverse democratic multicultural community. Schools must play a part in breaking the silence on gayness and creating a dialogue so that gay teachers and students are not marginalized from the "Normalizing Community."


Quotes:


1. "Within normalizing communities, some individuals and subject positions (i.c., white, middle class, male, heterosexual, etc.) get privileged and represented as 'normal' while other individuals and subjects positions (i.e. black, working class, female, homosexual, etc.) are dis-empowered and represented as deviant, sick, neurotic, criminal, lazy, lacking, in intelligence, and in other ways 'abnormal'."

This idea seems to be connected with Delpit's idea of the "culture of power." Just as Delpit talks about the privileges of those in the culture of power Calrson talks about the privileges of those in the "normalizing community." It seems that these ideologies are one and the same. It shows that people who are straight, christian, white, able bodied, american, male, property owners (SCWAAMP) are considered "normal" or ideal while those who do not fall in these categories are "not normal."


2. "To the extent that gayness is recognized in the curriculum, it is likely to be in the health curriculum, where it is associated with disease. For example, one of the most popular health texts on the high school market is Health: A Guide to Wellness, which mentions homosexuals or homosexuality once in acknowledging that 'the first group in the United States diagnosed with AIDS were male homosexuals'."


This quote was speaking in regards to the texts in public school curriculum. Carlson explains that gayness is not represented in any public school texts except in this instance in which gayness is associated with a disease. I found this fact shocking. I can't even believe that a group of people are completely marginalized in association with a disease. This just goes to show how society or "normalizing community" views gayness.


3. "we have a responsibility as public educators in a democratic society to engage them in a dialogue in which all voices get heard or represented and in which gay students and teachers feel free to 'come out' and find their own voices."


This is the problem that schools face today. In order to reduce the stigma of minority groups we must first acknowledge them and create a dialogue because if we simply ignore differences we contribute to their oppression.


Questions/ Comments/ Points to share:


This was an interesting article to read. I found some parts difficult to get through because of the dialogue used by Carlson but I think I got his overall ideas. The article reminded me of Delpit in connection with the "culture of power" which Carlson refers to as the "Normalizing Community." Just as Delpit defines the "culture of power" the ideal, privileged, normal, part of society and those outside the "culture of power" deviant, unideal, abnormal part of society. Carlson defines the "Normalizing Community" in the same way. He goes on to show how homosexuality and homosexuals are deemed deviant, undesirable, abnormal parts of society. I agree with Carlson because I have witnessed this in my own experiences in high school. Gayness was just something you didn't talk about in school because of the stigma attached to the words. It was as if just by saying the word gay promoted unwanted, deviant, sickness, and disease. I think that Carlson has a point about creating a dialogue just as Johnson suggests. In order to alleviate these feeling we must create a dialogue so that homosexuals become less marginalized and more comfortable with themselves in school as well as the community.